Princess Beatrice could have been named something different if Queen Elizabeth II hadn’t stepped in a rejected the original moniker her parents chose for her.
Sarah Ferguson and Prince Andrew welcomed their eldest daughter August 8, 1988.
However, her name was not revealed to the public for a whole two weeks after her arrival.
In that time, the nation waited with bated breath to discover the name of the new Royal, who at the time would be fifth-in-line to the throne.
And when the name was revealed, it was a surprise to bookies and the rest of the nation.
No-one had expected the newest Royal in 1988 to be called Beatrice.
In fact, many people were pretty sure as early as May that year that Beatrice would be called Annabel.This was after a newspaper quoted Andrew saying as much.
Some people also thought the names Charlotte and Victoria were in the running.
Not a single bet was placed on the name Beatrice at two of the largest bookmakers at the time.
The Press Association quoted a William Hill bookmakers at the time as saying: ‘It’s terrific.
‘We couldn’t have chosen a better name.’
Another bookmaker, from Coral, said: ‘It is a bit of a surprise for everybody.
‘Victoria and Elizabeth were the two favorites.’
Just one newspaper, The Sun, ended up correctly choosing Beatrice, in the process explaining the remarkable reason for why it wouldn’t be Annabel.
The newspaper reported that it was indeed Prince Andrew and Sarah’s first choice.
However, Princess Annabel was not to be, because the Queen disliked it. She rejected it, saying it was too ‘yuppie’.
Since the monarch has to approve Royal names, Annabel was out.
The report doesn’t explain why the Queen thought so little of the name.
The Queen ended up suggesting the name Beatrice, which was the name of Queen Victoria’s youngest child.
It derives from the Latin for ‘one who brings joy’.
According to The Sun, the name therefore was royal enough for the Queen and, crucially, unusual enough to satisfy Fergie.
