There is a royal baby due at the end of April, with Prince William and Princess Kate expecting their third child.
For many that will be cause for celebration and a ceremonial wetting of the baby’s net – something we Brits do very well, and for others….well, it will be just like any other day and barely register on their radar.
The reason we mention it is because there is a betting market opened up, naturally, and a umber of the big bookmakers are offering prices as to the first name of the next heir to the throne.
By examining the names that Willie and Kat gave to their first offspring, we actually have some idea where they go with their third child.
Their eldest is called George Alexander Louis, and that is a trio of names each with its own classically royal connotation. And his sister is called Charlotte Elizabeth Diana; a name with clear blue-blooded links.
So punters have a few clues already….we’re expecting a continuation of the royal theme in this third royal baby name.
At the time of writing, the royals are yet to announce the gender of their baby to the public.
That naturally makes our job of predicting the name of the new born more difficult, although we have two pieces of information to hint that it may – repeat, may – be a girl.
Firstly, an exchange between Kate Middleton and a member of the public has been reported by numerous news agencies.
She was on a royal visit to Grimsby (it’s not all glamour being a princess, you know) where she was handed a teddy bear by an onlooker.
“Thank you,” Kate is alleged to have replied. “I will take that for my d….”
The princess stopped herself suddenly, but the insinuation was that she was about to say the word ‘daughter’.
Whether as a consequence of that reporting or for reasons unknown, the betting market is also dominated by girls’ names. According to the bookies three of the four favourites are female names, and that perhaps gives as big a clue as any as to the identity of the royal baby.
By Royal Appointment
So we’re expecting a girl, and we know that the royals are likely to opt for a name with blue-blood connotations. That gives punters something to work with at least.
The bookies’ favourite ticks all the boxes: Mary, at 5/1, is one of the most backed by the public and it’s obvious to see why. The UK has twice been ruled over by a Queen Mary, and of course Mary Queen of Scots was the mother of King James I. There is also a theme in the UK at the moment for ‘retro’ baby names, so Mary is certainly a justified market favourite.
We’re not convinced by Victoria (8/1) or Elizabeth (20/1); of course they have the royal links, but neither are cool, retro names or considered modern and progressive, and Princes William and Harry are well known in their desire to be considered more ‘accessible’ by the British public.
Alice (5/1) is certainly an interesting one. The monarchy link is there, with Princess Alice a child of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert back in the 1800s. You may also recall the Duchess of Gloucester, Alice Scott, who was married to Prince Henry and lived to the sprightly age of 102. Alice is a ‘contemporary’ name too which wouldn’t alienate the royals further from their baying public, and so at 5/1 you would conclude that there is value there.
Fans of longshots are advised to stay clear of Posh, Chardonnay and Waynetta, which all look a tad under-priced at 500/1, and instead consider Matilda (80/1).
According to the polls, Matilda was the 34th most popular name for new-born girls in 2017, which ticks that ‘accessible’ box, and those with a long, long memory may just recall Henry I’s daughter, the Empress Matilda, who was never crowned but who ruled England for just under a year until Henry II was anointed.
It’s a long shot, but you just never know in the slightly incestuous world of royal baby names.