Why does Alexandra as a royal baby name sounds so familiar?
Well, not to brag, but our resident royal watcher picked that name months ago
Britain’s Kate, The Duchess of Cambridge, during her visit to Humberside Fire and Rescue Service, in Grimsby, northern England Tuesday, March 5, 2013. The Duchess was visiting The Princeâs Trust Team program which is a 12-week personal development scheme, which helps unemployed 16-25 year olds build the skills and confidence they need to get a job. (AP Photo/Scott Heppell)
Share
So after weeks of being consigned to the bargain basement of possible royal baby names, Alexandra has surged in recent days from 10:1 odds to a 2:1 favourite. (Even “Barack” makes an appearance, at 200:1, mind you.)
Well, way back in December–when the pregnancy was initially announced–everyone was plumping for Elizabeth, or possibly Diana.
Here was the list from Ladbrokes, the betting agency:
Elizabeth 8:1
Frances 10:1
John 10:1
Charles 10:1
Diana 12:1
Anne 12:1
James 12:1
George 14:1
Mary 14:1
Philip 14:1
Richard 16:1
Edward 16:1
Catherine 16:1
Sarah 16:1
Spencer 20:1
Andrew 20:1
David 20:1
Jessica 20:1
Victoria 20:1
Alexander 20:1
Note that Alexandra isn’t on the list, only the male version of Alexander was there (now relegated to 33:1). A month later Elizabeth and Diana were still the front runners.
Yet, within hours of the news that Kate was in hospital with acute morning sickness, I’d created a list of my favourite names for the future monarch—five for a girl and the same number for a boy, along with my reasonings. The first choice? Alexandra (Philip was my top pick for a boy).
While no one is going to know who’s right and who’s wrong until the baby is born—Kate recently said it’s due mid-July—it’s kinda nice to think the world is coming around to my way of thinking. At least in Britain’s gambling shops.