The late was reportedly left "outraged" over Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's lie about Princess Lilibet's name.
The couple, who welcomed their second child in June 2021, allegedly claimed they had been granted permission to use the name 'Lilibet' for their daughter.
Robert Hardman's book 'Charles III: New King, New Court. The Inside Story' - which was released earlier this year - revealed that one member of staff claimed that the late Queen was "as angry as I'd ever seen her" after hearing Harry and Meghan's comments.
The adorable nickname had stemmed from the late monarch's childhood and was a sweet alternative to Elizabeth after she could not pronounce her name as a young child. It later stuck and became one of the adorable names that the late Prince Philip used for his wife.
Despite Meghan and Harry's comments, the BBC later reported that the late Queen had not been asked for her blessing to use the name for their second-born.
Other reports later stated that, while the late monarch was contacted by her grandson, she was not in the position to say no.
A spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said that the pair would not have used the name if the monarch had not been "supportive".
At the time, a spokesperson said: "The Duke spoke with his family in advance of the announcement - in fact his grandmother was the first family member he called. During that conversation, he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name."
Law firm Schillings - which acts for Harry and Meghan - wrote a letter to some news broadcasters and publishers. They said, at the time, stating the claims that the pair had not asked the Queen for permission was incorrect and defamatory.
The book read: "One privately recalled that Elizabeth II had been 'as angry as I'd ever seen her' in 2021 after the Sussexes announced that she had given them her blessing to call their baby daughter 'Lilibet', the Queen's childhood nickname."
Mr Hardman added: "The couple [Meghan and Harry] subsequently fired off warnings of legal action against anyone who dared to suggest otherwise, as the had done.
"However, when the Sussexes tried to co-opt the Palace into propping up their version of events, they were rebuffed. Once again, it was a case of 'recollections may vary'."
You may also like
International Day for Eradication of Poverty: A Call for Collective Action
Strictly's Wynne Evans set 'to leave show' after 'wandering hands' scandal with Katya Jones
Project to provide Cauvery water to Bengaluru's peripheral areas launched
Seaside town with abbey on cliff edge that inspired Dracula
Prince Harry's uncle gushes about 'brilliant' new girlfriend after bitter split from third wife
Gary Neville slams the FA for appointing Thomas Tuchel as England manager
Rick Astley reveals brutal first take on Kylie Minogue as he makes 'snooty' admission
Hoax bomb threats to flights: Teenage boy, father under investigation for targeting Mumbai planes
AAP launches 'Jan Sampark' campaign ahead of Delhi Assembly polls
Adorable stray dog who spent 10 months crying in kennel undergoes impressive transformation
'Felt incomplete': What Rahul Gandhi said after Omar Abdullah's CM oath
US Winter Forecast 2024-2025: Will La Niña shape New York's snowy outlook?
Insurance bodies meet with ministers to tackle the 'spiralling' costs of motor cover
'I clean celebrity homes and swear by these Home Bargains products'
Smoothies vs. Juices: What's the Ultimate Weight Loss Solution?
'SFJ Communicating With PM Trudeau's Office For Last 2-3 Years..': Khalistani Terrorist Pannun's MASSIVE Admission Amid India-Canada Diplomatic Rift (VIDEO)
Jharkhand Party announces five candidates, party chief's children enter the fray
Centre will work closely with Omar Abdullah, his team: PM Modi
Liverpool owners FSG respond to 'serious' record-breaking NBA takeover rumours
Channel 4 confirms future of A Place in the Sun with fresh update