The Real Names Of The Royal Families


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
The Bhutan's royal family name is Wangchuck.
The former imperial family of Russia family name is Ramanov.
The former imperial family of Iran family name is Pahlavi.
The former royal family of Iraq family name is Hashmite being related to Jordan royals.
 
The official name for the royal family of Belgium is the House of Belgium. In reality, the name is supposed to be the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha which is also the royal house of the United Kingdom, Duchy of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, and Bulgaria. But, the name was changed when German Empire invaded Belgium in World War I at the same time that the British changed their name to the House of Windsor.

The House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg is the royal house of Schleswig-Holstein, Denmark, Norway, and Greece. Although the ancestral house is the House of Oldenburg, this is the name that the royal family uses today.

The House of Bourbon is one of the most powerful royal family in the world for the fact that it once ruled over France, Parma, and Two Sicilies. Currently, it rules over Spain and Luxembourg.
 
The House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg is the royal house of Schleswig-Holstein, Denmark, Norway, and Greece. Although the ancestral house is the House of Oldenburg, this is the name that the royal family uses today.


When Charles ascends the British throne, the SHSG-dynasty will reign in Britain as well under the name of Windsor - Mountbatten-Windsor-branch.
 
When Charles ascends the throne it will still be The House of Windsor, unless he chooses to change it.
 
When Charles ascends the throne it will still be The House of Windsor, unless he chooses to change it.

You're right, of course, but dynastically/historically in a the male-primogeniture sense it'll be the Oldenburg-SHSG-Mountbatten-Windsor branch of the House of Windsor.
 
When Charles ascends the throne it will still be The House of Windsor, unless he chooses to change it.
Lumutqueen, you have to learn not to be so literal but instead see the bigger picture, understand the perspective from which the member is posting, and not attempt to correct a statement which in its context is obvious and requires no correction.

From the perspective of long-term dynastic lineage or descent, Elizabeth II will be the last monarch of the British line of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha. Applying the common genealogical convention of the House name deriving from the father, Charles III will therefore be the titular founder and titular first monarch of the British branch of SHSG which is itself an offshoot of the House of Oldenburg.

It is a given that under Charles the House of Windsor will remain the House of Windsor (as was made perfectly clear in Kataryn's original post).
.
 
Last edited:
There was no need to quote my post and say those things, I didn't understand what Kataryn said at first and in her reponse to my post she explained what I didn't understand.
 
House of Windsor-England
House of wittelsbach- Bavaria
House of bourbon-France/Spain
House of Orleans -France
House of orleans-Braganza- brazil
House of Braganza -Portugal
House of Habsburg/austria-este-Austria
House of Holstein gottorp Romanov -Russia
House of Oldenburg-Denmark
House of Schleswig Holstein sonderburg glucksburg-Greece
House of hohenzollern sigmaringen-Romania
House of orange Nassau -Netherlands
House of Grimaldi -Monaco
House of Saxe Coburg and Gotha - Belgium
House of Bernadotte - Sweden
House of Stuart- once to Scotland
House of Bonaparte- France
Princely family of lietchenstein
Norwegian royal family
Imperial house of japan
House of pahavi-?
House of al saud -Saudi Arabia
House of hashimite- Jordan
House of chakri -Thailand?
Ducal house of Luxembourg

These are all I know so far.
 
I'm new here and I haven't read through the entire thread, so I may be repeating what others have already said.
It's a common mistake to think that the surname of the British Royal Family before 1917 was Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. That was the Royal House from which they were descended ie Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. It would be the same as saying the surname of the Spanish Royal Family is Spain. In fact their unused surname was Wettin. Had the Monarchy and all Royal titles been abolished in GB before 1917 Queen Victoria, or Edward VII or George V and their children would have become plain Mr or Mrs Wettin.
It took a Royal Decree in 1952 to prevent the Queen becoming the first Monarch of the House of Mountbatten (her husband's surname) the Decree stated her name and those of her children would continue to be Windsor.
Using the principle that a woman takes her husband's surname upon marriage the surnames of the British Royal Family working backwards in time were :
Windsor since 1917 (see Decree of 1952)
Wettin 1840-1917
Guelph 1714-1840
 
Very interesting post, Mark. :)
However, it has always been my understanding that before George V issued the 1917 Letters Patent, British Royals didn't have a surname at all.

George V's Letters Patent read: "Now, therefore, We, out of Our Royal Will and Authority, do hereby declare and announce that as from the date of this Our Royal Proclamation Our House and Family shall be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor..."
Before that announcement, British Royals (by birth and marriage) belonged to different Royal and Princely Houses (Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, Hanover, Saxe-Meiningen, Brunswick-Wolfenbuttel, Mecklenburg-Strelitz), but didn't actually have a surname. That is the case with some of the European Monarchies to this day.

Wettin was merely the name of the Dynasty or House from which various German princely and ducal dynasties originated, including the Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. The descendants of cadet branches of the House of Wettin do to this day reign in Britain and Belgian - as representatives of the House of Windsor and Saxe-Coburg and Gotha respectively.
 
:previous:
It's generally acknowledged that if members of the Saxon Royal House and the Saxon Grand Ducal and Ducal offshoot branches ever needed a family name or "surname", it would be Wettin.
 
:previous:
Thanks for the information Warren, I was not aware of that. :)
I suppose it makes sense since Wettin was the original House all those houses branched from.
 
When George V decided to change his name he himself was unsure what his surname was. The Royal College of Heralds was consulted and decided it was probably Wettin.
Along with Windsor other alternatives suggested were Tudor-Stewart, Plantagenet, York, England, Lancaster, Fitzroy and d'Este.
 
I vaguely remember Edward VII being associated with the name/House of Wettin. Maybe talk of him changing Windsor to Wettin?
 
The decision to sever the German connections was made in 1917 during World War I, seven years after Edward VII's death. Had GB not gone to war the Royal Family might still be styled Wettin or the Royal House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha today.
Interestingly it was not until after the war that those Peers with British titles who fought for or assisted the enemy were deprived of their titles under the Titles Deprivation Act. It was passed into law in 1917, but no action was taken until 1919 when four Peers were stripped of their titles; three were Royal Dukes, who also lost their rank of Princes of the United Kingdom, and one an Irish Viscount.

Charles Edward, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha; also Duke of Albany, Earl of Clarence and Baron Arklow.
Ernest Augustus, Crown Prince of Hanover; also Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale and Earl of Armagh.
Ernest Augustus, Duke of Brunswick, son of the above.
They all supported Germany in WW I.

Henry Taaffe, 12th Viscount Taaffe.
He lived in and supported Austria during WW I.
 
:previous:
Technically speaking, they weren't stripped of their titles; those titles that suspended. As such, any of their descendants could have applied for the titles' restoration, although none ever did. For instance, the heir to the Duke of Albany (as well as Earl of Clarence and Baron Arklow) title is Hubertus, Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, while the heir to the Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale (as well as Earl of Armagh) title is Prince Ernst August V of Hanover.

One major difference between taking away and suspending a peerage title is that when a title is suspended, it cannot be re-created. I would have loved to see the titles of Duke of Albany or Duke of Cumberland re-created for British Princes in future, but unfortunately they are not available.
 
Jenafran said:
I vaguely remember Edward VII being associated with the name/House of Wettin. Maybe talk of him changing Windsor to Wettin?
The House of Windsor came into being in 1917, well after the death of Edward VII, who in 1901 became the first Monarch of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha [British branch]. It's more likely that if 'Wettin' was raised at all by him, he was pondering the same question that his son George V asked: "if I had to have a surname, what would it be?"

At the time of Edward VII's accession to the throne the transition from House of Hanover to House of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha appears to have passed without comment and it only became an issue during the First World War. Prior to 1917 they didn't really have a name as such so the context is quite different - today the British Royal Family is commonly referred to as "the Windsors" whereas the Royal Family as a whole was never referred to as "the Hanovers" during Victoria's later reign nor "the Saxe-Coburgs" during that of Edward VII.

From today's viewpoint it may seem odd that prior to 1917 the Royal Family was "nameless" but it's no different to that of the current position of the Belgian Royal Family. They also dropped Saxe-Coburg for the same reasons as the British but rather than assuming a new name, they adopted 'de Belgique' or 'of Belgium'. So, while we can refer to the Windsors of Britain, the Grimaldis of Monaco, the Bernadottes of Sweden, the Bourbons of Spain or even the Glucksburgs of Denmark, the Belgian Royal House and the Belgian Royal Family are just..."of Belgium", in effect nameless.
 
Charles Edward, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha; also Duke of Albany, Earl of Clarence and Baron Arklow.
Ernest Augustus, Crown Prince of Hanover; also Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale and Earl of Armagh.
Did their wives bear all those titles too?
 
:previous:
Yes, they did. In Britain, a wife shares all of her husband's titles and styles for the duration of their marriage. However, both a peer and his wife are known by their highest available title.

So, for instance, Prince William's full styles and titles are His Royal Highness Prince William Arthur Philip Louis, Duke of Cambridge, Earl of Strathearn, Baron Carrickfergus. Consequently, Catherine is Her Royal Highness Princess William, Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn, Baroness Carrickfergus. Since "Duke of Cambridge" is William's highest peerage title, they are known as the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

Similarly, the highest peerage title of the Duke of Albany, Earl of Clarence and Baron Arklow was the first one - the Duke of Albany: thus, both the Duke and his wife were known simply as The Duke and Duchess of Albany.
 
:previous:
Technically speaking, they weren't stripped of their titles; those titles that suspended. As such, any of their descendants could have applied for the titles' restoration, although none ever did. For instance, the heir to the Duke of Albany (as well as Earl of Clarence and Baron Arklow) title is Hubertus, Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, while the heir to the Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale (as well as Earl of Armagh) title is Prince Ernst August V of Hanover.

One major difference between taking away and suspending a peerage title is that when a title is suspended, it cannot be re-created. I would have loved to see the titles of Duke of Albany or Duke of Cumberland re-created for British Princes in future, but unfortunately they are not available.

I can understand the claimants to the Royal titles not attempting to have then restored and there are no heirs to the Viscounty of Taaffe, the son of the 12th Viscount died in 1967 and the title became extinct.
 
Warren said:
The House of Windsor came into being in 1917, well after the death of Edward VII, who in 1901 became the first Monarch of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha [British branch]. It's more likely that if 'Wettin' was raised at all by him, he was pondering the same question that his son George V asked: "if I had to have a surname, what would it be?"

At the time of Edward VII's accession to the throne the transition from House of Hanover to House of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha appears to have passed without comment and it only became an issue during the First World War. Prior to 1917 they didn't really have a name as such so the context is quite different - today the British Royal Family is commonly referred to as "the Windsors" whereas the Royal Family as a whole was never referred to as "the Hanovers" during Victoria's later reign nor "the Saxe-Coburgs" during that of Edward VII.

From today's viewpoint it may seem odd that prior to 1917 the Royal Family was "nameless" but it's no different to that of the current position of the Belgian Royal Family. They also dropped Saxe-Coburg for the same reasons as the British but rather than assuming a new name, they adopted 'de Belgique' or 'of Belgium'. So, while we can refer to the Windsors of Britain, the Grimaldis of Monaco, the Bernadottes of Sweden, the Bourbons of Spain or even the Glucksburgs of Denmark, the Belgian Royal House and the Belgian Royal Family are just..."of Belgium", in effect nameless.

A little embarrassed here I meant Edward VIII....I forgot the last I. Sorry.
 
For the British Royal family, the "real" name should be Mountbatten since that is Prince Phillips last name.
 
For the British Royal family, the "real" name should be Mountbatten since that is Prince Phillips last name.
As the British royal family is larger than the children and grandchildren of queen Elizabeth and prince Philip the name of the whole family is Windsor, and with one branch Mountbatten-Windsor, or do you mean that the Kent and Gloucester branches should "adopt" prince Philip's surname?
 
Wikipedia mentioned that the family name of the Belgium Royal House was changed in 1920 from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. Wikipedia shows the family tree of the Kings of the Belgians. However, the statement is made: To date all have belong to the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.
 
Wikipedia mentioned that the family name of the Belgium Royal House was changed in 1920 from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. Wikipedia shows the family tree of the Kings of the Belgians. However, the statement is made: To date all have belong to the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

As i read it the name was changed to "of Belgium" because of WWI sentiments:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Belgium
 
Back
Top Bottom