Windsor/Mountbatten-Windsor: Name of Royal House and Surname


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
So the RF chose to hide their Germanic heritage, (to be more appealing to the British citizenry) as well as to add insult to injury in regards to their decision to leave the Kaiser out in the wind and on his own? I think that is known as spineless.
Would you rather they had left their name in the Germanic form and leave themselves open to criticism and hostility not unlike what Empress Alexandra of Russia experienced?
 
I have always wondered why the Russian royal family didn't promote the relationships between Nicholas and Alexandra to George V - they were, of course, both were his first cousins. But they didn't counter the 'German woman' claims and her relationship to the Kaiser (her first cousin but not his).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
By that point it was already too late. Alexandra had isolated herself from court and mistakenly had the opinion that "The People" loved her and the Tsar so she wasn't going to listen to any gossip. Case in point, Aunt Meichen (Grand Duchess Vladimer) was a German Princess of Mecklenberg-Schwerin yet nobody associated her with Germany, she was as Russian as the two-headed eagle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are right to a certain extent but they never tried and therefore I wonder why they didn't try.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are right to a certain extent but they never tried and therefore I wonder why they didn't try.
A myriad of reasons, I suspect. From all that I have read (Massie's N & A, Kings Alexandra, N & A in their own words, GD Alexander's Once a grand duke & ALways a grand duke and Marie Pavlovna the younger's book, Crawfords Michael and Natasha, etc.) Alexandra was shy and stubborn. Puritanical and demanding. Playing in the glittering Russian Court was a game she was not good at and like a spoilt child, she took her ball and went home. Leaving Minnie and Meichen to vie for most glittering hostess. They were seen and heard and Alexandra was shut up having children. She (Alix) didn't present herself to court and thus it was bound to be miscontrued by the courtiers as snubbing them.
And of course when Rasputin came on the scene. . well. . . that's a whole other kettle of fish.
 
I guess this is the right thread to ask, someone in the Swedish Forum brought this to my attention and I did some research on the matter.

According to Wikipedia,

The most prominent member of the House is Elizabeth II, the reigning monarch over the Commonwealth realms. However, the head of the House of Windsor (cadet branch of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha) is Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester, as the senior male-line descendant of King George V, who founded the house by changing its name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor. The overall head of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, including the Windsor branch, is Andreas, Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.
House of Windsor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've tried researching other websites to find a counter argument, but can't, there is nothing on the Royal Website either.
Hope someone can help.
 
I believe that is incorrect.

If in the House of Windsor ONLY males could inherit than I suppose he would be Richard IV and Head of the House of Windsor.Similar to Hanover when Victoria became Queen, her uncle became King of Hanover because women couldn't inherit. This is the Hanover that the Current Ernst August is the Head of.

Rirchard would be the senior male from the line of George V that is true. But since males and female can becomes King and Queen I think that is a moot point. I don't understand how Elizabeth can be Queen and not Head of the House of Windsor.
 
The article though is referring to the fact that the House of Windsor is a cadet branch of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha which didn't allow female inheritance. That inheritance comes from Prince Albert not Victoria and from Albert then Richard of Gloucester is the senior male and thus Head of the family. The difference is that Britain allowed female inheritance but as the line from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha then it is Gloucester and that Headship will more further apart over future generations.

You show it beautifully with Victoria and Ernst - Victoria's claim to the throne was due to her Hannoverian ancestry but she couldn't be the Head of the House of Hannover due to her gender ans so too Elizabeth can't be the Head of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and its translation into the House of Windsor but she can be The Queen.

It is to do with the different rules between German houses and the British system.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I see...so they are saying basically in the House of Windsor/Saxe-Coburg and Gotha line, Richard is the Head of the House because he is of the male persuasion. That makes sense then. But really, since they are no longer the House of Saxe Goburg and Gotha but actually the House of Windsor....it doesn't make sense? Its basically a moot point. Richard is the senior in a house that no longer exists.

I mean they are talking in hypotheticals.

Not trying to be funny...but that does make sense?
 
What you say makes sense, but I can understand why HM cannot be Head of The House.
 
In simple terms.....the House of Windsor pre 1917 used to be known as the House of Saxe Coburg Gotha which favors favors male progmeniture...as such...because Richard is the grandson of George V he would be the Head of the House.

Edward VII > George V > Henry, Duke of Gloucester > Richard, Duke of Gloucester

You cant be a woman in the German ruling sytem and be head of the House. I am also assuming that women can't rule in the German rulling system? This is a question as I don't follow German royalty to that detail but now that I think about it...there have never been any woman rulers, is that correct?
 
The House of Windsor, under Queen Elizabeth II, is a cadet branch of the House of Saxe-Coburg und Gotha. The Head of the House of Windsor is Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester, because he is the senior male-line descendant of King George V, who founded the house by changing its name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor.

The current head of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is Andreas, Prince of Saxe-Coburg und Gotha, Duke of Saxony. He has been the head of the princely house since 23 Jan 1998, and is the grandson of Charles Edward, Duke of Saxe-Coburg und Gotha, the last ruling duke. He is in the line of succession to the British throne being a great-grandson of Queen Victoria's youngest son Leopold, Duke of Albany, and has both German and British nationality.

But because membership to European royal houses is determined by patrilineal descent, The Prince of Wales and his sons, though they are still the House of Windsor, are members of the cadet branch of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg.. which itself is a cadet branch of the House of Oldenburg.

Christoph, The Prince of Schleswig-Holstein, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher,_Duke_of_Schleswig-Holstein#cite_note-thePeerage-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher,_Duke_of_Schleswig-Holstein#cite_note-OnlineGotha-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher,_Duke_of_Schleswig-Holstein#cite_note-thePeerage-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher,_Duke_of_Schleswig-Holstein#cite_note-OnlineGotha-1has been the head of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg and the entire House of Oldenburg since 1980. His eldest son, Friedrich Ferdinand, Hereditary Prince of Schleswig-Holstein, will eventually inherit both headships.

This may mean a split of the House of Windsor when Charles becomes king.

The Head of the House of Windsor (Saxe-Coburg-Gotha branch) will continue to fall on the male-line descendants of the Duke of Gloucester.

The Head of the House of Windsor (Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg branch) will fall to Charles and William, respectively, thus uniting the monarch with the headship of his house.

The agnatic descendants of Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh are and will remain members of the House of Oldenburg.
 
You cant be a woman in the German ruling sytem and be head of the House. I am also assuming that women can't rule in the German rulling system? This is a question as I don't follow German royalty to that detail but now that I think about it...there have never been any woman rulers, is that correct?

Since Germany subscribed to Salic Law, you are correct.

This law has had a formative influence on the tradition of statute law in Central Europe, especially in the German states, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, parts of Italy, Austria and Hungary, Romania, and the Balkans.

It regulates succession according to sex, barring women from inheriting any sovereign estate, title or ancestral lands.

The basis of the law was to preserve the noble bloodlines through male inheritance in perpetuity. A female would marry and take the name of her husband's house, and her children would continue her husband's bloodline but not her own.. thus, she was prevented from "tainting" the blood of her father with the blood of her husband.. nor was she allowed to inherit any of his ancestral property or title.

On very rare occasions, exceptions were made, but only if ALL the male line branches had been exhausted, including distant male relatives. In such cases, the closest female descendant of the last reigning titleholder was allowed to inherit, but she was not allowed to reign. That duty fell to her husband, and then to their sons and so forth.

Though Britain does practice male-preference primogeniture, they never fully subscribed to the Salic Law which dominated both France and Germany's statutes of inheritance.

And as in my previous post, membership of a royal European house is based solely on patrilineal descent.. which makes it virtually impossible for a female to be the head of any royal house.
 
Mountbatten-Windsor vs Wessex

I would just like to say that James and Louise are not Mountbatten-Windsors. Mountbatten-Windsor is only used by male line descendants of the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh who do not have a royal titles at birth. at the moment there is no one that this applies to. When Prince Harry and Lord Severn have children then they will be Mountbatten-Windsors but only then and that is only if the Queen is alive then because when Prince Harry becomes the son not grandson of a monarch he will transmit a royal titles to his children. They bear Wessex in place of a surname because they are not entitled to a surname like William Wales and Harry Wales. The royal family is one of the british anomolies in surnames with the dukes of Buccleuch and the earls of Mar (not Kellie) for whom the normal rules do not apply.
 
If that's the case, and only male-line descandants can. Why did Princess Anne use it for her second marriage?

Lady Louise Windsor is known as Windsor not as Lady Louise Wessex.

There are 12 members of the royal family, all the ones close to the throne, who have at one point used Windsor/Mountbatten-Windsor as a surname. They can use the surname, it just isn't used officially, due to the ambigious wording of the Order-In-Council issued in 1960.
 
The actual wording of the 1960s LPs is very clear - for any descendent needing a surname it is Mountbatten-Windsor. So Charles, Andrew, Edward, William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise and James IF they ever need a legal surname and not a style or title then that surname is Mountbatten-Windsor.

That being said - they don't generally need to use one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Come to think of it, the surname Charles would use if he needed one at all would probably be Mountbatten-Windsor correct?


Actually no: as I said on another thread, shortly after her accession, the Queen declared that the issue of her marriage and their descendants in the MALE line should bear the name of Windsor.

Hope this helps,

Alex
 
Thanks Diarist. I've really been enjoying reading what you have posted and looking forward to reading many more.

Out of curiosity I did go and read the letters patent issued in the matter of the Windsor/Mountbatten-Windsor surname. From what I read it states "Now therefore I declare My Will and Pleasure that, while I and My Children shall continue to be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor, My descendants other than descendants enjoying the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness and the titular dignity of Prince or Princess and female descendants who marry and their descendants shall bear the name of Mountbatten-Windsor."

I really love these days where I actually learn something. :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The majority of the members of the royal household have made use of the surname. I believe they prefer it to simply Windsor, as it honours there father as well.
 
Actually no: as I said on another thread, shortly after her accession, the Queen declared that the issue of her marriage and their descendants in the MALE line should bear the name of Windsor.

Hope this helps,

Alex

She said that in 1952 and then issued new LPs in 1960 that actually changed that to the fact that those male line descendents who needed a surname would have the surname 'Mountbatten-Windsor'.

It is that name that was used on Charles first marriage register and Anne's I think. I am not sure about Andrew and Edward.
 
I always assumed that M-W as a surname would officially come in to play with Harry's children. Silly me.

I am pretty sure Charles didn't use a surname at the 1981 wedding. Don't know about 2005.
 
Last edited:
There are a number of reports, coming out since 1981, that on the marriage certificate Charles name was put down as 'Mountbatten-Windsor' as was Anne's.

The column for surname was filled in and that was what was put there.
The alternative would be to leave the surname column blank.
Who put it there though is another question as I have also read that it was done after Charles and Diana left the registry at St Paul's - so they had signed it and then it was filled in with Mountbatten-Windsor.

Andrew also used Mountbatten-Windsor on his marriage certificate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have a question also. Why then are Prince William and Prince Harry called by the last name Wales in the Military ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have a question also. Why then are Prince William and Prince Harry called by the last name Wales in the Military ?

Most likely because as they are HRH they do not use a surname. As they are Princes of Wales. they go by William Wales and Harry Wales.
 
I have a question also. Why then are Prince William and Prince Harry called by the last name Wales in the Military ?


This is also traditional - the royal children of a royal duke use that duke's designation as their surname. The York girls also use York as a surname although it actually isn't their surname at all but it is also a lot simpler than Mountbatten-Windsor. (Maybe Philip should have adopted 'Smith' as his name when he became a British subject)
 
Can you imagine if they had their original surnames and put them together? The House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha-Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg. I like it actually!



Dont forget Wettin

The House of Wettin-Saxe-Coburg-Gotha-Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg

But in all actuality I believe since the current royal family is a decedent from Queen Victoria, who was formally Princess Victoria of Kent, they should be the House of Wettin-Hanover or just the house of Hanover.

However, I do like the Idea of House of Hanover-Kent. After all Victoria's Father was Duke of Kent.
 
I always assumed that M-W as a surname would officially come in to play with Harry's children. Silly me.

I am pretty sure Charles didn't use a surname at the 1981 wedding. Don't know about 2005.

HRH Charles only used his given names during the Marriage ceremony in 1981 which Di famously flubbed.
 
HRH Charles only used his given names during the Marriage ceremony in 1981 which Di famously flubbed.


That is all people do use during the cereminy but when they fill in the paperwork a surname is one of the spaces.
 
Charles last name

Hello,
i'm from Germany an I hope my english is good enough for you to understand.

The last two hours I read a lot about the british royal family and I have found a few different informations about some facts. Maybe you can help me and tell me what is right an wrong.

First I have read that the names "Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha" and "Battenberg" were changed into "Windsor" and "Mountbatten" in 1917 by King Georg V.
So HM The Queen is a born Windsor and HRH Prince Philip was born as a Mountbatten.
My first question: After or with the marriage of this both, has anyone of them changed it's last name? Or are they still a Windsor and a Mountbatten?

And whats about the children like Charles. Whats normal in the british royal house. Does the childs get the surname of the Queen or of the father, even if he is only prince consort and not the king?

And then I read something about a declaration of the queen from 1952/1960. That means that she bears the name of Windsor. Her descendants should be Windsor-Mountbatten's, unless they are bearing one of the titels HRH, Prince or Princess.

So Charles is a known as His Royal Highness and should bear the name Windsor. But I can find a lot of pages, were Charles is called a Mountbatten-Windsor.
(The german wikipedia: Charles Mountbatten-Windsor, Prince of Wales
or another german pagewith a portrait: Prinz Charles - Portrait auf WUNDERWEIB.de)

I'm really confused :confused:, please help a new german member.
Thousand thanks :)
 
Last edited:
In 1917 the British Royal Family changed its family name from the German name of Prince Albert to that of Windsor so Elizabeth was born with Windsor as her family name.

In the same year Prince Louis of Battenburg changed his name from the German to Mountbatten. Prince Louis' daughter was Prince Philip's mother.

In 1947, when Philip renounced his Greek and Danish titles he took the Anglicised version of his mother's family's name and became Philip Mountbatten and it was with that name that he was married.

Both Prince Charles and Princess Anne were born with the surname of Mountbatten, but never used it as George VI issued LPs to give them the styles of HRH Prince/Princess from birth - otherwise Anne would have been born Lady Anne Mountbatten and Charles would have been Lord Charles Mountbatten, Earl of Merioneth.

When the Queen ascended the throne in 1952 she issued a statement that said that her children were to have the family name of Windsor - upsetting Philip in the process as it meant that he couldn't give his name to his own children.

In 1960 a compromise was reached whereby those children and grandchildren who aren't HRH Prince/Princess will have the surnam Mountbatten-Windsor. The first to formally use that name was Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, especially in the wedding service for Prince William.

ALL of the Queen's children, if they have a surname at all it is Mountbatten-Windsor and on both Anne and Charles' first marriage registers that name appears but it isn't clear who put it in - they themselves or some official filling in the paperwork.

The announcement in 1960 also said that the Mountbatten-Windsor name only applied to those descendents who needed a surname and those who are HRH Prince/Princess don't need a surname on a day to day basis.

Technically Charles, William, Harry, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Louise and Sophie (and the spouses of the males) are Mountbatten-Windsor due to the joining of their father's and their mother's names.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ive
Back
Top Bottom