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

[Ive]

Thank you very much iluvbertie.
So if I have understood right, The Queen is still a Windsor an her husband still a Mountbatten but they do not need to bear a surname, because of her titles.
And Charles and Anne were born as Mountbattens but they never used the surname for the same reasons. Right so far?

So it was normal that the children bears the name of the father even though the mother hold a higer style or title? And thats what the Queen changed in 1952? Very interesting. I thought the person with the higher titel hands the name down to the childs.

So the Queen curtails a right of her husband and in 1960 the compromise gave Philip a part of his old rights back. And from now on the childs should named Mountbatten-Windsor.
So Charles and Anne were born as Mountbatten, changed the name in 1952 in Windsor an then 1960 in Mountbatten-Windsor, Andrew and Edward were born as Mountbatten-Windsor. But not really, because they do not need a surname too? In the birth certificates is it written, but it is not used? Am I right?

You write, that the spouses of the males get Mountbatten-Windsors too, so Kate is a M.-W. today, not longer a Middleton? But she do not use the surname because she is a RH.
So if a woman marries a member of the royal family, she gets the name, if a man marries a member of the royal family he do not change his name, an stop using his "old" surname, if he became a RH. Right?

Thanks for your patience.

 

[NGalitzine]

Yes if a woman marries into the royal family she assumes the surname (if required) of her husband.
If a man marries into the royal family he keeps his own surname.....Philip Mountbatten, Anthony Armstrong-Jones, Mark Phillips, etc and with the exception of Prince Philip his children bear his surname.
The name of the royal house remains Windsor but descendents of QEII requiring a surname use the family name Mountbatten-Windsor.

 

[Ive]

I think I figured it out with your help (if i have not done a mistake in my last summary post), there is just one little question. Do they not have a surname or have they one on the paper which they are simply not using.
Is the surname cleared if a person gained a title or just (i do not know the right word) muted/silent?

 

[NGalitzine]

They have a surname but generally an HRH has no use for a surname. They only sign with their Christian name.
The Duke of Cambridge uses William Wales as an officer in the armed forces. The Duke of York's children went by Beatrice York and Eugenie York at university. The then Prince Richard of Gloucester went by Richard Gloucester when he was a practicing architect in London.

 

[Osipi]

It still is a pet peeve of mine when we hear of females that have married into the royal family still referred to by their former surname such as Camilla Parker-Bowles, Kate Middleton and Sarah Ferguson. In my mind I feel that at least the media could use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor.

 

[royalistbert]

I hate that two. Well at least with Camilla they are getting right finely.

 

[csw]

It still is a pet peeve of mine when we hear of females that have married into the royal family still referred to by their former surname such as Camilla Parker-Bowles, Kate Middleton and Sarah Ferguson. In my mind I feel that at least the media could use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor.

I agree. It seems like the media thinks people are too simple-minded to recognize them when referred to by their proper names.

 

[SLV]

Why would W&H and B&E use those names if they had the W-M option at hand? Now they are associated with these names, but that wasn't the case when they started using them.

 

[Ive]

Sorry, sometimes for me it is difficult to translate/understand.
The Duke of Cambridge, Prince William is William Wales and his Brother is Harry Wales. The Reason? The father of them is The Prince of Wales?

And you Osipi are angry about womans which are keeping the old surname after a wedding? So is this made by the media or is it really? Is Camilla Parker-Bowles still a Parker Bowles and Kate still a Middleton or are both of them Mountbatten-Windsors (and do not use the surnames)?

Confused again?!?!
Have the Ladys found a loophole to keep the old (used) surnames?

 

[Ive]

I hate that two. Well at least with Camilla they are getting right finely.

my english is not good enough to understand this joke...

But I think you do not like her and her name sounds like something stupid and she not deserves the name M-W

 

[Kataryn]

The point is that those descendants of the Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh who "require" a surname use "Mountbatten-Windsor".

When do they require a surname? I can think only of the wedding register?
How about a passport?

Those with a title never require a surname, they use their title instead, as is custom within the Uk peerage.

All male descendants of the queen got a title of their own before they wed. Thus they did not need a surname.

Princess Anne did not get a title on her wedding, thus she signed "Anne Mountbatten-Windsor". If her mother hadn't been queen on her marriage day, she could have used her title of "Princess Anne of Edinburgh" and signed "Anne Edinburgh". Once she was the queen's daughter, she did not share her father's Royal Ducal title anymore, so had none and used the "Mountbatten-Windsor" as decreed.

Beatrice, Eugenie and Harry are the children of a Royal Duke/Prince, thus use their father's title as a surname as is tradition with the children of Royal peers. Thus Beatrice is Beatrice York, Eugenie is Eugenie York and Harry is Harry Wales. William used to be William Wales, is now William Cambridge, but decided to stick with the "Wales" name as long as he is a serving officer. There's a lot of precedence within the aristocracy that heirs kept their old surname even once they succeeded to the main title for their professional purposes.

Prince James of Wessex is known as James Viscount Severn - when he marries as long as his father is still The Earl of Wessex, he will sign the register as James Severn. His sister Louise will sign it as "Louise Mountbatten-Windsor" as she has no title of her own (the Lady is "by courtesy" only) and she does not use the "Princess Louise of Wessex". In that case she didn't need a surname but uses Louise Wessex instead.

 

[Osipi]

my english is not good enough to understand this joke...

But I think you do not like her and her name sounds like something stupid and she not deserves the name M-W

First of all, welcome to TRF! I think your command of the English language is excellent!

I think with William and Harry using Wales in the armed services, they are just omitting the "of" part and the same goes for Beatrice and Eugenie.

As with the use of a former surname, it doesn't actually make me angry but is more along the lines of an annoyance that rubs me the wrong way. I have learned so much about royalty and titles and styles and the ins and outs of protocol and what's correct and not correct to use since I joined here 4 years ago when I came here originally for Ascot hats on a whim.

I think that what royalistbert was chuckling about was that over the years since Charles and Camilla married, Camilla is referred to most times now as The Duchess of Cornwall rather than Camilla Parker-Bowles which was something the Daily Mail had a penchant for doing.

These ladies have not found a loophole anywhere as far as surnames go as being married to their husbands, they would take their surnames (and titles and styles) from their husbands. I think that as titled royalty and really never using surnames, the media just opts out to use their former surnames which, to me, isn't very correct and is kind of unflattering to the woman.

 

[EIIR]

So, potentially the firstborn daughter of a future King William V and Queen Catherine who marries a chap with the surname McDonald, would have children with the surname Mountbatten-Windsor-McDonald. The royal house would still be Windsor, though. Have I got that right?

I'd be tempted to simply issues LPs, or include in the coming legislation across the Commonwealth realms to change the succession rights to the British throne, that every monarch and heir to the throne whether male or female in future will bear the surname of Windsor, full stop.

 

[Artemisia]

It's pretty simple, actually.

All the descendants of the Queen and Prince Philip who have the style of Royal Highness and the title of British Prince/Princess belong to the House and Family of Windsor.

All the descendants of the Queen and Prince Philip who do not have the style of Royal Highness and the title of British Prince/Princess belong to the House of Windsor but Family of Mountbatten-Windsor (the latter being their surname).

The first-born daughter of William V and Queen Catherine will be a Princess and a Royal Highness; as such, her surname and house name will be Windsor.
If she's a first-born child of the couple, she will most probably be Heiress Apparent to the Throne; it is thus likely Letters Patent will be issued to guarantee the House name remains Windsor, repeating the situation with Prince Philip. If she is the first-born daughter but not child (in short, if she has an elder brother), then her maiden name will be Windsor. When she marries a Mr McDonald, she'll become Her Royal Highness Princess X, Mrs McDonald.

 

[NGalitzine]

Ive,
Neither Catherine or Camilla use a surname because they are British Royal Highnesses so they have no need for one. They are formally known by their titles HRH The Duchess of Cambridge and HRH The Duchess of Cornwall. Sometimes our press just like to dumb things down and use their maiden names as if the public couldn't figure out who is who in the BRF. If for some reason they were to need a surname it would be Mountbatten-Windsor.

Prince Charles sons were known as HRH Prince William of Wales (before he was created a duke) and HRH Prince Harry of Wales. For simplicity they are known in the service as William Wales and Harry Wales along with their military ranks. No need to use formal royal titles in the service where military rank is more important, and a hyphenated surname can be rather cumbersome.

 

[Molly2101]

It really bothers me when they refer to the wives as Camilla Parker-Bowles, Sophie Rhys-Jones and Kate Middleton, but I guess it's going to happen for the rest of their lives in the Royal family so we should get used to it.

When Edward owned his own company he went by Edward Windsor, not Mountbatten-Windsor. There were articles around the time of Sophie's pregnancy with Louise that stated that a daugther for Edward would mean please Philip as it would mean the return of the name Mountbatten-Windsor, however we all know for simplicity she is styled as The Lady Louise Windsor. In school, however, she is known as Mountbatten-Windsor. Images from a school netball game showed Louise with a name badge on saying L.M.W. (Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, not using "Lady".)

The only current Royal who will continue the line of Mountbatten-Windsor surnames will be Edward's son James as Harry's children will be Prince and Princess's. Although he will eventually be James, Duke of Edinburgh, his children will be Lady Christian Name Mountbatten-Windsor etc. as James' surname is Mountbatten-Windsor, even though we know him as Viscount Severn. Obviously Harry's grandchildren will likely have the surname Mountbatten-Windsor, by then Charles may have changed it to merely Windsor. (Not likely, I know.)

 

[Duke of Leaside]

Thank you very much iluvbertie.
So if I have understood right, The Queen is still a Windsor an her husband still a Mountbatten but they do not need to bear a surname, because of her titles.
...
So Charles and Anne were born as Mountbatten, changed the name in 1952 in Windsor an then 1960 in Mountbatten-Windsor, Andrew and Edward were born as Mountbatten-Windsor. But not really, because they do not need a surname too? In the birth certificates is it written, but it is not used? Am I right?
...

Thanks for your patience.

One way to think of this is that the Royal Family (those who are Prince/Princesses and HRH) have a (hidden) surname but don't use it. But it exists so that it can be passed down to descendants who may need to use it.

So you're correct Ive about the surname changes through the years of Charles and Anne.

I find it interesting that the Queen, upon marriage went from her maiden name of Windsor to her husband's surname of Mountbatten as per normal. Their first two children (Charles and Anne) were born and they were Mountbatten like their parents. Then after the Queen acceded to the throne she changed her and her children's surnames to Windsor. In 1960 she changed her children's names to Mountbatten-Windsor but interestingly kept her own name Windsor. So it continues to be the House of Windsor as per letters patent and also as per tradition and until (the present or future) monarch says differently, it will remain the House Of Windsor as per the Queen's Letters patent of 1952 and 1960.

Philip's surname is Mountbatten, the Queen's is Windsor and the male-line descendants (except married females) are Mountbatten-Windsor.

I believe what started the whole push for the 1952 Letters Patent was Earl Mountbatten of Burma (Philip's uncle) saying early in 1952 that the House of Mountbatten is here and what a glorious day it is. Of course he was wrong. According to custom while the Queen's (hidden) surname was Mountbatten the House was still Windsor. And it would only become the House of Mountbatten when Charles became King. But it would have probably worked out that way if Uncle Louis (Earl Mountbatten) had kept his mouth shut. He was too anxious and jumped the gun by one generation.
Queen Victoria's maiden name was (probably) Guelph and became Wettin upon marriage to Prince Albert but under Victoria it was still the HOUSE of Hanover. They never used surnames then so it was not an issue but the fact remains that the House changed to Saxe-Coburg-Gotha only when Edward VII succeeded Victoria.

The House of Windsor could (should) have continued without any Letters Patent being issued and then Charles would become the first monarch of the House of Mountbatten (although Uncle Louis wouldn't have lived to see it.)

Ironically because of Louis Mountbatten's bragging early in the Queen's reign, PM Sir Winston Churchill and Queen Mary among others were horrified and recommended the Queen issue the 1952 Letter's patent. In 1960, with the impending birth of Prince Andrew and with Philip's and (no doubt Louis's) influence the name was changed again. By this time Queen Mary was dead and Churchill was no longer in office.

I say ironically, because if nothing had been said in the early weeks of the Queen's reign, Philip's wife (The Queen) and his children would (still) bear his (hidden) surname Mountbatten. Now his children have it as part of a hyphenated name and his wife has reverted to her maiden name. And the House is still Windsor. Unless new letters patent are issued, then the House (oddly in terms of custom) will remain Windsor and the surname will remain Mountbatten-Windsor.

It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, happens when Charles becomes King!

 

[Dman]

JB ‏@Royal_beans 2h
On Feb 8, 1960, Queen Elizabeth II issued an Order-in-Council stating that she and her family would be known as the House of Windsor

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Lord Beaverbrook, who owned the Daily Express, the Sunday Express, and the Evening Standard, wrote:

The Queen could never see the name of Windsor, chosen by her grandfather, abandoned by the royal house.
​

The proclamation of the House of Windsor was announced on July 17, 1917.
King George V and his issue were to be referred to as the House of Windsor.
Was there any written declaration stating that Windsor would be their surname?

 

[Rudolph]

I'm not sure prior to 1952. Someone else can maybe answer.

There was a proclamation in 1952 that the name and house would be Windsor

There was a proclamation in 1960 that the house would be Windsor and the Queen's descendants bear the name Mountbatten-Windsor

 

[Skippyboo]

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

George V maybe wasn't thinking about a surname since with 4 Princes whose children would Princes & Princesses and Princess Mary's children would have a surname from their father. By the time, a surname is needed he would be long gone.

Technically, the House name would not change until Charles came to the throne. Victoria was Hanover but Edward was Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. So Charles could change the house name if he wanted.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Ish]

The proclamation of the House of Windsor was announced on July 17, 1917.
King George V and his issue were to be referred to as the House of Windsor.
Was there any written declaration stating that Windsor would be their surname?

I highly doubt there would have been. Royals using surnames (at least in Britain) is a rather new thing. The Tudors, Stewarts/Stuarts, and the Bruces of course all had actual surnames, but that was owing to the fact that these dynasties originated in the nobility instead of royalty. The Hanovers didn't have an actual surname, nor did the Saxe-Coburg and Gothas. When the descendants of such individuals needed to use a surname (and ceased to be royal) the name changed pretty much depending on the person; typically it was Fitz-Something or Other (FitzRoy, FitzJames, FitzClarence, FitzGeorge, etc). I kind of doubt George V was worried about what names his great-grandchildren would take. Given as the Windsors were all born after the Queen had made her proclamation that her descandants would be surnamed Mountbatten-Windsor, I wouldn't be surprised if it was that decision that set that the children of the Kents and Gloucesters would be Windsors instead of Fitz-Whatevers.

 

[Skippyboo]

Wasn't the Fitz prefix used for mostly royal illegitimate children in the Stuart and Hanover eras?


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Ish]

Yes.

Actually, looking at the descendants of Queen Victoria closer, and "Windsor" was used as a surname pretty much automatically; by the son of Prince Arthur of Connaught (Alastair Windsor, 2nd Duke of Connaught and Strathearn). So it seems to reason that George V was aware that "Windsor" was his future great-grandchildren's surname.

 

[Skippyboo]

Alastair lost his Prince title in 1917 Great Name/new HRH rules. Afterwards, he went by Earl of Macduff as he was heir to his mother's title, Duchess of Fife. When his father died, he became Duke of Connaught and Strathearn, he would also became Duke of Fife but he died at age 28.

He would not really need a surname. In 1917, all of the German names in the extended family were switched to British ones. That's how the Battenburgs became the Mountbattens.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Rudolph]

The proclamation of the House of Windsor was announced on July 17, 1917.
King George V and his issue were to be referred to as the House of Windsor.
Was there any written declaration stating that Windsor would be their surname?

I went back and checked and the 1917 Proclamation does state the name shall be Windsor.

"We, out of our royal will and authority do hereby declare and announce that as from the date of this Our Royal Proclamtion Our House and Our Family shall be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor and that all the descendants in the male line of Our said grandmother Queen Victoria who are subjects of these Realms other than female descendants who may marry or have married shall bear the said Name of Windsor"

George R.I.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Rudolph, Thank you for checking the 1917 Proclamation.
​

If Queen Elizabeth II of England had not had Prince Edward or Prince Andrew, would the name of the House of Windsor have been change to the House of Mountbatten-Windsor?
​

Just as how her grandfather, King George V had the right to change his dynasty's name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, so did Queen Elizabeth II.
She was no more bound by his ruling than he, George V, had been by any preceding monarch's.
However, in 1952 Elizabeth II was new to the throne.
She may not have wanted to make an error of judgement if she had insisted on the House of Mountbatten in 1952.
​

When the census is taken, what surname is used for the Queen and other Royals: Windsor or Windsor-Mountbatten?
​

 

[Iluvbertie]

Probably not. The reason why the name change was because there was advice given that Andrew would be seen as illegitimate due to having his mother's maiden name rather than his father's name.


Today it wouldn't matter so long as the parent's were married but in 1960 a child took their father's name.

 

[Skippyboo]

Queen Mary went to Churchill after Lord Mountbatten was bragging about the House of Mountbatten and thus the 1952 announcement of retaining Windsor


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Osipi]

When the census is taken, what surname is used for the Queen and other Royals: Windsor or Windsor-Mountbatten?
​

My guess would be that they would be listed by their titles rather than with a surname.