Why Harry/Henry??

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Dee Anna

Of course.

He signed as George R because he was King George, the name he took (from his names given at birth) when taking the throne. I don't think anyone ever referred to him as King Albert or King Bertie.

The reason he signed as George R was because he was King. The R stands for Rex, Latin for king and Elizabeth R is Regina, Latin for queen.

[Biri]

But at the altar he will say: "I, Henry Charles Albert David, take thee, Rachel Meghan, to be my wedded wife (...)"

[Ish]

Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla

Would it not be interesting that when Prince Henry of Wales' wedding is broadcasted and some reporters refer to him as Prince Henry and some reporters refer to him as Prince Harry, some people actually assume there are two gentlemen: Henry and Harry?

I think what’s more likely is people are going to be really confused when it gets to the vows and Harry is identified as Henry Charles Albert David and Meghan’s identified as Rachel Meghan Markle.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Biri

But at the altar he will say: "I, Henry Charles Albert David, take thee, Rachel Meghan, to be my wedded wife (...)"

Yes, he will; that's the whole idea behind using a different name than your official names - only on official occasions (wedding or a graduation ceremony) your full (official) name will be used (and of course on any official document).

As an official occasion, their full names will be used. Not sure why you bolded 'Rachel' as she will both say 'Rachel' and 'Meghan' (as is normal practice for anyone with more than one name - anytime your official name is used both your first and second (and third and fourth - as in Harry's case) names are used) - and Harry will not just be called and use 'Henry' but 'Henry Charles Albert David' - I don't think anyone would expect him to use that in daily life .

Originally Posted by Ish

I think what’s more likely is people are going to be really confused when it gets to the vows and Harry is identified as Henry Charles Albert David and Meghan’s identified as Rachel Meghan Markle.

I don't think it is that confusing; Harry and Meghan will be standing upfront, so I am quite sure everyone will understand who they are referring to

Would Meghan's surname be used? It is common in the Netherlands but I seem to remember that it isn't in the UK. And if so, I would expect it to be used for both...

[Pranter]

I don't think so...Ii've not seen a service where last names were used by a officiant.


LaRae

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Would Meghan's surname be used? It is common in the Netherlands but I seem to remember that it isn't in the UK. And if so, I would expect it to be used for both...

No. It will be Henry Charles Albert David and Rachel Meghan. No last names for either.

[Somebody]

Thanks for the confirmation; that's what I thought it would be!

[royal rob]

Originally Posted by Somebody

I don't think it is that confusing; Harry and Meghan will be standing upfront, so I am quite sure everyone will understand who they are referring to



Would Meghan's surname be used? It is common in the Netherlands but I seem to remember that it isn't in the UK. And if so, I would expect it to be used for both...

I see Mr Bean standing up “oops sorry everyone wrong wedding “ as he stubbles up the aisle ha ha

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

No. It will be Henry Charles Albert David and Rachel Meghan. No last names for either.

Indeed. The only time a last name is said during a wedding ceremony (well regular couple) would be when they are presented for the first time as the new mr and mrs...... Of course in a royal wedding that is not the ending.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by royal rob

I see Mr Bean standing up “oops sorry everyone wrong wedding “ as he stubbles up the aisle ha ha

Oh sheeesh! Thanks. I needed a really good laugh and there it is.

[Leopoldine]

Originally Posted by Skippyboo

The birth registry for George and Charlotte list William's full name William Arthur Philip Louis but he only signed them as William. George VI signed Elizabeth's wedding registry as George R and we all know that Albert is first name.

So Harry signing as Harry isn't a problem. Google US Presidents signatures half you can't even make out. Check out George W Bush

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geor..._Signature.svg

It doesn't even look like English.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

You should see Nixon's signatures from the mid-seventies.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla

Would it not be interesting that when Prince Henry of Wales' wedding is broadcasted and some reporters refer to him as Prince Henry and some reporters refer to him as Prince Harry, some people actually assume there are two gentlemen: Henry and Harry?

Why woudl they do that?

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by Denville

Why woudl they do that?

Happens all the time. I remember, I think it was the closing ceremony of the olympics where he was announced as Prince Henry and nobody knew who they were on about.

It all depends on the reporter, David Dimbleby will definitely refer to him by his christian name, where as the likes of ITV reporters, it'll be Harry all the way.

[jacqui24]

His legal name is Henry. However, he goes by Harry. It's just like if someone's name is Christopher, but goes by Chris.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

Indeed. The only time a last name is said during a wedding ceremony (well regular couple) would be when they are presented for the first time as the new mr and mrs...... Of course in a royal wedding that is not the ending.

Within some cultures - including the British one which is the one being discussed here

In cultures where a civil ceremony is required before the religious one, it seems that surnames are typically mentioned. See for example the wedding of the Dutch king and queen (around minute 6).

[Gaudete]

Some English names come with alternative pet forms. Henry/Harry is just one of them. The only one I’ve never quite understood is the name Margaret - which for some reason saw lots of ladies called Margaret in the 1930s to the 1950s, called “Peggy” instead. Peggy wasn’t their legal name, Margaret was. But they used a totally unrelated name because it was just tradition for people called Margaret to be called Peggy.

I don’t think Lady Thatcher ever went down that route of course....

[Lee-Z]

For what it's worth, an origin of 10 nicknames
The Origins of 10 Nicknames | Mental Floss

btw Daisy for Margaret is mentioned in this article
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellis_perennis

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Gaudete

Some English names come with alternative pet forms. Henry/Harry is just one of them. The only one I’ve never quite understood is the name Margaret - which for some reason saw lots of ladies called Margaret in the 1930s to the 1950s, called “Peggy” instead. Peggy wasn’t their legal name, Margaret was. But they used a totally unrelated name because it was just tradition for people called Margaret to be called Peggy.

I don’t think Lady Thatcher ever went down that route of course....

Margaret was often abbreveited to Meg or Meggy and in earlier times such names (which were very common, there being fewer names in circulation) were also used in a rhyming version.. ie Meg was rhymed with Peg or Peggy. same thng happened with Mary.. it was often abbreviated to Mall or Moll or Molly, and that rhymed with Polly.

[Osipi]

My grandmother was a Margaret of Irish descent and went by the name of Maggie.

[Denville]

True, the names that were very common, like Mary, Elizabeth, Margaret, had numerious abbreviations.. Margaret had Maggie, Meg, Margery, Madge, Peggy, Greta or Grittie, Margie, Meta, Rita and Daisy...
and it is very much in Irish culture for people to be known by these abbreviations or sometimes a name they were not even given at christening.. I am never called by my first name.. and sometimes I have to give it as its on my passport, and my pals are amused to hear me being called by it...