Originally Posted by Somebody
Other countries (The Netherlands and Denmark) already found a modus operandi for this situation (although Christian is of course not one of the female heirs).
In the case of prince Claus (and prince Bernhard and prince Hendrik before him), he did NOT get his wife's surname but was made a prince of the Netherlands (just like his daughter-in-law Máxima was made a princess of the Netherlands). Their children took both their mother's and father's titles; using one of their mother's titles (van Oranje-Nassau) as surname (mostly shortened to 'van Oranje'); which is also considered the name of the royal house. So, I don't see a reason for Amalia's husband to take on her surname; her children will surely be 'van Oranje(-Nassau)'.
In Denmark, they did something similar - albeit the addition of 'count of Monpezat' was a more recent one.
Even in Belgium, they already found a modus operandi, given that they wanted to make sure that Astrid's children were 'princes and princesses of Belgium' - using the surname 'of Belgium' -, so in the 90's they first made sure that their children added their mother's title/surname and later on also that her husband received her title (adding it to his own palet of titles - but the one that is primarily used in Belgium).
Originally Posted by Stefan
And this was also done by his tow predecessors as consort of Queens as Queen Juliana was also Duchess zu Mecklenburg and Queen Beatrix and her sisters are aklso Princesses zur Lippe-Biesterfeld. So one can exxpect that this will also be done for the future husband of Princess Catharina-Amalia.
To add to the posts above: Legally, the situations with respect to fathers' and mothers' titles/surnames actually vary a great deal between the Netherlands, Denmark, and Belgium.
Netherlands: Both "of Orange-Nassau" from "Prince of Orange-Nassau" and "van Amsberg" from "Jonkheer van Amsberg" are recognized as surnames. The Royal Decree of February 16, 1966 decreed that the children of Princess Beatrix and Prince Claus would "de volgende titels en namen
dragen: Zijne (Hare) Koninklijke Hoogheid Prins (Prinses) der Nederlanden, Prins (Prinses) van Oranje-Nassau, Jonkheer (Jonkvrouwe) van Amsberg."
Denmark: "of Monpezat" is recognized as a part of the title "Count(ess) of Monpezat" rather than a surname. The press release
via which the Queen created her descendants Count(ess) of Monpezat addressed it as a title ("tillægges titel af ’greve af Monpezat"), and the members of the Royal House who carry the title Count(ess) of Monpezat have still not been civilly registered with a surname.
Belgium: Under King Baudouin, the Belgian court claimed that for female-line children, "of Belgium" was merely a title, not a surname, but King Albert II believed otherwise. King Philippe overruled both of his predecessors with his 2015 royal decree
, according to which "of Belgium" is no longer viewed as a (legal) surname even for the male line. Today, for the children and male-line grandchildren of Princess Astrid, "of Austria-Este (Habsburg-Lorraine)" is viewed as their legal surname
Originally Posted by JR76
Due to the adoption of a new Swedish name law in 2017 a future consort of Princess Estelle would not have to take her surname given that a child of theirs would automatically receive the surname of the parent who gave birth to them unless otherwise reported to the Swedish Tax Office.
Wasn't that the situation under the old name law as well? According to the the second paragraph of §1
, if the parents' surnames were different from one another, and they made no report to the Tax Office, the child received the mother's surname.