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

[Claire]

She was at first called Lady Louise Windsor officially.

Announcement of the christening of Lady Louise Windsor | The Royal Family

I don't think it was rescinded - simply that they believed a double surname should be cumbersome.
Louise and James are both registered as Mountbatten- Windsor on their birth certificates. And that is how they have both entered schooling. However Louise name tag at school definitely just said Windsor, but her full surname was used on certificates ect. She competes in the horse riding competitions as Mountbatten-Windsor.
So they appear to use it as both.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The CC usually uses Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor when referring to Louise e.g. all the entries for the Jubilee and only use James' title - Viscount Severn. In day-to-day use I can see Louise and James using Windsor - just as William and Harry used Wales and Beatrice and Eugenie used York when all six have the same surname - Mountbatten-Windsor as shown when William took legal action in France when he couldn't use his title and so he was William Mountbatten-Windsor.

I have taught many children with double-barrelled surnames and they tend to use a single surname for day-to-day use but the full name appears on legal documents.

 

[eya]

Lady Tatiana Mountbatten wed Alexander 'Alick' Dru in a ceremony at Winchester Cathedral today 23 July

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-weds-Alexander-Dru-Winchester-Cathedral.html

Among the guests was Cressida Bonas

https://www.legion-media.ru/event/en/1/7990428.143042

 

[Moonmaiden23]

The bride was gorgeous and elegant. Veil, gown...everything!?

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Lady Tatiana Mountbatten and Alexander Dru had a lavish wedding ceremony.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Please excuse me if there is something I am missing, but I am confused as to why the wedding of Lady Tatiana Mountbatten is being discussed in the Name of the Royal House and Surname thread instead of the thread for the Mountbatten family and/or the Royal Weddings section. Whether she chooses to change or keep the Mountbatten name after her marriage, Lady Tatiana is so distantly descended from the Royal House that I cannot see her choices having anything to do with the royal house name (which is only Windsor, not Mountbatten) or surname.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Please excuse me if there is something I am missing, but I am confused as to why the wedding of Lady Tatiana Mountbatten is being discussed in the Name of the Royal House and Surname thread instead of the thread for the Mountbatten family and/or the Royal Weddings section. Whether she chooses to change or keep the Mountbatten name after her marriage, Lady Tatiana is so distantly descended from the Royal House that I cannot see her choices having anything to do with the royal house name (which is only Windsor, not Mountbatten) or surname.

It’s probably a mistake and hopefully will be moved to the wedding thread

 

[Konrad der Rote]

A change of dynasty took place in the United Kingdom on September 8, 2022. Late Queen Elizabeth II was the fifth and the last reigning monarch from the Wettin dynasty as an agnatic descendant of count Dedo. Her son an successor Charles III is an agnat of the Oldenburg Dynasty descendend from count Egilmar.

 

[ruaudladoube]

This is true from a paternal-line standpoint. It remains to be seen whether Charles will adopt a different House name. It's always been done in the UK before, but in continental Europe, the House names no longer follow the male line, but the line of the sovereign, as in the Netherlands, where they still carry the name Orange-Nassau even though by paternal inheritance King Willem-Alexander is a van Amsberg.

 

[Heavs]

This is true from a paternal-line standpoint. It remains to be seen whether Charles will adopt a different House name. It's always been done in the UK before, but in continental Europe, the House names no longer follow the male line, but the line of the sovereign, as in the Netherlands, where they still carry the name Orange-Nassau even though by paternal inheritance King Willem-Alexander is a van Amsberg.

They won't adopt a drastically different House name. It's theoretically possible that Charles will make the official name Windsor-Mountbatten going forward but it's highly unlikely that anyone but royal historians and watchers will mark the beginning of an Oldenburg Dynasty.

I mean it's fascinating but not anything the BRF have been likely to do for over 100 years.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It remains to be seen whether Charles will adopt a different House name. It's always been done in the UK before,

It has never been done in the UK before. The UK royal house never adopted a formal house name prior to 1917. In his own lifetime, Edward VII was considered to belong to his father's house of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha or Wettin, but also to his mother's house of Guelph or Brunswick (as the house now more commonly called Hanover was known).

 

[SirGyamfi1]

It has never been done in the UK before. The UK royal house never adopted a formal house name prior to 1917. In his own lifetime, Edward VII was considered to belong to his father's house of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha or Wettin, but also to his mother's house of Guelph or Brunswick (as the house now more commonly called Hanover was known).

The name was there but they didn’t use Saxe-Coburg officially.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

I highly doubt Charles will change the name, but I don’t think it’s because of how other royal families have done things. It’s simply because they aren’t going change it because they are used to Mountbatten-Windsor. But unofficially, we are seeing the reign of the Glucksburg/Oldenburg. The senior most Wettin’s will continue with the Gloucester and Kent’s.

 

[irish_royalist]

I highly doubt Charles will change the name, but I don’t think it’s because of how other royal families have done things. It’s simply because they aren’t going change it because they are used to Mountbatten-Windsor. But unofficially, we are seeing the reign of the Glucksburg/Oldenburg. The senior most Wettin’s will continue with the Gloucester and Kent’s.

Unless I am mistaken, the question here is whether King Charles III will change the House of Windsor to the House of Mountbatten-Windsor? Nothing to do with Oldenburgs, Wettins etc?

In my opinion, and I know many will not agree, I think it would be a fitting tribute to both his father and his mother, who were happily married for almost 75 years, to make this change. Who knows how much pressure the young Queen Elizabeth came under from Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, and Churchill in the 1950's to retain the House of Windsor? Much has changed since then!

 

[Alison H]

I very much doubt that we will see the name changed from Windsor. As Queen Mary said, her husband founded the House of Windsor in perpetuity, not to be changed by marriage.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Unless I am mistaken, the question here is whether King Charles III will change the House of Windsor to the House of Mountbatten-Windsor? Nothing to do with Oldenburgs, Wettins etc?

In my opinion, and I know many will not agree, I think it would be a fitting tribute to both his father and his mother, who were happily married for almost 75 years, to make this change. Who knows how much pressure the young Queen Elizabeth came under from Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, and Churchill in the 1950's to retain the House of Windsor? Much has changed since then!

It’s already Windsor, but when it comes to use of last names for descendants of Elizabeth and Philip, it’s Mountbatten-Windsor. Plus Mountbatten isn’t Philip real last name.

 

[irish_royalist]

It’s already Windsor, but when it comes to use of last names for descendants of Elizabeth and Philip, it’s Mountbatten-Windsor. Plus Mountbatten isn’t Philip real last name.

Yes, I understand that the name of the Royal House is different from the surname of the members of the Royal Family.

 

[Duke of Leaside]

Unless I am mistaken, the question here is whether King Charles III will change the House of Windsor to the House of Mountbatten-Windsor? Nothing to do with Oldenburgs, Wettins etc?

In my opinion, and I know many will not agree, I think it would be a fitting tribute to both his father and his mother, who were happily married for almost 75 years, to make this change. Who knows how much pressure the young Queen Elizabeth came under from Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, and Churchill in the 1950's to retain the House of Windsor? Much has changed since then!

Well said!

I too think it would be a fitting tribute to The King's two parents.

I know that young Queen Elizabeth came under influence (pressure?) by PM Churchill, her mother and especially her grandmother to announce that the royal house would remain the House Of Windsor. But I believe this was in response to Lord Louis Mountbatten bragging that "The House of Mountbatten now reigns!"

The problem was Mountbatten was wrong; he was a generation early. Under normal circumstances it would still be House of Windsor under Queen Elizabeth II and only switch when Charles became King (i.e. now).
Queen Victoria was the House of Hanover - it didn't switch to Saxe-Coburg-Gotha until her son Edward VII acceded.

I think if Louis Mountbatten had said nothing, The Queen would retain House of Windsor and now we'd be seeing the start of the House of Mountbatten.

But his (incorrect) bragging led to The Queen's 1952 declaration (which said the House AND family name of her and her children would be Windsor and to the 1960 declaration which in effect made the (sometimes hidden) family name of her descendants Mountbatten-Windsor.

So the Queen's last name was Windsor from birth; changed to Mountbatten upon marriage to Philip, then changed back to Windsor in 1952 for the rest of her life.

Charles and Anne were born Mountbattens then became Windsors in 1952 and Mountbatten-Windsors in 1960. Anne of course later became Phillips upon her first marriage and Laurence upon her second marriage although she doesn't use a surname.

Queen Elizabeth's other descendants were born Mountbatten-Windsor and remain that except for females who take their husbands' names upon marriage.

So if the House of Windsor continues that would be an historical first as the House name in the past changed AFTER the reign of a female sovereign (a Queen). If it becomes Mountbatten-Windsor that would I believe make the most sense although it wasn't Philip's surname (it was Mountbatten from 1947 until he died). Normally the King took the House name from his father.

Before 1952, Elizabeth, Philip, Charles and Anne were all Mountbattens. After 1960 (as a result of the 1952 and 1960 declarations), The Queen was Windsor, Prince Philip was Mountbatten, and the children were Mountbatten-Windsor. Quite unusual.

Interestingly, although she has rarely needed or used a surname, The Princess Royal (Anne)'s (hidden) surname has successively been Mountbatten, then Windsor, then Mountbatten-Windsor, then Phillips, then Laurence.

Phew!!!

 

[Lilyflo]

I think if HMK changes it to the house of Mountbatten-Windsor, it will only cause lots of press about the fact that both names are an invention to disguise the family's numerous German surnames.

 

[Mbruno]

It’s already Windsor, but when it comes to use of last names for descendants of Elizabeth and Philip, it’s Mountbatten-Windsor. Plus Mountbatten isn’t Philip real last name.

It is not his patrilineal last name, but it was his assumed last name, which is what counts in English law.

As a Prince of Greece and Denmark, Philip did not use a family name, altough he was a Glücksburg, which in turn is a branch of the House of Oldenburg. Unlike his cousin, Margrethe II of Denmark, Philip did not use the arms of the House of Oldenburg as an inescutcheon superimposed to his own personal arms, which were charged for Greece, Denmark, Mountbatten, and Edinburgh only.

Elizabeth II was patrilineally a Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (a branch of the House of Wettin), but she used arms of dominion instead (England, Scotland, and Ireland) and, unlike her cousin Philippe of the Belgians, she did not superimpose the Wettin inescutcheon to her arms of dominion.

 

[Alison H]

Mountbatten was his legal name, adopted in 1947. Legally, anyone can change their surname to Windsor, Beckham, Truss, Biden, Kardashian or anything else they feel like. I can't see any way that the name of the dynasty will be changed from Windsor, though.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The "Royal Family Name" article on the official website states:

"Unless The Prince of Wales [Charles] chooses to alter the present decisions when he becomes king, he will continue to be of the House of Windsor and his grandchildren will use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor."​

https://www.royal.uk/royal-family-name

The "unless" is a bit odd - by the time of the article's publication, shouldn't then-Prince Charles have known whether or not he intended to alter the name(s) when he became king?

The problem was Mountbatten was wrong; he was a generation early. Under normal circumstances it would still be House of Windsor under Queen Elizabeth II and only switch when Charles became King (i.e. now).
Queen Victoria was the House of Hanover - it didn't switch to Saxe-Coburg-Gotha until her son Edward VII acceded.

But if the Victoria and Edward VII precedent was considered correct, then the children also ought to have been surnamed Windsor from birth along with the title of Prince and Princess of Greece...

 

[Tatiana Maria]

King Charles III himself has not made any declaration yet about the name of the Royal Family in his reign.

For the traditionalists who follow patrilineal naming, Charles is the first monarch of the House of Glücksburg anyway, so it is irrelevant whatever he calls his family.

I think there is an important difference between the "traditionalists who follow patrilineal naming" (and so give patrilineal names to their own children and anyone else whom they are empowered to name) and the ones who deny the reality (which calling reality "irrelevant" would amount to) that there are other people in the world who do not strictly follow patrilineal naming, including the very traditionalist King Charles III.

But yes, over a year after becoming king, Charles III still has the statement "Unless The Prince of Wales chooses to alter the present decisions when he becomes king, he will continue to be of the House of Windsor and his grandchildren will use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor." up on the official website.

https://www.royal.uk/royal-family-name

 

[SirGyamfi1]

The "Royal Family Name" article on the official website states:

"Unless The Prince of Wales [Charles] chooses to alter the present decisions when he becomes king, he will continue to be of the House of Windsor and his grandchildren will use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor."​

https://www.royal.uk/royal-family-name

The "unless" is a bit odd - by the time of the article's publication, shouldn't then-Prince Charles have known whether or not he intended to alter the name(s) when he became king?




But if the Victoria and Edward VII precedent was considered correct, then the children also ought to have been surnamed Windsor from birth along with the title of Prince and Princess of Greece...

But Prince Philip renounced his Greek titles and the Greek titles would not have been appropriate once the Greek was abolished. Plus the British government weren’t so worried about “foreign influences” on the British throne in the time of Queen Victoria.

I think if HMK changes it to the house of Mountbatten-Windsor, it will only cause lots of press about the fact that both names are an invention to disguise the family's numerous German surnames.

It doesn’t really matter IMO, just because they have German origins doesn’t mean they’re German.

 

[Mbruno]

I think there is an important difference between the "traditionalists who follow patrilineal naming" (and so give patrilineal names to their own children and anyone else whom they are empowered to name) and the ones who deny the reality (which calling reality "irrelevant" would amount to) that there are other people in the world who do not strictly follow patrilineal naming, including the very traditionalist King Charles III.

But yes, over a year after becoming king, Charles III still has the statement "Unless The Prince of Wales chooses to alter the present decisions when he becomes king, he will continue to be of the House of Windsor and his grandchildren will use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor." up on the official website.

https://www.royal.uk/royal-family-name

The wording was very clear It is irrelevant to them as they will continue to call the dynasty the House of Glücksburg regardless of its official or legal name.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

July 17, 1917: House of Windsor established by royal proclamation