Royal House of Mountbatten-Windsor

247 views
Skip to first unread message

https:/www.maltagenealogy.com/LeighRayment/

unread,
Sep 21, 2022, 4:14:16 AM9/21/22
to Peerage News
is it rightly so, the end of the Royal House of Windsor with QEII and the start of the Royal House of Mountbatten-Windsor with CIII ?

www.lordmountbattenofburma.com

unread,
Sep 21, 2022, 6:11:36 AM9/21/22
to Peerage News
I personally do not think King Charles III will go against his mother's wishes...Its been already accepted that the family surname (if required) for QE2 & DofE descendants is different to the legal official name of the Royal House.  I know the Royal nomenclature is a long-stated argument by historians and constitutional experts/lawyers etc etc...  but I cannot see The King wishing to be bothered with what increasingly many people would think isnt relevant to their lives and yet another waste of money (in their eyes).

9 April 1952 -
"My Will and Pleasure that I and My children shall be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor, and that My descendants, other than female descendants who marry and their descendants, shall bear the name of Windsor."

8 Feb 1960 -
"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."

Perhaps it will be a matter for William V ?

William H.S. Leeson

unread,
Sep 21, 2022, 8:46:49 AM9/21/22
to Peerage News
I do stand by what I wrote when I first heard of Her Majesty's passing.  In a society such as ours steeped in patriarchal tradition, a Queen on the throne usually leads to a change in dynasties;  just as Victoria was the last Queen of the House of Hanover, and her son was the first King of what would become the House of Windsor, today is no different.  However, in these modern times of ours, where facts are offensive, logic is a dirty word, and critical thinking is all but extinct, the current reigning house will probably continue to be [erroneously] known as "Mountbatten-Windsor" (though "Windsor-Mountbatten" might be a fair compromise.)

Lori

unread,
Sep 21, 2022, 12:55:54 PM9/21/22
to Peerage News
I think that the Queen's views on the matter were that the House of Windsor would be the name of the House in perpetuity. Sort of like the House of Orange in the Netherlands where there have been numerous Queen Regnants and still the name is Orange. Mounbatten-Windsor being used as a surname when required.

www.lordmountbattenofburma.com

unread,
Sep 21, 2022, 4:21:45 PM9/21/22
to Peerage News
William - when Queen Victoria died in 1901 and the House of Hanover ended, and with Edward VII the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha was born.... Women didnt have the vote, there were no women MPs, no women Prime Ministers, no women Cabinet Ministers and ... in fact women were treated less important than a man's dog!  Facts to me are never offensive, logic is not dirty and critical thinking in my view should be applauded.... but we live in very different times.  

Had The Queen ascended the Throne in say 1972 (upon the death of King Edward VIII - had he remained on the Throne etc - talking extremely hypothetically) ... perhaps she would not have been made to reaffirm the "House of Windsor" as she was made to in 1952 ?  As we know, it was done to appease her aged grandmother (Queen Mary - widow of the founder of the House of Windsor), "persuaded" by Churchill and to put Lord Mountbatten back in his box, crowing about the "House of Mountbatten" etc etc etc...  The Royal House IS Windsor, and has never been Mountbatten-Windsor and I genuinely dont believe that The King will go against his mother's wishes.

Then again, in 2022, I wonder if the general public really care about such things nowadays ?

Message has been deleted

malcolm davies

unread,
Sep 21, 2022, 7:27:11 PM9/21/22
to Peerage News
Of course, in reality, there has been a change-the house of Wettin(family name of the Saxe Coburgs) has been succeeded by the house of Oldenburg(the Greek royal house being descended in the male line from the Danish royal house).

On Thursday, September 22, 2022 at 8:28:45 AM UTC+10 William H.S. Leeson wrote:
Fair point.  Granted, we live in very different times;  I'm simply resigned these days to being an anachronistic 21st-Century heretic.  I'm not here to pick a fight--I'm simply tired of standing alone against the tides of popular sentiment, and the logical left half of my brain is simply exhausted from having to compute and reconcile the endless inconsistencies--so, from now on, if someone says that the house on the British throne is the House of Mountbatten-Windsor, I'll just smile, nod, and say "Yes, absolutely!"--just don't follow up and ask if I actually believe it.

With respect, one small correction to what you wrote:  Queen Mary was not the widow of the founder of the House of Windsor;  she was the widow of the King who changed his family's name to Windsor from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha in order to appease then-prevalent anti-German sentiment in 1917.  (Though, by today's logic, the family name should have been "Saxe-Coburg and Gotha-Hanover, surely???)  

All I'm saying is that, due to intrigue from decades ago, the late Prince Philip and his family got shafted by those who, for whatever reason, didn't want to see the Mountbattens eventually on the throne.  (And seeing as how the Mountbattens are now the third family of Germanic origin to occupy the British throne, I really fail to see how this is somehow a novel thing or a threat to anything at all--guess I had to be there at the time.)  It was the late Queen's will and pleasure that her offspring be known by the name of Mountbatten-Windsor (which was respected for the duration of her long life), but that still must have been a real slap in the face for Philip, knowing that his children would bear his wife's surname over his own (hence why I suggested "Windsor-Mountbatten" as a compromise--if a double-barrelled name it has to be, at least then Mountbatten would be in the dominant position, as is the case for the last name in a double- or more barrelled name).

While I expect Charles III (and not George VII--I was wrong on that one) will clarify the issue at some point, I merely hope that the Mountbattens get the recognition that is due to them--after all, they made it to the throne fair and square.

William H.S. Leeson

unread,
Sep 21, 2022, 7:40:28 PM9/21/22
to Peerage News
Thank you, Malcolm;  I stand corrected.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages