Jump to content
  • The above Banner is a Sponsored Banner.

    Upgrade to Premium Membership to remove this Banner & All Google Ads. For full list of Premium Member benefits Click HERE.

  • Join The Silver Forum

    The Silver Forum is one of the largest and best loved silver and gold precious metals forums in the world, established since 2014. Join today for FREE! Browse the sponsor's topics (hidden to guests) for special deals and offers, check out the bargains in the members trade section and join in with our community reacting and commenting on topic posts. If you have any questions whatsoever about precious metals collecting and investing please join and start a topic and we will be here to help with our knowledge :) happy stacking/collecting. 21,000+ forum members and 1 million+ forum posts. For the latest up to date stats please see the stats in the right sidebar when browsing from desktop. Sign up for FREE to view the forum with reduced ads. 

The House of Windsor Complete First Year Sovereign Set


SiCole

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, srh2023 said:

Charles III is of the House of Windsor. When QEII acceded to the throne the then PM Winston Churchill would not permit the Royal House to become the House of Mountbatten. 

Why was this, just interested was it to do with German lineage?   I know George V changed their name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor as there was an anti German feelings after WWI. 
 

Royal houses as I understand run down the male line not the female unless I’m missing something, don’t know if anything got changed by royal proclamation. 
 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allegedly, someone overhead Lord Mountbatten 'bragging' that the House of "Mountbatten" now ruled (following the accession of Queen Elizabeth II). This was reported back to the Queen Mother and Churchill. The PM "advised" Queen Elizabeth II that the royal house should remain "Windsor". The odd thing is that the change of name would not have occurred during the late Queen's lifetime. It would only have taken effect last year when the King acceded to the throne. In theory (with Government agreement) the name "Mountbatten" could be adopted but I doubt it very much. Just seems not to be a major thing in the modern era.

The compromise was that, for everyday purposes, those not in direct succession were permitted to adopt the surname "Mountbatten-Windsor". A good example of this being the Sussex children until they themselves became prince and princess upon their grandfather becoming King. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This House question probably matters less now than before the succession law was changed to make female firstborn the heir apparent. The crown of UK passes down female lines, which isn't the case of some other monarchies in the world (there had been several Empresses of Japan but the throne always passed to their brothers/nephews).

If we do the right thing this time, we might have to do the right thing again next time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Cookies & terms of service

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies and to our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use