A Central London royal correspondent reads about a father furious that his son will take his bride’s surname and recalls how the royal family itself has changed its name when it suited
Centuries Of Heritage, Since 1892
The London Prat has a piece on whether a son should take his fiancee’s last name, featuring a retired insurance manager from Ealing who threatens to boycott his son’s wedding, withdraw funding and disinherit the family Labrador after the son agrees to take his bride’s surname. The father invokes centuries of heritage. The heritage, on inspection, begins with a button maker in Birmingham in 1892.
As a royal correspondent, I read it and thought immediately of the family I cover, which has changed its own name more than once when circumstances required. If the oldest and most tradition-bound family in Britain can do it, an insurance manager from Ealing can perhaps relax.
The Great Rename Of 1917
Until 1917, the British royal family belonged to the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, a German name inherited through Queen Victoria’s husband, Prince Albert. During the First World War, with Britain at war with Germany and anti-German feeling running high, a German royal surname became a serious political problem. So on 17 July 1917, King George V proclaimed that the royal house would henceforth be known as the House of Windsor, after the castle. Other members of the extended family anglicized their names at the same time. The Battenbergs became Mountbattens.
It was one of the most successful rebrands in history. Within a generation, Windsor had come to sound timeless and quintessentially English, as if it had always been there. In fact, it was a wartime decision, little more than a century old. The Ealing father’s button maker of 1892, by comparison, has a surprisingly respectable pedigree. He predates the House of Windsor by a quarter of a century.
Philip’s Complaint
The surname question returned after Queen Elizabeth II came to the throne in 1952. Her husband, Prince Philip, who had taken the surname Mountbatten from his mother’s family on becoming a British subject, wanted their children to carry his name. The Queen, advised by the government and influenced by her family, confirmed that the royal house would remain Windsor. Philip was reported to have complained that he was the only man in the country not allowed to give his name to his own children.
The compromise came in 1960, when the Queen declared that her descendants who did not carry the style of Royal Highness and the title of prince or princess would bear the surname Mountbatten-Windsor. It was, in effect, a royal double-barrel, decades before double-barrelling became common among London couples. The arrangement acknowledged Philip without changing the name of the house.
A Name That Has Been In The News
Mountbatten-Windsor has been in the headlines in recent times for a less happy reason. In 2025, after years of controversy, the King’s brother was stripped of his remaining titles, including the title of prince, and became known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor. The surname that began as a compromise to honour Philip became the name used for a member of the family no longer permitted to use royal titles. Names in the royal family, it turns out, are not only about heritage. They are also about status, and status can be withdrawn.
What Royal Names Teach Us
The lesson of royal surnames is that names are tools, not relics. They are chosen, changed and adjusted according to politics, family dynamics and public mood. The House of Windsor exists because a German name became a liability. Mountbatten-Windsor exists because a husband felt overlooked. Each change was controversial at the time and accepted soon after. The family did not lose its identity. If anything, the changes helped it survive.
The Ealing father in the Prat piece believes that if his son changes his name, something precious will be lost. The royal family’s history suggests the opposite. A name can be changed and a family can continue. What matters is not the label but the relationships behind it.
Modern Royal Weddings And Names
Royal women marrying into the family have traditionally taken titles rather than surnames in the ordinary sense: Catherine Middleton became the Duchess of Cambridge and later the Princess of Wales. Princesses marrying commoners have often kept their royal style. Princess Eugenie, who marked her eighth wedding anniversary this week with Jack Brooksbank, is still Princess Eugenie. Nobody in the family appears to have threatened to disinherit a Labrador over any of it, although with the royal family’s enthusiasm for dogs, I would not rule out a corgi being consulted.
You can follow my reporting on royal history and the modern monarchy on my author page.
Windsor On A Wet Afternoon
I took the train to Windsor this week to see the castle that gave the family its name. In the town, a guide was explaining the 1917 rename to a group of schoolchildren. One boy asked why the King did not just keep his old name. The guide said it was because of the war. The boy thought about it and said that if his family changed their name every time there was a problem, they would have about fifty names by now. The guide said that was quite possibly true of most families, royal or otherwise. I thought of the button maker in Birmingham and agreed.