Talk:House of Windsor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 House of Windsor is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia The spoken word version of this article is part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, an attempt to produce recordings of Wikipedia articles. To participate, visit the project page.

Contents

[edit] untitled Subject/headline

I do not like such unjustified reverts. The House of Windsor is not a different house than the house of Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha. The throne is still a posession of this house, and the only thing that happened in 1917 was that they adopted a new family name. Thus, I think it makes more sense to have one list of monarchs of this house, with a note concerning the name change. Besides, your removal of the rest of the information I added were highly inappropriate. I am going to revert this page. Ertz 07:56, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You are wrong. The name of the House was changed too: "hereby declare 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 who marry and their descendants, shall bear the name of Windsor" To say only the surname was changed is wrong and misleading. --Jiang 07:59, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
There's no confusion given that where the list continues or originates from is clearly states. There's more confusion when you list members of a house that is no longer called such. In addition, "house of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg" is a bunch of phooey. The order in council makes the provision for the House of Windsor to continue, even when ruled by a Mountbatten-Windsor. That will have to be changed by another Order in Council. --Jiang 08:05, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Pardon? No councils are in position to change the system of family succession, which is based on the agnatic principles, and which applies to all German noble families, without exceptions. No matter what they call themselves, the children of Prince Philip technically belongs to his family, the house of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. Ertz 08:26, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

And the stuff about the throne being a "possession" of a house reflects a position that is antiquated by a matter of some centuries. -- Nunh-huh 08:09, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
This is the British Royal Family, not the German one. No one is denying the lineage of the House of Windsor, but under British law, what is declared in the Privy Council goes. Your view is in the minority. Please cite your sources. --Jiang

i would tend to agree with Ertz, naming them of their true house would eliminate alot of confusion. - anon.

And yet Ertz's preferred name is not the actual name. That won't eliminate confusion, it will add it. - Nunh-huh 23:34, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Whether or not you merge the two articles in the future this one needs cleaning up now. Personally i feel you should leave them seperate but that isnt important. - Fenix

[edit] Princess Anne

Shouldn't Princess Anne's children be included in the list of Queen Elizabeth's grandchildren? AEriksson 14:38, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

No, they're not part of the House of Windsor. Craigy (talk) 15:01, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Why Windsor

It would be nice if the article said why the name Windsor was chosen. Windsor Castle says the family took the name from it, but that's still not much of an explanation - why not the House of Holyrood, resurrect the House of Stuart, or some other creative fiction like the House of Tudor-Stuart? Is much known about the rationale? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:24, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I thought the political rationale was well known: "Saxe-Coburg-Gotha" was too German-sounding in a Britain at war with Germany, so the King changed the family's name, purely for perspicacious political reasons. As for why "Windsor," it's a nice English-sounding name that his subjects were already familiar with and which was already associated with the royal family. Same rationale by which "Battenberg" became "Mountbatten" -- more English-sounding. --Michael K. Smith 16:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Note also that for royal families, there is a distinction between a "Royal House name" and a "personal surname", which do not always coincide. The "personal surname" of this royal family was "Wettin" before being changed to "Windsor", and arguably there is some similarity between those two names (they share the same initial letter, if nothing else).
--HYC 06:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Russell Henry Errett comments

Citations are sorely needed here. I couldn't find a lick of information on this doing a simple Google search, which leads me to believe that we're seeing a bit of nonsense. If anyone knows anything about R. Errett, they need to speak up before I remove the offending paragraph completely to avoid smearing someone's name unjustifiably. --Wolf530 07:03, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

It's just plain bullshit, and it's gone now. - Nunh-huh 08:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] American School of Paris

This article references Prince Philip attending the American School of Paris in St. Cloud. The American School of Paris website has an "official" historical timeline for the school, and that timeline begins in 1945. Moreover, the first location for the school was in the American Church in central Paris, not in the suburb of St. Cloud. Please clarify or correct the assertion in the article.


[edit] HRH?

This is used in the article. Can someone please clarify what it stands for or means. My people don't have a monarch, so I am clueless. I have heard it used in reference to Princess Diana. Thank you.Dkriegls 09:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

HRH - His or Her Royal Highness - its all about status. It means A first relation to the current monarch. Mike33 21:02, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Change of Dynasty name

By Act of parliament - shit about privy council (privy council have not met as a body since the reign of Charles I. Then new proclomations this is UTTER NONSENSE. The Queen has no right to style herself unless by act of parliament. It's happened once - the dynesty are windsor until parliament decides. forget german law or any law before the Saxe-coburg-gotha change - law is law until it is changed or repealed. This nonsense is SHIT an certainly not EVER to be part of wikipedia :-

In April 1952, after her accession, Queen Elizabeth II ended confusion over the dynastic name when she declared to the Privy Council her “Will and Pleasure that I and My children shall be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor, and that my descendants who marry and their descendants, shall bear the name of Windsor.” This comes into conflict with Germanic house laws, which state that all of her children are of the house of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg through their father, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

OH YES BS never ends, but with a cool was of saying its shit:-

Later, on February 8, 1960, the Queen issued another Order-in-Council, confirming that she and her four children will be known as the House and Family of Windsor, and that her other male-line descendants (except those who are "HRH" and a Prince or Princess) will take the name "Mountbatten-Windsor".

Any future monarch could change the dynasty name if he or she chose to do so. Another Order-in-Council would override those of George V and Elizabeth. For example, if the Prince of Wales accedes to the throne, he could change the royal house to "Mountbatten" in honour of his father, and of his uncle Louis Mountbatten. Mountbatten is the English translation of "Battenberg" and so a name of German origin as well. I can't beleive you write this shit. There is not a single source on google outside of a crazy, who possibly copied and thought it was true. I am shocked. Mike33 20:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editing an article with unsourced content

I am just SHOCKED - I can swear and scream at you all. How anyone can sit and glibly passed unsourced and false material since APRIL 2004? Please see this terrible unsourced edit to see where your article began. Compare Edit list. I would honestly be ashamed. And ppl have actually quoted from this article in their websites. Mike33 23:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Never mind

For the record, I think Mike33 was in good faith but a little confused. See my talk page and his. I have revamped the page somewhat. --BlueMoonlet 04:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] House of Windsor

The House of Windsor should remain the same, whether through male or female lines. The Netherlands' royal family is still called the House of Orange-Nassau, although there have been three successive queens - Queen Wilhelmina (reigned 1890-1948) married Duke Hendrik of Mecklenburg-Schwerin; Queen Juliana (reigned 1948-1980) married Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld; and Queen Beatrix (reigned since 1980) married Claus von Amsberg. I'm not sure of the Danish royal family's surname, Queen Margrethe II married Count Henri de Laborde de Monpezat, but I wouldn't be surprised its still Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. I don't see that the British royal family couldn't do the same and stick with Windsor, and not Mountbatten-Windsor. JJC-IE 23:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

This particular discussion doesn't directly relate or discuss or refer to any particular point or problem in the article. Is it just your opinion? The Dutch queens were members of two houses if you take their view of being members of the House of Orange-Nassau. Juliana was a member of the House of Mecklenburg (whether she liked it or not) as well as being "head of the House of Orange-Nassau". Beatrix is a member of the House of Lippe (again, whether she likes it or not) as well as being "head of the House of Orange-Nassau". Regardless of whatever other additional house names the British Royal Family takes on, they are agnates, and therefore members, of the Houses of Wettin and Oldenburg. Really, what it all boils down to is that Windsor is a sub-branch of these houses. "Changing" one's house name, as a junior member of the house, only ever creates a sub-house. Charles 03:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
...you posted your spiel verbatim at Talk:Mountbatten-Windsor. Don't do that. I've removed it as the talk pages are meant to directly discuss the topics at hand, not to copy and paste things. Charles 03:17, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] German hereditacies

Like I carefully wrote in the article, members of this House still held some rights to certain German principalities.

It is worth noting that George V was not entitled to renounce his already living sons' rights, if he even renounced any succession rights at all. His 1917 decision was to renounce from names, basically. Henq (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Where are your sources, especially for the Saxon territories which were NOT Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, and where are your sources which state than a woman with an English noble father was suitable marriage material for a Saxon princeling. Charles 18:54, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Talk more about Alice, daughter of Duke of Buccleuch, being not equal enough to a Saxe princeling. I am deeply interested in hearing about the matter. Henq (talk) 19:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

The thing is, there are no sources to support your claim of her without a doubt being equal. English nobility was not treated the same as German nobility. For sovereign houses, only brides from sovereign or mediatized families were usually admitted. Not simply noble ones, especially where the bride herself had no title ("Lady" is not a title, it's a style). Charles 19:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
You are sadly mistaken about the equality requirements enacted in the House of Saxony. They certainly did not reatrict only to sovereign or mediatized houses. Henq (talk) 19:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Saxe territories were hereditary in male-line descent from the first grantee. Both Ernestine and Albertine lines. And both Weimar and E the Pious line of the Ernestines. And each of the Ernest the Pious lines forwards. If a territory had primogeniture, and its branch went extinct, line from senior brother of the progenitor will enjoy the primogeniture of that territory. Hopefully no one is denying that actually these royal dukes descend in male line from first grantee of those Wettin lands. Henq (talk) 19:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

First, enough of this "Saxe" territories. Take your pick of Saxon lands, Saxon territories, Saxon duchies. Second of all, you have not given a source which states that Saxe-Meiningen had primogeniture, a condition for your assertion that it would pass to another line. I never denied that the Gloucesters are Wettins. I just don't support your unilateral and unsourced claims. Charles 19:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Enactment of primogeniture to the state of Saxe-Meiningen, in 1802, detailed further at Talk:Konrad, Duke of Saxe-Meiningen. Henq (talk) 21:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Material from web debates

Some scholars, such as Sainty, Sjostrom, Eilers and McFerran, have expressed their information and opinions about these questions: European Royals debate. Suedois (talk) 17:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Is M. Sjöström the Wikipedia user Henq? I don't think he's a scholar on the matter. The incorrect terminology used in the linked post is identical to posts made here. Charles 17:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
If we're going to admit message boards, which I don't think we should, we should note Guy Stair Sainty, a prominent and noted royal historian[1]. Charles 17:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Text of Proclamation by George V, 17 July 1917

[http://www.gazettes-online.co.uk/ViewPDF.aspx?pdf=30186&geotype=London&gpn=7119&type=ArchivedIssuePage&all=royal%20family&exact=&atleast=&similar= From The London Gazette.]

BY THE KING.

A PROCLAMATION

DECLARING THAT THE NAME OF WINDSOR IS TO BE BORNE BY HIS ROYAL HOUSE AND FAMILY AND RELINQUISHING THE USE OF ALL GERMAN TITLES AND DIGNITIES.

GEORGE R.I.

WHEREAS We, having taken into consideration the Name and Title of Our Royal House and Family, have determined that henceforth Our House and Family shall be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor:

And whereas We have further determined for Ourselves and for and on behalf of Our descendants and all other the descendants of Our Grandmother Queen Victoria of blessed and glorious memory to relinquish and discontinue the use of all German Titles and Dignities:

And whereas We have declared these Our determinations in Our Privy Council:

Now, therefore, We, out of Our Royal Will and Authority, do hereby declare and announce that as from the date of this Our Royal Proclamation Our House and Family shall be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor, and that all the descendants in the male line of Our said Grandmother Queen Victoria who are subjects of these Realms, other than female descendants who may marry or may have married, shall bear the said Name of Windsor:

And do hereby further declare and announce that We for Ourselves and for and on behalf of Our descendants and all other the descendants of Our said Grandmother Queen Victoria who are subjects of these Realms, relinquish and enjoin the discontinuance of the use of the Degrees, Styles, Dignities, Titles and Honours of Dukes and Duchesses of Saxony and Princes and Princesses of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, and all other German Degrees, Styles, Dignities. Titles, Honours and Appellations to Us or to them heretofore belonging or appertaining.

Given at Our Court at Buckingham Palace, this Seventeenth day of July, in the year of our Lord One thousand nine hundred and seventeen, and in the Eighth year of Our Reign.

GOD SAVE THE KING.

--StanZegel (talk) 04:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Change of name

There was a quote - possibly appearing in several places - on how the name was selected - along the lines of "it might be x or y, and is certainly not z or w...": anyone know where to find it? Jackiespeel (talk) 19:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)