header-logo header-logo

28 April 2017 / Michael L Nash
Issue: 7743 / Categories: Features , Public , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

What’s in a name? (Pt 1)

nlj_7743_nash

In its centenary year, Michael L Nash reflects on the birth of the House of Windsor

It was the King’s secretary who thought of it. ‘Do you realise,’ wrote Lord Rosebery to Arthur Bigge, later Lord Stamfordham, ‘that you have christened a dynasty? There are few people in the world who have done this, none I think. It is really something to be historically proud of. I admire and envy you.’

Thus it was that on 24 June 1917, Lord Stamfordham suddenly and simply put forward the name ‘Windsor’ when there appeared to be a deadlock in choosing a name for the Royal Family of Britain. Why was this necessary? Because, in response to disturbing rumours of the German connections and origin of the Royal Family during World War I, King George V took not one, but a series of actions which, at least on the surface, changed the face of that family, and ensured it took a different direction. The legal nature of these changes was, and has always been,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Switalskis—five appointments

Switalskis—five appointments

Firm expands national abuse compensation team

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

IP firm announces new partners and senior promotions across UK offices

Carey Olsen—five promotions

Carey Olsen—five promotions

Carey Olsen promotes five lawyers to the partnership

NEWS
Executors may be overlooking billions of pounds in estate assets hidden in forgotten investments and misplaced share certificates
Britain’s booming non-surgical cosmetics market is operating in what some critics describe as a regulatory ‘Wild West’
Family contact disputes are becoming an increasingly prominent feature of Court of Protection litigation
Material obtained through US discovery applications may have a much longer legal life than many litigants realise
English courts are developing a distinctly practical approach to sanctions disputes arising from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
back-to-top-scroll