IN recent months we have been marking the 100th anniversary of some of the bloodiest battles of the First World War, in which a whole generation of young British (and German) men died or were maimed for life in a pointless war which was effectively between the Royal Houses of various European dynasties.
Also recently, our television schedules have been full of documentaries about the homes, lives and loves OF our British Royal Family, revealing the palatial living standards they enjoy at public expense, along with details of the less than honourable behaviour of some and the problems and unhappiness caused by their activities.
There is another centenary anniversary coming up soon, this time concerning royalty, which may come as a surprise to some. In 2017 it will be exactly 100 years since the Royal House of Windsor first came into being, chosen simply because it was very English. It was a totally artificial nominal creation to replace the then actual family surname which was really Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, and before 1901 Hanover, both reflecting the long inter-connection with German royalty and aristocracy dating back 200 years to King George I.
This was kept very quiet throughout most of the war, because of the fear of anti-German sentiment turning against royalty. But by 1917 it was thought imperative to adopt a more English style, so on July 17 that year the Royal House of Windsor came into being for the first time, chosen simply because Windsor Castle was (and still is) the favourite home of most members of the family.
At the same time the close family Battenberg was changed to Mountbatten, and in the 1940s this name was adopted by Philip, who although Greek by birth had been of the House of Schleswig-Holstein.
But in July I am sure there will no official celebration or even much media mention of these nominal centenaries.
Iain AD Mann,
7 Kelvin Court, Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel