Scandal: Prince George, Charlotte & Louis all use ‘Wales’ as a surname at school

For most of this year, there’s been an endless amount of discourse about the Duchess of Sussex’s surname. Within With Love, Meghan, she told Mindy Kaling that “I’m Sussex now” when Mindy referred to her as “Meghan Markle.” Meghan told People Mag that she and her family (including Archie and Lili) use Sussex as their surname and they consider it their shared family name. Palace insiders and protocol police have been ripping out their hair and wailing like banshees for months. Even in Meghan’s interview with Emily Chang last week, Chang once again asked Meghan to clarify the Sussex surname situation. Everyone acted as if it was completely unheard-of for a royal or titled family to use their ducal/earldom/whatever title as a surname. Well, as part of People Magazine’s “no sh-t, Sherlock” royal coverage, they slipped in a fun little story about what names Prince George, Prince Louis and Princess Charlotte use at school. You’re not going to believe this, you guys.

Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis are off to a new school year, but they won’t be using their royal titles in the classroom. Prince William and Kate Middleton’s three children are known to their teachers and friends at school as George Wales, Charlotte Wales and Louis Wales, with the surname taken from their parents’ titles as the Prince and Princess of Wales.

Though the children all received prince or princess titles and His or Her Royal Highness styling at birth, going by their first name and the surname of Wales is a more informal address that allows them to blend in with the student body.

When a last name is necessary, it’s tradition within the royal family for children to use their parents’ titles as the basis for their last name. Prince William and Prince Harry were similarly called William Wales and Harry Wales while at school and in the military, as their father, the future King Charles, was then the Prince of Wales.

However, Prince George, 12, Princess Charlotte, 10, and Prince Louis, 7, didn’t always go by the last name of Wales in the classroom. Queen Elizabeth made William and Kate the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge when they wed in 2011, and the couple’s children were previously called George Cambridge, Charlotte Cambridge and Louis Cambridge at school. When Prince George started school at Thomas’s Battersea in September 2017, a close look at the name tag on his backpack showed said “George Cambridge.”

Last names are a bit tricky within the British royal family, and in 1960, Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip decided that their direct descendants would have the last name of Mountbatten-Windsor. The royal couple tacked “Mountbatten” onto the British royal family’s official surname of Windsor, which was adopted by King George V in 1917.

However, it became a custom within the family for later generations of children with royal titles to use their parents’ titles as the inspiration for their surname. As Prince William was called William Wales, his cousins, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, used York as their last name as their father, Prince Andrew, is the Duke of York.

[From People]

I already knew this, as did anyone with even a passing interest in British royalty. Harry and William both used “Wales” as a surname when they were in school and in the military. Beatrice and Eugenie both used York as a surname. When QEII died, there were stories updating the titles of the Wales kids and specifying that they were no longer “of Cambridge” but now “of Wales.” And yet, it was a five-alarm fire when Meghan called herself Meg Sussex, and said that her children use Sussex as a surname. Gee, I wonder why? In any case, I certainly hope that we get at least twenty huffy Daily Mail columns about how using “Wales” as a surname is a slap in the face to QEII, and how NO ONE would ever dream of using their title as a last name OR a married name.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

21 Responses to “Scandal: Prince George, Charlotte & Louis all use ‘Wales’ as a surname at school”

  1. Amy Bee says:

    Where’s the press outrage? Of course the press always knew that William and Kate’s children use their title as their surname but pretends that Meghan is doing something wrong.

  2. Meredith says:

    This is based purely on my own aesthetic preferences, but I like the “sound” of George/Charlotte/Louis Cambridge more than George/Charlotte/Louis Wales.

  3. It’s only a problem for Meg because she is biracial! It’s also a problem that Harry loves and wants to protect her and the children and has moved them from salt isle to where they can live happily ever after.

  4. sunnyside up says:

    There was no fuss when William’s children were called Cambridge or Wales, there are many times when WanK have been praised by the press for doing something and H and M criticised for doing the same thing.

  5. Harla says:

    My understanding is that anyone in the family with a prince/princess title is eligible to use Windsor as a last name, while those who don’t have a title or are not in the direct line of succession are to use the Mountbatten-Windsor surname. Of course, it makes sense for the kids of Charles, William and Harry to use their father’s highest ranking title as their surname so I don’t get all the kerfuffle but also, we know why.

    • Magdalena says:

      Here’s the rub: MOST (if not all) aristocrats in the UK use their titles as surname. So do their children. And the UK media (and several US media – with Brits on staff writing articles) know this. Yet another instance in which people just cannot help revealing themselves for what they are when it comes to M and the children.

  6. jais says:

    I mean at the end of the day they wish that Meghan and her kids weren’t royal. So making their last names Sussex, something that other royals have done, is something that Meghan shouldn’t be able to do. Bc they don’t want her or Archie or Lili to be considered as royal. Even though they are…

  7. Me at home says:

    Would have been nice if People put the Sussexes in the picture too, while they’re talking about the Waleses and the Yorks. Bet the Waleses kids have the same passport thing where their titles are on their passports, just like the Sussexes, yet everybody gnashes their teeth over how Meghan’s passport reads, “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.”

  8. Lily says:

    “Last names are a bit tricky within the British royal family, and in 1960, Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip decided that their direct descendants would have the last name of Mountbatten-Windsor.”

    Close but not quite. PP was mad that his kids didn’t have his name so QE2 ordered that the surname Mountbatten-Windsor would be used but ONLY by direct decedents of her and Phillip who needed a surname and did not have royal tiles available to use.

    More distant royal family members descended through the male line with no royal titles, and not from Phillip, are still Windsor.

    • bisynaptic says:

      Yes, that’s also what Wikipedia says. But I wonder to whom, for example, would this rule apply?

      • IdlesAtCranky says:

        @Bisynaptic

        Well, for examples of how this works, right now Edward & Sophie’s two children are named Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor and James Mountbatten-Windsor, Earl of Wessex.

        Anne declined titles for her two kids
        as I’m sure you know, and they were given their father’s last name, Phillips. Then Zara took her husband’s name when she married.

        Other examples include
        – Alexander Windsor, the Earl of Ulster, his wife Dr. Claire Windsor, née Booth, and their children, Lady Cosima Windsor and Xan Windsor, Lord Culloden
        – the three children of the Duke & Duchess of Gloucester, Alexander Windsor, Earl of Ulster, Lady Davina Windsor, and Lady Rose Gilman, née Windsor

        It all comes down to who are direct descendants of Prince Philip, and who are descendants from the original Windsor line.

  9. Becks1 says:

    Sooooo all that outrage over Meghan’s comment was manufactured and disingenuous? you don’t say.

  10. Nerd says:

    Yet another example of the UK media and derangers intentionally lying about the Sussexes so that they can scream and cry about them. The media themselves have written articles where they make a point of using royals titles as their last name. Even I a person who didn’t care about the royals when William and Harry were starting school, remember the media refer to them with Wales as their last name. There is even a video of a soldier saying that they were informed that a Wales would be joining them, and they were hoping it wasn’t William Wales and so they were excited to find out it was Harry Wales. So this whole temper tantrum by the media and derangers is them just showing how easily they lie on the biracial woman because her and her children being royal triggers them.

  11. Kingston says:

    @Jais
    Ding! Ding! DIng!

    The one and only correct answer. Cut thru the gaslighting and the fauxoutrage and faux hysteria and this is what it all amounts to: “they wish that Meghan and her kids weren’t royal. So making their last names Sussex, something that other royals have done, is something that Meghan shouldn’t be able to do.”

  12. Miss Scarlett says:

    So why Meghan’s issue is a little wonky is because legally in the UK she is HRH The Duchess of Sussex, but her name never legally changed, so everywhere else she is still Meghan Markle.

    We know this because Kate was legally Catherine Middleton in the French photo lawsuit.

    In the US, Meghan is likely still “Meghan Markle,” her children are Mountbatten Windsor in the US, but Prince and Princess of Sussex in the UK, and Harry is apparently on a diplomatic visa and only has a UK passport so is Prince Henry, Duke of Sussex here.

    Yes it’s totally fine for them all to use Sussex – but people were trying to find out what her legal name was, and that’s why it got strange.

    In the UK, no one would bat an eye at them using Sussex. In America, you have to register a legal name everywhere, and they all have different legal names. But Sussex is their family name.

  13. Hattie says:

    The hierarchy is clear: Royal Dukes outrank Royal Princes, but every Royal Duke was first a Royal Prince. While not every Royal Prince holds a dukedom (like Edward before receiving Edinburgh), all Royal Dukes began as Royal Princes before receiving their ducal titles.

    **The Title Timeline**
    When Edward’s children were born, he lacked a dukedom, so Louise uses Mountbatten-Windsor as her surname and James held the Viscount Severn title but now is the Earl of Wessex when Edward was promoted to Duke of Edinburgh. They wanted the Sussexes to settle and accept a similar naming convention, Archie would take Harry’s secondary title Earl of Dumbarton and for Lilibet to just be Lady Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor. Also, like Louise and James, the Firm did not want to officially title Harry’s children HRH Prince Archie and HRH Princess Lilibet.

    The key difference: William (Duke of Cambridge) and Harry (Duke of Sussex) both held dukedoms when their children were born. The late Queen’s Letters Patent changes meant William’s children, as heir’s children, received Prince/Princess titles upon birth whereas, Harry’s children had to wait until becoming the monarch’s grandchildren—which happened when Charles became King.

    **The Broader Strategic Picture**
    Had Harry been born female, as Charles reportedly hoped, this dynamic wouldn’t exist. A daughter would have been positioned like Anne or Charlotte—dutiful royal sister with no succession threat or ducal inheritance rights.

    Harry’s male status creates structural tension because he possesses legitimate title rights. This may explain why all his relationships faced such scrutiny and media sabotage, and why William reportedly suggested marriage might not suit Harry’s role.

    **The “Slimmed Down Monarchy” Reality**
    Charles and Camilla have promoted a “slimmed down monarchy” for decades, yet it now costs four times more with a quarter of the working royals, than when Charles first became the Prince of Wales. The true meaning appears exclusionary: no room for additional HRH Princely Dukes and certainly not a future HRH Prince Archie, Duke of Sussex.

    A family/firm that has ruled for over 1000 years looks ahead in 50 year periods. So, by their metrics in fifty years, the monarchy would feature King George VII, Prince Louis (likely Duke of Edinburgh as Andrew tarnished the York title), and Prince Archie (Duke of Sussex)—since James won’t inherit Edward’s dukedom. Two young Royal Dukes alongside the monarch represents exactly what this “slimmed down” vision seems designed to prevent.

    The underlying issue may transcend the racism narrative—it’s fundamentally about maintaining controlled succession and limiting competing centers of royal authority.

  14. Marthy says:

    Because meghan and harry whiny and bitchy about and leave palaces life and have the audacity to want to keep the names??? Get out of here

  15. Ed says:

    This is not good at all

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment