The Duke and Duchess gave their occupation as prince and princess of the United Kingdom on the birth certificate register

[vivizone]

Thought their occupation was helicopter rescue pilot and housewife

"Princess of England" as an "Occupation" is ridiculous. The father's occupation is an RAF helicopter pilot. Prince, isn't an occupation.

These are titles not occupations. Or have I got this wrong?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23552087

Why isn't being a prince/princess a job? Surely being the Queen is a job? What's the difference? Just different management levels!

1944

In my family tree there was a daughter born in the year of the census, the next census she wasn't on it or any thereafter at the family home. There was no death cert or anything for her.

Turns out she had been put in an institution at some point between the two because she had some kind of disability.

The person registering the birth is asked to sign their usual signature so can sign how they like eg wills, William or just initials etc

Ifyouleavemenow

Is your name related to the Nada Surf song?

Apologies in advance if not!

No 1944 that's true. And worse than that was done further back historically speaking. What we have currently might not be perfect by any stretch of the imagination re how we as a society look after people with disabilities but it is a marked improvement.

I chose not to tell my Nan about that part of the family tree, it would have really upset her.

I would be interested in a thread about the topic we are veering towards.

Was OP expecting a wave of outraged support that would suit her post?

Yeah, because AIBU is the right place for that. Idiotic much.

Charles signs his name Charles P. He gets to do that as Prince of Wales.

What I dont get is if your name is William then why, if you could choose Mountbatten-Windsor you would go by "William Wales". Sounds like a stand up comics name!

As an aside, I didnt know that they were also Earl and Countess of Strathmore. I recommend "Wedlock" by Wendy Moore for anyone who likes historical biographies. Mary Eleanor Bowes was the Great great great* grandmother of the Queen mother (Elizabeth Bowes Lyon) and was married to the 9th Earl of Strathmore. She was horribly abused and her mission to LTB took years and years.

• I may have got the number of Greats wrong but you get the idea!

Sorry, I should say that it was her second husband that abused her, not the Earl. Damn good read.

Will and Kate aren't Earl and Countess of Strathmore; they are the Earl and Countess of Strathearn.

I sign my name with just my first name,I get to do that to because I'm a person and your signature is intended to be however you normally sign your name.

I think it is a fake, she isn't a princess, she is a princess consort. \she can never by HRH Princess Catherine, just HRH Catherine x y z or HRH Princess WIlliam

Sorry sassh have you really are wrong, its not fake and Kensington Palace released it! Also we all know she's not Princess Catherine and the certificate doesn't say she is, it simply lists her occupation as Princess, not her name.

There was a photo in The Guardian (of all places!) yesterday of the Registrar holding up the completed certificate so I don't think it's fake.

Alisvolatpropiis - lol, no. But it is linked to the song 'please don't go' by Chicago. I couldn't get it out of my head when I was signing up to mumsnet. Seemed as good a name as any!

Oh my, these censuses are just fabulous.

By 1871, Victoria is a widow and the family are at Windsor Castle. This time, Name is given as "Her Majesty The Queen", and "Rank, Profession or Occupation" is blank. A son and two daughters are similarly His/Her Royal Highness [name] in the Name column; Rank column blank.

Other members of the household are filled in variously. Clearly some headscratching went on.

So the column "Relation to Head of Family - or Position in the Institution" contains entries like
Son-in-Law
Lady of Bedchamber
Governess
Visitor
Equerry
Master of Household
Librarian

And the column "Rank, Profession or Occupation" has respectively
Marquess of Lorns MP
Duchess
Governess
Duke of Roxburghe
Colonel Unattached
Lt Col. Active List. Knight Baronet
Librarian

The 1881 census is a dog's dinner. Taken at Windsor again, the first page is completed in two different hands: one sprawling, quavery script giving just the names, the other small and businesslike trying to fill in the gaps (sometimes with question marks).

The first four entries read:

Name ...Reln to Head of Family or Position in the Institution ...Condition ...Age M/F ...Rank, Profession or Occupation ...Where born
The Queen ...Head ...Widow ...61 ...Queen of Great Britain & Ireland ...-
HRH The Prince Leopold ...Son ...Unm? ...27 ...Prince ...-
HRH The Prince?s Beatrice ...Dau ...Unm? ...23 ...Princess ...-
Eugenie Ex-Empre?s of the French ...Visitor ...Widow ...43? ...Ex-Empress ...-

The "Ex Empress" under Rank is in the second hand, which has also added the "Ex-" into the first column. Oh dear! Gloria sic thingumy wotsit.

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but isn't it as much about status as whether you're actually working in an occupation? Eg I have known people who are doctors or teachers who have not worked since having the baby, yet the birth certificate still states this as their occupation. So you couldn't assume from anyone's birth cert. that their parents are even working, never mind in the occupation stated

As I said on the other thread, that box used to say rank or profession, not 'occupation'. They've filled it out correctly as that is their rank.

Before Charles and Diana got married there was discussions in the press about her being known as Princess Charles. Thank goodness that was knocked on the head. Also Fergie was going to be Princess Andrew until he got the York title which sounds slightly better than Princess Charles but very patriarchal still. Yet Princess Michael sounds ok for some reason.

What fascinates me is what occupation she put on her wedding certificate. given tbat sbe is notoriously work shy. Probably just a question mark or 'lazy cow'

Compo - I think you'll find she has been both a buyer for a large fashion chain AND a photograher. She has worked tirelessly over the years, dontcha know

Damn you all! I have been avoiding this thread and came on when insawnit AGAIN to tell you all off for being nasty, mean-spirited republicans who are determined to bash two perfectly nice people who can't help being part of the royal family.

And it turns out that your all just being nosy about Queen Victoria's domestic arrangements doing genealogical research and have ignored the OP's best efforts to start an argument.

What a bunch of rotters for spoiling my fun