British Royal Family Genealogy


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
As for Henry VII... Well, his claim was a shakey one at best, but basically in 1483 he was the senior male Lancaster claimant. In essence, he was the best claim that the Lancasters had, and in light of the way Richard III came to the throne he was able to also garner Yorkist support. He gained the throne not because he had the best claim - he certainly didn't - but because people who had better claims, or were on the throne, weren't appealing to the people who backed him.
Actually the senior male Lancastrian heir in 1483 was King Joao II of Portugal, as I pointed out above. Henry VII had no legal claim as his "Lancastrian" blood was via the Beauforts - who were specifically barred from the Throne by both civil and canon law.:flowers:
 
...Lionel was higher than both John of Gaunt and*Edmund of Langley. So then would his children be too right?
Under the rules of the day the descendants of Lionel (later the Yorks) had a better blood claim than the descendants of John. Daughter's couldn't inherit, but the sons of daughters could.

In Lion King terms, Mufasa (Richard II) was pushed off the throne and indirectly killed by Scar (Henry IV), while Mufasa's heir presumptive, Simba (Edward Mortimer) was pushed to the side. Go forward a bit and Simba's sister's son (Richard of York) is fighting Scar's grandson (Henry VI) for the throne.

The York claim to the throne was NOT through the York line, it was through their descent from Lionel. I'll map it out for you, italicized are women who were bypassed in favour of their sons. Bolded are the men who had or made a claim.

Edward III:

  1. Edward, the Black Prince
    1. Richard II (our Mufasa)
  2. Lionel of Antwerp
    1. Philippa of Clarence
      1. Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March
        1. Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March (our Simba), no issue
        2. Anne Mortimer
          1. Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York
            1. Edward IV
              1. Edward V
            2. Richard III
  3. John of Gaunt
    1. Henry IV (our Scar)
      1. Henry V
        1. Henry VI
    2. John Beaufort, 1st Earl of Somerset
      1. John Beaufort, 1st Duke of Somerset
        1. Margaret Beaufort
          1. Henry Tudor, later Henry VII


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually the senior male Lancastrian heir in 1483 was King Joao II of Portugal, as I pointed out above. Henry VII had no legal claim as his "Lancastrian" blood was via the Beauforts - who were specifically barred from the Throne by both civil and canon law.:flowers:

Actually... no.

The Lancaster line looks like this:

John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster

  1. John
  2. Edward
  3. John
  4. Henry IV
    1. Henry V
      1. Henry VI
        1. Edward of Westminster, Prince of Wales
    2. Thomas of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Clarence
    3. John of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Bedford
    4. Humphrey of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Gloucester
    5. Blanche of England
      1. Rupert, Hereditary Prince of the Palatinate
    6. Philippa of England
  5. John Beaufort, 1st Earl of Somerset
    1. Henry Beaufort, 2nd Earl of Somerset
    2. John Beaufort, 1st Duke of Somerset
      1. Lady Margaret Beaufort
        1. Henry VII, who claimed the throne in 1483, after everyone in the line before him was dead
    3. Thomas Beaufort, Count of Perche
      1. Edmund Beaufort, 2nd Duke of Somerset
      2. His 10 children and their descendants
    4. Joan Beaufort
      1. Her 11 children and their descendants
    5. Margaret Beaufort
      1. Her 8 children and their descendants
  6. Henry Beaufort, Bishop of Winchester
  7. Thomas Beaufort, Duke of Exeter
  8. Philippa of Lancaster
    1. Edward of Portugal
      1. Afonso V of Portugal
        1. John, Prince of Portugal
        2. John II of Portugal
          1. His descendants
        3. Joan of Portugal
      2. Infante Ferdinand, Duke of Viseu
        1. His 5 children and their descendants
      3. Edward's 3 daughters and their descendants
    2. Philippa's other children and their descendants
  9. Elizabeth of Lancaster
    1. Her 5 children and their descendants
  10. Catherine of Lancaster
    1. Her 3 children and their descendants
  11. Joan Beaufort
    1. Her 16 children and their descendants
The question of the legitimacy and ability to inherit of the Beauforts is tricky and, in the end a bit irrelevant given as Henry did become king.

In 1397 Richard II legitimized the Beauforts with no restrictions on their ability to inherit the throne. As such, under male preferred primogeniture the sons of John of Gaunt, regardless of which wife they were born to, and their descendants inherited before the daughters of John of Gaunt and their descendants - thus Henry VII was higher in the succession than John of Portugal because Henry was descended from a son, while John was descended from a daughter.

Ten years later Henry IV re-legitimized the Beauforts, but made them ineligible to inherit the throne in a move of debatable legality. This put Henry's sisters, and their descendants, higher up in the succession, while removing his half-siblings from the succession.

Go forward a bit and in 1455 Henry VI arranged the marriage between his half brother, Edmund Tudor, and his closest male-line relation, Margaret Beaufort. While the marriage was short-lived it resulted in the birth of Henry VII and can be seen as Henry VI attempting to keep his family close together.
 
Another genealogy question.

I was curious to know the monarch or otherwise who had the most children--European, that is. So on Wikipedia I saw that it was Robert I, Duke of Parma, and also Juliana of Stolberg.
Just wondering--are they both related to Queen Elizabeth II?
I was going to ask if the Dukes of Wellington are too, but I found out via an article on Wikipedia that they are indeed.

  1. Juliana of Stolberg
  2. Philip III of Hanau-Münzenberg
  3. Philip Louis I of Hanau-Münzenberg
  4. Philip Louis II of Hanau-Münzenberg
  5. Amalie Elisabeth of Hanau-Münzenberg
  6. William VI of Hesse-Kassel
  7. Charles I of Hesse-Kassel
  8. William VIII of Hesse-Kassel
  9. Frederick II of Hesse-Cassel
  10. Charles of Hesse-Cassel
  11. Louise Caroline of Hesse-Cassel
  12. Christian IX of Denmark
  13. Alexandra of Denmark
  14. George V of the United Kingdom
  15. George VI of the United Kingdom
  16. Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom
Prince Philip is also descended from her; the line is the same up until Christian IX, who also fathered George I of Greece, who fathered Andrew of Greece and Denmark, who fathered Prince Philip.

They also both descend from her through a second line:

  1. Juliana of Stolberg
  2. William I "the Silent" of Orange
  3. Catherina Belgica of Nassau
  4. Amalie Elisabeth of Hanau-Münzenberg
  5. William VI of Hesse-Kassel
  6. Charles I of Hesse-Kassel
  7. William VIII of Hesse-Kassel
  8. Frederick II of Hesse-Cassel
  9. Charles of Hesse-Cassel
  10. Louise Caroline of Hesse-Cassel
  11. Christian IX of Denmark
  12. George I of Greece/Alexandra of Denmark
A third line is:

  1. Juliana of Stolberg
  2. Anna of Nassau-Dillenburg
  3. Louis II of Nassau-Weilburg
  4. William Louis of Nassau-Saarbrücken
  5. Walrad of Nassau-Usingen
  6. William Henry of Nassau-Usingen
  7. Charles of Nassau-Usingen
  8. Charles William of Nassau-Usingen
  9. Caroline of Nassau-Usingen
  10. William of Hesse-Kassel
  11. Louise of Hesse-Kassel
  12. George I of Greece/Alexandra of Denmark
A fourth line is:

  1. Juliana of Stolberg
  2. John IV of Nassau-Dillenburg
  3. George of Nassau-Dillenburg
  4. Louis Henry of Nassau-Dillenburg
  5. George Louis of Nassau-Dillenburg
  6. Henry of Nassau-Dillenburg
  7. Charlotte Amalia of Nassau-Dillenburg
  8. Charles of Nassau-Usingen
  9. Charles William of Nassau-Usingen
  10. Caroline of Nassau-Usingen
  11. William of Hesse-Kassel
  12. Louise of Hesse-Kassel
  13. George I of Greece/Alexandra of Denmark
A fifth line is:

  1. Juliana of Stolberg
  2. Juliana of Nassau-Dillenburg
  3. Louis Günther I of Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt
  4. Albert Anton of Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt
  5. Louis Frederick I of Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt
  6. Anne Sophie of Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt
  7. Charlotte Sophie of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld
  8. Sophia Frederica of Mecklenburg-Schwerin
  9. Louise Charlotte of Denmark
  10. Louise of Hesse-Kassel
  11. George I of Greece/Alexandra of Denmark
Prince Philip also has a 6th line:

  1. Juliana of Stolberg
  2. Magdalena of Nassau-Dillenburg
  3. Philip Ernest of Hohenlohe-Langenburg
  4. Philippine Henriette of Hohenlohe-Langenburg
  5. Caroline of Nassau-Saarbrücken
  6. Caroline of Zweibrücken
  7. Frederick William III of Prussia
  8. Charlotte of Prussia
  9. Konstantin Nikolayevich of Russia
  10. Olga Konstantinova of Russia
  11. Andrew of Greece and Denmark
  12. Prince Philip
Neither the Queen nor Prince Philip are direct descendants of Robert I, Duke of Parma, although they are both related to his descendants through Johan Willem Friso of Orange. It should be noted that while Robert I had 12 children, only 3 of them went on to have children themselves.


The lines here are as such:

  1. Johan Willem Friso, Prince of Orange, married Landgravine Marie Louise of Hesse-Kassel
  2. William IV, Prince of Orange, married Anne, Princess Royal
  3. Princess Caroline of Orange-Nassau, married Charles Christian, Prince of Nassau-Weilburg
  4. Princess Henriette of Nassau-Weilburg, married Duke Louis of Württemberg
  5. Duke Alexander of Württemberg, married Claudine Rhédey von Kis-Rhéde
  6. Francis, Duke of Teck, married Princess Mary Adelaide of Cambridge
  7. Princess Mary of Teck, married George V of the United Kingdom
  8. George VI of the United Kingdom, married Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon
  9. Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, married Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh



  1. Johan Willem Friso, Prince of Orange, married Landgravine Marie Louise of Hesse-Kassel
  2. Princess Amalia of Nassau-Dietz, married Frederick, Hereditary Prince of Baden-Durlach
  3. Charles Frederick, Grand Duke of Baden, married Landgravine Caroline Louise of Hesse-Darmstadt
  4. Charles Louis, Hereditary Prince of Baden, married Landgravine Amalie of Hesse-Darmstadt
  5. Princess Wilhelmine of Baden, married Louis II, Grand Duke of Hesse
  6. Princes Charles of Hesse and by Rhine, married Princess Elisabeth of Prussia
  7. Louis IV, Grand Duke of Hesse, married Princess Alice of the United Kingdom
  8. Princess Victoria of Hesse and by Rhine, married Admiral Louis Alexander Mountbatten, 1st Marquess of Milford Haven
  9. Princess Alice of Battenburg, married Prince Andrew of Greece and Denmark
  10. Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, married Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom



  1. Johan Willem Friso, Prince of Orange, married Landgravine Marie Louise of Hesse-Kassel
  2. William IV, Prince of Orange, married Anne, Princess Royal
  3. Princess Caroline of Orange-Nassau, married Charles Christian, Prince of Nassau-Weilburg
  4. Frederick William, Prince of Nassau-Weilburg, married Burgravine Louise Isabelle of Kirchberg
  5. Princess Henriette of Nassau-Weilburg, married Archduke Charles, Duke of Teschen
  6. Archduchess Marie Theresa of Austria-Teschen, married Ferdinand II of the Two Sicilies
  7. Princess Maria Pia of the Two-Sicilies, married Robert I, Duke of Parma
 
Last edited:
Ah, there is our wonderful Johan Willem Friso of Orange again. ;)
He does keep popping up, doesn't he.
 
He does, he's useful like that!

I'm sure HM and the DoE are related to Robert I of Parma in other ways, but that was the only one I could show last night. I should note one error: they're only related to the children he had through his first marriage. I think 7 of his children (out of 12) from his second marriage went on to marry and have children.
 
Hey there Ish,

Wow, very interesting. I was confused about the lines though, since I never saw Robert's name or anyone connected to him on the lines you gave me.
Why is that?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He appears in the third line, but isn't the direct descendant. He's not a descendant of Johan, but his first wife is.

Her line is:

  1. Johan Willem Friso, Prince of Orange, married Landgravine Marie Louise of Hesse-Kassel
  2. William IV, Prince of Orange, married Anne, Princess Royal
  3. Princess Caroline of Orange-Nassau, married Charles Christian, Prince of Nassau-Weilburg
  4. Frederick William, Prince of Nassau-Weilburg, married Burgravine Louise Isabelle of Kirchberg
  5. Princess Henriette of Nassau-Weilburg, married Archduke Charles, Duke of Teschen
  6. Archduchess Marie Theresa of Austria-Teschen, married Ferdinand II of the Two Sicilies
  7. Princess Maria Pia of the Two-Sicilies, married Robert I, Duke of Parma
As such, Robert I's children through his first marriage are related to HM and the DoE through their common descent from Johan, but Robert himself and his children from his second marriage aren't related through this line.
 
They were not the rightful heirs, but...

Im wondering now how much it matters? ?? Arnt there any others who feel they had any claim to the throne from some other previous kings? So what im really saying here is what right did both the yorks and the lancasters really have. Didnt edward I, II or III have any brothers that could have fought just as much and still always felt the throne belonged to them???? Like I assume there are other kings that had battled other family members the same way these guys did. Like who challanged Edward I or II or some king way before that? I assume these guys have been battling with family members and 1st and 2nd cousins and like this for a while. Hasnt the throne switched familes even a few times? Like who was the first real king ever and at what point did it switch? Or am I completly off base here. Sorry for my lack of knowledge on this subject. My interest have always been from edward I through James I.
 
Henry VII was higher in the succession than John of Portugal because Henry was descended from a son, while John was descended from a daughter.
Thanks for all ut awesome help by the way but I thought I understood everything untill I just read this. If this is true about henry VII and john of portugal then wouldnt Guants male children be higher in succession than philippa or her children.
 
...So what im really saying here is what right did both the yorks and the lancasters really have...
I'm not sure what's confusing you here.

Richard II was the king. He was king because his father, Edward the Black Prince, was the eldest son of the previous king, Edward III. Richard didn't have any children, so his heir presumptive was the next male in the line of succession - the grandson of his father's eldest brother, Roger Mortimer, then later Roger's son, Edmund. The eldest son of his father's second brother, Henry of Bolingbroke, conflicted with Richard lead a rising and seized the throne, putting himself on it as Henry IV.

Go forward in time a bit and Roger's grandson, Richard, Duke of York, conflicted with Henry VI and pointed out that hey, his bloodline was of a senior line to the king's, so really he should be king. He lead a rising and when he was killed his sons continued that rising until eventually winning (twice) and establishing the eldest, Edward IV, on the throne.

People usurping the throne happened before, and happened again, but the case of the Lancasters/Yorks is one of the few ones where a house with a better claim was able to restore itself. Other usurpations/conquests happened under:

  1. William the Conqueror, who conquered England from Harald Godwinson
  2. Henry I, who seized the throne on the death of his elder brother, William II, over his elder brother Robert Curthose
  3. Stephen, who seized the throne over his female cousin, Matilda. Matilda's father, Henry I, had no male heirs so made the nobles swear to support his daughter as the heir, however when he died his nephew (the eldest son of his sister, and closest male relation) put himself on the throne, leading to a period of time known as the Anarchy as the two cousins fought for control. In the end, Stephen agreed to name Matilda's son as his heir, resulting in Henry II becoming king
  4. Edward III's supporters, lead by his mother, overthrew his father, Edward II
  5. Richard II's cousin, Henry IV, overthrew him. Later, Henry's grandson, Henry VI, would be overthrown by the great-grandson of Richard's heir presumptive, Edward IV
  6. Richard III usurped the throne of his nephew, Edward V
  7. Henry VII conquered the throne from Richard III. Both he and his son, Henry VIII, would put down Yorkist risings throughout their reigns
  8. Jane Grey attempted to usurp her cousin, Mary I, on the death of Mary's half-brother, Edward VI, but would be overthrown very quickly and eventually executed
  9. Similarly, during the reign of Mary's sister, Elizabeth II, their other cousin, Mary of Scots, was the subject of an attempt to usurp the throne, leading to Mary's execution
  10. Charles I was overthrown by Parliament and Oliver Cromwell. After Cromwell's death his son, Richard, became Lord Protector briefly before resigning in favour of the restoration of the monarchy under Charles' elder son, Charles II
  11. James II was also overthrown by Parliament in favour of his daughter, Mary II, and her husband, William III. On William's death, Mary's sister, Anne, became monarch, and on her death George I, was asked to be monarch, over the 50+ people that came before him in the line of succession but were deemed undesirable
  12. Edward VIII was pushed off the throne by Parliament and the Church because the woman he wanted to marry was deemed undesirable. His eldest brother, George VI, became monarch
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for all ut awesome help by the way but I thought I understood everything untill I just read this. If this is true about henry VII and john of portugal then wouldnt Guants male children be higher in succession than philippa or her children.

Yes. And that's why Henry VII got the support of the Lancasters while John of Portugal remained in Portugal.
 
Yes. And that's why Henry VII got the support of the Lancasters while John of Portugal remained in Portugal.

But I thought u had said the yorks had a superior claim through maternal decent. It really sounds to me based on what you just said about henry vii being from a son and jon of portugal being from a daughter that the lancasters did have the better claim because philppa was a duaghter too. And that relationship seems very parallel to me. I dont see why that would apply to john of portugal but not to phillippas children. Unless u were just saying that they "felt" they had a better claim.
 
The line of succession at the time goes like this:
  1. The first son and his male descendants
  2. The second son and his male descendants
  3. The third son and his male descendants
  4. And so on through all the sons
  5. The male descendants of the first daughter
  6. The male descendants of the second daughter
  7. The male descendants of the third daughter
The descendants of the Black Prince came before the descendants of Lionel of Antwerp, who came before the descendants of John of Gaunt. The Yorks were descended from Lionel of Antwerp through his only child, Philippa of Clarence, therefore they came before the Lancasters, who were descended from John of Gaunt.

Within the children of John of Gaunt, his sons and their descendants come first, then his daughters. John's eldest surviving son was Henry IV, the first Lancaster monarch. His second eldest surviving son was John Beaufort, through whom Henry VII descended. His eldest surviving daughter was Philippa of Lancaster, through whom John of Portugal descended. Henry IV and his descendants are first because he's the eldest male, John Beaufort and his descendants are second because he's the second male, while John of Portugal comes after because he's descended through the eldest female.
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
Why did non of the other children of Henry IV do anything? Were they all dead?

In short, yes. There were no living descendants of Henry IV, so the Lancaster line went to the next (mostly) male-line descendant of John of Gaunt, Henry VII.

Henry VII began being promoted as the Lancaster king in 1483. Going through the line we can see the various deaths that had to occur first:

  1. Henry IV, died in 1413
    1. Henry V, died in 1422
      1. Henry VI, died in 1471
        1. Edward of Westminster, Prince of Wales, died in 1471
    2. Thomas of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Clarence, died in 1421, no issue
    3. John of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Bedford, died in 1435, no issue
    4. Humphrey of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Gloucester, died in 1447, no legitimate issue
    5. Blanche of England, died in 1409
      1. Rupert, Hereditary Prince of the Palatinate, died in 1426
    6. Philippa of England, died in 1430, no issue
  2. John Beaufort, 1st Earl of Somerset died in 1410
    1. Henry Beaufort, 2nd Earl of Somerset, died in 1418, no issue
    2. John Beaufort, 1st Duke of Somerset, died in 1444
      1. Margaret Beaufort, died in 1509
        1. Henry VII
So, basically the entire line of Henry IV was dead by 1471, when Henry VI and the Prince of Wales died. The most senior person in the line of John Beaufort was Margaret Beaufort, who couldn't inherit due to her gender, leaving her son, Henry, to inherit. There were The 1st Earl of Somerset had other children, who had descendants as well, but none who would have been as senior as Henry VII.
 
Got it. I think I was getting the differeny phillipas confused.

There are a lot of Philippa's involved here. There are a lot of name duplications in general.

The thing to remember is that the children of Lionel and their descendants all come before the children of John and his descendants, and within John his sons and their descendants all come before his daughters and their descendants. This distinction isn't neccessary in Lionel's line because he only had a daughter.

I extended the British-English line all the way to Alfred the Great.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvDaHlZF2HfQdHhuUnBYbzJDQU5scTlBcmhvN2wzNWc#gid=0

It was fun to figure out the kings in the Anglo-Saxon&Danish period.
And to find several double-connections.

My computer's being lame and not letting me open the doc, but I was able to look at it on my phone and as usual I'm loving it. I'll do a closer look at it later!
 
The line of succession at the time goes like this:...
t's only your suggestion.
They didn't have written law. King's nephews was grey zone.
Usually kings named smb. as their heir.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's only your suggestion.

They didn't have written law. King's nephews was grey zone.

How is this my suggestion? It's based on what happened.

When Richard II was on the throne his cousin's child was his heir presumptive. That follows the succession that I described.

When Henry VI and the Prince of Wales died the person put forth as the heir was Henry VII because he was the senior male descendant.
 
How is this my suggestion? It's based on what happened.
Henry quickly gained enough power and support to have himself declared King Henry IV, imprison King Richard (who died in prison under mysterious circumstances) and bypass Richard's seven-year-old heir-presumptive, Edmund de Mortimer.
I can't describe it as " the throne passed smoothly to the first person in line".
 
And I didn't describe it as that. The throne didn't pas smoothly at all because people usurped it.
 
Another set of questions...

1) Queen Mary's brother married the 1st Duke of Grosvenor's daughter... Since the daughter is Elizabeth's great-aunt by marriage, what is the 1st Duke? Her great-grandfather?

2) I know Edward VII is her great-grandfather. I also know that Marie of Edinburgh/Romania is his niece... However Alexander II of Russia is her maternal grandfather.
Is Marie Elizabeth's ___th cousin, and is Alexander an nth g-grandfather of Elizabeth?
 
Neither the 1st Duke of Grosvenor not Alexander II of Russia are direct ancestors of HM.

The 1st Duke of Grosvenor is HM's great-uncle's father-in-law. There is no relation between him and HM.

Marie of Edinburgh's father was Prince Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh, who was the brother of Edward VII. Her mother was Maria Alexadrovna of Russia, daughter of Alexander II of Russia. So Alexander II was Prince Alfred's father-in-law, and Prince Alfred was HM's great-great uncle. No relation between HM and Alexander.

Marie would have been George V's first cousin. That would make her HM's first cousin twice removed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's based on what happened.

I think you are exactly right. Its all based on what happened. And it seems to me if what I read is correct that after Henry IV took over, parliament and the nobility accepted the Lancaster line. In my opinion giving them and any future descendants the legitimate claim to the throne.

Likewise I read that in 1460 it was agreed that after Henry VI's death the succession of the throne would transfer to Richard Duke of York and his sons. This effectively disinherited Henry's young son Edward. Seemingly giving them and any future descendants the legitimate claim to the throne.

I just know if I was a Lancaster or a York I would feel my claim was superior And again in my opinion now after reading here and many other pages is that who ever the parliment and nobles wanted to have the throne is who was suposed to and their claim was valid to them anyway and any of there children would feel it belonged to them. Whoever had any relation to any former king that could gain the political support and the bigger army was basically who should be the legitimate ruler.

One could argue that once the lancasters took over that they were the only claim to the throne and any who came before or after were null and void excluding there own descendants obviously. I know thats what I would proclaim if I took over.

This could probably be said for any new family taking the throne. I mean what gave any king a claim to the "throne?" Even those early early Kings you mentioned. I guess I just mean what gives any of them the right over any other human being on the planet. Again other than the support from the people. Once the people or the nobles I gather or parliament decides someone else should be king or the new line they pass a rule and it is so.
All that being said I know understand the line of succession but I'm just saying I know if I was scar in any situation I would always feel my claim was just as good as any grand kid of any of my siblings. And I guess my claim wouldn't mean much unless everyone else agreed with me or wanted it to be so for some reason that it would benefit them.
 
Last edited:
Spencer - Compton Genealogy

My 12th great grandfather is Sir John Spencer Lord Mayor of London (1538-1610) through his daughter Elizabeth Spencer who married Sir William Compton. I feel fairly confident that I am a distant relative of Princess Diana but I am having one heck of a time sorting through all the Spencers to link us..... does anyone have any suggestions?

Thank you
A Queen in my own mind,
Nancy Compton
 
I can't find a connection between Sir John Spencer and the Spencers of Althorp, largely because the Spencer trail that I can follow on the Peerage and wikipedia ends very close to Sir John.

His peerage page is here: - Person Page 2829, but looking at the various Spencers in Diana's direct line at the time I can't make the connection between her ancestors and either your Sir John or his father.

There is a connection, however, from William Compton to both the Queen and Diana if you're interested. William Compton's mother was Frances Hastings, whose parents were Francis Hastings, 2nd Earl of Huntingdon and Catherine Pole.

They were also parents to George Hastings, 4th Earl of Huntingdon, who fathered the following line:

  • Francis Hastings, Lord Hastings
  • Catherine Hastings
  • Sir Henry Stanhope, Lord Stanhop
  • Philip Stanhope, 2nd Earl of Chesterfield
  • Elizabeth Stanhope
  • Thomas Lyon, 8th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • John Bowes, 9th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • Thomas Lyon-Bowes, 11th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • Thomas George Lyon-Bowes, Lord Glamis
  • Claude Bowes-Lyon, 13th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • Claude Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne
  • Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon
  • Elizabeth II
Francis and Catherine were also parents to Elizabeth Hastings, from whom Diane descends in this line:

  • Henry Somerset, 1st Marquess of Worcester
  • Edward Somerset, 2nd Marquess of Worcester
  • Henry Somerset, 1st Duke of Beaufort
  • Charles Somerset, Marquess of Worcester
  • Henrietta Somerset
  • Isabella FitzRoy
  • Vice Admiral Hugh Seymour
  • Colonel Sir Horace Beauchamp Seymour
  • Adelaide Seymour
  • Charles Spencer, 6th Earl Spencer
  • Albert Spencer, 7th Earl Spencer
  • John Spencer, 8th Earl Spencer
  • Diana Spencer
 
Are these royals related to HM Elizabeth II (of the UK of course)

1) Louis Philippe, Duke of Anjou
2) Infanta Alicia, Duchess of Calabria
3) Maria Theresa, Queen of Hungary & Bohemia
4) Duchess Marie Therese of Wurttemberg
5) Louise Marie Therese (she's a French royal)
*Louise Marie Therese d'Artois
6) Archduke Charles, Duke of Teschen
7) Prince Leka II of Albania
8) George Mikhailovich of Russia

They may be indirectly related, but that's fine.

I also know (according to a new biography of Prince Philip) that said the Duke of Edinburgh's aunt Marie Bonaparte was a direct descendant of Napoleon's younger brother Louis. Would this make Philip a grandnephew of Napoleon?

Another one I forgot to add is if HM is related to Princess Caroline of Hanover, Grace Kelly's daughter.
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Do you mean George, son of Maria of Russia? The woman with the interesting personality and dress style? If so, he is related.
His mother is the child of Vladimir Cyrillovich, whose mother was Victoria Melita (Ducky).
Ducky is the child of Alfred, Queen Victoria's second son, and her mother was Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrova, daughter of Alexander II of Russia.
But I am no expert at all, so please correct me - anyone - if I am wrong. Thank you.
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
COUSINS :lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top Bottom