The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #121  
Old 09-11-2015, 05:04 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,579
It is not so straitghtforward to tell which reigning royal house is the oldest.

The Windsors for example trace their immediate ancestry to the first Hanoverian king of Great Britain in the early 18th century. However, the Hanoverians also descend from the Stuarts, who in turn descend from the Tudors, who in turn descend from the Plantagenets all the way back to William the Conqueror. One might say then that, including collateral and female lines, Queen Elizabeth II is part of a family tree dating back to 1066. Likewise, the Spanish Bourbons, through their French ancestors (King Philip V was a grandson of Louis XIV), can trace their roots all the way back to Hugh Capet, the first King of France who lived between 941 and 996, even though they have been in the Spanish throne properly only since the early 18th century.

In fact, even the royal houses of the "new monarchies" of the 19th century, e.g. Belgium and the Netherlands, are actually older than they look at first impression. There have been only seven "Kings of the Netherlands" (since 1815), but the Dutch house of Orange-Nassau is much older than the Kingdom of the Netherlands per se, dating back at least to the 16th century and, since then, the family has been closely associated with Dutch history (as any visitor to the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam will immediately notice). Likewise, there have been only seven "Kings of the Belgians" (since 1831), but the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha ancestors of King Leopold I had been rulers in Saxony long before the Kingdom of Belgium was created.

I guess the only European royals that can't claim a long dynastic tree pre-dating the 19th century are actually the Swedish Bernadottes, who are truly of commoner ancestry. Nevertheless, even in that case, through the marriage of King Gustav V with Victoria of Baden, his descendants , including the current king Carl XVI Gustaf, became matrilineally related to the old Vasa dynasty and, therefore, related to a royal line dating back to the Middle Ages.

I guess that the Danish royal familiy may be the oldest (patrineally ?) , but I don't see their ancestral claims as far superior than those of other European royal houses, particularly the major ones like the Bourbons.
__________________

  #122  
Old 09-11-2015, 05:15 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Albuquerque, United States
Posts: 7
Japanese Imperial NOT the Oldest Line

The Pictish (ancient Scottish) bloodline is older than the Japanese Imperial, for sure. It is at least 3000 years old, closer to 4000. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthol%C3%B3n
__________________

  #123  
Old 09-11-2015, 05:20 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Albuquerque, United States
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcc View Post
what royal/noble families have the oldest traceable ancesty.also is the massimo descent from an ancient roman general(maximus i believe) genuine.i find this fascinating so any info or input is much appreciated.

i forgot to mention that it does not matter wheather it is male or female line descent.

hi. let me start by saying that i have already asked this question in a different part of this forum,but recieved no reply. what royal/noble families have the oldest traceable lineage. also are the roman descents of the massimo, orsiniand antici-matei(sorry about the spelling)families genuine.thanks in advance.

By the by, if anyone is interested I would happily produce the family tree that outlines the genealogical connection between "Adam and Eve" and the current House of Lords nobles of the Erskine family, who are Pictish.
  #124  
Old 09-12-2015, 12:22 AM
norenxaq's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: La jolla, United States
Posts: 100
much of early pictish royalty is mythical... thus a non-factor here
  #125  
Old 09-16-2015, 10:11 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Albuquerque, United States
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by norenxaq View Post
much of early pictish royalty is mythical... thus a non-factor here
Just because the Irish or the British aren't the source of information doesn't mean it's "mythical". To say so is borderline slander. The earliest king reported by our enemies at the time, the Gaels, was in the 6th century, which definitively and historical establish their kingdom well before most of the bloodlines mentioned. Nonfactor indeed.
  #126  
Old 09-18-2015, 01:06 AM
norenxaq's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: La jolla, United States
Posts: 100
6th century ad is not a problem. when early kings are reported to have 80-100 year reigns consistently as sevaral of the first pictish kings have enters the realm of myth. time period, I believe these began around 1000 bc. Ireland has another problem with those attaching its royal family to judaea which I consider an early modern myth
  #127  
Old 09-18-2015, 05:45 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Albuquerque, United States
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by norenxaq View Post
6th century ad is not a problem. when early kings are reported to have 80-100 year reigns consistently as sevaral of the first pictish kings have enters the realm of myth. time period, I believe these began around 1000 bc. Ireland has another problem with those attaching its royal family to judaea which I consider an early modern myth
There is conjecture that the time periods of these reigns aren't meant to be interpreted as literal years, but that the numbers had significant meaning to the Picts. What that meaning is I couldn't say.

For a similar reason, I also agree that most of these supposed genealogical connections to judaea (Noah, in particular), are in fact mythical. However, it's interesting to see where there is some overlapping with fact.

The Romans (Tacitus) recorded the Battle of Mon Grapus in 84 AD, against the Picts, lead by Calgacus (a roman assigned name). Hadrian's wall which was built subsequently still stands to this day. This to me suggests that the Pictish kingdom was already established by this time, or certainly they were an organized people as they remained one of the only peoples in the area to remain unconquered by the Roman Legion.

This battle likely took place in Aberdeenshire, where my ancestors came from. There are also several Pictish Stones in this area, many of which predate the introduction of Christianity to the area. On these stones are Ogham markings, a form of writing. We do not know what these markings mean. The Pictish language was thought to have only been verbal, but clearly it wasn't, the meaning is simply unknown (or maybe only know by a very select few).

I'm inclined to believe that any connection to Judaea and "Adam and Eve" is mythical. The Christian's used all their might and fury to convert the peoples of the British Isles. Saint Columba, who converted the Pictish King in the 6th century (hmm...so this is why this is the accepted date their kingdom was established), also recorded the first sighting of the Loch Ness monster, and that the Picts had druids as their priest class. Supposedly, Columba even had a magical duel with the King's head druid, and converted them all by overpowering the druid with his magic.

Myth? Yes.
Christian writing? yes.
Our only fully interpreted source of information? Sadly.

If we could only read Ogham and understand the Pictish language, I'm sure there would be a lot more light shed on the topic.
  #128  
Old 09-19-2015, 12:32 AM
norenxaq's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: La jolla, United States
Posts: 100
I thought ogham could be transliterated?one can find ogham fonts online... I also believe i have heard pictish could be translated.or, are these guesses?
  #129  
Old 09-20-2015, 05:54 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Albuquerque, United States
Posts: 7
There are many theories, but very little consensus, and I haven't seen anything near what would be a full translations or understanding of the markings. The fonts online are generally used by people who revere the markings, and have assigned them to a alphabet, but not an actual translation.
  #130  
Old 09-20-2015, 06:43 AM
JR76's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,198
Oldest Royal and Noble Families

One ancient line of descent which is believed to be the oldest in the world is that of the Dukes Yansheng, descendants in the male line from the philosopher Confucius living between 551-479 BC. He himself was a descendant of the Zhang dynasty and the Lords of Song which would make his ancestry traceable back to at least around 1000 BC. Living today he has offspring in the 83d generation.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app
  #131  
Old 01-11-2016, 10:21 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Albuquerque, United States
Posts: 7
Clan Erskine
  #132  
Old 10-24-2016, 09:43 AM
MaNgonyama's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Richards Bay, South Africa
Posts: 3
Are there any notable Welsh families who can trace their lineage before the English conquest of Wales?
  #133  
Old 10-25-2016, 01:32 AM
norenxaq's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: La jolla, United States
Posts: 100
shang dynasty was established around 1600 bc. by 1000 bc it had been overthrown by the zhou. the latter's founder appointed a shang dynasty prince, duke of song
  #134  
Old 01-19-2017, 02:25 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom
Posts: 7
Elizabeth II can trace her lines back to semi legendary figures such as Cedric of Wessex and Fergus Mor of Dal Riata. Both are supposed to have lived in the early 6th century.
  #135  
Old 01-19-2017, 04:29 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chesh View Post
Elizabeth II can trace her lines back to semi legendary figures such as Cedric of Wessex and Fergus Mor of Dal Riata. Both are supposed to have lived in the early 6th century.
This thread is not about tracing back ancestors, it is about the oldest royal or noble families.

Queen Elizabeth is the last from her ancestral House of Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha (the British branch is renamed "Windsor") on the throne. After her, a scion of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg will sit on the throne.

United Kingdom
Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha (1825), known as "Windsor", branch of Wettin (around 1000)
successor: Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, known as "Windsor" (around 1100)

Belgium
Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha (1825), known as "of Belgium", branch of Wettin (around 1000)

Netherlands
Von Amsberg, known as "Orange-Nassau" (assumed nobility since 1795, formalized 1891)

Denmark
Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg (1100), kown as "of Denmark"
Successor: De Laborde de Montpezat (assumed nobility since 1650), known as "of Denmark"

Norway
Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg (1100), known as "of Norway"

Sweden
Bernadotte (1806)

Luxembourg
Bourbon-Parma (1731), known as "Nassau", branch of Capet (around 950)

Spain
Borbón (1700), branch of Capet (around 950)

Monaco
De Chalencon de Polignac (1349), known as "Grimaldi"

Liechtenstein
Liechtenstein (around 1130)
  #136  
Old 01-19-2017, 04:36 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
This thread is not about tracing back ancestors, it is about the oldest royal or noble families.

Queen Elizabeth is the last from her ancestral House of Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha (the British branch is renamed "Windsor") on the throne. After her, a scion of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg will sit on the throne.

The House of Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha was grounded in 1825, as a branch of the House of Wettin (first named around 1000).

The House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg was grounded in 1825, as a branch of the House of Oldenburg (first named in 1108).
So true...we are discussing here male line dynasties descent...
  #137  
Old 01-19-2017, 05:26 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom
Posts: 7
Funny I thought the opening post said it didn't matter if male or female lines and mentioned ancestors. I must of miss understood

It's ok I'll just go back to lurking again
  #138  
Old 01-19-2017, 06:30 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chesh View Post
Funny I thought the opening post said it didn't matter if male or female lines and mentioned ancestors. I must of miss understood

It's ok I'll just go back to lurking again
Well, a royal or a noble House usually becomes extinct with the death of the last legitimate male agnate. In aristocrat Houses still the procreation goes via legitimate male descendants only. In royal Houses the succession has become gender-neutral, since then the succession indeed can result in another House taking over.

With Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands, the last legitimate Orange-Nassau agnate died. The House of Mecklenburg-Schwerin came on the throne with her daughter Queen Juliana.

As Queen Juliana herself was a female, the House zur Lippe-Biesterfeld came on the throne with her daughter Queen Beatrix.

Since Queen Beatrix herself is a female, the aristocrat family Von Amsberg came on the throne with her son King Willem-Alexander.

Since the King has only daughters, the Von Amsberg intermezzo will last only two generations, unless Princess Amalia marries another Von Amsberg, of course, or something horrible must happen so that Claus-Casimir van Oranje-Nassau van Amsberg (cousin of the three Princesses) becomes a heir presumptive.

:)
  #139  
Old 01-19-2017, 06:54 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 5,779
The Netherlands isn't the House of Von Amsberg, not will Charles reign as a Glucksburg. The Netherlands is the House of Orange and Charles belongs to the House of Windsor.

Talk about ancestors is different but this thread discusses both male and female line
  #140  
Old 01-19-2017, 07:05 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 5,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chesh View Post
Funny I thought the opening post said it didn't matter if male or female lines and mentioned ancestors. I must of miss understood

It's ok I'll just go back to lurking again

The opening post does say male or female
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Royal, Princely and Noble Families of Germany & Austria 2 Dulce Elena Royal Families of Austria and Germany 252 09-11-2017 10:16 AM
Italian Noble and Princely Families 2: July 2007- Warren Royal Families of Italy 564 06-11-2017 05:18 PM
Princely and Noble Families of Hungary and Bohemia Adrienna Royal Families of Austria and Germany 44 12-30-2014 09:24 PM
Italian Noble and Princely Families 1: June 2004 - July 2007 Lord Williams Royal Families of Italy 206 07-20-2007 05:48 AM




Popular Tags
beatrice (1986- ) best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events cymry denmark fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein line monarchy news november 2016 october 2016 october and november 2016 picture of the week picture of the week december prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince nicholas prince oscar princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen margrethe queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia romanov state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family the duchess of cambridge casual wear victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:46 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises