The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #161  
Old 01-21-2017, 09:51 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,815
Anyway, the original question: the oldest royal or noble families. I think those who can claim to come from Rome's patriciate have a strong card, but it is very difficult to objectify such claims. It is nearly impossible to trace any noble lineage back much before 800. Let us say: when a dynasty can trace unbroken nobility in male lineage to 1000, then it is a very, very old one. The House of Capet (the Bourbons in Spain and Luxembourg) and the House of Guelph (the Windsors and the Of Belgiums) are the two best contenders, I think.
__________________

__________________
  #162  
Old 01-21-2017, 07:51 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 1,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post

That is not the case worldwide, e.g., certain Native American monarchies were matrilineal.

While children in Europe normally belonged to their father's house, there were many exceptions.

The Spanish royal family traces its name to Beatrice, Lady of Bourbon rather than her husband Robert, Count of Clermont (son of King Louis IX of France), who is the unbroken male line ancestor of Felipe VI de Borbón, King of Spain.

The children of Queen Maria II of Portugal and King Fernando, Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, were "de Bragança Bourbon", not "de Saxe-Coburgo-Gotha" or "de Bragança Saxe-Coburgo-Gotha". Here is the marriage contract of Infanta Maria Anna. http://books.google.pt/books?id=UXUMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA4&focus=viewport&hl=pt-PT
Of course, I know that there are matrilineal monarchies, but changing name doesn't determine family, it can determine new House, maybe new monarchy, but not a family.

Here almost everyone mixes the terms monarchy, dynasty and family...

In 1901 King Edward VI was head of the British royal family and he belonged to the ruling dynasty of Britain, but did not belong to the same family as his mother to whom he succeeded on the throne...So, he did succeed the throne, but did not belong to the same House.

And in this thread the title is "Oldest royal and noble families", and all noble families are determined by male descent. I am not talking about royal dynasties.

We have today British royal family, royal House and it's members belong to 2 families.

Duke of Kent, Prince of Kent and Duke of Gloucester belong to Saxe-Coburg-Gotha family, while Prince Charles and Prince William belong to Schleswig-Holstein family, while all of them technically belong to the House of Windsor.

So, we are here talking about families which have survived in an unbroken male line, which makes them extant...as that determines how old one House is.

If the contrary would be the case, then all royal and noble families would have never been extinct.
__________________

__________________
  #163  
Old 01-21-2017, 08:25 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 583


I am aware that you were talking about male line descent, however, the original post asked about families' traceable ancestry in female line and male line.

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.
__________________
  #164  
Old 01-22-2017, 02:12 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,815
The oldest traceable descent is a complete different question than the oldest royal or noble houses.

For sure is that for all the current reigning monarchs the closest shared ancestor is Johan Willem Friso of Nassau, Prince of Orange, Stadtholder of the United Netherlands. His genealogical House however became extinct in the Netherlands in 1962, became extinct in Luxembourg in 1985 and will be completely extinct when the very last (legitimate) male agnate (a German countess) will pass away.

But in the end the question of the longest ancestry is a bit useless if we are free to hopping from male to female, from family to family, like we are using the Metro of Paris. After all we seem to descend from the first man created, if we may believe the stories told in the biblical book Genesis.....

The most close comes a traceable and recorded lineage from father on son, in an unbroken descendance. But even then it is difficult because we have no DNA and is indeed the infant in that cradle born from his legal father's seed and not from an extramarital affair or a swap with someone's child for political reasons?
__________________
  #165  
Old 01-22-2017, 04:57 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 7,710
If you find it useless feel free to leave the thread

You didn't create this thread. This thread, and what was being discussed was set by another poster. It clearly states that.

You are free to hold to your only males should ever rule thoughts. And we have every right to discus maternal lineage. That is what the thread is about. Some of are interested in an entire family tree, not simply male. Obviously the poster who started the thread thought do.
__________________
  #166  
Old 01-22-2017, 05:20 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
If you find it useless feel free to leave the thread

You didn't create this thread. This thread, and what was being discussed was set by another poster. It clearly states that.

You are free to hold to your only males should ever rule thoughts. And we have every right to discus maternal lineage. That is what the thread is about. Some of are interested in an entire family tree, not simply male. Obviously the poster who started the thread thought do.
It is useless because:
- a - it can not be substantiated
- b- Christians believe we were created by a Creator

So ultimately all descendance is equally old. Your descendance is as old as that of Elizabeth von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha and mine is as old as that of the Earl of Farthing.

Take the example of the princely house of Monaco. The Prince's paternal great grandmother was a relatively undocumented daughter of a laundress working for the Prince. The prince's maternal ancestors came from Ireland. It is almost impossible to trace them since they were no high- and wellborn ladies and gentlemen with extensive recordings of their lives. Does that makes the descendance of the Prince of Monaco less older than that of his grandfather Pierre from the most noble and well-documented House de Chalencon de Polignac?
__________________
  #167  
Old 01-22-2017, 08:02 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
But in the end the question of the longest ancestry is a bit useless if we are free to hopping from male to female, from family to family, like we are using the Metro of Paris. After all we seem to descend from the first man created, if we may believe the stories told in the biblical book Genesis.....
I am doubtful that your descent from the first man or woman is a traceable lineage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcc View Post
i forgot to mention that it does not matter wheather it is male or female line descent. [...] what royal/noble families have the oldest traceable lineage.
__________________
  #168  
Old 01-22-2017, 10:57 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 1,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post


I am aware that you were talking about male line descent, however, the original post asked about families' traceable ancestry in female line and male line.
Ok, but that is completely stupid.

If you trace every line, almost all royal and noble families can trace their ancestry from few same persons.

If that is so, what is the difference as almost all of them would be the same by that criteria.

By that Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, Sophie, Countess of Wessex and Queen Elizabeth II are equal as all of them can trace their ancestry from Kings of England, who also trace their descent from etc. etc. etc.

Maybe even I am descendant of the Kings of England :P

So, what is the point of this kind of comparation then?
__________________
  #169  
Old 01-22-2017, 11:31 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,815


That is what I meant. As I am no native English speaker I can sometimes not come to what I meant. Thanks for the crisp and clear post.
__________________
  #170  
Old 01-22-2017, 01:24 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 3,027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
Ok, but that is completely stupid.

If you trace every line, almost all royal and noble families can trace their ancestry from few same persons.
Yes, but not all of them trace their ancestry in male line to those same few persons. That is the point some of the posters here are trying to make.
__________________
  #171  
Old 01-22-2017, 01:44 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
If you trace every line, almost all royal and noble families can trace their ancestry from few same persons.
Who are these persons? I am doubtful that the Senge family of Japan has a traceable and recorded descent from the oldest traceable ancestor of the Spencer family of England.
__________________
  #172  
Old 01-22-2017, 02:43 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 1,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Who are these persons?
If you count maternal descent of most royal or noble families,almost every noble person by this criteria has descended from William the Conqueror on this or that way and going further down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
I am doubtful that the Senge family of Japan has a traceable and recorded descent from the oldest traceable ancestor of the Spencer family of England.

You can doubt, but you might never know.

For example, when Queen Elizabeth II visited China in 1986 she got as a present her ancestry from Chinese Emperors.

Chinese Emperors married their daughters to Mongols(Genghis Khan and his family), Mongols migrated to Europe and intermarried with ancient Hungarian nobility who again intermarried with almost all other noble families of Europe.

As for Spencer family, by your criteria, Diana as a Spencer can trace her ancestry to Hannover dynasty and Stuart dynasty and they can trace their ancestry again to almost same people, so what is the point as everything leads to just few persons.

But,if we count just male descent Spencer family can be compared with almost every other family, as the first documented male is the founder of one noble family and the last documented male is last one before family is considered extinct.

And the first documented male determines how old one noble family is, not first female.
__________________
  #173  
Old 01-22-2017, 03:22 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 1,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post


That is what I meant. As I am no native English speaker I can sometimes not come to what I meant. Thanks for the crisp and clear post.
Me neither,but I completely understood your point and I am backing it up because it is the only comparable thing considering the thing "how old ONE family is, not 2 or 3 families."

And how old one noble family is is determined by first documented MALE who appeared at certain point etc.

That is comparable.

By using this criteria we can compare two families...for example Reibnitz family(family of Princess Michael of Kent) and Spencer family(family of Lady Diana):

As first recorded male member(or founder) of Reibnitz family dates back to 1288 and first recorded male(founder) of Spencer family dates back to 1478 one can easily say that Reibnitz family is the older noble family.

So, for me that is the only criteria which can be comparable.

It also reminds me of the fact that Queen Carola of Saxony was prior to her marriage called "the last Vasa Princess", while in reality she was the member of Holstein-Gottorp dynasty and had almost nothing to do with Vasa family that died out few centuries ago.
__________________
  #174  
Old 01-22-2017, 03:25 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
You can doubt, but you might never know. [...]
And the first documented male determines how old one noble family is, not first female.
I agree that it is not known if the Senges descend from William the Conqueror, but my point was that kcc, who created this thread, asked about traceable (known and documented) lineages in female and male line.
__________________
  #175  
Old 01-22-2017, 03:51 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 1,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
I agree that it is not known if the Senges descend from William the Conqueror, but my point was that kcc, who created this thread, asked about traceable (known and documented) lineages in female and male line.
Ok, but then kcc as a thread starter should say ancestry in general, but that is paradoxical as ancestry in general(both through male and female) can't determine oldness of one noble family.

If you want to compare something you must give one criteria and based on that compare. And the only criteria of oldness of one noble and royal family is when first documented male ancestor appeared. End of story.
__________________
  #176  
Old 01-22-2017, 04:05 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 583
Which family has the oldest documented lineage is what kcc meant, I believe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
And the only criteria of oldness of one noble and royal family is when first documented male ancestor appeared. End of story.
Even in matriarchal and matrilineal societies?
__________________
  #177  
Old 01-22-2017, 04:21 PM
Lee-Z's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Heerlen, Netherlands
Posts: 2,520
the first post was from almost 13 years ago, but imo it's intention was more "how far can a family lineage be traced back at all", for instance can it be traced back to roman times, more than the traditional royal genealogy tracing of "name genealogy" or "house genealogy"

I know there are families who can trace their lineage back to the time of Charlemagne, but are there any families who can trace back to roman times at all?
__________________
Wisdom begins in wonder - Socrates
  #178  
Old 01-22-2017, 05:59 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 10,220
When we really think about it, when it comes to the British Royal Family and the House of Windsor, Charles' descent from the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and Queen Victoria comes to him from both of his parents. Both Elizabeth and Philip are great great grandchildren of Victoria.

The thread is about the oldest and noble families, its different from discussing the Houses themselves and their different prerequisites for descent and denoting the head of the household. In this regards you have as many branches as you do on a tree.

I find this discussion interesting but will be the first to admit I'm a beginner.
__________________
I dream of a better tomorrow, where chickens can cross the road and not be questioned about their motives.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
  #179  
Old 01-22-2017, 06:22 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 7,710
The point if this thread was to discus lineage, plain and simple. Whose lineage could be traced furthest back.

If you are only interested in sperm contribution I am sure there are other threads. If not start one. Contrary to what some posters think, they don't have to take over every thread. If you aren't interested in lineage (which included both sides) choose another thread.

The popularity of sites like ancestry.com tells thet people are indeed interested in lineage, knowing where one comes from. And that extends to royals.
__________________
  #180  
Old 01-23-2017, 01:24 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 1,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Which family has the oldest documented lineage is what kcc meant, I believe.
Well, if the case is "noble and royal families", that is decided mostly by the male founders of the family.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Even in matriarchal and matrilineal societies?
If the criteria is maternal ancestry, like among Jews, where mother transmits almost everything than matriarchal.
__________________

__________________
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 260 02-17-2018 08:04 AM
Italian Noble and Princely Families 2: July 2007- Warren Royal Families of Italy 564 06-11-2017 06:18 PM
Princely and Noble Families of Hungary and Bohemia Adrienna Royal Families of Austria and Germany 44 12-30-2014 10:24 PM
Italian Noble and Princely Families 1: June 2004 - July 2007 Lord Williams Royal Families of Italy 206 07-20-2007 06:48 AM




Popular Tags
baltic republics birthday caracciolo carl gustaf china chris o'neill crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge cocktail dresses duchess of cambridge eveningwear family general news grandchild hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hereditary princess sophie infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia ińaki ińaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein meme monarchy morgan nassau news philippe pregnancy prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince jean prince nicholas prince oscar princess beatrice 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 eveningwear queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathildes hats queen maxima queen silvia romania state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family theatre the duchess of cambridge fashion victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:56 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises