The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Genealogy

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #21  
Old 12-02-2012, 10:28 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post
i also remember Emperor Franz Joseph's granddaughter Archduchess Elisabeth Marie of Austria, as she was asked to renounce her rights to the throne by marrying Prince Otto Weriand of Windisch-Grätz.. thing is, despite his status as a member of a mediatised house, the Habsburgs still views him as not their equal..
Yes,from the time of Rudolf IV there was a tradition that every Archduchess had to sign that document-to renounce their rights to the throne upon contracting a marriage...The only exception was an Archduchess who was the heir with no existent male members(case of Maria Theresia)...

Again,the problem with this marriage is that it was not treated as morganatic(official consequences),but rather as a messalliance(unofficial consequences) and those two words are often mixed in their meaning...

The other problem was that Otto belonged to collateral branch of the family and he was only a Prince while only the Head of the family is Fürst.To solve this problem,Emperor Franz Josef bestowed the title of Fürst(Secundogenitur) to Otto in 1902 before he married Elisabeth...

Poor guy was ordered to marry Elisabeth by the Emperor himself...They met at a Court ball while Otto was engaged to some Countess von Schönborn,who was also present at the ball where Elisabeth smashed the rules by asking Otto to dance with her 3 times...at that time,due to their position,Archduchesses had to ask for a dance and it should not be repeated more then once with the same dancer...

When his fiancee saw what was going on,she ran home angry,but that did not help...
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-02-2012, 11:19 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post
i believe that i have read somewhere that Archduke Charles of Austria, future Emperor Charles I wanted to marry a certain princess of Hohenlohe but he was ordered to marry someone of royal blood so he then married Princess Zita of Bourbon-Parma..
Yes,but he was an Heir to the throne at that time and that was the main reason why he was ordered to sought a greater alliance...

His brother Maximilian married Princess von Hohenlohe-Waldenburg-Schillingsfürst and there was no problem as union was treated equal...

Not to forget other equal marriages of the Habsburg family members(up to 1918) with mediatized Houses which were treated equal...Here are some of them:

Archduke Friedrich married Princess Isabella von Croy-Dülmen in 1878...

Archduke Maximilian married Princess Maria Franziska von Hohenlohe-Waldenburg-Schillingsfürst in 1917...

Archduchess Maria Henrietta married Prince Gottfried von Hohenlohe-Waldenburg-Schillingsfürst in 1908...

Archduchess Maria Christina married Prince Emanuel von Salm-Salm in 1902...

Archduchess Margarethe married Fürst Albrecht von Thurn und Taxis in 1890...

Archduchess Maria Anna married Fürst Johannes von Hohenlohe-Bartenstein in 1901...

Archduchess Hedwig(granddaughter of Franz Josef) married to Count Bernhard zu Stolberg-Stolberg in 1918...

Archduchess Elisabeth(other granddaughter of Franz Josef) married Count Georg von Waldburg-Zeil-Hohenems in 1912...


Apart from those marriages who were treated as equal prior to fall of the Empire(November 1918),there were two marriages with the family members of Almanach de Gotha,part III which were treated as morganatic...Those were marriages of Archduchesses Renata and Mechthildis to Princes Hieronymus and Ozgried Czartoryski...

Upon those marriages they renounced all of their titles, and the treatment of Imperial and Royal highness which Archduchess Elisabeth Marie kept after her marriage to Prince Otto von Windisch-Graetz and that was the difference between morganatic and non-morganatic marriage...

Their father Archduke Karl Stephan allowed these marriages of his daughter to old,rich and powerful Polish families hoping to gain support for Polish Crown...
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-02-2012, 12:17 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
That's shocking to see which families were NOT in the Almanac de Gotha. On what do these Goths base their exclusive right to be called royal? (that is a real question, not rhetorical).
My father's maternal family were "recorded" as donating to monasteries, along with their chiefs, the future "Stuarts", in the 12th century. I guess they had no titles other than "knight" but had a lot of land and hence could donate to Paisley and Melrose. So one could say there were records of them in the 11th and 12th centuries and after that until they lost much of their land in the Jacobite wars. If nobility is based on ancient records, they had them. On what is nobility based, ancient records? Or something else?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-02-2012, 12:33 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post
to think that the House of Radziwill were among the richest princely families in Europe and i think Princess Elisa was Wilhelm's one true love..
Yes,but at the time of Prussia-Radziwill love marriage their relations discovered that Radziwill family bought,rather then earned their title of Reichsfürst and that disqualified them from being treated equal in this case...

Because of this,both Eliza and her father Anton-who married Luise,a Hohenzollern Princess,were treated as unequal...

Due to their wealth,they were treated tolerably in highest society circles in Berlin...

In fact,Anton's parents Friedrich and Helena were very much liked by Louise's father and by the King himself...But,due to the pressure from his ministers due to discovery,the King could not accept the marriage of Anton and Luise as equal...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-02-2012, 01:31 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post
also, i can't recall if Princess Princess Irina Alexandrovna of Russia was asked to renounce her rights to succession after her marriage to Prince Felix Yusupov..
Yes,she did have to,just like princess Tatiana did...

Although in Tatiana's case Emperor Nicholas II assured her father that:

"They would never look upon her marriage to a Bagration as morganatic, because this House, like the House of Orleans, is descended from a once ruling dynasty."

and suggested that the groom Prince Teymuraz signs his marriage contract as "Prince Grudzinsky" no matter that his branch of the family is overall senior,but not senior male line descendants from the latest the Kings of Georgia...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-03-2012, 05:48 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Makati, Philippines
Posts: 131

but then, why is it the most members of the current House of Romanov deems the marriage of Vladimir Cyrillovich, Grand Duke of Russia and Princess Leonida Bagration of Mukhrani to be unequal.. and say that their daughter, Maria Vladimirovna, Grand Duchess of Russia is not the heir to the Russian Throne..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
...Those were marriages of Archduchesses Renata and Mechthildis to Princes Hieronymus and Ozgried Czartoryski...
i understand.. wait, wasn't Archduchess Renata married Prince Jerome Radziwil? also, i find it weird that while most Germans consider these princely families unequal to them, other royal families such as the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies consider marriage to Polish princely families such as Czartoryskis and Sapiehas to be equal..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-03-2012, 06:31 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Makati, Philippines
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariel View Post
That's shocking to see which families were NOT in the Almanac de Gotha...
according to the Almanach de Gotha, they have 3 divisions..

the first section consist of reigning and formerly reigning families such as the Habsburgs, Bourbons, Hanovers, Hohenzollerns, Oldenburgs, Romanovs, Savoys, Wittelsbach, Mecklenburgs, Ascanias, Zahringen, etc..

the second section consist of mediatised families of princely rank such as the Thurn and Taxis, Furstenberg, Arenberg, Hohenlohe, Windisch-Graetz, Lieningen, Isenburg, Salm, etc..

the third section consist of non-reigning princely and ducal families such as the Orsinis, Albas, Czartoryskis, Doria Pamphiljs, Marlboroughs (Spencers), Radziwills, Galitzines, Rohans, Kinskys, La Rochefoucaulds, Colonnas, etc..

thing is, since 1841, they moved the mediatised families of comital rank to section two as well, so making families such as Bentick, Harrach, Fugger, Schonborn-Glauchau, Rosenberg, etc, despite being of lower rank yet holds a degree of sovereignty, are considered equal to marriage purposes with that of reigning families..

what happened is, the Almanach de Gotha made some of the oldest and most noble families such as the Orsinis, Doria-Pamphiljs, Rohans, Colonnas, La Rochefoucaulds, Montmorencys, Czartoryskis, Eltzs, Kinskys, Spencers, Hamiltons, Howards, Percys, Medinacelis, Borgheses and others not mentioned appear to be of lower birth compared to more recent families yet of royal or mediatised rank such as Thurn and Taxises or Bernadottes.. some of formerly sovereign families such as the Bagrations, Birons, Boncopagni-Ludovisi did not enjoy the same precedence despite their status of formerly reigning families..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-03-2012, 08:54 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
Yes,from the time of Rudolf IV there was a tradition that every Archduchess had to sign that document-to renounce their rights to the throne upon contracting a marriage...
Archduchesses had to renounce their right to the throne but stayed members of the House of Habsburg. In case of Crown prince Rudolf's only child and daughter Elisabeth, it was the emperor's wish (or so some historians claim) for her to marry unequally, as she was the only male-line descendant of the emperor and the Pragmatic Sanction was not very clear about the inheritance rights for girls when the emperor's direct line became extinct but other branches of the family existed.
So it was better to remove her from any inheritance claims through an unequal marriage. But in private the emperor loved her dearly and left a large part of his fortune to her, which she could keep after 1918 because she was no longer a member of the House of Habsburg and thus was extempt from the Habrburg-laws. She left a lot of her possessions to the Austrian state and they are displayed at museums in Vienna.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-03-2012, 09:22 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
Archduchesses who had to renounce their right to the throne,but stayed members of the House of Habsburg have not entered morganatic marriages...

Archduchess Elisabeth-Marie stayed a member,while Archduchesses Renata and Mechthildis didn't...she made just a messalliance,while those two Archduchesses entered morganatic marriages and had to cease membership of the House of Habsburg,while Marie-Elisabeth didn't...

There was a problem because at that time there were many eligible male members of the Habsburg clan who could inherit the throne and Marie-Elisabeth was just the only daughter of the Emperors only son...and an Archduchess could inherit the throne ONLY if there were no male members of the family left...and there were plenty of them at the time...

In fact,Emperor Franz Josef wanted to make Marie-Elisabeth an Empress and made a plan with Kaiser Wilhelm II about the marriage between her and his son Prince Eitel-Friedrich,who would convert to Catholicism and inherit the Austro-Hungarian throne upon marrying her...

But,he didn't do that as he feared the reaction of other family members and wanted to wait for a while to see how things would go on...And Marie-Elisabeth wanted to marry only Otto...and her every wish was a command for him,so he had to step it up...

For example,he was very joyful when they would walk in the garden and she would order him to carry her things back to the castle...he just loved spoiling her!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-03-2012, 09:33 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post
the Almanach de Gotha made some of the oldest and most noble families...appear to be of lower birth compared to more recent royal or mediatised families...
I think this depended on how the family developed in the Empire,not how old the family was...

Many of those families "earned" their position due to their services to the House of Habsburg and based on that gained the money and power to obtain sovereign territory within the Holy Roman Empire,while some other old families didn't...

So,it was all matter of how the family developed in time and circumstances within the Empire and based on their progress the more honors were obtained...and those honors were later the qualification for the equal status they had...

And all other reigning families accepted them,some to a lesser and some to a higher degree...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post
also, i find it weird that while most Germans consider these princely families unequal to them, other royal families such as the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies consider marriage to Polish princely families such as Czartoryskis and Sapiehas to be equal..
Every royal family has it's own rules and exceptions when they wanted or were willing to make such,depending on situation and of the decision of the Head of the family...

For example,in Austria,the bride for the Head of the family had to have 16 equal ancestors...

While Empress Sissi's paternal great-grandmother was Marie-Adelaide de Mailly-Nesle who did not fit into either Part 1 or 2 of the Gotha...But,she was a niece of the politically influential mother of the Emperor and that had to be settled down...

And while in Germany Empress Augusta Viktoria's paternal great-grandmother was Henriette Kaas,from an untitled nobility...But,at that time she was the perfect political choice because of all those Schleswig-Holstein questions emerging...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post
i understand.. wait, wasn't Archduchess Renata married Prince Jerome Radziwil?
Jerome was one of the names of her 3 sons
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 12-03-2012, 09:41 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post
but then, why is it the most members of the current House of Romanov deems the marriage of Vladimir Cyrillovich, Grand Duke of Russia and Princess Leonida Bagration of Mukhrani to be unequal.. and say that their daughter, Maria Vladimirovna, Grand Duchess of Russia is not the heir to the Russian Throne..
It is simple,because they want to make their claim

To tell the truth,of all post revolution marriages of the pretenders to the throne Russia-Bagration was the closest one to equal requirement as the Bagration family was the reigning one until 1801 when the Bagration regent of Georgia had to back it up...

And at that time of the Georgia annexation,they were promised their equal status...to make sure of it,apart from their own titles,all the members also gained the title of Prince within Russia,which later caused the problem as why the other Princes within Russia could not be treated the same,and there were many of them...

To tell the truth,the Bagration family is certainly the most older one and the most recent reigning one of all,apart from Gotha 1 and 2 families...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-05-2012, 11:43 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Makati, Philippines
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
I think this depended on how the family developed in the Empire,not how old the family was...
well, looking back, most of the Habsburgs married only to the most powerful and illustrious families such as the Medicis, the Sforzas and the Gonzagas..

Quote:
Every royal family has it's own rules and exceptions when they wanted or were willing to make such,depending on situation and of the decision of the Head of the family...
true.. the British may be the most tolerant when it comes to equal marriages.. there have been many English queens who are not of royal blood, some are from the nobility and there are even some from the landed gentry..

Quote:
...at that time of the Georgia annexation, [the Bagrations] were promised equal status...
true enough.. wait, wasn't there a Bagration princesss who married an Orsini prince.. oh, yeah.. it was Prince Raimondo Umberto Maria Orsini d'Aragona who married Princess Khétévane Bagration of Moukhrani.. their son Prince Lelio Nicolò Orsini was once onsidered by some Georgian monarchists as the most suitable candidate for the throne of Georgia but it think the princess herself dropped the possibility..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-05-2012, 02:04 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Makati, Philippines
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
I think this depended on how the family developed in the Empire,not how old the family was...

Many of those families "earned" their position due to their services to the House of Habsburg and based on that gained the money and power to obtain sovereign territory within the Holy Roman Empire,while some other old families didn't...
thing is, there have been 2 Holy Roman Empresses from the House of Gonzaga, both named Eleonor.. i believe Gianfrancesco I Gonzaga became Marquess of Mantua through a payment of 120,000 golden florins in 1433 to Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor.. so, if the manner of how a family derived their titles and land is a prime category, why would the Gonzagas be considered equal to the Habsburgs if the questioned the "nobility" of the manner how the Radziwills earned their title.. granted, they are a sovereign family, but still, their origins are practically the same..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-05-2012, 06:40 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711

Didn't know that.Thank you for the information :)

I agree with you completely,but the main difference must have been that one was a ruling family and the other was not at the time of such decision...which was way later in 19th century when the whole equal concept started at a bigger stage(outside just reigning royal families)...

Until that time,don't forget that Ludwika Karolina Radziwill made made an equal marriage at the end of 17th century firstly to Ludwig,Margrave of Brandenburg,brother of King Friedrich I Wilhelm of Prussia and later to Karl III Philipp,Elector of Pfalz-Neuburg....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post
well, looking back, most of the Habsburgs married only to the most powerful and illustrious families such as the Medicis, the Sforzas and the Gonzagas..
Yes,but I was thinking about all those families that were considered equal,while some other didn't...

For example Harrach,Sinzendorf,Waldbott-Bassenheim,Wurmbrand-Stuppach families were raised in status due to their service to the Emperor(Empire) above some other great and old families who just didn't mingle at the right place or at the right time,and have fallen into Gotha 3 part such as Orsini,Doria,Ligne and such...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 12-05-2012, 07:01 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangre_Real016 View Post

true.. the British may be the most tolerant when it comes to equal marriages.. there have been many English queens who are not of royal blood, some are from the nobility and there are even some from the landed gentry..
Believe it or not,there wasn't an English Queen since the first half of the 16th century...The last English born Queen of England(later Britain) was Katherine Parr(if we exclude 9 days Queen Jane Grey)...

In fact,from that time until today the only Queen that was not born a Princess in her own right is Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon,who was Scottish,not English

From the end of the 17th century until today,all male/female consorts except Queen Mother were of German blood:


Queen Mary II-consort Prince(King) William von Nassau-Dillenburg,stadtholder of the Netherlands...

Quuen Anne-consort Prince George of Denmark(German Oldenburg dynasty)

King George I-consort Princess Sophia Dorothea von Braunschweig-Lüneburg-Celle,Princess von Ahlden

King George II-consort Princess Wilhelmine Karoline von Brandenburg-Ansbach

Crown Prince Frederick-consort Princess Augusta von Sachsen-Gotha-Altenburg

King George III-consort Princes Sophie Charlotte von Mecklenburg-Strelitz

King George IV-consort Princess Caroline von Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel

Crown Princess Charlotte Augusta-consort Prince Leopold von Sachsen-Coburg-Saalfeld

King William IV-consort Princess Adelheid von Sachsen-Meiningen

Queen Victoria-consort Prince Alfred von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha

King Edward VII-consort Princess Alexandra,born as Princess von Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg,only later became Princess of Denmark upon her father's succession...

King George V-consort Princess Victoria Mary von Teck

King George VI-consort Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon

Queen Elizabeth II-consort Prince Philipp of Greece and Denmark(Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg line of Oldenburg dynasty)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 12-05-2012, 08:50 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post

From the end of the 17th century until today,all male/female consorts except Queen Mother were of German blood:
Although,she herself can trace ancestry through her Bentinck blood from many German Houses such as Wittelsbach(Dukes of Bavaria),Oldenburg,Lippe,Münster,Droste zu Lüdinghausen...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 12-06-2012, 11:18 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Makati, Philippines
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
Believe it or not,there wasn't an English Queen since the first half of the 16th century...
yes.. i know all that too.. i just love reading about the British history..

not just them, all consorts after those of Henry VIII were all foreign born princesses, well except for Lord Guildford Dudley if he counts i guess.. all consorts from Mary I are of foreign blood..

Mary I -- consort: Philip II of Spain
Elizabeth I
James I -- consort: Princess Anne of Denmark
Charles I -- consort: Princess Henrietta Maria of France
Charles II -- consort: Infanta Catherine of Brganza (Portugal)
James II -- consort: Princess Mary d'Este of Modena

if Lady Diana Spencer never divorced Charles, Prince of Wales and didn't suffer her ill-fated death, she would have then the first "true" English Queen since Catherine Paar in 1547.. even though, the fact is, most of Diana's ancestors were French kings and nobles, and i have read somewhere that Diana was practically related to every French nobles..

reflecting on the strong German ancestry of the current royal family, i believe King George V was once described as "more German than the Kaiser".. thanks to Diana's English blood and royal descent from the Stuart kings, Princes William and Harry, as well as William's future descendants can claim descendancy to every English king to have left descendants, not to mention descent from powerful Italian families such as the Sforzas and the Medicis, as well as well as powerful Spanish families such as the Alvarez de Toledos of the Dukes of Alba and Medina Sidonia.. and, yeah, from ancient Irish families as well..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 12-06-2012, 02:07 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: philadelphia, United States
Posts: 711
True,but she also descended from Hanover dynasty...Her ancestor was Maria Sophia von Kielmansegg,daughter of Countess Sophie Charlotte von Platen-Hallermund,again daughter of Elector Ernst August von Hannover,father of King George I and Clara Elisabeth von Meysenburg...

The other German ancestry of Diana you mentioned in one of the posts...She has also descended from Karoline Elisabeth,Raugräfin von der Pfalz,daughter from morganatic marriage of Elector Karl Ludwig von der Pfalz with Baroness Marie Luise von Degenfeld...

Concerning French ancestry,one more interesting fact is that current Duchess of Camridge has descended from Le Despencer family,the one from which the Spencer family allegedly descended,although this was never proven...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 12-07-2012, 03:30 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Makati, Philippines
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc23 View Post
Concerning French ancestry,one more interesting fact is that current Duchess of Camridge has descended from Le Despencer family,the one from which the Spencer family allegedly descended,although this was never proven...
yes.. i tried to read about the Spencers alleged descent from the ancient House Le Despencer, and it seemed, the contradiction came because the first Coat of Arms granted to the Spencer family in 1504 which is a azure a fess ermine between six seamews' headswhich is very much different from the current Spencer arms.. according to what i have read, here is what the Clarencieux Kinge of Armes wrote:

Quote:
The pedigree of Sr John Spencer Kt. of Althrope and Wormleighton in the Countyes of Northampton and Warr. being a branche issueing from the ancient familly and chieffe of the Spencers, of which sometymes were ye Earles of Winchester and Gloster and Barons of Glamorgan and Morgannocke". "This pedegre and discent of Sr John Spencer of Althroppe and Wormleighton in ye countyes of Northampton and Warr. Kt. issueing from the auncient family of the Spensers herein set downe together wth the armes and coates thereunto belonginge collected out of divers records, registers, evidence, ancient seales of Armes, sundry willes and Testamentes with other good and sufficient proofes of ye truth having beene diligently and carefully seene and perused, is allowed of and confirmed by me Richard Lee als. Clarencieux Kinge of Armes, of the East, West, and South parts of England at my office 8 May 1595".
the thing is, its hard to confirm or deny the Spencers claim of decendancy from the Le Despencers.. it was said that Sir William le Spencer (whom the current Spencer line descents from) who died in 1333 was the son of Sir John le Despencer who died in 1274 by his second wife, Ann but it was questioned why John named his first cousin Hugh le Despencer "the Elder", later Earl of Winchester as his sole heir and that Sir William le Spencer was recorded as a tenant of Geoffrey De Albetot, holding of him a messuage, four virgates of land, and two acres of meadow in Defford, Worcestershire..

though it is has been proven that the Despencers were originally surnamed De Albetot when they arrived in England with William the Conqueror, which may give the link of William le Spencer to the Despencers, but if he is truly a member of the family, why was his so-called father named his cousin his heir than his son? sadly, there are no records to tell why such happened.. though, such thing is not impossible to happen seeing many people in history disinherited their own sons for some reasons.. sadly, i guess, the reason, if there was any, will never be unearthed..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 12-07-2012, 05:41 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Makati, Philippines
Posts: 131
also, if i am not mistaken, Emperor Joseph I made John Churchill the sovereign Prince of Mindelheim in 1714.. sadly, he left no male heirs and the last "royal" member of this royal house was Elizabeth, Duchess of Bridgewater, who if i am not mistaken also has the right to call herself, Her Serene Highness Princess Elizabeth Churchill of Mindelheim (well, more or less sound like that).. now, if the Churchill's "royal" titles were to have been passed down to its senior descendants, which by the way were the Spencers, then, as a male line descendant of Anne Spencer, Countess of Sunderland aka HSH Princess Anne Churchill of Mindelheim's second oldest son, then Diana could have been a princess in her own right.. a princess of equal status to any sovereign house.. am i correct? what do you think?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth bourbon-parma charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta sofia jewellery jordan kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman picture of the month pieter van vollenhoven pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:58 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]