Royal and Noble Families: Dynastic Laws and Marriage Rules

[Marc23]

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...

 

[Sangre_Real016]

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..

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..

...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..

 

[Sangre_Real016]

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..

 

[Marc23]

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....

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...

 

[Marc23]

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)

 

[Marc23]

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...

 

[Sangre_Real016]

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..

 

[Marc23]

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...

 

[Sangre_Real016]

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:

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..

 

[Sangre_Real016]

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?

 

[Marc23]

Well,Sangre_Real016,you opened up now a very interesting subject
The last member of the family was in fact Princess Mary,Duchess of Montagu(1689-1751)...
.

 

[Mariel]

Thank you, Sangre Real for explaining the various parts of the Gotha, a subject I am entirely new to.
Well I can see that my medieval ancestors had the qualifications you give to be noble, i.e., they earned their large estates in Scotland by service to Matilda in the war of succession, and to the Stuarts, who were their leaders, and to Kings David and William the Lion. Some records say Peter de Pollock (my "uncle" many times removed) had more wealth than the King of Scotland. Also gave to monasteries such as Paisley and Melrose, where his and his brothers' names were recorded as donors. His successors, who were all women for three generations, also have medieval donor records. The Pollocks lost most of their power in the wars against the English, usually fighting for Stuart causes, and vanished into relative obscurity, but the title "Lady of Rothes" came down to modern times, after the three-in-a-row women who held the title earned by Peter de Pollock. So I guess they were quite noble, but not remembered much today. I have read about them for years, and their Stuart loyalty, even though I never heard of them until l7 years ago when I discovered I had the Stuart-connected genetic ailment. What a heritage to have, good and bad.
So to be noble is dependent on whether anyone remembers you, or whether, too, you want to be remembered as a grand lord and knight. I think they did not want to be remembered, and disappeared into the night.

 

[Marc23]

also, if i am not mistaken, Emperor Joseph I made John Churchill the sovereign Prince of Mindelheim in 1714.. sadly, he left no male heir.. 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?

Could have and would be interesting,but the Duke of Marlborough(John) was tricked by the Germans and therefore prevented his family of later becoming one of the equal families...even if the female succession was recognized they would still be in part III of Gotha were they are now(I think)...

And here is why:

It was the truth that he was awarded with the title of Fürst von Mindelheim and with this title he also acquired the rest of the requirements other reigning Princes within the Empire had:

1-holding of an immediate fief of the Empire(Mindelheim Principality in Swabia which belonged to HRE)

2-having a vote and a seat in the Imperial Diet which comes with a certain existing sovereign territory someone holds

3-direct participation in the expenses of the Empire

And he had all this from 1704 until 1714 when his Princedom of Mindelheim was lost/annexed to Bavaria without any kind of compensation...

Even before his first creation Prussian King wanted to offer the title of Fürst von Donauwöth within Prussia,but it just didn't happen as he wanted to be a reigning Prince within Holy Roman Empire,not Prussia,with it's full rights...

Because of this annexation after 1714 he was awarded the County of Mellenburg which was raised to Principality for him by Emperor Charles VI...So,from 1714 until 1722 he was just Fürst von Mellenburg(Honorary title),which meant that the teritorry of Mellenburg was before that only a County in Upper Austria which was raised to Principality,but the territory did not have other requirements,meaning that it didn't have a seat and vote in Imperial Diet and only had a vote and a seat in comital councils(which Mellenburg area represented).

This made his situation almost the same as Princes Kinsky or Paar,who held honorary,but not sovereign titles of Fürst of the Empire,meaning that their territories only had a vote and a seat in Comital Coucils of the Empire,as they were not sovereign...

John Churchill,Duke of Marlborough tried to intervene about this kind of situation but the Emperor Charles VI was apologetic about this,unlike his late brother Josef I who gave him his first title of Fürst von Mindelheim with it's territory...

He also tried through the Prussian King and his representative Prince von Anhalt-Dessau to secure the title of Fürst/Fürst for his female line descendants(who would continue to be Dukes of Marlborough),but the other German Princes were against as they watched on his family as a mere English upstart landed gentry...It was now clear that with the death of his last daughter,the line and the German titles were to be extinct...

Even if he had secured succession though a female for his German titles,his family would still with Mellenburg possession and honorary Princely title fall into part III of the Gotha(where his family already is) which would also put him with the families like Kinsky,Paar,Ligne,Hatzfeld etc.

 

[Sangre_Real016]

Could have and would be interesting,but the Duke of Marlborough(John) was tricked by the Germans and therefore prevented his family of later becoming one of the equal families...

i see, so the Churchills were once equal to other sovereign houses but was later tricked and was demoted to an honorary title of prince, amd sadly, even his legitimate heirs were denied the honors as German families think of them as upstart Englishmen.. funny, coz from what i have heard, the old noble families in England views the royal family back then as "Middleclass Hanoverians" or most insultingly, "German beggars"..

but wouldn't make the current Spencers (as the legitimate heirs of the sovereign Chuchills of Mindelheim) technically similar to that of the Bagrations, or other once ruling families such as the Birons, Dadianis, Boncopagni-Ludovisis, O'Donnells, etc as they actualy once ruled as sovereigns? and doesn't it state in the Gotha that once ruling families should technically be equal to current ruling ones like the House of Orleans or the deposed House of Bourbon-Parma who's scion Princess Zita of Bourbon-Parma married Emperor Charles? and even if the Churchills were upstarts, their heirs, the Spencers is an ancient family.. it seems to me that the Gotha is largely favoring German dynasties..

 

[Sangre_Real016]

Thank you, Sangre Real for explaining the various parts of the Gotha, a subject I am entirely new to...

no problem.. quite a colorful family there..

 

[Sangre_Real016]

Well,Sangre_Real016,you opened up now a very interesting subject

The last member of the family was in fact Princess Mary,Duchess of Montagu(1689-1751)...

thanks.. but, wait, doesn't Princess Mary, Duchess of Montagu died in 1729? while Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Bridgewater died in 1738.. among John Churchill's daughters, i thought Anne died first while Elizabeth died last..

Princess Anne, Countess of Sunderland died. 1716
Princess Mary, Duchess of Montagu died. 1729
Princess Henrietta, 2nd Duchess of Marlborough died. 1733
Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Bridgewater died. 1738

did i got them wrong?

 

[Marc23]

thanks.. but, wait, doesn't Princess Mary, Duchess of Montagu died in 1729?

did i got them wrong?

If you read wikipedia,you did According to wikipedia,she died in 1729,while in fact she died in 1751.

Mary Montagu (Churchill), Duchess of Montagu (1689 - 1751) - Genealogy

- Person Page 10560

Lady Mary Churchill - I11286 - Individual Information - PhpGedView

 

[Marc23]

.. funny, coz from what i have heard, the old noble families in England views the royal family back then as "Middleclass Hanoverians" or most insultingly, "German beggars"..

As the members of ancient House of Este,they certainly were not middle class Their earliest known ancestor Adalbert was already a Markgraf von Mainz,existing some 150 years before William the Conqueror had even started his reign in England in 1066...

While son of a lawyer Sir,like the Duke of Marlborough was,who started his career as a Stuart page,was for most German Princely families an upstart,like in Germany would be a son of an Edler Herr von X,who would like to become a ruling Prince of the Holy Roman Empire...

There is an anecdote about the conversation between Prince Philipp and Lady Diana,the Princess of Wales:as Tina Brown noted in her biography of Diana,upon being threated by Prince Phillip:"If you don't behave,my girl, we'll take your title away."Diana is alleged to have replied:"My title is a lot older than yours,Philip."Diana was only too happy to remind Philip that while he may be married to the Queen, the Spencer family has been titled since the 1500’s.

Of course,either said or not said,this was not true

This means that Philip's earliest known ancestor Egilmar I,Count von Lerigau already had a title in 10th century,being born some 200 years before House of Spencer was even first time mentioned...yet titled!

 

[Marc23]

...but wouldn't make the current Spencers (as the legitimate heirs of the sovereign Chuchills of Mindelheim) technically similar to that of the Bagrations, or other once ruling families such as the Birons, Dadianis, Boncopagni-Ludovisis, O'Donnells, etc as they actualy once ruled as sovereigns?

Well,the problem is that all those families you mentioned(Bagration etc.) were one agnatic(same male-line) family with collateral branches existing,while the heirs of the Marlborough family were Spencers,who were only heirs,but different agnatic family members and that's the main problem for that kind of theory...

For example,your sisters son can be your heir,but can't be agnatic member of your family,unless your sister married her paternal male-line cousin...

This latter would be the case of Diana,Duchess of Cadaval who married Prince Charles d'Orleans,with both belong to one same agnatic family,House of Capet...

And yes,you are right,Gotha created this kind of system which was followed by almost every Imperial and Royal family with only few exceptions made by the Head of the family...

By doing this they generally and formally acknowledged Gotha and set an example to other lesser or former ruling(mediatized) families to have the strict equality system which some still follow today very strictly...

Even today some mediatized families are still "victims" of this system which they still follow:Leiningen and Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg cases...

 

[Sangre_Real016]

There is an anecdote about the conversation between Prince Philipp and Lady Diana,the Princess of Wales...

yes.. i have read that book by Tina Brown.. but you cannot blame her, the Spencers believe that their family tree stretches back since 920 AD from Norman noblemen.. since there are no records either falsifying or confirming their claim from such line, their family has came to believe of such pedigree.. one can only assume, i guess.. i have also read that Diana kept reminding William that his Spencer lineage stretches for a thousand year.. who knows what Diana meant.. maybe she was pointing out his title as Duke of Edinburgh which was just given to him in 1947..

 

[Sangre_Real016]

Well,the problem is that all those families you mentioned(Bagration etc.) were one agnatic(same male-line) family with collateral branches existing,while the heirs of the Marlborough family were Spencers,who were only heirs,but different agnatic family members...

i see.. but haven't there that female line descendants were allowed the same distinction like Empress Maria Theresa or Queen Victoria.. if ever the Empire allowed Princess Anne, Countess of Sunderland to succeed the title and sovereignty of her father, wouldn't it be possible to be passed down to her descendants like that of Louise Hippolyte, Princess of Monaco?

 

[Mariel]

Princess Mary of Denmark is of Scottish descent (i read). The Danes will now trump the Brits in terms of Scottish blood. Not royal Scottish, of course.

The present family of Wittelsbach is considered to be the true descendants of the Stuarts, according to at least one wing of the "Jacobites". The present Duke in Bavaria, Franz, is considered to be the heir. He is childless. so his brother Max will inherit, and then the eldest of Max's daughters, Sophie of Leichtenstein. Her son Josef Wenzel is therefore the youngest heir on that line. I brought this up because of the fact that Sophie's mother is a Douglass, descendant from Scots. Duke Max found his wife from among the Scottish Douglasses who have lived in Sweden for generations. The article I read said that these Douglasses were advisors to the King of Sweden; of course I don't know if that is true any more. But Duke Max's wife is of Scottish descent.

Further Scottish musings: Princess Alice of Gloucester was born and raised in Scotland and descended from the Douglas, Stuart, and other families of Scots history.

 

[Sangre_Real016]

i believe Franz, Duke of Bavaria's claim came from his descent from Princess Henrietta of England, daughter of Charles I of England making him the current senior co-heir-general of King Charles I of England and Scotland..

i believe there are senior yet illegitimate lines, one is James II's descendants from his only son to have left descendants, which leads today to the Dukes of Alba in Spain..

 

[Marc23]

i see.. but haven't there that female line descendants were allowed the same distinction like Empress Maria Theresa or Queen Victoria...

Yes,of course,but those were just few exceptions,with an approval of the reigning monarch and also the approval of other reigning Princes...

Of course,there were some other exceptions,like the one that Prince zu Putbus could become female line descendant and member of Wyllich und Lottum family...but they were not a reigning nor a mediatized family!

Remember that Maria Theresia had to fight for years before majority of other powerful rulers in the region acknowledged something her father,The Emperor already decided before his death...So,without the word of other Princes,Dukes and Electors even the word of an Emperor could be disputed...

As for Queen Victoria,Great Britain allowed it,while in Germany-Hanover it wasn't allowed...so,everything depended on the already established House Laws of succession.

 

[Marc23]

As for the Duke of Marlborough title,it was him who wanted to be Prince of the Holy Roman Empire and approached the Emperor through his envoy Count Wratislaw von Mitrowitz...The Emperor was not at all thrilled and because he felt obliged to the great soldier to give him at least an honorary title he asked Queen Anne for the formal approval which was "duly given",according to the letters of Count Wratislaw to the Emperor from the 22.August 1704.

But,the Duke did not want an "empty title",but an effective one and that's when they started to search for an empty land which was also Principality-just for him.They found Mindelheim which was bought by the Elector of Bavaria in the 17th century,but which Bavaria lost in recent wars. They awarded it to John Chruchill,now the Prince von Mindelheim,who again lost his Principality to Bavaria without compensation some ten years later. But,this time,Emperor Charles VI felt obliged to his German dominated Princes,who all,according to the notes from the Memoirs of the Duke of Marlborough,looked upon the Duke as "only a small country gentleman,from a country at the very edge of Europe" and wrote an apologetic letter to him,but did not do anything to restore his seat and vote in Imperial Diet. Of course,at that time Marlborough was not the force in Europe he used to be and did not dare to militarily defend his rights as an Imperial Prince against Bavaria and therefore had to settle for anything Empire had offered to him as a sort of consolation.

He later protested his male law succession for an Imperial title through Prince von Anhalt-Desau,but to no avail...and the line died out with his daughter,Princess Mary in 1751.

You are right,his descendants could have become mediatized,if,for example,the female-line succession was officially permitted and the family after acquired a sovereign part of Imperial land until the official mediatization...This only could have made Lady Diana "equal" as the family would fall into II part of Gotha-Almanach ,but even without requiring sovereign land if the family were allowed to use female succession of the title,Diana could have been Princess in her own right...even though,not equal!

But,again,it is a question which of the sisters would be "the one" who would transmit the imperial title if female succession have been permitted...

Maybe it could have been settled similarly to the Bentinck case,where an elder son succeeded English titles(Earl and Duke of Portland) and the issue of the younger brother were the Imperial Counts-reichsgrafen of Bentinck-Aldenburg?

And the family separated until Timothy Bentinck became Duke of Portland,whose great-grandfather Henry Charles deferred his rights as the Head of the Bentinck-Aldenburg family in favor of his brothers in 1874 upon marrying Harriet Eliza Cathcart McKerrell,a woman whose family McKerrels of the Hillhouse belonged to the old landed gentry lairds dating back from the 15th century,but in the eyes of the House of Bentinck she wasn't good enough...

Here is a picture of the manor McKerrell of Hillhouse family possessed which dates back from 1671:
http://www.hillhouse.co.uk/assets/images/thumbs/Aerial-view-of-Hillhouse.jpg

Unlike Charles-Henry,his younger Bentinck brothers made "respectable" marriages to Baroness Maria Cornelia van Heeckeren van Wassenaer,Countess Helene zu Waldeck und Pyrmont and Countess Luise van Bylandt who,in the eyes of the Bentinck-Aldenburg House Laws have been good enough for them to succeed as the Head of the House and as Imperial Count...

So,here we again have a case of a mediatized family which restricted a male family member of succeeding to the title because he has made "indecent" marriage with a woman whose family of old landed gentry lairds(Scottish title below a Baron and above an Esquire) was not good enough for the Imperial Count of Bentinck-Aldenburg,but whose family was good enough for the Duke of Portland

 

[Sangre_Real016]

You are right,his descendants could have become mediatized,if,for example,the female-line succession was officially permitted and the family after acquired a sovereign part of Imperial land until the official mediatization...This only could have made Lady Diana "equal" as the family would fall into II part of Gotha-Almanach ,but even without requiring sovereign land if the family were allowed to use female succession of the title,Diana could have been Princess in her own right...even though,not equal!

i see.. so technically, Lady Diana was the last person to have married into the British Royal Family to have descended in the male-line from the heirs of a once sovereign family since Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark?

But,again,it is a question which of the sisters would be "the one" who would transmit the imperial title if female succession have been permitted...

Maybe it could have been settled similarly to the Bentinck case,where an elder son succeeded English titles(Earl and Duke of Portland) and the issue of the younger brother were the Imperial Counts-reichsgrafen of Bentinck-Aldenburg?

well, possibly.. Charles Spencer would inherit the Dukedom of Marlborough (like he did) and John Spencer could have inherited the Principality of Mindelheim (sovereign) or the plain Princedom of Mellenburg..

So,here we again have a case of a mediatized family which restricted a male family member of succeeding to the title because he has made "indecent" marriage with a woman whose family of old landed gentry lairds(Scottish title below a Baron and above an Esquire) was not good enough for the Imperial Count of Bentinck-Aldenburg,but whose family was good enough for the Duke of Portland

true.. wait, did Princess Marie Amelie of Baden renounced her line of succession when she married William Hamilton, 11th Duke of Hamilton? i don't why the Germans are very particular with the equality of birth? Royal members of the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies and House of Orleans-Braganza have had Czartoryski and Sapieha wives and husbands before..

also, why is it that Princess Paola of Sapieha-Rozanska, the daughter of Princess Cristina of Orléans-Braganza is in line in the succession of the Brazilian throne while the children of Princess Maria da Gloria of Orléans-Braganza, now The Duchess of Segorbe like Doña Sol María de la Blanca de Medina y Orléans-Braganza, 54th Countess of Ampurias is not? do they consider the House of Sapieha equal while the House of Medinaceli below them?

 

[Marc23]

i see.. so technically, Lady Diana was the last person to have married into the British Royal Family to have descended in the male-line from the heirs of a once sovereign family since Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark?

Well,I think you are right...

well, possibly.. Charles Spencer would inherit the Dukedom of Marlborough (like he did) and John Spencer could have inherited the Principality of Mindelheim (sovereign) or the plain Princedom of Mellenburg..

Doesn't have to be like that...If the sisters would split the titles,which means that the heirs of one sister would inherit just English titles,while the heirs of other sister would inherit Imperial titles,like in the Bentinck family...

true.. wait, did Princess Marie Amelie of Baden renounced her line of succession when she married William Hamilton, 11th Duke of Hamilton?

I think that the marriage was maybe a mesalliance,but not considered morganatic by Baden family,as Princess Marie's mother was "only" a Beauharnais and also succession of Baden was permitted in 1796 to the descendants of the marriage between the Grand Duke Karl Friedrich and Caroline Geyer von Geyersberg,a woman whose father was only a German nobleman,while her mother was Countess von Sponeck...

But,as the Emperor of Holy Roman Empire allowed it,there was no further question...

i don't why the Germans are very particular with the equality of birth?

Well,I think that they had this common wide spread thought of being higher because of their sovereign status within the Empire,no matter how big or small their territory was...

The other thing that simply boosted their importance as such is that other big reigning countries supplied their rulers exclusively with German Princesses and German Princes knew it,so in order to be in the marriage market all the time,they wanted to keep their standard of birth as high as they can...because,you never know when some Princess von Anhalt-Zerbst might become Empress of Russia or Princess von Wied might becombe the next Queen of Britain...

Royal members of the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies and House of Orleans-Braganza have had Czartoryski and Sapieha wives and husbands before..

I think it depended on the House Law of any family...For example,something that could have been enough for the House of Bourbon might have not been good enough for the House of Hohenzollern or even for the House of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg as the late Prince stated in his testament that,apart from being equal,future wife of his Heir must be also of Arian blood...and Czartoryski and Sapieha would not fit into that category-maybe,just maybe if their wives were of Arian blood and some lawyers could make the case...That's why Prince Gustav von S-W-B is not getting married to his girlfriend Carina who,apart from not being noble is of Swedish and Mexican descent...

...why is it that Princess Paola of Sapieha-Rozanska, the daughter of Princess Cristina of Orléans-Braganza is in line in the succession of the Brazilian throne...

Well,it's hard to answer to this question,but obviously they are treated more or less higher as the families of Ligne and Sapieha were a little bit more independent though the history,while the House of Medinaceli,no matter how illustrious it is,was always in the service of the King of Spain,meaning it was always his subject and descended from an illegitimate branch of the House de Foix...But,that's just my thought.

What do you think the other reason would be?
.

 

[Sangre_Real016]

...the House of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg as the late Prince stated in his testament that,apart from being equal,future wife of his Heir must be also of Arian blood...

well, that doesn't sound very nice.. lol.. then does that include all nobles who has Mexican blood such as the princes and princesses of Monaco, the Ducal Family of Tetuan, and the exiled House of Iturbide.. some of the noble families in mexico can trace their descent from the earliest kings of Spain during the Visigothic era..

...the House of Medinaceli,no matter how illustrious it is,was always in the service of the King of Spain,meaning it was always his subject...But,that's just my thought. What do you think the other reason would be?

hmmm.. possibly, but to think that the House of Medinaceli are the descendant of the Counts of Foix and they are the eldest legitimate descendants of King Alfonso X of Castile but were usurped by Sancho IV of Castile.. they are descendants of a sovereign house.. but, anyways, the House of Orleans-Braganza probably has their reason..

 

[Marc23]

then does that include all nobles who has Mexican blood such as the princes and princesses of Monaco, the Ducal Family of Tetuan, and the exiled House of Iturbide.. some of the noble families in mexico can trace their descent from the earliest kings of Spain during the Visigothic era..

Yes,it does...Obviously,when he wrote his will Fürst zu S-W-B was not interested how old ones family is,but of what "stock" and what rank it is...So,only equal family under 19th century status and of Arian descent...I also think Gotha III family would also be acceptable as Margarethe,the wife of the Fürst in question was a daughter of Duke d'Otrante and having "only" 5 out of 8 nearest ancestors of "Arian blood"...

Prince Gustav's former girlfriend was a well-off French girl Elvire Pasté de Rochefort,who can trace her ancestry from an ancient Mavrocordato family of Greek phanariote Princes,but that was also not good enough...

If he doesn't have an heir,due to requirements in the will,the title of Fürst could pass on to his cousins Karl-Albrecht and Albrecht-Frederik,who are brothers of Princess Anna of Bavaria and later to the sons of Prince Hubertus von S-W-B and Countess Irina zu Solms-Baruth or sons of Prince Christian Peter and Princess Felizitas Reuss,later maybe to the son of Prince Richard Casimir and Countess Luise Batthyany von Nemet-Ujvar...

There are still very high-standing marriages in the family...

hmmm.. possibly, but to think that the House of Medinaceli are the descendant of the Counts of Foix and they are the eldest legitimate descendants of King Alfonso X of Castile but were usurped by Sancho IV of Castile.. they are descendants of a sovereign house.. but, anyways, the House of Orleans-Braganza probably has their reason..

Possibly the same reason why,for example,Imperial House of Russia didn't/doesn't "count" many Russian Princely families which belong to the House of Rurik,which ruled and was sovereign in Russia at the time Romanovs have not even set their foot out of the woods...

Some of those Princely families are Gagarin,Obolenski,Oginski,Volkonsky,Ostrogski,Gorchakov,Repnin,Shakhovskoy,Lobanov-Rostovsky...

But,as they lost their sovereign status centuries ago and they were subjects of the Emperor also,no matter how old their families were they just couldn't be considered as equal...

So,probably,the same pattern is for Orleans-Braganca family...

As you now mentioned Princess Paola Maria Sapeiha-Rozanska - it was her grandmother's greatest wish that she becomes the next Duchess of Feria.But nothing came out of it and Princess Esperanza died before seeing her married to Prince Constantin Sviatopolk-Czetwertynski,descendant of the Kings of Prussia,Great Britain,Electors of Brandenburg etc.

 

[Marc23]

...does that include all nobles who has Mexican blood such as the princes and princesses of Monaco, the Ducal Family of Tetuan, and the exiled House of Iturbide...

Maybe the House of Yturbide could get through,as it's original origins are from Navarre and as it is extinct in male line and through marriage today they are represented by the German Counts von Götzen,who for this purpose adopted the family name von Götzen-Yturbide...

Today's Head of the family is Maximilian Richard Gustav Albrecht Augustin,Count von Götzen-Yturbide who is married to Anna Rosa Maria Helena von Franceschi and has one son and two daughters...

He has also descended in male line from almost all ruling families within Empire such as Kings of Denmark,Schwarzburg,Sachsen-Weiamr,Solms,Waldburg,Wied,Erbach,Oettingen,Schönburg,Oldenburg,Pfalz,Anhalt,Holstein etc.

So,there is enough "arian descent"

Btw,I checked Sayn-Wittgenstein family laws and they say that for equal marriage it is required for a person to belong to "high nobility"...
.