General Royal Genealogical questions

[Warren]

A thread for general questions relating to Royal genealogy which don't fit in any of the Royal Genealogy Forum topic-specific
or House-related threads.

o o o

​

 

[PrinceS]

Thank you for creating this thread, Warren,

I am researching royal and aristocratic deaths in January 1968 and February 1968. I am looking for names (even lesser-known) and date of death. I'll do the follow-up research in libraries and online, but at this point I'm just trying to compile names.

Can anyone help?

 

[cmbruno]

Help from Londoners wanted

I belong to a newsgroup on Genealogy and a friend there is researching the family on the Countess of Rio Novo, Mariana Claudina Pereira de Carvalho. She was the founder of the city Três Rios in Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil and died in London on June 5th 1882, after going through a surgery. Her remains were later transferred to Brazil in 1885.
My friend has written to The Guardian to see if they have anything on her (obituary). If anybody subscribes The Times, it would be a great help if he/she could research for any info on the Countess.
Any suggestions of hospitals in London at that time where rich people could have gone through a surgery, undertakers, cemeteries, other newspapers, would be also welcome.

 

[Nice Nofret]

In 1882 a lot of surgerys for the rich where performed in privat practice, even at home - and not in hospitals.

Hospitals were for the poor

 

[NGalitzine]

Thank you for creating this thread, Warren,

I am researching royal and aristocratic deaths in January 1968 and February 1968. I am looking for names (even lesser-known) and date of death. I'll do the follow-up research in libraries and online, but at this point I'm just trying to compile names.

Can anyone help?

The Times used to publish books of notable obituaries. Your library may be able to find one covering the 1960s period for you.

 

[cmbruno]

I belong to a newsgroup on Genealogy and a friend there is researching the family on the Countess of Rio Novo, Mariana Claudina Pereira de Carvalho. She was the founder of the city Três Rios in Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil and died in London on June 5th 1882, after going through a surgery. Her remains were later transferred to Brazil in 1885.
My friend has written to The Guardian to see if they have anything on her (obituary). If anybody subscribes The Times, it would be a great help if he/she could research for any info on the Countess.
Any suggestions of hospitals in London at that time where rich people could have gone through a surgery, undertakers, cemeteries, other newspapers, would be also welcome.

In 1882 a lot of surgerys for the rich where performed in privat practice, even at home - and not in hospitals.

Hospitals were for the poor

Now it came to my mind that info about the most likely hotels the countess might have stayed at could also be a great help.

 

[Kataryn]

I don't know if this is the right thread to put it in but I just wanted to share exiting information I received today.

It started that we found my father's German ancestry proof (Ahnenpass) from the Nazi-times. There direct descent till the great-grandparents was established. The data I found on my great-great-grandmother led me to a ancient noble family from France, whose Austrian descendant my ancestress possibly was. I started looking for proof of this thesis.

And today I was sent by a distant relative I had unearthed an official document from the inheritance of a common relative, who, like my ancestress, was paternally descended from said family and maternally from the family I got the information from.

In it an official from the former Imperial and Royal Home Office (k.u.k. Ministerium des Inneren) declared that checks into the lineage and nobility of our common ancestor found proof of the membership of said ancient noble family and permission to carry the name and title of said family for the newly immigrated family in Austria.

I had already known through family hearsay that our ancestor had been forced to leave France because of his favorism of the Ancient Regime in the 1800s. But now I have the proof of this and of a family connection, which established my own direct-line descent from Charlesmagne and William the Conqueror!

Well, it is a sad thing really to see on which level of society we landed after my ancestors really had it big - I have no claim to nobility or riches whatsoever, but then I am more noble than Catherine Middleton! And I'm content and happy alone to know that some people I was always interested in were actually my own ancestors..

Just wanted to share that information with you - great discovery for me.

 

[Mariel]

Kataryn, I have admired your knowledge on TRF, and particularly am grateful for your posting of the material from the Hunter and McAlpine book on royal porphyria. I am glad you found this noble connection. I can't find my noble "stream" down to me, although I must have had one in medieval Scotland, from the history of my family way back then, and the common ailment I have with the Stuarts. I am afraid I don't even know how to look, and it isn't as important to me as it is to you...I have too many current challenges to look. But the McAlpine-Hunter material I had only heard about and was able to read word for word, thanks to you.

My Pollocks were supposedly related to the predecessor of Charlemagne, the Merovingian Clovis. That's what their website says, but I don't know how they think this is true. There are some errors on their site which I know to be errors because of my further research...a historian in Scotland told me that the woman named Mauricle, first Lady of Rothes, was actually a Muriel, which is known from her signature in Latin on donation documents to medieval priories. The Pollocks gave a lot to Paisley and Melrose abbeys, and this is the best source of documentation of their time period, place, etc. But Muriel didn't live in Renfrewshire, she lived in far North Scotland in the Castle of Rothes built by her "Norman castle builder" father, Peter de Pollock (my "uncle"). Muriel built a church and a hospital in Rothes, and her daughter Eva was the second Lady of Rothes. Eva's daughter is not named as she married Sir Norman de Leslyn and disappeared into the great mass of wombs.

 

[Anya04]

Non-royals forced to change last name

I'm new to this forum, so I hope this is the right place to post this.

Was it ever common or even heard of for people to have to change their last name because it was the same as the royal family of that country? Story goes that one of my ancestors was forced to change their last name because it was the same as the royal family, even though they left the country when they were a child (supposedly). Does that sound like something that could have happened ? There's no proof as to what his last name would have been before then, or anything that shows he actually had to change it. There's no birth certificate.

Thanks!

 

[Kataryn]

I can only imagine something like this happening in countries where Royality is treated close to deities - like Thailand or Japan. But not in a European country. A lot of the Royal families don't even have surnames and the others have no problem to share them - eg there are many people called Windsor who are not related to the BRF. Or Bernadottes in France.
.

 

[norenxaq]

this seems to have been a common practice in china

 

[Anya04]

Hm... so in the Prussia/Belarus/Scandinavia/Germany/northern Europe areas, they would definitely not have had to change it?

 

[NGalitzine]

Hm... so in the Prussia/Belarus/Scandinavia/Germany/northern Europe areas, they would definitely not have had to change it?

Cannot think of a single case in Europe where a non related commoner family had to change their names because a family with the same name became rulers of the nation.

 

[Rob57]

Nassau Family genealogy

Hello,

I have put the first edition of the genealogy of the Nassau family on my website. It’s a large file, so it is possible that you get a black screen. Most of the time it loads in 5 sec.

I’m still working on this genealogy to correct the names, if necessary, or ‘complete’ them.

Can you please send me your response if you find mistakes or any other comment? You see now only the names and dates. The file is a lot bigger with the text I add, but they are in Dutch. I have, when I have them or find them on the internet, put the photos by the name and by some I have put the birth or death transcription.

You can choose the Dutch, English, France or German language.

Rob

You can find it here: Stamboom van deze familie

 

[Edgar]

Genealogy expert for Europe region needed

Dear Sir/Madam,

Could you recommend most precise service for blood test with competent DNA database as it possible to get , regarding Royal blood for documentation in court processes for heritage and status ?

Regards Edgar

 

[Alexandros Hellas]

House of Mano history, coat of Arms and genealogy

Greetings everyone !!!

I was hoping to make a thread where all those interested in House Mano and it's background could commit their knowledge to the fray !!

Despite that the family married too 3 Royal Houses during the 20th century, notably the Royal Houses of Hellas, Yugoslavia and House of Orlean, the House has a very intriguing history stretching as far as the Principality of Genoa of the 10th century AD and Constantinople after the 4th Crusade !!

I look forward to all of your comments and i hope we can all share historical informations !!

 

[LadyGabrielle]

So is this a Greek house? I think I saw somewhere that the Hellas lineage is Greek. Maybe Im wrong. What information do you have on this lineage?

Sent from my SCH-I800 using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Alexandros Hellas]

There are currently 3 brunches of the family that are active.... one is in Bucharest, one in Athenes and a very spread out in America....it is though a Hellenic noble House.... if you go to Ghyka.org you will be able to find a somehow incomplete family tree.... for a more clear view of the House i would sugest the Grand Famille De Greece or Libro D'Oro Oro books

 

[LadyGabrielle]

What is your connection to this ancestry?

Sent from my SCH-I800 using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Alexandros Hellas]

purely historical interest

 

[WarHiker]

How Common Is ....... Geaneology

I'm curious how common it is to have a Great great great (to alot) power grandfather that is royal?

How common is it to have multiple royal ancestors?

Should I feel special, or is it VERY VERY common?

I have these connections on many different levels of my heritage?
Does it matter which royal family?
Does it matter how far back?

I'm pretty new into looking my past, as one of my royal connections was highly debated. But, I'm proud to have found more that is not debated.

Wouldn't this give creedence to the debated connection?

Thanks for the replies in advance.
I'm not sure if I posted this in the right section.

 

[Mermaid1962]

One rule in genealogy is to have solid sources which can be objectively confirmed. Don't assume that a connection is there because it appears to be there. Try to get a document to back up every connection you make. That's hard to do if you're going into the distant past for your ancestors. There's a theory that Europeans are all descendants of Charlemagne, for example:Charlemagne’s DNA and Our Universal Royalty – Phenomena

So my advice is: prove what you can by documentation. I find that people in genealogy are very happy to help other people who are searching. If you can link in with research that's already been done, you'll be able to confirm more of your background.

If you definitely find many royal ancestors in the recent past (the past few centuries), then I think that you are special indeed.

 

[Grandma828]

Have fun with the search. Invest in a good genealogy program so you can attach copies of all source documents. Be sure to list all sources with vol. and page number. Start with yourself and work backwards. Prove, prove, prove. With the fact that names were repeated in families make sure you have the correct one. Sometimes it can feel like looking for a needle in a haystack.

 

[WarHiker]

Well, I have lots of sources.
An using ancestry. Com
I understand that many records
Are user made, but I am focusing on the official

While I trust my findings, I really need a second opinion.
And I can't afford a professional.

If anyone knows someone who can verify,
I will be forever Grateful.

I believe someone can evaluate my tree online,
But am unsure how that works.

 

[Lee-Z]

Well, I have lots of sources.
An using ancestry. Com
I understand that many records
Are user made, but I am focusing on the official

While I trust my findings, I really need a second opinion.
And I can't afford a professional.

If anyone knows someone who can verify,
I will be forever Grateful.

I believe someone can evaluate my tree online,
But am unsure how that works.

You are right, you should always verify usermade records by the original source (if only for typing errors etc. which could throw you way off course).
Also: please note that even the old records can be wrong sometimes because of writing errors etc. I have a person in my family who was born a couple of years after the death of their father, but on further looking into the actual baptism books, it turned out that the birth was scribbled on a separate piece of paper that was put at the back of the baptism book and therefore it seemed that the piece was the continuation of the end of the book). The handwriting on this piece however was different than at the end of the book, and when I looked into the other births on that piece of paper (from other families), found out that all these births had actually occured a few years earlier...
I've also seen happen that the father's or mother's name were accidently switched around or that the grandfather's name was put there, so even on original records, always be aware there could be mistakes..
With children born out of wedlock, the biological father was not always known, sometimes it's scribbled in between the lines with pencil, but still: there was no DNA testing then, so there's always the chance that they got it wrong at the time. That said, even with children born *in* wedlock, you're not always sure that the actual father was mentioned (but that is very very difficult to trace)

Being decended from royalty is not very common, it still is something special if you find that in your family tree, but it depends a bit on where your ancestors came from; mine are from the south of the netherlands and have lived there for centuries, no royals ever lived there (not even close) so in my tree there are only farmers and peasants (and lots of them ).

If you *do* have royal ancestry, then the good news is that you can trace your line back a lot further than from a commoner, so that is something to look forward too

 

[WarHiker]

Thank you for the reply. I have noticed many errors in some of the user made trees. One common one is seeing the same man be listed as his father, with his wife being listed as his mother.

I have even found some problems in census records, with someone reading an H as a W. I am amazed that there are not more errors, with the cursive handwriting being a bit difficult to read.

The length of being able to trace back is quite interesting, and is one reason that I am looking for verification. As it stands right now, I traced one line back before Jesus.

I figure the best verifications that can be done will be done by SoAR (American Revolution) and BoMC (Magna Charta) that I am looking to join. I really just wanted verification before I submit official documents. However, I am sure they deal with false claims often.

This is a very interesting website. I look forward into delving into some old tradition and history. Where is the scholarship section for royals?

How does one determine royal status? I understand there are some different levels of royals (with the British being at the top). So far, I have been clued off more by titles of people (count/ess, Knight, Earl, etc.) and less by their name. Of course with a name like King of Turkey, it is quite easy to notice.

Most of my findings have been independent of my families own writings. I have our own history (from books), but this is what is "debated" in the genealogical community. I personally think that "the powers that be" have reason to deny certain claims (even if they are true). Ever since I was small I believed in this debated origin, but have realized that I will only truly know upon my own death.

Wow, sorry for the book that I have written.

 

[genegirl99]

Cite everything, no matter how official (birth, death, marriage records) or unofficial (family generated genealogies or you were told), even if you have a dozen sources attached to one person. The biggest mistake I made when I started was not citing everything.

 

[WarHiker]

I can see how citing sources is important.
Right now, that is one of the benefits of using the ancestry website (in my opinion), because of the strong link to census and birth/death records. No doubt I need to get some external collaboration, but I have SO MUCH work to do as it stands now.

I was surprised to see 20 hours of genie research costing 1500 to 2000 dollars. That is absurd!

 

[KittyAtlanta]

Why is it absurd? I know auto mechanics who make that much, when broken down into hours.


You get what you pay for.

 

[Ish]

I'm curious how common it is to have a Great great great (to alot) power grandfather that is royal?



How common is it to have multiple royal ancestors?



Should I feel special, or is it VERY VERY common?



I have these connections on many different levels of my heritage?

Does it matter which royal family?

Does it matter how far back?



I'm pretty new into looking my past, as one of my royal connections was highly debated. But, I'm proud to have found more that is not debated.



Wouldn't this give creedence to the debated connection?



Thanks for the replies in advance.

I'm not sure if I posted this in the right section.

You raise a few interesting questions here...

Okay, to start, depending on the number of generations we're discussing it can be very uncommon (ie only 4 people in the world can verify that Queen Elizabeth II is their great-grandmother) to very common (ie It's believed that the majority of people of English descent are descended from Edward I, they just can't always show it).

Statistically speaking, every person of European descent alive today is descended from every person who lived during the reign of Charlemagne and still has living descendants; the idea there being that if you go back enough generations the number of ancestors you should have becomes greater than the population of a given area. For people primarily of European descent, that time range is about 1,000 years.

How does one determine royal status? I understand there are some different levels of royals (with the British being at the top). So far, I have been clued off more by titles of people (count/ess, Knight, Earl, etc.) and less by their name. Of course with a name like King of Turkey, it is quite easy to notice.

What do you mean by "royal status"? If you're Royal you're Royal, if you're not you're not, and whether you are or you aren't is really determined by... Well, the realm and/or the house you belong to. The British RF themselves are no more Royal than the Spanish or Dutch RFs, or any other, although within the families themselves they might make some distinctions (ie some families have a lesser title for people who aren't in the direct line; HH instead of HRH).

As to other titles... Well again it depends on the realm, but typically a Duke (or Count, Earl, Knight, etc) isn't Royal. In Britain, you can be a Royal (in that you hold a Royal title), you can be a peer (holding a peerage), you can be a person who has received some other honour or rank (a knighthood, a military rank, etc), you can hold a title by courtesy because of your parent or spouse, or you can have no title at all. Sometimes you can combine them - Prince William is a Royal, who has a peerage, has a military rank, and has several additional honours, including being a Knight of the Garter.

There are exceptions; Luxembourg is a grand duchy not a kingdom, so the Grand Duke is a Royal. In Russia the children of a monarch were titles as Grand Dukes and Duchesses and were Royal, while members of the nobility held the title of Prince and were not Royal. As for the Russians and other non-reigning houses... Well they continue to have their rules regarding who is and is not Royal within them, but within the greater public some people still consider them Royal and others don't and sometimes someone who would consider one non-reigning family to be Royal might not consider another to be as such.