It is not so straitghtforward to tell which reigning royal house is the oldest.
The Windsors for example trace their immediate ancestry to the first Hanoverian king of Great Britain in the early 18th century. However, the Hanoverians also descend from the Stuarts, who in turn descend from the Tudors, who in turn descend from the Plantagenets all the way back to William the Conqueror. One might say then that, including collateral and female lines, Queen Elizabeth II is part of a family tree dating back to 1066. Likewise, the Spanish Bourbons, through their French ancestors (King Philip V was a grandson of Louis XIV), can trace their roots all the way back to Hugh Capet, the first King of France who lived between 941 and 996, even though they have been in the Spanish throne properly only since the early 18th century.
In fact, even the royal houses of the "new monarchies" of the 19th century, e.g. Belgium and the Netherlands, are actually older than they look at first impression. There have been only seven "Kings of the Netherlands" (since 1815), but the Dutch house of Orange-Nassau is much older than the Kingdom of the Netherlands per se, dating back at least to the 16th century and, since then, the family has been closely associated with Dutch history (as any visitor to the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam will immediately notice). Likewise, there have been only seven "Kings of the Belgians" (since 1831), but the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha ancestors of King Leopold I had been rulers in Saxony long before the Kingdom of Belgium was created.
I guess the only European royals that can't claim a long dynastic tree pre-dating the 19th century are actually the Swedish Bernadottes, who are truly of commoner ancestry. Nevertheless, even in that case, through the marriage of King Gustav V with Victoria of Baden, his descendants , including the current king Carl XVI Gustaf, became matrilineally related to the old Vasa dynasty and, therefore, related to a royal line dating back to the Middle Ages.
I guess that the Danish royal familiy may be the oldest (patrineally ?) , but I don't see their ancestral claims as far superior than those of other European royal houses, particularly the major ones like the Bourbons.
The Windsors for example trace their immediate ancestry to the first Hanoverian king of Great Britain in the early 18th century. However, the Hanoverians also descend from the Stuarts, who in turn descend from the Tudors, who in turn descend from the Plantagenets all the way back to William the Conqueror. One might say then that, including collateral and female lines, Queen Elizabeth II is part of a family tree dating back to 1066. Likewise, the Spanish Bourbons, through their French ancestors (King Philip V was a grandson of Louis XIV), can trace their roots all the way back to Hugh Capet, the first King of France who lived between 941 and 996, even though they have been in the Spanish throne properly only since the early 18th century.
In fact, even the royal houses of the "new monarchies" of the 19th century, e.g. Belgium and the Netherlands, are actually older than they look at first impression. There have been only seven "Kings of the Netherlands" (since 1815), but the Dutch house of Orange-Nassau is much older than the Kingdom of the Netherlands per se, dating back at least to the 16th century and, since then, the family has been closely associated with Dutch history (as any visitor to the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam will immediately notice). Likewise, there have been only seven "Kings of the Belgians" (since 1831), but the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha ancestors of King Leopold I had been rulers in Saxony long before the Kingdom of Belgium was created.
I guess the only European royals that can't claim a long dynastic tree pre-dating the 19th century are actually the Swedish Bernadottes, who are truly of commoner ancestry. Nevertheless, even in that case, through the marriage of King Gustav V with Victoria of Baden, his descendants , including the current king Carl XVI Gustaf, became matrilineally related to the old Vasa dynasty and, therefore, related to a royal line dating back to the Middle Ages.
I guess that the Danish royal familiy may be the oldest (patrineally ?) , but I don't see their ancestral claims as far superior than those of other European royal houses, particularly the major ones like the Bourbons.
Last edited:
