This thread comprises two sets of charts, with accompanying ancillary material. The first of the sets was posted several days before the second set, which I had not then even begun on. It is complete and in place now and has its own introduction, so I will mainly discuss just the first set here. The charts in that set deal with the relationships of what I am calling kinship group 1. Its members are those sovereigns, heads of house or heirs to either that appear in the four equal marriage charts in the original Blood Royal thread and belong (or belonged, since some have passed away) to currently non-reigning houses* – this because I have long wanted to do something with present-day and recent pretenders, and with this limitation most of the individuals appearing would be in that category.
A further proviso was that there must have been children of the equal marriage shown in the Blood Royal charts, which in the majority of cases there was. This was because the second set of charts covers, or at the date of first posting was planned to cover, the relationships of the heirs, or in some cases other children, of the members of the first set. These individuals form kinship group 2.
The idea obviously was to produce both an exemplar and an exploration of the difference equal marriage makes to relationships from generation to generation, using a much larger group of people than the current sovereigns of any particular day would provide, especially latterly when they rarely marry equally, i.e. within their own real and wider kinship groups, of which the groups here are subsets.
Relationships between the members of kinship group 1 are covered by three charts, split Protestant and Orthodox with each other, Catholics with each other, then the first set with the second set. The charts and their keys and statistical summaries are followed by two tables of combined statistics. Obviously the arbitrary nature of my selection criteria means that neither kinship group has any real statistical validity, but I have to produce the statistics anyway as a check on myself. I don’t have to show them but wished to, as now the second set of charts and tables is in they provide a readier basis for comparison between the groups than merely glancing through the charts.
A few more points, which apply to the second set also: ‘heir’ refers only to heirs in direct line, not heirs and heiresses presumptive. I have left Hereditary Grand Duke Georg Donatus and his son out due to the tragic circumstances in which they died, along with most of the rest of the family and several attendants and crew. I felt it would be rather indecent in particular to include a child who died so young and in such terrible circumstances in my treatment of these relationships. Infante Carlos of Spain is one of the two claimants to the Two Sicilies, but was also left out along with his son Prince Pedro on the basis that an Infante of Spain can hardly be said not to belong to a currently reigning family.
It might be thought that the spread in age within the first group in particular renders the exercise less meaningful than it might have been. I don’t think so, though; the earliest-born person in these charts is Boris III of Bulgaria, 30th January 1894, and the latest-born in the first set is Georg Friedrich, Prince of Prussia, 10th June 1976. Boris III died in 1943, but obviously it would not have been in any way extraordinary if he had been alive when Georg Friedrich was born, he would have been 82. So although they never were it is perfectly possible that the entire group could have been alive at the same time, making the selection reasonable enough from that point of view, I feel.
It is in fact by birthdate that the individuals in the charts are ordered, since it had to be on some sort of basis and I preferred not to go by notional accession dates. I have however used notional titles in both the charts and keys, both to make it all a little bit more fun and because in some ways that places individuals in context better than the styles they actually use. As neither Genealogics nor Wikipedia are in on my little game, clicking links will soon reveal those real styles. As the combined statistics have no links, titles in pretence are coloured differently in them.
On this question, I do of course realise that you can’t for example have two Emperors of Brazil on the go at once, nor can you have Henri VII and Napoléon VII simultaneously reigning in Paris. These are relationships charts, not an attempt at constructing a plausible fantasy, and except as noted all those with a valid basis of claim who otherwise fit the criteria feature in them, with the titles they would bear or have borne when reigning. Heirs by the way are known by the titles they would have were the monarchy in question in being.
Finally, the complex and thorny question of the paternal ancestry of Alexander II of Serbia, as I am calling him. There is no doubt that he is the son of Peter II of Yugoslavia, or that Peter II was the son of Alexander I of Yugoslavia and Princess Marie of Romania. The doubt is over Princess Marie’s paternity, and personally I feel certain that she was in fact the daughter not of Ferdinand I of Romania but of Grand Duke Boris Vladimirovich of Russia.
Genealogics take a different view, and therefore one of the links in chart I and a number of those in chart III show nearer relationships through Ferdinand I before they get to those I believe actually exist. In some cases there were too many of those nearer relationships for the ones displayed in the chart to appear at all. In those cases I have created a red link between near ancestors, then adjusted the relationships obtained by the necessary number of generations to get those for Alexander II and the other individual.
In chart I, the link referred to is that for Alexander II and the Bulgarian sovereign Boris III. All Alexander II’s links in chart III are affected one way or the other (that to Napoléon VII the least, in that there is only one invalid relationship, which comes in between a number of valid ones) except that to Aimone, Prince of Piedmont as he would be in my view of the Italian succession were the kingdom in being. There are three of Alexander II’s relationships in that chart that are not sufficiently covered by the general observations here, so I will explain them below.
He is shown as 6c through three different ancestors to Crown Prince Friedrich of Württemberg, as he is named here. Usually multiple relationships all appear in the same link, but here there are two links, one for FSA and FSC and one for KLB. The KLB link is calculated through near ancestors.
The closest relationship of Alexander II with Carlo IV is correctly 7c1r H24RK, and with Duarte II 6c2r H24RK. These are relationships through the aforementioned Grand Duke Boris, which I preferred not to show in the chart, displacing relationships through Princess Marie of Edinburgh (wife of Ferdinand I, mother of Princess Marie of Romania and lover of Grand Duke Boris). After all, while I may feel near moral certainty that Grand Duke Boris was the father, Princess Marie of Edinburgh being the mother was absolutely certain.
I apologise for both the length and dryness of this introduction. Unfortunately, for this exercise to be made meaningful at all I had to specify my selection criteria, and it was also an unfortunate necessity to thoroughly explain the problems with Alexander II's relationships. With that all done, we can now proceed with the charts and their associated material. There is a guide to how to read the charts here.
* German sub-monarchies below the rank of Grand Duchy were excluded. The only effect of this was the intended one, that Prince Alexander of Schaumburg-Lippe, the current claimant to the principality, and his son Prince Heinrich Donatus did not appear. Having looked at their ancestries I concluded that they would just bulk up the charts and keys without adding any particularly interesting links, so contrived this exclusion.
Nevertheless Schaumburg-Lippe, although small (in fact the second smallest of all the German Realms by area, and smallest by population) was a sovereign state, and were it in being Prince Alexander would be its monarch. I decided that while my original omission of him and his son probably was the best thing so far as the charts were concerned, it was wrong to leave them out altogether on no real ground except convenience. So I prepared two addenda detailing the relationships of Prince Alexander with kinship group 1 and his heir Prince Heinrich Donatus with kinship group 2. These now appear on page 2 of the thread following the statistics tables for kinship group 2, accompanied by a brief note discussing the relationships thus displayed.