User talk:Almanach de Gotha

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rupert Löwenstein is not a 'Prince'. Ruprecht, Graf zu Löwenstein-Scharffeneck is a Graf or Count, born Palma de Mallorca 24.08.1933.

Here is the supporting information:

Ruprecht, Graf zu Löwenstein-Scharffeneck is the son of Leopold, Graf zu Löwenstein-Scharffeneck

His children are:

Rudolph, Graf zu Löwenstein-Scharffeneck born 17.11.1957

Conrad, Graf zu Löwenstein-Scharffeneck born 26.11.1958

Maria-Theodora, Gräfin zu Löwenstein-Scharffeneck born 11.07.1966, Married Count Manfredi della Gherardesca.

Graf (Count) Ruprecht is the descendant of the morganatic marriage on 04.08.1861 of Leopold, Prinz (Prince) zu Löwenstein-Wertheim-Freudenberg and Amalie Wollrabe.

Leopold Emil Ludwig Konrad (born Geneva 26 Nov 1827- died Munich 13 Mar 1893); married Hamburg 4 Aug 1861 Amalie Wollrabe, created by the King of Bavaria 1 Dec 1869 Freifrau (Gentlewoman) Wollrabe von Wallrab, and 15 Jan 1875 Gräfin (Countess) von Löwenstein-Scharffeneck (born Detmold 3 Mar 1836- died Munich 14 Mar 1909); this marriage was apparently approved by the then Fürst (or head of house), who died 5 days after the marriage, but not by his successor, Leopold's brother; certainly some of his descendants (i.e., Ruprecht (b.1933) and Hubertus (b.1906)) have assumed the Princely titles (though possibly solely on the argument that "Prinz zu Löwenstein-Wertheim-Freudenberg" is nothing more than their legal name under civil law). The modern Almanach de Gotha gives the Princely titles to all descendants; GHdA does not. One thing seems clear: had the King of Bavaria considered the marriage to be equal, he had no need to confer other titles on Amalie.

I am grateful for to the author of the following source for details on this question:

http://pages.prodigy.net/ptheroff/gotha/lowenstein.html

Interestingly, Ruprecht zu Löwenstein-Scharffeneck's father, Leopold, Graf zu Löwenstein-Scharffeneck at no point assumed the title of 'Prinz'.

Graf Ruprecht has felt the need to assume a title whose provenance is highly questionable, rather than using one (Graf) which is not.