Question on succeeding peerage of one parent over another

[S. S.]

A rather pedantic questions, but I hope someone can find more examples of this. 

Edward Hyde, styled Viscount Cornbury, baptized 1691, was the son and heir apparent of the 3rd Earl of Clarendon, who had married Katherine, 8th Baroness Clifton. The young Hyde had succeeded his mother as Baron Clifton in 1706, but he dvp in 1713. Thus he never inherited his father's peerage, but did his mother's. 

I was wondering if someone has similar examples of this occurring? I would posit one might find an answer in women who were created or inherited peerages on Wikipedia.

S.S.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Can you be more specific about what you're asking?

Do you mean anyone who inherited a peerage from one parent, but failed to inherit the peerage of the other parent, while being heir apparent to both?

[dpth...@gmail.com]

If this is what you mean, there is the famous case of the dual earldoms of Mansfield. David William Murray (1777-1840) succeeded his father as 3rd Earl of Mansfield (1792 creation), but dvm and thus did not succeed his mother as 3rd Earl of Mansfield (1776 creation). Succeeding earls were thus in a seemingly illogical position of being, for example, 4th Earl of the later creation while only 3rd Earl of the earlier creation.

[S. S.]

"Do you mean anyone who inherited a peerage from one parent, but failed to inherit the peerage of the other parent, while being heir apparent to both", yep you articulated what I could not. I am looking for examples such as this and what you outlined with the Mansfield case. 

S.S.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Edward Michael Pakenham (1743-1792) succeeded his father as 2nd Baron Longford,  but dvm and did not succeed his mother as 2nd Earl of Longford.


Byron Noel King-Noel, Viscount Ockham (1836-1862), dvp and never succeeded his father as Earl of Lovelace. However, in 1860 he succeeded his maternal grandmother as 12th Lord Wentworth and de jure 16th Lord le Despenser, his own mother having died in 1852.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Here is a similar case, but with lots of asterisks.  :)

James Boyd, later Hay (1726-1778), called Lord Boyd as heir apparent of his father, the 4th Earl of Kilmarnock, never succeeded his father, but only because his father was attainted and executed in 1746. However, he did succeed his maternal great-aunt in 1758 as 15th Earl of Erroll. However, he had never been heir apparent, only heir presumptive, to his great-aunt.

[S. S.]

Well, the peerage is always full of obscure lines of succession that one does not know about until you research it hah!

Thank you as always for your myriad of examples. 

S.S.