Dukes of Schomberg question

[bx...@yahoo.com]

The 1st Duke of Schomberg (title created in 1689) had 2 sons, Meinhardt (b. 1641) and Karl (born 1645).

Yet, despite Meinhardt being the older son, it was Karl who succeeded his father to become 2nd Duke.  Upon Karl's death in 1693, Meinhardt succeeded and became the 3rd Duke.  (Meinhardt had previously been created Duke of Leinster in 1691.) The Schomberg title (as well as the Leinster title) became extinct in 1719, as the 3rd Duke's only son, the Marquess of Harwich,  had predeceased his father.

My question is: why did the younger son succeed to the dukedom ahead of his older brother?  Was that the way the dukedom was created?

Thanks for everyone's help.

Brooke

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Here is what I have in my file on them (as part of a much larger file on the family):

1.1.4.3.1.Friedrich Hermann von Schönburg auf Wesel, 1640 Graf von Schönburg [Schomberg], 1663 Conde de Mertola, Comte de Courbet et de Vitry-en-Brie, 1689 Duke of Schomberg, Marquess of Harwich, Earl of Brentford and Baron Teyes [with remainder of British titles to 5th son, then 3rd son, then other sons] (Heidelberg 6 Dec 1615-k.a.the Boyne 1 Jul 1690); m.1st 30 Apr 1638 Johanna Elisabeth von Schönburg auf Wesel (above); m.2nd 14 Apr 1669 Susanne d’Aumale (d.Dohna Palace, Berlin 1688)

1.1.4.3.1.1.Otto (Geisenheim 15 Mar 1639-k.a.Valenciennes 1656)

1.1.4.3.1.2.Friedrich Gf von Schönburg, Conde de Mertola (Oberwesel 14 Mar 1640-Geisenheim 5 Dec 1700); m.1st (div) Katharina Ernestina von Bocholtz (d.30 Aug 1716); m.2nd 1684 Amalie Charlotte Veronika Freiin von Spaen (1661-1731)

1.1.4.3.1.2.1.Maria Wilhelmine Elisabeth; m.1703 Friedrich Graf zu Sayn-Wittgenstein (d.27 Mar 1723)

1.1.4.3.1.3.Meinrad Gf von Schönburg, cr 1691 Duke of Leinster, Earl of Bangor and Baron of Tara, suc 1693 as 3rd Duke of Schomberg (Köln 30 Jun 1641-Hillingdon 5 Jul 1719); m.1st La Rochelle 3 Aug 1667 Barbara Luisa Rizzi; m.2nd 4 Jan 1683 Karoline Elisabeth, Raugräfin (19 Nov 1659-Kensington 28 Jun 1696)

1.1.4.3.1.3.1.Charles Louis, Marquess of Harwich (15 Dec 1683-5 Oct 1713)

1.1.4.3.1.3.2.Caroline (1686/7-18 Jun 1710)

1.1.4.3.1.3.3.Frederica Suzanne, Cdsa de Mertola (1688-7 Aug 1751); m.1st 1715 Robert D’Arcy, 3rd Earl of Holderness (d.20 Jan 1722); m.2nd 18 Jun 1724 Benjamin Mildmay, Earl Fitzwalter (d.29 Feb 1756)

1.1.4.3.1.3.4.Maria (16 Mar 1692-29 Apr 1762); m.1717 Christoph Martin Gf von Degenfeld-Schonburg (d.10 Aug 1762)

1.1.4.3.1.3.5.a child, b.ca May 1695

1.1.4.3.1.4.Heinrich (Hertogenbosch 9 Jul 1643-d.Brussels 1667 of wounds received in action)

1.1.4.3.1.5.Charles Gf von Schönburg, 1690 2nd Duke of Schomberg (Hertogenbosch 5 Aug 1645-Turin 16 Oct 1693)

1.1.4.3.1.5.1.[illegitimate] N Sibourg

1.1.4.3.1.6.Wilhelm (Hertogenbosch 11 Aug 1647-    )

[S. S.]

Friedrich/Frederick Schomberg (b. 6 Dec. 1615) married firstly 1638 his cousin, Johanna Elizabeth (d. 21 March 1663/64), daughter of his paternal uncle, Henrich Dietrich, Count of Schonberg. Friedrich had five sons, though only two sons survived to adulthood. The overall second son was Meinhardt (b. 30 June 1641) while overall fifth and youngest son was Charles (b. 5 August 1645). Note that Frederick married secondly as well though this marriage bore no issue.

In 1689, he was created Baron Teyes, Earl of Brentford, Marquess of Harwich and Duke of Schomberg [E] all with remainder to his 5th son, Charles, and the heirs male of his body, failing which to his 2nd son, Meinhardt, and the heirs male of his body, failing which to his own heirs male of the body (i.e. the heirs male of the grantee).

Now you asked why was the remainder to the younger (5th) son instead of the elder (2nd) son? It was because Meinhardt (himself a distinguished general like his father) only a short time later (and in anticipation of this) in 1690/91 was be created Baron Tara, Earl of Bangor and Duke of Leinster [I] (the titles were to celebrate his victory following the Battle of the Boyne). To avoid having the two titles merge and remain separate, this is probably why the Dukedom of Schomberg [E] and other titles were given a remainder to the younger son.

Thus, when Friedrich died on 4 July 1690, the Dukedom of Schomberg [E] passed to his younger (5th) son, Charles, who died unmarried on 16 October 1693. The title then passed off course to his brother, Meinhardt. Meinhardt therefore became 3rd Duke of Schomberg [E] and 1st Duke of Leinster [I]. Meinhardt died without surviving male issue on 5 July 1719, when all the titles [E] and [I] became EXTINCT.

 S.S.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Of the six sons, three did indeed die relatively young (though two of those were old enough to die in service), but three sons survived well into adulthood, of whom the eldest, Friedrich (1640-1700) was likely bypassed because he was well settled on the Continent while the other two surviving sons had more involvement with Britain.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

If you are searching for royal descent for these Dukes:

The 1st Duke of Schomberg's mother was Hon. Anne Sutton, daughter of the 5th Lord Dudley. He, in turn, descended from the 3rd Lord Dudley and his wife, Lady Cecily Grey. Lady Cecily descended from Sir John Grey and his wife, Lady Constance Holland, whose mother was daughter of John of Gaunt. Likely there are many other royal descents in this Sutton ancestry, too.

On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 5:50:42 PM UTC-6 bx...@yahoo.com wrote:

[bx...@yahoo.com]

S.S and Paul,  thank you so much for answering my question.  I had a feeling it was done precisely for that reason, but thought I'd leave it to be answered by the experts of this group.

Paul, thank you for the information on the royal descent.  That is the descent I'm going with. 

In general,  in doing this research, it is quite amazing how truly intertwined all of the ducal families are.  There are  likely a half dozen or more interconnections between one family and others.  I'm just trying to find ONE connection for each ducal family to the Royal Family and it's taking a long time.  I can't even imagine how long it would take to put together a tree with EVERY ducal connection to every other ducal family.

Brooke

[dpth...@gmail.com]

A few items which may also be of interest:

The second wife of the 3rd Duke of Schomberg, and the mother of his children, was of course a granddaughter of Elizabeth stuart, Queen of Bohemia (daughter of James I).

The name "Schomberg" as a forename occurs a few times in the family of the Marquesses of Lothian, who descend from the wife of the 4th Marquess, Lady Louisa Caroline d'Arcy, whose own mother was Lady Frederica Schomberg (1688-1751).

The name was also adopted (as "Schonburg") by the son-in-law of the 3rd Duke, Christoph Martin Freiherr von Degenfeld, who took the title "Graf von Degenfeld-Schonburg". This Degenfeld-Schonburg family went on to intermarry with many of the highest continental nobility.

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Out of curiosity, have there  been other situations like the Schomberg case (i.e. a younger son inherited a title over an older brother, and then the older brother succeeded the younger brother)?

Thanks.

Brooke

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Famously the Dukedom of Somerset was created in 1547 with remainder to the grantee's issue male by his second marriage before that of the first marriage. The issue of the first marriage did not succeed in the title until 1750.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

A footnote in The Complete Peerage, sub Somerset, mentions one other example:


Hon. John DRUMMOND, cr 1685 Viscount of Melfort and Lord Drummond of Gillestoun, with remainder to heirs male by 2nd m., failing whom to his heirs male whatsoever, cr 1686 Earl of Melfort, Viscount of Forth, Lord Drummond of Riccartoun, Castlemains and Gilstoun, with the same remainder, cr by James II after deposition 1689 Baron of Cleworth and 1692 Duke of Melfort, Marquess of Forth, Earl of Isla and Burtizland, Viscount of Rickerton, Lord Catlemains and Galston, with the same remainder, attainted 1695 (ca 1650-Paris 25 Jan 1715); m.1st 30 Apr 1670 Sophia, dau of Robert Maitland of Lundin by Margaret Lundin; m.2nd 1680 Euphemia Gemmill (d.St.Germain 1743)


In his case his issue by 2nd marriage remained extant longer than that of his 1st marriage, so the elder line never succeeded to the Melfort titles (which anyway were under attainder until 1853), though the elder line would have succeeded to the older earldom of Perth had it not also been under attainder.