Most distant successions, historical and possible

So, as I was looking at my other thread (about who would be the king Bourbon King of France if basically all lines of the family except the descendants of Philip V of Spain died out), I realized how distant the line of succession would be. That made me think: what is the most distant succession that has occurred, and what is the most distant succession possible? I would prefer a succession as legitimate as possible. If there is a civil war and one claimant wins out, that counts. However, that's not what I'm looking for. Please refer only to states that show some continuity and still exist. I once saw a website where somebody claimed he should be Emperor due to his descent from the imperial family of China's Tang Dynasty (618-907), so that doesn't count, since the Tang are no more. It's a lot easier to calculate in monarchies where the succession is patrilineal, but if there are claims via a distant female relation, that works too.

Some historical contenders (a random grab-bag of successions, feel free to contribute):

Emperor Duzong of Song (r. 1264-1274), an 11th generation descendant of Emperor Taizu of Song (r. 960–976), for a 288 year gap. This is the most distant, in the sense of generations removed from a ruling ancestor.

King Henry IV of France (r. 1589-1610), a 10th generation descendant of Louis IX of France (r. 1226-1270) for a 319 year gap. This succession is the most distant I found, chronologically.

Emperor Shaowu of Southern Ming (r. 1646), a 9th generation descendant of Emperor Hongwu of Ming (r. 1368–1398). However, he might be considered a pretender. A gap of 248 years.

King/Emperor Kojong of Chosŏn (r. 1863-1907*), a 9th generation descendant of King Injo (r. 1623–1649) for a gap of 214 years. *Chosŏn became a protectorate in 1905 but the monarch kept his throne.

King Louis-Philippe I of France (r. 1830-1848), a 6th generation descendant of King Louis XIII of France (r. 1610-1643), a gap of 183 years.

Potentially, very distant successions:

Prince Kan'in Kotohito (l. 1865-1945), a 15th generation descendant of Emperor Sukō (r. 1348-1351), who is regarded by the Japanese imperial household as a pretender for obscure reasons that I won't touch on. In that case, Prince Yorihito's last legitimate imperial ancestor was Sukō's grandfather, Emperor Go-Fushimi (r. 1298–1301). Adopted as a possible successor to Emperor Meiji.

Louis Antoine, Duke of Enghien (l. 1772-1804), an 18th generation descendant of King Louis IX (r. 1226-1270). Possible successor to the French throne after the Orleanist line through the Conde line.

Louis François Joseph, Prince of Conti (1734-1814), a 16th generation descendant of King Louis IX (r. 1226-1270). Also a possible successor to the French throne, though I didn't look to see if the Conti line is senior to the Conde line.

What would be the most distant succession possible, and what would be the most distant succession historically? My suggestion would be the Japanese one. If Prince Yoshihito dies during childhood, and the Emperor Meiji has no other surviving sons, and the closer-related Arisugawa line dies out in 1911 and not 1913, then Prince Kotohito of the Fushimi line would take the throne. So let's say Emperor Meiji dies in 1912 as he did historically. That means when Kotohito takes the throne, it will have been 611 years since Kotohito's ancestors last reigned over all of Japan (Emperor Sukō ruled during a civil war over the Japanese throne).
 
Adolhpe, Grand Duke of Luxembourg was his predecessor's 17th cousin. One technicality though: their common 17th (?) grandfather wasn't the ruler of Luxembourg but of Nassau estates that eventually got traded away for Luxembourg.

Salic law sometimes creates this scenario... Other German realms will probably have lots of other examples.

Also, the rise of the Carignano branch to the Savoyard throne in the 19th century.
 
King Christian I of Denmark/Norway claimed by descent from Eric V Clipping, who had reigned two centuries earlier.
 
In terms of Korea:

Goguryeo: If counting from Jumong, who theoretically reigned from BC 37-BC 19 BC, Bojang (642-668) is a 21st generation descendant, according to the Samguk Sagi, translating into a gap of 661 years. However, the Gwanggaeto Stele implies that he would be a 25th generation descendant, as there is a difference of four generations between the two sources. If Taejo (53-146) is considered to be the first instead, the gap is 496 years, and if he is replaced with Micheon (300-331), the gap is 311 years.

Baekje: If starting with Soseono (BC 18-6; conjectured), Uija (641-660) is a 23rd generation descendant, which is equivalent to a gap of 647 years. If Onjo (BC 18/6-28 AD) is taken as the first legitimate ruler instead, the gap is 613 years, and if he is replaced with Geunchogo (346-75), who unified the Mahan statelets, the gap is 266 years.

Silla: The Samguk Sagi implies that Gyeongsun (927-35) is a 29th generation descendant of Bak Hyeokgeose (BC 57-4 AD), which theoretically translates into a gap of 923 years. However, this is extremely unlikely considering that power alternated among the Bak, Seok, and Kim clans for centuries, not to mention that Silla was not consolidated until the 4th century. If Naemul (356-402) is calculated as the first instead, there is a 525-year gap, and if he is replaced with Jijeung (500-14), the gap is 413 years.

Goryeo: Chang (1388-9) is a 17th generation descendant of Taejo (918-43), with a gap of 445 years. If ending with Wonjong (1259-74) instead, who was theoretically the last independent ruler before Gongmin (1351-74), the gap is 316 years, and if he is replaced with Uijong (1146-70), who reigned before the military coup, the gap is 203 years.

Joseon: Sunjong (1907-10) is a 20th generation descendant of Taejo (1392-8), which translates into a gap of 509 years, as Injo (1623-49) was Seonjo's (1567-1608) first grandson. The state also remained politically intact during the transfer from Seonjo to Gwanghaegun to Injo, not to mention other cases, such as Yeonsangun (1494-1506), who was deposed and replaced with Jungjong (1506-44), one of his half-brothers. If Gojong (1863-1907) is viewed as the last legitimate ruler instead, the gap is 465 years.
 
Henry VII Tudor was the great-great-great-grandson of King Edward III, tracing through a bastard grandson. He was the second cousin once removed of his predecessor Edward IV. He was, however, the half-nephew of King Henry VI, which probably made him seem slightly closer to the throne than he was in actuality.

The Capetians also secured (legitimized?) their hold on the French throne by marrying descendants of the Carolingian dynasty.
 
Or William IV Prince of Orange from William III?

William III and William IV were descended respectively from William the Silent and his brother John. Their earliest common dynastic ancestor was William the Rich of Nassau Dillenberg. There were three intermediate generations between William the Rich and William III, five between William the Rich and William IV.
 
In terms of Korea:

Goguryeo: If counting from Jumong, who theoretically reigned from BC 37-BC 19 BC, Bojang (642-668) is a 21st generation descendant, according to the Samguk Sagi, translating into a gap of 661 years. However, the Gwanggaeto Stele implies that he would be a 25th generation descendant, as there is a difference of four generations between the two sources. If Taejo (53-146) is considered to be the first instead, the gap is 496 years, and if he is replaced with Micheon (300-331), the gap is 311 years.

Baekje: If starting with Soseono (BC 18-6; conjectured), Uija (641-660) is a 23rd generation descendant, which is equivalent to a gap of 647 years. If Onjo (BC 18/6-28 AD) is taken as the first legitimate ruler instead, the gap is 613 years, and if he is replaced with Geunchogo (346-75), who unified the Mahan statelets, the gap is 266 years.

Silla: The Samguk Sagi implies that Gyeongsun (927-35) is a 29th generation descendant of Bak Hyeokgeose (BC 57-4 AD), which theoretically translates into a gap of 923 years. However, this is extremely unlikely considering that power alternated among the Bak, Seok, and Kim clans for centuries, not to mention that Silla was not consolidated until the 4th century. If Naemul (356-402) is calculated as the first instead, there is a 525-year gap, and if he is replaced with Jijeung (500-14), the gap is 413 years.

Goryeo: Chang (1388-9) is a 17th generation descendant of Taejo (918-43), with a gap of 445 years. If ending with Wonjong (1259-74) instead, who was theoretically the last independent ruler before Gongmin (1351-74), the gap is 316 years, and if he is replaced with Uijong (1146-70), who reigned before the military coup, the gap is 203 years.

Joseon: Sunjong (1907-10) is a 20th generation descendant of Taejo (1392-8), which translates into a gap of 509 years, as Injo (1623-49) was Seonjo's (1567-1608) first grandson. The state also remained politically intact during the transfer from Seonjo to Gwanghaegun to Injo, not to mention other cases, such as Yeonsangun (1494-1506), who was deposed and replaced with Jungjong (1506-44), one of his half-brothers. If Gojong (1863-1907) is viewed as the last legitimate ruler instead, the gap is 465 years.

Most of these don't work. Yes, there's substantial distance between the ruler and the founder, but there's not much distance in the succession, and this thread is about distant successions.

King Pojang: A 2nd generation descendant of King Yŏngyang, for a total of one generation removed.

King Ŭija: The son of King Mu, so he's the first generation, for a total of zero generations removed.

King Kyŏngsun: The 6th generation descendant of King Munsŏng, so this is legitimately distant, but hardly record-breaking when you look at the 17 generations between Grand Dukes William III and Adolphe of Luxembourg.

King Chang: The son of King U, so he's the first generation, for a total of zero generations removed.

King/Emperor Sunjong: The son of Kojong, so he's the first generation, for a total of zero generations removed.

But, and this is for the thread as a whole, looking at the king list of Silla led me to one King Sindŏk (r. 912-917), a reported descendant of King Adalla (r. 154–184, ipse dixit). However, this moves into semi-mythical territory. If we take it at face value, is it even more distant than the gap between William III and Adolphe of Luxembourg?

So I did the math: Henry II, Count of Nassau, ruled his domain between 1198-1247, singularly from 1239. So that's a gap of 643 years between when Henry II in Nassau until Adolphe became Grand Duke of Luxembourg, but as mentioned earlier, Henry II never ruled Luxembourg, so it might not be considered succession in the same state, as I had mentioned earlier.

Still, King Sindŏk's succession, if taken at face value, would be a gap of 728 years, and probably more distant in generations than the gap between William III and Adolphe. But King Adalla's can't be simply taken at face value. Amongst other things, a state of Silla isn't explicitly mentioned in contemporary historical records for his reign. But, I'd hesitate to say that this figure was completely fictional, and that the later Kyŏngsun wasn't actually descended from him. I don't know, maybe Adalla was some minor chieftain of a Chinhan state who did exist in the 1st or 2nd or 3rd century, and thus it's not succession in the same state either. Thus, I'll categorize this as possibly being the most distant succession I've encountered, but not one that can be proved soon.
 
Most of these don't work. Yes, there's substantial distance between the ruler and the founder, but there's not much distance in the succession, and this thread is about distant successions.

King Pojang: A 2nd generation descendant of King Yŏngyang, for a total of one generation removed.

King Ŭija: The son of King Mu, so he's the first generation, for a total of zero generations removed.

King Kyŏngsun: The 6th generation descendant of King Munsŏng, so this is legitimately distant, but hardly record-breaking when you look at the 17 generations between Grand Dukes William III and Adolphe of Luxembourg.

King Chang: The son of King U, so he's the first generation, for a total of zero generations removed.

King/Emperor Sunjong: The son of Kojong, so he's the first generation, for a total of zero generations removed.

But, and this is for the thread as a whole, looking at the king list of Silla led me to one King Sindŏk (r. 912-917), a reported descendant of King Adalla (r. 154–184, ipse dixit). However, this moves into semi-mythical territory. If we take it at face value, is it even more distant than the gap between William III and Adolphe of Luxembourg?

So I did the math: Henry II, Count of Nassau, ruled his domain between 1198-1247, singularly from 1239. So that's a gap of 643 years between when Henry II in Nassau until Adolphe became Grand Duke of Luxembourg, but as mentioned earlier, Henry II never ruled Luxembourg, so it might not be considered succession in the same state, as I had mentioned earlier.

Still, King Sindŏk's succession, if taken at face value, would be a gap of 728 years, and probably more distant in generations than the gap between William III and Adolphe. But King Adalla's can't be simply taken at face value. Amongst other things, a state of Silla isn't explicitly mentioned in contemporary historical records for his reign. But, I'd hesitate to say that this figure was completely fictional, and that the later Kyŏngsun wasn't actually descended from him. I don't know, maybe Adalla was some minor chieftain of a Chinhan state who did exist in the 1st or 2nd or 3rd century, and thus it's not succession in the same state either. Thus, I'll categorize this as possibly being the most distant succession I've encountered, but not one that can be proved soon.

Never mind, then, as I misread your initial post. However, I found other potentially distant successions as well:

Silla: The Samguk Sagi states that Seondeok (780-5; not to be confused with Queen Seondeok) was a 10th generation descendant of Naemul (356-402), which would be a gap of 378 years. Although Seondeok was also the son of one of Seongdeok's (702-37) daughters, descent was not traced from females at the time with few exceptions.

Seondeok's successor, Wonseong (785-98), was also a 12th generation descendant of Naemul, which implies a gap of 383 years. He was also descended from Jijeung (500-14) as well, although the passage within the Samguk Sagi indicating his descent from Naemul suggests that the succession had been calculated in a different manner.

Munseong and Gyeongsun's distance is another minor option, as you stated, as the latter is a 6th generation descendant with a gap of 70 years.

Balhae: If Dae Jungsang, Go's (698-719) father, is assumed to be the first de facto ruler, then Seon (818-30) was a 5th generation descendant, implying a gap of 120 years.

Goryeo: Gongyang (1389-92) was a 7th generation descendant of Sinjong (1197-1204), which is a gap of 185 years. If Uijong (1146-1170) is assumed to be the last independent ruler before Gongmin, due to the military coup, then Gongyang was a 8th generation descendant of Injong (1122-1146), with a gap of 243 years.

Joseon: You already mentioned Injo and Gojong, so there is no reason to repeat it.

There may be other significant gaps when multiple states are taken into account, such as Muryeong of Baekje (501-23) and Kammu of Japan (781-806), or a gap of 258 years.
 
Just looked through Wikipedia again, for the fun of it, and I noticed something:

The House of Braganza, which ruled Portugal, was descended from Robert II of France, who was also ancestor of the Bourbons. However, they apparently stem from an illegitimate line. Going with my earlier idea, with the French Bourbon, Orleans, Conde, and Conti families being wiped out by the French Revolution, I think there are literally only two lines of Capetians still around: the Spanish Bourbons and the Portuguese Braganzas. In that case, imagine if John VI of Portugal, who took the Portuguese throne in 1816, attempted to claim the French throne, based on the fact that his (and I counted but may have mssed up) great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather (greatx21) was Robert II of France, and Robert II was the great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather (greatx22) of Charles X, the last of Henry IV's descendants. Robert II ruled 996 to 1031, so if John VI claimed the throne, it would be a gap of almost 800 years.

This would never happen, but it's currently the most distant succession that could be considered reliably documented.
There may be other significant gaps when multiple states are taken into account, such as Muryeong of Baekje (501-23) and Kammu of Japan (781-806), or a gap of 258 years.
What? That's not even the same country and I don't think the latter succeeded to the throne on account of his descent from the former.

EDIT: Well, you said multiple states, but that's not based on succession by birthright, so my point stands.
 
Last edited:
Just looked through Wikipedia again, for the fun of it, and I noticed something:

The House of Braganza, which ruled Portugal, was descended from Robert II of France, who was also ancestor of the Bourbons. However, they apparently stem from an illegitimate line. Going with my earlier idea, with the French Bourbon, Orleans, Conde, and Conti families being wiped out by the French Revolution, I think there are literally only two lines of Capetians still around: the Spanish Bourbons and the Portuguese Braganzas. In that case, imagine if John VI of Portugal, who took the Portuguese throne in 1816, attempted to claim the French throne, based on the fact that his (and I counted but may have mssed up) great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather (greatx21) was Robert II of France, and Robert II was the great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather (greatx22) of Charles X, the last of Henry IV's descendants. Robert II ruled 996 to 1031, so if John VI claimed the throne, it would be a gap of almost 800 years.

This would never happen, but it's currently the most distant succession that could be considered reliably documented.

What? That's not even the same country and I don't think the latter succeeded to the throne on account of his descent from the former.

EDIT: Well, you said multiple states, but that's not based on succession by birthright, so my point stands.

But then again, as you say, they stem from an illegitimate line. French Succession-wise is as if they didn't exist, like candidates that descend from a female line.

Unless you'd have the pope to retroactively legitimize the two successive bastard generations that created the Braganças. Papal legitimization post-mortem is something I have never heard of though. And I don't know if the French cared about that kind of legitimization.
 
But then again, as you say, they stem from an illegitimate line. French Succession-wise is as if they didn't exist, like candidates that descend from a female line.

Unless you'd have the pope to retroactively legitimize the two successive bastard generations that created the Braganças. Papal legitimization post-mortem is something I have never heard of though. And I don't know if the French cared about that kind of legitimization.
I don't think a succession of the Bourbons by the Braganzas was likely, so you're right. On the other hand, it's the type of idea that can be held in reserve. Maybe in some other timeline, as a result of the butterfly effect, France's Salic Law is never promulgated and bastards are allowed to succeed to the throne. Then this massively distant succession could happen.

More ideas:

I was looking at dynastic family trees on Wikipedia and noticed that Haile Selassie is rather distantly related to some previous Ethiopian monarchs. I don't know the specifics of Ethiopian dynastic succession. But of the family that produced Haile Selassie, there's another line solely in the male line stemming from Haile Selassie's grand-uncle. Perhaps, if Haile Selassie had no children, the succession could go to this guy. That would be 14 generations and about 430 years since the last member of their family to rule Ethiopia.
 
I had some fun in this timeline with French succession with a POD of 1631 (Louis XII's wife dies in childbirth) - I didn't have to have too many people die off for the Courtenays to take power a few decades later; they were descendants of the last son of Louis VI and were always trying to gain title as Princes of the Blood OTL but never did. (Frankly, I think I had the final French King, Le Grande Conde, wait too long - I imply that he kept trying to drag concessions out of them but I think he would name them Princes of the Blood in the scenario I paint int he late 1660s.)

So, the Courtenays wound up taking the throne in 1670, 533 years after the reign of their common ancestor to the previous rulers, but I'm not sure how many generations that is becasue I'm not finding the French list of their genealogy in the handy table that was linked when i did the TL. I know it was a lot, though. (If someone has time to look at the genealogy that is linked on Wikipedia theyc an find it.)
 
If instead of the Courtenays the Lorrainers inherited, that'd be one hell of a distant succession.

If Edward Stafford, 3rd Duke of Buckingham, had succeeded in toppling the Tudors off the throne that'd also be rather distant a succession.
 
I had some fun in this timeline with French succession with a POD of 1631 (Louis XII's wife dies in childbirth) - I didn't have to have too many people die off for the Courtenays to take power a few decades later; they were descendants of the last son of Louis VI and were always trying to gain title as Princes of the Blood OTL but never did. (Frankly, I think I had the final French King, Le Grande Conde, wait too long - I imply that he kept trying to drag concessions out of them but I think he would name them Princes of the Blood in the scenario I paint int he late 1660s.)

So, the Courtenays wound up taking the throne in 1670, 533 years after the reign of their common ancestor to the previous rulers, but I'm not sure how many generations that is becasue I'm not finding the French list of their genealogy in the handy table that was linked when i did the TL. I know it was a lot, though. (If someone has time to look at the genealogy that is linked on Wikipedia theyc an find it.)
I looked it up on French Wikipedia: Charles-Roger's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather was Louis VI, so there's thirteen generations between him and his last royal ancestor. Charles-Roger seems to have been the last adult male of the last generation of the Courtenays, though the family seems to have died out with the death of Charles-Roger's uncle, an abbot presumably without children.

If instead of the Courtenays the Lorrainers inherited, that'd be one hell of a distant succession.

If Edward Stafford, 3rd Duke of Buckingham, had succeeded in toppling the Tudors off the throne that'd also be rather distant a succession.
Does the House of Lorraine even share a male ancestor with the Boubons?

Oh, and the latter is only the great-great-great-great-grandson of a king, in contrast.
 
Maximilian III Joseph of Bavaria was succeeded by his 13th cousin, once removed, Charles Theodore, in 1777. Their last male-line common ancestor, Duke Louis II, died in 1294.
 
King/Emperor Kojong of Chosŏn (r. 1863-1907*), a 9th generation descendant of King Injo (r. 1623–1649) for a gap of 214 years. *Chosŏn became a protectorate in 1905 but the monarch kept his throne.
Technically adopted by his predecessor but yes, quite distantly related and resulted in bizarre politics of having the king's father having an important role in politics during his reign.
 
William, Duke of Brunswick, was the last member of the House of Brunswick-Wolfenbuttel.
When he died in 1884 the nearest heirs to the duchy were in the Brunswick-Kalenburg (or Hanoverian) lineage, specifically -- due to how Salic Law worked in the relevant dynasties -- the branch of this that was descended from Queen Victoria's uncle Ernest Augustus (Duke of Cumberland and, after 1837, King of Hanover). The duchy should have passed to Ernest Augustus's son & successor George the Blind, who had been deposed as King of Hanover nearly twenty years earlier when Prussia annexed that state (amongst others) after the Asutro-Prussian War, but he and his own son Ernest Augustus were so [understandably] anti-Prussian that the Prussians arranged for Brunswick to be governed by "Regents" instead and it was only when Ernest-Augustus's son (who rather confusingly bore that same name) married a Prussian princess in 1913 that --although his father was still alive, and legally ahead of him in the line of succession -- they actually relinquished control to this prince.
Ernest Augustus (the younger), Duke of Brunswick, was an eighth cousin twice removed of the late Duke William, and became Duke in this way approximately (I can't find my notes...) 250 years after the death of the mutual ancestor through whom this line of inheritance passed.
And then in 1918, after only five years as Duke, Ernest Augustus -- just like all of the other German princes -- had to abdicate...
 
Top