This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
!! <slap to forehead, otherwise known as the translator's salute>. Fixed. Next time, fix it yourself (and save me the embarrassment of sticking my foot in my mouth! <g>). Best regards Jersey_Jim04:02, 20 December 2005 (UTC)Reply
So following your convention, Victoria herself was not a Welf as the real house of Welf became extinct in 1055 when Welf died childless. The son of his sister took his name. So yea why not consider Victoria's children as Welf when she was considered as Welf ?86.206.184.13 (talk) 15:50, 30 December 2009 (UTC)Reply
agnatically, you're 100% correct. but edward vii officially was a wettin, not a welf, as prince albert was from the house of wettin. this is a common, well accepted principle behind the naming of all european noble and royal/imperial houses. it's this little thing called 'salic law' however, this principle is very occasionally violated, as with the 'welfs' who were actually of the house of este. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.130.48 (talk) 21:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
what Chl Chl said is that one belongs to the dynasty of one's father. Victoria's father was a Welf. The House of Welf did not go extinct, it just lost the British throne. Also, it should be noted that the ruling dynasty of UK was a cadet branch of Welfs, the house of Hanover, which I believe are the remaining Welfs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.44.209 (talk) 03:50, 7 May 2011 (UTC)Reply
"what Chl Chl said is that one belongs to the dynasty of one's father." Trouble is as you said it yourself, Victoria ancestors were not Welf (in a strict sense) as they were from the House of Este, Welf IV and (I of Bavaria) inherited House of Welf's lands from his maternal uncle (the last of the real House of Welf) so there was no paternal link. It does mean Victoria's father dynasty in its old fashioned name was Este and not Welf.92.157.236.160 (talk) 23:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I notice the usual conundrum in German articles - the random applications of either traditional German or Anglicized names. I notice Heinrich von Saxony is 'Henry', but Georg and Wilhelm aren't George or William. Does this seem inconsistant to anyone else? LTC David J. Cormier (talk) 20:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
While the Saxon steed was part of, and still is, the arms of the Welfs, it actually was only part of the arms of the Hanoverian cadet branch. The lions are more associated with the welf family and the two lions passant have been used by Welfs since Otto IV. Would it not be a better picture? 71.194.44.209 (talk) 04:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
He was the last king of Hanover, as his reign ended with the Unification of Germany.
Hanôver annexed to the German Empire
Er no, Hanover was annexed to the kingdom of Prussia a few years before the erection of the German Empire (of which Hanover would likely have been a member even if not for the annexation). – By the way, where did that circumflex come from? —Tamfang (talk) 22:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply