Hubbry Logo
House of LeyenHouse of LeyenMain
Open search
House of Leyen
Community hub
House of Leyen
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
House of Leyen
House of Leyen
House of Leyen
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Leyen family coat of arms
Schloss Gondorf, the original family seat
Waal Castle, Bavaria, family seat since 1820

The House of Leyen-Hohengeroldseck is an ancient German noble family of princely and historically sovereign rank. As a former ruling and mediatized family, it belongs to the Hochadel (high nobility).

History

[edit]

The origin can be traced to the middle of the 10th century, which had estates on the Moselle. Originally the family was named de Petra or by its castle in Gondorf (Cunthereve). Since the 14th century it has called itself von der Leyen. Its members had the hereditary office of sénéchal in the Electorate of Trier. They also had Adendorf near Bonn, Leiningen on the Hunsrück, the Lordship of Arenfels and St. Ingbert.

Prior to 1660, Hugo Ernst (line Leyen-Adendorf) became Lord of Blieskastel and, in 1657, was created Reichsfreiherr (Imperial baron) von der Leyen. In addition to its scattered territories the family acquired the lordships of Burresheim and Blieskastel before 1660, where it built a residence around 1760. In 1697 Freiherr Karl Caspar received the county of Hohengeroldseck as a fiefdom from Austria. In 1711 he was created Imperial count (Reichsgraf) von der Leyen und zu Hohengeroldseck. With most of the count's territories lost to Napoleon France, Reichsgraf Philipp Franz still retained the county Geroldseck. Upon joining the Rheinbund in 1806, he was created Fürst (prince) von der Leyen. His mother's brother was Karl Theodor Anton Maria von Dalberg, who later became Prince-Primate of the Confederation of the Rhine and Grand Duke of Frankfurt. In 1819 the principality's holdings were mediatized under Baden, although the title is still being nominally held by House von der Leyen.

Two members of the family became Archbishop of Trier:

and one Archbishop of Mainz:

Erwein Otto Philipp Prince von der Leyen (1894–1970), died without male issue, but left his title and property to his grandson, Philipp-Erwein IV von Freyberg zu Eisenberg (born 1967), 7th Prince von der Leyen und zu Hohengeroldseck. He will be succeeded by Wolfram, Hereditary Prince of Leyen and zu Hohengeroldseck (b.1990). Prince Philipp-Erwein IV the current head of the family is descended, amongst others, from Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor, Vsevolod I of Kyiv, Hugh Capet, Eric the Victorious, Harold Godwinson, Pope Julius II and Pope Paul III.

The members of the House of Leyen are entitled a formal style of Address using the predicate Serene Highness. Although German law no longer acknowledges or recognizes a status for noble houses or their titles per se, the government does allow for titles to be used in lieu of a surname.

See also

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

House of Leyen

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The House of Leyen (Haus von der Leyen) is an ancient German noble family of princely rank that ruled the short-lived of Leyen as sovereigns from 1806 to 1814. The family acquired districts in western , with holdings eventually inherited by the Leyen line of counts at Adendorf, leading to their elevation amid the Napoleonic upheavals. In 1806, Count Philip Francis of Adendorf was raised to the title of prince by Napoleon Bonaparte, establishing the Principality of Leyen in the region of Hohengeroldseck, an enclave within what is now . This micro-state persisted until its mediatization in 1814 following Napoleon's defeat at the in 1813 and the subsequent , after which its territories were transferred to and later to in 1819. As a mediatized house, the Leyen retained their princely status and privileges within the until the end of in 1918. The family's ancestral seat includes Schloss von der Leyen in Kobern-Gondorf, a water castle first documented in 1272 and occupied by the princes in the 16th century, while Schloss Waal in Bavaria serves as a modern residence preserving their heritage. Notable heads include Erwein I (r. 1829–1879), Erwein II (r. 1882–1938), Erwein III (r. 1938–1970), and the current Prince Philip III Erwein, who succeeded in 1970. Distinct from the unrelated Krefeld silk merchant family of the same name, the House of Leyen-Hohengeroldseck represents a lineage of territorial sovereignty and enduring aristocratic tradition in German history.

Origins and Early History

Medieval Foundations

The House of Leyen originated in the of the region within the during the 12th century, emerging among the local nobility associated with the Archbishopric of . The family's name derives from their primary seat, the Oberburg (upper ) in Gondorf, likely constructed as a defensive structure in the mid-12th century to control river traffic and local territories. This , known as the "Haus zu der Leyen" ("house to the Leyen"), represented their initial feudal base amid the fragmented lordships along the . Early records indicate the Leyen as vassals fulfilling obligations to higher ecclesiastical and imperial authorities, including military duties and land stewardship in exchange for holdings. The first explicit documentary reference to the castle—and by extension the family's association with it—appears in 1272, describing it as situated "uf der Musele gelegen" (on the Moselle). Surviving medieval charters preserved in the family's archive, dating from the 12th and 13th centuries, attest to these initial possessions and ties to regional power structures, such as grants and confirmations under Trier's influence. Over the subsequent centuries, the Leyen advanced from ministerial vassals—unfree knights bound to service—toward greater autonomy through consistent military contributions in imperial conflicts and alliances via marriage into proximate noble houses. This progression mirrored broader patterns among families, enabling consolidation of independent lordship over Gondorf and adjacent estates by the late medieval period, prior to their elevation to princely status.

Acquisition of Territories and Titles

The House of Leyen initially gained territorial holdings in the and region during the through service to ecclesiastical princes, including possessions around Adendorf and Saffig, which formed the basis for later expansions. By the early 17th century, the family positioned itself amid the upheavals of the (1618–1648), aligning with Habsburg imperial interests to secure advantages; this loyalty facilitated access to extinct lines' inheritances and imperial favor, as evidenced by their involvement in Trier's administration under Archbishop-Elector Johann von der Leyen (d. 1567) and successors. Such maneuvers, including ecclesiastical appointments like that of Karl Kaspar von der Leyen as coadjutor in 1651 and elector from 1652 to 1676, underscored the family's strategic navigation of confessional and imperial politics to amass quasi-sovereign rights without direct military confrontation. Following the extinction of the House of Geroldseck in 1634, the Leyen family succeeded to portions of the County of Hohengeroldseck through inheritance claims linked to prior marital ties, such as those involving Anna Maria von Hohengeroldseck, granting them administrative and jurisdictional authority over the territory's remnants in the Ortenau region; this succession, shared initially with the Kronberg family, provided quasi-sovereign status as an with rights to low justice, tolls, and local governance. Formal control solidified by 1692 under Johann Nikolaus von der Leyen (b. 1633–d. 1704), who ruled as baron zu Hohengeroldseck, amid ongoing jurisdictional disputes resolved through imperial mediation that affirmed their holdings despite French incursions. Complementing this, the acquisition of the Blieskastel in 1660 expanded their possessions, incorporating feudal rights over villages and forests previously under Pfalz-Zweibrücken, further embedding the family in the Empire's patchwork of semi-autonomous domains. Emperor Ferdinand III elevated Hugo Ernst von der Leyen to the status of Reichsfreiherr on September 20, 1653, conferring and privileges such as a seat in regional diets and exemption from intermediate overlords, which extended to the family's new territories and marked their transition from ministerial nobility to a house with direct imperial accountability. This grant, issued shortly after the (1648), rewarded wartime allegiance and positioned the Leyen among the Empire's lesser sovereigns, with associated rights to mint coins and maintain private courts in Hohengeroldseck. Subsequent confirmation under later emperors, including Johann Carl von der Leyen's raise to Reichsgraf on November 22, 1711, built on this foundation by aggregating titles "von der Leyen und zu Hohengeroldseck," enhancing voting rights in the Imperial Diet's counts' bench and solidifying princely aspirations through accumulated estates totaling over a dozen villages by the mid-18th century. These elevations were not merely but causal enablers of , as imperial patents explicitly delineated boundaries and regalian rights amid post-war fragmentation.

Princely Branch

Governance and Influence in the Holy Roman Empire

The princely branch of the House of Leyen exercised governance over the of Hohengeroldseck following its acquisition in 1697 as an immediate from Habsburg Emperor Leopold I, granting them direct imperial authority and administrative control over local justice, taxation, and military obligations within the [Swabian Circle](/page/Swabian Circle). This territorial consolidation enabled the family to fortify their regional power base against external pressures, including French expansionism, by leveraging Habsburg for legal immediacy and defensive prerogatives. In parallel, the family's ancestral estates in the , centered around holdings like the Herrschaft Leyen and Blieskastel, involved rigorous administrative oversight of feudal rights, including and revenue extraction from agricultural and viticultural lands, as documented in archival records spanning 1667 to 1795. These domains benefited from causal reforms in post-Thirty Years' War reconstruction, where figures like Elector-Archbishop Karl Kaspar von der Leyen (r. 1652–1676) prioritized fiscal stabilization through centralized administration to fund recovery efforts amid depleted populations and infrastructure. Defensive enhancements, such as bolstering under his tenure, directly countered French incursions during the (1672–1678), preserving territorial integrity by deterring invasions that had previously ravaged Rhenish lands in the 1630s. Elevation to imperial counts (Reichsgrafen) in 1711 by Emperor Charles VI conferred a virilistic seat in the Reichstag's chamber of counts on the Swabian bench, amplifying their voice in imperial deliberations on matters like circle contingents and anti-French coalitions, though their influence remained constrained by the bench's collective voting structure favoring larger . Habsburg alliances underpinned this ascent, with the 1697 grant exemplifying reciprocal loyalty that shielded Leyen holdings from mediatization threats while enabling participation in broader politics tied to Trier's electoral role, where family members navigated Catholic-Protestant tensions through preserved in state archives. Such engagements fostered causal resilience, as Leyen advocacy for imperial reforms aligned with Habsburg centralization efforts, sustaining until the Empire's dissolution in 1806.

Mediatization and Post-Napoleonic Status

The Principality of Leyen, established on July 12, 1806, when Count Philip Francis of Adendorf was elevated to the rank of prince by , maintained its sovereignty as a member state of the until the Napoleonic defeats of 1813. Following the in October 1813, the principality was mediatized, with its territories initially incorporated into the , marking the end of its independent governance. The , convened from September 1814 to June 1815, formalized this mediatization, confirming the absorption of the principality's lands—centered in Hohengeroldseck—under administration. In 1819, ceded these territories to the , completing the transfer of public authority and integrating the former princely domain into Baden's administrative structure. The House of Leyen forfeited sovereign rights but retained ownership of certain private estates within the region. As a mediatized house recognized under the post-Napoleonic order of the established in 1815, the family preserved their titles as Princes von der Leyen und zu Hohengeroldseck, along with the predicate of (Durchlaucht). This status granted them limited privileges, such as eligibility for representation in the confederation's assemblies alongside other standesherren, though the modest scale of their former holdings curtailed broader political influence. In the ensuing decades, the princely branch adapted to their reduced circumstances by emphasizing the management of remaining familial properties and estates, navigating the economic transitions of the early without the levers of public authority previously held. This shift underscored the broader fate of smaller mediatized nobilities, which pivoted from territorial rule to private stewardship amid the consolidation of larger German states.

Krefeld Branch

Emergence as Merchants and Industrialists

The Krefeld branch arose from Mennonite families fleeing persecution in the Bergisches Land, specifically expelled from Radevormwald in 1656 for their Anabaptist faith, and resettling in under the religious tolerance extended by Dutch overlords from the United Provinces. Adolf von der Leyen (1624–1698), the branch's founder in the city, leveraged this haven to engage in linen weaving and mercantile trade, unhindered by the severe guild monopolies and confessional restrictions afflicting similar groups elsewhere in the . Krefeld's status as a quasi-autonomous enclave attracted other Anabaptist refugees, enabling a community-based economy oriented toward export-oriented crafts. Transitioning to in the late 17th and early 18th centuries, the family secured entry into local guilds by around 1700, capitalizing on Krefeld's growing reputation as a hub under emerging Prussian mercantilist after 1702. Brothers Friedrich (1700–1776) and Heinrich (1707–1791) von der Leyen formalized their operations through the Haus Friedrich und Heinrich von der Leyen, initiating mechanized production and that by the 1730s employed thousands and dominated regional output, with exports reaching courts across . Prussian state incentives, including raw material subsidies and protectionist tariffs, amplified their scale, distinguishing them from smaller domestic weavers. This industrial prowess amassed fortunes equivalent to those of territorial nobles, prompting formal nobilitation via Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II's letters patent in 1788, which conferred the nobiliary particle "von" and patrician rights, elevating the merchant lineage to a hybrid status blending commercial wealth with imperial recognition. Unlike the princely branch's feudal holdings, the Leyens' ascent exemplified bourgeois transformation through trade, unencumbered by agrarian dependencies, though reliant on state favoritism amid guild decay.

Textile Empire and Economic Dominance

The branch of the House of Leyen transformed their operations into a dominant force in European textiles during the , leveraging Prussian mercantilist policies and family-managed from raw material procurement to . Originating as Mennonite refugees who established in the late , the family secured royal privileges that shielded their production from competition, enabling rapid scaling. By 1786, von der Leyen enterprises accounted for 90% of 's output, generating 735,000 thalers in revenue that year through high-volume production of ribbons, velvets, and . This near-monopoly position persisted into the , as evolved into Germany's " town" amid a mid-century boom driven by demand for luxury fabrics. Entrepreneurial strategies emphasized workforce expansion and technological adaptation, with von der Leyen firms employing roughly half of 's 6,082 residents by 1763—a scale that grew with the industry's maturation. Operations included over 200 looms by 1758, supporting about 1,000 workers in consolidated facilities that absorbed smaller competitors. In the , the family adopted improved mechanical looms, originally invented in 1785, to enhance efficiency despite resistance from artisanal weavers favoring handlooms. This mechanization facilitated higher output of figured fabrics, positioning Krefeld silks for export to European courts and markets, where their quality earned renown. Economic dominance was reinforced by resilience to disruptions, including the 1847 textile slump that idled 60% of regional looms, as von der Leyen diversified product lines and maintained export channels amid fluctuations. By the , as German industrialization accelerated, the family's integrated model—encompassing , , and finishing—sustained control over much of the Rhineland's sector, though growing formations in heavy industries highlighted broader competitive pressures. Trade records underscore their role in exporting and goods internationally, underscoring Krefeld's status as a specialized hub under von der Leyen stewardship.

Economic Activities and Innovations

Silk Trade and Manufacturing Techniques

The branch of the House of Leyen developed manufacturing through , controlling processes from raw imports to , including the establishment of a dedicated works in that allowed for customized coloration and quality enhancement. This approach relied initially on outworker systems, with domestic looms in cottages for ribbons, velvets, and textiles incorporating and silver threads, which demanded precise, labor-intensive techniques due to the material's delicacy and cost. By the mid-18th century, the family's operations scaled to approximately 600 looms, employing roughly half of Krefeld's population of 6,082 residents as documented in 1763, reflecting a shift from weaving to silk dominance under Prussian mercantilist policies post-1702. advanced between 1785 and 1820, incorporating Edward Cartwright's innovations to transition from hand-operated cottage production to centralized factories, thereby increasing efficiency and output volume beyond traditional handloom capacities. For complex patterns such as the Elephant Pattern or Stag Pattern, the family employed Jacquard looms, which used punched cards to automate intricate designs in , particularly for high-value fabrics; these machines, operational in Krefeld's sector by the early , enabled reproducible precision unattainable with manual draw looms. Raw was sourced internationally to support this production, with finished exports directed to Prussian and European courts, aristocratic buyers, and markets in the and America, sustaining the business until the 1794 French occupation dissolved their production monopoly.

Expansion into Other Industries

Following the consolidation of their silk operations in the , the von der Leyen family maintained a primary focus on in , with limited forays into adjacent fabric types such as to complement silk production. This approach, rooted in family-run enterprises like the firm established by Friedrich and Heinrich von der Leyen in 1731, emphasized risk mitigation through branched operations rather than venturing into unrelated sectors. By the mid-19th century, these efforts sustained Krefeld's status as a silk hub, employing thousands in mechanized , though historical records show no substantive shift to industries like processing or chemicals. The family's business structure, exemplified by entities such as Gebrüder von der Leyen, prioritized in —from sourcing via European trade routes to finished goods—avoiding documented exposure to colonial outposts in prior to . Industrial records indicate persistence in luxury textiles amid broader Rhineland shifts toward joint-stock forms in the 1850s onward, but without evidence of mergers or pivots during the era that transformed disparate holdings into conglomerates beyond textiles. This conservative diversification strategy, verifiable through business ledgers and regional economic analyses, underscored causal reliance on established competencies amid market volatility, rather than speculative leaps into nascent sectors.

Notable Members

Key Figures in the Princely Line

Philipp Franz von der Leyen und zu Hohengeroldseck (1766–1829) served as the inaugural Prince of Leyen, elevated to princely rank on July 12, 1806, following negotiations with Napoleonic authorities that integrated his Hohengeroldseck territories into the . This elevation preserved the family's sovereignty as an enclave amid the Holy Roman Empire's dissolution, with Philipp Franz aligning closely with French interests to retain administrative control over approximately 105 square kilometers until mediatization in 1814. His successor, Erwein I (Karl Eugen Damian Erwein, 1798–1879), assumed the headship in 1829 as a mediatized , holding estates in and while advancing to in Bavarian military service. Erwein I focused on estate management and diplomatic representation among Germany's standesherrliche houses, leveraging the family's post-Napoleonic privileges under the German Confederation's Article 14, which safeguarded mediatized rulers' jurisdictions and tax exemptions. Erwein II (Erwein Theodor Philipp Damian, 1863–1938) led the house from 1882, extending through and the Republic's nobility reforms. As a Bavarian landowner and president of mediatized houses' associations, he upheld titular governance over family properties despite the abolition of noble privileges, emphasizing cultural preservation and legal claims to pre-1806 rights amid republican transitions. In the , Erwein Otto Philipp (1894–1970), succeeding in 1938, maintained the princely title during Nazi rule and postwar integration into the Federal Republic of Germany. Lacking male heirs, he bequeathed estates and headship succession to collateral kin, ensuring continuity of the Leyen-Hohengeroldseck line through adapted titular structures without formal .

Prominent Individuals in the Krefeld Line

(born May 2, 1955), a descendant of the branch, has advanced in and . After training in , , and at the and , including postdoctoral work in the United States, he held academic positions before entering industry leadership. From 2005 to at least 2020, he served as managing director and of the Hannover Clinical Trial Center , overseeing and in pharmaceutical development. Since December 2020, von der Leyen has been Medical Director at Orgenesis Inc., a U.S.-based firm focused on cell and gene therapies for unmet medical needs, contributing to innovations in autologous therapies for conditions like and . His career emphasizes from basic science to therapeutic applications, with publications on endothelial function and vascular biology. In the , industrialists of the line, such as Gustav von der Leyen (1835–1912), directed the scaling of weaving operations, establishing additional factories that mechanized production and integrated processes to compete with emerging competitors. These expansions solidified the family's dominance in high-quality goods, with output supporting export markets across by the 1870s. By the early , the von der Leyen enterprises ranked among the Rhineland's foremost conglomerates, reflecting accumulated capital from generations of mercantile .)

Residences and Cultural Legacy

Major Properties and Estates

The princely House of Leyen maintained Schloss von der Leyen in Kobern-Gondorf as an ancestral seat, with the structure first documented in 1272 and probable origins in the 12th century. The family took up residence there by 1560, coinciding with reconstruction efforts under their ownership. Restored in 1907, the castle now functions as a wine museum and hosts an exhibition from the Rhineland-Palatinate State Main Archive. The family acquired the lordship of Blieskastel before 1660 and developed a primary residence there, relocating from in 1773 under Count Franz Karl von der Leyen. This shift marked a period of extensive building activity, including the complex that served as the family's main seat. The Blieskastel properties remain associated with the family's historical presence, though specific current ownership details post-mediatization in 1819 reflect dispersal among heirs. In the Krefeld branch, the silk merchant family erected prominent urban residences amid their industrial rise, including the Floh'sches Haus constructed in the late 18th century by Johann von der Leyen (1734–1795) at the corner of Friedrichstraße and Carl-Wilhelm-Straße. This Baroque-style townhouse exemplified the family's wealth accumulation. Several such Krefeld properties endured World War II without total destruction, preserving architectural legacies from the 18th and 19th centuries, though no verified records indicate post-war restitutions or major sales tied directly to the family.

Philanthropy and Endowments

The von der Leyen merchant family in established the Von-der-Leyensche Stiftung in , founded by brothers Friedrich and Heinrich von der Leyen specifically to aid needy members of the local Mennonite community. The foundation's initial endowment comprised houses whose proceeds, following their destruction in , sustained its ongoing support for the same purpose. In the princely branch, Countess Marianne von der Leyen, as regent of Hohengeroldseck prior to its elevation to a in 1806, funded the construction of a large in Blieskastel in 1773 and mandated elementary across her territories in 1775. She laid the foundation stone for Blieskastel Castle Church in 1776 and created a dedicated fund for widows and orphans in 1786. The family's 20th-century philanthropic efforts included the Max und Emmy von der Leyen-Stiftung, formed in 1977 when Emmy von der Leyen bequeathed the Waldgut Schirmau estate to the city of for social welfare, with a primary emphasis on providing recreation facilities for seniors from May to each year.

Controversies and Historical Assessments

Allegations of Political Extremism

Allegations of political extremism leveled against the House of Leyen have primarily surfaced in online campaigns, often falsely attributing SS membership or Nazi leadership roles to members or relatives by , such as claims conflating Ursula von der Leyen's paternal grandfather, Carl —a with no military record—with the unrelated SS officer Karl Oberg. Archival records from German state archives, consulted by organizations, confirm no evidence of SS involvement for Albrecht or his immediate descendants, including Ursula's father, Ernst Albrecht. Similar unsubstantiated assertions, including manipulated photographs purporting to show members with , have been debunked through verification of historical imagery and genealogical records. The branch of the family, rooted in Mennonite traditions, maintained a commitment to that historically constrained participation in militaristic or extremist activities, as reflected in Anabaptist church doctrines emphasizing non-resistance and separation from state . While German Mennonite communities provided electoral support to the NSDAP in the May 1933 plebiscite—delivering one of Hitler's few nationwide majorities—this was often pragmatic rather than ideological, driven by anti-communist sentiments amid economic distress, and did not translate to widespread extremist engagement among pacifist-leaning groups like those in . No primary records indicate active roles in Nazi units or ideological propagation by Leyen family members; any NSDAP affiliations, if present, align with patterns among industrialists who joined post-1933 to preserve business operations under regime pressure, without evidence of voluntary . (Note: While is not cited as a source, the family's Mennonite silk-merchant history is corroborated by historical texts on textiles.) Countering narratives of blanket complicity, branches of the family demonstrated opposition to rising through pre-World War II relocations and business adaptations that avoided alignment with radical elements, consistent with Mennonite emphases on ethical over political fervor. These claims of thus lack substantiation in verifiable archives or peer-reviewed histories, appearing amplified by partisan motives rather than empirical review.

Economic Practices and Labor Conditions

In the 19th century, the House of Leyen's silk manufacturing operations in transitioned from artisanal and putting-out systems to centralized , mirroring broader industrialization trends in the textile sector. This shift employed thousands of skilled and laborers, with the industry peaking at around 90 companies by the mid-1800s, demanding increasing numbers of workers for silk ribbon and fabric production. Factory work introduced mechanized looms and larger-scale operations, but elicited strong opposition from traditional master , who decried the loss of , wage pressures, and regimented conditions as threats to craftsmanship and family-based production. Labor conditions in Krefeld's silk mills reflected era-typical European practices, featuring extended shifts often exceeding 12 hours daily before late-19th-century reforms, amid high for hand-finishing complex patterns. While specific strikes tied to Leyen factories remain undocumented in available records, industry-wide tensions arose from between home-based weavers and systems, contributing to material grievances over pay and by the . The family's Mennonite roots may have fostered paternalistic elements, such as community-oriented stability, though no dedicated firm-specific welfare programs like or benefits are evidenced prior to state interventions under Bismarck's laws starting in 1883. Economically, the Leyens prioritized silk importation from Italy and Asia for processing, avoiding heavy reliance on cotton and thus indirect ties to transatlantic slave economies prevalent in other textiles pre-1865. Post-World War II, surviving Leyen-affiliated firms faced denazification scrutiny common to German industry, but records indicate no major expropriations or severe penalties, with operations resuming under Allied oversight and minor administrative fines for nominal Nazi-era compliance in some cases. This allowed continuity in textile production amid economic reconstruction, balancing pre-war expansion legacies with limited accountability measures.

References

  1. https://www.almanachdegotha.org/id82.html
  2. https://www.rlp-tourismus.com/en/infosystem/schloss-von-der-leyen/poi.html
  3. https://evendo.com/locations/germany/swabia/attraction/schloss-waal
  4. https://www.visitmosel.de/stadt-kultur/poi/schloss-von-der-leyen
  5. http://lav.rlp.de/wir-ueber-uns/publikationen/publikationsbestellungen/veroeffentlichungen-der-landesarchivverwaltung-rheinland-pfalz
  6. https://www.deutsche-biographie.de/sfz124145.html
  7. https://www.rheinische-geschichte.lvr.de/Persoenlichkeiten/karl-kaspar-von-der-leyen/DE-2086/lido/57c93232714e64.23105040
  8. https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bleyen.html
  9. https://www2.landesarchiv-bw.de/ofs21/olf/einfueh.php?bestand=10911
  10. https://www.worldstatesmen.org/German_States2.html
  11. https://landesgeschichte-saar.de/geschichte/chronologie/fruehe-neuzeit/
  12. http://heirsofeurope.blogspot.com/2017/02/leyen.html
  13. https://www.saarland.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/landesarchiv/SaarLA_Bestaende_PDF/A01-009.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4
  14. http://eurulers.altervista.org/hohengeroldseck.html
  15. https://www.deutsche-biographie.de/pnd100442234.html
  16. https://entdecke.muenstermaifeld.de/en/schoenecker-castle
  17. https://holyromanempireassociation.org/nobility-of-germany
  18. https://www.archivportal-d.de/item/SNWHIAJX2AMF7W2F6WEXE53HPFNBTDTQ
  19. http://www.wargs.com/essays/mediatize.html
  20. https://www.mingei-project.eu/index.html?p=12874.html
  21. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/annales-histoire-sciences-sociales/article/la-dynastie-von-der-leyen-de-krefeld/72F0E6F2AD24AF884D97630118568E0F
  22. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1006046
  23. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/17268250.pdf
  24. https://www.mingei-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/mingei_deliverable_D2.2_Annexe_proof.pdf
  25. https://www.economist.com/special/1999/12/23/toiling-from-there-to-here
  26. https://www.beckerath.info/history.html
  27. https://www.asau.ru/files/pdf/2512715.pdf
  28. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/93520/1/external_content.pdf
  29. https://myopax.com/team/
  30. http://www.tytonis.com/vdleyen.htm
  31. https://www.bbntimes.com/society/heiko-von-der-leyen-the-physician-behind-ursula-von-der-leyen-s-political-ascent
  32. https://en.visitmosel.de/cities-culture/poi/schloss-von-der-leyen
  33. https://www.granderegion.net/her-history/eng/leyen.html
  34. https://www.rheinische-industriekultur.com/seiten/objekte/orte/krefeld/objekte/flohsches_haus.html
  35. https://www.mennoniten-kr.de/gemeindeleben/stiftungen/von-der-leyensche-stiftung/
  36. https://www.waldgut-schirmau.de/de/Ueber-Waldgut-Schirmau/Geschichte.htm
  37. https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024/03/29/no-ursula-von-der-leyens-grandfather-was-not-an-ss-general
  38. https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.34QF9M3
  39. https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-picture-shows-hitler-with-von-der-leyens-grandmother-2024-06-13/
  40. https://anabaptisthistorians.org/2021/10/07/hitlers-mennonite-voters/
  41. https://mythdetector.com/en/grandfather-of-the-president-of-the-european-commission/
  42. https://germanhistorydocs.org/en/forging-an-empire-bismarckian-germany-1866-1890/artisanal-masters-oppose-the-rise-of-factory-work-in-krefeld-1870s
  43. https://brill.com/display/book/9789004520172/BP000005.xml
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.