Basically you are correct.
And it is odd that D.MIGUEL I
, who P.Theroff recognizes as de facto
king of Portugal from 1828-1834, does not come in block letters neither with the numeral associated.
Despite there was no de facto other king Miguel it is usual (in Portugal) to give him the number and his son has it under brackets to distinguish him from his father.
Same way as his grandson and gr.grandson are sometimes referred to as D.Duarte (II) and D.Duarte (III).
Same as in France with Henri (V) - Chambord, or the present Luis (XX) Alfonso or in Spain where the late Count of Barcelona was styled as Juan (III), or even Britain with Cardinal Henry (IX) Stuart.
I've been trying to understand the presentation of this. Correct me if I'm wrong, but his scheme seems to be to list the names of all sovereigns and heads of houses in block letters, using lowercase letters for all the other names. However, if a person was/ is the head of a NON-reigning house, there is a qualifier: the said person's claim to headship of the dynasty must be an undisputed one, in order for the name to be presented in block letters.
Case in point: Crown Prince Rupprecht of Bavaria. Although he never reigned (characterized as "the greatest king Bavaria never had"), nobody has ever questioned or contested his claim to headship of the royal house of Wittelsbach. Accordingly, his name (like those of the enthroned kings who preceded him), is presented in block letters. Ditto for his son, heir, and successor, Albrecht.
However, if the succession is disputed (commonly the case in deposed dynasties), then block letters are reserved only for the reigning monarchs and the last undisputed head of the house. The other members have their names in lower case letters only -- including those of rival claimants to defunct thrones. This would characterize dynasties such as Russia and the Two Sicilies (in any house where there is no clear head, the author issues a disclaimer at the beginning explaining the nature of the succession dispute).
The names of all dynastic members are presented in bold font, whereas those of morganauts and illegitimate issue are not.
Only male-line descendants of sovereigns are presented, even if female succession is permitted. The names of female sovereigns and heads of houses will be presented in block letters, followed by the names of their male-line descendants. Cases in point: Spain, Portugal, Brazil, and Great Britain.
The exception is Prince Ferdinand of Bavaria (1884-1958), who moved to his wife's native land of Spain and settled there permanently -- even being granted the title Infante. Accordingly, his children by Infanta Maria Teresa are presented under the section of Spain, not Bavaria.
Also, in some houses which have adopted fully cognatic primogeniture as the succession law, the names of all the dynasts, in both the male and female lines of descent, are presented. Case in point: Belgium in 1991 amended the constitution to permit females to inherit the throne, granting them equal rights as males. So the names of Princess Astrid's children (who were all given Belgian royal titles when inserted into the succession) are presented.
Are all these observations correct?