The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #221  
Old 06-12-2010, 10:07 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 32
Unfortunately based on the information on RoyalArk website concerning the succession to the Throne of Georgia, the succession first goes to legitimate males, then if none then to illegitimate males and then and only then can the succession pass to legitimate female line then to illegitimate lines. Based on that the Princess Anna is NOT the heiress presumptive to the Georgian throne as there are still legitimate males alive in the Grouzinsky line, not sure about the illegitimate line. However should this line die out the Moukhransky branch of the Bagration family has numerous legitimate heirs. Based on the information a distant cousin, Prince Peter (born 1916) is heir presumptive to the Headship followed by his son, Prince Evgeny (born 1947). Upon their demise the Moukhransky line could and probably will be the Royal line by default, due to the Grouzinsky line dying out, unless their is an illegitimate line.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 06-13-2010, 04:11 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 3
Correct! Prince Peter is heir presumptive to the Gruzinsky line and this line cannot pass to Princess Anna. The ruling monarch in this line made a decree that prohibits women inheriting the throne even if there are no males, unless she is married to Bagrationi. End of.
Moukharansky line won't be Royal line by default.

There seems to be some confusion as to who is the present "Head" of Georgian Royal House. Truth is, no one.
Before Georgian Royal Houses were annexed into Russia, there were two of them.
Kingdom of Kartl-Kakheti (roughly, East Georgia, old Kingdom of Iberia) (Grouzinsky line)
Kingdom of Imereti (roughly, West Georgia, old Kingdom og Kolkheti)

Bagrationi-Mukhransky cannot claim Kingdom of Georgia. They had princedom of Kartli, ruling under and with the consent of King of Kartl-Kakheti. I don't see how they can suddenly "take away" half of the Kingdom from the present heirs! Mind you, not the half, entire Kingdom and the Kingdom of Imereti, as well and declare themselves to be the "head" of the Royal House of Georgia. Nonsense! Besides, there were other princedoms in Georgia, imagine if they all start claiming that this entitles them to put the claim to the whole Georgian Kingdom.

very interesting article on wikipedia
Treaty of Georgievsk
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search - Treaty of Georgievsk
A Georgian version preserved at the Georgian National Center of Manuscripts
Signed - Location July 24, 1783
The Treaty of Georgievsk (Russian: Георгиевский трактат, Georgievskiy traktat; Georgian: გეორგიევსკის ტრაქტატი, georgievskis trak'tati) was a bilateral treaty concluded between the Russian Empire and the east Georgian kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti on July 24, 1783. The treaty established Georgia as a protectorate of Russia, which guaranteed Georgia's territorial integrity and the continuation of its reigning Bagrationi dynasty in return for prerogatives in the conduct of Georgian foreign affairs. Georgia abjured any form of dependence on Persia or another power, and every new Georgian monarch would require the confirmation and investiture of the Russian tsar.

Terms
Under articles I, II, IV, VI and VII of the treaty’s terms, Russia’s empress became the official and sole suzerain of Kartli-Kakheti’s rulers, guaranteeing the Georgians’ internal sovereignty and territorial integrity, and promising to "regard their enemies as Her enemies" [1]. Each of the Georgian kingdom’s tsars would henceforth be obliged to swear allegiance to Russia’s emperors, to support Russia in war, and to have no diplomatic communications with other nations without Russia’s prior consent.
Given Georgia’s history of invasions from the south, an alliance with Russia may have been seen as the only way to discourage or resist Persian and Ottoman aggression, while also establishing a link to Western Europe.[2] In the past, Georgia’s kings had not only accepted formal domination by Turkish and Persian emperors, but had occasionally converted to Islam and sojourned at their capitals. Thus it was neither a break with Georgian tradition nor a unique capitulation of independence for Kartli-Kakheti to trade vassalage for peace with a powerful neighbor. However, in the treaty’s preamble and article VIII the bond of Orthodox Christianity between Georgians and Russians was acknowledged, and Georgia’s primate, the Catholicos, became Russia’s eighth, permanent archbishop and a member of Russia’s Holy Synod.

Other treaty provisions included mutual guarantees of an open border between the two realms for travelers, emigrants and merchants (articles 10, 11), while Russia undertook to refrain from intervening, militarily or civilly, with Kartli-Kakheti’s internal affairs or taxing authority (article VI). Article III created an investiture ceremony whereby the Georgian kings, upon swearing fealty to Russia’s emperors, would receive in return such tokens of respect as a sword, scepter and ermine mantle.

The treaty was negotiated on behalf of Russia by Lieutenant-General Pavel Potemkin, commander of Russia’s troops in Astrakhan, a delegate and cousin of General Prince Grigori Alexandrovich Potemkin, who was the official Russian plenipotentiary. Kartli-Kakheti’s official delegation consisted of a Kartlian and a Kakhetian, both of high rank: Ioané (Bagrationi)-batonishvili (1755-1800), the 18th Mukhranbatoni (Prince of Mukhrani, referred to in the Russian version of the treaty as "Prince Ivan Konstantinovich Bagration"), Constable of the Left-Hand Army and son-in-law of the Georgian king, [3] and Adjutant-General Garsevan Chavchavadze, Governor of Kazakhi (aka Prince Garsevan Revazovich Chavchavadze, member of a Kakhetian princely family of the third rank, vassals of the Abashidze princes). [4] These emissaries officially signed the treaty at the fortress of Georgievsk in the North Caucasus on July 24, 1783. It was then formally ratified by the Georgian King Erekle II and Empress Catherine the Great in 1784.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 06-13-2010, 04:16 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 3
[edit] Aftermath

The results of the Treaty of Georgievsk proved disappointing for the Georgians.[5] King Erekle’s adherence to it prompted Persia’s new ruler, Agha Mohammad Khan, to invade. Russia did nothing to help the Georgians during the disastrous Battle of Krtsanisi in 1795, which left Tbilisi sacked and Georgia ravaged (including the west Georgian kingdom of Imereti, ruled by Erekle II’s grandson, King Solomon II). Belatedly, Catherine declared war on Persia and sent an army to Transcaucasia. But her death shortly thereafter put an end to Russia’s Persian Expedition of 1796, as her successor, Paul, turned to other strategic objectives. Persia’s Shahanshah next contemplated the removal of the Christian population from eastern Georgia and eastern Armenia, launching the campaign from Karabagh. His goal was frustrated not by Russian resistance, but by a Persian assassin in 1797.
On January 14, 1798, King Erekle II was succeeded on the throne by his eldest son, George XII (1746-1800) who, on February 22, 1799, recognized his own eldest son, Tsarevich David (Davit Bagrationi-batonishvili), 1767-1819, as official heir apparent. In the same year Russian troops were stationed in Kartli-Kakheti. Pursuant to article VI of the treaty, Emperor Paul confirmed David’s claim to reign as the next king on April 18, 1799. But strife broke out among King George’s many sons and those of his late father over the throne, Erekle II having changed the succession order at the behest of his third wife, Queen Darejan, to favor the accession of younger brothers of future kings over their own sons. The resulting dynastic upheaval prompted King George to secretly invite Paul I to invade Kartli-Kakheti, subdue the Bagratid princes, and govern the kingdom from St. Petersburg, on the condition that George and his descendants be allowed to continue to reign nominally – in effect, offering to mediatize the Bagratid dynasty under the Romanov emperors.[1] Continued pressure from Persia, also prompted George XII's request for Russian intervention. [2]
Paul tentatively accepted this offer, but before negotiations could be finalized changed his mind and issued a decree on December 18, 1800 annexing Kartli-Kakheti to Russia and deposing the Bagratids.[3] Paul himself died shortly thereafter. It is said that his successor, Emperor Alexander I, considered retracting the annexation in favor of a Bagratid heir, but being unable to identify one likely to retain the crown, on September 12, 1801 Alexander proceeded to confirm annexation.[4] Meanwhile, King George had died on December 28, 1800, before learning that he had lost his throne. By the following April, Russian troops took control of the country’s administration and in February 1803 Tsarevich David Bagrationi was escorted by Russian troops from Tbilisi to St. Petersburg. He was pensioned, joined the Russian Senate, and retained his royal style until May 6, 1833 when he was demoted from tsarevich (the Russian equivalent of batonishvili) to "prince" (knyaz), along with other members of the deposed dynasty, following an abortive uprising in Georgia led by David’s uncle, Prince Alexandre Bagrationi.
Paul’s annexation of east Georgia and exile of the Bagratids remains controversial: Soviet historians would later maintain that the treaty was an act of "brotherhood of the Russian and Georgian peoples" that justified annexation to protect Georgia both from its historical foreign persecutors and its "decadent" native dynasty. Nonetheless, no bilateral amendment had been ratified altering article VI sections 2 and 3 of the 1784 treaty, which obligated the Russian emperor "to preserve His Serene Highness Tsar Irakli Teimurazovich and the Heirs and descendants of his House, uninterrupted on the Throne of the Kingdoms of Kartli and Kakheti...forbidding [the Emperor’s] Military and Civil Authorities from intervention in any [domestic laws or orders]."
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 06-13-2010, 04:17 PM
wingsofsky's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 287
Thankfully, Georgia is not ruled with monarchy now, otherwise there would be a battle between these familis as far as I see. Maybe they should pay more attention what they can contribute to the development of their country rather than who must be the head of the royal house of Georgia. So they can be the Kings or the Queens of hearts.
__________________
ALWAYS SAY HELLO&SMILE BUT NEVER HESITATE TO SAY GOOD BYE KINDLY WHEN NECCESSARY!
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 06-14-2010, 06:06 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50
Millions and millions of people have royal ancestors, but that does not make them royal. It is estimated that 80% of the original stock of Europeans are all descended from Charlemagne and Mohammed, but only .001% of them are authentic and genuine royals. The Gruzinski branch descend from every line of kings from all of the three royal houses of Georgia. This line is the only true and royal sovereign house that exists for all of Georgia. All other lines are of the nobility or high nobility and are non-dynasts. This includes all the other 100 plus princely houses of Georgia many of whom had greater prestige than the Mukhrani house. This truth is important to understand.
__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 06-14-2010, 06:27 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50
On December 5, 1946, HIH Grand Duke Vladimir Kirilovich (1917-1992) made gave an opinion, not an authoritative ruling, which has been wrongfully used to suggest that the Muhkanski branch of offshoot princes, who had no royal, collateral, or sovereign rights in the Kingdom of Georgia, were suddenly somehow magically transformed into royals, when they were a lesser line of the high nobility, not royalty at all. Problems:

First, Vladimir Kirilovich was not universally recognized as the rightful heir of Imperial Russia, especially at this particular time. Note: (1) “The heads of the other branches of the imperial family, the Princes Vsevolod loannovich (Konstantinovichi), Roman Petrovich (Nikolaevichi) and Andrei Alexandrovich (Mihailovichi) writing to Vladimir in 1969 said that he had married unequally and that his wife was of no higher status than the wives of the other Romanov princes.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Kirillovich
,_Grand_Duke_of_Russia#cite_ref-4), (2) “The Romanov Family Association, which supports the claim of . . . Nicholas to be head of the House of Romanov, believes that the marriage was morganatic [that is, the Muhkranski’s were not royals, but nobles and therefore unequal].” (Ibid.), and (3) “As he [Vladimor Kirilovich] was not a grandson of an Emperor his claimed title of Grand Duke of Russia caused problems as to what to [validly and authentically] put on his grave.” (Ibid.) The point is, his authority was in question.


Second, he gave this decree as his opinion only. Opinions are not facts, nor are they absolute or final. As such, they must be defined as questionable and may have been prompted by a hidden agenda, especially since he married into this family two years later, and "Romanov house law dictates that only those children who are the product of an 'equal marriage'—between a Romanov prince and a princess from another royal, not just noble, house — are eligible to be included in the Imperial line of succession; children of morganatic [such unequal] marriages are excluded from the succession." (Ibid.)


Third, the Muhkranski branch were not "the senior branch of the Bagration family." The senior branch was the line of the kings, not a line of nobles with no dynastic rights. Note: "Leonida's branch [of the Muhkanski] had not been regnant in the male line as Kings of Georgia since 1505 and had been simply Russian nobility since then." (Ibid.); and


Fourth, Vladimir Kirilovich unlawfully by-passed any recognition for the true Royal House of Georgia, the line of the kings, who reigned all the way to 1800, and gave only the Muhkranski non-dynastic line the supposed right ". . . to bear the title of Prince of Georgia and the style of Royal Highness." (Vladimir Kirilovich 1946 decree) All of this was so out of order that as stated before, the Royal House of Spain rejected it completely and entirely. The Muhkranski line lost the status to be “infante,” or royal princes, of Spain because of this.
__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 06-14-2010, 06:33 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50
About Treaty of Georgievsk
However, the "Treaty of Georgievsk" of 1784, which he made with the Catherine II of Russia, made it clear that the Russian emperor was "to preserve His Serene Highness Tsar Irakli Teimurazovich and the Heirs and descendants of his House, uninterrupted on the Throne of the Kingdoms of Kartli and Kakheti . . . forbidding [the Emperor’s] Military and Civil Authorities from intervention in any [domestic laws or orders]." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty
_of_Georgievsk) This treaty made the Kingdom of Georgia a protectorate of Imperial Russia, but left its sovereignty fully and completely intact. As Johann Wolfgang Textor (1693-1771), one of the founding fathers of international law, declared:


There is . . . no absurdity in the possession . . . of true rights of sovereignty by one who yet is and remains the vassal of another. This is, indeed, the case, where the vassal is so vested with the practical lordship (dominium utile) of a realm --- which implies the utmost force and effect of sovereignty --- that he can exercise it, so far as rights of Majesty are concerned, independently of the consent of his directly superior lord. . . . (Synopsis of the Law of Nations, 1680, trans. 1916, chapter IX, no. 22)


Textor wrote that even a fief is sovereign if the internal rights are preserve. He declared,". . . I have no doubt that the King may enjoy the rights of Majesty, although his Kingdom be [merely] a fief. . . ."(Ibid., no. 21) By definition:


A protectorate, in international law, is an autonomous territory that is protected diplomatically or militarily against third parties by a stronger state or entity. In exchange for this, the protectorate usually accepts specified obligations, which may vary greatly, depending on the real nature of their relationship. However, it retains sufficient measure of sovereignty and remains a state under international law. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectorate)


The United Kingdom of Kartli and Kakheti retained all of its internal sovereign majesty and glory as an independent state under the provisions of the Treaty, and it made the annexation of the Kingdom in 1801 completely illegal and unlawful violating the Treaty and violating international law. This means that HRH Prince Nugzar holds "de jure" sovereignty as the rightful successor to the wrongfully deposed monarchy of Georgia. (See: "Sovereignty: Questions and Answers")


(15) The kingdoms of Kartli and Kakheti were vassals of both the Persia and the Ottoman Empire at different periods from 1516. Hence, some say they were not real sovereign kings, but in international law, ". . . tributory states, and those subject to a kind of feudal dependence or vassalage, are still considered as sovereign. . . .” (Henry Wager Halleck, Elements of International Law and Laws of War, 2009, p. 44) ". . . Their sovereignty is not affected by this relation.” (Henry Wheaton, Elements of International Law, 1836, chapter 2, no. 3, p. 52) Many wars were fought to maintain these rights. Finally, in 1784, Imperial Russia recognized their sovereignty and the sovereign rights of the king's legitimate successors. The Russian Empire then became legal protectors of the kings again without a loss of sovereignty. (See #8)


(16) The was no abdication when Russia annexed the Kingdom of Georgia in 1801. The kings remained true and faithful to their people and their ancient dynasty. The annexation was fought against. It was opposed. And the royal family risked their lives to do so.
__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 06-14-2010, 12:31 PM
wingsofsky's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 287
Hello Varaz. you seem to know lot about royal geneology. Excuse my ignorance about Georgian Royal Family or Families. Indeed IMO it is normal to have more than one royal family for a counrty in Caucasia, where there is a lot of historical, cultural and ethnic variety. I want to ask you something different. Which member of these families is the most popular in Georgia? You know the one who young people take as a role model and the elder respect for his/her hard work? Thank you in advance.
__________________
ALWAYS SAY HELLO&SMILE BUT NEVER HESITATE TO SAY GOOD BYE KINDLY WHEN NECCESSARY!
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 06-14-2010, 04:40 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50
Dear wingsofsky,
Thanks for your estimate.
Yes of course, it is HRH Crown Prince Nugzar !

Without mention of that difficult life, which he endured during communistic epoch, notwithstanding, he received the big love and respect from an intellectual society. He is known both by the governmental ranks and members of the public. But I ask to consider that royal families were not loved both by communists and even by today's republican governments. They are who fight against popularization of members of royal family in their own countries.
__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 06-14-2010, 05:53 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 3
Wow Varaz, lots of good info.! Its good that we agree on Mukhransky claim. I think the fact that Mukhransky prince has signed the Giorgievsky traktat as a representative of the Kartl-Kakheti King, and he didn't protest when he was referred as a Prince Mukhransky and not as a King of Kartli. He was also entered as such in the Russian Imperial "book". It's completely inappropriate that centuries later his heirs claim that very kingdom that their ancestor didn't claim himself or indeed have thought to have such a right.
By the way, what's the position (officially) of the Georgian nobility that were entered as belonging to Russian Imperial House? As far as I know it was written in the Giorgievsky Traktat that they should be treated same as Russian nobility (wierd clause)?

Hi Wingofsky. To answer your earlier question.... Ufortunately, Bagrationi family always fought with each other for the Kingdom. There are some gruesome historical facts about the fights. As far as I know the Kingdom of Imereti heirs were willing to forego their claims in favour of HRH Nugzar, but now that Anna is not married to Bagrationi and ultimately she can't inherit the Kingdom, I have no idea what their position is. The women in that line can become heirs if there are no male heirs (marrying Bagrationi is not required here). But recently, some other Bagrationi line with a male heir, allegedly put the claim forward for the Kingdom of Imereti. Unfortunately, I don't know if he is related. if I'm not mistaken he needs to show that there is a common relation "within" seven generations immediately preceding current one. Because heirs of this Kingdom have not been vocal about their inheritance most of us don't know the Imereti line well after Solomon II, the last ruling King of this Kingdom.

To answer your other question... its hard to say that they do anything. As Varaz here pointed out the government is fearful of the possibility of the Kingdom of Georgia, and is doing everything in their power (including KGB style "honey traps") to ridicule the claim. They control very closely TV and the Royals or the claimants are all ridiculed in the closely scripted programms. So, even if they were doing something, I wouldn't know about it, unless they are doing something bad!
I have to say that HRH is popular in the older generation. Not so much in the younger one though (although he is not thought to be a bad character or anything lik this). In the younger generations Davit and Anna seem to be popular (to be fair the only ones we knew about) before the marriage. Perhaps not anymore. Such a shame!
We georgians, are incredibly hard to please!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 06-14-2010, 06:53 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: -, United States
Posts: 1,021
Former Orthodox priest Basil Kobakhidze claims that the Georgian government was so threatened by the possibility of the marriage of Prince David and Princess Anna producing an heir that the government sent a young woman who had posed for the Georgian edition of Playboy to seduce Prince David and thus help break up the inconvienent Bagrationi union.

Kobakhidze also says that Prince David does not speak a word of Georgian, and that the Patriarchate was directly responsible for this attempt to bring about a monarchical restoration.

Source: Religioscope: Géorgie: Eglise et Etat, vers un conflit inévitable?


The young lady with whom Prince David allegedly committed adultery is named Shorena Begashvili. She is 28 years old and works as a model and actress.

Source: Vestnik Kavkaza
__________________
Sii forte.
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 06-16-2010, 04:45 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50
This treaty made the Kingdom of Georgia a protectorate of Imperial Russia, but left its sovereignty fully and completely intact. As Johann Wolfgang Textor (1693-1771), one of the founding fathers of international law, declared:
There is . . . no absurdity in the possession . . . of true rights of sovereignty by one who yet is and remains the vassal of another. This is, indeed, the case, where the vassal is so vested with the practical lordship (dominium utile) of a realm --- which implies the utmost force and effect of sovereignty --- that he can exercise it, so far as rights of Majesty are concerned, independently of the consent of his directly superior lord. . . . (Synopsis of the Law of Nations, 1680, trans. 1916, chapter IX, no. 22)

Textor wrote that even a fief is sovereign if the internal rights are preserve. He declared, ". . . I have no doubt that the King may enjoy the rights of Majesty, although his Kingdom be [merely] a fief. . . ." (Ibid., no. 21) By definition:

A protectorate, in international law, is an autonomous territory that is protected diplomatically or militarily against third parties by a stronger state or entity. In exchange for this, the protectorate usually accepts specified obligations, which may vary greatly, depending on the real nature of their relationship. However, it retains sufficient measure of sovereignty and remains a state under international law. (Protectorate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

The United Kingdom of Kartli and Kakheti retained all of its internal sovereign majesty and glory as an independent state under the provisions of the Treaty, and it made the annexation of the Kingdom in 1801 completely illegal and unlawful violating the Treaty and violating international law. This means that HRH Prince Nugzar holds "de jure" sovereignty as the rightful successor to the wrongfully deposed monarchy of Georgia.
__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 06-16-2010, 05:54 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50

The picture above taken on May 21, 2010 shows Crown Prince Nugzar addressing an important historical conference with members of the Georgian Parliament, famous historians, writers, publicists, etc. with His Royal Highness again introduced as the successor of the Georgian throne.
http://www.fundofcaucasus.org/portal...9/default.aspx
http://www.fundofcaucasus.org/portal...9/default.aspx
__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:13 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50
Dear "Ledy S",
Such decree simply does not exist. The ruling monarch? Which monarch? You probably confuse with the project of successor Crown Prince David (son of King Giorgi XII) which was not the monarch. In project he mentions a theme of inheritance of a throne because of fear of (ex) Queen Daredzhan who was stepmother of King Giorgi XII and who struggled against king. Her target to grip a throne lawfully belonging to King Giorgi XII. That was indeed a real reason of that point in above mentioned project. But consider that in this case there were direct male heirs of King. The Prince David`s project was unlegalized !
__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 06-29-2010, 04:54 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 2,859
Any news about Prince David?Why doesn't he learn the language of his country?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 06-30-2010, 04:16 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50
As for David, on Georgian national TV there was a transfer few days ago about David`s false orders and he was exposed as the charlatan and false pretender to the Georgian throne.
__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 07-03-2010, 09:40 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Launceston, Australia
Posts: 42
Quote:
As for David, on Georgian national TV there was a transfer few days ago about David`s false orders and he was exposed as the charlatan and false pretender to the Georgian throne.
This David? David Bagration of Mukhrani - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 07-04-2010, 04:11 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50
Yes, "vsriCo", Yes... That David.
Unfortunately too much falsehood on wikipedia. It is really sad...
__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 07-06-2010, 02:19 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia, United States
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Varaz View Post
Unfortunately too much falsehood on wikipedia. It is really sad...

You know, the beauty of Wikipedia is that you can correct falsehoods so long as you have legitimate reliable sources to back you up. Be sure to use in text citations.

I look forward to seeing your edits!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 07-06-2010, 02:35 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 50
It is good to be such naive as you are "Keystone", but unfortunately they block the truth constantly...

For example see georgia

Copyright ©Christopher Buyers Copyright ©Christopher Buyers
Note:
Although the Head of the House of Bagration-Mukhranski claims to be Head of the Royal House of Georgia, there is no historical, customary or legal justification for this claim. Salic laws of succession never applied to any of the Georgian Kingdoms. Indeed the final unification of the kingdoms of Kartli and Kakheti rests on female inheritance. There are numerous descendants in the natural and female lines, of the Houses of Kakheti and Kartli, and of Imereti, possessing superior claims to Regalty.


... But Wikipedia still keeps false claim of Mukhransky. Why ?
__________________

__________________
I love Georgia !
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bagration, georgia, royal house of georgia


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Royal Jewels Books Julia Royal Library 158 09-26-2013 04:44 AM
British Royal Calendar 2006/7 purple_platinum Current Events Archive 56 04-28-2007 10:46 AM
December/January 2005 Newsletter: A Royal Christmas GrandDuchess Picture of the Month, Special Features, Blogs & Articles 24 11-29-2005 01:34 PM




Popular Tags
belgium carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:28 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]