Russian Imperial and Other Titles

[Vasillisos Markos]

An interesting facet of the Russian Nobility, is that they are very lowkey and they do not use their titles as a matter of course in introducing themselves and they also already know who each other are. They don't hang out in Hollywood, they don't live the jet set (to my knowledge) life and they don't use their titles to get jobs or really publicly talk about their family. They are the most secretive family on earth.

I have only seen a few Russian royalty being interviewed or featured in articles. Where do these people live and work? Is it a matter of money that they are not in the Jet Set or do they prefer to keep as you indicate a low profile?

 

[Madame Royale]

Members of the cadet branches of the Imperial Family can be found in Australia, the United States, Canada, South America and Europe. To my knowledge they work, eat and live as every day citizens having 'normal' jobs, paying mortgages and saving for their holidays

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

An interesting facet of the Russian Nobility, is that they are very lowkey and they do not use their titles as a matter of course in introducing themselves and they also already know who each other are. They don't hang out in Hollywood, they don't live the jet set (to my knowledge) life and they don't use their titles to get jobs or really publicly talk about their family. They are the most secretive family on earth.

How did you hear about that? If it was from a book or documentary do you mind giving the title? I would love to read/watch it.

 

[AristoCat]

I can't remember, but in all honesty it's just how it is. A lot of them are really lowkey and prefer to only drag out the orders and titles for charity events to impress potential donors. It's a smart thing to do since it keeps them off the radar and keeps the social climbers away.

 

[Grandduchess24]

Grand duke
Grand duchess
Tsar
Tsarina
Prince
Princess
Most had the honorary title HIH
His/her impireal highness

 

[qzwxec]

Before Peter the Great changed the system, what were the style and title of a son and daughter of the Tsar ? I have seen several different explainations and hope we have settled on one.

Is it Tsarevich and Tsarovna ?

 

[Artemisia]

- The Tsar's sons were called tsarevich. After Peter's reforms, the eldest son and heir was called tsesarevich, while the younger sons were tsarevich(s).
- Daughters of the Tsar were called tsarevna(s); after Peter's reforms, that changed to tsesarevna(s).

 

[TomBert]

But, of course, there has not been a Tsar of Russia since 1721. The title of the Russian sovereign was Emperor = император, not Tsar = царь (However, Tsar did remain in various secondary titles, e.g. Tsar of Kazan). I remember reading somewhere that Nicholas II preferred the title Tsar, but Alexandra was a stickler for the formal, and correct, title of Empress. I have always wondered how widespread the use of император was in Russia outside of official circles. I wonder if the persistant use of Tsar in English stems from everyday Russians never really adopting император. Anyway, I stand with Empress Alexandra on this, and do not see Tsar and Emperor as interchangeable. I much prefer the correct titles of Emperor and Empress.

Here is the full title of the Emperor of Russia as of 1906:

By the Grace (and aid) of God, We NN, Emperor and Autocrat of All the Russias, of Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod; Tsar of Kazan, Tsar of Astrakhan, Tsar of Poland, Tsar of Siberia, Tsar of Taurian Khersones, Tsar of Georgia; Sovereign of Pskov and Grand Duke of Smolensk, Lithuania, Volhynia, Podolia, and Finland; Duke of Estland, Lifland, Courland and Semigalia, Samogitia, Bielostok, Korelia, Tver, Yugria, Permia, Vyatka, Bolgary and others; Sovereign and Grand Duke of Nizhni Novgorod, Chernigov, Ryazan, Polotsk, Rostov, Jaroslavl, Bielo-ozero, Udoria, Obdoria, Kondia, Vitebsk, Mstislav, and Ruler of all Northern territories; Sovereign of Iberia, Kartalinia, the Kabardinian lands and Armenian province: hereditary Sovereign and Ruler of the Circassian and Mountain Princes and of others; Sovereign of Turkestan, Heir of Norway, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein, Stormarn, Dietmarsen, Oldenburg, and so forth, and so forth, and so forth.

Chapter Six On the Title of His Imperial Majesty and the State Coat of Arms

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Tsars or Not?

Is Nicholas II's son counted as Tsar Alexis II? Is the Grand Duke Mikhail, Nicholas II's brother, counted as Tsar Michael II?

 

[Ish]

I don't think Alexis is considered to be a tsar at all. If I remember correctly, when Nicholas abdicated he did so for both himself and his son (who was a minor at the time). It's debatable whether or not Nicholas could do that, but I don't think lists of Tsars of Russia usually include Alexis. (According to Michael's Wikipedia page, Nicholas initially abdicated in favour of his son, then changed his mind and basically abdicated for the both of them, but it all occurred on the same date).

Michael's inclusion is trickier. When Nicholas abdicated it was in favour of his brother, implying that he was a monarch. However, the provisional government (and the people) didn't accept him as monarch. Michael then renounced the throne, but without actually abdicating it or refusing it leading to an uncertainty of whether or not he was ever actually monarch.

When it comes down to it, though, if Alexis is counted then he ruled for between a couple of hours or a day, and if Michael is counted then he ruled for a day.

That said, it's all based on the idea that Nicholas' abdication of himself is valid. However, there's a tendency to not accept abdications that are forced by revolutionary governments - consider the positions of Michael of Romania or Constantine of Greece. In that case, Nicholas could be considered monarch up until his death, and as Nicholas died the same day as his son and after his brother their validity as monarchs - even pretenders - is even further questioned.

 

[J Kendrick]

Contrary to popular belief, Nicholas did not abdicate for his son.

The abdication document says: "Not wishing to part with our dear son, we transfer our legacy to our brother."

That statement does *not* take Alexei out of the line of succession. The oath that Nicholas had taken at his coronation does not allow it.

Nicholas had remembered the one clear fact that everyone else forgets. His brother Michael had no direct heirs of his own. Michael's wife was a divorcée and his only son George was born out of wedlock, which eliminated George from the succession.

Michael's closest male heir in the direct line of succession was his nephew... his brother's son... Alexei... before his cousin Kirill. Alexei was both his father's closest heir in the line of succession *and* his uncle Michael's. Either way, no matter whether Nicholas wore the crown or his brother Michael, Alexei was next in the line of succession. Nicky's coronation oath did not allow him to change that fact.

Nicholas knew that even if Alexei took the crown, Michael would still be acting as Alexei's regent until he came of age. Nicholas was *not* cutting Alexei out of the line of succession. By passing the crown to his brother Michael first, he was only delaying his son Alexei's succession to the throne until after Michael's passing.

 

[TLJ110166]

Title Question

What rank would a female cousin of the Tsar hold?

 

[JR76]

A male line female cousin would be a grand duchess.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[TLJ110166]

Thanks for the quick answer.

 

[TLJ110166]

Title Question

What rank would the female cousin of the Tsar hold, if they were related through the female line?

 

[JR76]

What rank would the female cousin of the Tsar hold, if they were related through the female line?

That would depend on the title of her father. It did happen a few time that son in laws of the Tsar who chose to live in Russia got the title of Imperial highness but that was always by choice of the then emperor and never regulated by law


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[TLJ110166]

That would depend on the title of her father. It did happen a few time that son in laws of the Tsar who chose to live in Russia got the title of Imperial highness but that was always by choice of the then emperor and never regulated by law


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

The specific relationship is if the mothers were sisters.

 

[JR76]

The specific relationship is if the mothers were sisters.

Then it would depend on the title of her father. OTMA and Alexey's female line cousins where princes and princesses of Hesse-Darmstadt, Battenberg (after 1917 lords and ladies Mountbatten) and Prussia.



Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Ish]

The specific relationship is if the mothers were sisters.

Titles aren't typically passed on through maternal lines, this tends to only happen if the mother is herself the monarch. The Tsar's sister's children would get their titles and positions from their fathers.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

In 1976 Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna married Prince Franz Wilhelm of Prussia. He received the title of Grand Duke of Russia from Maria's father. He took the name of Michael Pavlovich. Did Franz Wilhelm select Michael Pavlovich? Or did Maria and her father select the name?

 

[CyrilVladisla]

The title of Tsar

Is it correct that there were no Tsars in Imperial Russia after October 1721? Was not the title suspended when Peter I was styled Imperator by Senate decree?

 

[Al_bina]

The "Tsar of All Russia" was not suspended. It was amended by Senate and the Most Holy Synod to reflect Peter's I great victories and the country's new status. The new title read "by the Grace of God, Emperor and Autocrat of All the Russias, ... " from 1721 to 1917. As you might know, the official title was very long.

 

[Countessmeout]

In Russia, in a way.

Tsar is an interesting title. It comes from the term Caesar, meaning emperor. But in European terms, the term tsar was the equivalent of 'king'. Monarch of a country, not ruler of an empire.

When the Russian 'empire' was created, the term Tsar was no longer proper. And therefore they were referred to as Emperor of all Russia. The term tsar was still used in parts of the empire, to refer to their leader.

But the term tsar is of course also been used in Bulgaria. Simeon II if he was restored, would properly be Tsar Simeon II of Bulgaria. During earlier Bulgarian kingdoms, they may have used the title khan, but Tsar was adopted.

The term was also used for a short time to refer to the Serbian monarchs.

 

[Spheno]

Is it correct that there were no Tsars in Imperial Russia after October 1721? Was not the title suspended when Peter I was styled Imperator by Senate decree?

No. They still were tsars.
Full title of Nicholas II: By the Grace of God, We Nicholas, Emperor and Autocrat of All the Russias, of Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod; Tsar of Kazan, Tsar of Astrakhan, Tsar of Poland, Tsar of Siberia, Tsar of Tauric Chersonesus, Lord of Pskov, and Grand Prince of Smolensk, Lithuania, Volhynia, Podolia, and Finland; Prince of Estonia, Livonia, Courland and Semigalia, Samogitia, Bielostok, Karelia, Tver, Yugor, Perm, Vyatka, Bogar and others; Sovereign and Grand Prince of Nizhni Novgorod, Chernigov, Ryazan, Polotsk, Rostov, Jaroslavl, Beloozero, Udoria, Obdoria, Kondia, Vitebsk, Mstislav, and Ruler of all the Severian country; Sovereign and Lord of Iveria, Kartalinia, the Kabardian lands and Armenian province: hereditary Sovereign and Possessor of the Circassian and Mountain Princes and of others; Sovereign of Turkestan, Heir of Norway, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein, Stormarn, Dithmarschen, and Oldenburg, and etc."