The Vladmimirovichi Ambition

[AristoCat]

I thought this would be an interesting topic. the Vladimir Grand Dukes and Duchesses have always been fiercely ambitious people and from Cyril and Ducky to Maria and Georgi.

[Vasillisos Markos]

My dear AristoCat,

Yes, the Vladimirs seemed to compete directly with the ruling Tsars, at least Nicholas, in St. Petersburg society for attention and influence. What do you know about the Cyril's parents?

[AristoCat]

Nothing really; I just know that Marie Pavlovna competed with the Tsarina and even had the gall to suggest that the Empress be 'eliminated' to a member of the Duma.

[kell]

members of the duma she did try to arrange in 1916 a puntsh to put her son cyril as regant when that failed they switched sides in 1917

[EmpressRouge]

Vladimir's ambition might have started after the early death of his eldest brother, the Tsarevich Nicholas "Nixa" died. Nixa had been a very cultured young man whereas the new heir, the future Alexander III, was a boorish kind of man. Vladimir felt that he, being cultured and sophisticated (he and Maria Pavlova were big francophiles) should have been the next tsar. In 1888, a train carrying Alexander and his entire family derailed resulting in fatalities. However, the imperial family all survived and Vladimir (or maybe Maria) supposedly lamented that they would never have a chance to get so close to the throne.

[AristoCat]

I honestly think that the Vladimir branch has been disgusting in their addiction to power and pushing people around. DUring the Revolution Cyril was quick enough to pledge alligance and then desert Alexandra and the other grand duchesses. It strikes me as chilling that all of them were so determined to push Nicholas aside and then take over themselves. Now Maria is doing the same more flagarantly.

[branchg]

The Vladimirovchi have always been ambitious and haughty, but the history of the House is not pretty or honourable. Several Tsar/Tsarinas came to power from military coups and murder of their relatives.

[AristoCat]

True, the Romanovs have been an unusually fractious royal clan.

[Kataryn]

Originally Posted by AristoCat

True, the Romanovs have been an unusually fractious royal clan.

And I wonder where that came from. Certainly not from being "Russian" as they didn't have that much Russian blood. Paul I. eg was the son of a Half-Russian Half-German (Anna, daughter of Peter the Great and Catherine I.) who had married a German and of a German mother and who after him married someone with Russian blood? So IMHO Peter the Great was the last who could claim Russian blood. But that didn't help the family from behaving as if they were all born in the deepest barbary.

[AristoCat]

I do too; only recently have there been a faction that has been so united (under the headship of Prince Nicholas) and Maria/Georgi on the other side. I think taht the reveolution and losing three fourths of their relations finally woke them up to the importance of family and unity. Now Maria is constantly grubbing for position and influence all she can, while the rest of the Romanovs are sick and tired of her and of the idea of being a reigning RF.

[TomBert]

I can understand the ambitions of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna. There she was with three sons within spitting distance of the Throne, while the occupant of said Throne was on the path to self destruction. It seems quite natural that by 1916 this branch of the family saw themselves as a viable alternative to the appalling incompetency of Nicholas and Alexandra. If I was Maria Pavlovna I am sure I too would have explored options for getting all political power out of the hands of the Empress. Desperate times call for desperate measures. But it was probably too late for any branch of the family to avoid the imminent catastrophe.

Post 1917/1918 it was simply a dynastic fact that Kyril was Head of the Imperial House. He and his successors have taken the view that they have a certain duty to maintain aspects of their heritage, just like any number of non-reigning houses. If the rest of the family does not agree, as they obviously do not, so be it.

What I do not understand is the contempt and ridicule Maria Vladimirovna has heaped upon her in places like these forums for simply doing her duty as she sees it. I greatly admire her and her wonderfully old fashioned and eccentric ways (proclamations, "signed by her own hand", always bring a smile to may face). She brings a larger than life splash of colour to the world of Russian monarchism. If it really is a lost cause, what harm is she doing and who is she hurting?

[AristoCat]

There she was with three sons within spitting distance of the Throne, while the occupant of said Throne was on the path to self destruction. It seems quite natural that by 1916 this branch of the family saw themselves as a viable alternative to the appalling incompetency of Nicholas and Alexandra.

I understand, but for Cyril to desert leaving the Imperial family unguraded and then declaring himself head of the house before Nicholas' body was even cold and with the Dowager Empress still living is disgusting. The minute Marie was dead, he immediately began demanding the headship and pretty much antagonized the entire Romanov family and even now, Maria is denounincg the rest of the Romanovs and determined ot push that claim and shoving the rest of them out, including Rostislav who is a more direct descendant than Maria and Georgi could ever hope to be.

[TomBert]

Grand Duke Kyril did not demand the headship of the Imperial House, he inherited it. He also waited until 1924 to declare himself Head of the Imperial House (and assumed the title of Emperor; an unnecessary move I think). Six years after the death of Nicholas II, so I think it safe to assume that the late Emperor's body was well and truly cold by then. It was also four years before the death of the Dowager Empress, not a minute after. Call me old fashioned, but I think it would be a good idea to get the facts right before before condemning someone's actions as "disgusting".

As to Kyril's choices in 1917? Perhaps he could, or should, have behaved differently. But they were tumultuous times and who knows how any of us would have acted. Ultimately it is not relevant to Kyril's inheritance. Abandoning the Empress may have been a cowardly act, but it was not an act that could deprive Kyril of his place in the succession.

I would be interested to see evidence of Grand Duchess Maria "denouncing" the rest of the family. As far as I am aware she simply states the facts as she sees them; her male relatives excluded themselves as dynasts, end of story. At least she is never rude like Nicholas Romanovich with his comments about his "fat cousin" in Madrid. He may (or may not) be a Prince, but he is certainly not a gentleman.

As for Rostislav, well good luck to him. If all you are interested in is someone called Romanoff as the representative of a family association, he could be your man. But Rostislav's descent from Grand Duchess Xenia is irrelevant. He is a Romanoff because he is descended from Nicholas I, not Alexander III.

[Marengo]

I have not much to add but TomBert you worded my opinion about the Vladimirovich clan perfectly. Esp. about it being normal to take action while the monarchy was very obviously heading for distruction (perhaps they should have been more forceful!) and also about GDss Maria Vladimirovna.

[Artemisia]

Originally Posted by TomBert

Grand Duke Kyril did not demand the headship of the Imperial House, he inherited it. He also waited until 1924 to declare himself Head of the Imperial House (and assumed the title of Emperor; an unnecessary move I think). Six years after the death of Nicholas II, so I think it safe to assume that the late Emperor's body was well and truly cold by then. It was also four years before the death of the Dowager Empress, not a minute after. Call me old fashioned, but I think it would be a good idea to get the facts right before before condemning someone's actions as "disgusting".

I agree with you. Whether you want it or not, the Headship of the House demands responsibilities, even if it is a House of an abolished Monarchy.

As to Kyril's choices in 1917? Perhaps he could, or should, have behaved differently. But they were tumultuous times and who knows how any of us would have acted. Ultimately it is not relevant to Kyril's inheritance. Abandoning the Empress may have been a cowardly act, but it was not an act that could deprive Kyril of his place in the succession.

While I do think that the behaviour of the entire Vladimirovichi clan acted cowardly during the revolution (rather akin to that of Louis XVI's brothers and their wives prior to the revolution), I concede that we cannot tell how any of us would have behaved in similar circumstances.
As for deprivation of his rights, that is a matter of debate. Some could say that Kyril's action constituted treason and he was thus automatically ineligible to succeed his cousin. In other words, the same arguments that were used against the Duke of Orleans and his descendants.

I would be interested to see evidence of Grand Duchess Maria "denouncing" the rest of the family. As far as I am aware she simply states the facts as she sees them; her male relatives excluded themselves as dynasts, end of story. At least she is never rude like Nicholas Romanovich with his comments about his "fat cousin" in Madrid. He may (or may not) be a Prince, but he is certainly not a gentleman.

Couldn't agree more. While I do happen to like Prince Nicholas, he was exceedingly rude towards Maria Vladimirovna. Now, the rift is hardly one-sided; the Grand Duchess has denounced her Romanov relatives to a certain extent. But name-calling is just childish.

As for Rostislav, well good luck to him. If all you are interested in is someone called Romanoff as the representative of a family association, he could be your man. But Rostislav's descent from Grand Duchess Xenia is irrelevant. He is a Romanoff because he is descended from Nicholas I, not Alexander III.

The thing about Rostislav isn't his actual rights to the Headship of the House; they are shaky at best. It's just that he is viewed as the likeliest candidate should the Monarchy be reinstated at some point. He is the most "Russian" of all current heirs (not in terms of blood, but culture); he lives in Moscow, has greatly improved his Russian and actually appears to genuinely care for the country. Not to mention, he's quite charming. Now, much as I would like Maria Vladimirovna and/or Prince Georgi to one day assume the Throne (provided, of course, there is a restoration), it is highly unlikely. Unless Georgi marries a Russian royal/noble with stellar Russian ancestry, there is absolutely no chance the people of Russia would ever accept him. Georgi is 1/4 Georgian and 1/2 German; if you know anything about Russians, you'll know that is an unacceptable combination.

[TomBert]

I do not know if Kyril's actions can be classed as treason, though they were certainly in poor taste. The Emperor abdicated on the 2nd of March (Old Style). The Empress stated that she "was utterly disgusted with Ducky's husband"* two day's later on March the 4th in a letter to the Emperor. So it looks like his recognition of the Provincial Government came after the Emperor's abdication. Can that be classed as treason? Does an abdication automatically absolve a sovereign's subjects of their oaths of loyalty?

*A lifelong pasion: Nicholas and Alexandra their own story London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1996, p. 552.

[NGalitzine]

It wouldnt absolve his family, who would have known it was a forced abdication, but marching down Nevsky Prospect waving a red flag and swearing allegiance to the new government did nothing to boost his reputation within the family. It was seen for what it was, self promotion.

[Benjamin]

Or maybe Kyrill was just attempting to ensure that his pregnant wife and two young daughters would be safe until such a time as they could flee the country?

[kell]

i gotta wasnt Rostislav born in the untied states which the anti amercian ism in russia works agasint him in claim wise as well
and 2nd benjamin that doesnt explain kyrill s mothers lobby the duma in 1916 for a punsch and to install her son as regant the bad blood in the family was starting to boil and people forget mikhal romanov had a claim before kyril so yes in most terms it can be said it does account for treason in a point of veiw espically if he had the troops to break the uprising in st perterburg and didnt do anything as for their claim well they been wanting the throne since the 1880s but i did laugh at that time article from 1998 when gergii was said to have tryed out the throne in the dirctor of the hertimage musem to yeltson where he tryed out the throne

[Ceallach]

[QUOTE=TomBert;1388375]I can understand the ambitions of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna. There she was with three sons within spitting distance of the Throne, while the occupant of said Throne was on the path to self destruction. It seems quite natural that by 1916 this branch of the family saw themselves as a viable alternative to the appalling incompetency of Nicholas and Alexandra. If I was Maria Pavlovna I am sure I too would have explored options for getting all political power out of the hands of the Empress. Desperate times call for desperate measures. But it was probably too late for any branch of the family to avoid the imminent catastrophe."

Nicholas was not listening to anyone except Alexandra and Rsputin including his immediate and extended family, politicians, friends, and generals. It was at the point in 1916 where he had put in jeapardy the monarchy and potentially his family. He was at the front and Alexandra was running things with RAsputin which led to his own family killing Rasputin. Alexei was a sickly kid who was not expected to reach adulthood, Michael had been removed from succesion for marrying a noble and Kyrill was the presumed heir. It was not ambition but fact that if Nicholas had to abdicate - Kyrill would be Tsar.

From Wikipedia's Nicholas II
Under pressure from the attempted 1905 Russian Revolution, on 5 August of that year Nicholas II issued a manifesto about the convocation of the State Duma, initially thought to be an advisory organ. Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna, the younger sister of Nicholas II, wrote, "There was such gloom at Tsarskoye Selo. I did not understand anything about politics. I just felt everything was going wrong with the country and all of us. The October Constitution did not seem to satisfy anyone. I went with my mother to the first Duma. I remember the large group of deputies from among peasants and factory people. The peasants looked sullen. But the workmen were worse: they looked as though they hated us. I remember the distress in Alicky's eyes."[34]
Minister of the Court Count Fredericks commented, "The Deputies, they give one the impression of a gang of criminals who are only waiting for the signal to throw themselves upon the ministers and cut their throats. I will never again set foot among those people."[35] The Dowager Empress noticed "incomprehensible hatred."[35]

[QUOTE=TomBert;1388375]Post 1917/1918 it was simply a dynastic fact that Kyril was Head of the Imperial House. He and his successors have taken the view that they have a certain duty to maintain aspects of their heritage, just like any number of non-reigning houses. If the rest of the family does not agree, as they obviously do not, so be it. "

[QUOTE=TomBert;1389168]Grand Duke Kyril did not demand the headship of the Imperial House, he inherited it. He also waited until 1924 to declare himself Head of the Imperial House (and assumed the title of Emperor; an unnecessary move I think). Six years after the death of Nicholas II, so I think it safe to assume that the late Emperor's body was well and truly cold by then. It was also four years before the death of the Dowager Empress, not a minute after. Call me old fashioned, but I think it would be a good idea to get the facts right before before condemning someone's actions as "disgusting".

As to Kyril's choices in 1917? Perhaps he could, or should, have behaved differently. But they were tumultuous times and who knows how any of us would have acted. Ultimately it is not relevant to Kyril's inheritance. Abandoning the Empress may have been a cowardly act, but it was not an act that could deprive Kyril of his place in the succession."

Nicholas had put the lives of his entire family at risk, and Kyril did what he had to in order to save his family. It might have been more admirable to have not worn the red armband, and to have sent his family to safety and stayed himself like Michael but it does not change his claim. The reason he did to assume the headship until 1924 was because that was when Michael was declared dead.

When Nicholas did abdicate it was in favour of Michael and in doing as such had reinstated into succession and thus arguably permitting noble marriages. Kyril's red armband and other actions may have caused this. But he was not taken out of succession - just demoted. Michael decided not to serve as Tsar until an election could take place so as to make Russia a constitutional monarchy first. He disappear before this happened and was actually killed before Nicholas and his family but not declared dead til 1924.

Some rejected Kyril as Tsar due to his actions in favour of no one in particular, but others saw Michael's son George as heir as son of the last Tsar. George was born before his parents' marriage which was morgantic and without consent, but Nicholas later returned Michael's estates, and legitimized George making him Michael's heir - but as a Count not and a Grand Duke. Becoming Tsar had put him back in succession, it legitimized Michael's marriage and made George as his heir - his heir in succession.

But others, such as the Vladimirovich, rejected Michael was ever Tsar and considered Nicholas's abdication as an act under duress. That is why Kyril is listed after Nicholas as head with often a vacancy from 1917-24. However, Kyril did declare George a Prince and when George died in a car accident in 1930, Kyril was undeniably the heir.

Ironically, their rejection of Michael and George's rights of succession have hurt them in the end since the case against Maria is based on he mom being a noble not a royal. All the others are married to or the child of a commoner and thus not affected. Allowing noble marriage, would have also improved George's chances of finding an acceptable bride .