Monarchy and Restoration; Rival Families and Claimants - Page 32

Cory · #**621** 08-17-2011, 03:09 AM

Let's see the chances of the Monarchy now.We can't change what happened in 1917.

Lenora · #**622** 10-03-2011, 07:56 PM

Here is the statement made some time ago by the Prince Nikolai Romanov and the other members of the Romanov dynasty("Association of the Romanov dynasty"), where they expressed their disagreement with the status given to the GD Georgii and his mother GD Maria Vladimirovna,they have not recognized their legitimacy and the role of official claimants to the throne.
romanovtoday -
Google

COUNTESS · #**623** 10-03-2011, 08:14 PM

I think Russia will do very well, without Romanovs. Their time has past. This is just nonsense.

Cory · #**624** 10-04-2011, 03:19 AM

For the republicans the time of Monarchy passed. For the monarchists the time of Monarchy is always.

Nice Nofret · #**625** 10-04-2011, 06:25 AM

so true Cory

I consider myself not monarchist and neither republican .. just demokrat .. I do see some very good reasons for having a Monarchy (like to have a "Galionsfigur" for the country and it's people.

But the problem is how to turn a Republic back into a Monarchy

. .And I cant see that happening anytime soon - and espacially not in Russia with the Romanov

Cory · #**626** 10-04-2011, 11:56 AM

It is rather complicated but dependents of the Imperial Family strategy and the monarchists' themselves to convince the people.

Alexey 1904 · #**627** 10-04-2011, 03:24 PM

The Royal Families of Europe also invite the ex-Empress of Iran and the King and Queen of Greece, along with Crown Prince Pavlos and his wife and children to their family weddings. The Shahbana has lived in exile in Paris since, when, 1980?, and the Greek royalty has been in exile since the late 1960's Also, GD Georgi is legally HRH Prince of Germany, just as his father is. So, in my opinion, it doesn't matter if they have titles or not. These royals had to leave their countries or be killed. That's why they're in exile to this day. So, Maria V. is and always will be a pretender to the Russian throne, which died out in 1918.

Cory · #**628** 10-04-2011, 04:20 PM

Is it impossible to know the future.

NGalitzine · #**629** 11-01-2011, 12:53 PM

I think there are enough flaws in every branchs right to the throne to make it a moot point. Under the old laws no successor remains. If a monarchy were ever to be restored it would be up to the Russian people to decide who should be Tsar and that person may not even be a Romanov.

branchg · #**630** 11-01-2011, 01:06 PM

In my mind, there are only two realistic scenarios. Either you accept that Vladimir Krillovich had the right, as the undisputed Head of the Imperial House, to declare his marriage to a Bagrid princess equal and compliant, therefore, Maria Vladimirovna is the only remaining dynast, or all lines are defunct with his death in 1992.

If all lines are truly defunct of dynasts (and realistically, they are), the throne would have passed through Grand Duchess Helen Vladimirovna's marriage to Prince Nicholas of Greece & Denmark as the only equal and compliant marriage in the female line. That would make Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia, her grandson, the rightful heir to the throne.

But I agree the matter is one of pure semantics. The Russians would restore the throne with whomever they wish as Tsar and it may not be even a royal.

NGalitzine · #**631** 11-01-2011, 01:13 PM

Yes, but when you get to Prince Alexander, dont you run into trouble deciding if he is the actual father of his own children or if their father (at least of the younger ones) is actually Prince Michael de Bourbon Parme.

Russophile · #**632** 11-01-2011, 02:57 PM

What it's going to come down to is what and/if who do the Russian people want?

AristoCat · #**633** 11-01-2011, 03:10 PM

Quote:

But I agree the matter is one of pure semantics. The Russians would restore the throne with whomever they wish as Tsar and it may not be even a royal.

This is something that quite a few Romanovs don't take into consideration. It's not like they can grant the Romanovs the right to decide that hte Russians can or can't choose. I think the Russians are very aware of the fact that they are the only ones in control of their country and the only ones who will even decide about anything. Russia is a fiercely nationalistic country and they did show the Romanovs just what they are capable of if they are pushed too far and beaten too down. Sometimes I think the Romanovs are behaving like a bunch of Communists, telling Russia they may choose who they want to have as Tsar, as long as it's a Romanov. They can choose which Romanov, as long as it's a Romanov.

BeatrixFan · #**634** 11-01-2011, 04:41 PM

That's not quite the case. Firstly, Russia is hardly shaped by the everyday Russian. Russian society is led by the rich (as always) with a dictator-like shadow in the wings (Putin). He'll be in charge for a very long time and Russia isn't the democracy you paint it to be unfortunately. That said, it's quite odd to say that the Romanovs behave like communists. That's a total contradiction. They may behave like autocrats (which I don't believe they do) but there's nothing new there. I also think to say that they are pushing monarchy is untrue, neither Maria nor Nicholas are pursuing that line. And they haven't demanded the Russians choose a Romanov to rule. That hasn't happened. It's also worth noting that the Revolution was not led by the Russians of today, nor the majority of Russians of yesteryear. When it comes to Russia, you can never generalize.

AristoCat · #**635** 11-01-2011, 05:22 PM

You have a point. I just think it's a shame that there is infighting and still a schism, which gets more and more pointless. I think that Georgi would be good and if Prince Nicholas and Dimitri want a part of being in charge, why not marry a daughter of theirs to Georgi and then have a united House of Romanov?

NGalitzine · #**636** 11-01-2011, 05:33 PM

Fathers today don't really get to tell their children who they have to marry........and can you really imagine telling a daughter that she has to marry with the goal of securing a throne that has not existed for almost 100 years. She would laugh in your face and tell you exactly where to go.

BeatrixFan · #**637** 11-01-2011, 06:38 PM

Again, we're not talking usual fathers and children. We're talking about people raised in a very different way with very conservative and ultra-traditional standards. Right or wrong, that's the world they live in.

Benjamin · #**638** 11-01-2011, 06:42 PM

Dimitri is childless, and the daughters of Nicholas are rather old for George, on top of already being married...so it's a bit of a moot point.

BeatrixFan · #**639** 11-01-2011, 07:13 PM

And I get the feeling that there's more than a little of the Baby Jane complex about Nicholas so I doubt he'd be too happy at a match if one was possible.

NGalitzine · #**640** 11-01-2011, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

Again, we're not talking usual fathers and children. We're talking about people raised in a very different way with very conservative and ultra-traditional standards. Right or wrong, that's the world they live in.

He raised his daughters to be regular Italian citizens not exiles and to live their lives in the real world, very untraditional given their paternal heritage. Nicholas has never come across as very conservative, especially when compared to the Vladimirs.