Monarchy and Restoration; Rival Families and Claimants

[Benedict XVI]

Originally Posted by branchg

Russia needs a responsive and democratic government, not another autocracy. The Romanovs have a long and bloody history that is hardly revered by the average Russian. While there may be a few monarchists running around, I doubt they are a majority of the people.

Maria is not advocating a restoration with her sitting on a throne. She recognizes the time is not right and she is realistic that it may never happen. In the meantime, she has a role to play in reminding people of the imperial heritage and history, which is considerable, and in upholding Orthodox tradition with the Church.

There's nothing wrong with that.

I agree with the Maria part. But from my point of view it appears that no matter what form of government it tends to be bloody.

[AristoCat]

I find that such a sad, horrible thing really.

[Cory]

I suppose Grand Duchess Maria wants the return of Monarchy in Russia but she understands in this moment it is rather difficult.

[branchg]

Originally Posted by Benedict XVI

I agree with the Maria part. But from my point of view it appears that no matter what form of government it tends to be bloody.

Sadly, you're right. Russia really replaced the autocracy of the Tsars with new Tsars in the form of Lenin and Stalin, etc, and now Putin. They've never really moved beyond the old system of control and ruthlessness, not to mention tremendous corruption.

But I am hopeful it is slowly starting to change.

[Benedict XVI]

Originally Posted by branchg

Sadly, you're right. Russia really replaced the autocracy of the Tsars with new Tsars in the form of Lenin and Stalin, etc, and now Putin. They've never really moved beyond the old system of control and ruthlessness, not to mention tremendous corruption.

But I am hopeful it is slowly starting to change.

That is true sadly. I do think that as long as the Communists do not regain power, that in twenty or so years they will have gotten out of the soviet era with most of the hardcore Communists will be retired or dead which should give the country time to work on a true new form of government that helps. But it is part of the great mystery of Russia.

[Al_bina]

If we look at the Russian history, any changes, bad or good, were introduced by fire and sword. Communists are unlikely to regain any significant power as well as monarchists will not gain the momentum for the restoration. Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna can do whatever she has been doing all this time: visit Russians, who live abroad, hobnob with some European non-reigning and reigning royalty, take missions on behalf of the ROC, etc.

Originally Posted by Cory

It is obvious in this moment there is no majority in favour of Monarchy in Russia. The royalists were quite damaged by those who continued to campaign against Grand duchess Maria.

I am curious as to who exactly campaigns against Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna.

[Benedict XVI]

I think we need to see restoration is surrounding countries such as Georgia but that is another matter entirely. I personally believe that Russia is a country that would truly do well under a constitutional monarchy, it would keep the prime minister in check. I also think that no matter what form of government the country has the will have leaders who are there for alot of their political career. But making a case for monarchy is a hard thing to do especially Russia.

[Al_bina]

Has there been any progress in the restoration in Georgia? I doubt that President Saakashvili, who is loved and backed by the democratic West, will give up his power without any fight.
To determine whether or not a constitutional monarchy will benefit Russian is impossible. Arguments for and against will inaccurate because of infinite variables. I do not think that Russia will suffer if it chooses to have a German model: President and Prime Minister.

[Artemisia]

Monarchy in Georgia will not be reinstated any time soon; the country faces far more important and pressing issues than a restoration.
On the other hand, the Monarch has always personified Georgia, a symbol of unity; if there is a momentum, backing by major political parties and the Church, it make take place. But an extremely powerful momentum indeed would be needed.

[Cory]

Those who campaign against the Grand Duchess are usually followers of a certain Association...

[NGalitzine]

Originally Posted by Cory

Those who campaign against the Grand Duchess are usually followers of a certain Association...

LOL, rather like Maria is the one who insists that only she and her son, Prince Georg of Prussia, are the only Romanoffs.

[Benjamin]

That is not what Maria is quoted as saying in Massie's The Romanovs: The Final Chapter.

She merely says that the other Romanovs are not dynasts.

I don't believe they dispute that point.

[NGalitzine]

Perhaps, but it is the other Romanoffs who dispute Marias claims to headship of the family and also that she and her son are dynasts.They quite rightly say that it would be up to the Russian people to determine who the new Tasr should be in the unlikely situation of a restoration.
None of the Romanoffs qualify as dynasts under the old rules no matter what Maria claims for herself and her Hohenzollern son. Pointless anyway since Russia is a republic, we are nearing the 100 year mark of the end of the empire, and no great masses of Russians are calling for their return.

[branchg]

The position of the Romanov Family Association is Vladimir Cyrilovich was the last dynast and Head of the Imperial House under the Pauline Laws. With his death in 1992, the Imperial House became extinct of dynasts in the male lines due to morganatic marriages, including his own.

Maria's position is she and Georgi are the sole remaining dynasts with her father's death as her cousins married unequally while Vladimir and she did not.

While it's true Maria married equally under the Pauline Laws, her mother, a Bagration-Moukhrani princess, would not have been considered of equal rank to the imperial family during Tsarist Russia. However, Vladimir was the sole arbitrator of whether any marriage was equal or not, and he declared the Bagration-Moukhransky branch of royal rank in 1946 via decree.

In reality, they are all morganatic and their claims legally ended with Grand Duke Michael's refusal to accept the throne in 1917 after Nicholas abdicated. So, no one really has a valid claim today.

[Cory]

Who denies Grand Duchess Maria as Heas of the Imperial Family does not respect the Laws of the Imperial House.

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/Imperial.../dynastic.html

http://www.chivalricorders.org/royal...a/russuclw.htm

[Artemisia]

With respect, those who deny Maria Vladimirovna's claims to be a dynast do that exactly because they respect all Imperial House Laws, not selective ones.
By Imperial House Laws, there are no living Russian dynasts - Maria Vladimirovna and Prince Georgi included.

[Al_bina]

I fully agree with you.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Artemisia

With respect, those who deny Maria Vladimirovna's claims to be a dynast do that exactly because they respect all Imperial House Laws, not selective ones.
By Imperial House Laws, there are no living Russian dynasts - Maria Vladimirovna and Prince Georgi included.

Could you explain why do you suppose that?

[Benedict XVI]

Originally Posted by Artemisia

With respect, those who deny Maria Vladimirovna's claims to be a dynast do that exactly because they respect all Imperial House Laws, not selective ones.
By Imperial House Laws, there are no living Russian dynasts - Maria Vladimirovna and Prince Georgi included.

In a case such as this one it may be more of a whoever fits the law the most Is the one who should be given the crown. As most people on this forum would agree
to Maria has the best claim. And as for the people who deny her claim i would like to know who they are and if by chance they are wanting the crown for themselves what gives them the right to denounce her claim in favor of there's. And those people who look at the succession law I would like to know who they suggest should get the throne.

[NGalitzine]

[QUOTE=Benedict XVI;1398838]In a case such as this one it may be more of a whoever fits the law the most Is the one who should be given the crown. As most people on this forum would agree
to Maria has the best claim. And as for the people who deny her claim i would like to know who they are and if by chance they are wanting the crown for themselves what gives them the right to denounce her claim in favor of there's. And those people who look at the succession law I would like to know who they suggest should get the throne.[/QUOTE

Several members of the surviving Imperial Family post WW1 married into aristocratic Russian families (same as Leonida was a member of an aristocratic family, the non-reigning branch of the formerly ruling Bagration family that had been incorporated into the Russian nobility), No members of the Romanoff Family have undisputed claims to the non-existent throne under the Pauline Rules. They all descend from non-equal marriages. No one is claiming the throne for themselves, although Maria does claim to be head of the family and as such pretender to the throne. If there were to be some bizarre historic switch leading to a restoration of the monarchy it would be up to the Russian people to determine who the new Tsar should be, and that leaves open the possibility that they may not go to a Romanoff at all.