Who is the Head of the Imperial Family?

[vorky]

Originally Posted by Cory

I suppose the study made by Brien Purcell horan can help you to understand even this issue:

RussianImperialSuccession

This study of Brien Purcell Horan is convincing. I have read it many times. I dont undestand why author mentioned only male dynast in 1938 and not living female. Why dont children of Grand Duchess Kira Kirillovna belong to Romanovs? Is a reason that GDs was a woman and after marriage she did not belong to Romanovs anymore?

[Cory]

In 1938 there were enough male members of the Imperial House not to think at a possible future female succession.

[vorky]

Originally Posted by branchg

A marriage between a dynast and a Bagration was never equal and Vladimir knew it, which is why he and Leonida, and now Maria, are so aggressive about promoting their line as the sole legitimate heirs.

Why did not he change the Law (morganic) if he knew it? He did not know that he dont have a boy before marriage. You know, he could think that if change the law and have only a daugther, another line could have a heir not his children (girls)

[branchg]

Originally Posted by Cory

I suppose the problem of the marriage of Grand Duke Vladimir( the royal status of the Bagratids for centuries,the way russians treated georgians and Georgian Royal Family) should be studied in the thread dedicated to him and to grand Duchess Leonida.

Brian's position on the matter is irrelevant. The Pauline Laws are clear that a dynast must make an equal marriage to a royal or sovereign house in order for their descendants to have rights. At the time of his marriage, Leonida was nobility, not royalty.

Even if Georgia restored their Royal House tomorrow and a new King and Queen representing both branches of the Bagrids took the throne, that doesn't make Vladimir's marriage equal. They were non-reigning and subjects of the Tsars for over a century during Imperial Russia and Leonida was nobility at the time of her marriage.

[vorky]

Originally Posted by Cory

In 1938 there were enough male members of the Imperial House not to think at a possible future female succession.

I see it. Ok. Could someone make a list of female dynast in 1938? Why dont children of female dynast (Kira etc) belong to Romanovs?

[Cory]

He would have changed the law if he supposed it was neccesary.In that period there were anyhow male heirs to the throne to succeed Grand Duke Vladimir.

[branchg]

Originally Posted by vorky

Why did not he change the Law (morganic) if he knew it? He did not know that he dont have a boy before marriage. You know, he could think that if change the law and have only a daugther, another line could have a heir not his children (girls)

Because Vladimir was the de-jure Emperor and Head of the Imperial House at the time of his marriage and he had already declared the Bagration-Moukhrani branch of royal rank in a decree in 1946.

As far as he was concerned, that was the end of that because he alone had the right to declare a marriage equal or not. Which is true.

[Cory]

I wonder why Nicholas Romanov(sky) and other descendants of morganatic marriages contest Grand Duchess Maria so much if they say are not interested in restoring Monarchy in russia.

[vorky]

Originally Posted by branchg

Brian's position on the matter is irrelevant. The Pauline Laws are clear that a dynast must make an equal marriage to a royal or sovereign house in order for their descendants to have rights. At the time of his marriage, Leonida was nobility, not royalty.

Even if Georgia restored their Royal House tomorrow and a new King and Queen representing both branches of the Bagrids took the throne, that doesn't make Vladimir's marriage equal. They were non-reigning and subjects of the Tsars for over a century during Imperial Russia and Leonida was nobility at the time of her marriage.

I am confused a little bit. I will quote author of that study

Grand Duke Wladimir examined the question, assisted by his uncle, Grand Duke Andrew of Russia, who then was next in the line of succession. He was also advised by a prominent Georgian historian. The Grand Duke recognised immediately that the Bagrations had sat on a royal throne and therefore were ipso facto of royal status. His conclusion was reinforced by his study of the 1783 treaty, especially the provision guaranteeing forever the royal status of the Bagration dynasty.

It seems that Vladimir (de iure Emperor) claimed that Bagrations and cadet branch were royals. It could be seen as interpretation of Law by Emperor. I dont know, Does anybody have original of this Treaty about Bagrations?

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Because Maria thinks she's better than them when in fact she is the same as them. Not only is she the result of a morgantic marriage but her great grandfather betrayed the Tsar. If she would stop acting like she is the only Romanov who matters perhaps things would be better.

[Lenora]

One cannot know their precise interests,but I am pretty sure they understand that there is a very little real possibility of monarchy restoration.
I suppose they get upset when they see Maria-Vladimirovna pretensions to the role of "Empress of Russia".

[Cory]

I do not think Grand Duke Kirill betrayed his cousin even if it is well known the members of the imperial Family were very againsts Empress Alexandra Feodorovna.
Grand Duchess Maria underlines just the fact she continues to respect the laws and she does not accept descendants of morganatic marriages in the Imperial Family, continuing like this the tradition of all the tsars ( including the "de ure Tsars").

[vorky]

Originally Posted by branchg

Because Vladimir was the de-jure Emperor and Head of the Imperial House at the time of his marriage and he had already declared the Bagration-Moukhrani branch of royal rank in a decree in 1946.

As far as he was concerned, that was the end of that because he alone had the right to declare a marriage equal or not. Which is true.

I see it. That means that there should not be any hesitation about Maria´s claims. It seems to me something like that: Two children say each other. If I can not have this chocolate, you will not it either. If I can not be Head of House (morganic descendants), you (Maria) wont be too.

[branchg]

The 1783 Treaty was in response to a request for Tsarist military support for Georgia from continual invasion from the Turks. It guaranteed the protection of Russia to the Kingdom of Georgia and its current ruler and heir.

In 1800, Emperor Paul annexed Georgia and declared the terms of the 1783 Treaty null and void. The Georgian royal family became nobility, although King David and his heir were granted the courtesy of their titles until they died.

[Cory]

Unfortunately I suppose it is really like this!The russian conquered the country and later tried to strip the royal rank to the georgian Royal Family.Fortunately after 1917 the Bagratids were considered again Royal Family and make marriages with russian and spanish royals.

On the other hand the descendats of morganatic marriages try to contest Grand Duchess Maria's rights only because they can't have dynastic rights.

[vorky]

Originally Posted by Cory

He would have changed the law if he supposed it was neccesary.In that period there were anyhow male heirs to the throne to succeed Grand Duke Vladimir.

I see you but it was period when many monarchies were abolished, so little chance to arrange dynastic marriage according to Pauline Law (plus problem with ortodox faith).

I would agree with Lenora in this matter.

but I am pretty sure they understand that there is a very little real possibility of monarchy restoration.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by branchg

Brian's position on the matter is irrelevant. The Pauline Laws are clear that a dynast must make an equal marriage to a royal or sovereign house in order for their descendants to have rights. At the time of his marriage, Leonida was nobility, not royalty.

Even if Georgia restored their Royal House tomorrow and a new King and Queen representing both branches of the Bagrids took the throne, that doesn't make Vladimir's marriage equal. They were non-reigning and subjects of the Tsars for over a century during Imperial Russia and Leonida was nobility at the time of her marriage.

At the moment of the marriage of Grand Duke Vladimir both the Imperial House of Russia and the Royal House of Georgia were deposed .The Imperial House of Russia considered the Bagratids a Royal Family as the Romanovs had considered before the russian conquest.

But the discussion about Grand Duke Vladimir 's marriage is rather here:

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...0-a-31641.html



I wonder why the group of russian aristocrats grouped in the association guided by prince Nicholas Romanov(sky) opposes so much the project of Grand Duchess Maria of restoration.

[genegirl99]

Originally Posted by Cory

I do not think Grand Duke Kirill betrayed his cousin even if it is well known the members of the imperial Family were very againsts Empress Alexandra Feodorovna.

So pulling the guards protecting the Empress and her sick children and wearing red isn't a betrayal?

Despite the known feelings For the Empress, but leaving sick kids unprotected, that's a hanging offense in my book...

[Cory]

The controversies concerning the behaviour of Grand Duke Kirill during march 1917 has nothing to do with the headship of the Imperial House.

[genegirl99]

I read in Massie's book according to Some Russian Monarchs that despite Miechen's non Orthodoxy Kyril should be disqualified because he abandoned the Empress and her children and wore red. Pg 268 in The Final Chapter