Who is the Head of the Imperial Family?

[BeatrixFan]

I have to disagree. Maria's claim can't be made void because of the actions of a relative, even if it's from that relative that her claim stems. That was monarchy is, you don't get a choice whether the ancestor to the successor is a good person or not. I think Maria's been more than accomodating to the other Romanovs, she simply doesn't like them pretending to be things they're clearly not. Let's face it; Maria undertakes world-wide official visits, she's accepted by a fair few Royal Families worldwide, she's extremely active in Russian life, she's very proud of her heritage and promotes Russian culture, she does a vast amount of charity work, she isn't in the least opportunistic, she realises that any return of a monarchy to Russia needs the Russian people's support and she's a good Orthodox Christian accepted by the Russian Church as the real head of the family. Now let's measure that against Elizabeth II - she undertakes official visits, she promotes British culture, she's proud of heritage etc etc. In my view Maria is definately monarch material and she puts herself head and shoulders above the other pretenders by refusing to get involved in family arguments and making Russia her priority. When you measure up Nicholas against Maria, there's simply no question of who is the Head of the family. He does sweet FA for Russia, his only priority is to accumulate titles and medals and swank about at foreign weddings. So practically he isn't nearly as right for the position as the Grand Duchess and as has been said here numerous times, his claim lineage wise is inferior to Maria's.

[NotAPretender]

Originally Posted by Michael HR

My view has always been that we need to go back to the manifesto of Grand Duke Michael when he decided not to accept the throne and passed the Imperial power to the Duma until such time as there was a vote on the dynasty. As he handed power to the Duma this brought the dynasty to an end and power lay with the Duma from that time on. It was his wish that they debate and vote both on government in general and the Crown and therefore it is a matter for the Russian people if the Crown is restored and also in my view that would wear the Crown.

That was very well put. I also feel that GD Kyrill forfeited his right to sucession by his treasonous acts. Maria V, by virtue of descent from a traitor, cannot hold the throne that her ancestor betrayed.

However, I really haven't seen the Russian people clamoring for a royal family.

[bbb]

since Alexander III decreed in 1886 that the title of Grand Duke be restricted to the sons and grandsons of the tsar, the titles died with murdered tsar IMO. The correct style would be princes and i assume share equal rank.

"It was his wish that they debate and vote both on government in general and the Crown and therefore it is a matter for the Russian people if the Crown is restored and also in my view that would wear the Crown. "
i agree michaelHR, thank you for your thoughtful post

i quote Prince Rostislav Romanoff in 1992
"The Romanoff family today consists of some twenty nine members. We are a family all of whom, except for Vladimir Kyrilovitch, his heirs and his father before him, have respected the wishes of my great-grandmother, the Dowager Empress Marie Feodorovna, that there should never be a question of a pretender or successor to the throne of Russia by the Romanoff family in exile. The questions could and should only be decided by the Russian people in Russia at the time appropriate to them"


"GD Kyrill forfeited his right to sucession by his treasonous acts

I've always thought this, Not a Pretender, he's always been a vile example of a traitor, when he was Commandant of the Palace Guard in 1917, he quickly sold out his birthright marching under a red flag through the streets of Petrograd!

[Russophile]

Most likely bbb, Kyril did it to save his arse what with the purge of Romanovs going on around him. But it doesn't speak well of his courage, or lack of . . .

[Michael HR]

GD Kyril and courage and not words that I would place in the same sentance. He was a traitor to the Tsar and his Country by his actions in 1917 and nothing can erase that. There are other reasons why I do not feel his line can assend the Throne such as his Mother's religion, his marriage and of course his son's marriage and thr fact that George is a Prussian Prince and I am not convinced that Russia wants to put a member of the German Imperial family on their throne after all that has happended.

As I said earlier I feel in light of GD Michael's wish that the matter go to the russian people. If they vote for a crown then so be it. If they vote Maria then so be it but if they vote for someone else then so be it.

I find it slightly offensive that Princess Maria Romonova spends part of her time handing out titles that no longer exsist and have not done so since 1917 and, as we have seen, tries to trash every other member of the family to ensure that she and only she is seen as a possible sucessor to Nicholas II when there are other persons who may have a claim.

She is in the same position as other members of the family with regard to marriage due to her parents and is not in a position to throw stones.

If her son George does not make an "equal" marriage or does not marry at all that will be the end for her line once and for all.

I feel the Russian people should decide how their country is run and by whom and in what fashion.

[Susana]

Originally Posted by Benjamin

Grand Duchess Maria Wladimirovna is a Grand Duchess of Russia by fact of being the daughter of the late Grand Duke Wladimir, former Head of the Imperial House of Romanov and thus de-jure Tsar.

This is all a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. Cyril was disqualified due to his mother's tardiness in accepting Orthodoxy. It doesn't matter WHEN Cyril's wife accepted it--it was too late. Also Catherine The Great's son passed a law preventing ANY female from ascending the throne ever again. Cyril wasn't ever in a position to change inherited titles; HIS children would be ONLY titled Prince or Princess. All changes he made were to further his progress toward his empty goals and courtiers who hung on to him sycophantly believed (still) they were receiving benefit from a fantasy restoration. Marie is NOT a Grand Duchess much less the head of the house of Romanov. I have met and spent time with Romanovs whose bloodlines are pure and not diluted by morganatic or divorced marriages--they politely ignore her and her son. The senior branch of the House of Romanov is represented today by Prince Nicholas (Nicholaeivichi) who is supported by the above-mentioned family members. Also recognized by Queen Elizabeth IIin public at a reception. The next house which would be considered would be the Michaelovichi). Both these houses use the appropriate term "prince or princess" So, you're influenced by one side of the story but might want to do a little investigation.

She's a pompous pretender and eats too much.

[branchg]

There is nothing in the Pauline Law disbarring Cyril from succeeding. It's a matter of historical record that Maria Pavlovna converted to Orthodoxy in 1908 and her children remained in-line to the imperial throne. Cyril's son, Vladimir, succeeded to his father's position as Head of the Imperial House and was born of an equal marriage (Victoria Melita was a Princess of the UK and daughter of Grand Duchess Marie Alexandrovna and Prince Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh).

While it's true there certainly are questions about Vladimir's marriage and whether Maria should be considered a dynast, there is no question Nicholas Romanov was morganatic and is not the senior male agnate in any case. He has no right to be Prince of Russia or His Highness because his mother was not royal.

None of the current Romanovs are in compliance with the Pauline Laws and the dynasty died with Vladimir's death.

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Susana

This is all a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.

Hardly fury, dear Susana. Just the facts.

Originally Posted by Susana

Also Catherine The Great's son passed a law preventing ANY female from ascending the throne ever again.

Care to cite this law? Don't bother, I'll save you the trouble of searching for something that doesn't exist . Here is the text of Article 30 of the Fundamental Laws (which Tsar Paul promulgated):
"When the last male issue of the Emperor's sons is extinct, succession remains in the same branch, but in the female issue of the last reigning Emperor, as being nearest to the throne, and therein it follows the same order, with preference to a male over a female person; but the female person from whom this right directly proceeds never loses this right."
Hmmm, sounds like females have succession rights after all .

Originally Posted by Susana

I have met and spent time with Romanovs whose bloodlines are pure and not diluted by morganatic or divorced marriages

Originally Posted by Susana

So, you're influenced by one side of the story but might want to do a little investigation.

May I endeavor to suggest that perhaps it is you who has been unduly influenced by one side of the story, and thus could benefit from further unbiased study on the subject?

Originally Posted by Susana

She's a pompous pretender and eats too much.

How do you know if HIH is pompous (or anything about her character, for that matter)? Have you ever met her? And how are you so well-informed as to be aware of the Grand Duchess's eating habits?
Purely my opinion, but: detractors of the Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna would probably be taken slightly more seriously if they could participate in discussions about the Russian succession without resorting to such childish remarks (ie commenting disparagingly about someone's figure and personality).

[branchg]

And I would love to know just who these Romanovs are that are "pure and not diluted by morganatic or divorced marriages", a criteria none of the current descendants meet.

They are ALL morganatic under the strictest interpretation of the Pauline Law. Given that point, Maria Vladimirovna arguably takes precedence since the senior line male, Dimitri Iliynsky, is an American and carries no titles of nobility.

[Susana]

How can ya'll talk about the 'dynasty' passing through or to a woman? It wasn't happening guys. The oldest living MALE descendent of a tsar would have been ruler after Michael abdicated. Some say GD Nicholas some say GD Cyril but at any rate it could not and would not involve a woman. AND it was rather presumptous for Cyril and his son PRINCE Vladimir to generously bestow titles they had no legal or dynastic right to bestow. PLUS the Romanovs I've met and spent time with don't acknowledge Maria--they seemed to pointedly ignore her. Queen Elizabeth II recognizes Prince Nicholas Romanov (note that he doesn't affect a grand ducal title which isn't his) as the Head of the House of Romanov. You can bestow all the titles you want but you can't change laws of succession in a defunct dynasty.

[branchg]

Grand Duke Michael never abdicated the throne. He simply declined to accept it, passing his sovereign powers to the new Provisional Government pending a referendum of the people as to what form of government they wanted, and if they wanted a Tsar, who that person should be. In effect, the reign of the Romanovs had come to an end.

After Michael's murder, the headship of the House under the Pauline Law passed to the next eligible male dynast, which was his cousin, Grand Duke Cyril Vladimirovitch. All of the surviving dynasts, with the exception of Grand Duke Nicholas and Grand Duke Peter, recognized Cyril as Head of the Imperial House. Nicholas and Peter refused to do so for personal reasons, having nothing to do with the Pauline Law, and everything to do with their own hostility to the Vladimirovchi. The headship passed in order of descending male lines of a Tsar, which after Alexander III, was his brother, Vladimir Alexandrovich's line.

The right of the Head of any Royal House to confer honours and titles is well-established. As the de-jure repository of sovereign powers, the Head of the House always has the right to confer or withhold any honours within their perogative.

As was always the case during Imperial Russia, morganatic descendants of a dynast were granted a style and title demonstrating affiliation with, but not membership of, the dynasty itself. The successive eldest male of each dynast's line was granted the right to be HH and Prince of Russia, so long as they were not morganatic. If they were not born of an equal marriage, they lost their imperial style and rank.

Queen Elizabeth II has never publicly commented on the Russian imperial question, although it's true she once stood at a reception in London when she saw Prince Nicholas Romanov approaching. A simply mark of courtesy is certainly appropriate, given the fact her grandfather, George V, refused to allow Nicholas II and his family to settle in England, which probably sent them to their death. She also has received Grand Duchess Maria and her son, George, privately for tea at The Palace.

At the end of the day, there is zero possibility of any restoration of the throne in Russia, whether Maria or another Romanov.

[JPhinala]

I feel like the group may have been a bit quick in shuting susana down. There is a fairly strong argument against Maria Vladimirovna. The argument is very simple.

While Pauline Law does indicate a sucession in the event of the extinction of the male line, it would not have come into effect. Nicholas II Aleksandrovich did something which went quietly unnoticed by most of you when he chose Mikhail to become Emperor. By choosing Mikhail in his abdication document he ignored (and not for the first time) the existance of a morganatic marriage. Mikhail was morganatically married which set a sort of precedent which can not be ignored.

Nicholas was also a reigning monarch which makes his inadvertant reversal of that part of Pauline Law more important and more legally acceptable than Vladimir Cyrillovich's proclamation allowing his daughter to succeed.

This makes the succession claim look something like this:
1. Dmitry Romanovsky-Ilyinsky (No male descendants)
2. Nicholas Romanovich (No male descendants)
3. Dmitry Romanovich (No male descendants)
4. Michael Andreevich (No male descendants)
5. Andrew Andreevich
6. Alexis Andreevich (No male descendants)
7. Peter Andreevich (No male descendants)
8. Andrew Andreevich (No male descendants)
9. Michael Feodorovich (No male descendants)
10. Rostislav Rostislavovich
11. Nikita Rostislavich
12. Nicholas Nicholaievich
13. Daniel Nicholaievich

Hope you all at least found this interesting.

-PS It's good to be back! I haven't been online in forever

[Marengo]

Originally Posted by JPhinala

While Pauline Law does indicate a sucession in the event of the extinction of the male line, it would not have come into effect. Nicholas II Aleksandrovich did something which went quietly unnoticed by most of you when he chose Mikhail to become Emperor. By choosing Mikhail in his abdication document he ignored (and not for the first time) the existance of a morganatic marriage. Mikhail was morganatically married which set a sort of precedent which can not be ignored.

That is an interesting argument actually and a new insight to me too, I never thoguht about the matter in this way. Thanks!

[Anna was Franziska]

I think the case against Maria V. is strong. First of all, her father, Vladimir, was born to a divorced mother (Ducky, divorced from Alexandra's brother) who was not converted to Orthodoxy at the time of his birth. In addition to this, Maria's mother was a member of the long deposed Bagration dynasty of Georgia, so her 'equality' is questionable. For example, the Yussoupovs were also a long deposed small ruling house as well, yet when Irina married Felix, she had to sign away all her rights to the throne (however minute they were) and marry him morgatanically. So if one deposed house of the old days before the empire is morgatanic, why not another?

But really, why couldn't Nicholas void the Pauline law? One Tsar made it, another could revoke it.Some people say he wouldn't do it because his cousins would 'get mad.' Well, who cares? He was Tsar and he could do what he wanted. (of course his weakness did destroy him) He could have done what was necessary to ensure the continuation of his line (assuming of course they were not ousted) At one time there was talk that, if Alexei passed or was unable to rule, Olga could rule jointly with, married to, Dmitri Pavlovich, sort of the same as William and Mary in England. Ultimately, since the dynasty is no more, its rules are as well, so anything can be changed since it hardly matters anyway.

In my view, the succession should have passed, as it would have in Britain, to Xenia. By the British laws, she would have been next in line after the deaths of her brothers and nephews. She was a direct descendant of Alexander III, which gives her a stronger connection than Kyril. She was married to a second cousin (Sandro) who was also a Romanov and descendant of Alexander II, making a much stronger royal blood connection than Kyril and Ducky. Xenia and Sandro with SIX sons would be well set to secure the succession and future of a dynasty. That branch of the family probably agrees, and that's why they have their Romanov Family Association, aside from Maria V. and the "House of Romanov."

[Russophile]

That is an interesting observation.
Not to dispute the blood lines, but to dispute the intellect, Xenia never seemed very bright (though Minnie was no intellect), and I have read Sandros books but though he seemed intelligent, he seemed to have no drive prefering to live off wealthy American heiresses. What do you think AWF?
(Or should we put this in another thread Warren? )

[JPhinala]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

In addition to this, Maria's mother was a member of the long deposed Bagration dynasty of Georgia, so her 'equality' is questionable. ."

Though I'd love to nail Maria Vladimirovna on this point, I don't know that it's 100% valid. Aleksandr III and Marie Feodorovna both wanted Nikolai II to marry Princess Helene d'Orleans (subsequently Duchess d'Aosta). While The Bourbon Dynasty was more freshly deposed this goes to show that the Romanov's still recognized Deposed Royals as Royals. The reason Felix Youssoupov was not held as equal is that not only was he a HH as opposed to an HRH or and HIH. The only way I can REALLY see this argument working is that since the Youssoupovs were Russian and as such the Romanov's rejected their claim to Regal/Imperial/Princely equality, they would also have rejected the Bagrations as Russian and therefor subservient. Just a thought. I'm still mulling this one over.

[FabianJ]

In my opinion Grand Duchess María Vladimirovna is the head of the Romanov Family, her parents marriage was an equal one. Her marriage was an equal one. I think that if his son marry with a commoner the succesion to the throne will pass to the line of the Grand Duchess María Kirillovna.

[branchg]

repeat
I agree she is the Head of the Imperial House without question. While Vladimir's decision to declare the Bagrations in the senior line as royal and equal to the imperial family was certainly controversial, it was his right as the head of the house to do so.

[wymanda]

I really wonder if these "rules" would stand up if challenged in the European Court of Human Rights. Ostensibly they discriminate against a persons right to marry another of their choosing.

[Michael HR]

Russia is not a member of the European Court sadly. I agree that Kyril's line is not my favorite for the reasons stated by others. I feel the Russian people should choose who if anyone they wish as Emperor.