Who is the Head of the Imperial Family? - Page 6

**MAfan** · #**101** 11-09-2008, 05:51 AM

I've two questions:

1- If the Head of the Imperial Family give his consent for the marriage of a Member of the Family and a woman who is'nt born in a Royal Family (condition required by the Romanov Family Laws), the marriage has to be considered dynastic or morganatic? Does theyr descendants retain theyr rights to the throne?

2- When can a woman, born in the Russian Imperial Famiy, inhereit the throne?

I was looking the Romanov's genealogy, and the equal and dynastic weddings of its members: as Head of the House there were, in theory:
Nikolaj II Alexandrovic 1894-1918
Alexis Nikolajevic 1918
Kirill Wladimirovic 1918-1938
Boris Wladimirovic 1938-1943
Andrej Wladimirovic 1943-1956
Vsevelod Ivanovic 1956-1973
Roman Petrovic 1973-1978
Andrew Alexandrovic 1978-1981
Vassili Alexandrovic 1981-1989

Nobody of the other Romanovs can be since 1989 Head of the House, because all others are descendants of unequal marriages.

branchg · #**102** 11-23-2008, 08:38 PM

The answer to Question #1 is any marriage made by a Grand Duke or Prince of the Blood to a woman who was not of a royal house was considered morganatic. The wife and children were given a morganatic title demonstrating association with, but not membership of the imperial family (i.e. Countess Torby, Princess Romanovskaya-Illiynskoe) and they were not considered dynasts.

The answer to Question #2 is a woman can inherit the throne when all senior male lines no longer have dynasts. This is the situation today, which is why Maria Vladimirovna is the pretender, versus her male cousins who are morganatic.

Some of her cousins, such as Nicholas Romanov, take the position she too is morganatic since her mother, Leonida Bagration, was not of a royal house. Even if we accept this premise (which certainly has some validity), there would be no male dynasts left as they are all descended from morganatic marriages.

In effect, the Romanov Dynasty died with Grand Duke Vladimir's death in 1992.

Only Cyril Vladimirovitch (who was next in-line after the death of Nicholas II, The Tsarevitch and Grand Duke Michael) made an equal and compliant marriage (to Victoria Melita, Princess of Great Britain and Ireland) under the Pauline Laws.

His cousins did not.

**MAfan** · #**103** 11-24-2008, 09:15 AM

But Orthodox Church didn't recognised it, becase Kirill and Victora Melita were first cousins, and Tsar Nicholas didn't recognised it too. (If I remember corectly, the Tsar was the Head of the Orthodox Church, isn't it?). In this way, theyr children weren't members of the Imperial Family.

So, can we consider as Head of the Family for example the descendants of GD Anastasia Michailovna, Grand Duchess Friedrich Franz III of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, or the descendants of GD Vera Konstantinovna, Duchess of Wurttenberg, or in general the descendants of Grand Duchesses who married equally?

branchg · #**104** 11-24-2008, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAfan

But Orthodox Church didn't recognised it, becase Kirill and Victora Melita were first cousins, and Tsar Nicholas didn't recognised it too. (If I remember corectly, the Tsar was the Head of the Orthodox Church, isn't it?). In this way, theyr children weren't members of the Imperial Family.

The Church recognized their marriage without question. Nicholas II was harsh at first because Cyril had married without seeking his consent and the Empress was displeased that Victoria had divorced her brother, Ernst of Hesse-Darmstadt.

Nicholas reversed his decision and Victoria was formally recognized as "Orthodox Grand Duchess" and they were noted as dynasts in the Court Circular.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAfan

So, can we consider as Head of the Family for example the descendants of GD Anastasia Michailovna, Grand Duchess Friedrich Franz III of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, or the descendants of GD Vera Konstantinovna, Duchess of Wurttenberg, or in general the descendants of Grand Duchesses who married equally?

It's a complicated question, with some scholars stating the succession would pass through Vladimir's sisters, Princess Kira, to the House of Hohenzollern, or Princess Marie, to the House of Leiningen, although neither of those dynasties are Orthodox, as required by the Pauline Law. In addition, many of their descendants married unequally as well.

Still others state the only line still unquestionably royal and Orthodox would be Grand Duchess Elena Vladimirovna's marriage to Prince Nicholas of Greece & Denmark (Cyril's sister). Her eldest child, Princess Olga, married HRH Prince Paul of Yugoslavia (an Orthodox union), and their eldest child, HRH Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia, married equally and has issue.

**MAfan** · #**105** 11-25-2008, 09:03 AM

Ok, I'm sorry; I've read in Greg King's biography of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna that Orthodox Church didn't recognise the wedding because of they were cousins, and the same was made by the Czar; only some year later he restored Kirill in all his titles and honours, but only for him and not for Victoria.

About Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia, he married two Catholic women; so his descendants can be considered as pretendants to the Russian Throne, after him?

branchg · #**106** 11-25-2008, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAfan

About Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia, he married two Catholic women; so his descendants can be considered as pretendants to the Russian Throne, after him?

Hypothetically, if they converted to the Serbian Orthodox Church and raised their children Orthodox (which I suspect was the case), their standing would be strong in terms of equal marriages.

Keep in mind this is only from the point of view that Maria would be excluded based on her mother's status as a Bagration, a family that was inscribed in the Fifth Book of Nobility during Imperial Russia. Vladimir was the Head of House and had ruled the senior Bagration line was royal prior to his marriage to Leonida.

Maria remains the Head of the Imperial House and is recognized as such by the Russian Government.

Camilo2002 · #**107** 01-07-2009, 08:44 PM

I don't think Maria V. has a valid claim to the hypothetic Russian throne; first of all the Russian crown in Russia passed from male to male since Tsar Paul I promulgated the Pauline Laws on 1797; such Law excluded females from taking the throne and was applied when Paul's widow (Tsarina Sofia Dorothea of Wuttemberg) wanted to become reigning empress after Paul was assassinated.

In strict Russian monarchic law, there are no Grand Dukes anymore. The Law promulgated by Alexander III stated that only paternal grandchildren of a Tsar could hold the title of Grand Dukes of Russia. That was the reason why Xenia's (Nicholas II's sister) children were "only" princes rather than Grand Dukes; that was the Law in Imperial Russia and Nicholas II did not want to change it, not even for the sake of his sister's children, who at the same time were maternal grandchildren of Tsar Alexander III.

Maria's grandfather, Grand Duke Cyrill Romanov, was considered a traitor by many members of the Russian royal family as during the February Revolution of 1917, upon the abdication of Nicholas II, Cyril came with his regiment to swear allegiance to the provisional government, wearing a red revolutionary band on his uniform. This caused grave offence in the Imperial Family and led to many members shunning him as legitimate heir to the Throne.

After the revolution, Maria's father, Prince Vladimir Romanov and gave himself the title of Grand Duke of Russia and did the same to his daughters. Their real title would be prince or princess of Russia, as they are not paternal grandchildren of any Tsar.

As per unequal marriages, the Bagrations were never considered as "equal" and the Gotha does not even consider then as members of a mediatized house (for example their rank is considered widely inferior to the mediatized houses of Croy, Erbach, Castell, Esterhazi, Furstenberg, etc.). A marriage between a Romanov and a Bagration would have been considered morganatic in the imperial Russia.

In any case, the main point is that princes that married morganatically became unable to inherit the crown if they married under the prohibition of the Head of the Royal House. In that sense, the better right would belong to the direct male descendants of Grand Duke Pavel (Vladimir's younger brother), throught his son Dimitry Romanov (who participated in the killing of Rasputin) who nowadays live in Florida. The line would be as follows:

Tsar Alexander II --> GD Paul Romanov --> GD Dimitry Romanov -->

-->Prince Paul Romanov ->Prince Dimitry Romanov Jr.

I agree with public opinion in Russia in the sense that there is no way the Country may return to an imperial regime; Russian newspapers state that claimants know that and are only looking for compensation in either cash or properties. They laugh on the fact that Maria V. may just think that her son, who is a Prussian prince (great great grandson of Kaiser Wilhelm II), could ever take the throne of the Romanovs.

branchg · #**108** 01-09-2009, 08:24 AM

Grand Duke Dimitri married Audrey Emery, an American heiress, who was created Princess Romanovskaya-Illinysky by Grand Duke Cyril. His line is ineligible to succeed under the Pauline Law as their descendants (including Dimitri Illinysky) are morganatic.

All of the Romanovs are morganatic under the strictest interpretation of the Pauline Laws. The throne would have passed to the Yugoslavian Royal Family through Grand Duchess Elena's marriage to Prince Nicholas of Greece via Princess Olga, Vladimir's cousin, after his death in 1992. Although Vladimir's sisters, Marie and Kira, both married German royals, it is likely both lines would have been excluded from the succession due to politics and religion.

Warren · #**109** 01-09-2009, 08:51 AM

A representation of branchg's line of descent:
Tsar Alexander II > GD Vladimir > GD Elena [Helen] (married Nicholas of Greece) > Princess Olga (married Paul of Yugoslavia) > Prince Alexander (b 1924)

Prince Alexander married firstly Princess Maria Pia of Savoy. A son and a daughter have married "unequally", another son is unmarried while the eldest is openly gay.
Prince Alexander married secondly Princess Barbara of Liechtenstein and they have one unmarried son, Prince Dushan (b 1977).

In this scenario, if the Yugoslav line fails succession would fall to the second daughter of Grand Duchess Helen, Princess Elisabeth of Greece, who married Carl Theodor, Count zu Toerring-Jettenbach, the Head of a mediatised House.

If that line fails or is ruled ineligible, succession falls to the descendants of Helen's third daughter, Princess Marina, who's eldest son is today the Duke of Kent. Those who have read Frederick Forsyth's Icon will know where this is going.

Vecchiolarry · #**110** 01-09-2009, 09:12 AM

Hi Warren,

I love the last supposition as to whom will reign over Russia!!!
But, since the Duke of Kent would probably not really want to be Czar, I think his brother should inherit the throne and reign as Czar Michael or Michail and then his wife could become the Empress Maria Christina!!!

Now wouldn't that just be a kick in the face or pants to us all????

Larry

Warren · #**111** 01-09-2009, 09:45 AM

His father was mooted for the throne of Poland in the 1930s so it would be a natural progression for Michael to take the throne of Russia.
Marie Christine would be in a similar position to that of the once-looked-down-upon Princess May of Teck and end up having the last laugh.

CarolinaLandgrave · #**112** 01-09-2009, 03:47 PM

Nice analogy, Warren. That made witty insight made my day.

Alfred The Great · #**113** 01-30-2009, 06:11 PM

I do have a question regarding succesion. Tsar Paul declared only male heirs could ascend to the throne, but as Monarch, and absolute ruler, could later monarchs, Nicholas II for example, not have rescinded the law so as Olga could have been the heir?

Michael HR · #**114** 01-31-2009, 05:37 AM

Nicholas could have done and was thinking of this before Alexis was born. Once Alexis came along they did not change the Pauline laws. He might have had a battle with the other members of the family who fell in line but as Tsar he could change had he wished and had the backbone. Even with Alexis once they knew the medical situation he should have changed so that his daughters followed or then his sisters first and so on.

Kalafrana · #**115** 01-31-2009, 05:50 AM

Prince Michael of Kent qualified as a British Army interpreter in Russian!

My understanding is that the Orthodox Churches do not recognise marriage between first cousins, and therefore would regard the marriage of Kirill Vladimirovich and Victoria Melita as invalid (the wedding took place in a Lutheran church, I think), so Vladimir Kirillivich would have been illegitimate in the eyes of the church. Before the Revolution the validity of the marriage was not important in succession terms, since the pair only had daughters - Vladimir Kirillovich was not born until August 1917.

As it happens, my maternal grandparents were first cousins, and married quite validly in the Church of England (though with much opposition from my grandmother's parents - my grandfather's were both dead, so whether they would have objected I don't know), which does accept marriage between first cousins, so the question of church attitudes to such marriages is something I'm interested in. The Catholic Church requires the couple to get a dispensation. There are suggestions in War and Peace that the Orthodox Church might have been persuaded to allow Nikolai and Sonya (who were first cousins) to marry, but the possibility was remote.

Where is the evidence that the Orthodox Church accepted the validity of Kirill and Victoria Melita's marriage 'without question'? Was their attitude similar to that of English civil law on foreign marriages - if the marriage is valid according to the law of the jurisdiction it took place in, then it is valid under English law? That might be enough for normal purposes, but was it enough for the Pauline Law?

Michael HR · #**116** 01-31-2009, 06:16 AM

I think it was regarded as valid if only for the reason that they were both Grand Duke/Duchess and the Tsar would not have done this if it was not acceptable to him. I think however they took some time to bestow the title on his wife but that may have been more to do with the Empress who was not a happy bunny at the marriage. In the end the Tsar did allow his wife the title of GD and they were on the court circular as members of the dynasty and in line to the throne. Please correct me if I have got this wrong.

branchg · #**117** 01-31-2009, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren

His father was mooted for the throne of Poland in the 1930s so it would be a natural progression for Michael to take the throne of Russia.
Marie Christine would be in a similar position to that of the once-looked-down-upon Princess May of Teck and end up having the last laugh.

Marina's line is ineligible too. None of her children were raised Orthodox and all married commoners.

**MAfan** · #**118** 01-31-2009, 04:17 PM

The problem is that NOBODY is eligible...

Alfred The Great · #**119** 01-31-2009, 05:16 PM

does anyone know the the estimated wealth of the romanov's before the revolution. also, I wondered, how exactly did the imperial family actually get money as well as the various members of the imperial family.

Anna was Franziska · #**120** 01-31-2009, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camilo2002

I don't think Maria V. has a valid claim to the hypothetic Russian throne...

I totally agree. I really don't see how anyone accepts Maria's claim as valid since:

1. She is a woman, curetux or whatever, it wasn't allowed for anyone else
2. Her mother was from a deposed house, and should have been considered of the same level of nobility as the Yussoupovs, and you know Irina had to marry morgatanically.
3. Ducky was divorced and not Orthodox when Vlad was born.
4. KYRIL WAS A TRAITOR and should be blackballed for that alone.

The children of Sandro and Xenia were the closest relations in bloodline, after all they were double Romanov, and Xenia being the direct daughter of a Tsar, Alexander III, was much closer than Kyril being only a grandson if Alexander II. The female thing is so archaic and disgraceful I can't even fathom it, in England's family, Xenia would have been next in line after her brothers and nephew died. But of course there will be no restoration, so it hardly matters.