Who is the Head of the Imperial Family?


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The claim to the Georgian throne rested with the Gruzinsky line, not the Mouhkrani, which hadn't reigned in hundreds of years. Tsar Paul declared the Treaty null and void and all branches became part of the Russian nobility when Georgia was annexed to the Empire in 1800.

Maria's claim is no better than other members of the family who also descend from a marriage of a dynast and a female Russian noble. Given equality on that point, there are males left that take precedence over her as a female.

...When Princess Tatiana of Russia married a Prince Bagration she officially lost he admittedly distant right of succession to the throne because it was not an equal marriage.
Tatiana renounced her rights to the throne as standard practice for a female dynast marrying outside the family. Nicholas II never asked her to renounce the succession. It was well-understood at the time that a marriage to a Bagration prince was not equal, but one of good standing for a female dynast in very distant succession to the throne. Nothing more or less.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"It was well-understood at the time that a marriage to a Bagration prince was not equal"

Well if Tatiana's marriage to a Bagration was understood to be uneqaul, the Vladimir's marriage to a Bagration was also unequal. That throws open the question of headship of the former Imperial Family.
 
Last edited:
All this quarreling goes to show that being a Russian royal can't be such a bad thing. Refreshing as compared to the constant self-martyrdom that so many royals subject the public to.
 
I have to say it's a pity that Maria's clan and the rest of the Romanovs can't come to some sort of rational agreement.I wonder if the two factions could somehow unite through a marriage and then have common cause for the couple. Georgi seems like a nice enough fellow and I am hopeful that there is a nice girl that can be found.
 
The rightful Imperial Dynast.

I have heard two claims of who the righftul heir to Russia's throne is. Some say it is Maria Vladimirovna Romanov and others claim it is Nicholas Romanovich Romanov. Maria claims the throne based on the fact that her father was the Czar's closest male relative and with his death, the eligible male bloodline is extinct, so she is the rightful Empress. Nicholas claims he is the rightful heir as he is the closest male dynast not excluded by the morganatic marriage clause in the House Laws. There are arguements against both.
Arguements against Maria:
Her mother, Leonida Bagration-Mukhransky, was of the Bagrationi Dynasty which ruled in Georgia. As that line was a cadet branch, when Russia took over Georgia, they became noblity and so Leonida was not of royalty, thus Vladmir violated House Laws and Maria is ineligible.

Maria's grandfather,Cyril, married without the approval of Emperor Alexander III, thus, all descendants of his line are ineligible.

Victoria, Maria's grandmother, was a Protestant and Cyril's 1st cousin, both forbidden by the Church to marry a dynast.

Maria's great-grandfather married a Lutheran

Cyril was not recognized by The Dowager Empress Marie or any senior members of the family.

Cyril joined the revolutionaries who toppled his family, thus hurting his legitimacy for the throne.

Arguements against Nicholas;
Nicholas argued all other people of elder branches had lost their rights to the throne by unequal marriages to non-royal wives, however, his mother was not of royal blood, so he was ineligible.

Counters:
The Mukhransky family is indeed royalty and since it was approved by the recognized Head of the family at the time, the marriage is equal

Cyril and Victoria's marriage was approved by Emperor Nicholas II, eliminating any arguements based against Maria due to their marriage

Cyril and his brothers were never excluded from the succession, so the arguement against Cyril's mother is invalid.

Nicholas claims the House Law only disqualifies the heirs of Grand Dukes who marry a non-royal. His father was a Prince, so the Law doesn't apply.

Counters to Counters

If Vladmir's marriage is valid, so are some other marriages said not to be, and that would require a revision to the succession.

Nicholas' parents' marriage was said to be invalid in the Almanach de Gotha, meaning he is not eligible.

based on all this, who is the rightful dynast?
 
Last edited:
Put frankly, the reason for all the 'unequal' marriages is that there was never really an anticipation for the Romanovs to return, since no one anticipated just how short Communist rule would actually be. The Vladimir branch collaborated, which pretty much means that in a sick way, they were more than happy that tens of millions of Russians get butchered as long as they were recognized by the ruling politboro. They antagonized the rest of the Romanovs by punishing the other family members, by decalring them 'non-Romanovs' in the Imperial sense, and then proceeded to reward their toadies with titles in excahnge for support.
 
The main problem with Maria's claim is her father's marriage to Princess Leonida Bagration-Moukhransky was not equal under the Pauline Law, as her branch of the Bagrids was not regnant in the Kingdom of Georgia, and all branches of the family were absorbed into the Russian nobility after Tsar Paul annexed Georgia in 1800.

However, the other branches of the family also married unequally, leaving the male lines defunct of dynasts under the Pauline Law. Therefore, under the Pauline Law, the succession would pass to the next eligible female line of the last regining Emperor. With Grand Duke Vladimir's death in 1992 (the last undisputed Head of the Imperial House), this would be through his aunt, Grand Duchess Helen Vladimirovna.

His sisters, Kira and Marie, also married equally under the Pauline Laws, however, they married German royals and did not raise their children Orthodox, another requirement of the Pauline Laws. Those female lines are ineligible.

Grand Duchess Helen married Prince Nicholas of Greece & Denmark. Her eldest daughter, Princess Olga, married Prince Paul of Yugoslavia, an equal and Orthodox marriage. Olga's eldest son, Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia, would arguably be the rightful successor if the monarchy was ever restored.

However, I do believe Maria Vladimirovna is the Head of the Imperial House. The fact is her father alone had the right to declare any marriage equal or not. Maria married equally to Prince Franz-Wilhelm of Prussia and her son is royal.
 
Maria and Georgi's claim is invalidated way back with Maria's grandfather Grand Duke Cyril, the first pretender to the throne.


The Russian Law of Succession established by Emperor Paul in 1797 states that:
  1. The monarch must be Orthodox.
  2. The monarch must be male as long as there are any eligible males in the Imperial house.
  3. The mother and wife of the male monarch or male heir must be Orthodox at the time of marriage.
  4. The monarch must make an equal marriage to a woman from another ruling house.
  5. The future monarch can only marry with the permission of the reigning Tsar.
Grand Duke Cyril failed to meet two of these requirements: Neither his wife nor his mother were Orthodox when they were married. And Cyril married without the permission of - indeed, defiance of - Tsar Nicholas II.
Cyril probably wasn't eligible for succession before he got married and he certainly wasn't after he married Victoria Melita. He knocked himself and his descendants out of the line of succession while the law was still in effect! For them to continue to insist otherwise just makes them look silly!
 
Cyril's marriage was in compliance with the Pauline Laws and his daughters were listed as dynasts in the Court Circular of 1917. The Tsar could waive any religious requirements of marriage and his mother, Maria Pavlovna, converted to Orthodoxy in 1905. His wife, Victoria Melita of Edinburgh, was recognized by Nicholas II as a Grand Duchess and Orthodox.
 
For my two-penneth, there's an issue here which has been previously unexplored and that is the whole concept of having a royal family. Monarchy survives because one man gives his loyalty to another as his King. In 1908 when Nicholas II restored Grand Duke Cyril Vladimirovich's ranks and titles, he was third in line to the throne. The Tsar also recognised Victoria Melita and made her a Grand Duchess of Russia and so whatever the views of the Tsar and the Tsarina on the marriage between Cyril and Ducky before 1908, we know that they changed at least legally at that time. In 1907, Ducky converted to Orthodoxy, she was of equal standing being from a ruling royal house and the union was legitimised by the Tsar. Therefore, anyone who counts himself as a monarchist would be duty bound by his loyalty to the Russian crown to accept that Cyril Vladimirovich was not only third in line when it comes to the succession but that his marriage was equal and legitimate in the eyes of the Tsar and therefore should be regarded as equal and legitimate to us. (Or rather to those who are monarchists and I understand not everyone who contributes to the board is!)

So when Nicholas II and Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich were dead, Cyril Vladimirovich became Tsar to those who wanted there to be a Tsar. By which I mean that although the Tsar no longer held any political power, the loyalty invested in reigning monarchs was deferred to him. Many people throw up the fact that Cyril swore allegiance to the Russian Provisional Government as a negating cause for him to be replaced but once again, the idea of monarchy is that a person doesn't choose his monarch and that there is no guarantee that the monarch will make the right decision all of the time. Let's not get confused, Cyril wasn't swearing loyalty to the Bolsheviks who had murdered Nicholas and Alexandra, Elisabeth etc etc - this was in fact something that other monarchs have done in order to try and secure their positions. Constantine II of the Hellenes could be said to have tried something similar. In both cases, exile was still the end result.

So, to those Russians who saw Cyril as the legitimate Tsar in exile there is almost certainly no reason why anyone other than Maria Vladimirovna is the rightful heir - because with Cyril as the head of the house, he could change laws and legitimize marriages just as Nicholas II had done. If Cyril regarded the marriage between Vladimir and Leonida as equal then it was equal and acceptable, just as Nicholas II recognised the marriage between Cyril and Ducky and put their children in the line of succession to the Russian throne. And similarly, when Vladimir decided that his daughter would be his heir, she was just that. This is where Nicholas and Dmitri Romanov's case totally collapses. They want people to ignore the decision of a reigning monarch (Nicholas II) which goes against the whole idea of monarchy.

Add to all this the fact that the likes of Nicholas and Dmitri have said they don't want to see a monarchy restored (yet still use the title of Prince?) and that they do very little for Russia whereas Maria has now dedicated her entire life to working for the Russian people in whatever way she can and I think the case gets sewn up pretty quickly. Even if we put aside the old house laws for a moment, the fact that it's Maria the Russian government and the Russian Orthodox Church recognise as the head of the Imperial Family and it's Maria all the way.
 
Umm, wasn't Cyril dead when Vladimir married Leonida?
 
You're quite right, he was, my mistake. However, that actually makes the case even stronger because when Cyril died and Vladimir became Head of the House (let's remember that actually connotates Tsar of all the Russias) he could have ripped every dynastic law in the book and been quite entitled to do so. If Leonida wasn't equal, he could even have made her so before their marriage. Monarchs often change things to suit the time or their own ends. Look at George V and the surname swap during the First World War.
 
Actually there were a few posts that I noticed saying that.

I thought as one of the conditions for marrying Maria, GD Vladimir had to renounce the rights of any children he had with her, but retained his rights to the throne...

Or maybe I'm trying to stir up trouble? LOL
 
I assume you mean Leonida? I doubt very much Vladimir would have agreed to that. Besides, the royal house of Bagration had been recognised by Russia in 1783 with the Treaty of Georgievsk and that was never repealed, so Leonida was equal to Vladimir and the question of their children having succession rights was really not an issue.
 
The Gruzinsky line of the Bagrids was the reigning branch over Georgia, not the Moukhransky, which was a cadet line. The Treaty only recognized the royal status of the reigning King and his heir, not the other branches. In 1800, Paul revoked the Treaty and annexed Georgia.

Vladimir recognized Prince George of Moukhrani in 1946 as being of royal rank in a published decree. At that time, there was doubt whether there were surviving descendants of the Gruzinsky still alive in Georgia, especially in light of Stalin's reign of terror. He recognized the Moukhrani branch as the surviving branch of the Georgian royal house, which was his right as de-jure Tsar.

Vladimir was already the Head of the Imperial House at the time of his marriage to Leonida and declared her of equal rank.
 
Actually there were a few posts that I noticed saying that.

I thought as one of the conditions for marrying Maria, GD Vladimir had to renounce the rights of any children he had with her, but retained his rights to the throne...

Or maybe I'm trying to stir up trouble? LOL

Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich did not renounce his rights to the throne with his marriage to Marie. Nor was he the only Grand Duke who married a royal princess that retained her faith. These requirements were only for the monarch and heir to the throne.

And his father, Alexander II, married morganatically after the death of Empress Marie. His mother, Princess Marie of Hesse-Darmstadt, was illegitimate, but recognized by Louis II as his own child.
 
Last edited:
The Gruzinsky line of the Bagrids was the reigning branch over Georgia, not the Moukhransky, which was a cadet line. The Treaty only recognized the royal status of the reigning King and his heir, not the other branches. In 1800, Paul revoked the Treaty and annexed Georgia.

Vladimir recognized Prince George of Moukhrani in 1946 as being of royal rank in a published decree. At that time, there was doubt whether there were surviving descendants of the Gruzinsky still alive in Georgia, especially in light of Stalin's reign of terror. He recognized the Moukhrani branch as the surviving branch of the Georgian royal house, which was his right as de-jure Tsar.

Vladimir was already the Head of the Imperial House at the time of his marriage to Leonida and declared her of equal rank.

Thanks for this branchg! So yep, Leonida was equal because Vladimir made her so, thus Maria is of equal birth.
 
Posts discussing Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna's role have been moved to her thread as they don't relate to the topic of 'Who is the Head of the Imperial Family?'

° ° °

The moderators have noted that this thread is one of the most repetitive and circular discussions we have in the Forums. Time after time the same questions are asked, the same facts are stated, the same arguments for and against are put forward, and then the process starts all over again from scratch with exactly the same questions, facts and arguments restated.


Until there is something new to report and discuss on this issue, the thread will remain closed.


Warren

Non-Reigning Houses moderator
 
I think she inherited the Headship of the Imperial House at the death of her father.

She would be the Curatrix only if one of the other Romanov Dynasts had outlived her father, because none of them (except her father) have had Dynastic issue. But Grand Duke Vladimir Cyrillovich was the last male Dynast (with the exception of Grand Duke George) to die, so, Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna bacame the Head of the Imperial House and Empress de jure.

Grand Duke George will ascend to the Headship of the Imperial House only after his mother dies or renounces her rights to the Throne.
 
I think she inherited the Headship of the Imperial House at the death of her father.

She would be the Curatrix only if one of the other Romanov Dynasts had outlived her father, because none of them (except her father) have had Dynastic issue. But Grand Duke Vladimir Cyrillovich was the last male Dynast (with the exception of Grand Duke George) to die, so, Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna bacame the Head of the Imperial House and Empress de jure.

Grand Duke George will ascend to the Headship of the Imperial House only after his mother dies or renounces her rights to the Throne.

Many would argue that under the Pauline Laws her father did not make an equal marriage so Maria herself would be considered non-dynastic. During the Empire marriage to a Bagration was not considered equal as Princess Tatiana found out and had to formally give up her remote place in the line of succession. Leonida herself came from the non-reigning branch of the former Georgian royal family that was incorporated into the Russian nobility. Marias father basically married a member of the Russian nobility, as had many other Romanovs in exile although they lost their succession rights because of it.
 
Many would argue that under the Pauline Laws her father did not make an equal marriage so Maria herself would be considered non-dynastic. During the Empire marriage to a Bagration was not considered equal as Princess Tatiana found out and had to formally give up her remote place in the line of succession. Leonida herself came from the non-reigning branch of the former Georgian royal family that was incorporated into the Russian nobility. Marias father basically married a member of the Russian nobility, as had many other Romanovs in exile although they lost their succession rights because of it.

On the website of the Imperial House, they consider the Bragations as equals, and they have pretty good arguments.

Dynastic Succession

Personally, I think Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna has the strongest claim, and her position as Empress de jure is undisputabl.
 
I would hardly expect Maria to argue that her parents marriage was not dynastic which would not be in her best interests, I was merely pointing out that during the reign of the last Tsar the prescedent would suggest a Bagration was not considered equal for marriage to a Romanoff dynast under the families Pauline Laws. Such a marriage required the dynast to give up their succession rights before marrying.

Personally I think Maria stands on pretty shaky grounds where ever she turns. Her own position as "Head" is not universally recognized and if Georgi (aka Prince George of Prussia per his father) marries a non-Orthodox, non-Russian commoner then all of her arguements just fly out the window since she insists the family consists of only herself and her son and the family becomes extinct. At the end of the day though none of it really matters since the Romanoffs lost the throne nearly 100 yrs ago and no one is begging to get them back. Georgi can do what ever he wants when it comes to picking a bride and Msria will just have to live with the consequences. I just hope some one has the smelling salts at hand when he comes home and announces his engagement to Rebecca.
 
I don't think it's that simple.

According to Maria her father was the last dynast and therefore she is the heir - if there are no other male dynasts then the succession goes to the last male dynasty's closest female relation born through the right dynastic relations.

I have heard it said that Vladimir's marriage itself wasn't dynastic, and that therefore Maria doesn't qualify as that female heir, but I've not read enough about it to really comment on that matter.

According to other Romanovs, however, regardless of what the succession may have been 100 years ago, the head of the house is not Maria but rather Nicholas Romanovich Romanov. It is significant that within the house itself, the only people who recognize Maria as the head are Maria and her son. The argument in defence of Nicholas, despite his parent's (alleged) non-dynastic marriage is that when the marriage happened no one asked them to renounce their rights or the rights of their children, therefore as no rights have been renounced Nicholas and others are still eligible to inherit.

With that said, I think when it comes to a non-ruling house - especially one that's as divided as the Romanovs - it's hard for any one person to try to put themselves as the head when they are in any way different from what the succession detailed - either because of their gender, their dynasticness, or what have you. Without a government to support them in making changes to the succession, or to support them in officially recognizing them as the head/monarch, really it's just a huge family struggle.
 
I don't think it's that simple.

According to Maria her father was the last dynast and therefore she is the heir - if there are no other male dynasts then the succession goes to the last male dynasty's closest female relation born through the right dynastic relations.

I have heard it said that Vladimir's marriage itself wasn't dynastic, and that therefore Maria doesn't qualify as that female heir, but I've not read enough about it to really comment on that matter.

According to other Romanovs, however, regardless of what the succession may have been 100 years ago, the head of the house is not Maria but rather Nicholas Romanovich Romanov. It is significant that within the house itself, the only people who recognize Maria as the head are Maria and her son. The argument in defence of Nicholas, despite his parent's (alleged) non-dynastic marriage is that when the marriage happened no one asked them to renounce their rights or the rights of their children, therefore as no rights have been renounced Nicholas and others are still eligible to inherit.

With that said, I think when it comes to a non-ruling house - especially one that's as divided as the Romanovs - it's hard for any one person to try to put themselves as the head when they are in any way different from what the succession detailed - either because of their gender, their dynasticness, or what have you. Without a government to support them in making changes to the succession, or to support them in officially recognizing them as the head/monarch, really it's just a huge family struggle.


I am absolutely no expert in the least so I have a question: If she does not have a very valid claim then why does the church recognize her?
 
Personally, I think Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna has the strongest claim, and her position as Empress de jure is undisputabl.

See, personally I think Maria's claim is shakier than the other claims owing to the fact that within the family, hers is supported only by her and her son, while Nicholas is supported by the bulk of everyone else.

While Maria may have more apparent support from foreign royals or people like Putin, I think that's just because she's managed to put herself forward more. She circulates in those circles, therefore she's garnered that support. However, if the Russians decided to restore their throne and they named someone other than Maria as the monarch, Maria would most definitely lose whatever recognition she has today from any reigning monarch or foreign government.
 
Well its not like Maria shows up on too many reigning royal family guest lists. She got an invite to the Monaco wedding but in Copenhagen it was Prince Dimitri Romanoff, the brother of Prince Nicholas, who was the guest. Most reigning royal families ignore the Romanoffs entirely. They have simply been gone from the scene too long and of course their internal disputes do them no good either.
 
I am absolutely no expert in the least so I have a question: If she does not have a very valid claim then why does the church recognize her?

It's my opinion that this support is more owing to the fact that Maria is the better connected claimant, not the most valid one.

Someone high up in the church had an opinion on the matter and chose to support Maria, as simple as that. Perhaps money exchanged hands, not that I would suggest such a thing.

If a referendum happened tomorrow and the Russian people chose to restore the monarchy and named Nicholas as the tsar you'd bet that the church would be changing who they support.

Well its not like Maria shows up on too many reigning royal family guest lists. She got an invite to the Monaco wedding but in Copenhagen it was Prince Dimitri Romanoff, the brother of Prince Nicholas, who was the guest. Most reigning royal families ignore the Romanoffs entirely. They have simply been gone from the scene too long and of course their internal disputes do them no good either.

This is a very good point.
 
It's my opinion that this support is more owing to the fact that Maria is the better connected claimant, not the most valid one.

Someone high up in the church had an opinion on the matter and chose to support Maria, as simple as that. Perhaps money exchanged hands, not that I would suggest such a thing.

If a referendum happened tomorrow and the Russian people chose to restore the monarchy and named Nicholas as the tsar you'd bet that the church would be changing who they support.



This is a very good point.


Thank you very much for your expertise:flowers:
 
I think ti's a bad idea for the church to get involved in a spat like this; as for Rebecca, Maria will have a coronary, unless she has some sort of change of heart and changes the succession ideas and therefore undermines her credibility.

This is going to get interesting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom