Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Namarolf

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
Is there any document (diaries, letters, etc.) to confirm that the lack of children was due to Sergey and not to Ella? As far as I know, there is still no proof about Sergey's alleged homosexuality. Anyway, being a homosexual doesn't mean you can't be a father... We know for sure that K. R. was a homosexual, and yet he had a big loving family and was a much better father and husband than his own dad ever was.


2
Having Fun! / Re: The Romanov You Dislike
« on: October 28, 2004, 11:59:35 AM »
Grand Prince Kiril Vladimirovich had many good personal qualities -for instance I admire his decision to marry Viktoria Fyodorovna even if at that time the wedding made him lost his position in the Navy and the Court. Cerytainly, an ambitious man with no feelings would not have done so.

In other thread in this forum, Mr. Greg King has already explained and clarified many of the accusations against Kiril. I would also reccomend people to read GP K's autobiography - it gave me new sides of his life and thought. He may have been a "cold" man -but so was George V, and few people would call George "pure evil", despite his refusal to welcome N II and his family in 1917. Besides, the leading characters in Russian history were not exactly "warm" people: Ivan IV, Pyotr I, Yekaterina II, Lenin, Stalin...

Why should GP Kiril be blamed for proclaiming himself Tsar in 1924? With N II, Tsarevich Aleksey and GP Mikhail A. dead, he was the next in line, and a restoration was still likely to happen. Should we blame Charles II or Louis XVIII for styling themselves kings while they were in exile? Or Queen Wilhelmina and King Haakon for keeping their royal title while their countries were occupied by the Germans?

I wouldn't say GP Kiril is my favorite Romanov, but I prefer him to many others - his own son Vladimir, to start with.


3
Imperial Succession and the Throne / Re: Who Would You Choose?
« on: October 25, 2004, 07:18:41 PM »
Lisa, I know Dmitry Pavlovich has only 3 daughters (Adaire Catherine, Victoria and Lela), and his brother Mikhail a child named Alexis Taylor. Do you know if a Alexis Taylor is a girl or a boy? If it is a girl, I guess the Romanov-Illynsky male line will end with Dmitry and Mikhail, is that so?
Thanks

4
Imperial Succession and the Throne / Re: possible wives for Prince Georgy
« on: October 25, 2004, 06:26:29 PM »
Most people in Europe and America have at least one royal ancestor... I guess anyone could say "Oh well Miss X family comes from Sitting Bull, so she is a royal. Certainly, her mother was not a royal, but the Sioux royal family rules didnt forbid non-royal marriages, so Miss X is a real Sioux princess, an equal to Georgy and a very suitable candidate for becoming Grand Duchess X".

However, it would be much more interesting to see what could happen if Georgy decides to marry one of his despised "Romanovsky", "non-equal" cousins. Very unlikely of course, but I wonder what his mom would say...


5
Imperial Succession and the Throne / Re: Who would you prefer?
« on: October 22, 2004, 06:04:11 PM »
Does the remaining Yurievsky Prince may be considered? After all, he belongs to a line senior to the Mikhailovichi.
Does any of Prince Illynsky's sons have male offspring?

6
Imperial Succession and the Throne / Re: possible wives for Prince Georgy
« on: October 22, 2004, 05:47:19 PM »
If he is the head of the house, couldn't he marry anyone and make her a Grand Duchess?

7
I have read that Gavril Konstantinovich, who was not born a Grand Duke and married morganatically, was granted the title Grand Duke by Vladimir Kirilovich  - on which grounds?

I feel the Vladimirovichi, apparently so strict about other relatives who married morganatically (even refusing the name Romanov to their offspring), were/are not that rigid about titles and styles when it comes to their own close family and friendly cousins.

8
Having Fun! / Re: If Anastasia had been found alive...
« on: October 22, 2004, 11:20:35 AM »
Somwhere I read the "Vladimirs" refers publicly to the other cousins as "false Romanovs". Dynast or not, I guess no one would be enthusiastically praising about someone who goes around telling that about you.

9
The Imperial Family / Re: The Paleys
« on: October 22, 2004, 11:00:06 AM »
According to princess Paley memoirs, she sent Irina and Natalia abroad in 1918 and they reached Finland safely. Of course, it was very unlikely for a mother to tell about one of her daughters being raped, but she doesn't seem to be under the impression that the girls had been harassed sexually. Anyway she and the girls met again in Finland in 1919, not in Paris. I know there is a biography of Natalia, "Une princesse dechirée", but I haven't got it - does the information about her being raped in 1918-1919 comes from that book?

10
The Windsors / Re: the windors claim to the throne
« on: May 24, 2004, 01:14:17 PM »
Certainly Charles of Savoy was from the same line of William the Conqueror.

James I had several children, including:
-Charles I
-Elizabeth, Queen consort of Bohemia, grandmother of George I.

Charles I had several children, including:
-Charles II
-James II
-Henrietta Anne (1644-1670), married to Philip of Bourbon, Duke of Orleans

Henrietta was the mother of Anne Marie (1669-1728), who married Victor Amadeus II, King of Sardinia and Duke of Savoy and was the mother of Charles III of Sardinia (1701-1773). His son by Princess Polyxene of Hesse-Rheinfelds-Rothenburg, Victor Amadeus III (1726-1796), was the father of two Kings of Sardinia and Jacobite pretenders:
-  Charles (1751-1819), married Clotilde of France, sister of Louis XVI, but had no issue.
- Victor (1759-1824), married Maria Theresa of Modena and had several children, including the Jacobite pretender Mary "II" (1792-1840), who married Francis, Duke of Modena, and had issue, from whom descends the present day "Jacobite" claimant, Francis of Bavaria.

As it can be seen, genealogically the current "Jacobite" line, and all the other (countless) descendants from Henrietta and Philip of Bourbon, are senior to the members of the Hannoverian/Windsor line, but they are barred from the succession.



11
The Windsors / Re: the windors claim to the throne
« on: May 23, 2004, 10:06:14 PM »
James "III" had two sons, Charles "III" (d. 1788) and Henry "IX" (d. 1807). After Henry's death, his closest relative was Charles of Savoy, not George III, but he was a Roman Catholic, so he and his branch were already excluded from the line of succession.
As far as I know, the "legitimist" or "Jacobite" succession went as follows:
Charles "IV" (Savoy), his brother Victor "I", his daughter Mary "II", her son Francis "I" (Duke of Modena), his niece Mary "III" (consort Queen of Bavaria), her son Rupert "I", his son Albert "I" and his son Francis "II", current head of the former Royal house of Bavaria. He is single, the next in line being his brother Max. Max's elder daughter Sophia is married to the Crown Prince of Liechtenstein.

12
I think in exile GD Dmitry and Pr. Iusupov were not precisely in friendly terms.

13
Rulers Prior to Nicholas II / Re: Empress Catherine II
« on: May 14, 2004, 01:03:37 PM »
That depends on what you may or may not accept as "Russian blood". Are we talking about nationality or ethnicity? I guess many Russians, born in Russia, children and grandchildren of Russians, have a lot of Viking or Tartar blood, and I don't think that make them "less" Russian. Considering how peoples have moved from here and there, who can say "I am 100% Russian" (or Nigerian, or Peruvian, or Chinese... not to mention Americans).
The question of Paul's legitimacy is a hard one... actually it was Catherine who in some writings stated he was not Peter III's son. Of course, that may be true... but I still wonder about some details, such as the following:
1) Catherine never showed love nor affection for Paul. If he was the son of a man who provided her love and confort (and sex!) when she was still married to Peter III, it would have been expected quite the contrary: to love and cherish a boy who could remind her of one of the few persons who treated her as a normal, young loving woman. However, she behaved toward Paul the way she would have done to a child by Peter, a man she despised and who behaved like a rascal to her.
2) Catherine, a German princess with no connection to the Romanovs, was not a legitimate ruler - denying Paul's legitimacy would have been a way to say "Oh, ok, I am not the legitimate ruler, but Paul has no better claim, since he is not the son of the Tsar"
3) Catherine was not Miss Universe, but was an attractive young woman, and Saltykov, the alleged father, was a good looking man. Poor Paul was anything but handsome... where did he got his looks from? Peter III ...? Not to talk about their mental balance...

Of course, only DNA could have cleared the point...

14
Thank you very much Greg- but I keep wondering why they didn't make the search! It would have been so easy -and they were already used to dig their noses in the Romanov belongings (Radzinsky suggests they even read the diaries). I still can't find a good reason not to examine the family's clothes, esp. if they had very good reasons to pressume there were jewels there. I have read for instance that some weeks before their murders, the Grand Dukes imprisoned in Alapaevsk were forced to give all their valuables to the Bolsh. Why the Ekaterinburg Reds were so "respectful"? Any ideas?

15
Was there any particular reason for the Ekaterinburg Bolsehviks not making a search on the family's belongings, including clothes, to look for the jewelry and seize it, instead of waiting until the execution? As far as I know, that was done with many other prisoners, even Romanovs. Considering the way the family was treated, with little respect for privacy -even if thanks to Greg and Penny we may know now that it wasn't as horrible as it was always believed-, I wonder what prevented them to do such a search, esp. if they already knew the jewels were there. Hiding valuables would have added charges against the Romanovs, if needed.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4