Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna

[Robert_Hall]

If he marries at all!

[LisaDavidson]

If he marries at all!

Agreed. And, that may help resolve the situation with dynasts and the Fundamental Law.

[Robert_Hall]

A tad "wordy" for an interview but interesting. Nice to hear from  GD MV. I hope that  more people watch this, it will clear up a lot of misconcetions about  and her positions.
 Thank you for the link Lucien.

[Michael HR]

Thannk you so much for this link. I found it intresting and it was good to hear Maria speak and voice her views.

[susana]

Here's my opinion on the whole Leonida--Marie thing: Leonida married real ly well; he got killed; their daughter inherited; Vladimir and Leonida decided to marry; she married UP and he married $$. They had a daughter Marie and now all were supported financially by the heiress daughter; Imposter daughter Marie married a lowly but genuine title to have a legitimately titled child; but fake titles can't inherit a. thrones and b. nonexistent thrones or c. thrones which CANNOT pass through the female line.

These insurmountable problems are relative ONLY to Leonida and the imposter and the imposter's son. Looking back to GD Cyril, he was never eligible for the imperial throne as his mother hadn't converted to Orthodoxy prior to her marriage OR his birth; nor had Vladimir's mother Ducky; and no matter how hard you wish it you simply cannot create a silk purse out of a sow's ear--OH! Excuse me--I meant to say you can't just hand out royal titles right and left to create your own court in exile and set youself and your family up for a magical throne. Other obstacles also exist: morganatic marriages, divorces, narcissism in the extreme, evident Russian disinterest in occupied thrones, flouting of the laws of succession, leadership of a marching band of ruffians--OH! Excuse me again--I meant to say ruffian revolutionaries. Anyway I bet I've made myself clear on this issue. Thank you for your time,  WHEW

[David Pritchard]

Here's my opinion on the whole Leonida--Marie thing: Leonida married real ly well; he got killed; their daughter inherited; Vladimir and Leonida decided to marry; she married UP and he married $$. They had a daughter Marie and now all were supported financially by the heiress daughter; Imposter daughter Marie married a lowly but genuine title to have a legitimately titled child; but fake titles can't inherit a. thrones and b. nonexistent thrones or c. thrones which CANNOT pass through the female line.

These insurmountable problems are relative ONLY to Leonida and the imposter and the imposter's son. Looking back to GD Cyril, he was never eligible for the imperial throne as his mother hadn't converted to Orthodoxy prior to her marriage OR his birth; nor had Vladimir's mother Ducky; and no matter how hard you wish it you simply cannot create a silk purse out of a sow's ear--OH! Excuse me--I meant to say you can't just hand out royal titles right and left to create your own court in exile and set youself and your family up for a magical throne. Other obstacles also exist: morganatic marriages, divorces, narcissism in the extreme, evident Russian disinterest in occupied thrones, flouting of the laws of succession, leadership of a marching band of ruffians--OH! Excuse me again--I meant to say ruffian revolutionaries. Anyway I bet I've made myself clear on this issue. Thank you for your time,  WHEW

An absolutely perfect shade! Which reminds us all why published character smears were once called yellow journalism.

This is an old issue that seems to be re-discussed and disputed on a regular basis. It would seem that there are those who do not care for the Vladimirovichi but do not simply say so. With this lack of honesty in their motives, they insult our intelligence by presenting a twisted understanding of the Fundamental Laws of Russia that governed the succession and membership of the Imperial House of Russia.

The Emperor/Head of Imperial House was/is the sole interpretor of the Fundamental Laws. As such the Emperor granted the titles and pensions of Grand Dukes of Russia to the sons of Grand Duke Vladimir and his wife Grand Duchess Vladimir. After her conversion to Orthodoxy, Grand Duchess Vladimir was given the Russian name of Maria Pavlovna and the title of Grand Duchess of Russia in her own right by the Emperor.

Grand Duke Kyril Vladimirovich was Head of the Imperial House after the abdication of Mikhail Aleksandrovich, thus it was Kyril and later his son Vladimir who were the sole interpretors of the Fundamental Laws. Their decisions regarding the interpretation of these laws are not debatable according the the autocratic nature of the Russian Imperial House.

Again, if one does not care for the Vladimirovichi, simply say so but do not distort historical fact as a smoke screen for ones true motivations.

[susana]

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear--I don't care for this branch of the family--some of the individuals were delightful in some ways however I consider them as a whole schemers and somewhat preposterous in their pretensions to a toppled throne. Someone was inevitably going to be considered the Head of the House of Romanov en exile, but I believe it was first the Dowager Empress, then Nicholas Nicholaivich, and through today Prince Nicholas Romanov. The only Romanov considered Head of State by QEII is that same Prince Nicholas for whom she stood when greeting. This was a first for any present day Romanov and is prescribed by etiquette for any head of state. The Queen has never stood for another member of this family. I do want to say that I spent a little time with four members of the Romanov family travelling through Russia and they very politely glossed over the Vladimirovichi--that branch was a non-subject--the branch of the family was cut as only royals can cut a topic.

When Paul I changed the laws of succession there was no recourse as evidenced by the succession of emperors who followed faithfully his wishes. The Vladimirovichi, in all their previous Russian glory, were not ennobled enough or ennabled to perform, even with the trappings of a coronation and support of the throne, the change in the law of succession which was firmly in place since his Paul's accession.

Yellow journalism is generally considered to be rabble-rousing with a loose association with facts. This entry represents my opinion of Grand Duchess Leonida's familial royalty and is based solidly on Romanov rules and facts. I've offered some information, some even first-hand and this is called objective reporting in which I clarified my bias up front.

[Marc]

On what basis Nicholas II recognised the House of Bagration equal when Princess Tatiana Konstantinovna married?Her husband was signed as Prince Grudzinsky or something like that if I remember correctly?

[David Pritchard]

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear--I don't care for this branch of the family

With this issue out of the way, your opinions (and their value) can be weighed in the minds of the readers in a fairer manner.

When Paul I changed the laws of succession there was no recourse as evidenced by the succession of emperors who followed faithfully his wishes.

This not true legally. The Emperor was the Sovereign Autocrat and he could change the Fundamental Laws if he so desired. The Fundamental Laws were modified four times by a reigning emperor: the Manifesto of Nikolai I of 22 August 1826, the Family Statute of Alexander III of 2 July 1886, the Fundamental Laws of the Empire of 23 April 1906 and the Imperial Ukase No. 1289 of 8 August 1911. What did keep Emperors Aleksander I through Nikolai II from changing the line of succession defined in the Fundamental Laws was their desire not to break the Coronation Oath. They were however free to break the oath without legal concequence if they so desired since they were the Sovereign Autocrat.

The Vladimirovichi, in all their previous Russian glory, were not ennobled enough or ennabled to perform, even with the trappings of a coronation and support of the throne, the change in the law of succession which was firmly in place since his Paul's accession.

A very odd paragraph to me. The Vladimirovichi Branch was never enobled since they were born of the purple cloth, that is in more common parlance born, into an imperial family rather into a noble family. Emperors or kings in exile never have coronations. Grand Duke Kyril Vldimirovich was in exile when it became known that his senior male line cousins were all dead and that he was thus the head of the Russian Imperial House. A proper coronation according to imperial traditions could not have been staged at the Moscow Kremlin as it was occupied by Lenin and his henchmen.

The better question to ask here might be if a non-reigning head of the imperial house has the legal ability to change the laws of succession to an abolished Throne?

[mcdnab]

It is an important question -

"the better question to ask here might be if a non-reigning head of the imperial house has the legal ability to change the laws of succession to an abolished Throne?"

Though it's important to bear in mind the real arguement within the Romanoff family actually concerns the pre-revolutionary rules regarding who members of the dynasty could marry whilst retaining their dynastic rights. So a better question might be "whether a recognised head of an exiled imperial house has the right to change the rules regarding the marriage and status of other members of that exiled imperial house?"
The answer to that is yes they did, but the Romanov's didn't which is why the great divide has continued.

Point 1: Like it or not - Grand Duke Kyril was the senior surviving male Romanov, irrespective of the views of the Dowager Empress or any other member of the family, with the death of Nicholas 11, Alexei and Michael, Kyril was next in line to the Imperial Throne (we can debate for hours whether or not Marie Pavlovna's late conversion to orthodoxy affected his rights but the reality is that once the Dowager was dead the vast majority of the family did recognise him as such and in time the vast majority of the male dynasts alive in 1938 recognised Vladimir as head of the house.)

Point 2: Nicholas II was approached prior to the First World War by senior Grand Duke's requesting that he ammend the rules over equal marriage - he refused and in fact re-emphasised the requirement for a Grand Duke to marry equally and that descendants of an unequal marriage did not have dynastic status.

Point 3: Nicholas II never formarly recognised the Bagraton's as equal (irrespective of what Russia's treaty obligations to them might have been) they did not have the same status within the Empire that say the Leuchtenberg or the Oldenburgs enjoyed. A casual comment and a note to Grand Duke Constantine (at the time of his daughter Tatiana's marriage) does not equate with a formal change or recognition of equal status.

Point 4: The 1911 emphasis on the need for Grand Duke's to marry equally is silent on the Prince's and Princesses of the Blood (great grandchildren of an emperor) that doesn't in itself mean that they could marry unequally and transmit their rights to their children. In fact a strict reading of the rules would suggest that whilst the Emperor was willing to permit and authorize an unequal marriage for a Prince or Princess of Russia (though not for a Grand Duke) it still mean that their offspring were not dynasts.

Point 5: If you accept (as most Romanov's do) that Grand Duke Kyril was head of the house until his death, and that as such he exercised his rights (as de jure Sovereign Emperor) to raise his children to Grand Ducal status - then you can accept that the head of the Russian Imperial House did have the right to exercise sovereign power in exile and therefore could ammend the rules if he so wished.

Point 6: The fundamental rules are quite close the the British situation - they don't clarify anything about the marriage of someone who is already sat on the throne - technically therefore Grand Duke Vladimir as de jure Emperor declared his own marriage to be valid and technically he was the sole arbitor of whether it was or not.

Point 7: As it became apparent that his only child would be his daughter Maria - he seems to have refused any suggestion that as head of the family he should adapt or change the rules governing the marriages of members of the dynasty - in effect ensuring that at his death there would be no surviving male dynasts left and thereby ensuring that his daughter would succeed him in his pretensions.

Point 8: Many of Europe's exiled Royal Houses have ammended their rules in exile - for example the Hapsburgs ammended their family statutes - AD Otto doing so after consulting senior members of the House of Austria-Este - it enabled his son to marry Baroness Francesca Thyssen-Bornemisza.

Point 9: Whilst many families have chosen to amend or just ignore their house rules over marriage very few have actually attempted to change their rules of succession - one sole example i can think of is the Romanian Royal House.

Finally and personally it seems to me that technically Maria Vladimirovna (whether you call her Princess, Grand Duchess or an ex Princess of Prussia) probably has the strongest claim, that none of the surviving male line descendants of the Russian Imperial House are descended from an equal-marriage and as of 1917 would not have been regarded as dynasts. Had Russia remained a monarchy had it moved slowly to a constitutional form then its highly likely that by today it would like most of Europe's remaining monarchies abandoned many of these rules and regulations and would probably have first moved to male preference primogeniture and perhaps eventually to absolute primogeniture. Its always struck me that trying to stick to the rules, twisting them to suit personal situations and personal dislikes that Kyril and Vladimir managed to extinguish the dynasty.

[David Pritchard]

mcdnab,

What a wonderfully knowledgable post on this topic. It is nice to learn that there are still members of this forum that are actually familiar with the Fundamental Laws and have a firm understanding of them. I am strongly in agreement with you on all your points.

[mcdnab]

Thanks for your kind comments - i don't pretend to have any great knowledge of the situation i am not a legal expert, the above was mainly from what i'd read over the years.

I will say a couple of other things I do believe that Kyril's insistance on maintaining the rules was understandable given that in the twenties the chance for a restoration was felt still to be far more likely.  I do believe that Vladimir should have exercised his rights to amend the house rules over marriage (given that so many other reigning and non-reigning houses were doing so) but I do think his decisions to stick to the rules were motivated by a desire that his only child should succeed him in his pretensions rather than a distant cousin who's branch of the family had always been opposed to his and who himself only had daughters.

There are faults on both sides of the arguement and there is a case that both sides are technically correct, the status of marriages of Prince's of the Blood was never properly clarified, although the Pauline Law on equal marriage would still apply.

I personally don't buy the arguements advanced that the House of Bagration were a sovereign house and therefore equal but again it is debateable - Grand Duke Vladimir made a different judgement (once when he was consulted over the marriage of Leonida's brother to the niece of Alfonso XIII of Spain and again on his own marriage to Leonida) to the one made by Nicholas II when Tatiana Constantinova married and technically that was his right to do so as de jure Emperor.

One interesting point worth mentioning is if (and its a big if) Grand Duke Kyril's mother's failure to convert to Orthodoxy before his birth would bar his succession (if not his membership of the dynasty) then the heir to the throne following the death of Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovitch (murd 1918) was Grand Duke Paul Alexandrovitch (murd 1919) and then Grand Duke Dimitri Pavlovich in which case as head of the house his unnequal marriage would be irrelevant as he would have been de jure Emperor at the time of his marriage and his Illynsky descendants might then have been considered dynasts.

Of all the issues relating to Europe's former reigning houses the attempt to maintain their rules regarding equal marriage into the 20th and 21st centuries has been one of the most damaging - causing serious dynastic problems for not only the House of Holstein Gottorp Romanov, but for the Royal House of Prussia and many others. Sadly the only people to blame for these problems and dynastic divisions are the members of the houses in question.

None of them seem capable of facing modern realities - ironically the surviving reigning houses have shown more pragmatism which is why their thrones remain relatively secure and their unequal consorts have proved rather popular - Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, Diana Princess of Wales, the Crown Princess of Denmark, The Queen's of Sweden and Norway, the Crown Princess of Norway, The Princess of Orange, The Princess of The Asturias etc.

[PAVLOV]

She was recently interveiwed on Russian TV, and really did not make a good impression, I think. Maybe she was filmed from the wrong angle, which was very unflattering, so her physical presence did not inspire any conficence, or project "royally" enough. Perhaps I was comparing her to other royals, which may be prejudicial.
Or perhaps I was expecting her to be more impressive, especially given her background, previous marriage etc. Although she is very well educated, and speaks well, she was hesitant, and repetative. Maybe if she was interviewed in  more "Royal" surroundings, it would have made a difference. A bit dissapointing.   

[PAVLOV]

Actually, everything taken into consideration, and after having read the previous arguments, I really cant imagine why she considers herself to be heir to the Russian throne. Or her son for that matter.
One thing stands out, and that is Queen Elizabeths attitude toward Prince Nicholas. I dont think she would get out of her chair for Leonida. Surely the Queen of England's acknowledgement of Prince Nicholas should, to a very large extent, settle this much debated issue ? Or is she misinformed ? I dont think so.   
         

[mcdnab]

I think its perfectly reasonable for Maria Vladimirovna and her widowed mother Leonida to regard her as the legal heir - her grandfather and father were recognised as the senior dynasts and heads of the dynasty by almost all the surviving male dynasts of the Russian Imperial House (the only exception being Grand Duke Nicholas, Grand Duke Peter and Prince Roman Petrovitch - Prince Nicholas' father). In their view none of their family had made dynastic marriages and therefore Maria would be the legal heir.

As to her son's position - he is her heir and he is certainly born of a dynastic marriage (the Prussian Royal house seem to regard Maria as the product of an equal marraige as her son is regarded as a Prussian Dynast as well as a Russian one). The Imperial House changed with the death of Elizabeth and the accession of Peter III from Romanov to the House of Holstein-Gottorp (technically Oldenburg) - the Imperial family continued to use Romanov (Peter III's mother was Grand Duchess Anna Petrovna of Russia) therefore its technically not an issue that George Mikhailovitch is technically a Hohenzollern - presumably the house would become Hohenzollern-Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov???

As to the views of the Queen of The United Kingdom of Great Britain etc (she is not Queen of England - a bit pedantic but no such title exists and hasn't since the Act of Union) - she's never expressed them so we can't know nor does her view or opinion really matter. in fact the incident as it is related suggests that she permitted Prince Nicholas to sit in her presence which has been read as suggesting she recognised his rights or claims but its a far stretch.  Maria is far more closely related to the Queen than Prince Nicholas as far as that matter goes. Maria - Vladimir - Kyril - Victoria Melita - Alfred - Victoria Queen of The UK of GB etc, Elizabeth II - Albert (George VI) - George V - Albert Edward (Edward VII) - Victoria.

The better way to sort out the dynastic squabbles would be for Maria to offer formal recognition of her cousins as dynasts and they to offer to accept a switch to male preference primogeniture and recognise her claim - but that would be far too sensible of course. On one side you have a rigorous and unbending view of the rules governing marriage and on the other a rigid determination to stick to semi selic laws regarding succession. The reality of this is that if her son doesn't marry or marries unequally the dynasty will be by her standards defunct - as most Grand Duchesses of Russia were required to rennounce their rights on marriage to foreigners the only eligible descendants will be the descendants of Vladimir's sisters (both of whom married equally)