dental work

[HERE MS. SEAN]

does anyone know about Tsar Nicholas II "s teeth ,,,were they good or bad
the only reason i am asking is becuase of the internment of the burial of the bodies by the Russian authorites who said the Tsar had bad teeth. Pamela seana

[Carolath Habsburg]

you can find some info here

http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/index.php?action=search2

[RomaFan96]

According to his remains, Nicholas' dental health was extremely poor. Alexandra's skull showed signs of elaborate dental work but Nicholas had nothing to suggest he recieved adequate dental treatment. He also suffered from pretty bad halitosis (bad breath) and had gum disease. So one can assume his teeth in life were in pretty bad condition.

[Kalafrana]

According to his remains, Nicholas's teeth were in a terrible state, having been thoroughly neglected.

Was Nicholas terrified of the dentist?

Interestingly, the Kaiser's American dentist published a book in 1917-18 (Arthur N Davis: The Kaiser I Knew), in which he was at pains to say that the Kaiser was a stoic in the dentist's chair. This contrasted with his youngest son, Joachim, who was a complete wimp!

Obviously, haemophilia would create problems for Alexei when it came to dental treatment, but is anything recorded about the girls' teeth?

Ann

[RomaFan96]

Hi Ann,

The girls had a number of fillings which suggests that their dental health wasn't the greatest. King and Wilson attribute this to their fondest of sweets. All of them (not sure about Tatiana) had a gap in the front of their teeth. Olga apparently had straight, white teeth as well.

[edubs31]

Too bad the technology of the time didn't allow dentists to place people under general anesthesia. Otherwise the Tsar might have been able to get some much necessary treatment on his teeth.

On a related note would GD Michael (pre-August, 1904) or Alexei have been "acting Tsar" during the procedure while the Tsar was unconscious? In the US temporary transfer of presidential authority gets handed over to the VP in such circumstances. Would have been something Russia might have had to consider.

[RomaFan96]

Edubs, I think Alexandra would have "ruled" in that instance as was the case when Nicholas went to the front in 1915. Alexei was far too ill and young to rule an empire of that size and Michael, even though it was still highly possible he may have one day become Tsar since Alexei had such fragile health, was in  disgrace for many years.

[Превед]

On a related note would GD Michael (pre-August, 1904) or Alexei have been "acting Tsar" during the procedure while the Tsar was unconscious? In the US temporary transfer of presidential authority gets handed over to the VP in such circumstances. Would have been something Russia might have had to consider.

Neither the Pauline Laws of 1797 nor the Fundamental Law of 1906 considered the possibility that the sovereign emperor, once he had succeeded, could become insanse, unconscious or unfit or unable to rule in any way. (Just like in the world's first modern absolutist constitution, the Danish Lex Regia of 1660, it must have been considered contrary to absolutist monarchy to presume that a monarch chosen directly by God could become unfit to rule. Thus there was no constitutional coping mechanism when King Christian VII went insanse in the late 18th century and his cabinet had to make him sign every important state document in between bouts of his hobby of breaking china.)

A regent and a regency council was in Russia only intended for the cases where the heir was a minor. The regent was, in lack of appointment of the late emperor, the heir's surviving parent or, if both were dead, the next person in the line of succession. As the majority of direct heirs was 16 years and 20 for other members of the Imperial Family, Alexey could not have played any part in any regency when he still was a minor himself.

If NII was to be placed under anesthesia, he should have appointed a regent, guardian and a regency council for Alexey, in case he never woke up,  but he could not transfer his imperial authority temporarily to anyone else without abdicating.

[Kalafrana]

In Britain, legislation had to be passed specifically in 1811 to place George III under a regency. There had been a Regency Bill in the 1780s, but the king recovered while it was still being debated in Parliament. There is now a Regency Act, which provides for an adult monarch to be declared incapable of ruling and placed under a regency.

The monarch's temporary absence from the realm is dealt with by the use of Counsellors of State (adult members of the royal family who are permanently appointed). They do things like hold Privy Council meetings when the Queen is abroad (not so common now, as her visits abroad are a matter of days rather than weeks). I'm not aware of any special arrangements being made for the Quuen being under anaesthetic. She did have a sinus operation in the 1950s, and more recently a broken wrist (don't know if that needed an anaesthetic to be set).

As to dental anaesthetics, anaesthesia was quite primitive until well into the 20th century - drops of ether on cotton pads over the patient's face - so I imagine dentists would do it.

Ann

[Превед]

In Britain, legislation had to be passed specifically in 1811 to place George III under a regency. There had been a Regency Bill in the 1780s, but the king recovered while it was still being debated in Parliament. There is now a Regency Act, which provides for an adult monarch to be declared incapable of ruling and placed under a regency.

The British constitution sure is a flexible thing, when a mere ad hoc act of parliament is enough to resolve constitutional issues that make autocracies by divine right self-implode.

Ironically the Bavarian Constitution of 1818 has very detailed regulations for regencies, also in case of the monarch's incapacity of ruling, which came in quite handy in 1886.

[Превед]

Edubs, I think Alexandra would have "ruled" in that instance as was the case when Nicholas went to the front in 1915.

As far as I can see, Alexandra's position as NII's representative in the residence was only informal and de facto. He did not delegate any official authority to her, did he?
After Alexey's birth in 1904 Mikhail Alexandrovich had been named "co-regent for the boy, along with Alexandra", in the case of NII's death during Alexey's minority, according to Wikipedia. What is really meant here? Perhaps that Mikhail was to be правитель, regent and head the regency council, while Alexandra was to be опекун, guardian -  and a member of the council?

The Fundamental Law of 1906, which is nearly identical to the Pauline Laws on the subject, says:

Глава третья.
О совершеннолетии Государя Императора, о правительстве и опеке.

40. Совершеннолетие Государям обоего пола и Наследнику Императорского Престола полагается в шестнадцать лет.

41. При вступлении на престол Императора прежде сего возраста, до совершеннолетия Его, учреждается правительство и опека.

42. Правительство и опека учреждаются или в одном лице совокупно, или же раздельно, так, что одному поручается правительство, а другому опека.

43. Назначение Правителя и Опекуна, как в одном лице совокупно, так и в двух лицах раздельно, зависит от воли и усмотрения царствующего Императора, которому, для лучшей безопасности, следует учинить выбор сей на случай Его кончины.

44. Когда при жизни Императора такового назначения не последовало, то, по кончине Его, правительство государства и опека над лицем Императора в малолетстве принадлежат отцу или матери; вотчим же и мачиха исключаются.

45. Когда нет отца и матери, то правительство и опека принадлежат ближнему к наследию престола из совершеннолетних обоего пола родственников малолетнего Императора.

46. Законные причины неспособности к правительству и опеке суть: 1) безумие, хотя бы оно было временное; 2) вступление вдовых, во время правительства и опеки, во второй брак.

47. Правителю государства полагается Совет Правительства; и как Правитель без Совета, так и Совет без Правителя существовать не могут.

48. Совет составляют шесть особ первых двух классов, по выбору Правителя, который назначает и других, при случающихся переменах.

49. Мужеского пола особы Императорской Фамилии могут заседать в сем Совете по выбору Правителя, но не прежде своего совершеннолетия и не в числе шести особ, оный составляющих.

50. В Совет Правительства входят все без изъятия дела, подлежащие решению Самого Императора, и все те, которые, как к Нему, так и в Совет Его вступают; но опеки Совет не касается.

51. Правитель имеет голос решительный.

52. Назначение Совета и выбор членов оного полагается в недостатке другого распоряжения скончавшегося Государя, ибо оному должны быть известны обстоятельства и люди.

=

CHAPTER III
On the attainment of Majority of the Sovereign Emperor, on Regency and Guardianship

40. Sovereigns of both sexes and the Heir to the Imperial Throne reach their majority at the age of sixteen.

41. When an Emperor younger than this age ascends to the Throne, a Regency and a Guardianship are instituted to function until this majority is attained.

42. The Regency and the Guardianship are instituted jointly in one person or separately, in which case one person is entrusted with the Regency and the other with the Guardianship.

43. The appointment of Regent and Guardian, either jointly in one person or separately in two persons, depends on the will and discretion of the reigning Emperor who should make this choice, for greater security, in the event of His demise.

44. If no such appointment was made during the lifetime of the Emperor, upon His demise, the Regency of the State and the Guardianship of the Emperor who is under age, belong to the father and mother; but the step-father and step-mother are excluded.

45. When there is no father or mother, then the Regency and Guardianship belong to the nearest in succession to the Throne among the underage Emperor’s relatives, of both sexes who have reached majority.

46. Lawful reasons barring tenure of the Regency and Guardianship are the following: 1) insanity, even if temporary; 2) the remarriage of widowed persons during tenure of the Regency and Guardianship.

47. A Regent of the State must have a Regency Council; there can be neither a Regent without a Council nor a Council without a Regent.

48. The Council consists of six persons of the first two classes selected by the Regent, who will also appoint others as changes arise.

49. Male dynasts of the Imperial Family selected by the Regent, may attend sessions of this Council but not before reaching their majority and are not included in the number of the six persons constituting the Council.

50. The Regency Council deals with all matters without exception, which are subject to the decisions of the Emperor Himself and with all matters that are submitted to Him and to His Council; but the Council is not concerned with the Guardianship.

51. The Regent has the decisive vote.

52. The appointment of the Council and the selection of the members thereof are provided for in case of the absence of other directives from the deceased Sovereign, to whom the circumstances and the persons should have been known.

[TimM]

I wonder what a modern dentist would have done about Nicholas's teeth?

[Inok Nikolai]

According to his remains, Nicholas's teeth were in a terrible state, having been thoroughly neglected.

Was Nicholas terrified of the dentist?

Interestingly, the Kaiser's American dentist published a book in 1917-18 (Arthur N Davis: The Kaiser I Knew), in which he was at pains to say that the Kaiser was a stoic in the dentist's chair. This contrasted with his youngest son, Joachim, who was a complete wimp!

Obviously, haemophilia would create problems for Alexei when it came to dental treatment, but is anything recorded about the girls' teeth?

Ann

Well, I think that over the years Tsar Nicholas II demonstrated his physical and moral courage on enough occasions that he needs no defense from me. In my opinion, the poor state of his teeth had nothing to do with his supposed fear of pain or of dentists in general.

It would seem that cultural and social norms were much more the cause.

Matters of health and personal hygiene differ vastly from society to society, and from one era to another. Look at the tremendous evolution that the standards of personal hygiene have undergone in just the last 50-75 years here in the USA. The purveyors of hygienic products seem to keep discovering issues and ‘problems’ which none of us knew that we had until the advertisements told us so!

I think that it is safe to say that, in general, women usually pay more attention to their health than men do. Men seem to think that they are indestructible; and often it is the women in their lives who have to compel them to see a doctor or seek medical aid.

I remember back when the Koptiaki graves were first opened publicly in 1991, and the state of the Tsar’s teeth was commented upon. An elderly gentleman (since reposed), recalling the days of his own father and grandfather, told me that in those times most men simply didn’t take much care of their teeth — even if they had the means and opportunity. It would have been considered excessive, or even effeminate — especially so for a military man, which Tsar Nicholas II certainly was his whole life.

For the record, Tsar Nicholas II did spend quite a bit of time with the Court dentist, S. S. Kostritsky. In January 1917 alone, he had five session with Kostritsky, each of which lasted for an hour or two. But Tsar Nicholas II spent more time in discussions with Kostritsky, than in the dental chair. In his memoirs, General A. I. Spirodovich relates that Tsar Nicholas II greatly valued Kostritsky for his simplicity, truthfulness and candor. The Tsar also knew that whatever was said between them would not go any further — Kostritsky knew how to hold his tongue. The Tsar liked to talk with Kostritsky about literature, about people, about current events, etc. Knowing that Kostritsky traveled a great deal in his profession, treating patients from all levels of society and walks of life, the Tsar would sometimes ask him concerning public opinion on current events in the empire. And Kostritsky was always frank with the Tsar. In her letters the Empress mentions that she too would sometimes speak with Kostritsky on topics other than dental care.

[Kalafrana]

All this is very interesting.

Perhaps I am demonstrating my social norms, since I come from a family where going to the dentist regularly is usual. None of us has good teeth, and we need to look after what we've got!

Interesting too that Nicholas liked to chat to the court dentist. So did the Kaiser with his American dentist, though I suspect that the Kaiser talked at the dentist!

Ann