Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
Theodore's Royalty and Monarchy Site > Categories > Europe > Russian Monarchists
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 7      1   2   3   4   Next   »
Tzarist

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1
Posted Reply with quote  #1 

Legitimists - "Kirillists"

Legitimist - Centrist (for House of Oldenburg)

Anti-Legitimists, "Soborniks" - for election of new emperor by Zemsky Council

Others

 

Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality!
__________________
For God, Tzar and Fatherland!
GrumpyTroll

Registered:
Posts: 111
Posted Reply with quote  #2 
Welcome!

Thank you for all the links.
SupremeDirector

Registered:
Posts: 192
Posted Reply with quote  #3 

I'm extremely interested in the restoration of the Russian throne, but there is a question about all monarchist groups which has bothered me for a while: since we're already a minority, why do we divide ourselves into so many different groups? Look at all the different Legitimist groups he posted, is it really necessary to have all those instead of just one large one which would be more influential? How do Monarchists ever hope to influence opinion at all when we're so divided amongst ourselves, when there's not many of us around to begin with?
__________________
Long Live The King, Long Live Louis XX!
"So pride yourself on what you are, And hold them all to words they can't take back. I've seen a place (it comes) to me in dreams, Where fires die but light still shines for us to see! Would God bless a murder of the innocents? Would God bless a war based on pride? Would God bless a money-hungry government? Noooo! Would God bless our ineffective court system? God bless the sweatshops we run. God bless America? God bless America?" ~Rise Against (Blood Red, White & Blue)


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Posted Reply with quote  #4 

Isn't Putin the defacto Emperor already?  But I guess he doesn't have any children to carry on his dynasty, right?


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Posted Reply with quote  #5 

If the Tzarist would be so kind to explain all those terms like krillist and sobernost and others it would be helpful.
royalcello

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,990
Posted Reply with quote  #6 
Kirillists are supporters of the descendants of Grand Duke Kirill Vladimirovich (1876-1938) as heads of the Romanov family and claimants to the Russian throne since the murder of the Tsar and his immediate family in 1918.  I am, I suppose, a Kirillist.  Grand Duke Kirill, the eldest son of Alexander III's younger brother Vladimir, was succeeded as head of the house by his son Vladimir (1917-1992), who married Princess Leonida of Georgia.   Since he was the last male dynast (Romanov born of an equal marriage), Vladimir's daughter and only child, Maria (b. 1953) has been the head of the Imperial house since then.  She married Prince Franz Wilhelm of Prussia and has one son, Georgiy (b. 1981).

See http://www.riuo.org/status/status.html for a good concise explanation of the "Kirillist" position.

Putin is not a "de facto" emperor.  Monarchy is not just about "rule by one."  It is also about continuity with tradition.  I am not interested in any "emperor" who is not a biological relative of the pre-1917 rulers of Russia.  Putin is a KGB commoner who has no more right to be head of state of Russia than I do.
royalcello

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,990
Posted Reply with quote  #7 
One caveat to my support of Maria Vladimirovna and her son: it is conditional on Georgiy eventually making a suitable marriage.   If he does not, I would then be more sympathetic to the idea of electing a tsar, as Michael I was elected by the nobility in 1613, though I would still prefer that he be a descendant of Nicholas I (1796-1855), of which there are many.


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Posted Reply with quote  #8 

I was injecting a little humor into the thread.  The Russians are a people pre-disposed to autocratic rule and so Putin does resemble it. Like the current president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, he might as well be a king.  Some countries enjoy and take to autocratic rule and like it that way.  Mubarak and Putin well may continue in their office till their deaths.

 

But the remark on Putin is not so far off the mark----In the general section, it is asked can someone be made king.  In the Kyklos, Socrates mentions that democracy ends in Tyranny.  The tyrant then has his son take over and then it becomes a monarchy thus completing the circle.  An example, Cromwell set up his son.

 

And the cycle continues all over again.

 

Yes, it would be great that the traditional families take over again.


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Posted Reply with quote  #9 

Quote:
Originally Posted by royalcello
She married Prince Franz Wilhelm of Prussia and has one son, Georgiy (b. 1981).

It seems that everybody has a death wish.  How can a royal line continue with ONLY ONE son?  You would think that one would have eight or nine children!  One son? 

 

This is like playing Russian roulette!
royalcello

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,990
Posted Reply with quote  #10 
Certainly it's unfortunate that both couples had only one child.  I doubt very much that either Vladimir or his daughter Maria, who were/are proud of their dynastic role, intended (as all too many modern European couples do) to have only one child.  In both cases, the child was born five years after the marriage.  I think it is reasonable and charitable to assume that both Leonida and her daughter Maria had some trouble conceiving and/or carrying to term.  Leonida (b. 1914) was 39 when Maria was born, so it is not surprising that she had no more children.  Perhaps Maria and Franz Wilhelm would have had more children had their marriage not failed, but perhaps not.

Considering how prolific the Romanovs were in the 19th century, it's remarkable and tragically ironic how the dynasty has shrunk (though this is partly due to the Russian monarchy's strict marriage laws, which no one since 1917 has had the authority to modify).  The Bolsheviks did their evil "job" very well!
Macoraba

Registered:
Posts: 1
Posted Reply with quote  #11 
IMO the problem is not the equal requirement marriage laws but rather today so many royals putting their own selfish wants and desires first - i.e. mating / marrying commoners - rather than doing their duty to their country and marrying another royal, an equal. IMO royal ought to only marry royal. And if they do not rather than the commoner spouse being raised up the royal ought to be degraded and excluded!


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Posted Reply with quote  #12 

I do heartedly endorse Marcoba's criticism--it is selfishness.  But the Royal family being of so little parameters--very few members.  Can't royalty marry from the Aristocratic families?  Royalty is only a single family.  It is bad genetically to keep marrying within the family. 

 

Instead of finding mates among commoners---is there not enough Aristocracy to find mates among?
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,990
Posted Reply with quote  #13 
The Russian Ruling House's restrictions (to marry other Royals) are imposed by their House Rules.  The British Monarch is free to Mary any Non Catholic (I almost said Protestant, but thats not what the act actually says).


The Restriction to 'Royals Only' wasn't so big a deal back in 1917, there where a lot more reigning royal houses back then!
__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"
I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.
Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
royalcello

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,990
Posted Reply with quote  #14 
There are so many German titled families, suitable for marriage into other royal houses, and enough other European royal families, that it actually has always been quite possible, at least in theory, for European royals to make traditional "equal" marriages without excessive inbreeding.

The fact that the Bourbons and Habsburgs often limited their marital choices to other Bourbons and Habsburgs should not be interpreted to mean that multiple first-cousin (and even uncle-niece) marriages are the inevitable result of traditional standards.

Even as recently as 2004, a perfectly traditional, but hardly incestuous, royal match was able to be made: that of Archduke Martin of Austria and Princess Katharina of Isenburg.
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,990
Posted Reply with quote  #15 
Would the German houses still count in terms of Royalty for the Romanov Rules? (Since the establishment of the 'republic' I mean).
__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"
I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.
Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.