Question by Bill Smith: If the monarchy of Russia had not been abolished, who would be the Tsar today?
The research I’ve done seems to indicate that there are three main claimants, but there seems to be a great deal of argument over which, if any, of the three has the more valid claim. Frankly, I am having trouble wrapping my head around the various arguments in support of each claim.
More important, it seems that the supporters of each of the claimants are quite adamant in their position, despite the fact that the chances of the Tsar being restored are almost non-existent. So, I suppose my follow-up question would be why is the question of who the Tsar would be today so important to so many people?
Answers and Views:
Answer by Rachel Sheen
hmm thats hard to say, i doubt it would’ve been the Romanovs because of alexei’s haemophilia, but i dont really know who else…
Read all the answers in the comments.
Know better? Leave your own answer!
Richard says
This is in response to Bill Smith’s original question at the end of his article, “I suppose my follow-up question would be why is the question of who the Tsar would be today so important to so many people?”
The answer? Because “so many people” in the world – and in Russia – are hoping and praying that the office of Tsar will return. I believe this will be inevitable, and can only hope it will be in my lifetime, that I may witness it…..
Vennes says
Russia kingdom was god appointed and who could be more handsome, kind, brilliant and a true emperor than Alexis himself.
Maj Hewitt's Eq says
Joe Stalin.
iconoclast60 says
I understand that Rory Emerald, Baron Sligo, is in line for the job as soon as Putin decides to defect to Switzerland.
flyingbug says
Well, the Imperial House Law mandated male-only succession–but a Tsarina-Regnant would exist ONLY IF no legitimate male dynasts existed.
The normal line of sucession, had Nicholas II not abdicated, would have been thus:
Grand Duke and Tsesarevich Alexei Nikolaevich (1904–1918, 1.2.1.1)
Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich (1878–1918, 1.2.2)
Grand Duke Cyril Vladimirovich (1876–1938, 1.3.1)
Grand Duke Boris Vladimirovich (1877–1943, 1.3.2)
Grand Duke Andrew Vladimirovich (1879–1956, 1.3.3)
Grand Duke Paul Alexandrovich (1860–1919, 1.4)
The descent would continued thus: GD Cyril–GD Vladimir Cyrillovitch. Cyril's older daughters married into the German Royals.
The question behind the succession: were the marriages of GD Cyril and GD Vladimir dynastically valid (equal)? Cyril did have Imperial permission–after the fact–but his bride was the former wife of Empress Alexandra's brother.
GD Vladimir's wife, Princess Leonida Bagration, was also considered by some to be unequal.
Fiq Faysee says
I would.
Rico says
Hard to say as Mikal II had no living descendants, he was the last Tsar, not his elder brother or nephew.
Felix T says
Me and I still am
Solstice Boy says
Roman Abramovitch
Paco says
There are some people who believe that the monarchies will be restored, although at a greatly reduced compensation. They will become unifying symbols of the old times.
When the Romanov's were killed, Russia was the fourth most populous country in the world. Russia has been shrinking in population since 1995 is now the ninth most populous country. In 40 years they are expected to lose another 30 million people and be ranked #16 and still dropping.
As the country's citizens get older, and become a relatively minor portion of the world's population there may be a strong reaction to look to the past, at least in a symbolic fashion. The country may feel that a monarchy will more strongly associate them with the wealthy kingdoms of northern Europe.
In a dozen years Russia may have the population and the national wealth of Mexico. Restoration of the tsar may be an easy way to reach back to the powerful imperious past.
Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia might have lived long enough to marry and produce a child. There would have been a lot of family members encouraging him to marry young and have a child given the precariousness of his life.
Fiq Faysee says
The followup question is more important. You actually never really know what is going to happen in Russia. That should be the lesson from the last 100 years. Who knew communism would fall? If someone were selling shares in claims on the future tsar I would buy some at the right price.
Lili says
Well, if the monarchy hadn't been dissolved, then presumably the Tsar and his immediate family wouldn't have been executed either. Nicholas would have been succeeded by his son. However, since Alexei had a very severe case of hemophilia, he might well not have lived to produce an heir of his own.
The main problem today is that no one alive meets the criteria for the succession that were in place in 1918 and which have never been officially altered, because there was no one to do it. These involved being male, being married to a member of ruling house, being married to someone who was a member of the Russian Orthodox Church, and having the consent of the Tsar for one's marriage. Or else, you must have been the child of a marriage that met the criteria. The Tsar's younger brother Michael, who would normally have inherited from Alexei if the latter had died before having children (or else Michael's son would have inherited), married outside of the rules, so even if he had survived and not refused the monarchy (which he wasn't really eligible for because of his marriage), his line could not have inherited.
One claimant is Grand Duke George, whose grandfather, Grand Duke Vladimir, proclaimed himself the Tsar decades ago. Vladimir would probably have been the next proper claimant after Michael, but the problem is that HIS marriage (and his parents') didn't meet the succession criteria. He therefore couldn't proclaim, as he did, his daughter Maria the "Curatrix" of the throne after him, and Maria couldn't claim that her son George was the next heir. In any case, under the rules, the throne could not pass to or through a woman. If Vladimir had been a qualified claimant, he could have changed the rules on behalf of his daughter on the grounds that the Tsar has the right to do this, but since he hadn't met the criteria in the first place, he wasn't the correct pretender; therefore, neither is she and neither is her son.
All of this is quite complicated and arcane, but the fact is that experts believe that there is NO qualified claimant today, if you're going to go by the rules in place when the Russian monarchy was abolished.
The best and clearest discussion of this I've ever seen appears in Robert K. Massie's book "The Romanovs: the Final Chapter," published in 1995. Massie is also the author of the famous book "Nicholas and Alexandra."
The question of who would be Tsar today actually isn't important to a lot of people. Within the Romanov family there has been much contention, but not really because they expect the monarchy to be restored. Some of them have taken great exception to Maria's claims for herself and her son George because they have involved statements on her part that deny status to her relatives. Some of them, such as Prince Nicholas Romanov (another possible claimant), are republicans and feel that the whole discussion is rather ridiculous while also finding Maria's claims offensive to everyone else in the family. But really, only among monarchists and other people who enjoy discussing obscure matters of succession rights is this an issue of any importance, and even they mostly understand that it doesn't have any SUBSTANTIVE importance.
jono says
It's hard to say. Two people claim to be the head of the romanov house. but which claim is more valid is hard to tell
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Romanov,_Pr…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Vladimirovna,_…
In my opinion Maria vladimiorvan would be the Tsar today but who knows. It's an interesting subject.
EDIT:
as for your follow up question. I'm not sure it is important. I'm pretty sure just about everyone that would have been alive during the reign of the Russian monarchy would have long died by now. I personally as a Russian Canadian to think it's cool to see if the Monarchy would have lasted just who the Tzar would be .