WI: Running out of Czars

naraht

Russia went for most of the 1700s with the list of those in Line for Succession being *extremely* short. (It makes Britain in the early 1800s look in great shape)

From Peter the Great (died in 1725) who only had two children live to adulthood (Anna and Elizabeth) through Paul who became Czar in 1794 with two sons and 4 daughters, (and who his mother may have wanted to skip over), the line of succession was short antagonistic and ugly among those few in it. It seems that the idea of completely running out of Czars in the Romanov line is not too odd? It would seem that the most likely scenario would be Elizabeth dying in the first year of her rule, before she set her nephew Peter (OTL PeterIII) has her heir. The infant Ivan VI would have to be killed of course, but given that Elizabeth had him imprisoned, that shouldn't be too tough.

If this happens before July 1741 then I believe that the only living descendant of Peter the Great is Ivan VI's mother Grand Duchess Anna Leopoldovna who is pregnant (with a daughter) and imprisoned with Ivan VI...
 

Bee

naraht said:
Russia went for most of the 1700s with the list of those in Line for Succession being *extremely* short. (It makes Britain in the early 1800s look in great shape)

From Peter the Great (died in 1725) who only had two children live to adulthood (Anna and Elizabeth) through Paul who became Czar in 1794 with two sons and 4 daughters, (and who his mother may have wanted to skip over), the line of succession was short antagonistic and ugly among those few in it. It seems that the idea of completely running out of Czars in the Romanov line is not too odd? It would seem that the most likely scenario would be Elizabeth dying in the first year of her rule, before she set her nephew Peter (OTL PeterIII) has her heir. The infant Ivan VI would have to be killed of course, but given that Elizabeth had him imprisoned, that shouldn't be too tough.

If this happens before July 1741 then I believe that the only living descendant of Peter the Great is Ivan VI's mother Grand Duchess Anna Leopoldovna who is pregnant (with a daughter) and imprisoned with Ivan VI...
Click to expand...

The premise is plausible.

Couple of minor corrections: Peter the Great also had a son, Alexei, who lived to adulthood but did not survive his father (he died in prison while under a death sentence for allegedly plotting against his father). Alexei's son was Peter II, who died in his teens without children of his own.

Paul had three sons (Alexander, Constantine and Nicholas), not two.

There isn't much doubt that Peter III wasn't really the father of Paul, so what you said about Anna Leopoldovna and her children being the only real Romanovs actually happened.
 

RGB

Bee said:
There isn't much doubt that Peter III wasn't really the father of Paul, so what you said about Anna Leopoldovna and her children being the only real Romanovs actually happened.
Click to expand...

There's all sorts of doubt about it, actually. Even a sort of complete uncertainty. The fact that there's all sorts of contradicting speculations about his parentage seems like attempts at slander from different angles, where by contrast we know of Catherine's other bastards for certain.

Not that it really matters.
 

Bee

RGB said:
There's all sorts of doubt about it, actually. Even a sort of complete uncertainty. The fact that there's all sorts of contradicting speculations about his parentage seems like attempts at slander from different angles, where by contrast we know of Catherine's other bastards for certain.

Not that it really matters.
Click to expand...

My main source is Peter Massie's book on Catherine the Great. Peter himself thought that someone else must have been the father but he didn't care. The portrait of Catherine's lover, Saltykov, looks a lot like Paul.
 

RGB

Bee said:
My main source is Peter Massie's book on Catherine the Great. Peter himself thought that someone else must have been the father but he didn't care. The portrait of Catherine's lover, Saltykov, looks a lot like Paul.
Click to expand...

Saltykov (just like Peter III, actually) never had any other children and doesn't really look like Paul (Saltykov was described as tall and was kept as an ornament at court, Paul, not so much). Peter III actually does a bit on the official portrait, but that's likely because Paul consciously imitated him in some things. Portraiture at the time was...well. Disappointing. Everyone looked a lot like everyone else.

But, for example, there were also rumours that the real Paul actually died at birth and was replaced by a random peasant boy, among other things. And most of the fake-Peters all seemed to pretend that Paul was their real son during the many rebellions in Catherine's time.

Catherine spread some of these rumours herself, which is extraordinary if you think about it. Meanwhile she had an acknowledged bastard whom she indulged and did not mistreat unlike Paul. In fact, it seems she disliked her son as much as she disliked her husband. I wonder why.

In any case, it doesn't really matter. The real power in Russia at that point were the Guards regiments. They made and cast down Tsars as they pleased and any legal fiction would probably fly if they were OK with it.
 

Elfwine

RGB said:
In any case, it doesn't really matter. The real power in Russia at that point were the Guards regiments. They made and cast down Tsars as they pleased and any legal fiction would probably fly if they were OK with it.
Click to expand...

This explains why Catherine, despite having zero in the way of claim to the throne, got away with murder (literally?).

Also, that suggests that if the Romanov line was acknowledged as ended - one way or another - the Guards would just back whoever - although a schism amongst the Guard regiments sounds like it would have interesting impacts for Russia's future.
 

isabella

Bee said:
The premise is plausible.

Couple of minor corrections: Peter the Great also had a son, Alexei, who lived to adulthood but did not survive his father (he died in prison while under a death sentence for allegedly plotting against his father). Alexei's son was Peter II, who died in his teens without children of his own.

Paul had three sons (Alexander, Constantine and Nicholas), not two.

There isn't much doubt that Peter III wasn't really the father of Paul, so what you said about Anna Leopoldovna and her children being the only real Romanovs actually happened.
Click to expand...

Paul had four son (Alexander, Constantine, Nicholas and Michael) and six daughters (Alexandra, Elena, Maria, Catherine, Olga and Anna) who can be eligible to the Russian throne before their father reign
 

RGB

Elfwine said:
This explains why Catherine, despite having zero in the way of claim to the throne, got away with murder (literally?).

Also, that suggests that if the Romanov line was acknowledged as ended - one way or another - the Guards would just back whoever - although a schism amongst the Guard regiments sounds like it would have interesting impacts for Russia's future.
Click to expand...

The guards officers were all from well-placed nobility who liked being paid a lot and not actually training or going to war, Peter's attempted Danish expedition is a major reason why he got assassinated, the Guard didn't want to deploy.

In many ways the Napoleonic wars saved Russia from this situation: the regular army suffered a lot, so however reulctant the Guards HAD to go fight, the Guards corps itself was expanded, professionalism in the army rose all around...

I'm not sure along which lines the schisms would come, personally, but Russian nobility at the time is just...awful. Half of them are still openly receiving pensions from foreign powers like it's 1730. So you can think of court struggles that way.
 

Elfwine

RGB said:
The guards officers were all from well-placed nobility who liked being paid a lot and not actually training or going to war, Peter's attempted Danish expedition is a major reason why he got assassinated, the Guard didn't want to deploy.

In many ways the Napoleonic wars saved Russia from this situation: the regular army suffered a lot, so however reulctant the Guards HAD to go fight, the Guards corps itself was expanded, professionalism in the army rose all around...
Click to expand...

Interesting.

I'm not sure along which lines the schisms would come, personally, but Russian nobility at the time is just...awful. Half of them are still openly receiving pensions from foreign powers like it's 1730. So you can think of court struggles that way.
Click to expand...

Not sure either. I was just thinking of it in the sense of someone being able to sway some but not all of the Guard (not enough money/influence/power to look like the obvious choice to them) - and no opponent being able to do better.

Schism might have been the wrong word there, I suppose. "Division".
 

Jurgen Wullenwever

Bee said:
There isn't much doubt that Peter III wasn't really the father of Paul, so what you said about Anna Leopoldovna and her children being the only real Romanovs actually happened.
Click to expand...
What about the claim that Peter I was someone else's son? Have any dna-studies been done there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top