Talk:Grand Duke Konstantin Pavlovich of Russia

Issue

I've deleted information about Constantine's son with Joanna Grudzińska. Existence of such a child is not supported by any reliable sources and this information is probably a hoax. 5.185.15.57 (talk) 22:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC) Sorry, forgot to log in Stresinski (talk) 22:38, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

• See ru:Александров, Павел Константинович. His mother was Josephine Mercier. --Ghirla^-трёп- 07:33, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

POV

The following fragment is a laughable POV: "the great champion of the Poles. His love for a Polish woman cost him the Russian crown." For reasons why, see references that I recently added, for example, this (which seems to be written by a Russian, too). As Balcer pointed out, the Britannica article is almost a 100 years old, uses even older, imperial Russia references and thus should not be considered NPOV when it comes to Poland. In addition, Ghirla's revert, which removed my reference as well as copyedit changes (adding caption, removing empty section, etc.), is borderline 'v'-word - please refrain from such blatant reverts, and discuss your POV here first, preferably citing modern academic sources.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:01, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, it appears Ghirla has forgotten about the talk pages. Edit summary is not the best place for discussion, Ghirla - please reply here instead of waging a revert war.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Article name

So, I see we have no concensus for moving the article. Fine. Let's discuss this then. Ghirlandajo cites some elaborate guidelines for naming articles about royalty. Care to point me as to where they are? As far as I can tell, even Russian Tsars don't have that title indicated in their article titles (Nicholas II of Russia, Alexander III of Russia etc.) Why should Grand Dukes be superior? Also, what is wrong with Russian Wikipedia that it simply titles this article Constantine Pavlovich? Balcer 17:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(names_and_titles) notes that it covers Western nobility, but may be applicable. I don't think that the issue is related to Wikipedia:Transliteration of Russian into English. Let's wait for Ghirla to enlighten us about the specific policy he is relying upon.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 19:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

The list of Grand Dukes and Grand Princes who do not have that title in their article titles seems extensive: Yuri Dolgoruki, Mikhail Yaroslavich, Vladimir II Mstislavich, Andrei Bogolyubsky,Sviatoslav Vsevolodovich of Vladimir and so on. So at the very least we have a giant mess of inconsistency in this area. Still, I am not keen to have a fight over this. I just assumed that Russian Wikipedia is probably as neutral and accurate as can be in this matter, and attempted to follow its convention. But apparently they are wrong. Balcer 19:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Move

Does anyone agree on moving this to Constantine Pavlovich, Tsarevich of Russia or Constantine Pavlovich, Tsesarevich of Russia because that was his title and the fact that he turned down the throne doesn't erase the fact that he was once Tsesarevich? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 02:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Viceroy?

My current research indicates there was never a viceroy of Congress Kingdom. There were Namestniks of Kingdom of Poland, but Constantine was not one of them. He seems to have held the posistion of commander-in-chief of the Kingdom's army, and while he was de facto 'second in the country after the tsar', there is no 'viceroy' posistion mentioned in the pl:Konstytucja Królestwa Polskiego. While Constantine might have been de facto viceroy because of his royal bloodline, namestniks were the official viceroys; I'll see if I can find info on his exact position and title (help appreciated).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  23:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Why did he turn down the Russian throne?

He didn't. Secretly he was an Ally to Louie XVIII, and Tollyrand, as Tzar Paul II and he gave immunity to the Bourbons while Napoleon was in power, and everything in Europe was in turmoil and even Russia was occupied twice by Bonaparte, and he himself aligned Russian Orthodox Catholicism and Modern Christianity in Russia, stemming from the Conclave. Earl 01/10/2014 The trigger for the Decembrist revolt appears to have been Constantine's refusal of the imperial succession. Why did he do it? Was it an apparently exceptional moment of awareness of his own undoubted limitations, or was he persuaded by Nicholas? And why did the Decembrists back his accession, since his policy as ruler of Poland seems to have been as reactionary as Nicholas could wish? I assume these interesting questions are discussed in the historical literature, and should at least be raised in the article. JamesWim 20:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

There is a much better Wiki article Russian interregnum of 1825, better researched and referenced. (I had nothing to do with it, I am just admiring the work.) Some of the researched for that article could be brought into the article on Constantine as well.

Basically, Constantine never wanted to reign and refused the throne as far as 1823. Also, he was in an unequal marriage, which meant that his descendants would never be able to accede to the throne. Constantine's abdication was put into a secret manifesto by Alexander I, and then sealed until the latter's death, but Constantine was still titled as heir apparent, which meant that once Alexander died, he would still succeed automatically. That happened in 1825, and only after C refused the throne twice, the succession was passed to Nicholas. The Decembrists merely saw the confusion regarding succession as a golden opportunity for their coup-d'etat. You can read it all in books on Russian history - even the most general ones will have the basic facts. ouital77 (talk) 19:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Grand Duke Constantine Pavlovich of Russia.PNG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Grand Duke Constantine Pavlovich of Russia.PNG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:25, 21 September 2011 (UTC)