Posted by Damian on 25/10/2009, 20:13:10, in reply to "Re: paternity of Paul I of Russia"
195.93.21.5
--Previous Message--
: As far as disputed paternities go, that of
: Czar Paul I of Russia has always been one of
: the weaker cases -- precisely because of the
: said resemblance. It's true that Empress
: Catherine CLAIMED to have conceived her son
: by a lover -- but some have called this
: simply a case of *bad history.*
In the case of Czar Paul I,it is really a difficult one to call.There certainly seems to be a great deal of circumstantial evidence to cast doubt on his paternity.After 8 years of married childlessness,Empress Elizabeth was so desperate for an heir that she hinted that Catherine should take a lover who might do the job if her husband couldn't and so she took up with Sergei Saltykov,the first of her many lovers.Shortly afterwards,Paul was conceived. Although her husband Peter had several mistresses,he never subsequently fathered any other children by them.
Physically,Peter's and Paul's similarities were not really that striking.Peter was tall and long-nosed with a long face while Paul was short and stocky and snub-nosed with broad features (see links below).It is true however that they both shared impulsive and erratic traits of behaviour.
On the other hand,Peter III never made any move to disown Paul or denounce his wife as an adulteress which one might suppose he would have been eager to do if he had hated her as much as she said he did.Then again,his silence on the subject may have been self-serving as he may not have wanted the humiliation of having the widespread rumours about his impotence and/or infertility to have been confirmed.Of course,Catherine's stories and hints about Paul's paternity may well have been somewhat exaggerated and also self-serving so as to make people think that she had not necessarily usurped her son's rightful throne.But it seems to me that this argument might have cut both ways.After all you could argue that if Paul was not a true Romanov,then what right had Catherine to rule at all?
In the end,like any other dispute about royal paternity,only a DNA comparison of samples from the remains of both Peter III and Paul I would establish conclusively if there was a true father-son relationship between them or not.Failing this,we will only ever be left with endless speculation and a choice of which stories and 'evidence' you choose to believe!
Paul I:
http://pic.srv104.wapedia.mobi/thumb/215514542/en/max/384/276/Paul_i_russia.jpg?format=jpg,png,gif,wbmp
Peter III:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Antropov_PeterIII.jpg
Message Thread:
« Back to thread
