The International Commission on Nobility and Royalty
Disclaimer: These articles are a public service. The author's opinions are their own. They do
not necessarily reflect the opinions of The International Commission on Nobility and
Royalty. But we highly recommend them in general as they promote what we feel is highly
valuable and worthwhile.
© Copyright 2021/2022
The International Commission on Nobility and
A Statement Issued by the Chancellery of the Royal House of Georgia
(See Additional Articles below)
The official website of the Royal House:
See also the articles:
Before the statement begins, the following shows the
genealogical chart of a number of Royal and Princely Houses of Georgia. However, one needs
to go to The Royal Line
of Kings & True Successors of the Kingdom of Georgia, and
see the new, but briefer chart, because there some important changes that had to be made
because modern genealogical research shows that Prince
Demetre, Prince David's ancestor, was actually a grandson of Bagrat V (1360-1393) instead of, as
formerly thought, to be the eldest son of Alexander I (1412-1442). What this means, is that the
royal line of all Georgia (the line of the kings) came exclusively through His Royal Highness
Prince Nugzar as the senior line of, not some, but all the kingdoms of the land.
The second reason for this chart is all the valuable genealogy of other lines.
The statement of the Chancellery is below this chart:
The Impact of House Rules on Royal Succession
In the early 1990s, the representatives of several Georgian monarchical organizations met Her
Royal Highness Princess Anna, the daughter of the Head of the royal House of Georgia. The
representatives, as full-hearted patriots of the cause of monarchy, wanted to remind her about
the importance of her origin. She is not a common or ordinary girl, but she is instead a
princess of the blood of an ancient royal throne. Therefore, she should dutifully obey the
ancient traditions regarding the choice of her future spouse. She took their counsel to heart
and adopted the principles as her own. Almost ten years later, the time of her marriage came.
The First Marriage
Princess Anna, like most women of her generation, has the right and inclination to choose her
own husband. Her marriage to architect Gregory Malania stemmed from love. Mr. Malania was also a
descendent, only through the female line, from the last King of Georgia - His Majesty King
The Head of the royal House of Georgia , His Royal Highness the Crown Prince
NugzarBagrationi-Gruzinsky, had visited the Patriarch Ilia II of Georgia for advice regarding
the marriage of his daughter as a
Royal Heir to the
throne. The Patriarch listened and told him that love is important. His Holiness the Patriarch
also recognizes the importance of tradition and house rules and asked that the princess and the
future bridegroom be brought to him so that he could ask that their children carry the royal
surname of their mother. This would ensure that the children of the marriage would continue the
royal line according to the ancient rules of the House.
The Crown Prince, as agreed, presented the engaged couple to His Holiness the Patriarch. The
Patriarch blessed the couple and raised the issue of preserving the royal surname for their
future children. Mr. Malania consented to the request and promised to fulfill the agreement. So
His Holiness once again blessed the forthcoming wedding.
The chart below shows the descent of both Princess Anna and Grigol Malania and their two
The Crown Prince of Georgia published news of this wedding agreement and, through his royal
prerogative, bestowed upon his future son-in-law the princely title of sakhltukhucesi. Please
see the wedding agreement below the picture of the Patriarch for more information.
The newly-raised Prince Gregory Malania fully obeyed Georgian dynastic law. This law is based
upon a historical “zedsidzeobis” tradition. The ancient law holds that if a husband is not a
royal and he marries into a royal family, his surname is not passed to the children so that the
royal line of the mother may continue. For more information on this, please see D. Ninidze,The
History of the Bagrationi Dynasty Offshoots (XII-XVIIIcc), Tbilisi, 2004, page 41.
Prince Gregory faithfully fulfilled the agreement, and the children born from this marriage
carry the royal surname of their mother with the royal pre-nominal titles of "Royal
Highness." The Prince consort worked with historians and genealogists and made a
considerable contribution in promoting the Royal House. Through his efforts, in 2006, an
important historical memorandum was sign by almost all representatives of the Bagrationi
dynasty. This memorandum unanimously recognized the superior claim and royal rights of the
Bagrationi-Gruzinski family and is in full agreement with international law in regard to
clarifying and resolving succession disputes. For information on the law of nations in regard to
succession, please see Samuel von Pufendorf, On the Duty of Man and Citizen, Book 2,
chapter 10, No. 12, p. 135; Jean J. Burlamaqui, The Principles of Politic Law: being a
Sequel to The Principles of Natural Law, Part 2, chapter 3, no. 42(1); and Emerich de
Vattel, The Law of Nations, Book 1, chapter 5, no. 66.
While married, Prince Gregory also studied at the Tbilisi Theological Academy. In 2007, as he
neared the completion of his studies, problems emerged in the marriage and, regrettably, the
couple separated. Despite the separation and ultimate divorce, there remains a positive
relationship of respect and admiration between Prince Gregory and His Royal Highness the Crown
Prince Nugzar Bagrationi-Gruzinsky.
The Second Marriage
In 2007, His Holiness the Patriarch of Georgia, at one of his weekly sermons, announced that
Georgians should discuss different types of political systems. Chief among these is a system of
constitutional monarchy, where the King is Head of State but does not rule. This announcement
was accepted by most Georgians with gladness.
Within several Georgian monarchical organizations and, unfortunately, even in the backrooms of
the Patriarchate, there were people who wanted to use the
royal family for their own purposes and when they found that they could not have power and
dominion over this family, they would not support them as the true successors.
One reason put forth for the lack of support is that Prince Nugzar has only daughters;
therefore, the royal line could not continue in their minds. To this end, various Georgian media
artificially tried to represent some male representatives from the different offshoot Bagration
branches as the royal candidate. But when proper Georgian and international dynastic laws were
brought to the attention of the errant reporters, attempts were made to discredit the rights of
Princess Anna and her daughters as eventual heirs to the throne. Some organizations incorrectly
declared that if Princess Anna did not marry another Bagrationi line and produce a son from the
marriage, the royal line would become perpetually unclear and disputed. Having bypassed the true
royal claimant, some organizations deliberately searched for fabricated claimants from the
offshoot branches of Kartli, Kakheti, and Imereti. These false claimants would be announced as
the rightful claimant in media and then discredited, making monarchy in Georgia appear
disorganized and disjointed.
Yet the royal Bagrationi family did not need the second marriage of Princess Anna to ensure a
continuation of the royal line, because the succession law clearly designated Her Royal Highness
Princess Anna as second-in-line to the throne. After Princess Anna, Her Royal Highness Princess
Irine Bagrationi-Gruzinski, the eldest daughter of Princess Anna, is the next rightful claimant.
Prior to the second wedding, Princess Anna was 32 years old, and a second
marriage could lead to additional royal children resulting from the marriage. Therefore His
Royal Highness Crown Prince Nugzar consented to the idea of a second marriage for his daughter.
Yet legally, within the constraints of Georgian royal tradition and House law, the royal family
had no dynastic need for this second marriage. But His Royal Highness Prince Nugzar consented to
the Patriarch's wish for union between these families. It was believed that union would resolve
all discord resulting from the Mukhranski family unlawfully usurping the royal rights and
prerogatives of the Bagrationi-Gruzinski family while in Spain in the 1940s and continuing to
the present. For more information, please see V. Kiknadze, The Heir Family of the Georgian
, Tbilisi, 2006. Given that the Mukhranski claim, although incorrect, had gained
momentum in some circles, it was believed that this union of marriage between the rightful
Bragrationi-Gruzinski line and the Bagration-Mukhranski line would stop all the hostile forces
against monarchy in Georgia. Furthermore, it was believed that the union could wash away the
troubled history and animosity between the two families. This is why the Crown Prince consented
to the idea of union sponsored by the Patriarch of Georgia.
Since a relationship of love seemed to be developing between Prince David and Her Royal Highness
Princess Anna, it seemed appropriate to proceed. However, Princess Anna's first husband refused
to permit a divorce for a time, but out of a sincere respect for the Patriarch and the Royal
House of Georgia, he eventually agreed to a formal divorce.
In 2008, when the Patriarch of Georgia arrived back from the funeral of the Russian Patriarch
Aleksy II, His Holiness met with the Head of the royal House of Georgia, Prince Nugzar, and the
future son-in-law Prince David. Discussion centered upon a wedding date of Easter in April of
2009. Additionally, with Prince David present, His Royal Highness Crown Prince Nugzar insisted
upon a wedding contract. The wedding contract was to be akin to the first marriage of Princess
Anna, and the purpose of the contract was to follow dynastic house rules to preserve the royal
rights and dynastic priority of Princess Anna and any future children of the marriage.
The document would further define the legal title and status of both spouses, thereby preserving
the royal inheritance from the mother for any future children. This would allow the children to
be formally of the royal line and entitled to a place in succession. Thus, Prince David would
become Prince consort for Her Royal Highness Princess Anna of Georgia, similar to the status
once held by Princess Anna's first husband. This would allow David to be the father of a future
heir to the throne, which is a great privilege in its own right. While Prince David would be
head of the home, he would not be the de jure Head of State or the Head of the Bagrationi
dynasty. That would be Princess Anna's exclusive right given that Prince Nugzar has designated
her as his heir. Without this contract, Georgian dynastic law and traditions would be violated,
and any children born from the union would not be royal and entitled to succeed as potential
heads of the dynasty. Instead, the children would simply be high nobles of the
Bagration-Mukhranski line and not royal.
The Patriarch concurred and thought that there would be plenty of time before
Easter for both parties to prepare the necessary documentation to enact the contract. As part of
this agreement, His Royal Highness Prince Nugzar, in good faith, transferred all important
historical and genealogical documents to the Patriarch.
Per Georgian tradition, prior to the wedding, Prince David visited the head of the royal House,
Prince Nugzar, to officially ask the hand of his daughter. While visiting the Crown Prince's
home, David apologized on behalf of his Bagration-Mukhranski ancestors for incorrectly trying to
usurp the rightful Bagrationi-Gruzinski royals for roughly 70 years. He further stated that the
Bagration-Mukhranski attempted usurpation stemmed from a belief that all Bagrationi-Gruzinski
line members had not survived Russian occupation. Prince David confirmed verbally that the
Bagrationi-Gruzinski family had the highest entitlement to the Crown of Georgia.
While the wedding was originally set for Easter of 2009, due to intense political problems
within the country, the Patriarch unexpectedly asked His Royal Highness Crown Prince Nugzar and
Prince David to set the wedding date much sooner. His Holiness the Patriarch proposed the date
of the 8th of February, and premarital preparation began by the Patriarchate. But in late
January of 2009, the Patriarch suddenly got sick and had to leave for Germany to receive special
treatment. Unfortunately, because of time pressures and the already announced wedding date of
of February, there was not enough time for the
creation of the wedding contract. The Patriarchate had already sent out wedding invitations to
several royal houses; therefore, prolongation of the wedding date became impossible. Because of
the non-participation of the Patriarch himself at the wedding ceremony given his medical needs,
the dynastic law requirement was not completed. The Head of the royal House, Prince Nugzar,
during his official speech at the wedding, emphasized the transcendent rights of his daughter.
The speech was accepted by the audience as a verbal decree and confirmation of his rightful heir
to the throne, but this did not resolve the problem of a violation of dynastic law in regard to
the children of the marriage.
Barely over a month after this wedding, relations between the spouses deteriorated because of
unworthy behavior of Prince David. Furthermore, Prince David also proclaimed on his
internet site that he was the head of the royal House of Georgia, thereby again usurping the
legal rights of the true heir to the throne. Given David's behavior, Princess Anna had to return
to her father's home.
The situation was strained. Time passed and the Georgian public was left in the dark. To reduce
public pressure, some Georgian officials urged Prince Nugzar to establish a Chancellery for the
royal House. The Chancellery was designed to protect royal claims as well as develop, enhance,
and stabilize the situation.
On the 7th of November of 2009, the Crown Prince
published a special decree. Within the decree, he expressed gratitude to his supporters for
their merit and allegiance while simultaneously establishing the Chancellery. The Chancellery
obtained all necessary documentary materials concerning the succession to the throne of Georgia.
It also proved the supreme priority of Prince Nugzar as head of the Bagrationi dynasty in
accordance with international and Georgian dynastic laws.
On the15th of December 2009, the royal Chancellery of His Royal Highness Prince Nugzar sent an
official letter with attached material, 62 pages in all, where all the nuances of the situation
were analyzed. The letter also asked to meet with the Patriarch in order to find the best
During the visit with His Holiness the Patriarch, it was decided that representatives of both
parties complete the wedding contract as agreed to prior to the wedding in accordance with the
ancient house rules. In all, four meetings were held between the two parties. The agreement
would formally recognize and confirm Prince Nugzar as the head of the royal Bagrationi house. By
virtue of marriage to his daughter, Prince David would be granted full royal rights, including
the pre-nominal title of “His Royal Highness,” as Prince consort of Princess Anna. The
chivalric Orders invented by David's ancestors that lacked a true fons honorum would be
legitimized under Prince Nugzar. Prince David would be allowed to retain the income these Orders
provide, and they would be officially part of the Bagrationi honors system under His Royal
Highness Crown Prince Nugzar. Most importantly, children of the marriage would be recognized as
royal with succession rights.
Despite the fact that Prince David, at the beginning of the discussions, was ready to sign the
contract, he unexpectedly did not sign the binding agreement. Instead, he left for Spain. Copies
of these agreements, including royal protocols, are held by the royal House Chancellery, the
Patriarchate, and Prince David.
The following is a scan of the dynastic contract:
In the eyes of the Georgian public, Prince David's behavior has been interpreted as illogical
and raised suspicion. By his actions, he has refused to be the prince consort of his wife and
thereby kept children of the marriage from a place in line to the de jure Georgian
But there may be some compelling information that offers a reasonable explanation. The Georgian
internal affairs minister, Mr. Vano Merabishvili, revealed something heretofore unknown. He
speculated that the wedding to Prince David was a project sought by Russian ex-Prime Minister
Yevgeny Primakov. Please see the Georgian newspaper - "Siakhle", dated the 14th of
April, 2010. Therefore, the royal Chancellery began an investigation and started collecting
information in the hope of shedding light on Prince David's sudden and unexpected withdrawal
A representative of the Russian nobility, Prince Sergei Dadiani stated:
Here in Russia with the support of David are engaged the "legitimists," which are
supporting Maria Romanova and propose to hide her morganatic origin (the marriage of her father
Grand Duke Vladimir Kirillovich to Princess Leonida Bagration-Mukhranski) such that it is
profitable for them to present prince David as heir to the throne of Georgia.
Information obtained by the royal Chancellery concludes that Prince David's
behavior may be related to David's grandfather's sister, Leonida Bagration-Mukhranski. Her
marriage to Vladimir Kirilovich Romanov produced Maria Vladimirovna, who is a claimant to the
Russian Imperial Throne. These persons try to circumvent the morganatic requirements of Russia
by portraying the Mukhranski branch as belonging to the Kartli royals. The information on which
these claims are made is flawed and is recognized as such by the majority of the Romanov family.
From the previously mentioned book of V. Kiknadze, one can easily discern that Prince Irakli
Bagration-Mukhranski, David's grandfather clearly knew about his origins. Prince Irakli
presented himself on the so-called "Berlin elections" of 1942 as a descendant of
Princess Ketevan, the ninth daughter of King Erekle II. The other candidate in the so-called
“Berlin elections” of 1942, Prince Simon Tsitsishvili, was descended from the fifth daughter of
the King, Princess Mariam. Thus, the two Princes had roughly the same succession position in the
Bagrationi dynasty, which was far removed from Prince Nugzar's line. Prince Nugzar's line was
presumed not to have survived the Russian occupation.
This was the only argument Prince Irakli presented at the elections in claim of the royal
throne. If he had a much stronger position as now claimed by his grandson Prince David, why did
he not submit it in 1942? In contrast, the genealogical table submitted in the 1942 so-called
elections did not show any heir coming from King George XII, which was the line Prince Nugzar
comes from, as it was presumed to be extinct. It is from this error that the basis for the
Mukhranski claims has derived. For more information, please see V. Kiknadze, The Heir Family
of the Georgian Throne, Tbilisi, 2006.
In an effort to be a legitimate dynast of the Romanov House, Mrs. Maria Vladimirovua attempts to
portray her mother's non-royal origin (Mukhranski) as a royal bloodline. Because of the
morganatic, or unequal marriage, requirements of Imperial Russia, Ms. Vladimirovua's Mukhranski
mother disqualified her line from succession. For more information, please see M. Nazarov's web
article (in Russian) at:
The following is another article on the situation: #
These websites raise a large number of serious accusations against the Mukhranski family. One
would think that the family would protest any untruths and attempt to correct any errors, but
there has been no attempt to mitigate these concerns.
There are also widely publicized myths that in the early 1990s, the Georgian
government and His Holiness the Patriarch recognized George (Jorge) Bagration-Mukhranski as the
heir to the Georgian throne. No such evidence of this exists at all, especially in written form.
However, there is an interesting written letter by Maria Bagration, Prince David's aunt, which
indicates that her father excluded Giorgi (David's father) and his descendants from their
rights. If true, then David, and his siblings, would not even be princes of the nobility of
Georgia, let alone royal claimants.
Under Georgian dynastic law, Prince Nugzar from birth was a lawful successor to the Georgian
throne. Upon the death of his father, Crown Prince Peter II in 1984, Prince Nugzar became Head
of the royal House of Georgia. He owns all the rights, privileges, and prerogatives of his
royal status; however, he never requested or demanded privileges. He does not flaunt his royal
Therefore, during Easter of 2010, by the order of His Royal Highness the Crown Prince and
Princess Anna, the royal Chancellery issued the following statement. It was published in the
Georgian journals and newspapers. A link to the statement may be found here:
This statement quickly spread around the world, and it has significantly changed the world
community's representations about the royal House of Georgia. Previously established
misconceptions are giving way to truth about the royal House.
A force of stability, the Patriarch of Georgia urged Princess Anna to reconcile with her husband
with the hope of preserving the family. In October of 2010, when His Holiness returned from his
medical treatment from Germany, he requested that Princess Anna leave immediately for Spain to
give her husband another chance. The Patriarch declared that David should not have left the
country without the consent of His Holiness. Trusting the Patriarch and her own feelings,
Princess Anna left for Spain in an attempt to try to reconcile with Prince David. While leaving,
she promised that she would never go against the legitimacy of the true royal House.
Princess Anna left for Spain on the 12th of November
in 2010 and entered into a Spanish civil marriage with her husband. Further, she gave birth to a
son, Giorgi, on the 27th of September in 2011.
Unfortunately, the aforementioned royal succession marriage contract was not signed by Prince
David prior to their son's birth. Therefore, under international and Georgian dynastic law,
Prince Giorgi is not a royal. He is instead a prince of the Bagration-Mukhranski nobility
line. He is not a dynast of Georgia and has no succession rights.
For evidence of this, one need only look at Georgian history. The King's daughters often married
Georgian nobility, such as the Princes Eristavi, Tsitsishvili, Orbeliani, Mukhranbatoni, etc.
Children born from these marriages inherited the surnames of their fathers and were not members
of the royal House.
Georgian dynastic law, called Zedsidzeoba, has prevailed in Georgia for hundreds of years. When
there was only a female dynast, upon her marriage, a husband would lose his own surname
(gvartomoba) and thus children of the marriage would carry the royal surname of the mother and
consequently inherit succession rights in the royal House. For example, when the female King of
Kings (albeit really Queen of Queens) Rusudan I of Georgia married Moughir-ed-Din, Emir/Sultan
of Erzerum, the son born from this marriage carried the mother's surname. He later became King
of Georgia as David VI Bagrationi, who ruled from 1245-1259. It should also be noted that the
consort-husband of King (really Queen) Rusudan belonged to a sovereign house, and so they had
equal status. Nevertheless, Georgian dynastic law was preserved and her name was given to the
Another historical example is King of Kings (really Queen of Queens) Tamar of
Georgia. She married Prince David Soslan, who was a member of the Bagrationi Dynasty that ruled
Alania (modern-day Ossetia). While both King (Queen) Tamar and the Prince consort had identical
surnames, the son born from this marriage in historic sources is known as King Giorgi IV
Bagrationi. King Giorgi IV reigned from 1210 - 1223. Historical sources demonstrate that
King Giorgi IV in accordance with succession rules inherited his royal rights through his
mother, not his father.
The examples mentioned above clearly demonstrate how Georgian dynastic law impacts marriages.
These laws are ancient, and there is not a mechanism to change them. This is why Prince Nugzar
requested that the marriage contract be prepared and signed to fulfill the ancient requirements
just like he did in the first marriage of HRH Princess
Because the legally binding marriage contract was not signed, dynastic law was not met by Prince
David. Consequently, according to Georgian dynastic law, any children born from this marriage,
including Prince Giorgi, will not be royals or dynasts. Instead, they will be members of
the Bagration-Mukhranski princely line. This cannot change unless Prince David agrees to sign
and honor the marriage agreement and Georgian dynastic law. It
is important to note that a male descendent of the Royal House has priority over any females in
the line of succession. Were Prince Giorgi to become a dynast, he would be the heir apparent to
the throne after his mother.
If the House Rules are followed, the controversy between these two branches could be forgotten
and the royal prerogatives and sovereign rights could be shared through the posterity of Prince
David and Her Royal Highness Princess Anna. Only Prince Nugzar, as Head of the royal sovereign
House of Georgia, could initiate a change in the succession. According to international law,
such a change would require a majority decision of all true dynasts that hold genuine succession
rights. Ancillary Georgian princely lines, including the Bagration-Mukhranski family, could not
participate as they do not hold dynastic rights. For additional information, please see Samuel
von Pufendorf, On the Duty of Man and Citizen, Book 2, chapter 10, No. 12, p. 135; Jean
J. Burlamaqui, The Principles of Politic Law: being a Sequel to The Principles of
Natural Law, Part 2, chapter 3, no. 42(1); and Emerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations,
Book 1, chapter 5, no. 66.
The Chancellery of His Royal Highness Crown Prince Nugzar appeals to everyone to respect the
binding rules of the de jure Kingdom of Georgia. This includes preserving the legitimate
and rightful claims to the throne of this ancient and beautiful land under dynastic law.
It is hoped that His Royal Highness Crown Prince Nugzar's grandson, Prince Giorgi, may yet
obtain a place in the royal line. While Prince David so far has chosen to ignore and breach
these ancient traditions, the royal House would welcome Prince David fulfilling his earlier
obligations. Such action would serve to unite his family line with the royal line, and he could
be the father to a future heir of the throne.
We pray God's blessings on all and for the future of the Georgian people.
The origin of the princely family of
Bagration-Mukhrani and their legal and social status in the XVI-XX centuries.
Samukhranbatono - name of princely
fief where the owners of this territory since its inception in 1512 were the representatives of
an offshoot princely line of Bagrations. Needs to be underlined that this particular princely
line emerged only after the united Georgian Kingdom was split into three small kingdoms thus
this line was an off- shoot from Kartli royal house rather than from the Royal House of Georgia
and moreover, the first sovereign of the kingdom of Kartli and the founder of this separate
territorial entity was not a member of the Royal House of United Georgia but just a distant
Mukhrani - is a historical
lowland district in eastern Georgia. It lies within the historical borders of Kartli,
bounded by the Kura (Mtkvari) River, and its two tributary streams: Ksani and Aragvi.
Mukhranbatoni - Senior
owner (Prince) of the territory (princely fief) of Mukhrani.
In 1512 with the emergence of new “Satavado”
(Princely fief without individual sovereignty) “Samukhranbatono”, was led by the Princely
Family of Mukhranbatoni and Bagration-Mukhranski. This princely offshoot has emerged from the
royal house of Kartli of the Bagrationi Dynasty. They were high nobles and managers of this
particular fief. The right to be the prince of Mukhran-Batoni was not always hereditary, but
depended on whom the king chose out of this noble house to preside. The first Prince of
Mukhranbatoni was the third son of the King of Kartli Constantine II - Prince Bagrat (? -1540).
The reason for the formation of this “Satavado” and thereby the princely Line of Mukhrani
consisted in the politics of the time. King David X divided Kartli Kingdom in 4
Military-Administrative Regions “Sadrosho” (territorial unit) (Military Districts), one
of which was leaded by Bagrat Mukhranbatoni. Besides “Satavado Samukhran- batono”, this
Military District also included the territories of the two other non-sovereign princedoms -
Ksani and Aragvi “Saeristavo” or Princely fiefs. As said, these “Satavado"
did not have their own sovereignty or any indepen- dent right to rule. They were completely
subject to the Rulers and Kings of Kartli and later Kings of Kartli-Kakheti.
Thus arose one of the first Princely
Branches from the Royal House of Kartli. The status of this princely branch was briefly
expressed by Prince Ioane of Georgia, when he states: “[They are] second degree Bagrationi
and first degree princes”. (Prince Ioane of Georgia, a brief description of the nobility of
Georgia, n.p. “Iveria” V-VI, 1884; Brief description of living of the Princely and Noble
Families in Georgia. The editor and publisher O.Katselashvili, Tb. 1997, page 29).
Only the Head of the Mukhranski Princely
House - Prince Mukhranbatoni was the 1st Degree Prince, but all his younger relatives –
Mukhranbatonishvili (literally - "children of Mukhranbatoni") were the Princes
of the 2nd and 3rd Degrees. Since their origin in 1512 and up to the 20th century, the
representatives of Mukhranbatoni and Bagration-Mukhranski retained their non-sovereign princely
status. This is evidenced by numerous certificates issued by the Georgian Kings, historical
sources and archival materials that are listed in chronological order.
One of the earliest historical sources,
in which is mentioned a legal status of Princes of Mukhranbatoni, is a "Paris
Chronicle", which indicates the event occurred in 1609: "Mtkvari was a
full-flowing at that time. It was June. Prince of Mukhrani, Eristavs (means the princes of
Aragvi and Ksani), Amilakhvari were on the other side”. (Paris Chronicle. Translation, study
notes and pointers G.G.Alasania. Tb., 1991, page 45).
In the same historical source, there is
an evidence of much earlier representatives of this Princely house, "In 1555 Shah Tamaz
came in Kartli the second time. The sons of the owner of Mukhrani: Archil, Ashotan and Vakhtang
arrived to Atskuri." (Paris Chronicle. Translation, studies, notes and pointers were
fulfilled by G.G.Ala- sania. Tb., 1991, p.30) and "On 1578 the owner of Mukhrani,
Vakhtang, the son of the owner of Mukhrani Bagrat, when entering into the Temple was captured by
the lord King Simon and imprisoned into the Kekhvi Castle." (Paris Chronicle.
Translation, studies, notes and pointers made by G.G.Alasania. Tb., 1991, page 36).
Another historical source is the
"History of Georgia" written in the 17th century by Parsadan Gorgidzhanidze,
which relates to events that occurred between 1625 and 1635, Representatives of the
Mukhranbatoni princely house along with other Princely houses of Kartli Kingdom: ". . .
Eristavi (Prince) Iase of Ksani and owner of Mukhrani (Prince of Mukhrani) - Teimuraz . . .", and
"[the King] Teimuraz was joined by Kakhetians, both Eristavs, Mukhranbatoni, Iotam
Amilakhvari ...“ (Parsadan Gorgidzhanidze. History of Georgia. Translated by R.K.Kiknadze
and V.S.Puturidze. Research and pointers fulfilled by R.K.Kiknadze. Tb., 1990, page 81,92).
In this same historical source, we find,
that King Teimuraz I after the Battle at Bazaleti, which took place in 1626, abolished the “Satavado
Samukhranbatono”, and its lands and ownership which he granted to his son, HRH Prince David,
that is: "King Teimuraz (I) gave Mukhrani to his son Datuna ... " (Parsadan
Gorgidzhanidze. The History of Georgia. Translated by R.K.Kiknadze and V.S.Puturidze. Research
and pointers fulfilled by R.K.Kiknadze. Tb., 1990, page 92).
In 1716, Vakhtang VI once again to became
the King of Kartli and his son, Prince Bakar as his deputy became, “Dzhanishin” (Ruler)
of Kartli. King Vakhtang VI demanded that HRH Prince Bakar punish the supporters of his younger
brother, the former King Iese. In 1717, “Dzhanishin” of Kartli – Prince Bakar ordered to
seize prince Erekle Mukhranbatoni, blind him and then to appoint the son of the former
Mukhranbatoni Papuna - prince Levan, as the new Mukhranbatoni. In the historical source
concerning this event: ". . . The Shah called upon Vakhtang, [and] gave [him] Kartli and
the title of sipahsalar (Persian) of Iran . . . and as the governor of Kartli was as- signed his
son Bakar. Bakar . . . ordered by his father [King Vakhtang VI] grabbed Erekle Mukhranbatoni and
blinded [him], and then gave Mukhrani to the son of Papuna - Levan". (Vakhushti
Bagrationi. The History of Georgian Kingdom. Translated, supplied with the foreword,
dictionaries and indexes by N.T.Nakashidze. Tb., 1976, page 104).
According to the document issued in 1720,
the King of Kartli (Vakhtang VI) has divided the land of this princely fief (“satavado
Samukhranbatono”) between the representatives of this Princely Family (see: Monuments of
Georgian Law. Tome VI. Published by I.Dolidze, Tb., 1977, str.689-693 (in Georgian language) and
in 1721 King Vakhtang appointed his younger brother - Prince Iese as a new Mukhranbatoni
(Monuments of Georgian Law. Tome IV. Published by I.Dolidze, Tb., 1972, page 395 (in Georgian
The following historical document also
clearly evidences that Prince Mukhranbatoni was part of the Nobility of the Kartli Kingdom. In
1724, the King of Kartli Vakhtang VI with family was forced to leave Georgia and moved to
Russia. Together with the King, his numerous retinue also left the country. After listing the
members of the royal house then begins listing of the King's entourage. As part of this retinue
there were the chiefs of “Sadrosho” (military districts), and among them was listed - the
full General of troops of the right flank - Prince Vakhtang Amilakhvari (patronymic of Avtandil)
as well as the full General of the left flank, Prince Levan Mukhranbatoni (patronymic of
Papuna). The documented information regarding the composition of those who left with the King of
Kartli (Vakhtang VI), are given in the Book of the Historian S.Kubaneyshvili as follows:
"The List of retinue of King Vakhtang VI dated 1724. List A: Georgian King Vakhtang
(patronymic of Levan), princes, nobles, and his servants. The full Generals of the left, right
and front flanks of the troops of the Georgian King: the full General of troops of the right
flank of Upper Kartli, Prince Vakhtang Amilakhvari (patronymic of Avtandil). The full General of
the left flank, Prince Levan Mukhranbatoni (patronymic of Papuna)". (List of the
retinue of King Vakhtang VI dated 1724. List A. S.Kubaneyshvili. David Guramishvili in Regiment
of Georgian Hussars. Tb., 1965, pages 121-22 (in Georgian language)
In 1778, King Irakli II granted a
monetary gift to his son-in-law, the Prince Ioane Bagration-Mukhranski (patronymic of
Constantine). (D. Ninidze. Samukhranbatono. Tb., 1997, p.56 (in Georgian. Lang.).
The social status of the Princes
Mukhranbatoni is also shown in the Interstate Document known as “The Treaty of
Georgievsk,” concluded in 1783 between the Russian Empire and King Irakli II. This document
indicated that King Irakli II authorized his Ambassadors and faithful servants - Prince Ioane
Mukhranbatoni and Prince Garse- van Chavchavadze to sign the above-mentioned document:
. . . Chosen and authorized faithful
and loyal servants to us - Prince Ioane Bagrationi (patronymic of Kon- stantine), the full
General of troops of the left flank and also the Chief Adviser in matters of Erevan
province, Prince Garsevan Chavchavadze (patronymic of Revaz), of our Adjutant General and
Overseer of the Kazah province, by which we give a full power of attorney ... (Treaty of
Georgievsk. The Contract concluded on 1783 “Concerning the accession of Eastern Georgia under
Russian auspice”. The text was prepared for publication, intro- duction and notes were supplied
by G. G. Paychadze. Tb., 1983, page 68).
In the nobility List of Georgia that was
signed and presented by King Irakli II and attached to the Interstate “Treaty of
Georgievsk” of 1783, Prince Mukhranbatoni is listed among the other non-sovereign Princes of
Kartli. This was stated in the Document: "List of the Princes and Nobles of
Kartli-Kakheti. List of the Kartlian Princes. Prince Mukhranbatoni Bagrationi" (Treaty
of Georgievsk. Agreement of 1783 concerning the accession of Eastern Georgia under Russian
protectorate”. The text was prepared for publication, introduction and notes were supplied by G.
G. Paychadze Tb., 1983, p.57 (in Georgian language).
Till present day there has survived the
gravestone of the above mentioned Prince Ioane Mukhranbatoni, located in the Cathedral Church
Svetitskhoveli on which is placed the Epitaph of 1800. It clearly evidences the status of his
Offspring of the Bagrationi family,
son of Mukhranbatoni, Sardar Sakhltukhutsesi (Minister of Economy of the Royal Court)
Constantine, Mukhranbatoni, Sardar Sakhltukhutsesi and Governor of Erevan . . . left his beloved
[monogamian] wife, daughter of Irakli II, the King of all Georgia, Ketevan, in sorrow for ever.
. . . (A.Natroev. Mtskheta and its Cathedral Church Svetitskhoveli. Tiflis, 1900, page 331).
In 1800, King Giorgi XII issued a Letter
of granting the title of Mukhranbatoni to Prince Constantine (patro- nymic of Ivan)
Bagration-Mukhranski. In this document is stated, that the King... "... has bestowed the
title of Mukhranbatoni and approved onto this title Constantine, son of Ioane...."
(Platon Ioseliani. Life of Giorgi Thirteenth. Tb., 1978, page 151 (in Georgian language).
After the abolition of Georgian Kingdom,
Russian Government issued a List of the Members of the Royal House of Georgia. The mentioned
list, besides of listing the royal persons, also indicates the names of their spouses, so along
with other sons-in-law of the Royal Family also mentioned Prince Ioane Mukhranbatoni as a spouse
of the royal Princess Ketevan (the 9th daughter of King Erekle II). (The Family Tree of the
Persons of Georgian Royal Family during the accession of Georgia into Russia. The Archives of
the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Letter ? 735 of Knoring to Obolyanov dated on April 1,
1801. In the book: N.Dubrovin Transcaucasia since 1803 up to 1806. Saint Petersburg, 1866).
The same is indicated in the Acts of
Caucasian Archaeological Commission published in 1866, which also shows a list of the members of
the Royal House of Georgia, where Prince Ioane Mukhranbatoni is mentioned only as son in law of
the royal family same as Princes Tsitsishvili and Tarkhan-Mouravi for example. (see: Georgian
Royal House. 161. List of the Georgian Royal Family. Acts collected by the Caucasian
Archaeological Commission, tome I, Tiflis, 1866 pages 199-200). (See Document ?16)
October 30, 1820, Prince
Constantine Bagration-Mukhranski (patronymic of Ioane) applied with a request to the Tiflis
Assembly of Noble Deputies concerning his approval in the princely dignity. This petition reads
As evidence of an ancient origin of my
princely family, herewith I am presenting the Documents that were issued to the ancestors of
mine, as well as to my late father - Prince Ioane Mukhranski by the Georgian Kings.: 1st.
from [king] Giorgi in 1687; 2nd. [king] Erekle in 1784 and the 3rd from [king] Giorgi in
1798, as equally the pedigree with the family list, and by evidence of 12 Noble persons in
regards to our origin from that of surname, that is shown in the Treaty of Georgievsk
concluded by the Russian Imperial Court with the late King Erekle in 1783. I humbly beg you
to include our family name into the Nobility Lineage Book and to provide me with diploma
that evidenced from the extract of family lineage along with brothers [In Georgian:
Major-General Constantine Mukhranbatoni (Signature)]. (Case of Tiflis Assembly of Noble
Deputies regarding the petition by Major General K. I. Bagration-Mukhranski for his approval in
the Princely Dignity. Central Histori- cal Archive of Georgia (CHGA), ?213 Fund, Series 1, Case
?63 (October 30, 1820 - June 24, 1915), sheet 1).
In this same archival document, the
Prince Constantine Bagration-Mukhranski (patronymic of Ioane) presents his genealogical table,
which begins with his direct ancestor, Prince Teimuraz Mukhranbatoni and comes down to his sons
(CHGA, Fund 213, Series 1, Case 63, sheet 9-10).
This archival file also kept another
petition addressed to the Tiflis Assembly of Noble Deputies, dated 1915, which belongs to the
Marshal of Dusheti District Nobility Prince Giorgi Bagration-Mukhranski (patronymic of
Alexander) on inclusion of his children Irakli, Mary and Leonida into the princely family of
Bagration-Mukhranski and issued him the birth certificates for his children (It should be
emphasized that Irakli which is listed among children of the above-mentioned prince Giorgi was
the grandfather of prince David Bagration-Mukhranski, whose baseless and ungrounded claims to
the Georgian throne are still ongoing.) (CHGA, Fund 213, Series 1, Case ?63, sheets 294, 299,
On November 24, 1820 the representative
of another branch of this Princely house, Prince Giorgi Bagration-Mukhranski (patronymic of
Simon) petitioned to the Tiflis Assembly of Noble Deputies on his approval in the princely
dignity. In confirmation of his princely origin, he provided a Letter of King of Kartli Simon
II. In the above-mentioned petition it stated:
Petition of the landowner from the
Ananuri district, captain and cavalier Prince Giorgi Bagration-Mukhranski son of Simon to
the Georgian Assembly of Noble Deputies: In evidence of our princely origin I submit to you
herewith a Letter issued by the King Simon in 1618 that was granted to our ancestors; equal
to the evidence of 12 Noble persons concerning that our Princely family name is shown in the
Treaty concluded by Russian Imperial Court with the deceased King Erekle in 1783, and the
pedigree with the family list, humbly begging an honored Assembly to include our family name
into the Nobility Lineage Book and to issue a Certificate. [Signed in Georgian: Captain
Prince Giorgi Bagration]. November 24, 1820. (Case of Tiflis Assembly of Noble Deputies
for petition of the Captain Prince G. S. Bagration-Mukhranski with regard to recognize his
family line into the Princely Dignity. The Central Historical Archive of Georgia (CHGA), Fund
?213, Series 1, Case ?117 (November 24, 1820 - March 30, 1915), sheet 1).
In 1892, in the official edition
published by the Department of Heraldry of the Governing Senate of Russian Empire, Princes of
Bagration-Mukhranski are presented among the titled nobility, not royalty. When in the
same edition the descendants of the former Royal House of Georgia are mentioned as Serene
Highness Princes /Princesses of Georgia. (The Princes of Bagration-Mukhranski. Lists of
titled families and personalities of Russian Empire. The publication of the Department of
Heraldry of the Governing Senate. Saint Petersburg, 1892, page 12).
Articles in this section include:
We encourage you to read and enjoy the articles that follow, which are informative and can
deepen one's understanding of the whys and wherefores as well as the true and permanent
rights of royalty, nobility and chivalry. The following articles are considered to be
especially important and valuable:
to join the Commission as a contributor or apply for certification for titles, knighthood,
status or ancestry. Our goals and mission are to protect the public from counterfeit
titles, phony knighthoods and fake genealogies. We certify the true and the genuine as well as
promote chivalry, royalty and nobility. There is so much that needs to be done. We invite you to
contribute and join with us.
Contact or donate through the following:
© Copyright 2021/2022 -- International Commission on Nobility and Royalty. All