|
|
Post by kueifei on Dec 2, 2020 1:37:14 GMT
I thought a thread should be created for the Revolution and it is clear that it was almost more vicious than the French Revolution. The monarchs didn't get trials and didn't get to at least get their time to state their side of things and perhaps even become more aware of things that they had been unaware of. The entire family was butchered and interestingly, it was Grand Duke Michael (briefly Michael II before he abdicated in favor of a constitutional republic) who was the first to die. He was taken out to the back into the woods of the city of Perm and executed along with his secretary. It was the beginning of the end for all of them. I just wonder if whether or not it would have been different for all the Romanovs if Nicholas had said that he would abdicate only AFTER being granted refuge in another country and only signed papers of abdication after getting refuge at a foreign embassy or even being on foreign soil. It might have saved his life, his family's life, and also maybe provided a way out for the other Romanovs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 2, 2020 2:05:46 GMT
I thought a thread should be created for the Revolution and it is clear that it was almost more vicious than the French Revolution. The monarchs didn't get trials and didn't get to at least get their time to state their side of things and perhaps even become more aware of things that they had been unaware of. The entire family was butchered and interestingly, it was Grand Duke Michael (briefly Michael II before he abdicated in favor of a constitutional republic) who was the first to die. He was taken out to the back into the woods of the city of Perm and executed along with his secretary. It was the beginning of the end for all of them. I just wonder if whether or not it would have been different for all the Romanovs if Nicholas had said that he would abdicate only AFTER being granted refuge in another country and only signed papers of abdication after getting refuge at a foreign embassy or even being on foreign soil. It might have saved his life, his family's life, and also maybe provided a way out for the other Romanovs. Thank you for getting this started, KF. This could led to some very interesting about the Romanovs (and those family members who actually survived the Revolution). My overall impression of the French and Russian Revolutions is that they were a long time in building up, yet it was certainly the later day relatives and servants who paid the ultimate price. As I have written before (indulge me) I am very distantly related to the Romanovs (from Catherine the Great, the real one, not Middleton). Quite recently I have read up on those Romanovs who met tragic ends, and their grieved family and friends. Yes, there are so many that were executed - and of course we cannot forget their loyal and faithful servants who were devoted to the end. I will look back on what I have found and post - there are so many fascinating lives and stories. I encourage any and all other history buffs to share here. Thanks again, KF. I love history. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 2, 2020 2:09:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 2, 2020 2:22:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Dec 2, 2020 3:00:38 GMT
What I find chilling, is how Rasputin was killed and then how the Imperial Family was killed. Rasputin was poisoned, shot multiple times, stabbed thoroughly, and all in the basement of the Yussoupov Palace. Then he was driven out into the night and drowned in the dark river and in a way, that was a horrific form of desecration. He also ended up desecrated by the Bolshevik troops and the Romanovs did pass by his hometown before they were executed. I also know that the Imperial Family was in fact driven out into the night (after they were executed) and their remains desecrated and have been continued to be desecrated and disrespected ever since they were denied a proper burial. I also believe that it is a parallel alongside Rasputin's reputation as well. Rasputin was grossly calumniated and so was Alexandra and eventually Nicholas.
I often wonder if Rasputin was in fact demonically possessed. He could carouse and drink more than any other normal human and there was something about him that attracted women like crazy. He was a bad influence and if he had been decent, he would have told Alexandra to tell the nation the truth of Alexei's illness. It was horrific that it was kept a secret and for once they should have stopped being so insistently isolated and 'above' answering to the nation. There is nothing holy about the 'order' that he came from, where 'sin must be committed before forgiveness can be given.' The 'religious' order was in fact officially banned and he was a kind of fraud since he was sleeping with women in direct violation of the order of chastity, getting drunk regularly (in direct violation of the requirement of abstinence living) and not urging Alexandra and Nicholas to come clean about the reality of Alexei's illness. He meddled in affairs of state and wrecked it all.
He also talked down about Nicholas and controlled Alexandra by keeping her in religious thrall and manipulating everything until it got terribly out of control.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 2, 2020 3:31:47 GMT
A Romanov...and one of the murderers of Rasputin (Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich, first cousin of Nicholas II, grandson of Tsar Alexander II) - he was a nephew (by marriage) to Elisabeth, a sister of the Tsarina's. After his father remarried when he was young, he essentially was raised by his Uncle Sergei and his wife Elisabeth ("Ella"). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Duke_Dmitri_Pavlovich_of_Russia |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 2, 2020 3:38:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 2, 2020 3:47:04 GMT
What I find chilling, is how Rasputin was killed and then how the Imperial Family was killed. Rasputin was poisoned, shot multiple times, stabbed thoroughly, and all in the basement of the Yussoupov Palace. Then he was driven out into the night and drowned in the dark river and in a way, that was a horrific form of desecration. He also ended up desecrated by the Bolshevik troops and the Romanovs did pass by his hometown before they were executed. I also know that the Imperial Family was in fact driven out into the night (after they were executed) and their remains desecrated and have been continued to be desecrated and disrespected ever since they were denied a proper burial. I also believe that it is a parallel alongside Rasputin's reputation as well. Rasputin was grossly calumniated and so was Alexandra and eventually Nicholas.
I often wonder if Rasputin was in fact demonically possessed. He could carouse and drink more than any other normal human and there was something about him that attracted women like crazy. He was a bad influence and if he had been decent, he would have told Alexandra to tell the nation the truth of Alexei's illness. It was horrific that it was kept a secret and for once they should have stopped being so insistently isolated and 'above' answering to the nation. There is nothing holy about the 'order' that he came from, where 'sin must be committed before forgiveness can be given.' The 'religious' order was in fact officially banned and he was a kind of fraud since he was sleeping with women in direct violation of the order of chastity, getting drunk regularly (in direct violation of the requirement of abstinence living) and not urging Alexandra and Nicholas to come clean about the reality of Alexei's illness. He meddled in affairs of state and wrecked it all.
He also talked down about Nicholas and controlled Alexandra by keeping her in religious thrall and manipulating everything until it got terribly out of control.
No wonder he fascinates us to this day. A truly larger and life character and it makes one wonder - superhuman almost. Who knows if he was truly possessed? The details of the murder are horrific. When Alexandra heard about the death, she wanted the culprits executed, apparently. |
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Dec 2, 2020 4:08:35 GMT
Thing is, there was nothing natural about his ability to heal Alexei and it was impossible for it to be explained. He was according to Robert Massie, a fraudulent holy monk. The man literally assaulted NUNS and was someone who successfully prophesied the death of Stolypin and the affects that the first world war would have on the House of Romanov. He wasn't getting his signals from Heaven, I believe that much. There is no way that a holy monk, a genuinely holy monk, would be so addicted to power, nor would he be encouraging Nicholas and Alexandra to  the truth from the Russian people. |
|
|
|
Post by despina on Feb 21, 2021 18:54:34 GMT
There was the problem with Nicholas himself. He was born on the same day as a big Russian marthor of Orthodoxe church and he thing that it is a bad sign for him,that his life would be difficult and so on. And of course the Coronation day when tousend of people died in Moscow,he took it very personally.
When Nicholas came to power he made it clear that he will rule the country the same way that his father does. It was a big dissapointment for the people,most of them hope that he wold finally change something.
I read a very interesting theory that it was Nicholas who ordered the assasination of Stolypin. Nicholas think that Stolypin hold too much power and star to became too dangerous.
And about the princesses. Felix Yusupov asked for the hand of the elder daughter,but Alexandra rejected this proposal because she thought that Yusupov is too low for her daughter(at that time Yusupovs there more rich than the Romanovs)
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Feb 21, 2021 19:18:33 GMT
I think Alexandra was instrumental in all of it. She was so antiseptic and never gave Russian society a chance and it irritates me that she would have thought that a Yussoupov would not have been good enough. She never shook off her grand imperial airs and regrettably she never did do much for Russia. She did nothing for the people.
In the Netflix miniseries, it shows her perpetually condescending attitude and interestingly, the character of Yurovsky asking Nicholas heatedly, "What did you do for the people? Russia is the people!". That is something that should be asked of any and all monarchs every year before they get any kind of money from the taxpayer.
Nicholas would have been a much better, and happier constitutional monarch. With only one or two palaces and a decent allowance, he would have been much better suited, but his wife was perversely determined to maintain autocratic grandeur, over common sense and the fact that it was unaffordable. All that tax money was going to paying for the upkeep of the entire Imperial family and it is clear that it did bankrupt him (and the national treasury) and that was money that should have been reinvested into the nation.
It was a conflicting mess since Alexandra was all for the autocracy and yet by temperament, Nicholas was not equipped to handle all that work and Alexandra was unstable at best and having hysterics every couple of days and he couldn't handle the fact that Russia was terribly behind (in regards to industrial development) and Nicholas made the terrible choice of going after more land, via war, despite the fact that Russia was already 1/6 of the world's land mass. He had no logic despite it all. I believe that Nicholas just killed off all that patience and tolerance. |
|
|
|
Post by despina on Feb 22, 2021 8:41:45 GMT
When Russians make their first State Duma in 1905 Nicholas took it as a kind of tragedy, he said that he is humiliated by his own nation.
Nicholas was not a leader , so it was easy for Alexandra to manipulate him.
As for Russian society,especially the Aristo set, Alexandra disliked them a lot,she didn't try to be friend with them or at least be amiable.
|
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Feb 23, 2021 4:26:11 GMT
You know, I get ticked that Nicholas thought he was being betrayed, despite the fact that the Duma could have prevented the violent overthrow that eventually happened. Nicholas was not temperamentally suited to be an absolute monarch and it is clear that he was moving in that direction, but Alexandra stymied him every step of the way. I just regret that the Russian Tsars had a habit of marrying Germans and Danes and not Russian aristocrats. An actual Russian aristocrat would have likely bonded better and added more Russian lineage to the Romanov family. for all that Nicholas viewed himself as a Russian, he was about as Russian as strudel.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 24, 2021 0:14:08 GMT
You know, I get ticked that Nicholas thought he was being betrayed, despite the fact that the Duma could have prevented the violent overthrow that eventually happened. Nicholas was not temperamentally suited to be an absolute monarch and it is clear that he was moving in that direction, but Alexandra stymied him every step of the way. I just regret that the Russian Tsars had a habit of marrying Germans and Danes and not Russian aristocrats. An actual Russian aristocrat would have likely bonded better and added more Russian lineage to the Romanov family. for all that Nicholas viewed himself as a Russian, he was about as Russian as strudel. No, Nicholas didn't have the temperament to be an absolute ruler. And you are right, the Romanovs going back to Catherine the Great, at least, were very Germanic. The Russian revolution was probably decades (at least) in the making. What were the triggers leading to full-blown revolution when the Russians and rest of Europe, etc, were supposedly fighting the war to end all wars.?Anybody want to refresh my memory? (it's been awhile since I studied any Russian history) I don't know if marrying Germans was supposed to give their Monarchy a sort of legitimacy? It worked for the Swedish monarchy (the Bernadottes) who made it a habit into marrying Germany royalty to give themselve legitimacy. One aside about strudel: www.bargaintraveleurope.com/17/Germany_Statue_Frederick_Josias_Saxe_Coburg.html |
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Feb 24, 2021 3:42:00 GMT
I don't know if marrying Germans was supposed to give their Monarchy a sort of legitimacy? It worked for the Swedish monarchy (the Bernadottes) who made it a habit into marrying Germany royalty to give themselve legitimacy.
I think the German royals for some reason or another manage to convince other people that their particular brand of stoical stiffness is in fact regal dignity and regrettably it has convinced others. I dislike how the Scandinavian royals prefer to behave as if they are above it all, when their airs/graces only make them of no practical use, much less help, to their country. Russia has always been about the people and Alexandra alienated herself from the people. It literally NEVER occurred to her that the people were not just simple minded peasants who were happy to work nonstop for a handful of kopecks and it never occurred to her that they had hopes and dreams and aspirations of their own. Like Marie Antoinette, Alexandra really believed that the Revolution was in fact just some kind of collective temper  and that it would end and the Russian peasants would go back working nonstop for kopecks and also be apologetic for demanding civil and human rights. Even at the Ipatiev House, Nicholas and Alexandra would not stop scheming behind the backs of the Bolsheviks, despite the fact that the Bolsheviks knew what was going on. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 24, 2021 13:18:01 GMT
I don't know if marrying Germans was supposed to give their Monarchy a sort of legitimacy? It worked for the Swedish monarchy (the Bernadottes) who made it a habit into marrying Germany royalty to give themselves legitimacy.
I think the German royals for some reason or another manage to convince other people that their particular brand of stoical stiffness is in fact regal dignity and regrettably it has convinced others. I dislike how the Scandinavian royals prefer to behave as if they are above it all, when their airs/graces only make them of no practical use, much less help, to their country. Russia has always been about the people and Alexandra alienated herself from the people. It literally NEVER occurred to her that the people were not just simple minded peasants who were happy to work nonstop for a handful of kopecks and it never occurred to her that they had hopes and dreams and aspirations of their own. Like Marie Antoinette, Alexandra really believed that the Revolution was in fact just some kind of collective temper and that it would end and the Russian peasants would go back working nonstop for kopecks and also be apologetic for demanding civil and human rights. Even at the Ipatiev House, Nicholas and Alexandra would not stop scheming behind the backs of the Bolsheviks, despite the fact that the Bolsheviks knew what was going on. Well, Prussia was the royal powerhouse, plus there were many dukedoms and principalities with a great many princesses to choose from. They had the weight and the power and the intricate family heritage, so it was almost inevitable that their centuries long influence would continue to make itself known. Look to any royal house, and there's a strong German background. Sweden had to have true royalty of any stripe to marry into it - after the deposing of Gustav IV, they placed a french general on the throne. |
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Feb 25, 2021 22:53:10 GMT
Good point, but thing is, that there is near zero lineal connection. If Nicholas had married a Russian aristocrat, I honestly think that it would have been better and a Russian, with concrete Russian lineage, would have brought a better connection with the aristocracy and public. Also, if the Grand Duchesses had married a Yussoupov, or a Russian prince, with dollops of Russian lineage, I am certain that it would have been a PR masterstroke. I do believe that Alexandra never really got it into her head that the Russian nation was more than just a reflection of her own grand image of herself. Russians needed food, Russians needed decent housing, Russians needed enough money to get their families nice things and good clothes. The last thing Russians needed, was more land. Nicholas, being born and raised in the 1800's, was more interested in more war for more land. Big effing mistake. Then there was Alexandra who would NOT let up on Nicholas, telling Nicholas to be tougher with the Russian people and then go figure, when the Russians start pushing back for once in their miserable lives, Alexandra urges Nicholas to get worse.
I did read that what shattered relations permanently, was Bloody Sunday. Up until that point, the peasants always believed that if they went to the Tsar, that the Tsar would understand and solve everything. That everything would be okay. Russian fairytales are filled with that belief. Yet on that day, the protestors were ignored by the Tsar since the Tsar wasn't there and were all shot by Cossack regiments. Father Gapon, who had led the protestors was was a monarchist, became a radicalized anti-monarchist and the Russian people lost all love of the Romanovs. They no longer believed that the Tsar loved them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 26, 2021 1:03:08 GMT
Good point, but thing is, that there is near zero lineal connection. If Nicholas had married a Russian aristocrat, I honestly think that it would have been better and a Russian, with concrete Russian lineage, would have brought a better connection with the aristocracy and public. Also, if the Grand Duchesses had married a Yussoupov, or a Russian prince, with dollops of Russian lineage, I am certain that it would have been a PR masterstroke. I do believe that Alexandra never really got it into her head that the Russian nation was more than just a reflection of her own grand image of herself. Russians needed food, Russians needed decent housing, Russians needed enough money to get their families nice things and good clothes. The last thing Russians needed, was more land. Nicholas, being born and raised in the 1800's, was more interested in more war for more land. Big effing mistake. Then there was Alexandra who would NOT let up on Nicholas, telling Nicholas to be tougher with the Russian people and then go figure, when the Russians start pushing back for once in their miserable lives, Alexandra urges Nicholas to get worse.
I did read that what shattered relations permanently, was Bloody Sunday. Up until that point, the peasants always believed that if they went to the Tsar, that the Tsar would understand and solve everything. That everything would be okay. Russian fairytales are filled with that belief. Yet on that day, the protestors were ignored by the Tsar since the Tsar wasn't there and were all shot by Cossack regiments. Father Gapon, who had led the protestors was was a monarchist, became a radicalized anti-monarchist and the Russian people lost all love of the Romanovs. They no longer believed that the Tsar loved them.
Oh, yes, I agree - almost no real lineal connection. Literal straight descent, from one line of Nicholas' (at least) from the German Kaisers (for instance, a daughter of Friedrich Wilhelm III married Nicholas I), Nicholas and Alexandra were cousins (at least through one line - the Hesse and by Rhine, having a common 3x great-grandfather) Interesting about Bloody Sunday...thanks for posting that. |
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Feb 26, 2021 3:19:10 GMT
If Nicholas had been honest about the condition of his son, maybe there could have been a referendum about changing the Pauline Laws and regrettably he didn't THINK that the Russian people would suspect that something was up. It is also clear that Alexandra was getting in WAY too deep with Rasputin and while his ability to heal Alexei is uncanny, it is clear that he wasn't a good influence. He was not encouraging Alexandra to be honest with anyone and he was screwing tons of aristocratic women and it is clear that he was out of control. Most 'holy monks' do not at all do what he was doing and it is clear that he was crossing lines. I do not think that the Duma would have tolerated Rasputin and I honestly think that Nicholas was just in over his head. Right before (or after) the abdication Nicholas just had a complete nervous breakdown and I honestly think that Alexandra was the worst possible influence. She was fatalistic and she was not someone who encouraged him to socialize or go out and have a good time. She was over-controlling and she treated the creation of the Duma as a kind of rebellion despite the fact that the Duma was the final system standing between her, the Tsar, the Romanovs, and the Bolsheviks. If she had had half a brain, she would have either fled the country or backed the Duma with all her strength.She would just NOT STOP trying to run the nation through her husband and it was increasingly clear up to WWI that Nicholas would have preferred a constitutional role rather than an autocratic one. It's not like he really could handle the role and he was not able to make good decisions since there was his interfering uncles, the manipulative Kaiser, and the general situation. Alexandra was someone who would NOT LET Nicholas move towards a constitutional role and it is clear that he would have been happier, more carefree, and more popular and liked. Alexandra just wanted power and once she had a taste, was NEVER going to let go. The Revolution could have been avoided if she had been smart enough to reach out to the people and do what she could to make the life easier for the peasants. If she had just supported the Duma, she would have saved the lives of the entire Imperial Family. That alone could have thwarted Communism.
|
|
tale BS.
#JamesMiddleton