The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   The Imperial Family of Russia (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f80/)
-   -   The extent of Alexandra's responsibility for the fate of the dynasty (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f80/the-extent-of-alexandras-responsibility-for-the-fate-of-the-dynasty-31563.html)

XeniaCasaraghi 07-21-2011 10:20 PM

The extent of Alexandra's responsibility for the fate of the dynasty
 
Do you blame Alexandra for what happened to the Romanovs? Either alone or together with her husband?
It seemed that a lot of bad omens surrounded her when she moved to Russia.

Daria_S 07-21-2011 10:29 PM

if you asked me this question several years back, I would have said 'yes' without even thinking. While I will say that she definitely contributed to the fall of the regime, she did thinking that she was doing right. Yes, a road to Hell is paved with good intentions, but let's think about this for a second. She was a woman who was desperate to provide a heir in order to secure the succession, yet, once she does, he ends up sick with an incurable illness that came from her side of the family. I'm sure guilt had a great deal to do with her decisions when dealing with Aleksey, and out of that guilt, coupled with desperation, she trusted a person like Rasputin. We know what went on, so I don't need to rehash the entire fiasco of World War I and the Empress's attempt to run the government and basically having Rasputin dictate and her blindly following. However, I will say that it was all done with a hope that somehow her son and Nikolai's heir will survive and be able to take the throne. I don't want to judge too harshly, because in all reality, I'm not sure how I would have acted if I were in her position. A mother will do anything to stop her child's suffering, and unfortunately, in this case, it led to a bigger catastrophe.

Vasillisos Markos 07-21-2011 10:39 PM

Does Alexandra deserve all the blame? No. Does she deserve part of the blame? Yes.

I too used to believe that it was her fear for her son which led her and the others down the path to ruin but after reading serveral books about Russia, I now believe that it is only part of the reason for the Romanovs destruction. For example, I recently read Queen Marie of Romania's description of Nicholas and Alexandra's coronation and she is spot on in describing Alexandra as one who did not welcome the future but seemed to dread it and was ready to engage in combat with it. (Marie describes the uncrowned Empress lips as pressed into a thin line and her eyes seemed to be that of one going towards her execution). She was ill suited to being a consort and what's worse, once anyone criticized her or Rasputin, he or she became the enemy and Alexandra's hatred was implacable. If Nicholas had been made of sterner stuff, he might have stood up to her but unfortunately he was no match for her.

IloveCP 07-21-2011 11:59 PM

I don't think so.Not entirely.Her husband was the monarch not her.I know her being German made things worse but,even if she was from England I think she would have had the same fate.

Meadow 07-22-2011 01:57 AM

I think she played her part which helped define what happened. Her trust in Rasputin was very bad judgement and in the end it was to no avail it ended up costing many lives. I don't fully blame her because she was trying to help her sick son and was blinded by that and trying to ensure he one day could take the throne. Mothers don't always think clearly when they have a sick child and Rasputin did take advantage of that too. I wonder how different Russia would be today if it hadn't happened and if what effect it would have had on the other royal families?

Cory 07-22-2011 08:46 AM

She didn't want to harm anybody or anything but she put too much trust in Rasputin and she influenced the changes of the members of the government during the war.She was not loved by the members of the Imperial Family and she was rather hated by the people.

RubyPrincess168 07-22-2011 01:21 PM

No. Her being a carrier of the hemophilia gene is hardly something she could do anything about. Plus from what I've read, Alexandra sounds a little.......I don't want to use the words 'mentally unstable', but she seemed depressed, morose, etc. from the beginning of her relationship with Nicholas. And then there's her faith in the "faith healer" Rasputin - really no different than our faith in our Gods.

Cory 07-22-2011 02:32 PM

She was declared Saint by the Orthodox Church.

olebabs 07-22-2011 03:24 PM

What happend in Russia, is not only one persons fault. Had Alexander the 3. not decided to ignore his fathers wishes and ratified the new constitution, perhaps it wouldn't have been so easy for the communists to take power. Had he also educated his son better to be the monarch, he might have made better decisions and perhaps have chosen a wife that could support him in this.

AristoCat 07-22-2011 03:46 PM

Alexandra had it all going for her when she ascended the Throne, but she didn't capitalize on it and work it to her advantage. She held a sort of reverse snobbery against the Russian Court and she took a real imperious view of her and the position of her husband. A huge mistake was in treating her position as some sort of martyrdom, not as something to be enjoyed. She never gave the Russian courtiers a chance to really get to know her and she isolated her husband from his relatives. It's not like she really understood what was expected of her, mainly to be a leader of society and I don't see why she always cut out the Russian people when they wanted to meet/greet her and Nicholas.

Quote:

She was ill suited to being a consort and what's worse, once anyone criticized her or Rasputin, he or she became the enemy and Alexandra's hatred was implacable. If Nicholas had been made of sterner stuff, he might have stood up to her but unfortunately he was no match for her.
Her biggest mistake was the insistence on secrecy surroudning the health of her son. She would have been blamed, but the Russian people would have understood completely and been able to help. I am sure that better healers would have been found and that Rasputin's role would have been understood, but there would have been more of a balance on how much influence that he had over the Tsar/Tsarina and the rest of the Imperial Family. I'm more than sure that the nobility would have helped find good doctors (making Rasputin less needed) and more holy men would have been able to end up providing moral/spiritual support. She never reached out and preferred to martyr herself.

XeniaCasaraghi 07-22-2011 04:04 PM

What exactly does her being declared a saint have to do with the question I asked?
To the people who answered my question, thank you for your opinions. Just to clarify, I am not talking about just Alexei's illness or Rasputin, but her entire tenure as Empress.

Fürstin Taxis 07-22-2011 04:08 PM

IMO no. She was the regent of Russia.

XeniaCasaraghi 07-22-2011 04:42 PM

AristoCat, I can't necessarily blame Alexandra for keeping Aleksy's illness a secret because it was a different time the early 19th century and hemophilia was not widely understood. I also recall reading that Nicholas wanted to keep the illness a secret as well.

Archduchess Zelia 07-22-2011 07:07 PM

No, Alexandra isn't the only one to blame. She did have her flaws, but she definitely wasn't the only one responsible for what happened. Nicholas wasn't the perfect ruler either, I think he was too soft / too nice. A lot of people are to blame.

Russophile 07-22-2011 07:18 PM

Do I blame her? Yes. She KNEW better. IMO, she didn't try hard enough. However, hindsight is 20/20 and there was enough blame to go around.

pgm1952 07-22-2011 08:57 PM

The whole saga of that family has different levels of blame on all parties. Alexandra was very willfull and hectoring as a consort to Nicholas. She was undoubtedly the stronger personality in that marriage and could badger him to no end. He took the route of many husbands: avoid a scene and agree with her! If he didn't listen to her and Rasputin there would have been hell to pay. Nicholas should have known better than to place his wife as the decision maker when he took over as commander in chief of the army during the war.

This delicate- in- health but opinionated woman saw her role in the same light as her husband; as a protective autocrat parent to a rambunctious Russia- child. They both felt they knew what was right for Russia and brooked no opposition, simply relying more and more on each other (two well- meaning but flawed individuals) and their belief in the old order.

AristoCat 07-22-2011 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi (Post 1290542)
AristoCat, I can't necessarily blame Alexandra for keeping Aleksy's illness a secret because it was a different time the early 19th century and hemophilia was not widely understood. I also recall reading that Nicholas wanted to keep the illness a secret as well.

Back then, since most royal families (and aristocratic) had sons with hemophilia, it wasn't such a taboo subject. I am sure that people would have understood and that the Russians (who are notorious in their love of children) would have reached out and understood when she showed up in public looking upset. It would have broken the hold that Rasputin had over the Imperial Family and in some cases, the nation.

Quote:

This delicate- in- health but opinionated woman saw her role in the same light as her husband; as a protective autocrat parent to a rambunctious Russia- child. They both felt they knew what was right for Russia and brooked no opposition, simply relying more and more on each other (two well- meaning but flawed individuals) and their belief in the old order.
There was a definate lack of balance in her religious views as well. She never managed to find a healthy equilibrium with her devotion and at no point found a rational balance between her role as Tsarina in the social sense, or her husband's role as God's anointed. She never questioned her husband's specific role and failed to let things change for the better.

glassary 07-23-2011 12:33 AM

Believe that no one is 100% to blame for the fate of imperial Russia but Alexandra did have a hand in the outcome.
To me a big problem for Russia was that at turn of the century the absolute wrong couple occupied the throne.
They may have shared a great love for each other but they also didn't share a great deal of intellect for the positions they were placed in.

Nicholas was ineffective and blind to anything that pointed to change. He would have been happy to maintain the status quo and do nothing about the problems in Russia. But his biggest flaw to me was his weak will and lack of willpower when it came to Alexandra. He seemed to be incapable of making a decision without her. He seemed to always be making sure he was doing what Alexandra wanted not what his country needed.

Alexandra in turn seemed to have been a shy, stubborn woman who made no attempt to blend into her new country. She wasn't going to be a part of court life and did her utmost to insure that Nicholas wasn't either.
I find it funny that one of the things she did take to in Russia was the belief that the Tsar was chosen by God and was an all powerful autocrat. Her continous meddling (for whatever reason) and sway over Nicholas was damaging.

Nicholas and Alexandra lived in their own fantasy reality of what it meant to be the rulers of Russia. They seem to have been blind to the reality of what was going on in their country and preferred the false picture of happy peasants worshiping their Tsar (father) and Tsarina (mother).

Sadly I believe if Nicholas wasn't as weak or if Alexandra wasn't as overbearing things might have turned out different.
They were the perfect storm for the revolution.

AristoCat 07-23-2011 12:47 AM

Quote:

I find it funny that one of the things she did take to in Russia was the belief that the Tsar was chosen by God and was an all powerful autocrat. Her continous meddling (for whatever reason) and sway over Nicholas was damaging.
Which is ironic since she came from a background that believed in the institution of monarchy as bound by Constitutional restrictions. She knew the British system perfectly and knew all about the benefits. With her genuine interest in charity, she would have made the perfect consort of a constitutional monarch.

glassary 07-23-2011 12:55 AM

LOL exactly my thought Aristo. I wonder what her granny thought of that?
Did she approve of the belief or possibly hope that with Alex on the throne things would change?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises