Murder of the Imperial Family 17 July 1918

[Grandduchess24]

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi

I'm sorry but for whatever hatred the Russians felt for Nicholas and Alexandra it did not call for what happened in that basement. First, there should have been a trial, second the Russian people did not condemn the Romanovs to die, only a select few bullies made that decision and then went on to terrorize the entire country. That's probably one of the reasons why Russians have never "forgotten" the Romanovs like the Bolsheviks wanted them to, because Russia didn't condemn them as a people.
And if the murders did need to occur there was no reason to murder Olga, Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia, Dr. Botkin etc. I could maybe MAYBE understand killing Alexei along with his parents, and I hate to even say that, but he was a political liability being Nicholas' heir. But the other 6 people who died that night served no purpose. Plus they killed Nargony prior to the murders in the basement.

I totally agree there really was no reason to kill the royal family, they should have had at least a fair trail( not like a Marie Antoinette and Louis who were also killed unjustly) should have at least exiled them since Nicholas II abdicated already and mikhail didn't accept it, because I think when he abdicated he knew the Russian people no longer loved him as czar , but case and point there was no reason for killing them.

[Grandduchess24]

I just think they were innocent souls that were hated and shouldn't have been killed like animals. How could they murder them who loved each other very much and did almost everything together and got along. Look at this family picture ....they shouldn't have been murdered :( by looking at the picture who would have thought they would be murdered by the Bolsheviks.

[COUNTESS]

What happened in Ekaterinberg was wrong. The children were innocent. Nicholas was a fool and a terrible Tsar, Alix was a neurotic. Murder is wrong.

[vorky]

why did not they escape? They were hold at Tsarske Tselo for a long time

[Vasillisos Markos]

Originally Posted by vorky

why did not they escape? They were hold at Tsarske Tselo for a long time

How could they escape? There was not a mounted effort by people in the area to liberate the Tsar and his family. In addition, the diplomatic efforts to get them out of the country never came about because of political opposition both inside and outside Russia.

Some of the royal family (such as the other Grand Dukes) could have escaped if they were savvy enough to know that the end was coming but I doubt many of them thought their lives would be lost, so they stayed on and we now know what happened. Grand Duke Michael, for example, was given relative freedom when compared to what Nicholas and his family were subject to but even Michael waited too long; his plan to escape via Finland was within hours of being completed when he was arrested again.

[AristoCat]

How could they escape? There was not a mounted effort by people in the area to liberate the Tsar and his family. In addition, the diplomatic efforts to get them out of the country never came about because of political opposition both inside and outside Russia

The British government initially offered to take them in and made arrangements, but unfortunately George V stepped in and prevented it from being carried out, mainly to placate his people and also ensure the survival of his good PR. The Hanovers were becoming Windsors and they were working at a PR campaign to prove how English they were. The one chance the Romanovs had at being saved was stopped because their cousin was so determined to protect his image.

All that had to be done was for the Brits to send in a warship and make a point that the Imperial Family was to be handed over, but it wasn't done. With the actions of the Whites, the Reds believed that killing them all would have ended the campaign of the Whites. There were those who wanted to get the Imperial Family out, but there was no organized effort at all.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Questions abou why the Romanovs didnt escape reminds me of questions like "why didn't the Jews fight or flee from the Nazis"? In both cases the victims did not know the extent of the danger they were in. For awhile in Tsarske Selo they believed they were soon going to be in England. Then they were assured that Kerensky didn't want to kill them only to get them out of the country. Even when the Bolsheviks came to power they still believed they would be ok, and even if they tried to escape they had no means.

[AristoCat]

Alexandra and Nicholas were aware of a possible trial, but not like the butchery of their entire family. Hindsight is the only time that one can see clearly, all the developments. Second, the entire family was immured and under 24/7 supervision, basically prisoners in a well maintained jail. No one could fathim literally murdering the entire RF, even the children. Even in the French Revolution the kids were spared and eventually shipped off to relatives in Austria.

The murder was unprecedented because it was the first time that the "State" decided that people were disposable for reasons other than criminal. NO one could fathom that Nicholas wouldn't be put on trial, or that Alexandra wouldn't be put on trial, even if they were executed in the end. Do you think that you could imagine such a thing? Now we can, but before that, it was unimaginable.

[Grandduchess24]

It is just so sad what happened to the Russian imperial family in 1918 period

[Furienna]

Indeed. Even if Nicholaus and Alexandra had made their mistakes, killing not only them, but also their children and their servants, was really cold.

[Grandduchess24]

They should've at least been exiled but not murdered.July 17.1918.is a memorial day for me.

[Jagdflieger]

Originally Posted by Vasillisos Markos

Some of the royal family (such as the other Grand Dukes) could have escaped if they were savvy enough to know that the end was coming but I doubt many of them thought their lives would be lost

This may be true, in some cases particularly. But there is another reason for not leaving your country even when one knows it could be dangerous or even lethal. And the Tsar and his family (as well as many other Royal members) proved it right.

Nicholas was a fool and a terrible Tsar

This comes to your personal favours and likes/dislikes. But there is no unbiased historical research proving this statement (especially in Russia). Sorry for an off-topic passage.

[Carminha Stalker]

Everytime I remember, or read, or see news about that awful massacre, I get sick in my stomach and also in my heart.
There is no excuse possible for the brutality that occured in that cellar room.
Proof of that is that the regime which murdered them, went on to commit millions of murders, to tyranize a whole polulation for many many years.
And now, this same family which was supposed to have been wiped out forever, is still very much in the minds and hearts of people all over the world.

[Alexey 1904]

The 'Windsors' were Saxe-Coburg and Gotha's , not Hanovers. A cabinet member of George V supposedly came up with the name on July 17th, 1917. If George would have stood up to his wife, Queen Mary, who told him in no uncertain terms not to bring 'Nicky' and the rest of the family to England, history may have been kinder to the Romanovs. But, then again, maybe not. Maybe there would still be a monarchy in Russia and GD Maria would not be THE Pretender to the Throne now.

[Vasillisos Markos]

My dear Alexey,

I have never read that it was Queen Mary who dissuaded George V from sheltering the Romanovs. My I ask what is your source for this statement? I had always assumed it was a number of factors and people involved which caused the King and his Government to refuse to take in the Romanovs, not just one person such as Queen Mary. Indeed, I don't think I have ever read what was her view on the matter. This has piqued my curiosity!

[Artemisia]

Originally Posted by Alexey 1904

The 'Windsors' were Saxe-Coburg and Gotha's , not Hanovers. A cabinet member of George V supposedly came up with the name on July 17th, 1917. If George would have stood up to his wife, Queen Mary, who told him in no uncertain terms not to bring 'Nicky' and the rest of the family to England, history may have been kinder to the Romanovs. But, then again, maybe not. Maybe there would still be a monarchy in Russia and GD Maria would not be THE Pretender to the Throne now.

If we are going to be technical, the Windsors weren't Saxe-Cobrug and Gotha either; they belonged to the House of Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld, itself one of the Ernestine branches of the House of Wettin.

Ernst III of Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld, received Gotha from the uncle of his then wife, Louise of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg despite the objection of her relatives; to appease them, he agreed to cede Saalfeld to Saxe-Meiningen. When Prince Albert was born, the House he belonged to was still Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld, not Saxe-Cobrug and Gotha; that, in turn, means that all his descendants should technically belong to the House of Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld. In fact, Queen Victoria's mother (who was the sister of Prince Albert's father) was still known as Victoria of Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld at the time of her marriage which took place less than a year before Prince Albert was born.

The point is, Ernst III - as Head of the House - had as much right to change the name of his House as George V - as Head of one of the branches of the House.

[Alexey 1904]

Sorry about the family name, Artemisia. I never heard of Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld. I only assumed that their old family name was the OTHER Saxe-Coburg area. So, if the name Windsor had not come into existence as a family name, and not just a castle, do you think they would be still known as Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld?

My dear VM: I'm ashamed to say this, but at the moment, I don't remember where I read that about Queen Mary. I know it was either in one of my 'Majesty' magazines or perhaps, a book on the Romanovs. I got the feeling that Q. Mary didn't mind 'Nicky', but couldn't stand Alix, just like her husband. I will search my mags and books to see where I saw that. Wherever I saw it, it said when K.George discussed it with his wife, she simply said 'no' to the idea of the Romanovs moving in. In 'The Last Days of the Romanovs', when Mary and George did find out 3 or 4 days after the R's. had been executed,they were very sad, and kept George's aunt Helena waiting more than an hour for lunch while they mourned 'Nicky's' passing. At that point, Queen Mary referred to the Bolsheviks as 'those brutes who killed Nicky'. I don't recall if she said anything about Alexandra and the children.

[Artemisia]

Originally Posted by Alexey 1904

Sorry about the family name, Artemisia. I never heard of Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld. I only assumed that their old family name was the OTHER Saxe-Coburg area. So, if the name Windsor had not come into existence as a family name, and not just a castle, do you think they would be still known as Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld?

No, they wouldn't. You were correct that the name of the Royal House of Britain before the Windsors was Saxe-Coburg and Gotha; I just got into unnecessary technicalities. My apologies for that; genealogy is my hobby and I tend to get carried away.

Basically, the Duke of Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld changed his House name in the same way his descendant, George V, change the name of his. If George V hadn't issued the royal proclamation of 1917, the name of the House would have now been Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, just as you said.

The House of Wettin (to which currently two reigning houses - the British and Belgian, as well as several non-reigning houses belong) had two cadet branches - Ernestine and Albertine. The Ernestine branch (the more senior one) consisted of numerous sub-branches which ruled various Duchies in the territory of Saxony (hence the Saxe). The most senior branches (those most others originated from) were Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, Saxe-Meiningen, Saxe-Coburg (including Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, and their cadet branch - Windsor), and Saxe-Altenburg.
The current Head of the House of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, as well as the senior-most agnate of the entire House of Wettin (which includes Queen Elizabeth II and King Albert of Belgium) is Michael, Prince of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach.

[AristoCat]

My dear VM: I'm ashamed to say this, but at the moment, I don't remember where I read that about Queen Mary. I know it was either in one of my 'Majesty' magazines or perhaps, a book on the Romanovs. I got the feeling that Q. Mary didn't mind 'Nicky', but couldn't stand Alix, ]

Yes, it was Alix who was the main problem in everyone's eyes. There was so much anti-German fervor that the Windsors changed their dynastic name (to Windsor of course). Either way, it was a cowardly act.

I hope that the Windsors are never in need of refuge at the hands of any other royal family, I can tell you that much. There is a thing such as karma and I hope taht they don't need refuge, or the royals of the world might instead ask "Why, when you didn't help the Romanovs?"

[Artemisia]

But why pick on the Windsors? Why not the Danish Royal Family who was more closely related to the Imperial Family? Or any other of the royal families of the time who were as closely related to the Romanovs as the Windsors? At least the British Government considered helping (and opted not to out of concern for their own country and, yes, their own survival): most other countries didn't even entertain the possibility.

To say a country fully emerged in a World War had to think about the ruling family of another country (especially one whose new government was basically an enemy) is really unfair, in my opinion. Every single Government will always put the interests of his country before any other interests, be it family ties or human rights.