The extent of Alexandra's responsibility for the fate of the dynasty

[AristoCat]

In most dysfunctional families a scapegoat can be found-usually a child. In communities it will be one family who is singled out and a country can blame the government of the day. Did Russia, already in crisis, point its' collective finger at the "German bitch" and lay the blame for it at her feet?

You have a point there, but there were times when she stepped over the mark and it was vital that while she did do good, she should have in fact reached out to society and not the government.

[ilovemonaco]

they didnt have to kill them

[Barton]

The Romanov's were headed for trouble long belong Alexandra arrived on the scene. However her stubbornness did play a minor part.

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi

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.

[Vasillisos Markos]

Originally Posted by Cory

But now she is declared saint by the Orthodox Church.

But what does this have to do with Alexandra's involvement with the downfall of the dynasty? She was killed as a political act; I for one do not see that she died for her Orthodox belief.

Originally Posted by ilovemonaco

they didnt have to kill them

You are absolutely correct but this thread is not about justifying Alexandra's death. It is about the extent of her involvement in the downfall of the Romanovs.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Look at all the things Alexandra did wrong, make a list of them, and research how many times she was advised to not do these things for the good of Russia and the country but she simply ignored the advise of others. After doing all that then tell me she is nothing more than a scapegoat. Perhaps people are misunderstanding the point of this thread, I am not saying it was all Alexandra's fault, Nicholas had a much bigger hand in the demise of the Romanov dynasty. What I was wondering is if anyone who has read up on her, can't help but to blame her a little bit for the Romanov dynasty being ousted. Of course it is not all her fault, but do you believe some of it was her fault. That is what I was asking, despite the fact that the title of my thread has been changed!

[Vasillisos Markos]

My dear XeniaCasaraghi,
See what you have started, my dear?
I have enjoyed the discussions on this thread. It would be a boring world if we all agreed all the time.

[kell]

well you gotta remember the head of the secert service was also haveing his agents write alexandra letters flasely in the name of people to show support for alix kinda easy to not be fooled by that as she was

[Tsaritsa]

XeniaCasaraghi, hello.Yes, Alexandra made some massively bad judgement calls but her own could never have been less than clouded and 20/20 vision is a wonderful thing. Perfection is illusive and the most that mere mortals can hope to achieve is "good enough" Nothing that anyone does is in isolation, every decision taken is dependent on personal experiences, so it was thus for Alexandra. To my knowledge, only one perfect human being has ever walked this earth and there must have been occasions when He doubted Himself. The rest of us go on doing the best we can with whatever hand we have been dealt and at some time we will all be guilty of making errors of judgement.

[fearghas]

Hello I would like to throw in a few things that I think may be relevant. First I think it is ironic that Alix was called the "german'Bitch when most of the Romanov wives were from german families. But in many ways she wasn't really german. Much of her upbringing was in England and she was very english in some ways. As i understand from what I have read she was very undemonstrative in public, which is a very upperclass énglish thing. Her cousin Ena was accused of being cold and infeeling as well whem she didn't throw a hysterical fit at her wedding when the bomb was thrown at them. Alix tended to behane in a similar upright sort of way. Remeber when all the people were killed at the coronation and even though she had been crying in private, at the ball she looked very composed, as if she didn't care, in contrast to her mother in law who was very demonstrative in public.
Alix was mentally unstable. I've noticed that people here in this forum still don't like to consider such things but an illness is an illness, whether mental or physical. Much of Alixs physical illmness' can be considered as symptoms of the mental and emotional turmoil she would have been in. This would have contributed to her appearing unfeeling as well because she would have straining hard to keep herself together.
Unfortunately she was the wrong bride for the Romanovs and those around her knew it. Unfortunately, rather than try to support and help her, those who should have been able to help, her mother in law and sister, and sisters in law, chose instead to belittle her or were in no position to help.
The Romanov dynasty were constantly affected by misfortune. The early death of the tsaravitch Nicholas in 1865 was a piece of special badluck. A well educated man similar in outlook of his father, Aleander II, educated in the role of the Tsar he was a bitter loss. Alex III was a completely different man who was not liked by his father, not educated and a reactionary to change. He was not really the man needed for the throne.
Then Alex II untimely death and the failure to get the new constitution. I can only shake mt head when I read of his refusal to go to safety. Why does it seem that so many men who want and are in a position to make changes refuse to protect themselves.

I am a monarchist and I would love to have monarchies back in all the european thrones but the Romanovs do show how heridtary positions can really backfire badly.

[Tsaritsa]

I concur with what you say, Fearghas, although I thought her emotional state was generally accepted. Another point which could be thrown into the mix is Alexandra's female role model. Queen Victoria was hardly a good example of ruling publicly, in fact her maxim may have been the one used frequently by my ex husband "Why should I if I don't want to?" Victoria made a career out of staying out of the public gaze, would it be very surprising if her grandaughter believed that this was how one reigned? Also, could it not be said that Victoria's own emotional state was questionable and is it not possible that she spent the greater part of her adult life in depressions of varying depths? Supposing Alexandra was attempting to be the monarch she saw her Grandmother as being?

[AristoCat]

Unfortunately she was the wrong bride for the Romanovs and those around her knew it. Unfortunately, rather than try to support and help her, those who should have been able to help, her mother in law and sister, and sisters in law, chose instead to belittle her or were in no position to help.

There were a lot of courtiers who could have helped, but Alix rejected them, mainly because she refused to invite them over, work to get to know them, and kept away the rest of the Romanovs to mainly keep her husband to herself. She also judged them as all lazy and immoral and not the 'real Russia.' It was a two way street that Alix didn't work on when she had the chance.

[fearghas]

That's true. I believe that the Dowager Empress did try at first and was severly rebuffed. However she didn't want to give up the limelight and was delighted when Alix proved to be reclusive.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Just because Maria might have been happy with Alexandra being into isolation doesn't excuse Alexandra from doing it. If she had bothered to get to know Russia she would have become better acquainted with her duty; you say Alexandra learned isolation and her mental problems from Queen Victoria, but if Alexandra had been smart enough she would have recognized the difference between a constitutional monarch and an autocrat. She defended and supported Nicholas role as an autocrat but didn't want to put in the effort to maintain it. Even in England where the monarch is not all powerful, Victoria's behavior was causing a problem. Did Alexandra bother to learn anything about what an autocracy was and how it is to be handled? Isolating herself is one thing, but isolating her children and especially the Tsar is just taking it too far. I understand she was shy, I am a shy person who likes being alone as well and I sympathize with her. But there are many shy people throughout history who have still done their duty.
I apologize if once again it seems I am blaming only Alix for the problems of Russia, I am aware that it goes far beyond her.

[AristoCat]

If Alexandra had gotten off of her high, self righteous horse for once, she would have made things so much easier for herself and Russia. She judged all the Romanovs without getting to know them, alienated en entire nation, and then encourgaed her husband to keep ruling on his own, wihtout realizing that it was killing him slowly. A Duma would have takne a huge burden off of him and then saved him from the nervous collapse he had right after abdication.


As for autocracy, she mistook it for not having to be accountable. God did not place her there because she was uniquely qualified, he placed her in Hesse and then she married Nicholas and then God ripped her from her throne (like Marie Antoinette) because she showed herself unwilling to pay the price of her position.

[Tsaritsa]

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi

Alexandra learned isolation and her mental problems from Queen Victoria, but if Alexandra had been smart enough she would have recognized the difference between a constitutional monarch and an autocrat. She defended and supported Nicholas role as an autocrat but didn't want to put in the effort to maintain it. Even in England where the monarch is not all powerful, Victoria's behavior was causing a problem. Did Alexandra bother to learn anything about what an autocracy was and how it is to be handled?

XeniaCasaraghi, if Alexandra had been smart enough much may have been different. I see her mindset regarding the monarchy,and Russia as simple and uncomplicated-if one was a monarch, one ruled/reigned-and came to her courtesy of her beloved Granny, who had reigned forever, was the fount of all knowledge and whose views were unchallengable. I don't imagine she thought there had ever been a time when Granny had had to LEARN how to be Queen and I don't suppose Victoria recalled those earlier days and whilst her behaviour might have been causing problems for her government, Victoria, had she even cared to know, would simply have dug in her heels and done whatever she wanted.........and Alexandra would have witnessed this behaviour. She didn't need to know any details, knowing that this was how Granny did things would have been enough, and in any place, other than Russia, it might have worked.

[AristoCat]

Even IF Nicholas had not been an autocrat, she was still not a good Consort; with any throne she would have been a liability because of her reitring nature and unwillingness to understand that when she married a monarch, she would belong to the State and public, not herself and she would have to perform a vital social function.

[NotAPretender]

If I were to put a number on it, I would place the blame for the final downfall at 75% on Alix.

The remaining 25% would be a combination of Nicholas and his father, and the Romanov refusal to adhere to very basic marriage laws which in turn led to their taking no part in public life and duties, but continuing to sup at the public trough. Unbridled and rampant greed without performing the duties that come with a position certainly made the Romanovs look corrupt and indifferent to the needs of the country.

[AristoCat]

Unbridled and rampant greed without performing the duties that come with a position certainly made the Romanovs look corrupt and indifferent to the needs of the country.

That was definately it really. It's not like they bothered to marry responsibly and too many ran Nicholas over and did what they wanted, when they should have been rallying around and supporting Nicholas at every turn. They could have made things so much easier if they had shown some restraint and then NOT married some of the women they did. Grand Duke Michael did the worst out of all of them, marrying a twice divorced commoner when he KNEW he was in line to become Emperor after Nicholas.

defended and supported Nicholas role as an autocrat but didn't want to put in the effort to maintain it

I agree; her job as Consort was to make his personal and social life as easy as possible. It was her JOB to be social, to reach out, and to ensure that she had smoothed out the path so the other Romanovs could be part of things as needed, socially or politically. It was never her job to interfere in politics and also to tell Nicholas who to hire and fire based on Rasputin's viewpoint.

[Benedict XVI]

If nicholas had not had such a controlling wife I would bet that he would have given in more to the liberal demands that the people and the Duma wanted. A huge mistake that nicholas made was that he decided to take control of his armed forces shortly after the outbreak of World War I. He had no experience in military. But the even worst mistake was to leave the internal running of the country to his wife who was even less able to run the government than he was. When she took over control of the government she made some very dumb mistakes. The first issue was the fact that she relied to heavily on Rasputin. Who was a complete and total idiot. She would not listen to any of the advisors that knew anything about it. I think that she wanted power and her husband was so weak that he wouldn't do anything.

[AristoCat]

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi

Look at all the things Alexandra did wrong, make a list of them, and research how many times she was advised to not do these things for the good of Russia and the country but she simply ignored the advise of others. After doing all that then tell me she is nothing more than a scapegoat. Perhaps people are misunderstanding the point of this thread, I am not saying it was all Alexandra's fault, Nicholas had a much bigger hand in the demise of the Romanov dynasty. What I was wondering is if anyone who has read up on her, can't help but to blame her a little bit for the Romanov dynasty being ousted. Of course it is not all her fault, but do you believe some of it was her fault. That is what I was asking, despite the fact that the title of my thread has been changed!

I have to agree; she came to Russia, isolated herself from society, ended up condemning society, and then began almost immediately interfering in politics. Now tell me why she didn't deserve quite a bit of condemnation. She thought she knew better than her husband about a country she knew nothing about and she let her persecution complex infect her husband as well. She refused to accept that she had a public role to fulfill and the Russian people wanted to like her and get to know her. She also made it difficult for the rest of the Romanovs to spend time with Nicholas and she kept trying to have the rights of a private person with the authority of a Tsarina, incompatible traits. The one person I think should have helped her was the Dowager Empress Marie, someone who didn't really try to help her when she could have.