The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #641  
Old 11-16-2020, 10:20 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,571
By Nicholas II's reign it was far too late. The rot against autocracy set it at the time of the Decembrists early in the 19th century. If moves towards democracy had begun in the 1830s there might have been a chance. After that, it was one slow decline to disaster IMO.

After the assassination of Alexander the Liberator, Nicholas's grandfather, his son Alexander III was determined to retain autocracy and strengthen it. His younger brothers agreed with that philosophy and had an enormous influence over the young and inexperienced Tsar Nicholas.

Alexandra didn't interest herself in politics in the earlier years of her marriage. And she was quite happy with the way things were. When her grandmother Victoria spoke to her about being gracious to commoners she replied 'Here' (in Russia) 'it is not necessary to seek the favour of the people'.

She was in fact quite upset when a limited Duma was set up after the mini-revolution in 1905 that 'Baby' (Alexei) wouldn't inherit the same powers and prestige as his ancestors.
Reply With Quote
  #642  
Old 11-17-2020, 08:01 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 11,704
I think that there was a chance even at the beginning of Nicky's reign. If it didn't save the dynasty, it might have at least saved their lives... if he had allowed a Duma with some powers, in the early years of his reign.. there would probalby have been discontent still and the War might still have caused the end of his reign but Russia would have moved a fraction closer to a normal developing democracy and it wouldn't have required such a massive Revolution to try and break the stranglehold that autocracy had on Russia. There would have been more political parties, and while there would still have been Communists they might not have been able to get a hold on power the way they did, and kill off the Tsar and his family. Nicky might have been pushed to abidcate but he might have been allowed to abidcate and leave the country....
Reply With Quote
  #643  
Old 11-17-2020, 08:37 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,591
It seems like, every time there was a move towards reform, something happened to spook the Romanovs. Catherine the Great was spooked by the Pugachev revolt and the French Revolution. Alexander I might have made changes had he not been distracted by the Napoleonic Wars, but then the Decembrist Uprising spooked Nicholas I right at the start of his reign. Even Alexander II rolled back on things after being spooked by the Polish Uprising, and then his assassination drove his son right the other way. But, yes, I think there was still a chance early in Nicholas II's reign, and sensible ministers like Witte could see that.
Reply With Quote
  #644  
Old 11-17-2020, 09:03 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 11,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
It seems like, every time there was a move towards reform, something happened to spook the Romanovs. Catherine the Great was spooked by the Pugachev revolt and the French Revolution. Alexander I might have made changes had he not been distracted by the Napoleonic Wars, but then the Decembrist Uprising spooked Nicholas I right at the start of his reign. Even Alexander II rolled back on things after being spooked by the Polish Uprising, and then his assassination drove his son right the other way. But, yes, I think there was still a chance early in Nicholas II's reign, and sensible ministers like Witte could see that.
I dont have a detailed knowledge of Russian history.. but I think that for Russia's sake as well, some moves towards reform would have been better than what happened. Because the Russian tsars had stamped on even a mild measure of reform, in 1917 Russia had to move from the 18th C (or even earlier) to the 20th C in one jump, and the Communist system was a brutal blunt instrument that probably killed more than it helped. Had Nicky allowed a proper Duma in 1905, the country would have begun to develop a bit further towards constitutional monarchy.. and Nicky would not have been in sole charge when the war broke out.. and made a hash of things. I think that its possible that if the war was going badly, a semi constitutional monarchy with Nick at the head and a sick child like Alexis as the heir would have been vulnerable.. and as the people got more fed up wiht them, there might have been pressure for them to leave and the country would become a republic, like Germany and other monarchies did toward the end of the war.

But it might have been a case of saying "Sign this abdication paper and get out" to Nick and the IF, so he would have escaped with his life.. And mabye it would have been easier, if Nicky wasn't seen as the Bloody Tsar who had refused all reform, for him to find asylum somwhere.
Reply With Quote
  #645  
Old 11-17-2020, 11:15 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 1,015
The Russian regime of Nicholas II. was as backwards as the one of Alexander I., the winner over Napoleon, and much more liberal, than the one of Stalin, the winner over Hitler.

All three were involved in giant wars, yet Nicky II. was the only one, who died not in his bed...

The difference between the three: While Alexander I. and Stalin were attacked by their enemies, Nicky II. attacked his.

And this is the turning point imho: The Russian nation has always been willing to endure gruelling situations and to fight against the most terrible opponents - in defence of Mother Russia!

So, I am pretty much convinced, that if Nicky II. had waited for a pre-emptive strike of the Germans, he would have been the victorious hero instead of dead....
Reply With Quote
  #646  
Old 11-17-2020, 03:42 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,591
I think the Bolsheviks were genuinely concerned that the White Army might take Ekaterinburg and liberate the Romanovs, and that that was why they decided to shoot them when they did, but who knows what would have happened if they had? Maybe somewhere - Denmark? Greece? - would have taken them in?
Reply With Quote
  #647  
Old 11-17-2020, 05:35 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,571
King Alfonso XIII of Spain, (probably with the encouragement of his wife) tried constantly after the Revolution to negotiate safe travel for the IF. In the autumn of 1918, having heard that the Tsarina and her daughters were still alive but being held by the Bolsheviks, he urgently renewed his efforts. He was prepared to have them settle in Spain, at least temporarily. However, by then they were dead.

The Danish Royal family, not particularly well off, paid large ransoms (in vain) for two Princes of the extended family who were later shot by the Bolsheviks. I believe they would have been allowed to settle in Denmark, just as the Dowager Empress and her daughter were. And if Nicholas and his family had managed to get away before Siberia, then I am convinced that they would have been allowed to stay there, at least for a while.
Reply With Quote
  #648  
Old 11-18-2020, 05:52 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 11,704
I think that when they went to Siberia it was nearly impossible to rescue them. But possible at first other royal families while they would like to rescue fellow royals did not think they'd actually be shot, that they would spend some years in confinement and eventually when things cooled down, it would be possible for them to leave the country...
And of course the other RF's were concerned for their own survival in their own countries and weren't keen to take in a member of a RF who had such a poor reputation and who would be seen as Nicholas the Bloody and might arouse their own socialists and communists to protests that might get out of hand. Which was no doubt why the Romanovs tried to hold onto their jeweler and money so that if they did manage to get away they had money to support themselves which might make it a bit easier to find somewhere that would take them in.
Reply With Quote
  #649  
Old 05-03-2021, 08:28 AM
Blog Real's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 11,309
Nicholas II and Alexandra Fiˇdorovna on the roof of the Great Kremlin Palace. Moscow, 1903.
https://c6.quickcachr.fotos.sapo.pt/...399_dYTgs.jpeg
__________________
My blogs about monarchies
Reply With Quote
  #650  
Old 05-27-2021, 07:54 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 1,015
Voice Recording of Tsar Nicholas II

This is the ONLY surviving recording of a speech by Nicholas II. It was delivered during the visit of French President Emile Loubet to Russia, in May 1902: https://youtu.be/2cBdDE80_T4

An interesting youtube vid (~ 4 min) about the visit of the then French President!
Reply With Quote
  #651  
Old 05-27-2021, 11:41 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 328
The irony is that now the Russians idolize Nicholas II, and call him our father, the Emperor, Natalya Poklonskaya,



I am sorry this one is in Russian, but you can google more, perhaps with English subtitles

Religious processions in honor of the deceased royal family



Reply With Quote
  #652  
Old 05-31-2021, 01:10 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 328
Excellent documentary on George V and Nicholas II






Reply With Quote
  #653  
Old 06-02-2021, 05:48 AM
Furienna's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Írnsk÷ldsvik, Sweden
Posts: 1,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Ester View Post
The irony is that now the Russians idolize Nicholas II, and call him our father, the Emperor, Natalya Poklonskaya
Now, that was bound to happen after seventy years of a Communist dictatorship.
That he was murdered also gives him sympathy in retrospect, I guess.
Reply With Quote
  #654  
Old 06-02-2021, 01:51 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 11,704
he was still a bad Tsar and just because the Communists were also very bad rulers does not negate that. If Nicholas hadn't been such a bad and inflexbile tsar, there might not have been a communist revolution
Reply With Quote
  #655  
Old 06-02-2021, 06:18 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
he was still a bad Tsar and just because the Communists were also very bad rulers does not negate that.
"ALSO very bad"? They were a totally different league of not bad but evil!

Stalin alone sentenced more people to death on an average morning between his shower and the breakfast, than the Romanovs in their rule over 300 years!

Not to speak of Lenin's Red Terror and the "Holodomor"!
Reply With Quote
  #656  
Old 06-15-2021, 07:02 PM
Furienna's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Írnsk÷ldsvik, Sweden
Posts: 1,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by victor1319 View Post
"ALSO very bad"? They were a totally different league of not bad but evil!

Stalin alone sentenced more people to death on an average morning between his shower and the breakfast, than the Romanovs in their rule over 300 years!

Not to speak of Lenin's Red Terror and the "Holodomor"!
This!

Also, it is not so much about what Nicholas was like as a person.
But it rather is about him being a symbol of a lost era, and a marture.
Reply With Quote
  #657  
Old 06-15-2021, 07:22 PM
Prinsara's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 4,566
But when you are murdered because you almost entirely brought it on yourself...
And then your death is what allowed a more murderous regime to take over...
It's just that no one remembers Nicholas and plenty of people do remember Communism.
Reply With Quote
  #658  
Old 06-15-2021, 07:28 PM
Blog Real's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 11,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
he was still a bad Tsar and just because the Communists were also very bad rulers does not negate that. If Nicholas hadn't been such a bad and inflexbile tsar, there might not have been a communist revolution
There could still have been a communist revolution.
And the people who murdered Nicholas II and his family were worse people than Nicholas II.
__________________
My blogs about monarchies
Reply With Quote
  #659  
Old 06-16-2021, 06:51 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 1,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blog Real View Post
There could still have been a communist revolution.
Yep! And there is this widespread believe, that it was a fault of Nicky II., to not have given the Empire a constitution and by that to have guided the necessary reforms into a legal framework.

But we see, what happened: First there was a bourgoise revolution and then the communists took over - violently. These communists never wanted to play by the rules, anyway - the wanted to take over at any price.

There were so many mishaps, but the outcome justified the outmost conservatisms from before the end of the Romanov rule. So, what is left: An eternal shame for Russia to have fallen for the nonsense of communism without any really credible resistance.

Just imho... In the end this is all history and in the past, a bygone era...
Reply With Quote
  #660  
Old 10-03-2021, 06:36 PM
Feologild's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Agder, Norway
Posts: 27
There where actually some talks about Nicholas marrying Maud of Wales (Future Queen of Norway) in the early 1890s.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
alexandra, alix, empress alexandra, nicholas, nicholas and alexandra, tsar nicholas ii


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tsar Alexander III (1845-1894) and Empress Marie Feodorovna (Dagmar) (1847-1928) TOMMIX The Imperial Family of Russia 191 09-04-2023 09:32 PM
Grand Duke Serge (1857-1905) & Elisaveta Feodorovna, Grand Duchess Serge (1864-1918) gaoshan1021 The Imperial Family of Russia 146 02-15-2023 12:30 PM
Tsar Nicholas I (1796-1855) and Empress Alexandra Feodorovna (1798-1860) lexi4 The Imperial Family of Russia 27 12-11-2022 06:12 PM
Prince Nicholas (1872-1938), Grand Duchess Elena (1882-1957) and daughters Princess_Elizaveta Greek Royal History 116 04-17-2022 10:49 AM
HH Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan (1918-2004) Akilah Ruling Family of Abu Dhabi 95 08-07-2016 08:59 AM




Popular Tags
#alnahyan #alnahyanwedding #baby #rashidmrm abolished monarchies baptism bevilacqua british caroline christenings coat of arms commonwealth countries crest defunct thrones edward vii emperor naruhito fabio bevilacqua fallen empires fallen kingdom fifa women's world cup football france godfather grace kelly grand duke henri grimaldi harry hollywood hotel room for sale house of gonzaga international events jewellery jewels king king charles king george list of rulers mall coronation day monaco new zealand; cyclone gabrielle official visit order of the redeemer overseas tours pamela hicks preferences prince & princess of wales prince albert monaco prince christian princeharry princess alexia of the netherlands princess of wales q: reputable place? queen queen alexandra queen camilla queen elizabeth ii queen elizabeth ii style queen ena of spain queen mathilde ray mill royal christenings royal without thrones silk soccer spanish royal family state visit state visit to germany switzerland tiaras william


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:26 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2023
Jelsoft Enterprises