Tsar Nicholas II (1868-1918) and Empress Alexandra Feodorovna (Alix) (1872-1918)

[Al_bina]

Right you are, COUNTESS... Alexandra Fedorovna had a clear idea about the Russian Imperial Court because her sister was married to Grand Duke and she visited the country. Thus, it would be fair to assume that Princess Alix did know what she was getting into.

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by AnastasiaEvidence

I agree, he wasn't hard enough, he was too lenient. He didn't have enough experience, it just wasn't the job for Nicholas to be a tsar. I think being a father, instead of a ruler would have been a good enough job for Nicholas. He lacks tough behavior.

I don't necessarily think it was lack of tough behavior as opposed to no clear direction. I don't think anybody was steering that ship. Nobody knew what was going on, there was no direction, no focus, nothing to work towards, no goals, nothing. So they just floated around. . .

[Odette]

I believe he was basically a very kind decent man who was ill prepared to become Tsar. His uncles did not help him either. Between the sycophants, Alexandra's dependence on Rasputin and his influence on the Empress and the changing mood of the masses put him in a position he could not win no matter what he did. In essence he could not do much since he did not believe in democracy and he tried to rule in an autocratic way a people who wanted freedom. Little did they know of what was to come.

[AnastasiaEvidence]

I don't necessarily think it was lack of tough behavior as opposed to no clear direction. I don't think anybody was steering that ship. Nobody knew what was going on, there was no direction, no focus, nothing to work towards, no goals, nothing. So they just floated around. . .

Well, I believe that it depended on how he dealed with huge issues...he didn't handle them as rough as others expected, he was too lenient. He just didn't have enough experience and knowledge to be tsar. The big job defiantly wasn't for him. That's why it's not good to force people to rule becuase they had royal blood.

[COUNTESS]

He really didn't have any leadership potential. He, unfortunately, was born to the position.

[AnastasiaEvidence]

Yes, I think a person with good social, studious, leadership, ablitity to motive and control a large group of people and experience would be suited for the job of a tsar.

[Odette]

It is quite an interesting view of the historic times he reigned. He swore to be an autocrat when he was crowned csar. He was a good hearted person who was led by the nose by everyone around him but could not allow Russia to become a constitutional (To whatever extend it was possible at the time) monarchy. He was a devoted family man but had no actual interest in his own people and how they lived. He was totally detached at a time when the instigators were trying to get the hungry to rise and ask for their due.
If there was no war in between something may have been salvaged even with Rasputin and poverty and the Bolsheviks but he was engulfed in so many serious problems there was no way he could have survived. If only they'd drive them to the border and leave them for the British to take them away to safety.

[Kurenai]

After reading several books about the last emperor of Russia and his family, I was appalled at the lack of a "training period" for an imperial prince. From what I know, Alexander III died quite unexpectedly when Nicolas was only 27 years old. After his initial education, Nicolas had nothing better to do than to travel, enjoy life, and wait until his father passed away (which, everyone believed, was not going to happen for another 30 years). No administration roles were given to Nikki, and I don't believe his father ever discussed the affairs of state with his son.

[Carminha Stalker]

Every time I read a book or article about this tragic family, I can´t help to think that I wish there was a time machine, that could help save them. No matter their limitations, they were not evil people. He loved his wife and children and their end was just awful.

[Furienna]

That's true. If they only had made better choices earlier on, I think their end wouldn't have been so tragical. I don't think they were worse than any other tsar family, they were just sheltered from the real world, that was changing really quickly at the time.

[BorisRom]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

<...>
Nicholas II looks nice and peaceful now. However, he proved incapable of ruling the country, thereby making Russian people suffer various ills. I agree with Furienna, Nicholas should have better adapted to a fast-paced world around him instead of burying his head in the sand. As said by Machiavelli, "The one who adapts his policy to the times prospers, and likewise that the one whose policy clashes with the demands of the times does not". Nicholas II failed to adapt his policies to the times, and paid the ultimate price for this mistake.

Dear Al_bina,

How much I remember, you well know Russian, therefore I can recommend you the articles about development of economy of imperial Russia:
http://www.zlev.ru/105/105_11.htm
http://forum-nameofrussia.ru/showthread.php?p=4323#post4323
If you have time, look please a forum about Nicholas II too:
http://forum-nameofrussia.ru/showthread.php?t=24
About Russian miracle - the posts №№: 16, 19, 60, 137, 307, 316, 877,
About Nicholas's II power - the posts №№: 39, 43, 91, 207, 219-221, 431,
About " Bloody Sunday", two "Lensky executions"(1912 and 1938) and about "Obuhovskaya oborona" - the posts №№: 31, 34, 44, 48, 875-876
About Rasputin - the posts №№: 197-198
About the Russian-Japanese war and about the WWI - the posts №№: 19, 35-37
Regards
Boris

[chaz]

Buying Faberge Eggs, While the people begged their," Little Father" for bread. May have had something to do with it. Do you think? Not Bread, Cosacks.

[Al_bina]

I do give the credit to Nicholas II for doing his best to usher the modern industrial age. Was Nicholas II a weak and unintelligent man who was poorly equipped to deal with the challenge of a newly emerging, modern nation? Absolutely not. While not possessing an education equal to that of today's rulers, he had proficiency in English, French and German, as well as considerable teaching in military, political, and economic sciences. However, Nicholas II did prove incompetent for being unprepared militaries in the World War I, cruel for poorly treating and exploiting the peasant community, as well as using brutal force to instill fear and obedience throughout the country.
By the time Nicholas II ascended the throne, in 1894 becoming the last Romanov Tzar, the Russian Empire encompassed staggeringly vast territory . This provided them with great wealth, and also great logistic and administrative problems as well, which later led to its abrupt end.

As a ruler, Nicholas had many failings. However, the most important was his inability to dominate events and take charge. As an example, his coronation address was merely a repeat of what Alexander III had said. The domination of his father was also shown in the fact that he kept most of his father’s ministers rather than appoint his own. However, these men did have the tried and tested experience of knowledge of government; they also knew how Alexander’s mind worked and what he wanted for Russia. With Nicholas, they had a tsar who wanted to continue his father’s policies but had neither the driving force nor the abilities of him. Senior ministers such as Plehve and Witte started to carry out their own policies as opposed to what Nicholas might have wanted. He, in turn, was more concerned with family issues and was seemingly bewildered by major affairs of state.

The economy positively developed at the macro level. Yet positive development of this macroeconomical development were very slow to show up at the micro level. This means that this positive developments had no significant positive impact on lives of impoverished common people. We can dwell on exactly why and how the reign of Nicholas II came to its end. It is my understanding that the answer lies largely in what such an autocratic ruler might have done while in power, why he did it and under what circumstances he lost control of the Russian monarchy. Well, it has transpired that the circumstances in their totality were against him. It is nice for us at this point in time to melt about Nicholas II and his family as well as have compassion on their ill fate. At the same time, I am sure that there were people, who tremendously suffered because of Nicholas's II poor management skills. Perhaps, people should sue the Romanovs for failing to prevent such criminal regime as Communism from usurping the power and making Russians and other nationalities suffer even more.

Reference: ::Nicholas and Alexandra::

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by chaz

Buying Faberge Eggs, While the people begged their," Little Father" for bread. May have had something to do with it. Do you think? Not Bread, Cosacks.

But then again, the people EXPECT their rulers to have jewels and to look good. What would people think of HM at a state dinner with out the crown jewels??

[CarolinaLandgrave]

What was it that some of Queen Victoria's ministers told her.... and I dont have the quote correctly..... so correct me if I mispeak.

"People want a little gilding for their money"
"Empires are represented by Crowns, not bonnets"

[Anna was Franziska]

I am glad that it's finally been proven Lenin ordered the murders. It's been denied for too long and now we have the truth. It is good the Russians admitted what happened and made the family victims. The children were especially innocent.

[AnastasiaEvidence]

I know...it was so sad of them to kill the innocent young Romanov children. It really was rididuclous. The murderers didn't have much pity. All they wanted was anyone related to the tsar to be dead.

[Furienna]

They simply wanted a revolution, and they didn't think that could happen, if the tsar family still was alive. I know there were some major problems in Russia at the time, but killing them all was the wrong way to go. :(

[Avicenna]

Originally Posted by Furienna

They simply wanted a revolution, and I didn't think that could happen, if the tsar family still was alive. I know there were problems in Russia at the time, but killing them all was the wrong way to go. :(

Why no revolution with the tsar still alive, maybe out of the country? Of course such a thing is possible. Just remember the revolution Iran and the Schah getting out of it.

[Furienna]

Yup, but I don't think they thought that far.