Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Her personality didn't quite "fit in," plus as the rumor had it, her mother-in-law, wife of Alexander III, Maria Fedorovna ( who hated Germans) helped to spread the animosity towards her in Russian "high society."
So don't blame the "Russian Russians" for that animosity spread in the society ))))
( It looks like Sergey Witte was not happy about Alexandra's influence on Tzar as well, judging by his memoirs.)
No she was not ( at least not that I know of.) Since so many "Westerners" were firmly entrenched into Russian society, it all depended on their personalities - how well did they fit in. (Or not.)
Back story of the relationship between empress Alexandra and the dowager empress Marie is a tale that deserves a book, film, mini-series of its own. *LOL*
First and foremost Alexandra (and many others) already knew both of Nicholas II's parents opposed the match. The German princess also knew the reasons why, so that was the start.
Next came the intricate social dynamics of any imperial, royal, or even noble court/household.
Usually upon the heir coming into his inheritance (throne, title, estates, etc...) his mother (the dowager or simply widow) retires from dominate position in the household/court/society and retreats, this allows the new consort/wife to take her proper place. This didn't happen with empress Alexandra and the dowager for many reasons.
First the empress Marie was totally opposite of her DIL. She was high spirited, outgoing, loved parties, games an so forth. Quite the opposite of the shy, introverted, prudish and priggish Alexandra.
As czarina Alexandra detested court functions or anything else that required her to leave the safe cocoon of the household she made for Nicholas II and herself along with later the children. Her Imperial Majesty detested going to or giving balls, parties, events, etc.... Long story short as noted elsewhere in this thread Alexandra simply refused to do her duty as first lady of Russia.
Thus was created a vacuum, and Maria Fedorovna was more than willing and able to fill.
The dowager was still rather young when made a widow, and after a respectable period of mourning slowly re-entered society. She gave parties, balls, events, etc.. that people wanted to attend instead of the dour affairs Nicholas and or Alexandra gave. Indeed much of the high living imperial court and other Russians just seemed to prefer the dowager and her company over the czarina. That was a bitter pill for Alexandra to swallow, and caused some resentment between the two ladies.
Alexandra accused and or complained that her MIL was preventing her from taking her rightful place as "first lady" of Russia. The dowager essentially replied that she wasn't and that if Alexandra wanted that place it was hers to take on.
Empress Marie was simply born to be czarina of Russia. The Russian imperial court was high living (considered a bit louche by some, including Alexandra), but that didn't hold Maria Fedorovna back one bit.
Dowager Marie had a spectacular grand ball planned, then someone died and the imperial court went into mourning. The dowager at once surmised the the situation and quickly sent out notices to those invited that the ladies were to wear black gowns. By all accounts the event was spectacular. Imagine all those grand Russian ladies decked out in their famous diamonds and other jewels against the background of all black. They do say the effect was wonderful as it made the jewels sparkle even greater. Alexandra never would think of something like this nor pull it off.
is pretty much answer to your question.
NONE of them is correct. NONE. You are reading a bunch of propaganda, venomous lies and utter BS. Unless you learn Russian and dig DEEP into the original sources, you will NEVER have truth about that family.
Due to political interest, they were thickly cloaked into layers and layers of lies.
And btw, reason TN married who he married was very pragmatic. She was carrier of the hemophilia gene. Hence, his male heirs to the throne would not have been healthy enough to survive. And by another BTW, Rasputin was the only one who could stop young price bleeding just by laying his hands on him.
They would have had no idea she carried the gene. It was the very early 1900s and very little was known about the disease and how it could be passed on. The disease could skip several generations and then mysteriously reappear.
They would have had no idea she carried the gene. It was the very early 1900s and very little was known about the disease and how it could be passed on. The disease could skip several generations and then mysteriously reappear.
True, but people did know about "bad blood", back then, and having a family history of madness or anything else believed to be passed on would seriously hampered martial prospects for males and females from royal or noble classes. This also applied to the new and growing middle class as well.
While not much was known about insanity/mental illness back then people could put two and two together and having a parent, grandparent or even great grandparent who suffered from various illnesses was more than enough to strike someone off potential marriage lists.
Sadly people didn't give much thought to close family marriages (aside from obviously incest such as brother sister, etc...) which is where many of the problems in RF or noble bloodlines began.
They would have had no idea she carried the gene. It was the very early 1900s and very little was known about the disease and how it could be passed on. The disease could skip several generations and then mysteriously reappear.
On another note it was historically nearly *always* the female's fault when healthy heirs were not produced.
Henry VIII divorced one queen (and treated her badly), killed another and so forth all because they didn't produce healthy male children.
Of course modern medicine now tells us there are many reasons for this and that both parents bring something to the party. However for much of history it was believed females had some sort of control over entire pregnancy and outcomes thus failure to deliver healthy children, and or conceive at all was entirely their own fault.
Far as many members of the Romanov family (and others who knew of their son's illness), Alexandra was entirely to blame for not only failing at her primary duty, to deliver a healthy heir for Russia, but also introducing a disease previously unknown into the imperial family.
Had things turned out differently Nicholas and Alexandra would have had four daughters to marry off. We don't know for sure if any of the grand duchesses were carriers of hemophilia, but any potential prospect (and or his family) surely would have found out about Alexi's health problems, and *perhaps* considered the possibility of getting healthy male heirs out of any of them too large a risk.
Most wives of Monarchs through history have been foreign to the country in which they marry. The most obvious example is Henry VIII who married the youngest daughter of Queen Isabella of Spain. It was a normal thing to do and it was part of diplomacy in aligning countries. It was important the marriage was between royals, not necessarily from the same country.
Everyone talks about Alexandra being German, which she was but she was also the grand daughter of Queen Victoria so she had quite a bit of English blood as well. I doubt very much the average Russian at that time concerned with feeding their family really cared about Alexandra being German, English, Italian or anything else or knew very much about her personally. They needed a better economy and a Czar that cared if they had enough food to eat. In reality, I doubt she had much influence at all regarding the running of the government or the Czar's poor decisions. She was there to raise their children and run their domestic lives. By all accounts she was an excellent mother, not a claim too many royals can make. I dare say if most Russians disliked her, it wasn't because she had German lineage, it was because she was married to Nicholas.
I also never understood why Nicholas was hell bent on exile in England when his mother was of Danish Royalty. It seems he could have at least sent his children to Denmark at least temporarily before things got so out of hand, but I suppose Nicholas was never one to face reality.
That's what seems Witte is saying, that she was basically a good woman, but she only reinforced Tzar's weaknesses and shortcomings, since he didn't have much will power, so she took over him.
That was the problem, not her German origin.
After all, nobody cared that Sergei Witte was half-German himself.
Back story of the relationship between empress Alexandra and the dowager empress Marie is a tale that deserves a book, film, mini-series of its own. *LOL*
First and foremost Alexandra (and many others) already knew both of Nicholas II's parents opposed the match. The German princess also knew the reasons why, so that was the start.
Next came the intricate social dynamics of any imperial, royal, or even noble court/household.
Usually upon the heir coming into his inheritance (throne, title, estates, etc...) his mother (the dowager or simply widow) retires from dominate position in the household/court/society and retreats, this allows the new consort/wife to take her proper place. This didn't happen with empress Alexandra and the dowager for many reasons.
First the empress Marie was totally opposite of her DIL. She was high spirited, outgoing, loved parties, games an so forth. Quite the opposite of the shy, introverted, prudish and priggish Alexandra.
As czarina Alexandra detested court functions or anything else that required her to leave the safe cocoon of the household she made for Nicholas II and herself along with later the children. Her Imperial Majesty detested going to or giving balls, parties, events, etc.... Long story short as noted elsewhere in this thread Alexandra simply refused to do her duty as first lady of Russia.
Thus was created a vacuum, and Maria Fedorovna was more than willing and able to fill.
The dowager was still rather young when made a widow, and after a respectable period of mourning slowly re-entered society. She gave parties, balls, events, etc.. that people wanted to attend instead of the dour affairs Nicholas and or Alexandra gave. Indeed much of the high living imperial court and other Russians just seemed to prefer the dowager and her company over the czarina. That was a bitter pill for Alexandra to swallow, and caused some resentment between the two ladies.
Alexandra accused and or complained that her MIL was preventing her from taking her rightful place as "first lady" of Russia. The dowager essentially replied that she wasn't and that if Alexandra wanted that place it was hers to take on.
Empress Marie was simply born to be czarina of Russia. The Russian imperial court was high living (considered a bit louche by some, including Alexandra), but that didn't hold Maria Fedorovna back one bit.
Dowager Marie had a spectacular grand ball planned, then someone died and the imperial court went into mourning. The dowager at once surmised the the situation and quickly sent out notices to those invited that the ladies were to wear black gowns. By all accounts the event was spectacular. Imagine all those grand Russian ladies decked out in their famous diamonds and other jewels against the background of all black. They do say the effect was wonderful as it made the jewels sparkle even greater. Alexandra never would think of something like this nor pull it off.
Ughh...In all honesty I never cared for Russian nobility, so I don't know much about them. To me people that don't have enough of brains to figure things out and to fix their society so that it wouldn't come to such breaking point as October revolution - they are not worth much attention in my eyes.
The Decembrists are my personal heroes though; that's the notable exception.
Ughh...In all honesty I never cared for Russian nobility, so I don't know much about them. To me people that don't have enough of brains to figure things out and to fix their society so that it wouldn't come to such breaking point as October revolution - they are not worth much attention in my eyes.
The Decembrists are my personal heroes though; that's the notable exception.
Again there were ministers and others in Russian government along with members of the Romanov family, and or even nobility who saw the need for change. Nicholas II egged on by that wife of his wouldn't have any of it. The czar and czarina believed it was Nicholas's duty to maintain and hand over to his (sickly) heir the same absolute monarchy that was inherited.
If Russia had stayed out of WWI (indeed if Nicholas II hadn't signed the orders for Russia's military to mobilize that event might not have happened at all), and used the period after the disastrous Japan/Russo war to begin reforms the Romanovs might still be in power today.
Would Nicholas II not been so *whipped* by his wife and put some stick about showing he had a pair, again things may have ended differently.
Again there were ministers and others in Russian government along with members of the Romanov family, and or even nobility who saw the need for change. Nicholas II egged on by that wife of his wouldn't have any of it. The czar and czarina believed it was Nicholas's duty to maintain and hand over to his (sickly) heir the same absolute monarchy that was inherited.
So you believe that the 1917 revolutions were what? Due solely to Nicholas being weak-willed and Alexandria being reactionary? If only Nicholas had heeded the correct personalities, the Tsardom would still be alive today? Did not Russian history play any role before Nicholas? The "Reforming Tsar" was the Tsar who was assassinated, "enlightenment" brings disbelief in God and the Tsar, industrialization (other than for military reasons) brings large cities which are centers for independent political activity. These were the historical lessons the Tsars (Alexander III & Nicholas II) learned, hence they were not friendly towards any reform. Coupling the despotic Tsarist system with a weak-willed Tsar did spell its doom; and by the 1917 revolutions it was clear that the Tsardom would not and could not produce any meaningful reform and once the state starts faltering it was over for him; and I don't think its bad at all he went, he was thoroughly discredited so that almost no one wanted to restore Nicholas or even the Tsardom after the February Revolution.
Quote:
If Russia had stayed out of WWI (indeed if Nicholas II hadn't signed the orders for Russia's military to mobilize that event might not have happened at all), and used the period after the disastrous Japan/Russo war to begin reforms the Romanovs might still be in power today.
What ifs, if onlys, and hypotheticals. I don't, and I'm guessing erasure does not care, about hypotheticals where the Romanov dynasty could have maintained power. They managed to get things so bad that the country ended up turning to communism. They hobbled any sort of liberal leadership that by the time of the February revolution, the liberal leadership was afraid to rule and the Provisional Government was incapable of providing any necessary reforms. The abolition of private property looks enticing if you have no property to lose or gain, but the the new people holding the billy club are afraid to use their club. So the urban workers turned to the Bolsheviks and the lower peasantry towards the Left SRs.
Quote:
Would Nicholas II not been so *whipped* by his wife and put some stick about showing he had a pair, again things may have ended differently.
If you have a despotism then you need to have a despot. Not exactly an endorsement of Nicky or the Tsarist system.
Most wives of Monarchs through history have been foreign to the country in which they marry. The most obvious example is Henry VIII who married the youngest daughter of Queen Isabella of Spain. It was a normal thing to do and it was part of diplomacy in aligning countries. It was important the marriage was between royals, not necessarily from the same country.
Everyone talks about Alexandra being German, which she was but she was also the grand daughter of Queen Victoria so she had quite a bit of English blood as well.
I doubt very much the average Russian at that time concerned with feeding their family really cared about Alexandra being German, English, Italian or anything else or knew very much about her personally. They needed a better economy and a Czar that cared if they had enough food to eat. In reality, I doubt she had much influence at all regarding the running of the government or the Czar's poor decisions. She was there to raise their children and run their domestic lives. By all accounts she was an excellent mother, not a claim too many royals can make. I dare say if most Russians disliked her, it wasn't because she had German lineage, it was because she was married to Nicholas.
I also never understood why Nicholas was hell bent on exile in England when his mother was of Danish Royalty. It seems he could have at least sent his children to Denmark at least temporarily before things got so out of hand, but I suppose Nicholas was never one to face reality.
Nicholas II could hardly have foretold things were going to end so badly when he mobilized Russia's military.
Next the czar and czarina were very close to their children. Indeed the entire family was rather insular in that regard. Besides you're forgetting Alexi's poor health and medical "secret" Nicholas and Alexandra desperately tried to keep out of general knowledge. As things stood in 1914 Alexi couldn't survive without Rasputin (so at least thought the czarina), so if one went the other would have to go as well, that wasn't going to happen.
Finally how would it look to not just the imperial court and other high born Russians, but everyone else to have the czar sending his own children away from Russia during wartime. Maybe to another one of their palaces (which in hindsight might have saved their lives), far away from St. Petersburg or Moscow, but not to Denmark or whatever.
There is a strong tradition among royalty for this sort of behavior.
Louis XVI, and certainly Marie-Antoinette along with their children could have fled Versailles long before the rabble arrived to arrest, and take them back to Paris. God knows much of the Bourbon family, courtiers and others at Versailles legged it out of there to various other parts of France and or onto Europe before the mob arrived.
Louis XVI saw it as disgraceful for a monarch to flee his country (something he would later change his mind about with the ill fated Flight to Varennes), but did urge his queen to leave and take their children. MA would have none of it so they all remained.
So many unforeseen and bad things happened in Russia at the time that influenced events.
If Germany hand't packed Lenin off on sealed train back to Russia the Bolshevik counter revolution may not have occurred, or at least may have been repulsed. Krenesky didn't want the czar and certainly neither the empress and their children dead. Had he remained in power longer there might have been a trial (like Louis XVI), and possible exile of the czar, his wife/family along with other Romanovs. Germany likely would have taken them all in at least initially. From there they could have scattered across Europe as surviving members of the Romanov family did anyway.
We also know in hindsight what no one could have foretold during WWI; that by the end of things forced by the United States many other imperial/royal dynasties of Europe would be forced off their thrones.
This would have been important because the czar and his family would have been in very reduced circumstances, and someone or thing would have to provide for their housing, upkeep, etc... It would only have been the jewels and or any other valuables they managed to get out of Russia that could sustain them, but how much and for how long would be the larger question.
Dowager empress didn't get on well in England and soon moved back to her native Denmark, where relationship with her nephew the king was "interesting" to say the least.
Going by how George V treated the surviving Romanovs who did manage to make it to England, don't believe he would have provided much and for very long to Nicholas and his family. The British government certainly wasn't likely to vote funds for the upkeep of a deposed "tyrant".
So you believe that the 1917 revolutions were what? Due solely to Nicholas being weak-willed and Alexandria being reactionary? If only Nicholas had heeded the correct personalities, the Tsardom would still be alive today? Did not Russian history play any role before Nicholas? The "Reforming Tsar" was the Tsar who was assassinated, "enlightenment" brings disbelief in God and the Tsar, industrialization (other than for military reasons) brings large cities which are centers for independent political activity. These were the historical lessons the Tsars (Alexander III & Nicholas II) learned, hence they were not friendly towards any reform. Coupling the despotic Tsarist system with a weak-willed Tsar did spell its doom; and by the 1917 revolutions it was clear that the Tsardom would not and could not produce any meaningful reform and once the state starts faltering it was over for him; and I don't think its bad at all he went, he was thoroughly discredited so that almost no one wanted to restore Nicholas or even the Tsardom after the February Revolution.
What ifs, if onlys, and hypotheticals. I don't, and I'm guessing erasure does not care, about hypotheticals where the Romanov dynasty could have maintained power. They managed to get things so bad that the country ended up turning to communism. They hobbled any sort of liberal leadership that by the time of the February revolution, the liberal leadership was afraid to rule and the Provisional Government was incapable of providing any necessary reforms. The abolition of private property looks enticing if you have no property to lose or gain, but the the new people holding the billy club are afraid to use their club. So the urban workers turned to the Bolsheviks and the lower peasantry towards the Left SRs.
If you have a despotism then you need to have a despot. Not exactly an endorsement of Nicky or the Tsarist system.
Pretty much, I'd like only to add that the whole mess, the whole disaster that Tzarist Russia was, didn't hinge solely on Nicholas and his wife, but it all goes back to the times of the "Age of Enlightenment" and the stubborn refusal of Russian monarchy ( and aristocracy in general) to adjust accordingly.
Had the Decembrists managed to implement the changes, it would have been not too late for Russia. By the times of Nicholas, as much as some ministers (and whoever) were pushing for the necessary reforms, it was already too little, too late. After all, other European countries moved ahead, and that's why, by the time of attempted reforms tzarist Russia already found itself in semi-colonial situation, which would have stunted her further development anyways. "All of these were undoubtedly great achievements of Russian economic planning; and the main credit was to be given to the Russian finance minister of the time, Count Sergei Witte. During his time in office, from 1892 till 1903, he tried his best to bring Russia fiscally and industrially into alignment with the other European powers and the rest of the government supported him in this endeavor. Russian government was keen on promoting industrialization because (1) the market was heavily controlled by the state, (2) the development of heavy industry allowed for a fast catch-up, rapidly covering the 'gap' that existed in the country's economy, and besides all this (3) such industrialization improved the overall military capability of Russia. However, such an enormous project required enormous investments. The investments required were (a) the capital investments, (b) the knowledge capital, and, certainly, (c) the workforce investments. Speaking of the first, it is obvious that any industrialization requires much capital. Russia was unable to provide it in sufficient quantities and, hence, foreign investment was widely encouraged. Eventually, some of the industries ended up being predominantly 'owed' by foreigners. For example, in steel industry - 69% of the invested capital was foreign capital; in mining - 85% of the capital investment was foreign. According to Gregory, by the outbreak of the Crimean War, Russia was the world's largest debtor nation."
So yes, I pretty much agree with the article's conclusion "Russia never lacked potential, but it often ran out of time; and the late tsarist period was a good example of it."
The October revolution of 1917 took place most likely because Russia "run out of time," because of objective and multiple reasons, not because of Tzar's Nicholas actions or lack of them. (Although the lack of them contributed to the growing list of problems of course.)
Last edited by erasure; 06-29-2019 at 02:45 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
))))
