Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => Tatiana Nicholaievna => Topic started by: RHB on December 19, 2009, 03:01:26 AM

Title: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: RHB on December 19, 2009, 03:01:26 AM
Does anyone think (aside from Olga perhaps) that Tatiana could make it as the Czarina of Russia if the need came for her to be perhaps? IMO given how responsible and dutiful and being the people's favorite (if i remember correctly) that she could possibly be able to do a good if not excellent job as Empress! She knew what needed to be done and did it without argument! Opinions? btw i hope i didn't screw up with my posting again if not well I'm sure people will correct to the right thread!
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: tatianolishka_ on December 19, 2009, 11:40:38 AM
Tatiana is an interesting character. She demonstrated a sense of purpose during her short life and did very well under pressure unlike her elder sister or mother. But the strength required to rule a country was something beyond her grasp. None of the children possessed this strength. Heck, even Nicky didn't have it. It is likely she would have followed her father's example of tsardom - she had no interest in the political nature of her country, nor did she have any other examples of good Tsars in her lifetime.

Added to this, the political atmosphere of the turn of the century. Russia wanted change - something Tatiana could never offer to them. The revolution would have happened wether or not she, Olga, Alexei or even Nicky were rulers. I doubt that Tatiana would have made it in that time era for less than a few days. The people of Russia would never accept a new Tsar, let alone a twenty-something year old girl with no training.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Nicolá De Valerón on December 19, 2009, 01:55:31 PM
tatianolishka 1, totally agree with you. I'm happy that OTMA fans have a critical and holistic view about this situation.

I think that Russia at that time would not help no one, including the God itself.
Although he could probably help Nicholas II with a powerfull parliament, well-written constitution and Europe-oriented elite, oriented mainly on the consistent liberal reforms. But all what Russia had at that time, if we are talking about for example the period after the February Democratic Revolution, are intelligent, but unprepared to govern the country Kerensky, Lvov, Shingaryov, Miliukov, etc. The main problem was, that all those intelligent people didn't knew what to do with the huge "army" of the Russian peasants (about 90 million).

So, I think that possible governing of Tatiana, the simple Russian girl, who was not prepared to govern the country, would not be long, and finally would ended for her and for the country with bad consequences. Catherine the Great failed, Witte failed, Stolypin failed, Kerensky failed and even the Alexander II failed. Of course, our dear Tatiana finally wouldn't had a success. She was just a girl, with the simple school education and a girl, who was spending all her free time in the hospital playing a bezique with officers.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: blessOTMA on December 19, 2009, 02:50:05 PM
imo by the time of the revolution, the big pair's interest was thier immediate family and in being in a sense thier parent's champions...this they were until the end.  All the girls showed thier mettle and a great capacity during captivity. I wonder how many of us would do so well ?
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: tatianolishka_ on December 19, 2009, 03:15:54 PM
tatianolishka 1, totally agree with you. I'm happy that OTMA fans have a critical and holistic view about this situation.

Thank you, Nicolá, for your kind words.

Quote
So, I think that possible governing of Tatiana, the simple Russian girl, who was not prepared to govern the country, would not be long, and finally would ended for her and for the country with bad consequences. Catherine the Great failed, Witte failed, Stolypin failed, Kerensky failed and even the Alexander II failed. Of course, our dear Tatiana finally wouldn't had a success. She was just a girl, with the simple school education and a girl, who was spending all her free time in the hospital playing a bezique with officers.

Indeed. I also forgot to mention the mental state of the girls - they were terribly juvenile (see Olga's recently published diary) and showed signs of becoming more and more like their reclusive mother. Olga's mental state during the Great War was not sound (mood swings, smashing windows, withdrawal), but she continued to read of her country's decline as the war went on. Olga began to understand the consequences of her father's old-fashioned ideas. Tatiana? Not so.  Her life was spent in the hospitals, watching the wounded return and holding committees to support the war effort. She didn't see how her father had contributed to their downfall.

With such a distorted view of life, it would only be a female version of Nicholas' reign. He was raised in a similar way - not allowed to grow up.

imo by the time of the revolution, the big pair's interest was thier immediate family and in being in a sense thier parent's champions...this they were until the end.  All the girls showed thier mettle and a great capacity during captivity. I wonder how many of us would do so well ?

Sadly, The family only did what millions of others in their country were forced to do every day since the beginning of their lives, with far more luxuries than any of them could have prayed for.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Nicolá De Valerón on December 19, 2009, 03:42:42 PM
Olga began to understand the consequences of her father's old-fashioned ideas.Tatiana? Not so.  Her life was spent in the hospitals, watching the wounded return and holding committees to support the war effort. She didn't see how her father had contributed to their downfall.

Agree with you. But not only Tatiana, but also Olga were and stayed till the end typical Orthodox and conservative in their views. Something like Russian Nationality, Orthodoxy, Autocracy. Nothing about liberalism or democraсy.

imo by the time of the revolution, the big pair's interest was thier immediate family and in being in a sense thier parent's champions...this they were until the end.  All the girls showed thier mettle and a great capacity during captivity. I wonder how many of us would do so well ?

Dear BlessOTMA, you are right, of course they both with Olga were very diligent and good girls, devoted till the end to their beloved parents. And this is great. And I appreciate it. I also appreciate kind people. But the question was about Tatiana as a possible ruler of the country. On my opinion this is very different thing.

To be just a kind person, is not enough to be the leader of a country. And not just in a quiet European civilised country, with the established rules, transparent laws and with the democratically exchangeable elites, but in Russia. I think you understand the difference;))

Only in several cases, Tatiana as a possible leader of Russia, could manage the country: powerfull backing of a parlament and democratic independent government, constitution and powerful political elites. Unfortunately, all these important things during Tatiana's life were missing.

Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Tina Laroche on December 19, 2009, 04:58:15 PM
With such a distorted view of life, it would only be a female version of Nicholas' reign. He was raised in a similar way - not allowed to grow up.

IMO, that's a really good point. I totally agree. I also agree with - how do you spell it once again? - Nicolá de Valeron. =D

Btw, I've read (either on here or on some other forums) how some people say Tatiana would have made a good Empress and give examples with how she ordered her siblings around. Well, I personally think there is a big difference between bossing your sisters and ruling a country... =/
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: aleksandr pavlovich on December 19, 2009, 05:33:53 PM
"Romanov History Buff" :  Realizing that you are relatively new, I would kindly point out that your original projection posted here on this thread, would be a certain impossibility.  Under the existing "Laws of Succession," NONE  (not one) of those sisters would have EVER been within a hope of the Russian Imperial Throne.  This has been pointed out SO many times on this forum. You need to research that.  (Yes, I see your words, "perhaps" and "possibly" and I understand/respect that this is undoubtedly a wish-fulfillment position/personal opinion that you offer.)  AP
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Nicolá De Valerón on December 19, 2009, 06:17:16 PM
"Romanov History Buff" :  Realizing that you are relatively new, I would kindly point out that your original projection posted here on this thread, would be a certain impossibility.  Under the existing "Laws of Succession," NONE  (not one) of those sisters would have EVER been within a hope of the Russian Imperial Throne.  This has been pointed out SO many times on this forum. You need to research that.  (Yes, I see your words, "perhaps" and "possibly" and I understand/respect that this is undoubtedly a wish-fulfillment position/personal opinion that you offer.)  AP

aleksandr pavlovich, I think you take it too seriously. Let our dear and maybe not so knowledgeable as you at that question girls to discuss possible Tatiana's Russian government. Of course formally she could not be a tsarina. But I think nothing prevents us of discussing about it.

Moreover, as I know you are not a moderator, or something else.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: RHB on December 19, 2009, 06:34:55 PM
thank you Nicola for pointing that out and i hoped i spelled that right btw! And didn't her father have plans to change the law of succession whereby granted if Alexei couldn't rule that Olga could (or i guess one of the other 3)? I'm saying if the law had been changed where women could (once again) rule Russia... who says Tatiana couldn't? Sophie Buxhoeveden mentioned that she would always follow Olga's lead but she could and would make up her mind faster then Olga if the need called for it... or something like that! So I'm just saying!

Actually what she said was: "She had a less strong character than Olga Nikolaievna whose lead she would always follow, but she could make up her mind in an emergency quicker than her elder sister, and never lost her head
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 19, 2009, 06:36:47 PM
tatianolishka 1, totally agree with you. I'm happy that OTMA fans have a critical and holistic view about this situation.

I think that Russia at that time would not help no one, including the God itself.
Although he could probably help Nicholas II with a powerfull parliament, well-written constitution and Europe-oriented elite, oriented mainly on the consistent liberal reforms. But all what Russia had at that time, if we are talking about for example the period after the February Democratic Revolution, are intelligent, but unprepared to govern the country Kerensky, Lvov, Shingaryov, Miliukov, etc. The main problem was, that all those intelligent people didn't knew what to do with the huge "army" of the Russian peasants (about 90 million).

So, I think that possible governing of Tatiana, the simple Russian girl, who was not prepared to govern the country, would not be long, and finally would ended for her and for the country with bad consequences. Catherine the Great failed, Witte failed, Stolypin failed, Kerensky failed and even the Alexander II failed. Of course, our dear Tatiana finally wouldn't had a success. She was just a girl, with the simple school education and a girl, who was spending all her free time in the hospital playing a bezique with officers.

It is more difficult as you think. Only USSR had more than 200 nationalities from which a lot of them they have hated each other. Plus different religions, consuetudines etc. etc.. Or Russian climate and geography..., find me so big country with so different geography and such many people in the West in these time (and not only in these time). Besides Russian (of course not only Russian) have some other character, you cannot compare them with West people. Russia is not Moscow or St. Peterburg. And "intelligents" have wanted to lead the country as in the West. It is stupidity. Look, a some time ago there was a questionnaire in the net about the most distinguished and the most popular man in the Russian history. The winner was.....YOSIF VISSARIONOVICH STALIN! Stalin is enough popular in Russia, even Orthodox christians and Russian nationalists like him. Russian hated liberals and similar politics, they do not like West parliament system.  Parliament have never functioned in Russian history. The fact is that Duma not decide, it approbate what president says. Simply said, Russia is some other culture and we cannot compare it with West.

So, I think Russian Tsars and people as Stolypin and Witte were very good leaders. Lenin and company had to use terror in their politic.  Tsars did not need it.

IMHO Tatiana would be a good Czarina. Because we must not forgot that she would be prepared on her role. Plus her character was very good for this position.

P.S. I hope we will understand my comment good.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: RHB on December 19, 2009, 06:47:41 PM
IMHO Tatiana would be a good Czarina. Because we must not forgot that she would be prepared on her role. Plus her character was very good for this position.

thank you again this time to wox and i agree i think with her character she would be make a good czarina... especially after going through what she went through she most likely would have learned what happens to "poor" rulers I'm sure there would have been/were a lot of lessons learned in captivity.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: aleksandr pavlovich on December 19, 2009, 06:53:47 PM
Re Post #8: Thank you, Nicloa, for your kind observations!  Agreed, that within parameters, personal observations are always certainly appropriate, and in this case, you come nicely to the crux of the matter in your statement that, "Of course formally she could not be a tsarina."  Definitely agreed!  Regards,  AP
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Nicolá De Valerón on December 19, 2009, 07:03:35 PM
tatianolishka 1, totally agree with you. I'm happy that OTMA fans have a critical and holistic view about this situation.

I think that Russia at that time would not help no one, including the God itself.
Although he could probably help Nicholas II with a powerfull parliament, well-written constitution and Europe-oriented elite, oriented mainly on the consistent liberal reforms. But all what Russia had at that time, if we are talking about for example the period after the February Democratic Revolution, are intelligent, but unprepared to govern the country Kerensky, Lvov, Shingaryov, Miliukov, etc. The main problem was, that all those intelligent people didn't knew what to do with the huge "army" of the Russian peasants (about 90 million).

So, I think that possible governing of Tatiana, the simple Russian girl, who was not prepared to govern the country, would not be long, and finally would ended for her and for the country with bad consequences. Catherine the Great failed, Witte failed, Stolypin failed, Kerensky failed and even the Alexander II failed. Of course, our dear Tatiana finally wouldn't had a success. She was just a girl, with the simple school education and a girl, who was spending all her free time in the hospital playing a bezique with officers.

It is more difficult as you think. Only USSR had more than 200 nationalities from which a lot of them they have hated each other. Plus different religions, consuetudines etc. etc.. Or Russian climate and geography..., find me so big country with so different geography and such many people in the West in these time (and not only in these time). Besides Russian (of course not only Russian) have some other character, you cannot compare them with West people. Russia is not Moscow or St. Peterburg. And "intelligents" have wanted to lead the country as in the West. It is stupidity. Look, a some time ago there was a questionnaire in the net about the most distinguished and the most popular man in the Russian history. The winner was.....YOSIF VISSARIONOVICH STALIN! Stalin is enough popular in Russia, even Orthodox christians and Russian nationalists like him. Russian hated liberals and similar politics, they do not like West parliament system.  Parliament have never functioned in Russian history. The fact is that Duma not decide, it approbate what president says. Simply said, Russia is some other culture and we cannot compare it with West.

So, I think Russian Tsars and people as Stolypin and Witte were very good leaders. Lenin and company had to use terror in their politic.  Tsars did not need it.

IMHO Tatiana would be a good Czarina. Because we must not forgot that she would be prepared on her role. Plus her character was very good for this position.

P.S. I hope we will understand my comment good.

Yes, I've heard you clearly. Now I hope, you hear me clearly. I hope;)

Wox24, to be honest with you I don't like people who so undisputedly talking for the whole Russians. Did you asked evryone Russian personally about his "anitliberalism" and "antidemocratic" mood. How about Novgorod and Pskov democracy republics (12-16 centures) before they were conquered by Moscow? That people also didn't like democracy?!

I also have heard thousand times about "special Russian way" - Orthodoxy, Autocrasy and Russian nationality. But this endless vertical power doesn't work. Awful roads, men life expectancy of 59 years, dying villages, endless emigration, degradation of the population, lopsided economy, etc..........FOR centures.......

If you can not take into account those things, and like to listen for centures (starting from Ivan IV) only sweet slogans " Orthodoxy, Autocrasy and Russian nationality", to listen things about "special climate" you are welcome. This is your choise. But please, do not speak for the entire population of the Russians. Please.

Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: blessOTMA on December 19, 2009, 09:22:42 PM
Quote
..... But not only Tatiana, but also Olga were and stayed till the end typical Orthodox and conservative in their views. Something like Russian Nationality, Orthodoxy, Autocracy. Nothing about liberalism or democracy.
Indeed
Quote
imo by the time of the revolution, the big pair's interest was thier immediate family and in being in a sense thier parent's champions...this they were until the end.  All the girls showed thier mettle and a great capacity during captivity. I wonder how many of us would do so well ?
Dear BlessOTMA, you are right, of course they both with Olga were very diligent and good girls, devoted till the end to their beloved parents. And this is great. And I appreciate it. I also appreciate kind people. But the question was about Tatiana as a possible ruler of the country. On my opinion this is very different thing..
I agree Nicolá...and I with agree with your other comments here. Even if they were brought up with leadership in mind, they would have been taught only  the Autocracy mode of goverment. Perhaps the chance for a democracy to develop in a relatively  peaceful manner was thrown away even before they were born, when Alexander III tore up his father's order for a Duma.I just always speak up if thier accomplishments are seen as small simply because they were family based...I have to admire them...or anyone who went though what they did and functioned as well as they did. Threatening someone's family is the number 1 way to break someone and here the whole family was threaten, day after day for many months. Remarkable.  But you are right ...thier goodness is not the question on the thread.
Quote
Only in several cases, Tatiana as a possible leader of Russia, could manage the country: powerful backing of a parliament and democratic independent government, constitution and powerful political elites. Unfortunately, all these important things during Tatiana's life were missing.
and by then there was no hope to develop them in time. It was 6 million men too late
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 20, 2009, 03:24:49 AM
Yes, I've heard you clearly. Now I hope, you hear me clearly. I hope;)

Wox24, to be honest with you I don't like people who so undisputedly talking for the whole Russians. Did you asked evryone Russian personally about his "anitliberalism" and "antidemocratic" mood. How about Novgorod and Pskov democracy republics (12-16 centures) before they were conquered by Moscow? That people also didn't like democracy?!

I also have heard thousand times about "special Russian way" - Orthodoxy, Autocrasy and Russian nationality. But this endless vertical power doesn't work. Awful roads, men life expectancy of 59 years, dying villages, endless emigration, degradation of the population, lopsided economy, etc..........FOR centures.......

If you can not take into account those things, and like to listen for centures (starting from Ivan IV) only sweet slogans " Orthodoxy, Autocrasy and Russian nationality", to listen things about "special climate" you are welcome. This is your choise. But please, do not speak for the entire population of the Russians. Please.



You do not know facts. Between 1991 - 1999 were liberals in the Russia (a in this time have begun problems which you work). Gajdar, Chubajs etc. Rubel failed 2x, the industry, the agricultural and the science were destroyed. Life radical worsen in these times, unemployment begun to be tragical. I show you one example. My husband is Russian (so I have family from Kyiv to Ural). He is an engineer who worked in company. So, his salary was better than many people. But his salary was similar as normal (I think) a drilling machine in the begin of Jeltsin gouvernment. When his a bed breaked away, he had to repair by hisself, he had to buy practical only basic foodstuff  etc. His life was improved later but only a bit.  It did not exist during USSR acording his life. And I replay, he was better salary than many people.The life began to be much better in Putins times. So, do you think Russian have some reason to like liberals? Go to Russian internet and read comments on Gajdars death. And I do not think nationalists sites but sites as www.rbc.ru, www. pravda.ru and similar. There are often comments of people with university not "plebs".
Next. Russia have enough moslim people. And islam with liberalism... . Look at Chechnya. First Basayev led now Karimov. And any liberalism and similar. Only "hard hand", moslims and liberalism is as water and fire. Moslims (but not so fanatic) have in Ingushetia, Dagestan, Bashkorstan and Tatarstan too. As soon as Jeltsins liberalism began, there were begun separastic veins.
And do not agree on Siberia.
So there are liberals so reputable in the West. If Jeltsins people would not false elections, the winners would be .... communists.

BTW, nobody says about Orthodoxy and Novogorod etc. were town as Germans hansa. They were trading towns.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Olga Maria on December 20, 2009, 03:29:14 AM
Tatiana would have been a good Tsaritsa in the fields of philanthropic activities and giving parties for the society (I’m sure she loved parties, too, and not very shy to appear on public as what she proved in wartime). In political side, she’s a no-no.

If Alexei had not been born, Nicholas would have changed the succession laws, as what Sergei Witte said in his memoirs (which he was afraid of to happen).


Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 20, 2009, 04:32:14 AM
succinct prices and salary:

the salary in the 1992... 7 dolars (my husband), 4 dolars university profesor.
the price of drilling machine... 70 dolars (seventhy)
husband price in 94 ... 20 dolars (in University), 98 70 dolars, than again 20 dolars... rubel failed
according Putins time..... 800 (eight hundred) dolars.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 20, 2009, 04:39:07 AM
Tatiana would have been a good Tsaritsa in the fields of philanthropic activities and giving parties for the society (I’m sure she loved parties, too, and not very shy to appear on public as what she proved in wartime). In political side, she’s a no-no.

If Alexei had not been born, Nicholas would have changed the succession laws, as what Sergei Witte said in his memoirs (which he was afraid of to happen).




I agree. ;) I think Nicholass family did not changed the succession laws too.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Nicolá De Valerón on December 20, 2009, 06:13:30 AM
Dear, Wox24.

"Do not wake a radical-liberal in me;))" Elisabeth know, what I'm talking about.

I will surprise you, but I know a lot about Russia, maybe too a lot.
After your words about Trotsky, and about Novgorod as a "simple trading town" I cannot say the same thing about you.

All that you wrote in the last post is a typical propaganda opinion. Sadly, but Ivan IV and Joseph Stalin made an exelent work.
And it's sad for me, that majority of Russians thinking the same way as you. Russia has no future.

Democracy and liberalism are the not the salary, supermarkets, etc.
It's you personal freeedom, feeling yourself as a human being and a right to choise.
Of course, after an endless totalitarian sleeping of 70 years, everything that people wanted in 1991 was just products in the stores....
But this is not a democracy.

Oil prices in 1991 -  11 dollars per barrel, respectively salary.
Oil prices in 1998 -  11 dollars per barrel. respectively salary.
Oil prices in 2008 -  135 dollars per barrel. respectively increase of salary (remnants of what Putin left Russians)

No role of Putin and others. And state Russian propoganda TV doesn't say it. Do not watch it. This is farmful for the health.

These would be my last words on this topic.
Sorry for a little bit rough tone.

Dear Sarah and Forum admin, sorry for a little off-topic, but I had to say it.

Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 20, 2009, 07:03:23 AM
After your words about Trotsky, and about Novgorod as a "simple trading town" I cannot say the same thing about you.
Nicolá, compare Novgorod and Russia. ;)

Democracy and liberalism are the not the salary, supermarkets, etc.
It's you personal freeedom, feeling yourself as a human being and a right to choise.
Of course, after an endless totalitarian sleeping of 70 years, everything that people wanted in 1991 was just products in the stores....
But this is not a democracy.
I can only agree with your text: "It's you personal freeedom, feeling yourself as a human being and a right to choise." But you are wrong in the others. I do not think a big salary, super supermarkets etc. I think normal life without problems whether I can buy something, without abhorrence about my life, without anxiety about future my children and similar.  Or do you think you can feel as human body when  you must pick off  things for you from garbage or stand pad? Not exclusive salary, a lot of things in the supermarket. I agree, it is not demokracy and you undesrtood me bad.

Oil prices in 1991 -  11 dollars per barrel, respectively salary.
Oil prices in 1998 -  11 dollars per barrel. respectively salary.
Oil prices in 2008 -  135 dollars per barrel. respectively increase of salary (remnants of what Putin left Russians)
I know it.  Putin made smaller Yeltsins anarchy in all sectors etc. And he used for it oil prices. But salary began to increase early than in 2008 year. Simply said... Putin is "less evil" ;)


BTW, I am Slovak and live in Slovakia. I do not like communism I am fan of Nicholas II. ;)

But I would like to come back to Tatiana. In regard of different people, religions etc. in Russia I think Tsar must be resolved but one must know to make compromise as well, one must discuss with people, one has not be nizy and one must know to pick out good collaborators. I do not know as latest two things but IMHO the other things only Tatiana fulfiled. What do you think?
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Nicolá De Valerón on December 20, 2009, 08:02:38 AM
I do not like communism I am fan of Nicholas II. ;)

Breaks a promise, but,

Dear Wox24,

These your final words were as a tasty balm to my liberal soul;)
It sounds something like - "anticommunism connected them;)"
Connected incompatible monarchist and a liberal.

Sorry again for little bit a rough words.
Have a good evening in a Free, Democratic and Liberal Slovakia
with both a diverse economy and civil liberties.

Nicola.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 20, 2009, 08:14:50 AM
I do not like communism I am fan of Nicholas II. ;)

Breaks a promise, but,

Dear Wox24,

These your final words were as a tasty balm to my liberal soul;)
It sounds something like - "anticommunism connected them;)"
Connected incompatible monarchist and a liberal.

Sorry again for little bit a rough words.
Have a good evening in a Free, Democratic and Liberal Slovakia
with both a diverse economy and civil liberties.

Nicola.

Nicola, I do not understand, how is  repugnancy between my anticommunism and respecting  of Nicholas II and his reign ?

I am afraid, you are wrong with Free, Democratic and Liberal Slovakia. :(  But this is not thread for it.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Nicolá De Valerón on December 20, 2009, 09:47:11 AM
Dear Sarah and forum admin, sorry again,
but I think we have a very difficult "situation";)

Wox24, you missunderstood me, and not in the first time.
I mean that of course it is natural and understandable anticommunism and monarchism (to like Nicholas II).
Although I have a very different views, but I can understand it.
Please look carefully in my words and do not distort it.

About "Nonfree, Undemocratic and Illiberal" Slovakia. Then why do you live there?! Why are you mutilate yourself?!

Political and civil liberties, according to Freedom house in 2009.

Slovakia
Capital: Bratislava
Population: 5,400,000
Political Rights Score: 1
Civil Liberties Score: 1
Status: Free

Russia
Capital: Moscow
Population: 141,900,000
Political Rights Score: 6
Civil Liberties Score: 5
Status: Not Free

Welcome to "Free, Liberal and Democratic" Mother Russia! Russia are waiting for you!
Or have a good and calm evening in "Nonfree, Undemocratic and Illiberal Slovakia".
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 20, 2009, 10:40:41 AM
Dear Sarah and forum admin, sorry again,
but I think we have a very difficult "situation";)

Wox24, you missunderstood me, and not in the first time.
I mean that of course it is natural and understandable anticommunism and monarchism (to like Nicholas II).
Although I have a very different views, but I can understand it.
Please look carefully in my words and do not distort it.

About "Nonfree, Undemocratic and Illiberal" Slovakia. Then why do you live there?! Why are you mutilate yourself?!

Political and civil liberties, according to Freedom house in 2009.

Slovakia
Capital: Bratislava
Population: 5,400,000
Political Rights Score: 1
Civil Liberties Score: 1
Status: Free

Russia
Capital: Moscow
Population: 141,900,000
Political Rights Score: 6
Civil Liberties Score: 5
Status: Not Free

Welcome to "Free, Liberal and Democratic" Mother Russia! Russia are waiting for you!
Or have a good and calm evening in "Nonfree, Undemocratic and Illiberal Slovakia".


My answer will not here but you are wrong.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 20, 2009, 11:22:19 AM
And I am ending to discussion about it in these thread. ;)
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Nicolá De Valerón on December 20, 2009, 11:36:26 AM
Dear Wox24,

As I know, you are not a moderator or admin to establish the forum rules or stop discussions.

Ok,
I also will not continue this discussion, however I really want to continue.
It's a pity, that your arguments are over. I like to discuss.
In the future, if you don't have a good arguments, please do not start a discussion.
As I clearly remember, you the first answered to my post, not me.

Take care of yourself,
Sorry for a little bit rough words.
Regards.
Nicola.

P.S. I love Russia and Slovakia and all other countries in the entire world, and moreover, in the entire Universe.
But I can't say the same thing about governmants, including developed countries;)

Sarah and forum admin, sorry again.
Sorry also Romanov History Buff, that we turned your innocent topic about Tatiana to political dispute.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 20, 2009, 12:26:35 PM
So, back to Tatiana. I replay my idea because it vanished in our discussion with Nicola. ;) It is a pity my English is not such level to discuss better.

In regard of different people, religions etc. in Russia I think Tsar must be resolved but one must know to make compromise as well, one must discuss with people, one has not be nizy and one must know to pick out good collaborators. I do not know as latest two things but IMHO the other things only Tatiana fulfiled. What do you think?
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Proud_Olga on December 20, 2009, 01:39:32 PM
About "Nonfree, Undemocratic and Illiberal" Slovakia. Then why do you live there?! Why are you mutilate yourself?!

Sorry to bring that again, as apparently that discussion was over but perhaps Wox24 still remains in Slovakia because she likes that country, despite its flaws. Living in a country doesn't prevent from being critical about it.

Anyway, I must agree Nicolá's first post about Tatiana. What made Nicholas II's fall, despite his inability to rule, was also probably the education the Romanovs received. If we admit that Tatiana received the education Nicholas, or his brother Alexei, received that was not one to open the minds to a change in the country. The revolution would have happened, no matter what.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: tatianolishka_ on December 20, 2009, 01:47:32 PM
Don't worry, Wox, I can assure you that English is a second language for quite a few on this forum, and I applaud your courage for discussing in spite of it. Very few seem to be able to do that.

one must know to pick out good collaborators.

Tatiana seems to have been heavily influenced by her mother.

For by all accounts it seems that her friends and company were all "chosen" by the Empress, if you will. Alexandra selected her children's playmates, set up the hospital where the girls worked. The only friends she "chose" were some of the soldiers who came in - Dmitri Malama, for example. Although even he had to receive approval from Alix.
From Sophia Buxhoeveden (not the most reliable source, yet nonetheless): She was sociable, and friends would have been welcome, but no young girls were ever asked to the Palace. The Empress thought that the four sisters should be able to entertain one another.

Quote
one must know to make compromise as well

All of the children could compromise, however Tatiana was more of a messenger than the one doing the actual compromising among the family, bringing suggestions from the children to their mother and letting both parties come to their own decisions. I'm sure she could compromise and likely did so on occasion, however there is nothing to suggest that she was more reasonable than any of her sisters. :) .

Quote
one must discuss with people

Each of the girls could carry on a conversation. Olga, Maria and Anastasia was friendly and open, speaking to whomever would listen. From Lili Dehn: With [Tatiana], as with her mother, shyness and reserve were accounted as pride, but, once you knew her and had gained her affection, this reserve disappeared, and the real Tatiana became apparent. She was a poetical creature, always yearning for the ideal, and dreaming of great friendships which might be hers.

The girls certainly leaned how to converse more easily with the people as she reached captivity, however these events would never have happened in a scenario that Tatiana became Tsaritsa.

Tatiana seemed to have little confidence in her abilities to lead. Again from Sophie, with regard to the comittees she lead: The young Grand Duchess took the greatest interest in it and, young though she was, had quantities of papers sent her every day, which she went over with her mother's help, making notes and writing her decisions. Tatiana would have needed so much guidance that the country could not have provided. Tatiana would not only replicate the reign of her father, but it would have been riddled with the influence of her mother. It would have been an exact replica of his reign.

Quote
If we admit that Tatiana received the education Nicholas, or his brother Alexei, received that was not one to open the minds to a change in the country. The revolution would have happened, no matter what.

Exactly.

Tatiana had many redeemable qualities - she was kind, caring, an example to her sisters, her mother's pride and joy, and would have made an absolutely beautiful young lady had she been given the chance. However none of these make her an acceptable tsarina.

Sorry for posting so often, I keep thinking of new things to add.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: wox24 on December 20, 2009, 03:40:51 PM
It would be important how people Tatiana would choose to your gouvernment. I think Tatiana would know to emancipate from her mothers influence. Next, discuss with politic, personators of different religions etc. Sorry, but I do not know conceive how Oľga, Maria and Anastasia listen them (I need not explain why...  :D. ;)

What is happen Nicholas. There are many lies about his reign. I looked a video in Russian about this theme and I was very suprised. So, if Tatiana would continue in Nicholass politic and find people as Stolypin or Witte, it would be very good for Russia.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Lady Nikolaievna on July 15, 2010, 05:11:42 PM
Eventhough the girls were described as "too childish (is this the right word?) for their age", I think Tatiana would do a great job as an Empress. I think she was the most mature of the girls, no wonder she was "The Governess".
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: TimM on July 15, 2010, 05:15:10 PM
Yeah, I think she would have done a great job on the throne of Russia.    Queen Victoria and our modern Queen Elizabeth II show that women can do the job just as good as a man can.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: RHB on July 15, 2010, 07:29:18 PM
The way I look at it... Olga's nerves were too wrecked when it came to stress (hospital work as good example)... Maria can be too sweet (closest came to mind) and Anastasia... well she's too laughable and impish! And your right they didn't call her the Governess for nothing!
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Kalafrana on July 16, 2010, 08:25:39 AM
'Queen Victoria and our modern Queen Elizabeth II show that women can do the job just as good as a man can.'

There is a huge difference between being a constitutional monarch (which Elizabeth II does in a way which is second to none, and Queen Victoria rather less well, in my view) and being an autocrat who must actually make decisions. To be a successful autocrat requires personal attributes which are quite different from those of Nicholas and Alexandra's daughters. Olga and Tatiana were nice kind girls who would have done well in Britain as members of the royal family, but nothing in their lives equipped them to be autocrats.

Ann
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Grand Duchess Valeria on August 21, 2010, 11:40:20 AM
I agree. The problem is that they never ever were seen as heirs to the throne and they didn't get any political lessons and couldn't gain political acumen or foresight.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: RealAnastasia on August 21, 2010, 11:26:46 PM
I agree. The problem is that they never ever were seen as heirs to the throne and they didn't get any political lessons and couldn't gain political acumen or foresight.

But all things are relative. I think that if you are intelligent enough, you could learn how to rule. Brightness is not an attribute of education. Of course, education helps, but it's not the "sine qua non".

Yes, the girls were childish, but again, it was quite common back then to pass from childhood to mature age without any "teenager" between, and people could mature quite fast...or not. It depends on the person.

I insist we know very litte about OTMA's true personnalities. They never talked by THEMSELVES. We never heard their own voices, but the depictions of people who was interested in showing how they were for some special reason. They were people who would said they were perfect, they were ohter people who depicts them as silly, childish and even snobbish, mean and wild...I suppose nonne of them was right. They are gone without leaving to us more than some traits of their tastest  ,their way of life their personnalities and photos...a lot of photos.

RealAnastasia.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: TimM on August 22, 2010, 12:43:47 AM
They should have followed the British example.  OTMA's great-grandmother, Queen Victoria, showed that woman could do the job just as capable as a man could.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: LauraO on August 22, 2010, 03:52:39 AM
i think that her peronality reflects that she would have been a good empress, i think its interesting to think which of the grand duchess's would have been effective empress's. however whether the oppurtunity would have ever arisen is an entirely different subject- i doubt it... mind you, you never know.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Nicolá De Valerón on August 22, 2010, 04:42:56 AM
Although it seems to me that we've already concluded the discussion clearly, but anyway. Just some reflective thoughts.

To rule Russia with it's unique problematics you should be not just a good person, and even not just a good and educated person, or even not just a good/intelligent/educated/sober-minded leader at the same time (even this thing is absolutely rare) - you must be a Napoleon! On one hand liberal politics with strong and tough actions for intellectuals and business, on another big amount of necessary Russian traditionalism for simple people. This formula was realised only ones in Russian history - during Alexander II times. But even this great man with liberal mind and European education ended tragically and didn't finally close all his reforms. Even Alexander II!

Of course in this case, if we are talking about simple girls (even good and open-minded), who were taught by their father and mother from birthdays with only one simple theory "Orthodoxy, Russian nationalism and Absolute monarchy" and read romantic Chekhov works (nothing from Adam Smith;)) - this question for any non-obsessed person is automatically closed. Again, all the girls were good guys, but this is not enough even for modern rulership, and of course absolutely not enough for that difficult times. Sad truth: someone is able to be a good house cleaner, someone is able to be a good national leader;). We already seen the Soviet example when housewife's and locksmiths took the power... We know the results.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: LondonGirl on August 28, 2011, 06:26:54 PM
Lol I doubt anyone could have ruled Russia then. Not only did the dynasty fail by default largely thanks to WWI, but the subsequent governments made an even worse job. i doubt that even had members of the family lived and potentially been offered the throne after a (hypothetically) successful outcome to an event like Operation Barbarossa, that any of them would have even wanted it.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Selencia on October 03, 2011, 02:09:31 AM
Don't know if she could be Empress, given her closeness to Alexandra I assume she would have taken on some of her characteristics and beliefs and that's not a good thing. Maybe all 5 children rolled into one could have run the country.
Alexei is the right gender and could take on politics with...
Olga the smartest so she could learn the ways of politics and tackle it with Alexei
Tatiana is the most regal, elegant, composed under pressure and could take on society along with...
Maria a social butterfly and could be the new Marie Fedorovna. She also had loving caring nature which would help with charity work and helping the poor of Russia
Anastasia, she wasn't bright and I may be crazy but I think her role should be foreign affairs and the soldiers.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: LondonGirl on October 15, 2011, 02:48:14 PM
Don't know if she could be Empress, given her closeness to Alexandra I assume she would have taken on some of her characteristics and beliefs and that's not a good thing. Maybe all 5 children rolled into one could have run the country.
Alexei is the right gender and could take on politics with...
Olga the smartest so she could learn the ways of politics and tackle it with Alexei
Tatiana is the most regal, elegant, composed under pressure and could take on society along with...
Maria a social butterfly and could be the new Marie Fedorovna. She also had loving caring nature which would help with charity work and helping the poor of Russia
Anastasia, she wasn't bright and I may be crazy but I think her role should be foreign affairs and the soldiers.

Olga was the most capable in school - but that doesn't equate to the smartest lol, just the most conventional.

Tatiana was refined but not so conventional, despite the official propaganda. Maraia was by all accounts less a social butterfly than a maternalistic type. Anastasia was far from "not bright" - she seemed to grasp people and other things in a way that fed her humour. I doubt the Grand Duchesses can be easily stereotyped, as in fact most people can't.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Kalafrana on October 16, 2011, 06:23:12 AM
I don't think Anastasia was unintelligent, but she was very spoilt and had no application, plus she tried to wing it on charm.

Ann
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: Selencia on February 18, 2012, 08:00:19 PM
IMO Anastasia was the least intelligent, or least educated. Perhaps by the time she came along she suffered the Marie Antoinette syndrome of her parents just being too preoccupied. Anastasia especially never was allowed to grow into herself; by the time she was maturing she was already imprisoned with her family and as a result there was no longer anyone around who could write about her emerging adult personality.
It appears that there are a very small few of Russian rulers who actually did it right, Nicholas was definitely not one of those rulers.
Perhaps Tatiana gives off the impression that she would be a good Empress because of how regal she appears in photos and in memoirs about her. But history was against anyone who ruled Russia if they were still going to hang onto the idea of autocracy.
Title: Re: Czarina of Russia???
Post by: feodorovna on February 19, 2012, 02:41:57 AM
IMO Anastasia was the least intelligent, or least educated. Perhaps by the time she came along she suffered the Marie Antoinette syndrome of her parents just being too preoccupied. Anastasia especially never was allowed to grow into herself; by the time she was maturing she was already imprisoned with her family and as a result there was no longer anyone around who could write about her emerging adult personality.
It appears that there are a very small few of Russian rulers who actually did it right, Nicholas was definitely not one of those rulers.
Perhaps Tatiana gives off the impression that she would be a good Empress because of how regal she appears in photos and in memoirs about her. But history was against anyone who ruled Russia if they were still going to hang onto the idea of autocracy.

Selencia, I think you have picked up on something really important here. It is a rare family who can throw up someone with leadership qualities when its' own are found wanting. It usually follows that because they are all so tightly enmeshed their thought processes are alike. Book learning alone would be unlikely to cut through these internalized views unless the student was given the opportunity to impliment and discuss new ideas with those removed from the family "box," and as this seems not to have been encouraged, each emerging young mind would have been little more, intellectually, than a clone of an older sibling, who, in turn, were clones of the parents. This model establishes a false "If we all believe it, it must be right" mind set and discourages challenge and creates difficulties with separation.