Re: The Empress Alexandra Fights Back #4

Griffh

Thanks for this detailed reply. 400lb is 28 1/2 stone by Brit reckoning - Masha was a very hefty lady indeed! One more question. If she was a childhood friend of the Empress and Ella, was she actually German? Or Russian, or Austrian, or a mixture? Certainly her links with the Empress, and movement to and from Germany were highly likely to arouse suspicion of the Empress's loyalties, whether justified or not.

Alexandra was not the only royal person whose commitment to the war effort was in doubt by her own or her husband's subjects. While researching the Titles Deprivation Act 1917 I came across a few examples from Germany. Admiral von Muller's diary mentions the bad impression the Kaiser created in autumn 1914 by talking to captured British soldiers in English, and the Duke of Brunswick was told by the Kaiser not to show his face in Berlin after a mob surrounded the ducal palace in Brunswick and demanded his immediate reurn to the Front. This is in 'The Kaiser I Knew', by the Kaiser's American dentist, Arthur N. Davis, who records that the Duke then paid a surreptitious visit to his surgery very early one morning! I think, though I don't have the book to hand, that the Kaiser had also told his sons to stay out of Berlin.

Ann

Hi Kalafrana,
No, it didn't take much to arouse suspicion that one was a traitor, or at the very least had "enemy sympathies".  Earlier in this thread we were discussing Queen Sophie of Greece, and all it took to start rumours about her allegiance was the fact that she was the Kaiser's sister.  It didn't even matter that he had publicly humiliated her because she converted to Orthodoxy.  Or that she had little to no relationship with him.  Hundreds of acres of forest (that she had arranged for the creation of, by the way, as part of her efforts of reforestation) were burned to the ground in the hopes of finding the "secret wire" she was supposed to have had to Berlin.  (Source:  Born to Rule, Five Reigning Consorts, Granddaughters of Queen Victoria, by Julia P. Gelardi)

And her people liked her, unlike Alexandra's, who already had their misgivings about her.  Alexandra didn't stand a chance.

Paranoia running abound is a common thread between all wars, but I'm sure WWI has to be the worst case of it, due in large part to the fact that most of the crowned heads in Europe were related.

Griffh

Thanks for this detailed reply. 400lb is 28 1/2 stone by Brit reckoning - Masha was a very hefty lady indeed! One more question. If she was a childhood friend of the Empress and Ella, was she actually German? Or Russian, or Austrian, or a mixture? Certainly her links with the Empress, and movement to and from Germany were highly likely to arouse suspicion of the Empress's loyalties, whether justified or not.

Alexandra was not the only royal person whose commitment to the war effort was in doubt by her own or her husband's subjects. While researching the Titles Deprivation Act 1917 I came across a few examples from Germany. Admiral von Muller's diary mentions the bad impression the Kaiser created in autumn 1914 by talking to captured British soldiers in English, and the Duke of Brunswick was told by the Kaiser not to show his face in Berlin after a mob surrounded the ducal palace in Brunswick and demanded his immediate reurn to the Front. This is in 'The Kaiser I Knew', by the Kaiser's American dentist, Arthur N. Davis, who records that the Duke then paid a surreptitious visit to his surgery very early one morning! I think, though I don't have the book to hand, that the Kaiser had also told his sons to stay out of Berlin.

Ann

Thanks Ann for that fascinating information.  I have Davis' book but I have not read it for years.  I can't wait to dig it out and read it again. 

Hi Kalafrana,
No, it didn't take much to arouse suspicion that one was a traitor, or at the very least had "enemy sympathies".  Earlier in this thread we were discussing Queen Sophie of Greece, and all it took to start rumours about her allegiance was the fact that she was the Kaiser's sister.  It didn't even matter that he had publicly humiliated her because she converted to Orthodoxy.  Or that she had little to no relationship with him.  Hundreds of acres of forest (that she had arranged for the creation of, by the way, as part of her efforts of reforestation) were burned to the ground in the hopes of finding the "secret wire" she was supposed to have had to Berlin.  (Source:  Born to Rule, Five Reigning Consorts, Granddaughters of Queen Victoria, by Julia P. Gelardi)

And her people liked her, unlike Alexandra's, who already had their misgivings about her.  Alexandra didn't stand a chance.

Paranoia running abound is a common thread between all wars, but I'm sure WWI has to be the worst case of it, due in large part to the fact that most of the crowned heads in Europe were related.

Historyfan it is so true! 

I just wanted to say that I have been away for a few days and have not been able to post and I will be away this coming weekend too.  But I will post more themes tomorrow.   

[• Question of Religious Tolerance Belongs Solely to Interior Ministry]

Helen I just wanted to take a minute before I post more themes to answer that question you asked me quite awhile ago about the Church's attitude toward religious freedom in the post-reform period (1905-1917). 

My answer was something to the effect that during the post-reform period the Synod showed greater tolerance to other denominations and to some of the Sects such as the Old Belivers. 

I had assumed that the religious freedom reform had it's origin with that same anti-Petrine clerics within the Church that Vera Shevzov had mentioned in her work, Russian Orthodoxy on the Eve of Revolution.   

However, I was mistaken.  In Peter Waldron's short but concise work, Between Two Revolutions: Stolypin and the Politics of Renewal in Russia, I learned that the question of religious tolerance was considered to be a secular and not a religious issue; and that consequently it fell within the domain of the Minister of the Interior and not the Over-Procurator of the Most Holy Synod.

Waldron explains:

•   Question of  Religious Tolerance Belongs Solely to Interior Ministry

Although the Holy Synod occupied a position that gave it both spiritual and temporal authority, the Synod bore no responsibility for government policies toward other religious faiths.  This was in the jurisdiction of the ministry of internal affairs and Stolypin’s department [the Prime Minister also held the post of Minister of the Interior] was keen to promote greater civil rights to the non-Orthodox to fulfill the commitment made by the government to extend religious toleration.  There was also a political motivation for the policy, as, by improving the lot of these groups, the government hoped that it would be rewarded by increasing support.  [Ref: Peter Waldron, Between Two Revolutions: Stolypin and the Politics of Renewal in Russia, (1998), p. 141]   

•   Over-Procurator Sits in Council of Ministers

The Orthodox religion already had institutional channels that enabled it to make its views known at the highest levels of the Russian state.  The chief procurator of the Holy Synod sat as a member of the council of ministers and this offered him a unique position—as the representative of a sectional group—to express the church’s opinion.  Often, however, the chief procurator ended up expressing his own views or represented only one part of the full spectrum of ecclesiastical opinion.  Nevertheless, the chief procurator’s status as a quasi-member gave him direct right of access to the tsar...  [Ref: Peter Waldron, Between Two Revolutions: Stolypin and the Politics of Renewal in Russia, (1998), p. 140]


•   State Council Overturns Over-Procurator’s Opposition for Religious Tolerance

The Holy Synod was aghast when it realized the extent to which other religions were to be given parity with the Orthodox Church, and the chief procurator used his position in the council of ministers to press the church’s case.  The Synod argued that the government had no business concerning itself with the extension of freedom of conscience to non-Orthodox religions, since this was a matter of canonical significance and, therefore, came within the jurisdiction of the Synod itself.  This argument was designed to stop the reform process in its tracks by challenging the validity of any temporal involvement in reforming the status of religions in the empire, but while the council of ministers agreed that strictly canonical questions must remain under the Synod’s jurisdiction, it did not accept that these reforms fell into this category.   [Ref: Peter Waldron, Between Two Revolutions: Stolypin and the Politics of Renewal in Russia, (1998), p. 141]   


•   Synod Organizes Reform-Bloc Within Church: Hermogen, Vostorgov, and Illiodor

The Orthodox Church was not prepared, however to let the situation rest: it was able to voice it’s concerns through a wide variety of channels.  The church’s network of parishes and monasteries gave it a level of contact with the population of the empire that was unmatched by any other organization....The Chief Procurator identified a number of individual priests, including Bishop Hermogen of Saratov, Archpriest Vostorgov of Moscow and the monk Illiodor, who were especially active in fermenting discontent against the government bills.  These priests – and others – were identified as having close links with right-wing political organizations and these political groups were often recruited to add extra weight to the church’s own protestations.  [Ref: Peter Waldron, Between Two Revolutions: Stolypin and the Politics of Renewal in Russia, (1998), p. 141]   
     
•   Over- Procurator, Izvol’skii, Cautions Against Synod’s Political Role

While the Synod wanted to press its case with vigour, the chief procurator recognized the dangers that were inherent in the church becoming openly involved in the political arena.  The creation of antagonism between the spiritual and temporal powers would only lead to a diminution of the church’s power and influence, Izvol’skii realized, and he set out to try to limit the extent of political involvement in church affairs. (Izvol’skii apparently did not impact the Synod’s anti-government activities as he was removed by Stolypin on Feb. 1, 1909 griffh)  [Ref: Peter Waldron, Between Two Revolutions: Stolypin and the Politics of Renewal in Russia, (1998), p. 144]   
   
•   Assistant Over-Procurator Pleads Synod’s Position to Duma (1909)

The Synod devoted substantial energies to presenting its position in the Duma when the bills came to be debated there.  It also continued its pressure on Stolypin himself to shift his position.  The appearance of the assistant chief procurator, A. P. Rogovich, before the Duma in the spring of 1909 demonstrated that the church’s position remained as firm as ever and he declared that if the ministry of internal affairs continued to insist on supporting a bill, “which is out of line with the judgements of the Holy Synod...then new ways will have to be found to defend the independence and power of the Church”.  The new chief procurator, S. M. Luk,ianov [Replaced Izvol’skii, Feb. 1909 griffh], kept up the pressure on Stolypin as the government’s proposals were being debated in the Duma.  He continued to insist that the Synod would not compromise and intended to hold out to ensure that the church’s position remained untouched.  It is clear that, by the spring of 1909, the Synod had a clear perception of the direction in which the political wind was blowing in St. Petersburg.   [Ref: Peter Waldron, Between Two Revolutions: Stolypin and the Politics of Renewal in Russia, (1998), pp. 144-145]   

------------------

Just a quick note to say that I had not fully appreciated that Samarin's attack on Rasputin was all the more powerful politically because he was not only the Over-Procurator of the Most Holy Synod, he also had a set on the State Council.  This makes the Empress' extreme concerns about Samarin's appointment to the office of Over-Procurator in Sept. 1915 all the more understandable. 
   

I've got an e-mail from The GARF about Madame Geringer. Now I'm in search for someone who can translate this e-mail because it's completly in Russian. Because in this thread we talked about this mysterious lady, this information is maybe a little help.

[King George V]

There are two important themes that relate to the Great War that I have not posted and they are King George V and Nicky's Suite and Gentlemen.   I will try and post both themes today as I will be away on the weekend. 

Just to say, I can't stop thinking about Ann's research about the spy hysteria in Germany as recorded by the Kaiser's American Dentist.  Americans in Europe had an enviable historic perspective during almost the entire duration of the Great War as the States remained neutral for almost the entire war. 

Ann's remarks made me realize how many Germans with connections to Britian suffered the same kind of persecution that spy-hysteria had created in Allied countrys. 

I think that the general lack of sympathy for Germany during the rest of the 20th century makes it hard to remember what kind of persecution German's of British descent suffered during the Great War. 

Actually my Father's British grandmother married a German just prior to the Great War and to this day I cannot pronounce my last name correctly as my Grandmother sort of "invented" her own non-German pronunciation. 

The fact is that our German heritage was hidden in every possible way.  Were were raised as if we an American family with extremely close ties to Great Britian.  My father had been born in England and my mother's family were listed among American families of British Royal Descent.  Every male in my mother's family had to include the name Ethelbert which they did faithfully though they often disguised it with Edward, Edwin, etc.  But on all legal documents Ethelburt appeared. 

Needless to say my mother's mother viewed, through her gold lorgnette, her daughter's German father-in-law as if he was, in spite of his brilliant accomplishments or that the fact that he spoke English flawlessly, some kind of strange specimen that had managed to crawl out of an overturned laboratory bell-jar.   

It is not an exaggeration to say that Queen Elizabeth was as honored in our home as were the plethora of American Presidents that have come and gone during her reign.  Germophobia so penetrated every aspect of our family life that my uncle Morgan and my aunt Danica who spoke six or seven languages refused to speak a word of German. 

The most humorous thing is that my sister told me recently that when she saw for the first time a picture of the Kaiser Wilhelm in a history class in school and said that she finally knew who our father was as to her he looked like Kaiser Wilhelm.  Father sported a very German moustache and always had his hair styled in a buzz cut.  His personal style fitted his profession as he worked at NASA/Jet Propulsion Labs and had that slightly German-Geek-Scientist look going for him. 

It just didn't do to be German or of German extraction in 20th century America unless you were part of the military/science community as my father was. 

The really funny thing is that when I made my first German friends, Stefan and Christiana Von Zimmer, in NYC, I learned that all of my father's favorite things were not British at all but were distinctly Southern German. 

Well anyway back to the themes.  I shall post King George V first. 

ALIX AND NICKY’S WARTIME CORRESPONDENCE

NOVEMBER 1, 1915 — NOVEMBER 30, 1915

Once a rumour, however false, becomes the subject of common belief, it assumes the status of political fact, informing the attitudes and actions of the public…what gave these rumours their potential as a unifying belief...was the fact that they were endorsed by the Duma leaders, and indeed by conservatives. 
Orlando Figes and Boris Kolonitskii

KING GEORGE V OF ENGLAND

Letter No. 162  Tsarskoie Selo, Nov. 25-th 1915
Had you an answer from Georgie. -

Letter No. 163 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 26, 1915.
What news from Georgie?

Letter No. 164  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 27, 1915.
- Georgi telegraphed that it had been one of the finest sights he had ever seen in his life. How emotioning.

Letter No. 165  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 28, 1915
I have sent your letter to Malcolm to give over to Georgie - he leaves to-morrow. -

Stavka. 28 November, 1915.
- I send you Georgie's reply - keep it. Nicky

Letter No. 167 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 29 1915.
I don't like Georgie's answer, to my mind its quite wrong. -

--------------------------------------------------
   
I really have no idea what the exchange between Nicky and Georgie was about.  I could not find any reference to the letter that Alix did not care for in any of my books, such as Lifelong Passion, etc. 


 

I've got an e-mail from The GARF about Madame Geringer. Now I'm in search for someone who can translate this e-mail because it's completly in Russian. Because in this thread we talked about this mysterious lady, this information is maybe a little help.

Thank you Teddy for your research on Madame Geringer.  Perhaps Helen can translate the reply.  I am sorry that I have rather dragged my feet on following through with Mme. Geringer's maiden name.  I will try and contact the Bodley Head archive in England and the John Lane archive in Texas.  Thanks again Teddy. 

[KING GEORGE V OF ENGLAND]

Griff, Thank you so much for the information about religious freedom from Peter Waldron's book. If it's okay with you, I'll reply to it in a day or two.

KING GEORGE V OF ENGLAND

Letter No. 162  Tsarskoie Selo, Nov. 25-th 1915
Had you an answer from Georgie. -

Letter No. 163 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 26, 1915.
What news from Georgie?

Letter No. 164  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 27, 1915.
- Georgi telegraphed that it had been one of the finest sights he had ever seen in his life. How emotioning.

Letter No. 165  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 28, 1915
I have sent your letter to Malcolm to give over to Georgie - he leaves to-morrow. -

Stavka. 28 November, 1915.
- I send you Georgie's reply - keep it. Nicky

Letter No. 167 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 29 1915.
I don't like Georgie's answer, to my mind its quite wrong. -

--------------------------------------------------
  
I really have no idea what the exchange between Nicky and Georgie was about.  I could not find any reference to the letter that Alix did not care for in any of my books, such as Lifelong Passion, etc.  

I have no idea either. George had been thrown off a horse at the Western front several weeks earlier, on 26 or 28 October 1915 [New Style], and had "cracked three ribs  and fractured his pelvis", as Catrine Clay described it. "Acute pain then prevented the King visiting the front for some weeks." [Ref: King, Kaiser, Tsar, p. 324] The Times still reported on his convalescence by the middle of November [New Style], but wrote that he was receiving people again at the beginning of December [New Style].

According to his diary, Nicholas wrote to George in the evening of Wednesday 25 November 1915 [Old Style]. Unfortunately he didn't say anything about the contents of his letter. According to Clay, Nicholas again wrote to King George on 26 January 1916: "... I hope you will quickly recover from the results of your accident and not need the help of a stick any more. ..." Sympathetic, but I doubt this was the issue Nicholas and Alexandra referred to.

[KING GEORGE V OF ENGLAND]

Griff, Thank you so much for the information about religious freedom from Peter Waldron's book. If it's okay with you, I'll reply to it in a day or two.

KING GEORGE V OF ENGLAND

Letter No. 162  Tsarskoie Selo, Nov. 25-th 1915
Had you an answer from Georgie. -

Letter No. 163 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 26, 1915.
What news from Georgie?

Letter No. 164  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 27, 1915.
- Georgi telegraphed that it had been one of the finest sights he had ever seen in his life. How emotioning.

Letter No. 165  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 28, 1915
I have sent your letter to Malcolm to give over to Georgie - he leaves to-morrow. -

Stavka. 28 November, 1915.
- I send you Georgie's reply - keep it. Nicky

Letter No. 167 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 29 1915.
I don't like Georgie's answer, to my mind its quite wrong. -

--------------------------------------------------
  
I really have no idea what the exchange between Nicky and Georgie was about.  I could not find any reference to the letter that Alix did not care for in any of my books, such as Lifelong Passion, etc.  

I have no idea either. George had been thrown off a horse at the Western front several weeks earlier, on 26 or 28 October 1915 [New Style], and had "cracked three ribs  and fractured his pelvis", as Catrine Clay described it. "Acute pain then prevented the King visiting the front for some weeks." [Ref: King, Kaiser, Tsar, p. 324] The Times still reported on his convalescence by the middle of November [New Style], but wrote that he was receiving people again at the beginning of December [New Style].

According to his diary, Nicholas wrote to George in the evening of Wednesday 25 November 1915 [Old Style]. Unfortunately he didn't say anything about the contents of his letter. According to Clay, Nicholas again wrote to King George on 26 January 1916: "... I hope you will quickly recover from the results of your accident and not need the help of a stick any more. ..." Sympathetic, but I doubt this was the issue Nicholas and Alexandra referred to.

My apologies if this is a dumb question - it's late, and I'm far too lazy to go find my book...but, are we sure we're referring to King George V?  And not another George(Georgi)?  It seems like it should be, but....?

My apologies if this is a dumb question - it's late, and I'm far too lazy to go find my book...but, are we sure we're referring to King George V?  And not another George(Georgi)?  It seems like it should be, but....?

Good question! In the index to "The Complete Wartime Correspondence", Fuhrmann placed all of these references, except one, under the heading of George V.

The line from the Empress' letter of 27 November - "Georgi telegraphed that it had been one of the finest sights he had ever seen in his life. How emotioning" - is said to refer to Georgie Mikhailovich, lieutenant-general on Supreme Command Staff. The sentences preceding and following this line are about activities on 26 November, the feast of the dedication of the Church of St George in Kiev in 1051. Nicholas wrote that there was a review in which the St George Cavalry took part, followed by a thanksgiving moleben, a diner, and then a visit to the town duma or 'People's House' of Mogilev. Alexandra wrote that "18,000 men sat together according to the wars [in which they served]" at the People's House, so I'm not sure whether Georgi's remark was about the review or the gathering at the People's House.

On Sunday 29 November, Nicholas wrote in his diary that he had decided to send Georgie [Mikhailovich] to Japan; it seems he left for Japan on 10 December.

[Nicky's Suite and Gentlemen.]

Just to say that George V will come up again in the December correspondence as this is the month that he will make Nicky a British Field Marshall. 

Helen I finally found some information on the author of the book Nicky so enjoyed reading in December, 1916, The Millionare Girl.   The Millionarie Girl, and Other Short Stories, was written in 1908 by the British novelist, Mrs W. Desmond Humphreys, née Gollan] (1850–1938) who wrote under the name of Rita. 

There is a biography of Mrs. W. Desmond Humphreys on the Oxford Biography site: http://www.oxforddnb.com/index/101045494

I was hoping to find a copy of the book but it does not seem to be available, however apparently Mrs. W. Desmond Humphreys still has the ability to hold her audience spell bound, as one of her novels was the basis of a Nick Hodson production that you can find out more about at:

 available on www.mobileread.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-31887.html •

Mrs. W. Desmond Humphreys novel  is described as "... A sensational novelette, set in a ladies’ Turkish bath at an English spa town."

Well I had best return to our War Correspondence and post the theme, Nicky's Suite and Gentlemen.  This theme is interesting because it includes a fairly heated disagreement over a member of Nicky's Suite, Alexander Alexandrovitch Drentel'n.  I may be making more of this than is necessary but it apprears to me that Nicky is fairly short with Alix and clearly irritated by some of her remarks.  See what you all think.  Again I may have misunderstood the references to Drentel'n.

 
 

[ALIX AND NICKY’S WARTIME CORRESPONDENCE NOVEMBER 1, 1915 — NOVEMBER 30, 1915]

ALIX AND NICKY’S WARTIME CORRESPONDENCE

NOVEMBER 1, 1915 — NOVEMBER 30, 1915

Once a rumour, however false, becomes the subject of common belief, it assumes the status of political fact, informing the attitudes and actions of the public…what gave these rumours their potential as a unifying belief...was the fact that they were endorsed by the Duma leaders, and indeed by conservatives. 
Orlando Figes and Boris Kolonitskii

NICKY’S SUITE AND GENTLEMEN

DRENTEL’N AFFAIR

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
Beloved, I have popped into bed after seeing Khvostov who begged urgently to be received.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
- Khvostov told Fred. that one must beware of Dzhunkovsky because of his different actions, police etc. Moscou meeting of the nobility, making himself out as a martyr because of Gregory and so on, and finding that in the society and clubs one ought to pay attention to his talks - and not let him receive a nomination in the Caucasus.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
Well, our good old Fred. had gaffed quite colossaly again, wh. shows that one must no more tell him anything serious or wh. is not to be repeated.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
Khvostov got a letter fr. (his former brother-in-law) Drenteln - he will bring it to you, for you to see in what terms it is written.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
He [Drenteln] tells him [Khvostov] that Fredericks sent for him and told him that he wishes to know why Khvostov judges Dzhunkovsky so unjustily etc. Drenteln furious, sees in it the result of that black force (one understands our Friend) and that he pities you and Russia if Khvostov perverts all orders in that way.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
I said in future Khvostov is to address himself to Voyeikov in stead of the old ramoli gaffeur –[Fredericks] no its too, too bad. Tell it Voyeikov if he promises to hold his tongue until he has seen Khvostov.

Mogilev. 2 November, 1915.
 I have just received your last letter of the 1st November, in which you speak of your conversation with Khvostov.  Nicky

Mogilev. 2 November, 1915.
I had no idea that Drenteln had been his brother-in-law.  Nicky

Mogilev. 2 November, 1915.
I wish that you paid less attention to such details!  Nicky

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
He [Khvostov] will send me his answer to Drenteln. - I begged him to well think it over, as many will read it, and he must still explain reasons wh. can be told.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
Oh, that awful gaffeur - now that runs the round of the "Preobrazhensky" reg. and the Governors excomerades and hinders Khvostov terribly.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
Such an unfortunate affair and binds Khvostov's hands.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
He begs you not to tell anything to Fredericks, who will make it yet worse, nor Drenteln, who will be furious that I saw the letter.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
He [Khvostov] begs you to receive him one of these days for affairs.

Mogilev. 2 November, 1915.
I cannot understand what worries Khv. in this story of the letter.  Nicky

Letter No. 148  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 3, 1915
he [Khvostov] dreads meeting Drenteln, after such a letter finds he cannot give him his hand (ask him to show it you) - if you invite, him he must - & if you dont people wld. be unkind & speak. Am so sorry for the poor man.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
The regiment [Preobrazhensky] is not, alas, famous and hates our Friend, so he [Khvostov] hopes you will soon promote Drenteln - give him an army brigade, so as that he should not yet more influence the regiment.

Mogilev. 2 November, 1915.
I told you several days I had offered Drent. the command of the Preobraj. & I cannot take that back.  Nicky

Letter No. 148  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 3, 1915  
Nov. 4-t h.  
I did not mean you should now take the Pr(eobraientzi) away fr. Drenteln but later on. -  Thats all I think -

Letter No. 167 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 29 1915.
- Does Drenteln take over the regiment now, or how is he arranging?

Stavka, 30 November, 1915.
Drenteln is taking leave here on the day of our departure, and is going straight to Petrograd, for family reasons. Nicky

COUNT DE FREEDERICKSZ

Letter No. 150  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 6, 1915.
Bow to the old man, I do hope he wont hinder yr. movements.

Telegram 83.  Tsarskoe Selo> Razdel’naya.  8 Nov 1915.  10.00> 11.35 a.m.
How is count [Frederick]’s health? 

Letter No. 155  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 11, 1915.
How is the old man Fred.

Mogilev. 12 November, 1915.
Everything is well with the old man. He is now and then very pale before meals, and at times says foolish things across the table, but feels no fatigue from what we are doing and from much walking. Nicky

[NICKY’S SUITE AND GENTLEMEN continued]

NICKY’S SUITE AND GENTLEMEN continued

NICHOLAS PAVLOVICH SABLIN (N.P.)

Letter No. 150  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 6, 1915.
Give the little Admiral & N. P. also my love.

Letter No. 163 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 26, 1915.
I am awfully sorry he [N.P.] wont be any more with you, was so quiet for you both - we shall miss him awfully - but its a splendid nomination - but you will be so lonely!

Letter No. 163 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 26, 1915.
- I know what this means to him [N. P.] & his comerades, tho' he will horribly suffer leaving us, who are his nearest & dearest as he always says! -

Letter No. 163 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 26, 1915.
How delighted Orlov & Drenteln will be that N. P. leaves their jealous hearts will be contented.

Telegram. Stavka. 27 November, 1915.
N. P. has said good-bye; I am glad, for his sake. Nicky

Stavka, 30 November, 1915.
The same with Nic. Pav. [leaving Stavka], who is returning from Odessa for ten days. Nicky

MISCELLANEOUS    

Letter No. 146  Tsarskoie Selo, Nov. 2 , 1915
She [Ania] gave me a letter of Kellers for you to read through when you have a free moment;

Letter No. 154. Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 10, 1915.
How is the little Admiral [C. D. Nilov, Commander of Standard]?

Letter No. 163 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 26, 1915.
 - And 3 of yr. Players at once gone, whom can you get?

Letter No. 163 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 26, 1915.
Silaiev is quiet & nice & utterly devoted.

Stavka. 26 November, 1915.
Please forward my letter to Malcolm.
Nicky

[Romanov Family.]

My apologies if this is a dumb question - it's late, and I'm far too lazy to go find my book...but, are we sure we're referring to King George V?  And not another George(Georgi)?  It seems like it should be, but....?

Good question! In the index to "The Complete Wartime Correspondence", Fuhrmann placed all of these references, except one, under the heading of George V.

The line from the Empress' letter of 27 November - "Georgi telegraphed that it had been one of the finest sights he had ever seen in his life. How emotioning" - is said to refer to Georgie Mikhailovich, lieutenant-general on Supreme Command Staff. The sentences preceding and following this line are about activities on 26 November, the feast of the dedication of the Church of St George in Kiev in 1051. Nicholas wrote that there was a review in which the St George Cavalry took part, followed by a thanksgiving moleben, a diner, and then a visit to the town duma or 'People's House' of Mogilev. Alexandra wrote that "18,000 men sat together according to the wars [in which they served]" at the People's House, so I'm not sure whether Georgi's remark was about the review or the gathering at the People's House.

On Sunday 29 November, Nicholas wrote in his diary that he had decided to send Georgie [Mikhailovich] to Japan; it seems he left for Japan on 10 December.

Historyfan and Helen thanks for pointing out my mistake with the Nov. 27th entry.  I will remove it in my main file and place it in the theme, Romanov Family.

[Nicky's Suite and Gentlemen.]

I finally found some information on the author of the book Nicky so enjoyed reading in December, 1916, The Millionare Girl.   The Millionarie Girl, and Other Short Stories, was written in 1908 by the British novelist, Mrs W. Desmond Humphreys, née Gollan] (1850–1938) who wrote under the name of Rita.

Thank you for the book title and the links! Mrs Humphreys/Rita sure was a productive writer. I searched the Internet and found old and new copies of several of her novels, including an e-version of "The Mystery of a Turkish Bath" at www.archive.org , but alas no copy of "The Millionaire Girl".  

Well I had best return to our War Correspondence and post the theme, Nicky's Suite and Gentlemen.  This theme is interesting because it includes a fairly heated disagreement over a member of Nicky's Suite, Alexander Alexandrovitch Drentel'n.  I may be making more of this than is necessary but it appears to me that Nicky is fairly short with Alix and clearly irritated by some of her remarks.  See what you all think.  Again I may have misunderstood the references to Drentel'n.

NICKY’S SUITE AND GENTLEMEN
DRENTEL’N AFFAIR
Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
Beloved, I have popped into bed after seeing Khvostov who begged urgently to be received.

Letter No. 145  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
- Khvostov told Fred. that one must beware of Dzhunkovsky because of his different actions, police etc. Moscou meeting of the nobility, making himself out as a martyr because of Gregory and so on, and finding that in the society and clubs one ought to pay attention to his talks - and not let him receive a nomination in the Caucasus.
…

I didn't quite understand the Drentel'n Affair section, so I turned up Alexandra's full letter of 1 November, in which the above lines appear in a slightly different order and which also included a few lines that might help explain Alexandra's concern. The relevant parts of her letter read as follows:

Letter No. 145 Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 1, 1915
"Beloved, I have popped into bed after seeing Khvostov who begged urgently to be received. Well, our good old Fred. had gaffed quite colossaly again, wh. shows that one must no more tell him anything serious or wh. is not to be repeated. Khvostov got a letter fr. (his former brother-in-law) Drenteln - he will bring it to you, for you to see in what terms it is written. He [Drenteln] tells him [Khvostov] that Fredericks sent for him and told him that he wishes to know why Khvostov judges Dzhunkovsky so unjustily etc. Drenteln furious, sees in it the result of that black force (one understands our Friend) and that he pities you and Russia if Khvostov perverts all orders in that way. -
Khvostov told Fred. that one must beware of Dzhunkovsky because of his different actions, police etc. Moscou meeting of the nobility, making himself out as a martyr because of Gregory and so on, and finding that in the society and clubs one ought to pay attention to his talks - and not let him receive a nomination in the Caucasus. Oh, that awful gaffeur - now that runs the round of the "Preobrazhensky" reg. and the Governors excomerades and hinders Khvostov terribly. He begs you not to tell anything to Fredericks, who will make it yet worse, nor Drenteln, who will be furious that I saw the letter. Such an unfortunate affair and binds Khvostov's hands. The regiment [Preobrazhensky] is not, alas, famous and hates our Friend, so he [Khvostov] hopes you will soon promote Drenteln - give him an army brigade, so as that he should not yet more influence the regiment.
…
I said in future Khvostov is to address himself to Voyeikov in stead of the old ramoli gaffeur –[Fredericks] no its too, too bad. Tell it Voyeikov if he promises to hold his tongue until he has seen Khvostov. He [Khvostov] begs you to receive him one of these days for affairs. He [Khvostov] will send me his answer to Drenteln. - I begged him to well think it over, as many will read it, and he must still explain reasons wh. can be told."

At the ellipsis in this letter, Alexandra wrote that Nikolasha wanted Dzhunkovsky to become hetman of the Tersk troops, which Dzhunkovsky had refused, and wanted to propose to Dzhunkovsky to become his aide. She felt it would be a very bad idea for Nicholas to agree, fearing they would brood harm and mischief.

Nicholas reply:
Mogilev. 2 November, 1915.
I have just received your last letter of the 1st November, in which you speak of your conversation with Khvostov. I had no idea that Drenteln had been his brother-in-law.  I cannot understand what worries Khv. in this story of the letter.  I wish that you paid less attention to such details!  I told you several days I had offered Drent. the command of the Preobraj. & I cannot take that back.  

Letter No. 148  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 3, 1915
he [Khvostov] dreads meeting Drenteln, after such a letter finds he cannot give him his hand (ask him to show it you) - if you invite, him he must - & if you dont people wld. be unkind & speak. Am so sorry for the poor man.

Letter No. 148  Tsarskoe Selo, Nov. 3, 1915  
Nov. 4-t h.  
I did not mean you should now take the Pr(eobrazhensky) away fr. Drenteln but later on. -  Thats all I think -

As regards the tone of Nicholas letter of 2 November, I think Nicholas did sound rather short with his wife. I personally wouldn't interpret it as irritation or a heated disagreement, though. I doubt that Alexandra got a proper 'job description' from her husband, when he enlisted her help, so  limits to her help or advice had to be set 'on the job'. In his letter of 2 November, Nicholas seems to do just that: he gave her instructions, asking her to receive General Murray, and also gave her feedback, letting her know that she did not need concern herself with 'such details'.

I also think that Nicholas sounds less short or irritated when one reads Nicholas' full letter. Nicholas had started his letter with a few words about her health, adding the words: "Take care of yourself and rest well. But I know that this is a vain wish because one cannot live near the capital without receiving people." He then wrote that he and Alexei had had a bad night two nights earlier, as Alexei had hurt his arm and had kept his father awake, sitting up, groaning and calling for his mother. Nicholas must have realised that neither the news about Alexei's injury nor any worries about Drenteln and Khvostov and what Nikolasha and Dzhunkovsky might be up to would do Alexandra's health the least bit of good. If he was irritated because of her letter, it apparently wasn't too bad, as he wrote the following lines directly after his lines about Drenteln: "Please receive General Murray before he leaves for England. Now we must end as I have lots to read. Baby is gone to sleep. God bless you and the girlies. Good-bye my own sweet Sunny-dear. I kiss you ever so tenderly & miss you quite awfully." [Joseph Fuhrmann, The Complete Wartime Correspondence, p. 285-6]