Alexandra's political power/control during WWI

This is kind of an elementary question for an AP old-timer like me...

Did Alexandra really wield any formal power or control over the Russian government once Nicholas took over the high command in 1915? I know one of NII's wartime letters refers to her as being his "eyes and ears" in the capital, but that's different than being officially in charge. Clearly the public perceived Alexandra (and/or Rasputin) as bearing responsibility for the conditions in Petrograd by late 1916, but again, was that an accurate perception?

(I can't imagine this hasn't been discussed before, but none of the thread titles suggested where I might find prior conversations on this topic. Please point me in the right direction!)

I would say she did, but according to everyone else on this forum, my sources ain't accurate.

[Mathematic, art and history in ♥]

I would, Sarah, recommend Radzinsky's Rasputin File. Book is prone towards Alexandra's influence after Nicholas' in almost any action from August 1915 on. However, there are sequences and extracts of letters which suggest at her undoubtedly influence, (un)wittingly done by her/Rasputin. However, the thread 'The Empress Alexandra fights back's shows chronological Alexandra's increase influence from Autumn of 1916. I think things are visible/clear. Historians are the one to judge the possible true, did she, or not. It is matter of individual person, IMO.

Thanks, I'll have a look at that. It's been on my shelf for ages but I haven't gotten to it yet.

It's clear from Alexandra's wartime letters that she never missed an opportunity to foist her advice or opinions in political matters on the tsar. (Whether Nicholas actually followed his wife's advice is another matter.) However, was Alexandra ever in a position to make and implement political decisions solely on her own?

I am rusty here, but I think that she tried.  It seems that I remember that she tried to fire some ministers that she didn't like (or that Rasputin didn't like).

The down fall of Nikolasha was on her mind a lot and she was forever saying that he was not a good man or a friend of "our friend".

It might just have been her constant nagging of Nicholas that led to the "outlook of power".  He made the actual announcement, but she was the "power behind" the decision.

I know she ordered the arrest of Grand Duke Dmitri and Felix Youssoupov on her own after the murder of Rasputin.

Good question!

[Mathematic, art and history in ♥]

Indeed . Radzinsky classifies persons surrounding The Empress into two groups. One of them is 'The clique of Moscow', in which Ella, Nikolasha, The Dowager Empress are included. Another group is 'Our people', firstly Virubova included, Rasputin , and few ministers who do on triplet's (Alexandra, Rasputin, Virubova) behalves. Of course Alexadra ordered arrestion of Young prince, however, any murder was crime for her.

But only the Emperor could order the arrest of any member of the Imperial Family.

Alexandra did not have the authority to do so.

It seems that I remember that she tried to fire some ministers that she didn't like (or that Rasputin didn't like).

"Tried" as in she attempted to take matters into her own hands and dismiss someone on her own authority? Or that she attempted to influence the tsar to do so?

"Tried" as in she attempted to take matters into her own hands and dismiss someone on her own authority? Or that she attempted to influence the tsar to do so?

Alexandra Fyodorovna had every right to speak about ministers of the government, however as can be read in both Mordvinov's memoirs and in Spiridovich's "diary", Nikolai II always acted as he saw fit, undeterred by the opinions of others.

It seems that I remember that she tried to fire some ministers that she didn't like (or that Rasputin didn't like).

"Tried" as in she attempted to take matters into her own hands and dismiss someone on her own authority? Or that she attempted to influence the tsar to do so?

Too many people over the century have assumed that Alexandra Fyodorovna played some kind of specific role over the dismissal of government ministers. At the time it made for good conversation in the salons and later repeated from the Duma tribune, but if one chooses to look today, irrefutable evidence indicates that each minister fell on his own sword, soley due to his own actions.

Margarita

... I know she ordered the arrest of Grand Duke Dmitri and Felix Youssoupov on her own after the murder of Rasputin.

Sadly this is yet another myth directed against Alexandra Fyodorovna that is very difficult to set aside.

Margarita

... Of course Alexadra ordered arrestion of Young prince, however, any murder was crime for her.

Murder is considered to be a crime among all law abiding citizens. Why isolate the Empress about that truism as if she was the one at fault?

Although Dmitri's noble supporters wanted to believe that Alexandra Fyodorovna ordered Dmitri's arrest, in reality it was Nikolai II who acted exactly as the Criminal Code stipulated.

Margarita

It's clear from Alexandra's wartime letters that she never missed an opportunity to foist her advice or opinions in political matters on the tsar.

"Foist" her advice you say ... Hmm, curious word choice.

Is there any firm evidence that you could provide, which supports your assertion that Nikolai II granted a political matter solely because he was compelled to do so by his wife?

It's clear from Alexandra's wartime letters that she never missed an opportunity to foist her advice or opinions in political matters on the tsar.

"Foist" her advice you say ... Hmm, curious word choice.

I wondered if anyone would comment on that.

By "foist" I mean that Alexandra presented her opinions uninvited. The apologies the empress sometimes pads her her advice with in her wartime letters suggest that the empress realized her blatant counseling of the tsar might be viewed by some as stepping out of bounds, so to speak. Nicholas, however, never seemed to be critical of his wife's habit.

Is there any firm evidence that you could provide, which supports your assertion that Nikolai II granted a political matter solely because he was compelled to do so by his wife?

Nowhere did I make that assertion; foist and compel are not synonymous. (Case in point -- you may foist this assertion on me, but you can't compel me to believe it.) Further, the very next sentence of my original post, which you chose not to quote, reads: "Whether Nicholas actually followed his wife's advice is another matter."

For what it's worth, no, I'm not aware of any evidence that supports the point of view you've misattributed to me.

"Tried" as in she attempted to take matters into her own hands and dismiss someone on her own authority? Or that she attempted to influence the tsar to do so?

Alexandra Fyodorovna had every right to speak about ministers of the government, however as can be read in both Mordvinov's memoirs and in Spiridovich's "diary", Nikolai II always acted as he saw fit, undeterred by the opinions of others.

That was my initial impression as well, but I've been hearing/reading again and again in documentaries and in print that Alexandra "ran the government" in the tsar's absence. Although I suspected it was a persistent myth, I wanted to make sure my perception of the situation wasn't incorrect.

[uninvited]

It's clear from Alexandra's wartime letters that she never missed an opportunity to foist her advice or opinions in political matters on the tsar.

"Foist" her advice you say ... Hmm, curious word choice.

I wondered if anyone would comment on that.

By "foist" I mean that Alexandra presented her opinions uninvited. The apologies the empress sometimes pads her her advice with in her wartime letters suggest that the empress realized her blatant counseling of the tsar might be viewed by some as stepping out of bounds, so to speak. Nicholas, however, never seemed to be critical of his wife's habit.

Thus it becomes apparent that you used the word "foist" to actually mean that Alexandra Fyodorovna "presented her opinions uninvited".
 
Perhaps you could clarify a few points:

1. Why do you believe that she required an invitation to present "advice or opinions" in her private correspondence?
 
and

2. From whom would Alexandra Fyodorovna need to have sought an invitation to write her private thoughts?

I am intrigued with your comment as to why you "wondered" if someone might comment on your use of the word "foist". Why so?