Author Topic: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?  (Read 272053 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Belochka

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4447
  • City of Peter stand in all your splendor - Pushkin
    • View Profile
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #540 on: February 12, 2007, 08:48:57 PM »
Bear ... And if, as you and Belochka and vladm have been arguing, everyone in Russia betrayed him - from the generals to the nobility to the Church to the peasantry and so on and so forth - then all I am saying is, perhaps it's because he deserved[/b] to be betrayed ...

Simon, the short answer is that everybody betrayed Nicholas II and so he deserved to be betrayed.

A hundred points to me.

No Elizabeth,

The loyalty points are really mine, and I prefer to share them around.

History tells us that there were no prizes for betrayal.

Margarita
« Last Edit: February 12, 2007, 08:55:14 PM by Belochka »


Faces of Russia is now on Facebook!


http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/

Offline Louis_Charles

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1498
    • View Profile
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #541 on: February 12, 2007, 10:21:20 PM »
... And if, as you and Belochka and vladm have been arguing, everyone in Russia betrayed him - from the generals to the nobility to the Church to the peasantry and so on and so forth - then all I am saying is, perhaps it's because he deserved[/b] to be betrayed? Because he was a bad ruler - worse yet, a bad autocrat, at a pivotal time in his nation's history, when bad leadership inevitably resulted in the loss of millions of innocent lives?

Then there is nothing left to discuss ....

Margarita


Margarita,

Perhaps not for you and Bear. The rest of us are doing nicely with the topic, thanks. I am sure that Nicholas appreciates the loyalty (especially since it seems to be fueled by emotions and reasons he would understand). The two of you have nothing further to demonstrate concerning either your scholarship levels or allegiance to the throne. Now may the rest of us please get on with the discussion, ignoring the attempts to dodge all over the map (Bear, you did so call him a terrorist) and shoddy scholarly support for your arguments (deicidal culture, my foot) in favor of rational historical discourse?

Simon
"Simon --- Classy AND Compassionate!"
   
"The road to enlightenment is long and difficult, so take snacks and a magazine."

Offline grandduchessella

  • Global Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 13061
  • Getting Ready to Move to Europe :D
    • View Profile
    • Facebook page
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #542 on: February 12, 2007, 10:49:40 PM »
Back on the 23 of Feb. 1917

And then I found this!

26 Feb 1917:

This morning during service I felt an excrusiating pain in the middle of my chest which lasted for a quarter of an hour.

I could hardly stand and my forehead was covered with beads of sweat.

I cannot understand what it was.... 


I don't recall anyone,  historians or posters here on this thread,  talking about Nicholas II's health.  Was  it was possible that Nicholas II had a heart attack.... ???  ???  ???

Was this the first time he felt these pains?

If Nicholas II felt that he did have  a heart attack,  this places a completely different slant on why he might have abdicated  when he did.

AGRBear

They are all symptoms of, amongst other things, severe anxiety or an anxiety attack. Not unusual given the circumstances.
They also serve who only stand and wait--John Milton
Come visit on Pinterest--http://pinterest.com/lawrbk/

Offline Belochka

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4447
  • City of Peter stand in all your splendor - Pushkin
    • View Profile
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #543 on: February 13, 2007, 12:31:50 AM »
With the monarchy swept aside under the fervor of nationalism, the notion of new found civil liberties were curiously defined indeed:

. the right to preach armed insurrection,
. mutiny,
. and desertion.

In addition to freedom of speech and assembly the Provisional Government guaranteed the people the right:

. to sedition,
. to loot,
. to confiscate private property,
. to lynch.

and the right to paranoia.

Now who was it that betrayed Imperial Russia and her sovereign?

One can perhaps fully understand Lenin's dictum that the "Provisional Government had transformed Russia from a decrepit despotic state into the freest country in the world."

No wonder he arrived on the scene to restrain this interpretation of democracy.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2007, 12:33:55 AM by Belochka »


Faces of Russia is now on Facebook!


http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/

Offline Tsarfan

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1848
  • Miss the kings, but not the kingdoms
    • View Profile
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #544 on: February 13, 2007, 06:10:07 AM »

In addition to freedom of speech and assembly the Provisional Government guaranteed the people the right:

. to sedition,
. to loot,
. to confiscate private property,
. to lynch.

and the right to paranoia.

Could you cite the specific legislative acts that conferred these new rights on the populace?  I'd be particularly interested to see the wording of a statute that established the right to paranoia.

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #545 on: February 13, 2007, 11:07:20 AM »

... Bear, you did so call him a terroris...

Simon

I called who a terrorist?

AGRBear
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #546 on: February 13, 2007, 11:16:12 AM »
Back on the 23 of Feb. 1917

And then I found this!

26 Feb 1917:

This morning during service I felt an excrusiating pain in the middle of my chest which lasted for a quarter of an hour.

I could hardly stand and my forehead was covered with beads of sweat.

I cannot understand what it was.... 


I don't recall anyone,  historians or posters here on this thread,  talking about Nicholas II's health.  Was  it was possible that Nicholas II had a heart attack.... ???  ???  ???

Was this the first time he felt these pains?

If Nicholas II felt that he did have  a heart attack,  this places a completely different slant on why he might have abdicated  when he did.

AGRBear

They are all symptoms of, amongst other things, severe anxiety or an anxiety attack. Not unusual given the circumstances.

Is this your opinion or was this opinion of the doctors who were with Nicholas II.

Did anyone even know what "anxiety" attacks were in 1917?

Without all the modern medical stuff we have these days,  how would Nicholas II or the doctors know if this attack wasn't a real heart attack?

If  Nicholas II thought  he had a heart attack,  this places a different slant on why he might have abdicated when he did.

AGRBear
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #547 on: February 13, 2007, 11:21:23 AM »
Did Nicholas II actually write somewhere that he placed his personal life before his duty as Tsar?

Did Catherine II actualy write somewhere that she was planning a coup against her husband?  But the coup happened, didn't it?

I don't why the notion that actual events can convey motive and meaning is so difficult for you to grasp, Bear.  Why do other posters have to spend so much time helping you gas up for the next lap of the race?

Is this a "yes"  or a "no"  about you having something which the  Tsar wrote which you can post which tells us that he placed his personal life before his duty as Tsar?  Or is it  a feeling  [educated deduction; assumption; whatever....] you have after reading all the books, letters, ect. etc.  about Nicholas II which drew you toward this conclusion? 

I  assume you weren't channeling.  ;)

AGRBear

I guess it's  a "no"  .

"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline Tsarfan

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1848
  • Miss the kings, but not the kingdoms
    • View Profile
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #548 on: February 13, 2007, 11:30:48 AM »
Is this your opinion or was this opinion of the doctors who were with Nicholas II.

Did anyone even know what "anxiety" attacks were in 1917?

Without all the modern medical stuff we have these days,  how would Nicholas II or the doctors know if this attack wasn't a real heart attack?

If  Nicholas II thought  he had a heart attack,  this places a different slant on why he might have abdicated when he did.

The man had access to the best medical care at the time of this attack.  He chopped wood and shovelled snow -- both very strenuous activities -- for exercise during his captivity.

Now you're suddenly speculating that he might have abdicated because of a heart attack . . . something never mentioned in his diaries or correspondence, or surmised by anyone else at the time?

For God's sake, Bear . . . how many wild chases can one goose run off on?
« Last Edit: February 13, 2007, 11:34:27 AM by Tsarfan »

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #549 on: February 13, 2007, 11:40:30 AM »
LITTLE MOTHER OF RUSSIA  by Coryne Hall p.  273:

>>In the wake of Nickholas ' visit Dagmar was distressed.  Once again she had failed to make him see that the influence of Alicky and Rasputin was endangering the dynasty.  According to Pince Youssoupov,  she wrote to her son "begging him to send Rasputin away and to forbid the 'Tsarina to interfer in affairs of state'. Nicholas told his wife and she broke off relations with the family.  The Tsar and Tsarina sent no Christmas presents to the Grand Dukes or their families that year.<<

This was in 1916.

Rasputin's murers were placed on trial.

Dagmar wrote, again, to her son,  Nicholas II  p.277:

>> Dagmar followed his with a tactful letter, expressing her worry and distress that she had been unable to help during the last trying months.  Then she came to the subject upper most in her mind, "One should reach in oneself and forgive....  I am sure you are aware yourself how deeply you have offended all the family by your brusque reply, throwing at their heads a dreadful and entirely unjustified accusation.  I hope also... that you will alleviate the fate of Dimitri Pavlovich by not leaving him in Persia whre the climate is so dreaful... [he hd tuberculouis].  It is not like you with your kind heart to behave in this way;  it upsets me very much."<<

>>...Nicholas does seem to have suffered a nervous collapse.  Ministers and Ambassadaors were shocked by the change of his appearance.  Rumors circulated that the Empress was giving im drugs...<<

p. 278

>>,,,Dagmar was worried about the curret state of affairs.  On 19th January 1917 she noted her concern in her diary, again adding her wish that Nicholas  would stop followng his wife's disastrous counsel.  She now received few letters from Nicholas.   Sandro and Felix hoped that once the Tsar was back to the front,  they and the Dowager Empess could descend upon Petrograd.  There they would have Protopopov and Alicky and her confiddante Ann Vyrubova be sent to the Crimea.  Only by this course of action, Felix felt, could disaster be avoided.<<

The plot thickens.

AGRBear
« Last Edit: February 13, 2007, 11:42:57 AM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline Louis_Charles

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1498
    • View Profile
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #550 on: February 13, 2007, 11:43:23 AM »
Well, something's thickening.

Anyway. . .
"Simon --- Classy AND Compassionate!"
   
"The road to enlightenment is long and difficult, so take snacks and a magazine."

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #551 on: February 13, 2007, 11:51:57 AM »
Is this your opinion or was this opinion of the doctors who were with Nicholas II.

Did anyone even know what "anxiety" attacks were in 1917?

Without all the modern medical stuff we have these days,  how would Nicholas II or the doctors know if this attack wasn't a real heart attack?

If  Nicholas II thought  he had a heart attack,  this places a different slant on why he might have abdicated when he did.

The man had access to the best medical care at the time of this attack.  He chopped wood and shovelled snow -- both very strenuous activities -- for exercise during his captivity.

Now you're suddenly speculating that he might have abdicated because of a heart attack . . . something never mentioned in his diaries or correspondence, or surmised by anyone else at the time?

For God's sake, Bear . . . how many wild chases can one goose run off on?

Just because you or I haven't been aware of it until, now,  doesn't mean this is a wild goose chase.   

Are you sure that just because you've not read it in anyone's diaries or books that Nicholas II didn't have a heart attack?

Being the age I am,  and hearing stories from my friends who, just, now,  are admitting that maybe they had early signs of heart attacks,   it is common knowledge that  people go into denial about their hearts.

Just last week,   I was at a funeral of  one of my son's friends,  he was only 45.    A wake up call for my son's group.  I told them,  hey,  your friend was in good shape,  he had collasped on the golf course...  The heart can fail anyone at any time.   Or in Nicholas II's case,  it was giving him a huge warning when he was highly stressed.

And,  it seems just lately I recall reading that a swarm of doctors were around Nicholas II just about that time period.    I've gotta run.  Be gone for a few days.  Maybe,  by the time I get back,  I'll have remembered where I read  it.

AGRBear
« Last Edit: February 13, 2007, 11:53:48 AM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline Tsarfan

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1848
  • Miss the kings, but not the kingdoms
    • View Profile
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #552 on: February 13, 2007, 12:00:45 PM »
Just because you or I haven't been aware of it until, now, doesn't mean this is a wild goose chase.

Bear, I read the diary entry years ago, and it has been known to historians of the period for years.

It has not become a topic of serious examination by anyone because nothing  in succeeding events or correspondence suggests it had the least bearing on Nicholas' decision to abdicate.

That is, of course, until you belatedly came across it and managed to elevate it to a significance that has eluded everyone else.  Of course, everyone else is deprived of your talent of coherent analysis.

Offline Tsarfan

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1848
  • Miss the kings, but not the kingdoms
    • View Profile
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #553 on: February 13, 2007, 12:19:47 PM »
Dagmar was worried about the curret state of affairs.  On 19th January 1917 she noted her concern in her diary, again adding her wish that Nicholas  would stop followng his wife's disastrous counsel.  She now received few letters from Nicholas.   Sandro and Felix hoped that once the Tsar was back to the front,  they and the Dowager Empess could descend upon Petrograd.  There they would have Protopopov and Alicky and her confiddante Ann Vyrubova be sent to the Crimea.

So, the Little Mother was up to a little treason.

Actually there has been some discussion over the years of whether Marie might not have gone further and considered marshalling the family to stage a coup against Nicholas himself.  The problem, of course, was that the morganatic marriage of Michael presented the dilemma to Marie of thereby moving the line of succession to a lateral branch of the family.  (But then, she was probably more realistic than Nicholas and Alexandra in having already confronted the reality that Alexei was unlikely to live to rule or to propagate the line.)

Such were the desperate straits to which Nicholas had driven his own family.  For them, as for his military commanders and the few remaining competent ministers, the choice had become one of standing by God's Annointed or of tacitly furthering the destruction of the dynasty and Russia.

Offline Elisabeth

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2131
    • View Profile
Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« Reply #554 on: February 13, 2007, 12:21:28 PM »

Are you sure that just because you've not read it in anyone's diaries or books that Nicholas II didn't have a heart attack?

And,  it seems just lately I recall reading that a swarm of doctors were around Nicholas II just about that time period.    I've gotta run.  Be gone for a few days.  Maybe,  by the time I get back,  I'll have remembered where I read  it.

AGRBear

Bear, you're probably thinking of Nicholas's diary entry for March 11, 1917, quoted in Massie's Nicholas and Alexandra:

"A vivid warning signal on the state of his health flashed on Sunday morning, March 11. As he stood in church, Nicholas suffered 'an excruciating pain in the chest' which lasted for fifteen minutes. 'I could hardly stand the service out,' he wrote, 'and my forehead was covered with drops of perspiration. I cannot understand what it could have been because I had no palpitation of the heart.... If this occurs again, I shall tell Fedorov [the doctor].' The symptoms are those of a coronary occlusion" (Massie, p. 390).

I don't know on what basis Massie concludes that Nicholas II had had a coronary occlusion (I assume he consulted with a doctor or two). But certainly, from the description Nicholas gives, it doesn't sound like any panic or anxiety attack I've ever heard of (I thought these were characterized by a pounding or racing heartbeat, whereas Nicholas states quite specifically that he felt no "palpitation of the heart").

Whatever this was, a coronary occlusion or something else, it occurred four days before Nicholas's abdication, and, it would seem, only hours before he learned that the rioting in Petrograd had reached alarming proportions (according to Massie, he was informed of the seriousness of the situation only on the evening of March 11).

It's also obvious from at least one of his ministers' remembrances that Nicholas had been approaching a state of nervous collapse for some time before the March Revolution. Kokovstov recorded his impressions of the tsar during an interview on February 1: "During the year that I had not seen him, he had become almost unrecognizable. His face had become very thin and hollow and covered with small wrinkles. His eyes...had become quite faded and wandered aimlessly from object to object.... The face of the Tsar bore an expression of helplessness.... the Tsar listened to me with the same sickly smile, glancing nervously about him....[asked] a question which to me seemed perfectly simple...the Tsar became reduced to a perfectly incomprehensible state of helplessness. The strange, almost vacant smile remained fixed on his face; he looked at me as if to seek support and to ask me to remind him of a matter that had absolutely slipped his memory.... For a long time, he looked at me in silence as if trying to collect his thoughts or to recall what had escaped his memory" (Kokovstov, quoted in Massie, pp. 365-366).

Massie notes of this interview that Kokovstov left it "in tears. Outside, he found Dr. Botkin and Count Paul Benckendorff... 'Do you not see the state of the tsar?' he asked. 'He is on the verge of some mental disturbance if not already in its power.' Botkin and Benckendorff both said that Nicholas was not ill, merely tired. Nevertheless, Kokovstov returned to Petrograd with the strong impression 'that the Tsar was seriously ill and that his illness was of a nervous character'" (Massie, p. 366).

To me it seems quite clear that once the initial horror of deciding to abdicate was over, and all the burdens of office and a disastrous war had been lifted off his shoulders once and for all, Nicholas experienced his abdication as a relief. If we are to believe the memoirs of Gibbes, this sense of relief appears to have lasted until news of the Bolshevik takeover reached the former emperor in exile in Tobolsk less than a year later.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2007, 12:48:56 PM by Elisabeth »
... I love my poor earth
because I have seen no other

-- Osip Mandelshtam