Realistically, was escape possible?

If the British were serious about rescuing the Romanovs and had the means to do so, why didn't they?  Certainly they must have known that the advance of the Czech forces would send the captors into a panic during which the family's fate would become very precarious.  And as Elisabeth pointed out, there were times earlier in the captivity where the prospects were more favorable.  No attempts were made then.  Why not?

England had not been willing to accept the family when it would have meant little more than meeting them at the dock.  Why would they have later become willing to risk British lives and unforeseen diplomatic snares with a rescue attempt?

You're absolutely right to point out that just because a person belonged to the Whites did not make him a monarchist.  I think most of the Whites, at that point, would still have rather seen the Tsar permanently removed from power (be it through exile or death) than risk him reestablished.

The British did not want the IF, period.  Which makes all the chatter about rescue plots absolutely meaningless.  I am not saying that a few monarchists out there weren't genuinely trying to free the IF.  But to think that the British government was seriously involved in rescue attempts is as ridiculous as asserting that the German government would fight for the handover of a minor Hessian princess and her even more minor children (who, coincidentally, were also the children of an enemy of Germany).

Blood may be thicker than water, but nothing trumps politics. 

I do like people who make absolute statements such as "the British did not want the IF period".

Certainly they didn't want them at the start but then they weren't perceived as being in any particular danger and the Provisional Govt was fully committed to the war, which to be honest was all the British Govt were interested in.

With the Bolshevik revolution both scenarios change and the threat that Russia would permanently pull out of the war (which it did after Brest-Litovsk) was very real.  Even though Nicholas was a minor pawn in the game by this stage he might have been useful if he could have been got hold of.  

As to why HMG didn't stage a rescue I think the answer is that it was always going to be extremely difficult and perhaps they "tried" i.e. had plans in place that were too late or impossible to put into effect for some reason.

Ekaterinburg is about as far from anywhere useful that the family could have been got to safely (Archangel, Murmansk, Vladivostok) as it's possible to get and it would have taken time to put together any serious attempt after the move from Tobolsk.

There is very little evidence of British plans that I've so far been able to uncover but that's not the same as no evidence whatsoever.  I shall keep digging.

And NO - I don't believe that any attempts were successful - it's the attempts themselves I'm interested in.

Phil T

Certainly they didn't want them at the start but then they weren't perceived as being in any particular danger and the Provisional Govt was fully committed to the war, which to be honest was all the British Govt were interested in.

Thanks for sticking with this.  I really don't know enough about what was going on at the English end at this stage.

But why wouldn't the British have perceived that Nicholas and his family were in a very precarious position, even at the outset?  He had abdicated amid total breakdown of order in St. Petersburg.  The British must have known that Kerensky, while personally committed to keeping the Romanovs safe, was being backed into one corner after another as he tried to keep the political turmoil in hand.  Michael, after all, had declined the throne because his personal safety could not be assured.

More ominously, Kerensky himself was looking to get the Romanovs out of Russia.  Given the risk that, once out of his control, the tsar could become the focus of attempts to form a counter-government in exile, it would seem that Kerensky's interest in getting him and his family out of Russia signalled a deep concern on Kerensky's part that he could not keep them safe.

And there is another scenario that I suspect would have worried the British at any point during the captivity.  What if, once sanctuaried in Britain, Nicholas took the position that his abdication had been forced, or that his declining the throne for Alexei was not legally binding?  (Alexandra indicated in some later comments that if she had been near Nicholas at the time, he would not have abdicated.  And her influence over him was known, possibly to the point of exaggeration, in diplomatic circles outside of Russia.)  This would have put Britain in quite a predicament diplomatically, as there was very little sympathy anywhere outside of Russia for its autocracy.

In 1918, the Bolsheviks were perceived by Western governments as a threat to the social and economic order of Europe.  But they were not yet perceived as a government that would murder women and children.  In fact, the initial announcements by the Soviet government after the executions at the Ipatiev house attempted to conceal that willingness, and well into the 1930's, many in the West persisted in maintaining that the violence of the Soviet regime was either overstated or did not extend beyond the absolutely necessary.

So, even as late as July 1918, my guess is the British would have thought Nicholas and perhaps Alexei might be at risk, but not the rest of the family.  Given that, a rescue would have looked more political than humanitarian to the British public.  And the reaction of the British public was never far out of mind.

Sorry for the length and speculative nature of this post.  But further discussion and debate of these points might be interesting.

One of the biggest problems that the British foresaw was trouble at home if they gave refuge to Nicholas.  He was not personally popular among "liberal" elements who remembered Bloody Sunday and the pogroms.  Nor was Alexandra popular because of her German antecedents.  George V may have been more in touch with public opinion than Lloyd George, though the Govt spent an enormous amount of time monitoring public opinion and being terrified of revolution at home.

There were quite enormous British plans to buy up Russian industry in 1918 and to guarantee their purchases they needed a friendly Govt.  Probably any White Govt would have done but again, having Nicholas in the bag might have been seen as an additional safeguard.

There are also George's personal feelings to be taken into account.  He does seem to have been genuinely fond of Nicky and may have felt guilty at letting him down in 1917.

Phil T

The biggest question is had a rescue attempt succeed in penetrating ipatiev house would nicholas has gone. Most of the documented accounts I have seen show that he would not have went and (although I don't remember where I read it) He rebuffed any attempts to get them out of the country. It seemed almost to the bitter end he felt that he and his family would not be harmed. Indeed in the newspaper accounts of the time the SHOCk of the even doesn't seem to rest on the death of the Tsar but rather the murder of the entire family. It seems the world is easy to accept regicide over genocide. JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT!!!
I have researched this area and it is my firm belief that had a rescue been attempt they prbably would have had to literally drag him out of russia!!!

One thing I've never been clear on, as I have heard conflicting reports . . . who revoked the original offer of sanctuary?  George, acting against his government's advice; or his government, overriding George's wishes?

The Duke of Windsor claimed that it was in fact his father who had revoked it, but I find this doubtful --- if the British government had wanted to bring the Tsar to England, the royal authority would not have been able to prevent it; there was genuine warmth on George V's side for his cousins; and it seems particularly coarse to suggest that the Windsors would have left the Romanovs in positions where the children would be executed.

That being said . . . I think we have forgotten that in 1917 it was the Tsarist government that had a reputation for killing woman and children, on Bloody Sunday, in pogroms and in the execution of the women attached to Nihilist cells. As detestable an act as the Ipatiev Cellar was, it didn't exactly come out of nowhere in Russian history.

The biggest question is had a rescue attempt succeed in penetrating ipatiev house would nicholas has gone. Most of the documented accounts I have seen show that he would not have went and (although I don't remember where I read it) He rebuffed any attempts to get them out of the country. It seemed almost to the bitter end he felt that he and his family would not be harmed. Indeed in the newspaper accounts of the time the SHOCk of the even doesn't seem to rest on the death of the Tsar but rather the murder of the entire family. It seems the world is easy to accept regicide over genocide. JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT!!!
I have researched this area and it is my firm belief that had a rescue been attempt they prbably would have had to literally drag him out of russia!!!

Yes, both Nicholas and Alexandra seem to have taken an especial pride in the fact that they were not abandoning their country in its new time of troubles. Judging from Alexandra's letters from Tobolsk, she still held out hope that the Russian people would eventually see the light and Nicholas would be restored to his throne.

I've said elsewhere that I'm also convinced Alexandra had the example of Varennes continually in mind. After the French Revolution, when Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette attempted and failed to escape the country (only getting as far as Varennes before being hauled back to Paris by the revolutionaries), this seriously discredited them in the eyes of the population. From this day forward they were treated with ever-increasing hostility and suspicion by their captors.

I also agree with Tsarfan that Nicholas was essentially a very passive, fatalistic man. Perhaps he believed that as God's annointed one it was necessary for him to share Russia's fate, however terrible it turned out to be. But still, he might have considered the children.

How many whites have you written to, or personally spoken to?  Just wondering in terms of what you have stated as your thinking.

In fact, I'm wondering how many on these threads have spoken to those who escaped from or lived in Russia at that time, rather than gaining the 'thinking' you have gained from certain historical documentation. Thanks.

Tatiana+

You're absolutely right to point out that just because a person belonged to the Whites did not make him a monarchist.  I think most of the Whites, at that point, would still have rather seen the Tsar permanently removed from power (be it through exile or death) than risk him reestablished.

The British did not want the IF, period.  Which makes all the chatter about rescue plots absolutely meaningless.  I am not saying that a few monarchists out there weren't genuinely trying to free the IF.  But to think that the British government was seriously involved in rescue attempts is as ridiculous as asserting that the German government would fight for the handover of a minor Hessian princess and her even more minor children (who, coincidentally, were also the children of an enemy of Germany).

Blood may be thicker than water, but nothing trumps politics. 

For me, it seems out of all the posts offered on most of these threads, when you post yours Phil, I see the work you have done and continue to do, in order for 'truth' to be valued as real information!

With yours, every time, they seem quite on target. Thanks always for all your hard work and efforts. I very much appreciate all you offer and share with us, and even that much more for the countless history students comming to these sites. I know you have your own life, and duties to fill out, but your always here, offering your very best, and to many of us, that means a lot, if only for historical reasons.

Tatiana+

I do like people who make absolute statements such as "the British did not want the IF period".

Certainly they didn't want them at the start but then they weren't perceived as being in any particular danger and the Provisional Govt was fully committed to the war, which to be honest was all the British Govt were interested in.

With the Bolshevik revolution both scenarios change and the threat that Russia would permanently pull out of the war (which it did after Brest-Litovsk) was very real.  Even though Nicholas was a minor pawn in the game by this stage he might have been useful if he could have been got hold of.  

As to why HMG didn't stage a rescue I think the answer is that it was always going to be extremely difficult and perhaps they "tried" i.e. had plans in place that were too late or impossible to put into effect for some reason.

Ekaterinburg is about as far from anywhere useful that the family could have been got to safely (Archangel, Murmansk, Vladivostok) as it's possible to get and it would have taken time to put together any serious attempt after the move from Tobolsk.

There is very little evidence of British plans that I've so far been able to uncover but that's not the same as no evidence whatsoever.  I shall keep digging.

And NO - I don't believe that any attempts were successful - it's the attempts themselves I'm interested in.

Phil T

[I THINK]

How many whites have you written to, or personally spoken to?  Just wondering in terms of what you have stated as your thinking.

In fact, I'm wondering how many on these threads have spoken to those who escaped from or lived in Russia at that time, rather than gaining the 'thinking' you have gained from certain historical documentation. Thanks.

Tatiana+

What a thin veil...

First of all, I conditioned the comment about the Whites not necessarily wanted Nicholas back on the throne with I THINK .  This thinking is based on extensive reading on not only the Romanovs and Russia at the time of the Revolution but also general studies of history (personal readings, college courses, etc.).  In many of the books I have read on the Romanovs and Russian history, it is made clear that while Whites were an anti-Bolshevik force that did not mean they were fighting for the reinstatement of the Imperial Family to the throne.  In any case, the rescue and reinstatement of the IF was not their major goal.  Yes, a few of the Whites were probably monarchists, but the majority were simple Russians who themselves had struggled so long under the yoke of Imperialism.  They may not have wanted the IF completely removed from Russia (through death, for example) as the Bolsheviks did but that does not mean they were supporters.  I'm sure if the opportunity had arisen to save Citizen Romanov and his family they would have taken it out of kindness and perhaps a little loyalty to the old order, but then they would have probably shipped him out of the country.  He was still a threat to the idea of a free Russia.  But who knows, maybe they would have been willing to work out a deal about constitutional monarchy.  I doubt it, but who knows.    

As for the British not wanting the Imperial Family, the actions of the British government from the moment the first threat to the family appeared make their unwillingness to help clear.  Someone, I believe it was Louis_Charles (but I could be mistaken), pointed out that the British refused to help and harbor the Imperial Family when it meant something as simple as sending a battle cruiser to a port to pick them up.  If they were unwilling to do even that in the beginning, they were certainly even less likely to help them later when real military action would have been necessary.  Also, many books (and people here on the threads) have pointed out that the government (and maybe even George himself) felt that the Romanovs would carry to England with them the liberal spirit of Revolution (certainly some in England could have been inspired by the Soviets) and put at risk the comfortable arrangement the government had at that time.  

Everything TL has said is well documented and anyone who has read exstensively on the subject would be familiar with the consensus.
As for knowing any "Whites", well, I grew up with in such a family and frankly, they were a very prejudiced lot who exagerarated their loss and suffering [they did a lot better in America than they ever would have in Imperial Russia, despite their middle class background]. They were bigoted and closed minded as were their friends of the same ilk.
By the same token, I knew "Reds". I had a friend at the Soviet Embassy in D.C. when going to school.  He, of course had his prejudices and view on history that was totally different.
The point being that neither side was looking at events from objective eyes.

Everything TL has said is well documented and anyone who has read exstensively on the subject would be familiar with the consensus.
As for knowing any "Whites", well, I grew up with in such a family and frankly, they were a very prejudiced lot who exagerarated their loss and suffering [they did a lot better in America than they ever would have in Imperial Russia, despite their middle class background]. They were bigoted and closed minded as were their friends of the same ilk.
 By the same token, I knew "Reds". I had a friend at the Soviet Embassy in D.C. when going to school.  He, of course had his prejudices and view on history that was totally different.
 The point being that neither side was looking at events from objective eyes.

To some extent,  I'll have to agree with Robert.  There are always a few family members who exagerate their suffering, who were biggots, closed minded and held all kinds of prejudices.

Most of the Russians who migrated to the USA  benifited in many respects.


That said.  And,   since my family were also Whites,  and because my family roots  stretches from poor peasant to rubbing elbows with the rulers of Russia, including Nicholas II,  I can see from many different portals into the history of Russia.

Many of my family members, their friends, people they knew and strangers suffered greatly and their stories are not an exageration, in fact,  many were so traumatized they never even talked about what happen to themselves and others.

Back to the topic at hand.

Was it possible for an escape?  Yes.

On other threads we've talked about plots of rescue.  I find them very interesting.  You should take a took and read some of the posts.  

Until a person knows about who the people were who had hoped to rescue the IF,  then it's pretty hard to know what kind of escape they had in mind.

Was it  realistic for the people,  who really wanted to rescue Nicholas II and the others,  to plot, plan and risk their lives?  I think it was.  Was escape possible?  Yes.  Those who were plotting an escape wouldn't have been plotting if they had thought it impossible.

   Here's a sigh to those who love,
         And a smile to those who hate;
    And, whatever sky's above us,
          There's a heart for every fate.


We know that the remains of nine of the eleven were found in the mass grave in Pig's Meadow.  SO,  the rescue of the nine and probably eleven failed.

We have no record of how many of people, who are unknown to us and who had failed in their attempts of rescue,   had escaped the Bolshviks or like the nine/eleven were executed and  buried in unmmarked graves.

AGRBear
                   

32

Everything TL has said is well documented and anyone who has read exstensively on the subject would be familiar with the consensus.
As for knowing any "Whites", well, I grew up with in such a family and frankly, they were a very prejudiced lot who exagerarated their loss and suffering [they did a lot better in America than they ever would have in Imperial Russia, despite their middle class background]. They were bigoted and closed minded as were their friends of the same ilk.
 By the same token, I knew "Reds". I had a friend at the Soviet Embassy in D.C. when going to school.  He, of course had his prejudices and view on history that was totally different.
 The point being that neither side was looking at events from objective eyes.

Wow a Soviet Embassy.  I feel so... young.  I had no idea they had them in the United States.

Did any of your family ever express their views on the Imperial Family?  Did your friend?  

I don't mean to pry, I just find this very interesting.  I have never known anyone who was a White or Red.  In school, whenever we were taught about the Revolution it was always White v. Red, good v. bad.  If you were White, you were on the side of the Romanovs and if you were Red you were out for Romanov blood.  None of my textbooks and none of my teachers gave a different view.  When I started reading about the Russian Revolution and the Romanovs on my own, it was a shock to me to find out that White did not mean Monarchist and that many if not most of the people in Russia were okay with the deposition of the Tsar.  It took some time to get such a stereotype out of my head.  So it's very interesting for me to hear about personal opinions on the topic.  

I believe that nobody ever really believed they'd all be killed. Even afterward it was reported only the Tsar was shot. Some people may not have known the family was held captive and assumed they just went away to live quiet lives. I really do think if the British and/or American governments, or other foreign governments would have known ahead of time what their drastic fate would be, they could have launched a rescue mission that likely could have worked. There was no way the Whites could do it, see what happened in real life.

There are stories that Maria Rasputin and her husband tried to help them, but plans fell through.

As far as them escaping on their own, there may have been chances but they didn't risk it thinking they'd be safter cooperating. It's a shame the KR boys didn't join in Sergei M.'s resistance, the whole bunch of them could have made it. I used to think ALL escape was impossible, but after reading Volkov's memoirs, and reading about Helen of Serbia's adventure, even the stories of Sophie B. and Anna V., I think there could have been ways. But not for N and A, I feel they were doomed. The kids, the servants maybe, if the time was right. It never was, and they apparently didn't try.