Author Topic: Abdication and Alexandra  (Read 22514 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ordino

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 76
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Abdication and Alexandra
« on: April 25, 2006, 02:05:51 PM »
I don´t know if this subjet is in the forum but my personal oppinion is that if Alexandra would have been with Nicholas in the moment of the abdication he had not abdicate. ( I´m very sorry because my verbs are really bad)
She was a very strong woman (intelectual), and she did know perfectly well all the situation. In several books we can read that she said to Nicholas " be strong your are the Tsar", so this was that Nicholas need to ear in the moment of the abdication.
So, what do you think?
Thanks. Ordino

Offline LisaDavidson

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2665
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2006, 04:17:21 PM »
This scenario only works if you think that Nicholas was a weakling and drew strength from his wife. This certainly seems to have been Alexandra's point of view at certain times.

However, I think the situation was far more complex than this. Both Nicholas and Alexandra were intelligent, for example, and certainly of the two, Nicholas was the better educated, although the point is somewhat moot. And, I don't think Nicholas was the weakling portrayed right after the Revolution., for example.

In a political sense, Nicholas was finished at the time of his abdication. Had Alexandra brow beaten Nicholas into not abdicating, all that would have happened would have been Civil War. We have many cases of Nicholas standing up to his "strong" wife, and I am certain that he would not have let anything that dire happen to Russia, wife or no wife.

So, I don't think Alexandra's absence was terribly relevant, although I am certain they would have preferred as a loving married couple, to have gone through it together.

Offline Ra-Ra-Rasputin

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 814
  • Another Anastasia claimant; the ears match exactly
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2006, 04:19:27 PM »
Alexandra was not intelligent.  She was stubborn.  There's a difference.

The trouble with the abdication situation was that neither Alexandra nor Nicholas realised how bad things had become, and by the time the abdication was considered necessary, there was really no alternative.  Nicholas didn't have a choice.  He didn't WANT to abdicate; he HAD to.  The country simply wasn't accepting his authority as Tsar any more, so his position had become untenable.  Nothing Alexandra could have said would have changed that situation.  

I have no doubt that Alexandra maintained the belief that if she had been there, Nicholas wouldn't have been forced into abdicating by those nasty generals, and this belief is bolstered by the fact she insisted on going with Nicholas, leaving her children behind, when the family were moved from Tobolsk to Ekaterinburg.  In 'The Fall of the Romanovs' she is quoted as apparently saying to a guard something along the lines of 'I want to go with him in case he does something stupid like last time he was left alone'.  The thing is, Alexandra didn't have a CLUE about what was actually going on and she didn't realise that the abdication had nothing to do with a choice Nicholas made.  By the time Nicholas was given the papers to sign away his throne, all power he had was already gone.   He didn't have a choice, so her input wouldn't have made one iota of difference anyway.  The abdication would have happened whether she had been there or not.  By that point, it was inevitable.  

Vanity working on a weak head produces all sorts of mischief.  Alexandra is one of the best examples of that.

Rachel
xx
'History teaches that history teaches us nothing' ~ Hegel

Offline Yseult

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
  • I Love YaBB 2!
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2006, 05:25:52 PM »
Mnnn...

I don´t think that  the presence Alix would change to better the situation in the train stopped at Málaia Víshera. In fact, I think that if Alix were at this place, at this moment, would change the situation to worse.

Offline Belochka

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4447
  • City of Peter stand in all your splendor - Pushkin
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #4 on: April 25, 2006, 11:43:12 PM »

Let us not forget that despite the contrasting Imperial personalities - Nikolai as Commander-in-Chief lost the confidence of the majority of his Generals.

That military betrayal was one critical factor that prompted Nikolai to consider his own position. Russian victory at the front was at all times the Emperor's primary consideration
.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Belochka »


Faces of Russia is now on Facebook!


http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/

Offline ordino

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 76
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #5 on: April 26, 2006, 05:59:46 AM »
Of course as Commander in Chief, Nicholas lost the confidence of the majoty of his Generals, and this was  very upset for him. But the Generals were not the Tsar, and may be Nicholas was in need of support, just somebody to say him, no better to remind him " Majestic your are the Tsar, you can do it, speak to the troops, do it something!". Let Alexandra apart, I agree with you, look just to Nicholas, he was really upset and desesperate and like Massie said in his book, his health was in bad condition ( about his heart problem),and he considered that Generals were his "military brothers", and because the lost of confindence of them, he just said "my Generals too say to me adbicate is better", but these Generals swored loyalty to him and Russia and they betrayed the Tsar and Russia. Some time ago in a TV program, History Channel, Michel of Greece, I think the same who wrote the book "white nigth in San Petersburg" or similar title, said that Nicholas was weak in a moment that he would have been more strong that ever. He was absolutely alone, anybody of his family or advisers were brave to say "Hey Nicholas, let´s go to do it, you are the Tsar, you can do it, you must do it". He was betrayed for everybody. He was in need of help, just a word to say "come to do this, and this and this".It´s for this that I think of  his wife to do this.  He was in need of support and who better in  those moments that his wife?, the Generals?, The Romanov family? the Duma? the Senators?. How many advicers had George in England or  has now Elisabeth II or Margarita of Denmark or Juan Carlos of Spain?
How many loyals advicenrs, loyals I say had Nicholas II in March 1917, where were they, at the train?
This was my idea, Alexandra was in fact theonly loyal advicer that Nicholas had in March 1917 and she was not at the train. ( By the way, of course Alix was stubborn yes, a lot, but al so was intelligent, the first is not obstacle for the second.
Thanks. Ordino

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #6 on: April 26, 2006, 06:21:25 AM »
Rachel, I agree with every word you have written here, especially the first three sentences.

WHY do people persist in saying Alexandra was intelligent?  She WASN'T!  Intelligent people have their eyes open to the world around them - they know what's going on and they're not oblivious to the input and opinions of others.  

Anyway, I think that whether or not she was present at the actual time of abdication would have made no difference - the situation was out of Nicholas's and her hands by then.  :(

Offline Ra-Ra-Rasputin

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 814
  • Another Anastasia claimant; the ears match exactly
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #7 on: April 26, 2006, 07:31:21 AM »
Thanks Grace. :)

I too am perplexed by this belief that Alexandra was the 'intelligent' one who 'guided' Nicholas.  It is clear to see from letters during the war that Alexandra's misguided and uninformed 'advice' to Nicholas, all boiling down to 'shout at them until they listen' was not taken seriously by Nicholas. He did not blindly rely on Alexandra's judgement as is commonly believed, and he did not hire and fire people because of her say so.

Alexandra would have been an emotional support for Nicholas had she been there, but her counsel was neither wanted nor needed.  The idea of Alexandra being a counsel at such a time is laughable to me.  What would she have suggested? 'Don't let them bully you, Nicky...remember who is Tsar' would not have helped when your army is in mutiny and your generals are walking out on you. Alexandra never understood the Russian people, Russia in general or what was going on politically and economically.  Her comment to Nicholas that he shouldn't worry about the revolutionary activity in 1917 because the people still loved him and only wanted bread shows how unaware she really was.  

Alexandra saw things as she wanted to, and interpreted them in the way that suited her.  She didn't want to believe that Russia was crumbling and that Nicholas' power was eroding day by day, so she didn't.  She didn't see the mistakes they had made as a couple, how Rasputin had permanently ruined her reputation, etc, because she didn't want to.  Instead, she stuck her head in the sand and kept on telling Nicholas to be firm, to not back down, etc, and then everything would be alright.  Now that's stupid.

I'm sure Alexandra was a lovely lady, but she certainly was not the sharpest tool in the box.

Rachel
xx

'History teaches that history teaches us nothing' ~ Hegel

Offline nene

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2006, 08:58:44 PM »
I've been reading the posts here, and I just had to offer my opinion too. I also think that Alexandra's presence regarding the abdication would have made any difference; it would have happened regardless. I think the people were basically tired of being ruled by the Romanovs. They were tired that that family were able to live in paradise while the majority of the Russian people had to stand on long lines to get something to eat (or in some cases, not get anything at all).

I've been learning more about Alexandra from books and from reading the posts here, and the more I learn about her, the more I'm starting to like her less and less. I agreed that she never really understood the Russian people, or her role as Empress, or the Romanov dynasty in general. I think she was crazy to let Rasputin have such influence over her (I always thought he was a fraud and a hypocrite). She should have listened to other people who obviously knew better about him than she did.

I think the Russia that Alexandra saw was what she WANTED to see, rather than face the REALITY of Russia.  

Sorry if I got a bit long here. Alexandra is certainly a passionate person to talk about right?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by nene »

Offline Sarushka

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 6489
  • May I interest you in a grain of salt?
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #9 on: April 27, 2006, 07:55:14 AM »
Do you think Alexandra was presented with enough accurate information to formulate a realistic view of the situation in Russia at the time of the abdication? Remember, at one time, the Okhrana was deliberately deluding her by sending fake fan letters, so to speak, from peasants, so it's not as if she came by this rose-colored vision all by herself. Laying aside the issue of Alexandra's intelligence, and given her isolation from the front, and the capital itself during the war, was it really possible for her to have an accurate understanding?

Also, who was informing her?  Nicholas, of course, who didn't have such a great command of the situation himself. But what other reports would she have relied on? Were the reports written especially just for her? And if so, I wonder if they were selective in what news they presented. Yes, she was the empress and as such had a certain amount of power and was entitled to a certain amount of information. But she was also a woman, in a time when women were often thought of as faint of heart and weak of brain.

Now, I don't mean to come swooping to Alix's defense. I don't think she did much of a job processing the information she had been given. But I do wonder what she had to work with. She may have stuck her head in the sand, but I don't think she did it all by herself...
THE LOST CROWN: A Novel of Romanov Russia -- now in paperback!
"A dramatic, powerful narrative and a masterful grasp of life in this vanished world." ~Greg King

Offline Tania+

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1206
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #10 on: April 27, 2006, 12:23:18 PM »
[size=9]Sarushka,

Your points are very valid and glad someone at last stated this. I waited for someone to state this, but all I saw was statements of HIH lack of intelligence. I beg to differ, for all the books written by various people about her person, who really knew her personally, on a daily time table where she could be properly understood? How many then or of the posters now, [lol] ruled any country, let alone knew the vast issues laid before them to make serious on hands decisions? It's all well and fine some 80 years later to say this about that, or how much someone read, and they have decided based on the limited writings of those who wrote the book, that she was not so sharp. [Even today, today's educator's state intelligence is addressed in many ways, etc.] She certainly may have not had the hands on experience or infinite knowledge of governing, but she was far from not understanding her country's issues. She was indeed intelligent.

As on other threads, we have gone through the infinite statements placed by their writers, and found many inconsistencies. Who is to say of what was written about HIH, or HIH was not fully of truth substance?

[Good Lord, our own President has his advisors, yet he has lost the full confidence of the people, and has trouble understanding the people's needs, yet his own father was a President, and head of the CIA. Now, that's really someone who is lost without real understanding of government, and or the people's heart. 57% loss of trust is quite telling].

As Sarushka has kindly put before us, the question and I quote : "Laying aside the issues of Alexandra's intelligence, and given her isolation from the front, and the capital itself during the war, was it really possible for her to have an accurate understanding?

Indeed, what sort of valid reports were coming through, and again, who could they trust ? I think also Sarushka, there were only selected news reports that HIH was offered. She was not the Tsar, so they quite possibly limited her intake of information. She also was thought as weak, because she was a woman. [Still today, what woman is given absolute reign to every corner of the world as men are freely? Still today, doors are closed, and that's a relevant fact.] Even if she wanted to do something, she would have been stopped in her tracks.

Again Sarushka thank you for thinking this through. I believe in responding to issues as such, is to look at all presenting facts, and not just go for the jugular. You always seem to think things through and it always shows in your postings. Thank you. As I said, you bring up very valid points ! Thank you.  ;)

Tatiana+[/size]


Quote
Do you think Alexandra was presented with enough accurate information to formulate a realistic view of the situation in Russia at the time of the abdication? Remember, at one time, the Okhrana was deliberately deluding her by sending fake fan letters, so to speak, from peasants, so it's not as if she came by this rose-colored vision all by herself. Laying aside the issue of Alexandra's intelligence, and given her isolation from the front, and the capital itself during the war, was it really possible for her to have an accurate understanding?

Also, who was informing her?  Nicholas, of course, who didn't have such a great command of the situation himself. But what other reports would she have relied on? Were the reports written especially just for her? And if so, I wonder if they were selective in what news they presented. Yes, she was the empress and as such had a certain amount of power and was entitled to a certain amount of information. But she was also a woman, in a time when women were often thought of as faint of heart and weak of brain.

Now, I don't mean to come swooping to Alix's defense. I don't think she did much of a job processing the information she had been given. But I do wonder what she had to work with. She may have stuck her head in the sand, but I don't think she did it all by herself...
[size=9][/size]
TatianaA


Offline Ra-Ra-Rasputin

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 814
  • Another Anastasia claimant; the ears match exactly
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #11 on: April 28, 2006, 04:05:53 AM »
Good points, Sarushka.  I think that's certainly an interesting angle to look at, and one I hadn't really considered before.

We don't know what Alexandra was told regarding the situation in the cities, or in the war. Nicholas may have sugar coated information for her, and so may have ministers.  Ministers may also have manipulated information to get her to do what they wanted.  All of these things are possible, and Alexandra certainly wasn't bringing down Russia alone.  I didn't mean to suggest that.

I take your points that Alexandra was not close to the action, and yes, she was misinformed by people about the true state of affairs. However, Alexandra chose to be away from the city and she chose to believe what she was told without question.

I think it would have been easy for Alexandra to see what was going on if she had wanted to.  But she didn't.  Her view was very narrow minded; I get the impression from reading about Alexandra that her mindset was: 'the people love Nicky and anyone who says otherwise is a liar'.  That's what she wanted to believe, and so that's what she did believe.  If she had listened to the striking people in St Petersburg, she would have learned that the people DID hate her and Nicholas and Rasputin, but she didn't want to know about it, so she didn't listen.  She hid herself away in her own little world, and that is what shows her lack of intelligence.  Hiding from your troubles does not make them disappear.

Alexandra chose to ignore what didn't suit her.  I think it's certainly true that she wasn't always given the big picture and she was possibly misinformed on occasion, but to be so out of touch with your own people? I just can't excuse Alexandra for that.  Perhaps I am being a little hard on her, but her closed mindedness makes it very difficult for me to relate to her.

Rachel
xx
'History teaches that history teaches us nothing' ~ Hegel

Offline Sarushka

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 6489
  • May I interest you in a grain of salt?
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #12 on: April 28, 2006, 07:24:02 AM »
Quote
I take your points that Alexandra was not close to the action, and yes, she was misinformed by people about the true state of affairs. However, Alexandra chose to be away from the city and she chose to believe what she was told without question.
I can agree with that.

IMO, narrow-mindedness is a form of stupidity, but it doesn't negate the possibiliity for other kinds of intelligence.
THE LOST CROWN: A Novel of Romanov Russia -- now in paperback!
"A dramatic, powerful narrative and a masterful grasp of life in this vanished world." ~Greg King

Offline Lyss

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #13 on: April 29, 2006, 04:02:22 PM »
Quote
$Intelligent people have their eyes open to the world around them - they know what's going on and they're not oblivious to the input and opinions of others.     :(

Going off topic for the moment. A lot of intelligent people don't have their eyes open to the world, are narrow minded and can say such stupid things just because they don't know what's going on around them. I'm speaking out of experience. I believe it's more than just a case of intelligence, it's also about your upbringing and a general curiosity about the world around you. I don't know why, but when peoplethink themselves superior they mostly lack that certain curiosity to all that around them which is actualy sad because the have the capacity to do it (=intelligence).
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.

Offline Robert_Hall

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6649
  • a site.
    • View Profile
Re: Abdication and Alexandra
« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2006, 04:56:35 AM »
IMO, if Alexandra had been present on the abdication train, her hysterics  could have gotten them shot a lot sooner.
Life may not be the party we expected, but while we are here, might as well dance..

Do you want the truth, or my side of the story ?- Hank Ketchum.