1
Nicholas II / How Would History Have Rated Nicholas II if....?
« on: January 26, 2007, 02:19:51 PM »
I would like to open an sort of op-ed thread here. Keeping in mind that it is a "what-if" situation to which there are no definitive answers.
What if: there had been no revolution. Nicholas II had been forced by the Duma during the war to accept strict limitations on the monarchy. Then, the war had been ended with a treaty with Germans, which while harsh was no where near as harsh as the Brest-Litvosk treaty. Then, say after three or four years Nicholas II had suffered a fatal heart attack and died. Alexei had become emperor.
What kind of verdict would HISTORY have rendered on the reign of Nicholas II? How would he have been judged without all the baggage of the revolution and the ultimate tragedy of Ekaterinburg?
What if: there had been no revolution. Nicholas II had been forced by the Duma during the war to accept strict limitations on the monarchy. Then, the war had been ended with a treaty with Germans, which while harsh was no where near as harsh as the Brest-Litvosk treaty. Then, say after three or four years Nicholas II had suffered a fatal heart attack and died. Alexei had become emperor.
What kind of verdict would HISTORY have rendered on the reign of Nicholas II? How would he have been judged without all the baggage of the revolution and the ultimate tragedy of Ekaterinburg?