Personal Attributes of Nicholas II

[anna11]

lamented newsgroup alt-talk-royalty

The what? I would gladly look through it if i knew how, or what it was 

[Janet Ashton]

lamented newsgroup alt-talk-royalty

The what? I would gladly look through it if i knew how, or what it was 

There you go: -

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.talk.royalty/topics

It's the archive of one of the old Usenet Newsgroups from the 1990s, which came before these boards. I think it is still active, but mainly with trolls. It was excellent in its heyday....

There's a search box at top right, but here's the thread: -

http://tinyurl.com/ywvj7j

[helenazar]

I just skimmed through the alt-talk-royalty discussion.. According to Bob A, condoms were found at the AP, in N's rooms after the family left in 1918. I wonder who or what was his source for this info? According to Marlene Koenig "it was not usual for royal couples to use birth control - since the idea was to procreate and have heirs -- and there is no doubt that Nicholas and Alexandra would have tried again to have another son because both knew that hemophilia did not pass to every son. " This last point makes sense... Again, not to say that it would have been impossible, but at the same time I would find it unlikely that the imperial couple would try to prevent the conception of another possible male heir ... And I totally can't imagine that they practiced "planned parenthood" and wasted time by using contraception before the first male heir was born... But what I can and can't imagine is irrelevant here, in this discussion it would be nice to have some reliable published sources...

[Robert_Hall]

Helen, I think, in the inventories of the goods and chattels left by the IF at Ipatiev House, there were such items. Including the mysterious merkins. This is in several books and I also think on the Time Machine site itself. 
 What I think more curious, though, is that anybody really wants to know that much about their sex life?

[helenazar]

 What I think more curious, though, is that anybody really wants to know that much about their sex life?

Well, people tend to be naturally curious about stuff like that, but it is a little too much information if you think about it...

I'm sorry, but I have to ask, why would Nicholas and Alexandra have had merkins?

[helenazar]

 What I think more curious, though, is that anybody really wants to know that much about their sex life?

Well, people tend to be naturally curious about stuff like that, but it is a little too much information if you think about it...

I'm sorry, but I have to ask, why would Nicholas and Alexandra have had merkins? I find that very hard to believe...

[Mazukov]

I’m sorry but I do not see this as being relevant, what two people do behind closed doors as "man and wife" belong to them and them alone.

[Robert_Hall]

I  have no idea, Helen. That subject was discussed some time back and  no one could come up with an answer, as far as I know. My guess would be sanitation, though.

[Janet Ashton]

I just skimmed through the alt-talk-royalty discussion.. According to Bob A, condoms were found at the AP, in N's rooms after the family left in 1918. I wonder who or what was his source for this info? According to Marlene Koenig "it was not usual for royal couples to use birth control - since the idea was to procreate and have heirs -- and there is no doubt that Nicholas and Alexandra would have tried again to have another son because both knew that hemophilia did not pass to every son. " This last point makes sense... Again, not to say that it would have been impossible, but at the same time I would find it unlikely that the imperial couple would try to prevent the conception of another possible male heir ... And I totally can't imagine that they practiced "planned parenthood" and wasted time by using contraception before the first male heir was born... But what I can and can't imagine is irrelevant here, in this discussion it would be nice to have some reliable published sources...

After 1908, Alexandra believed herself to have - or had - a heart condition, which would have made pregnancy risky, and was an incentive for avoiding it. I tend to agree about the unlikelihood of planning prgnancy BEFORE the first son, but that was not the part of the discussion that interetsde me. Were I using this inforation in a book etc I would wnat to cite Bob's exact source (one assumes inventory lists), but I see no reason to doubt his word that the condoms were actually found there....

[Janet Ashton]

I’m sorry but I do not see this as being relevant, what two people do behind closed doors as "man and wife" belong to them and them alone.

In my view, it's entirely relevant, both as social history and as biographical info. Once upon a time I planned a novel on the life of Alexandra (it morphed into various articles instead) and it was while thinking of that that I first read the a.t.r. discussion with interest. That is to say, I looked up all old posts by Romanov historians for thoughts on N and A - I did not specifically trawl for info on contraception....

[Petrushka]

I don't know enough about Russian Orthodoxy to back this up, but I would have assumed that contraception was viewed as against doctrine.  Whilst I appreciate the Catholic church is very different, it has extremely strong views on contraception - which are often cited as out-date and inappropriate, but certainly I would image that Orthodoxy, being even more beholdent to its traditions, would be opposed to its use?  Clearly with their 'extreme' devoteness I would have thought N&A would be the last to go against this???

In fact the "Assembly of Hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church condemned abortion, contraception, pre and extra-marital sexual activity as reasons for the collapse of the Russian population" only last month!  It is one of the pillars of Orthodox doctrine and whilst it might seem outdated now, a century ago it would have been viewed far more seriously.

[helenazar]

I don't know enough about Russian Orthodoxy to back this up, but I would have assumed that contraception was viewed as against doctrine.  .... It is one of the pillars of Orthodox doctrine and whilst it might seem outdated now, a century ago it would have been viewed far more seriously.

Does anyone know if this is, in fact, the case? That may put a entirely different spin on things...

[anna11]

I don't know enough about Russian Orthodoxy to back this up, but I would have assumed that contraception was viewed as against doctrine.

I have read, though I have no evidence to back it up, that Orthodoxy does permit conraception under certain cases, such as a child born may be damaged or it could endanger the health of the mother. I could be totally wrong though.

And also, it's not that I want to know about their sex life particulaly. I just heard 'contraception' and it interested me, I didn't know conraception has been around that long.

[helenazar]

I didn't know conraception has been around that long.

Contraception has been around for centuries, way before N & A :-)

[Belochka]

I’m sorry but I do not see this as being relevant, what two people do behind closed doors as "man and wife" belong to them and them alone.

In my view, it's entirely relevant, both as social history and as biographical info.

So called "social history" tends to apply to the broader social community and the trends expressed by that community. It follows that the concept can not apply to the ruler of Imperial Russia, the Emperor and his consort.

Furthermore inclusion of such a discussion into any serious biographic study of the Tsaritsa adds nothing but titillation for the adolescent mind.

Margarita