Alexandra Feodorovna on Trial- What were her crimes as Empress of Russia?

[Forum Admin]

It goes to demonstrate what I try to say here often. Just because it is in a book, doesn't make it true!  Historical scholarship changes over time, and things believed true twenty, thirty or 100 years ago turn out to be not true. 

[TimM]

It has helped that more information has become available since the USSR collapsed in 1991.

[Alixz]

Sir Bernard Pares probably picked up the quote from Simanovich's book when he wrote his own books later in the 1920s. Even then it would have been impossible to tell truth from fiction.

I don't think that Sir Bernard would put something false in his books on purpose so I believe that he was taken in as everyone else was for about the next 80 years.

As to Rasputin (and I know this thread is about Alexandra) I never thought he was evil. He just took what was offered and made the most of what he was given. Whether that was money or sex or Imperial Favor, the man may have been illiterate, but he certainly wasn't stupid.

As to Alexandra, she wasn't stupid either but she reacted in situations where she should have either kept quiet or been pro-active. Sometimes there is more dignity in silence. There is certainly none in hysteria.

[TimM]

As to Rasputin (and I know this thread is about Alexandra

Sometimes it's hard to write about Alexandra without Rasputin creeping in.  He was a major player in the latter part of her life, after all.

[Vanya Ivanova]

I agree totally Tim.

Its incidents like this, that reaffirm to me why I love studying history as it makes one think, why didn't I see, or question that before? , as when its pointed out, it obvious really that Rasputin was not the author.

Myths and falsehoods like this letter have a tendency to distance those they surround from their humanity as in Rasputin's case it made him appear 'larger than life' in some respects ; ie a bit of a caricature.  

He was not of course Nicholas & Alexandra's very own personal 'Gandalf'/wizard, he was just a peasant on the make, who hit the 'jackpot' and then paid for it with his life, which is actually much more interesting as it leads into the Russian culture of holy wandering men/ class divisions etc. Also that these falsehoods were perpetrated on his behalf by others is again really facinating, as it leads to when? and how did they get away with it? etc.

Absolutely riveting, I love this Forum!

[Alan]

The trouble with Alexandra was that she was obsessed with finding a cure for her son and thought the world of Rasputin who  had produced one or two temporary "cures". She let this cloud her judgment over matters in general and she overstepped the mark with what she could do as Empress. Nicholas was the Tsar, the man in charge, and he should have prevented it. Alexandra was dominant in her German nature and Nichoas was too weak to stand up to her. Admittedly they were very much in love but he ought to have exerted some control over his dominant wife  -- if he dared !

[Vanya Ivanova]

Hi Alan, if you dont mind my asking what is specifically that makes you feel that Alexandra 'overstepped the mark as Empress'?

I hear this a lot and I'm genuinely interested to know why people hold this view, ideally, what is it specifically? Most people I've asked state the private correspondence, between N & A as being what led them to form this view, is that the case for you too?

For me, with Alexandra, its not a case of trying to defend her rather to try to get to the truth ( although I do tend to defend her it has to be said), as her reputation, like Raspution's, has always struck me as being a bit of caricuture.

[Forum Admin]

One can not fault Alexanadra for doing exactly what Nicholas wanted and expected of her.  From day 1, he leaned on her for advice and turned to her for opinions.  Remember, he was very young and wholly unprepared to govern when Alexander III died. Nicholas felt there were few people he could trust, to give him unbiased and honest advice. Which, actually was quite true as most of the Ministers and Court had their own sharply honed agendae. 

The problem wasn't actually Alexandra's opinions, her voicing them, or Nicholas listening to them. As research in prior pages has shown, her factually accurate influence in decision making was quite small.

It wasn't what she "did" that created so much of a problem, rather it was what she did NOT do.  She did not solicit favor or support from the Imperial Family and Aristocracy, as Marie Feodorovna had done. Alexandra disdained them, she shut them out, she never socialized with them, nor throw the lavish balls and entertainments they expected of the Empress.  Her shyness also kept her rather closed off from the People of Russia, who felt no kinship or support for her.  When things started to crumble under the stress of World War I, it was far too late. The aristocracy and Romanov relations wanted her gone. The people felt she was too "German"...Popular support for the Throne had evaporated from the top and bottom, only the weakened middle class felt the Status quo should be upheld.

[Vanya Ivanova]

I totally agree that AF disdained the court and society on a moral level and was for the most part invisible to them and that this increased antagonism towards the regime from the top end of the social structure, which had a negative influence on events.

However I do think that this and especially the comparisons with Maria Feodorovna, have to be balanced to some extent with the extremely difficult start AF had, as Grand Alexander Mikailovich pointed out, AF had 96 hrs to prepare for her role as Empress, whilst Maria Feodorovna had 17yrs!  Also that the court were extremely unforgiving of AF's early transgressions of etiquette and language. Her start in Russia could not have been more difficult.

Long term for whatever reasons, Maria Feodorovna did nothing to help her daughter in law with her role as Empress, and strictly enforced her precedence at court as Dowager over AF. Nicholas II was upset by the antagonism of the court and society towards his wife and was unwilling to confront his mother, thus to some extent its fair to argue he enabled AF to withdraw in order to protect her and keep the peace.

However that is not the whole story of course and their is plenty of evidence/incidents that show AF had moral disdain for the court and society, perhaps best demonstrated by the fact that her children were not really allowed to socialise with the court or their children very much at all. AF could and should have tried harder in this respect.

However as stated, on balance, the difficult start, the unforgiving nature of the court, her mother in law's antagonism and her husband's unwillingness to confront these on her behalf meant that AF did have more than her fair share of obstacles to overcome in this respect.

[Alan]

I have been reading quite a lot of history especially up to the date of my trip.
The Dowager Empress Marie and others were very much against Alexandra's consulting with Rasputin and their joint decisiion making. This is not the job of the consort. Nicholas was at fault for going off and leaving her in charge.
It was because of the resentment against the German born Empress and Rasputin that several people including a Yusopov, who was related to Nicholas, brought about Rasputin's murder to try and save the monarchy.

[Forum Admin]

Alan, you are over stating the a) actual influence Rasputin had over Alexandra and b) the influence Alexandra had over Nicholas.   As stated earlier, one must not necessarily assume just because it is written in a book that it is true or accurate.

When the history is actually reviewed for the facts and not the rhetoric,of the 26 ministerial appointments/dismissals that took place between 1914-1917 only 7 were actually in any way attributable to AF. The actual number out of these 7 times in which Rasputin made the suggestion  or had some part in, to the Empress, which then went to Nicholas and which Nicholas actually agreed to was, a whopping, ONCE: Scherbatov, Minister of the Interior.  One more, Samarin, head of the Orthodox Synod, Alexandra supported Nicholas' decision but did not actually instigate the idea or action.  Two other men BLAMED Rasputin, but only after their replacement which became part of the "history" but in actuality there was no mention of them between Rasputin and the Empress ( Khostov, Minister of Internal Affairs, was unliked by Alexandra but not at any suggestion of Rasputin, and Polivanov- Minister of War who just blamed Rasputin with no actual substantive evidence to support the accusation).

THATS IT.  Now the effect of Rasputin on the Empress may be a bit more than that, however, one must take the following into account: Two different investigations were undertaken on Rasputin years before the war. One at the request of Nicholas, the other undertaken by Stolypin and presented to Nicholas who had the report investigated for accuracy. BOTH TIMES, the reports were full of made up, salacious rumors, which overshadowed the "real" faults of Rasputin (ie: drunkenness and woman chasing. Both of which Nicholas tolerated because, to be blunt, most of the military men with whom he socialized did the same things)...

So, by the time of the War, both Nicholas and Alexandra simply wouldn't listen to anything more about Rasputin, because the Court and Ministers had all "cried wolf" about him too many times before.  This part really can't be blamed on Alexandra, since all previous "reports" about Rasputin turned out to be false and made up lies to discredit him, she rather naturally believed the same later.

[Alixz]

Also, I have read that Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich (Sandro) put a few made up things in his book, too.

One is that story about Nicholas crying on Sandro's shoulder. It may have happened, but the extent of the fear and just what was said might be in doubt.

So, I am not sure I would believe all of what Sandro said about Nicholas or Alexandra and that includes the good and the bad.

Felix Youssupov's book Lost Splendor is a PR campaign to make Felix look good.  A lot of what he said and did is true, but he elaborated to make himself look more glamorous.

If you truly want to read trash about the last imperial family and the last empress, then take a look at Princess Radziwill's book. She wrote under the pen name Paul Vasili.

I believe that the truth about Nicholas and Alexandra and Rasputin is somewhere in the middle of all that was written. I believe that Nicholas was wrong to put Alexandra in charge. I believe that Alexandra was wrong to harass her husband in the volumes of letters that she sent to him while he was at Stavka. While I understand the failing of Alexandra to see that Rasputin truly didn't do much for Alexei, I think she was wrong to let him continue to pollute the last years of the Romanov Dynasty with her devotion to him as a "Holy Man".

I don't remember where I read that Nicholas once said that he would put up with 10? Rasputins rather than one outraged Alexandra. And that is a paraphrase because I truly don't remember were I read it. But if it is true, then he was weak and in the habit of giving in to his wife. He could never be firm except when it was the wrong time to be firm and with the wrong people.

So, Vanya, you may have proven to your satisfaction that Alexandra had little to do with the fall of dynasty, but there are many of us who will still see her as a stiff necked, opinionated harridan who should have made more of an effort herself to come to terms with her job as Empress. If she had made more friends and stopped pushing away those who could have helped her adjust, then she wouldn't have been so alone at the end.
But even as alone as she was at the end, she still pushed her own sister away and defended Rasputin over a "dear" family member.

I won't blame Marie for Alexandra's deficiencies. Alexandra had enough backbone to begin telling Nicholas what to do even before his father was dead. I don't think she ever stopped.

[Vanya Ivanova]

Alixz,

I agree wholeheartedly with you that AF isolated herself from the court and that helped deepen divisions between the throne and the social elite that had a detrimental effect to some extent towards the end. The facts bear this out. As the Grand Duke Andrei Vladimirovich quote showed they hadn't SEEN her really in almost 20 years! and so set themselves against her without knowing what she actually thought. I have stated she had many obstacles in this regard but IS still personally culpable.

I am also therefore not attributing all blame to Maria Feodorovna for AF's failings to engage with the court. However as Dowager she had certain responsibilities and duties also, which in respect to her daughter in law she simply did not fulfil, and in that respect she was at least part of the problem and failed Russia too.

You have again stated that Alexandra Feodorovna was put 'in charge' while her husband was at the front, this is simply not a factual statement. The Prime Minister was 'in charge' whilst Nicholas II was at Stavka NOT Alexandra, AF's proven involvement in ministerial appointments bears this out.

I understand that you personally dislike AF, but so far, your arguments against her have been entirely rhetorical. You have still not given one FACT to demonstrate why despite all the evidence to the contrary that I have supplied, you still feel the way you do and claim many others do to.

I also have to say making mention of a very strong 'quote' such as Nicholas II saying 'he would rather put up with 10 Rasputins than one outraged Alexandra' without knowing if there is ANY validation to it, is just plain unhelpful to a discussion trying to separate fact from fiction. For me, I'm sorry to say, it rather undermines your position in regards to this topic.

[Alixz]

I do have validation for it - I simply do not have the source close at hand and or the inclination to continue this discussion. I told you that I have been reading and researching the Romanovs for over 40 years. I can't be expected to remember the source (off the top of my head) for everything I have read over a period that long.

As I said, before, I do not lightly share my personal life with the forum (with the exception of a few very close friends through pm) and I am very tired of you asking for validation and sources as if you are the arbitrator of all things true and false in this discussion.

I have other things to attend to.

I told you that I am impressed with your research and your determination, but I will not be instructed to go and find a source for everything that I have read over the course of 40 plus years. I don't have that kind of free time.

For those who find this post offensive, I apologize right now. But It is how I feel.

[Alixz]

I just spent about 45 minutes searching the forum for you,

I found this, but since Imperial Angel doesn't give a source, I don't suppose you will like this either.

I don't think it ever put a major strain on the marriage- they were very devoted to each other, theirs was one of the greatest royal love stories.
Maybe it wasn't how he wished things, but I don't think he ever felt resentment or strain about it, so there wasn't any strain major or minor. Nicholas simply went along with circumstances, and what was part of that, his wife's emotional and physical condition, and Rasputin, etc. He famously said '' Better one Rasputin than ten fits of hysterics a day''. I think he just wanted to avoid trouble, so he never felt any negative emotions towards Alexandra. He was very devoted to her- some might say blindly in matters regarding her health, and her son's health, and thus Rasputin. With lesser marriages, and perhaps most, there might have been a strain, but not with this one.

This quote is from another thread on the forum about How Nicholas felt about Alexandra's illnesses and is in the sub forum Nicholas II.