The British Queen Responsible for the Murder of Tsar Nicholas ll and His Family?

[Forum Admin]

I must add to this
The Russian Revolution really shook up King George V he blamed it mainly on Alexandra not his friend Nicholas II

At this time 1917 England had a new PM David Lloyd George. To put it mildly he and King George V didn't get along very well during the WW I years.

As for Queen Mary nobody ever refered to her as the beloved Queen Mary. Being German didn't help in 1917 England where anti-German feeling were running high

In 1917 England there was a lot of anti-government feeling . People were accusing King George V of being disloyal ect. Hence the name change to Windsor.

Out of interest how well did George know Alexandra? Everybody knows the closeness between George and Nicholas, due to their mothers being sisters, and the holidays and Denmark. But we also know a lot of Alexandra visiting England, especially after her mother died. I don't know the years of George's traveling, as a school boy and as a naval officer, but surely they saw some of each other. And even then he would have heard family talking about her in person and correspondence. After all she almost became his sister-in-law!

So they weren't super close and being different genders makes it all different but still. I just find it odd that, as family, George couldn't absolve Alexandra just as he did Nicholas. Surely when he saw all the reports, facts and street gossip, from Ambassador Buchanan, George would know enough about Alexandra to say, "Oh poor Alicky. Somewhere along the way she lost her way, how terrible" just as he said "poor Nicky. He always had his heart in the right place and meant well." Instead he blames her for EVERYTHING, as if he believed every report and knew nothing about her.

When other family members talk you get almost the same tone as well. Sympathy and sadness for Nicholas and some sympathy but lots of scorn added in for her. I don't even think Marie Antoniette was that toxic among the foreign royals.

George and Alexandra were first cousins. Alexandra was one of Victoria's favorite grandchildren, and Alexandra spent a lot of time in England which included her own family. I have no doubt George being only 7 years older knew his cousin Alix as well as he did any of his other cousins.

[James_Davidov]

You are all neglecting what should be the main focus here, "Lady Colin Campbell’ is not a reputable historian. She writes tabloid style books, often with some scandalous, fabricated hook, which she uses in publicity rounds... much like the title she acquired for a brief minute, through a failed marriage to a Lord in the 70s.

What we do know, for a fact, is that Q. Mary was a submissive, and had no political influence as far as anyone can tell. It is not logical to assume that her grievances would override her dominant husband, who viewed himself as having a strong bond with his cousin, the Tsar.

The fact is George V's decision was a political one, made out of fear, historians have a tendency to give a few lines to support his decision, 'it was a tricky time' etc, but I don't think a lot of people grasp just how unstable and cataclysmic WWI was. It fundamentally shook society, and changed the political order and British society as a whole, no one saw it coming in 1914, but in 1917, George was absolutely correct in thinking it could 'bring down the House' as it had in Russia, and would in Germany.

It was an act of fear, but not an illogical one.

It unfortunate that it haunts his legacy, and a bit unfair. Nicholas II & Alexandra had multiple opportunities to help themselves, and their people. For over a decade, close relatives, friends, trusted courtiers and ministers, begged, petitioned and worked covertly to assist them, the fact was they were obstinate and deluded, a dangerous mix... this is was condemned them, not the fact that their cousin, aborted their one of their final chances.