Author Topic: George V  (Read 13034 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nastya

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 131
  • Your Own Loving Girl, Tatiana
    • View Profile
George V
« on: October 15, 2005, 10:07:06 PM »
after the murder did king george the 5th of england feel very guilty because he didnt let his cousin and family come to england? and because of that they were murdered

Offline Louis_Charles

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1498
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2005, 10:09:07 PM »
George V was not a man noted for his sentimentality or compassion.
"Simon --- Classy AND Compassionate!"
   
"The road to enlightenment is long and difficult, so take snacks and a magazine."

Offline Nastya

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 131
  • Your Own Loving Girl, Tatiana
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2005, 12:25:45 AM »
thats true i totally forgot about that.
how i loath him so. because of him the romanovs are dead. :'( :'( :'( :'( if he would have left them come to england they would have lived.

Offline Eddie_uk

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2925
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #3 on: October 16, 2005, 04:31:14 AM »
Hindsight is a very powerful thing!

Of course they should have been allowed asylum but George V was not to know what would happen. Infact  it's hard to believe in this day and age that they did what they did, especially to the children.

It's not fair to blame George V. Infact, Edward VIII, not usually a defender of his father, did write that his father did all he could to save them.

Anyway i believe this has been covered  :)
Grief is the price we pay for love.

FREE PALESTINE.

Offline Kimberly

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3143
  • Loyaulte me lie
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #4 on: October 16, 2005, 04:49:24 AM »
Dear Nastya, have a look over on the Windsor Threads. There is a topic there called "Did George Know" that you might find interesting ;)
Member of the Richard III Society

Offline Phil_tomaselli

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2005, 03:25:52 PM »
King George sent a battleship to haul the Greek Royal Family out of difficulty in the early 1920's so he presumably had learnt some kind of a lesson anfd had some kind of guilt.  The Royal Navy also pulled the rest of the family out of the Crimea in 1920 (HMS Marlborough I believe).

Phil T

Offline Richard_Cullen

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 373
  • Sad memory brings the light. Thomas Moore 1815
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #6 on: October 18, 2005, 01:52:09 PM »
One may sense the dead hand of reginald Second Viscount Esher on this.  If you ever have a chance read his biography a man with no official power who held sway in Royal family from Victoria to George V.  he would have been rooting around in this.  I don't know whether George V was sorry that he didn't rpovide safe passage for the IF.

I am quite sure that neither he nor the Govt wanted the Tsar and his family here - revolutionary seeds were everywhere.  The presence of the Tsar and his family could have tipped the balance.

He may have felt some personal guilt but probaly that was outweighed by doing, on advice, what he thought was right for the country.

One has to remember that Britain was a constitutional monarchy and he couldn't just direct thinsg to happen.

Although I regret what happened to the IF I believe the decision not to bring them to Britain was the right one for Britain and the British monarchy.

I personally cannot believe the Russians would really have allowed them to come anyway.  What a threat living in a powerful sovereign country.  Not likely.

Richard



Richard

I feel like one
Who treads alone
Some banquet-hall deserted,
Whose lights are fled,
Whose garlands dead,
And all, but he, departed!
Refrain:
Thus, in the stilly night,
Ere slumber’s chain hath bound me,
Sad mem’ry brings the light
Of other days around me.

Thomas Moore 1815

Offline Caleb

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 447
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #7 on: October 18, 2005, 06:54:08 PM »
I'm sure that the provisional government would have let the Imperial Family go to England because they were becoming a liability in Russia. I'm sure that there were disputes in the duma in Petrograd about the future of the Romanovs. Personally I think that Kerensky was all that stood between the Romanovs & their execution. I really believe that George V could have done somewhat better, in that considering the fact that the British Empire was so large, he could have perhaps sent Romanovs to Australia or something, instead of denying his cousins' their only realistic hope for survival.

Offline Eddie_uk

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2925
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2005, 06:41:50 AM »
Quote
he could have perhaps sent Romanovs to Australia or something, instead of denying his cousins' their only realistic hope for survival.


True, but is there any definite evidence to prove that George V knew what extreme danger they were in?? He may well of thought they would be sent in to exile like so many others.

All though it sounds harsh you can not blame him for thinking of his position first. I think if he had known they were to be excuted he would of rescued them.
Grief is the price we pay for love.

FREE PALESTINE.

Offline Louis_Charles

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1498
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2005, 09:44:56 PM »
Two things:

I think most of the blame for the decision not to extract the Imperial Family has to ultimately rest with the British Government, and not with the Royal Family. A decision to offer Nicholas a refuge within the British Empire couldn't have been made by any King without the approval, and indeed the instigation, of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

That being said, it defies belief that George V did not realize the potential danger in which NAOTMAA found themselves in after March, 1917. Alexander II was assassinated; there were numerous murders (Grand Duke Serge and Stolypin, to name only two) prior to the actual overthrow of the monarchy, and no reason to suppose that there would be a non-violent transfer of power. In fact, by the time the Bolsheviks seized control it must have been obvious in what danger the Imperial Family was placed. As for the idea that he may have thought they would be allowed to go quietly into exile, neither the Austrian or German Kaisers was overthrown until after the Tsar, and Wilhelm II was prudent enough to abdicate near enough to the Dutch border to get across it. Had he been imprisoned in Berlin at the end of the war, it is likely he would have been either extradited to the Allies as a war criminal, or possibly executed by his own former subjects during the Bolshevik uprisings at the end of the war.

I don't think you had to be too sensitive to realize that the former absolute ruler of the Russian Empire, a prime target of assassins throughout his entire reign, was going to be in danger when he was deposed.
"Simon --- Classy AND Compassionate!"
   
"The road to enlightenment is long and difficult, so take snacks and a magazine."

Offline grandduchessella

  • Global Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 13040
  • Getting Ready to Move to Europe :D
    • View Profile
    • Facebook page
Re: George V
« Reply #10 on: October 25, 2005, 10:56:54 PM »
I just cant' believe this is true. I would also suggest going to the other thread as it's been gone over and over.

Wilhelm probably only felt the need to save his skin by going to the Dutch border because the IF had already been murdered. Prior to that he most likely wouldn't have. He also left Dona in Potsdam I believe so he obviously wasn't too concerned with her sharing Alix's fate.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. There was NO precedent save the French Revolution for the wholesale slaughter that befell the IF. Even other Romanovs didn't feel the need to hastily get out of Russia after the Tsar abdicated. Plus the children were ill so even if the offer had been kept, they couldn't have gone.

Kerensky's government had no desire to massacre the Romanovs. By the time the situation disintegrated they were already in Tobolsk.

As for loathing GV, save it for the Bolsheviks (esp the Ural ones who Penny Wilson & Greg King hypothesize in Fate of the Romanovs probably acted on their own rather than on direct orders from Lenin) and the Romanov dynasty with its inherent flaws. GV was responsible for them.

Assassinations of monarchs are different from executions of entire families. Except for the French Revolution and the bizarre killing of Alexander & Draga of Serbia EVERY modern monarch who abdicatedwent into exile and often pretty comfortable exile. Why should it be thought differently with the Romanovs?

Portugal (1910) Manuel went to England
France (Orleans) went into exile
France (Bonaparte) went into exile
France (Bourbon) went into exile
Greece (1917 et al) went into exile
Greece (King Otto) went into exile

After the Romanovs it was the same--they didn't institute a new policy of massacre.

Spain--went into exile
Greece (again) went into exile
Montenegro--exile
Italy--exile
Yugoslavia--exile
Romania--exile
Austria--exile
various German Duchies, Principalities, Kingdoms--pretty much stayed where they were after abdication

I understand the attachment to the Romanovs and the horror at their fate but I cannot comprehend why it's all laid at GV's feet when he was far down the line in terms of responsibility IMO.

And actually he was well-known for his compassion and sensitive nature. He may have been gruff and bad-tempered and not a great father but there are multiple stories that demonstrate his kindness and concern for others. I suggest people start reading up on it.

They also serve who only stand and wait--John Milton
Come visit on Pinterest--http://pinterest.com/lawrbk/

Offline Eddie_uk

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2925
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #11 on: October 28, 2005, 12:30:31 PM »
Well said Ella!!!  ;) :)
Grief is the price we pay for love.

FREE PALESTINE.

Offline AnastasiaTheImp

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #12 on: June 16, 2013, 08:58:26 PM »
Is there a diary entry or a letter from George V that talks about the decision not to offer asylum?

I've read several posts and threads on here, and it is apparent that he wasn't an overly sentimental/ emotional person. I also know that his diary, like Nicky's, was more for documenting events over emotions.

I was just curious if there was a first hand account of how he felt about the situation.

Offline Kalafrana

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2912
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #13 on: June 17, 2013, 03:59:14 AM »
He does say something in his diary about hearing of the murders, and there is a passage in Princess Marie Louise's book in which he asks her to break the news gently to Victoria Milford Haven.

Ann

Offline AnastasiaTheImp

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: George V
« Reply #14 on: June 17, 2013, 05:04:37 PM »
Does anyone have a quote of this?