Author Topic: Not allowed to be Tsar?  (Read 29341 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

GrandDuchess_2011

  • Guest
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #15 on: April 08, 2007, 09:50:03 PM »
How did this guy get his degree?  ::) Geez...

Offline Jarian

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
    • freewebs.com/mariaromanov
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2007, 03:04:53 PM »
Did  someone correct him?

avaava203

  • Guest
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #17 on: April 09, 2007, 03:31:00 PM »
Hello,
I have just joined this interesting forum and read some postings. What a shock, how inaccurate Taren's prof. is about Nicholas and Alexandra. Is he paid for teaching? I hope I will be able to participate in this forum it is very interesting. Greetings!
Taren's quote:
"Alexandra was a princess of Denmark
Nicholas and Wilhelm II were first cousins (as in Nicholas was also a descendant of Queen Victoria who just happened to pass on hemophilia to every royal family including the Italians)
Nicholas and Alexandra had five daughters, one of whom died in early childhood
Alexei frequently tried to kill himself
Alexander III died in 1892
Alexandra miscarried several sons -at least five
The uprising on the Battleship Potemkin happened at least a decade after 1905
Alexander III despised Nicholas II with a passion (we're talking Hanoverian style)"


TheAce1918

  • Guest
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #18 on: April 09, 2007, 10:54:01 PM »
No. He specifically stated to me that there was a document made up that said that because of Alexei's illness he could never be Tsar. He said nothing about the abdication.

I'm no scholar, but even I know that such a document is pure faux.  Unless this professor is attempting to pull a cruel joke [highly doubt it] he should have his PhD to be stripped of him.

Robert_Hall

  • Guest
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #19 on: April 09, 2007, 11:01:45 PM »
This situation has been mis-understood many times. I would simply ask the  professor for his proof. If he cannot or will not provide his source, or otherwise clarify  this statement, then he is dis-credited. Most teachers are also willing students, after all.

Offline Taren

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 483
    • View Profile
    • The Chick Manifesto
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #20 on: April 12, 2007, 12:18:35 PM »
Robert, I never actually thought to ask him for proof -thank you. I just assumed that since I had none at the moment it would be best for me to shut up. I chose a more passive-aggressive stance and wrote my term paper over a few specific royals who were their countries heads of states during the first world war. Naturally, I chose Nicholas and made sure to include quotes from himself and noted historians referring to Nicholas abdicating on behalf of himself AND his son and how Alexei's illness was to be kept a secret so that the people wouldn't know that their future TSAR would never be completely healthy. Hopefully I got my point across and if he writes that the information is somehow wrong, I'll go to the head of the department.

He did make a couple of mistakes last week that I'm prepared to correct him on if he mentions them again. They're relatively small, but it all adds up. Apparently the royal family spends Christmas in Scotland at Balmoral (instead of Sandringham) and that Elizabeth II's title is Queen of England. I was talking to a friend about it, explaining that in fact there is no Queen of England, but instead a Queen of Great Britain, when he popped into the conversation and with a sniff, assured me I was incorrect. Someone with a laptop came in later and upon thirty seconds on royal.uk.gov I was proven right on both counts. So now it's no longer about what he teaches, but what he tries to insert into the conversations of others. He was passing out tests and commented on a book I was reading, something about the fact that the author had spent years in prison. I got home, looked it up, and he didn't.

Robert_Hall

  • Guest
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #21 on: April 12, 2007, 12:39:36 PM »
What kind of quack is this teacher? Sounds either very young or very senile to me. We all make mistakes now & then, but his seem almost wilfull.
 He needs to be reminded that many authors have spent time in prisons. It certainly does not discredit their talent. I hope your term with him is coming to and end. I am afraid I would not be very tolerant of him at this point.

Offline Taren

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 483
    • View Profile
    • The Chick Manifesto
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #22 on: April 12, 2007, 01:30:19 PM »
He's middle aged -in his 40's at least. He's working on his doctorate and is writing his thesis over the Tudor period of all things. What I wouldn't give to be able to read it!

The point of my tolerance and that of much of the class has since passed. A friend laughed at my anger over the royalty mistakes until the teacher made a mistake about my friend's subject of choice: drugs. Apparently amphetamines did not exist in the 1940's and Adolf Hitler surely never made use of them. The term ends in a few weeks and I've decided that after I transfer colleges I'll take the class again with a (surely) more competent professor.

Robert_Hall

  • Guest
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #23 on: April 12, 2007, 01:57:42 PM »
I certainly wish you better luck the second time around!

Offline Romanov_fan

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4611
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #24 on: April 12, 2007, 02:07:46 PM »
Yeah, he sounds like one of those characters who sometimes are teaching in a classroom they don't belong in- I had one in writing last semester. I guess you just have to put up with it during it and move on. I bet he would have an interesting take on the Tudor period  ;). It would most likely be hilarious.

mr_harrison75

  • Guest
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #25 on: April 12, 2007, 02:57:27 PM »
You should almost mount a file against that teacher for incompetence! Making some mistakes from time to time is ok, but to that degree...  ::)

As for the topic, perhaps what was meant was that Alexei wasn't allowed to be Tsar because Nikolaï abdicated for both himself and his son. Other reasons than that...

TheAce1918

  • Guest
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #26 on: April 12, 2007, 03:43:33 PM »
The second I read that this professor is working on his doctorate and is preparing his thesis paper, I nearly fell from my chair laughing.  I think that might explain a thing or two.  This guy might not have his facts straight, or as the others have mentioned, he simply could be mistaking.  Stuff like that happens.

Offline Greenowl

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 587
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #27 on: April 28, 2007, 02:20:45 PM »
I have just read a thread....as I posted a question about it, it should be directly below this one (unless of course somebody else posted something in the meantime)....which mentions a rumour that there exists a Ukaze (or decree) reportedly written and signed by Nicholas after nearly losing Alexei in Spala, that repealed the male only rule of succession and named Olga as Empress-presumptive should Alexei die. Maybe this is what the teacher was referring to??

Offline Greenowl

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 587
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #28 on: April 28, 2007, 02:21:53 PM »
The thread is called "The crisis at Spala". Have a look at it!!

Offline Taren

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 483
    • View Profile
    • The Chick Manifesto
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #29 on: April 29, 2007, 02:27:02 AM »
I have just read a thread....as I posted a question about it, it should be directly below this one (unless of course somebody else posted something in the meantime)....which mentions a rumour that there exists a Ukaze (or decree) reportedly written and signed by Nicholas after nearly losing Alexei in Spala, that repealed the male only rule of succession and named Olga as Empress-presumptive should Alexei die. Maybe this is what the teacher was referring to??

I don't know because that rumored document says if Alexei dies, which assumes that if he had lived he would have been Tsar. My professor said that there was a document drawn up when Alexei was very young that said he could never be Tsar no matter what. A couple of weeks ago this same professor also said that Alexei repeatedly tried to kill himself. This is the point in the semester I just tuned out completely and carried on historical conversations of a different nature with friends in the back of the room.