Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Romanovs' Fate Revealed
Wall Street Journal ^ | July 10, 2012 | Jonathan Earle

Posted on 07/11/2012 7:01:18 AM PDT by C19fan

Nicholas Romanov, the deposed czar of Russia, and his family were awakened in the middle of the night on July 16-17, 1918, and told to get dressed. They were being moved to a safe location, their Bolshevik captors said, away from the White army that was closing in on Yekaterinburg, in the southern Ural Mountains.

The soldiers shepherded the family and four servants—a cook, valet, doctor and maid—into the basement of the house where they were being held. Nicholas carried his ailing son, Alexei, in his arms. Once all were assembled, a death sentence was read aloud, twice, and the eight executioners raised their guns.

Precisely what happened next took Soviet and Russian investigators nearly a century to piece together.

Now the results of those investigations, the last of which was closed last year, are the subject of an ambitious exhibition at the Russian State Archives in Moscow. "The Death of Tsar Nicholas II's Family: A One-Hundred Year Investigation," through July 29, aims to clear away seven decades of misinformation and silence under the Soviet regime.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: godsgravesglyphs; romanov; russia
I found this quote interesting:

many Russians see the Bolshevik Revolution as the start of a 70-year detour from their nation's path to becoming a developed, Western European-style state—"a normal country," as they like to say

The last hope of Russia avoiding the fate of falling to Marxist hands was probably when Tsar Alexander II was assassinated. His successor Alexander III was a autocrat reactionary and his son Nicholas II was the same except he did not have the force of personality to pull it off. As one historian described Russia during Nicholas II reign, "'autocracy without an autocrat".

1 posted on 07/11/2012 7:01:22 AM PDT by C19fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: C19fan
Once all were assembled, a death sentence was read aloud, twice, and the eight executioners raised their guns.

Precisely what happened next took Soviet and Russian investigators nearly a century to piece together.

Seriously, almost 100 years to determine folks pulled the trigger?

2 posted on 07/11/2012 7:14:15 AM PDT by JRios1968 (I'm guttery and trashy, with a hint of lemon. - Laz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

An interesting read. I wonder why the Russian Orthodox Church is not buying it. More reading required on my part.


3 posted on 07/11/2012 7:16:39 AM PDT by SueRae (See it? Hell, I can TASTE November from my house!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan
Nicholas II was the same except he did not have the force of personality to pull it off. As one historian described Russia during Nicholas II reign, "'autocracy without an autocrat".

I've always thought that Nicholas II would have been a very good constitutional monarch (as his cousin George V was); however, the Russian nobility was completely opposed to it.

In the 19th century western Europe was embracing democracy and had an ever-expanding middle class while Russia was still clinging to medieval feudalism. Russia effectively skipped the Industrial Revolution and eventually they had to pay the price for it.

4 posted on 07/11/2012 7:42:18 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SueRae
Jacob Schiff of Kuhn Loeb financed the Russian Revoltion

Wonder what they got out of it?

5 posted on 07/11/2012 7:42:35 AM PDT by scooby321 (h tones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Russia was rapidly expanding in the decade or two leading to Great War. But the fundamentally flawed autocratic state could not handle the pressure from the Great War.


6 posted on 07/11/2012 7:45:02 AM PDT by C19fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

That’s the irony, according to Marx, the Communist revolution was to take place in the Industrial countries, a country could not become socialist until it had a significant proletarian population in an industrialized country. Russia was nowhere near that point in 1917.


7 posted on 07/11/2012 7:46:19 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

This was a tragedy, but millions of other families died in similar ways, murdered by the commies.

And Nicholas and Alexandra arguably deserved their fates, though their children and servants of course did not.

Most of the other millions who died did absolutely nothing to deserve it.

It is an oddity of history that the generally most decent and well-meaning monarchs in their respective dynasties were often the ones who got it in the neck during revolutions. Charles I (somewhat of an outlier in the decency criteria, though), Louis XVI and Nicholas II.


8 posted on 07/11/2012 7:58:40 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
And Nicholas and Alexandra arguably deserved their fates

Why?

9 posted on 07/11/2012 7:59:41 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: C19fan
You're right, Russia did start to expand in the late 19th century, but the reality is that their industrial infrastructure probably a century or more behind the UK, France or Germany at the start of WWI.
10 posted on 07/11/2012 8:03:19 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: scooby321
Jacob Schiff of Kuhn Loeb financed the Russian Revoltion Wonder what they got out of it?

The opportunity for his descendant to marry into the prestigious Gore family (Karenna)?

Of course they are divorced now.

11 posted on 07/11/2012 8:05:42 AM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
I think the main catalyst is that the great majority of the Russian people were close to starving at any given point while the nobility had wealth that equaled or even surpassed that the of the British and German nobility.

The average Russian didn't give a damn about the Balkans and didn't understand why the Tsar was willing to go to war over it.

12 posted on 07/11/2012 8:09:06 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Alxendra was Nicholas’ innocent consort, so I don’t see why she should get any blame. However, Nicholas II did preside over a bloody and arbitrary regime that ruled through tyranny and brute force.
You could argue that Nicholas II was in some ways a victim of circumstances, having been born into a situation where he would one day inherit the position of an autocrat in charge of a backwards Empire, but you cannot say his hands were entirely free of blood.

That said, judging from the history of Russia and the cultural mindset of the Russians, I tend to lean towards the conclusion that the Russians are fundamentally incapable of living under anything less than an authoritarian government. As Stalin once said ‘The Russian People need a tsar’...


13 posted on 07/11/2012 8:15:03 AM PDT by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SueRae

Same here, why did they allow the first burial if they do not think it was the Tzar, his wife and daughters?


14 posted on 07/11/2012 8:16:06 AM PDT by kalee (The offenses we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Absolute monarchs, by definition, have absolute responsibility for all decisions made by their government.

Nick made the decision to take Russia into a war for which it was woefully unprepared, resulting in the deaths of millions.

He also bears at least some moral responsibility for repressive policies in the years before the war, including support of pogroms against the Jews, repression of democratic movements that might have led towards a constitutional monarchy, etc.

Alexandra shares this responsibility because it was well known that he was heavily influenced by her.

BTW, I didn’t say I necessarily believed their fates deserved. I said it is possible to make such an argument, which it is.


15 posted on 07/11/2012 8:25:59 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I don't agree. The average Russian knew that those in the Balkans were fellow Slavs. Pan-Slavic ideals did have a hold on the minds of a significant number of Russians. Also remember the Balkans had become newly freed from the Ottoman Turks, some this was done with Russian help. In the minds of Russians, Moscow had inherited from the fall of Constantinople the mantle of the protector of Eastern Crhistainity. The Ottomans’ were allies of the Germans and the Germans were not particularly liked anyway. Also their was a notion they were the Third Rome.
16 posted on 07/11/2012 8:29:09 AM PDT by Reily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Reily
You are right about the Pan-Slavic sentiment, but they weren't willing to go to war with Austria and Germany for it.

World War I was hell on the Russian people. As long as the army remained loyal everything was fine, but the Tsar's fate was sealed when officers started embracing the Bolsheviks.

17 posted on 07/11/2012 8:37:01 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: kalee; SueRae
It was Prince Philip's DNA that was used to confirm the remains of Alexandra and the children, the remains of Nicholas were confirmed with DNA from living Romanovs and blood on a shirt he was known to be wearing when he was attacked in Japan as a young man. I have no idea why the Orthodox Church would suggest otherwise.
18 posted on 07/11/2012 8:44:42 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SueRae

Because the Church is supported by the KGB communist Putin. Don’t want to create anti-communist sentiment, right?


19 posted on 07/11/2012 9:25:02 AM PDT by autumnraine (America how long will you be so deaf and dumb to the tumbril wheels carrying you to the guillotine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
If you look at the pictures of the crowds in August 1914 in Saint Petersburg and elsewhere they seem pretty willing. (As do the crowds in every other European belligerent capital!) What doomed Russian was it's backwardness and its military incompetence. War had moved past where all you needed to win was feed numbers to the battlefield. Technology was at a point where it could kill and maim faster then you could feed the beast. The Russo-Japanese War did send the message that battlefield technology was the deciding factor, but obviously it fell on deaf ears.
As far as Czar Nicholas II goes, he was a good and decent man, and I think cared for the Russian people. However he wasn't very bright, his father poorly prepared him for the throne, he was way too mild mannered to be the Czar of Russia. I think he did care for the Russian people but didn't know how to be effective, whatever levers he had to pull or push were corrupt, obsolete and made things worse. None of this he understood it was beyond him and outside his world view.
20 posted on 07/11/2012 9:38:00 AM PDT by Reily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Nick made the decision to take Russia into a war for which it was woefully unprepared,

I've read that what passed for brinkmanship in those days was mobilization, and once the extremely expensive task was started, it sort of took on a life of its own, as egos measured the capabilities of each other.

You would think "Nick" would have learned from getting his buttocks kicked by Japan.

21 posted on 07/11/2012 9:44:04 AM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Reily
The Russian interest in the Balkans seems fitful. Earlier they had fought a war with Turkey and tried to set up an independent Bulgaria (in the 1870s)--later, in the post-WWII era, Bulgaria was one of the most loyal of the satellite nations in the Soviet bloc. The Russians sided with Serbia in 1914 and in the 1990s but pretty much ignored them at other times--they didn't offer any help when Hitler was about to attack in 1941.

Besides the humiliating defeat in the Russo-Japanese War, Russia had been forced to back down in 1908 after Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia, with nothing to show for it. They didn't want another humiliation in 1914. In July 1914 they should have told the Kingdom of Serbia: "Yes, the ultimatum is outrageous, but you had better give in."

22 posted on 07/11/2012 10:24:55 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Reily

Nice post. Barbed wire, machine guns, artillery and chemical weapons. Not the same as the Charge of the Light Brigade.

One of Russia’s greatest fears has historically been to be left behind intellectually, technologically, culturally, commercially by the West, and in this case the fear became reality.


23 posted on 07/11/2012 10:37:42 AM PDT by 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Reily
What doomed Russian was it's backwardness and its military incompetence. War had moved past where all you needed to win was feed numbers to the battlefield. Technology was at a point where it could kill and maim faster then you could feed the beast. The Russo-Japanese War did send the message that battlefield technology was the deciding factor, but obviously it fell on deaf ears.

Excellent point and this is at least partly due to the fact that western Europe was much further along with technology in general.

As far as Czar Nicholas II goes, he was a good and decent man, and I think cared for the Russian people. However he wasn't very bright, his father poorly prepared him for the throne, he was way too mild mannered to be the Czar of Russia. I think he did care for the Russian people but didn't know how to be effective, whatever levers he had to pull or push were corrupt, obsolete and made things worse. None of this he understood it was beyond him and outside his world view.

As I said in my first post on this thread, I think he would have made an excellent constitutional monarch in the manner exemplified by his cousin George V. Unfortunately, it is difficult to transition from an autocracy to a democratic republic (Russia still hasn't done it) and I think Nicholas was doomed from the outset.

24 posted on 07/11/2012 11:00:37 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: scooby321

Schiff, Kuhn, Loeb. Any commonality between the people behind these names?


25 posted on 07/11/2012 11:22:56 AM PDT by DickBrannigan (When did logic become reversed, and right became wrong, and wrong became right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Read “August 1914” by the divine Alexander a very profound book. The Russians were doomed by history and the Orthodox Church in Russia was doomed by Peter when adopted the Byzantine model.
26 posted on 07/11/2012 11:40:43 AM PDT by Little Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DickBrannigan

“Any commonality between the people behind these names?”

You mean, beyond the obvious?


27 posted on 07/11/2012 1:11:38 PM PDT by TexasRepublic (Socialism is the gospel of envy and the religion of thieves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: scooby321

The German High Command funded the Bolsheviks, brought them into Russia, and armed them. No one seems to mention it.


28 posted on 07/11/2012 4:46:19 PM PDT by rmlew ("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DickBrannigan

They were German Jews who preffered civilized Wilhemine Germany to the Slavophilic thugs running Russia?


29 posted on 07/11/2012 4:50:10 PM PDT by rmlew ("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Exactly, DNA confirmed the identity of the remains and the RO Church buried them befitting that identity. I can’t understand why the church balks now. One would think the two remaining children should be buried with their parents and the family reunited for eternal rest.


30 posted on 07/11/2012 8:11:20 PM PDT by kalee (The offenses we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

How does one go from believing oneself to be God’s absolute authority on earth for the Russian people to constrained rule at the people’s pleasure? England needed the Protectorate, the Restoration, and overthrow of Charles II to get King and subjects accustomed to the idea. If the monarchy ever returns to Russia,it will be modern, the royals and the people have had time to make the necessary adjustments in expectation.


31 posted on 07/11/2012 8:26:24 PM PDT by kalee (The offenses we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


 GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach
Thanks C19fan.

Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.


32 posted on 07/12/2012 6:15:15 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: C19fan

The fall of Tsarist Russia begs the question- what is the mind set of the aristocracy that has doomed them to obsolescence? How is it that people in power cannot evaluate their own shortcomings and modify their behavior and policies in light of the work of history? We see this in a global financial aristocracy which has basically run the world’s economies over the cliff and suffer no remorse or ability to change policies. The same SOB’s are garnering bailouts and golden parachutes while retirements, jobs and homes are wiped out. No one has gone to prison. None of the guilty have been brought to the book. Both the Tea Party movement and the Occupy movements have been rendered impotent. Members of this forum seem to suffer from attention deficit disorder. We need to march, period.


33 posted on 07/12/2012 8:48:51 PM PDT by Yollopoliuhqui
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson