European Royalty discussion
European Royalty Group Reads
>
The Last Days of the Romanovs - Chapters 1-7
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Mandy
(new)
Jan 16, 2013 09:15AM
Please discuss the introduction and chapters 1-7 of The Last Days of the Romanovs here.
reply
|
flag
This is the third book that I am reading about the Romanov, the second about the murder, but the first that does not romantize the event. I am struck that although Tsar Nicholas II dreaded going to the Urals he seem to know that such a destination would not bode well for the family-- the town of Ekaterinburg was not a "backwater' town for lack of a better discription but was the "entrance to a wilderness. What breaks my heart and which also shows the evil of the Soviets is how they treated the Romanovs. The erecting of the palisade around the house which according to the description was more like a mansion, but days before the soviets, had most of the furniture removed. The owner was given such short notice that the soviets needed the house that he took very little and left the house intact. In addition, many of the Romanov's close relative were also being held prisoner in the same town, only Tsar Nicholas II and his family had no idea. It is very difficult to get pass the evilness of it all.
Would anyone like to join the discussion? It is lonely out here!
I am just about to start this book but have read a lot too about the Romanovs. I agree that Nicholas and his family were kept in the dark about what was happening to other members of the Russian nobility. I think he was resigned to the fact that he would never be tsar again but never in his wildest dreams that the family would be assasinated in so brutal a manner. There was such hatred toward the tsar, his family and anyone who had any money or land that the peasant, soldiers took such pleasure in taking away/ destroying everything from the nobles.
I have not started this book yet - waiting to get it in the mail, but I have recently read some other books about the Romanovs and Russia during WWI. I agree that the murder of the royal family was atrocious and unthinkable to our modern sensibility, but when you consider how the Russian people were being repressed and forced into being cogs in the giant but inefficient war machine that was the Red Army, one can understand how it occurred. They thought it was their only way to a better world, unfortunately Russia had decades more of dictatorial oppression to get through before real improvements could be made. One thing I am interested to know: what is Russia like now? I'm so much more knowledgable about history than current events!
I am just reading the first chapter but can you imagine the fear that Nicholas must have felt when he realized that they were not being exiled from Russia to a friendly Europe but were being sent tothe Urals, a place he knew hated him. Bad enough that you worry about your own well being but having your family with you and trying to be strong for them must have been so difficult. I get why the Russian people hated the tsar and even many of the aristocracy thought Nicholas was an incompetent leader but family should be off limits to this kind of mistreatment.
I have read of all Peter Massie's books about the Romanovs and one more is just too sad. Next time!
Mary wrote: "I am just about to start this book but have read a lot too about the Romanovs. I agree that Nicholas and his family were kept in the dark about what was happening to other members of the Russian n..."There was such hatred toward the tsar, his family and anyone who had any money or land that the peasant, soldiers took such pleasure in taking away/ destroying everything from the nobles.
I agree that there was hatred for the Tsar, but what confounds me is that much of the hatred came from propaganda and lies which started with the "Nihilist" the terrorist who assassinated Tsar Nicholas's father and many others (I read this in another book) but it is relevant because the Soviets used this properganda to recruit and further inculcate hatred for Tsar Nicholas into their members.
In addition, it seems the Tsar had nothing much going for him. The Germans started World War 1,that was unpopular and which I think gave the Soviets cover to do their evil deeds, recruit, infiltrate local government, trade unions etc coupled with the Tsar’s inexperience make it seem he did not have a fighting chance. Having said that the brutality and evilness that befell them is still shocking almost 100 yrs hence.
Kathy wrote: "I have read of all Peter Massie's books about the Romanovs and one more is just too sad. Next time!"I empathize, I get emotional when I read about the brutality and savagery, but I hope to chat with you again, soon.
Mary wrote: "I am just reading the first chapter but can you imagine the fear that Nicholas must have felt when he realized that they were not being exiled from Russia to a friendly Europe but were being sent t..."Yes, many were disatisfied with the Tsar, but all were fooled by the promises of the Soviets which never materilized.
I have read of all Peter Massie's books about the Romanovs and one more is just too sad. Next time! - Kathy I agree. Have read all of those and others, too. No Romanovs for me right now.
I have often wondered if Nicholas and Alexandra had shared Alexis' condition with the people, instead of hiding it, would the Russian's amazing faith have had them praying for the child and not allowed someone like Rasputin to gain such a hold over them, much to their folly.
Donna wrote: "I have often wondered if Nicholas and Alexandra had shared Alexis' condition with the people, instead of hiding it, would the Russian's amazing faith have had them praying for the child and not all..."Good point Donna...If Alexandra wasn't so much into mysticism and had such a stronghold over her husband it might have happened but I think there were other issues regarding Alexey's succession. I can think of two, the throne would be taken over by Vladimir? But there was so much animosity towards Alexandra by Vladimir and his wife, Marie Pavlovna together with the fact that the the general public had no love for Alexandra that it would be a struggle. But, I think such a struggle could have been overcome! What do you think?
Russia had a history of being ruled by women, so there were 4 sisters who could have ruled if their brother could not. I also wondered if they weren't such a close knit family, at least two of the girls might have been married, out of harm's way and provided a HUGE problem for the Bolsheviks. Think about it, person even a grandson to inherit the throne, creating many complications that might have led to a different ending for them.
Donna wrote: "Russia had a history of being ruled by women, so there were 4 sisters who could have ruled if their brother could not. I also wondered if they weren't such a close knit family, at least two of the ..."True..so when Nicholas abdicated he also did so on behalf of his son Alexey, which meant that Alexey was next in line. Why weren't the girls considered then or maybe it was too late? This also begs the question, why wasn't this considered at all even before the revolution started. Hindsight is always 20/20 but it seems the Romanov's were not thinking ahead much and if they did as when the Dowager Empress ask Witte to speak with Nicholas about the the direction of the country and monarchy Nicholas hardly heeded his advice!
You also made the point of the family being "close-knit". I think they were too sheltered and way too over-protective of their children--it seems I read all the time that they were always hold up at Tsarskoe Selo. The author also alluded to the fact that although Nicholas was well read, he was not able to or did not discuss what he read with anyone and further his tutor as she discribed him on Page 49 -- (first she discribes Nicholas and then his tutor.)
"Nicholas's natural intelligence was dissipated in the dull and stultifying curriculum imposed upon him, and in response he was a dull and dutiful student"
-"One man among them, however, exerted a considerable influence in shaping the young Tsarevich's mind: the coldly ascetic Kontantin Pobedonostsev, Procurator of the Holy Synod and an arch-conservative, anti-Semite and adherent of autocratice monarachy. Pobedonostsev 'put the final seal on an already closed mind',...
Nicholas was truly a product of his environment and when he married Alexandra he became even more entrenched as the author says "an unshakeable belief in the high ideal of his role as...God's chosen protector of an Orthodox-observant nation."
Sadly it seems his fate was already decided and with World War I and revolution bubbling under the surface it was the "perfect storm."
I agree, Beve. If they believed that they would be allowed to retire to the countryside and be a regular family, they were forgetting many examples of those with royal blood being disposed of not only because of their own claim but because if those who would use their name to rally others around.
Since Nicholas really did not even want to become Tsar, if given the option I'm pretty sure he would have been happy to retire to the countryside and live in seclusion, as they mainly did any way. Though once Tsar he was a great adherent to the status-quo and had to be practically forced to make the changes he did. He truly believed he was right as Tsar, the father of his country, and brooked no dissent.Unfortunately, as we have seen often in history, plots and plans are made in their name so they would really have never been safe anywhere in Russia and everyone else was too scared to take them. I read a fiction book one time, I can't remember what it was called, how Nicholas and one of the girls escaped and he spent the rest of his life as a gardener in the US or England, heartbroken over losing Alexandra. The daughter married and her child was the heir to the throne. Maybe a Cotton Malone novel?
Such a powerful paragraph in chapter 3 comparing Nicholas to Job. My other reading has been from revolutionist point of view, but this book is already causing me to sympathize with the Romanovs.
Samantha wrote: "Such a powerful paragraph in chapter 3 comparing Nicholas to Job. My other reading has been from revolutionist point of view, but this book is already causing me to sympathize with the Romanovs."I have not read much from the revolutionist point of view, but I might someday. But back to your comment about the comparision between Nicholas and Job of the Bible. While Job learned from his suffering, Nicholas only suffered and did not learn much unfortunately his life was cut short.
If we consider that Job's main lesson was to trust in God regardless of his circumstances, then Nicholas seems to have learned this same lesson. Job was blessed with more than what he had lost in his earthly life while Nicholas was not, but if we consider that God's greatest gift is eternal life with Him then certainly Nicholas through faith would have gained that. This may be getting more theological than necessary, but I did enjoy the comparison.
Samantha wrote: "If we consider that Job's main lesson was to trust in God regardless of his circumstances, then Nicholas seems to have learned this same lesson. Job was blessed with more than what he had lost in h..."One can't help but be theological because the Romanovs were very religous. But I want to comment on Alex and the children.
I have not read much about the Alexandra yet, but I have found that she is very controlling, neurotic and very inflexible. I am also astounded that they kept their girls so sheltered that they were in their late teens and early twenties and still without the prospect of marriage--it seems very strange as culturally it seems royalty in general in those times would ensure that the girls were married at least by their late teens.
Has anyone observed that people back then took allot of drugs that today are regulated. Granted, the Romanav had doctors around but it seems to me that Alexandra was over medicated because of her symptoms--lithargy, headaches etc which might have been as a result of the medicines she was taking.
Alexey: My heart breaks for him. So young and suffered so much --he must have felt trapped by his mother constantly fawning over him--granted his case was exceptional because injuries made his condition worse-but he also had a cadre of cartakers plus his sisters!. I also don't get that they thought that he would live long enough to become Tsar and hiding it from the general public --that's just show that they were all in denial.
One last point Alexandra is said to be very religous, read her Bible all the time but believed in a mystic- Rasputin! Clearly, she was not understanding the Bible-- but then again they seem to worshop idols /icon which has nothing to do with the Bible. She also "lived the guilt" of her sons illness projected that guilt on her family and the world for that matter.
Beve wrote: "Samantha wrote: "If we consider that Job's main lesson was to trust in God regardless of his circumstances, then Nicholas seems to have learned this same lesson. Job was blessed with more than what..."Russian, as well as Greek, Orthodoxy teaches to venerate icons not worship them. Very important distinction.
Beve wrote: "Samantha wrote: "If we consider that Job's main lesson was to trust in God regardless of his circumstances, then Nicholas seems to have learned this same lesson. Job was blessed with more than what..."I agree that they did a great disservice to the children by sheltering them as they did. I do recall reading of Alexandra's concern for Olga's future knowing she would be (used) to strengthen alliances. I forget which chapter but it also relates how, when almost paired with a Romanian prince, Olga declared she would never leave Russia.
Monica wrote: "Beve wrote: "Samantha wrote: "If we consider that Job's main lesson was to trust in God regardless of his circumstances, then Nicholas seems to have learned this same lesson. Job was blessed with m..."I saw that too but that is only one instance...it seems that not much more was done.
Monica wrote: "Beve wrote: "Samantha wrote: "If we consider that Job's main lesson was to trust in God regardless of his circumstances, then Nicholas seems to have learned this same lesson. Job was blessed with m..."Thanks for the distinction. In Christianity the Bible teaches in Exodus 20:3:4 in the second and third commendments not to worship idols.
Am I the one that finds the author's method of going through the days of the month a little awkward? I find myself reading great background information when I am rudely interrupted with something like, "But today, on July 7....." I am enjoying this book but I find this style distracting.
Samantha wrote: "Am I the one that finds the author's method of going through the days of the month a little awkward? I find myself reading great background information when I am rudely interrupted with something l..."Could it be because the Russian used the Julian Calendar vs the Gregorian until 1918.
Found this quote...
"The Julian calendar is currently 13 days behind the Gregorian callendar, so that, for instance, January 1st in the Julian calendar is January 14th of the Gregorian."
I am so moved at the dedication of the people who served the Tsar, Tsarita their children. Many were willing to died with and for them. I was extremely moved when I read the chapter on Dr. Boktin. He is a shining example of a man truly bound to the hypocratic oath and beyond that he lived it in his everyday life--while at Ekaterinburg he saw the peasants and others who were poor at no charge and even when he knew that he his live was about to end he did not run--what dedication! I was truly moved reading about him.
I'm sorry, I was referring to the author's treatment if each chapter like a different day though much of what is included in the chapter does not fall on that day. I guess I did not word that well the first time. I do understand that their calendar was behind the rest of the world, but I meant the style of writing not a problem with the dating. Maybe this just isn't bothering anyone else ;-)
I was also surprised by Alexandra's portrayal in the book. She seemed to have never gotten used to their new reality as ordinary citizens. Reprimanding Nicholas in English, being very sickly, insomnia; she must have made life more miserable for everyone in their small living space.Poor Alexey. My heart always breaks for him too. To be in so much pain and discomfort for a large part of his young life. He was so adored by his parents and sisters.
I'm surprised too that the girls were never engaged to anyone in any royal family.
I just picked my copy up from the library. Now I have to play catch up!!!
It is odd that none if the girls were even engaged. They were clearly a very tight, sheltered family, very unexpected for royalty.
I'm not following this book as well as I'd like :-( and therefore have a question I'm hoping someone can answer.It is noted at the beginning of a paragraph something to the affect that if Nicholas had abdicated in 1905 he would have been able to live his life out. But I don't remember reading anything in the book that indicated he was thinking of abdicating back then. The author briefly touches on a revolution and several murders, but again, I don't recall reading anything about abdicating. Did I miss something?
Hi Sabrina, I remember reading that part, too, and no, you didn't. I think perhaps the author could be inferring that abdication would've served Nicholas best in 1905 in view of the fact that 1905 was one of several major pinnacles's of Nicholas' poor leadership. Russia had just lost a major war with Japan in which close to 90,000 Russian souls were killed; Bloody Sunday occurred; and the October Revolution. If Nicholas had been self aware enough at any point in his reign to realize he should abdicate, it was then. He was reviled, but he and his family would've lived.
Monica wrote: "Hi Sabrina, I remember reading that part, too, and no, you didn't. I think perhaps the author could be inferring that abdication would've served Nicholas best in 1905 in view of the fact that 1905..."I agree with you, Monica. I don't know that Nicholas considered abdicating at this time, but the author is suggesting that possibly he should have. The author does assume a rather high level of knowledge about Russian history surrounding the specific events of this book.
Thanks Samantha and Monica. It helps to know I didn't actually miss information from the book.I do wish things were clarified a bit more. This being my first book on the Romanovs I've actually had to search the internet to fully understand some of the information presented.
Reading through the days, my heart aches for what this family is enduring. Especially the children.
Samantha wrote: "Monica wrote: "Hi Sabrina, I remember reading that part, too, and no, you didn't. I think perhaps the author could be inferring that abdication would've served Nicholas best in 1905 in view of the..."Well stated, Samantha.
OHNO, my book (a loan from the library) cuts off in the middle of chapter 5 and doesn't pick up again until chapter 12?! ggrrrr - I'll have to see if I can get another book.
definitely not cool! I'll try and get a replacement this weekend and play catch up.
