Who came after Tsar Nicholas 2. Nicholas II and his family

Nicholas II was born in 1868 and went down in history as the last emperor of the Russian Empire. Nicholas II's father was Alexander III, and his mother was Maria Fedorovna.

Nicholas II had three brothers and two sisters. He was the eldest, so after the death of Alexander III in 1894, it was he who took the throne. Contemporaries of Nicholas II note that he was a fairly easy-to-communicate person

The period of the reign of Nicholas II was marked by a fairly rapid development of the economy of the Russian Empire. However, at the same time, social and political contradictions and revolutionary movements were growing in Russia.

During more than twenty years of his reign, Nicholas II did a lot for the Russian Empire.

First of all, it is worth noting that during his reign the population of the Russian Empire increased by almost 50,000,000 people, that is, by 40%. And natural population growth increased to 3,000,000 people per year. At the same time, the overall standard of living has increased significantly.

Thanks to the active development of agriculture, as well as more sophisticated communication routes, the so-called “hunger years” at the beginning of the twentieth century were quickly eliminated. A crop failure now did not mean that there would be famine, since a bad harvest in some areas was compensated by a good harvest in others. Under Nicholas II, the grain harvest increased significantly.

Coal production has increased very significantly. During the entire reign of Nicholas II, it increased almost fourfold.

Also, during the reign of Nicholas II, the metallurgical industry increased very significantly. For example, iron smelting increased almost fourfold, and copper production increased fivefold. Thanks to this, quite rapid growth began in the field of mechanical engineering. Consequently, the number of workers increased from 2,000,000 to 5,000,000 people.

The length of railways and telegraph poles has increased significantly. It is also worth noting that under Nicholas II the army of the Russian Empire increased significantly. Nicholas II managed to create the most powerful river fleet in the world.

Under Nicholas II, the level of education of the population increased significantly. The production of books also increased.

Finally, it is worth saying that during the entire reign of Nicholas II, the treasury of the Russian Empire increased significantly. At the beginning of his reign it was 1,200,000,000 rubles, and at the end - 3,500,000,000 rubles.

All this indicates that Nicholas II was a very talented ruler. According to his contemporaries, if everything had continued like this, then by the 1950s the Russian Empire would have become the most developed country in all of Europe.

Let's take a closer look at his reign:

When they talk about Nicholas II, two polar points of view are immediately identified: Orthodox-patriotic and liberal-democratic. For the first, Nicholas II and his family are an ideal of morality, an image of martyrdom; his reign is the highest point of Russian economic development in its entire history. For others, Nicholas II is a weak personality, a weak-willed man who failed to protect the country from revolutionary madness, who was entirely under the influence of his wife and Rasputin; Russia during his reign is seen as economically backward.

Attitudes towards the personality of the last Russian emperor are so ambiguous that there simply cannot be a consensus on the results of his reign.

When they talk about Nicholas II, two polar points of view are immediately identified: Orthodox-patriotic and liberal-democratic. For the first, Nicholas II and his family are an ideal of morality, an image of martyrdom; his reign is the highest point of Russian economic development in its entire history. For others, Nicholas II is a weak personality, a weak-willed man who failed to protect the country from revolutionary madness, who was entirely under the influence of his wife and Rasputin; Russia during his reign is seen as economically backward

Let's consider both points of view and draw our own conclusions.

Orthodox-patriotic point of view

In the 1950s, a report by the Russian writer Boris Lvovich Brazol (1885-1963) appeared in the Russian diaspora. During World War I he worked for Russian military intelligence.

Brasol's report is called “The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II in Figures and Facts. A response to slanderers, dismemberers and Russophobes.”

At the beginning of this report there is a quote from the famous economist of the time, Edmond Thery: “If the affairs of European nations go from 1912 to 1950 in the same way as they went from 1900 to 1912, Russia by the middle of this century will dominate Europe both politically and both economically and financially." (Economist Europeen magazine, 1913).

Let us present some data from this report.

On the eve of the First World War, the population of the Russian Empire was 182 million people, and during the reign of Emperor Nicholas II it increased by 60 million.

Imperial Russia based its fiscal policy not only on deficit-free budgets, but also on the principle of significant accumulation of gold reserves.

During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, by law of 1896, gold currency was introduced in Russia. The stability of monetary circulation was such that even during the Russo-Japanese War, which was accompanied by widespread revolutionary unrest within the country, the exchange of banknotes for gold was not suspended.

Before World War I, taxes in Russia were the lowest in the world. The burden of direct taxes in Russia was almost 4 times less than in France, more than 4 times less than in Germany and 8.5 times less than in England. The burden of indirect taxes in Russia was on average half as much as in Austria, France, Germany and England.

Between 1890 and 1913 Russian industry increased its productivity fourfold. Moreover, it should be noted that the increase in the number of new enterprises was achieved not due to the emergence of fly-by-night companies, as in modern Russia, but due to actually working factories and factories that produced products and created jobs.

In 1914, the State Savings Bank had deposits worth 2,236,000,000 rubles, i.e. 1.9 times more than in 1908.

These indicators are extremely important for understanding that the population of Russia was by no means poor and saved a significant part of their income.

On the eve of the revolution, Russian agriculture was in full bloom. In 1913, the harvest of major cereals in Russia was one-third higher than that of Argentina, Canada and the United States of America combined. In particular, the rye harvest in 1894 yielded 2 billion poods, and in 1913 - 4 billion poods.

During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, Russia was the main breadwinner of Western Europe. At the same time, special attention is drawn to the phenomenal growth in the export of agricultural products from Russia to England (grain and flour). In 1908, 858.3 million pounds were exported, and in 1910, 2.8 million pounds, i.e. 3.3 times.

Russia supplied 50% of the world's egg imports. In 1908, 2.6 billion pieces worth 54.9 million rubles were exported from Russia, and in 1909 - 2.8 million pieces. worth 62.2 million rubles. The export of rye in 1894 amounted to 2 billion poods, in 1913: 4 billion poods. Sugar consumption during the same period of time increased from 4 to 9 kg per year per person (at that time sugar was a very expensive product).

On the eve of World War I, Russia produced 80% of the world's flax production.

In 1916, i.e., at the very height of the war, more than 2,000 miles of railways were built, which connected the Arctic Ocean (port of Romanovsk) with the center of Russia. The Great Siberian Road (8,536 km) was the longest in the world.

It should be added that Russian railways, compared to others, were the cheapest and most comfortable in the world for passengers.

During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, public education achieved extraordinary development. Primary education was free by law, and from 1908 it became compulsory. Since this year, about 10,000 schools have been opened annually. In 1913 their number exceeded 130,000. In terms of the number of women studying in higher educational institutions, Russia ranked first in Europe, if not in the whole world, at the beginning of the 20th century.

During the reign of Sovereign Nicholas II, the government of Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin carried out one of the most significant and most brilliant reforms in Russia - the agrarian reform. This reform is associated with the transition of the form of ownership of land and land production from communal to private land. On November 9, 1906, the so-called “Stolypin Law” was issued, which allowed the peasant to leave the Community and become the individual and hereditary owner of the land he cultivated. This law was a huge success. Immediately, 2.5 million requests for release from family farmers were submitted. Thus, on the eve of the revolution, Russia was already ready to turn into a country of property owners.

For the period 1886-1913. Russia's exports amounted to 23.5 billion rubles, imports – 17.7 billion rubles.

Foreign investment in the period from 1887 to 1913 increased from 177 million rubles. up to 1.9 billion rubles, i.e. increased by 10.7 times. Moreover, these investments were directed into capital-intensive production and created new jobs. However, what is very important, Russian industry was not dependent on foreigners. Enterprises with foreign investment accounted for only 14% of the total capital of Russian enterprises.

The abdication of Nicholas II from the throne was the greatest tragedy in the thousand-year history of Russia.

By the definition of the Council of Bishops from March 31 to April 4, 1992, the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints was instructed “in studying the exploits of the new Russian martyrs to begin researching materials related to the martyrdom of the Royal Family.”

Excerpts from “GROUNDS FOR CANONIZATION OF THE ROYAL FAMILY

FROM THE REPORT OF METROPOLITAN JUVENALIY OF KRUTITSKY AND KOLOMENSKY,

CHAIRMAN OF THE SYNODAL COMMISSION FOR THE CANONIZATION OF SAINTS.”

“As a politician and statesman, the Emperor acted based on his religious and moral principles. One of the most common arguments against the canonization of Emperor Nicholas II is the events of January 9, 1905 in St. Petersburg. In the historical information of the Commission on this issue, we indicate: having become acquainted on the evening of January 8 with the contents of Gapon’s petition, which had the nature of a revolutionary ultimatum, which did not allow entering into constructive negotiations with representatives of the workers, the Sovereign ignored this document, illegal in form and undermining the prestige of the already wavering in the conditions wars of state power. Throughout January 9, 1905, the Sovereign did not make a single decision that determined the actions of the authorities in St. Petersburg to suppress mass protests by workers. The order for the troops to open fire was given not by the Emperor, but by the Commander of the St. Petersburg Military District. Historical data does not allow us to detect in the actions of the Sovereign in the January days of 1905 a conscious evil will directed against the people and embodied in specific sinful decisions and actions.

Since the beginning of the First World War, the Tsar regularly travels to Headquarters, visiting military units of the active army, dressing stations, military hospitals, rear factories, in a word, everything that played a role in the conduct of this war.

From the very beginning of the war, the Empress devoted herself to the wounded. Having completed nursing courses together with her eldest daughters, Grand Duchesses Olga and Tatiana, she spent several hours a day caring for the wounded in the Tsarskoye Selo infirmary.

The Emperor viewed his tenure as Supreme Commander-in-Chief as the fulfillment of a moral and national duty to God and the people, however, always presenting leading military specialists with a broad initiative in resolving the entire range of military-strategic and operational-tactical issues.

The Commission expresses the opinion that the very fact of the abdication of the Throne of Emperor Nicholas II, which is directly related to his personal qualities, is generally an expression of the then historical situation in Russia.

He made this decision only in the hope that those who wanted to remove him would still be able to continue the war with honor and would not ruin the cause of saving Russia. He was afraid then that his refusal to sign the renunciation would lead to civil war in the sight of the enemy. The Tsar did not want even a drop of Russian blood to be shed because of him.

The spiritual motives for which the last Russian Sovereign, who did not want to shed the blood of his subjects, decided to abdicate the Throne in the name of internal peace in Russia, give his action a truly moral character. It is no coincidence that during the discussion in July 1918 at the Council of the Local Council of the question of the funeral commemoration of the murdered Sovereign, His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon made a decision on the widespread service of memorial services with the commemoration of Nicholas II as Emperor.

Behind the many sufferings endured by the Royal Family over the last 17 months of their lives, which ended with execution in the basement of the Ekaterinburg Ipatiev House on the night of July 17, 1918, we see people who sincerely sought to embody the commandments of the Gospel in their lives. In the suffering endured by the Royal Family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom, the evil-conquering light of Christ's faith was revealed, just as it shone in the life and death of millions of Orthodox Christians who suffered persecution for Christ in the twentieth century.

It is in understanding this feat of the Royal Family that the Commission, in complete unanimity and with the approval of the Holy Synod, finds it possible to glorify in the Council the new martyrs and confessors of Russia in the guise of the passion-bearers Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Maria and Anastasia.”

Liberal Democratic point of view

When Nicholas II came to power, he had no program other than the firm intention not to cede his autocratic power, which his father had handed over to him. He always made decisions alone: ​​“How can I do this if it’s against my conscience?” - this was the basis on which he made his political decisions or rejected the options offered to him. He continued to pursue the contradictory policies of his father: on the one hand, he tried to achieve social and political stabilization from above by preserving the old class-state structures, on the other, the industrialization policy pursued by the Minister of Finance led to enormous social dynamics. The Russian nobility launched a massive offensive against the state's economic policy of industrialization. Having removed Witte, the tsar did not know where to go. Despite some reform steps (for example, the abolition of corporal punishment of peasants), the tsar, under the influence of the new Minister of Internal Affairs Plehve, decided in favor of a policy of fully preserving the social structure of the peasantry (preserving the community), although the kulak elements, that is, the richer peasants, had an easier exit from peasant community. The Tsar and the ministers did not consider reforms necessary in other areas either: on the labor issue, only a few minor concessions were made; Instead of guaranteeing the right to strike, the government continued repression. The tsar could not satisfy anyone with a policy of stagnation and repression, which at the same time cautiously continued the economic policy he had begun.

At a meeting of zemstvo representatives on November 20, 1904, the majority demanded a constitutional regime. The forces of the progressive landed nobility, rural intelligentsia, city government and broad circles of urban intelligentsia, united in opposition, began to demand the introduction of parliament in the state. They were joined by St. Petersburg workers, who were allowed to form an independent association, headed by priest Gapon, and they wanted to submit a petition to the tsar. The lack of overall leadership under the already effectively dismissed Minister of the Interior and the Tsar, who, like most ministers, did not understand the seriousness of the situation, led to the disaster of Bloody Sunday on January 9, 1905. Army officers, who were supposed to restrain the crowd, in a panic ordered to shoot at civilians to people. 100 people were killed and more than 1,000 are believed to have been wounded. Workers and intellectuals responded with strikes and protest demonstrations. Although the workers mostly put forward purely economic demands and revolutionary parties could not play an important role either in the movement led by Gapon or in the strikes that followed Bloody Sunday, a revolution began in Russia.

When the revolutionary and opposition movement in October 1905 reached its climax - a general strike that practically paralyzed the country, the tsar was forced to again turn to his former Minister of the Interior, who, thanks to the very beneficial peace treaty for Russia that he concluded with the Japanese in Portsmouth ( USA), gained universal respect. Witte explained to the Tsar that he either had to appoint a dictator who would brutally fight the revolution, or he had to guarantee bourgeois freedoms and elected legislative power. Nicholas did not want to drown the revolution in blood. Thus, the fundamental problem of constitutional monarchies - creating a balance of power - was exacerbated by the actions of the prime minister. The October Manifesto (10/17/1905) promised bourgeois freedoms, an elected assembly with legislative powers, expansion of suffrage and, indirectly, equality of religions and nationalities, but did not bring the country the pacification that the tsar expected. Rather, it caused serious unrest, which broke out as a result of clashes between forces loyal to the tsar and revolutionary forces, and led in many regions of the country to pogroms directed not only against the Jewish population, but also against representatives of the intelligentsia. The development of events since 1905 has become irreversible.

However, there were positive changes in other areas that were not blocked at the political macro level. The rate of economic growth has again almost reached the level of the nineties. In the countryside, Stolypin's agrarian reforms, which aimed at creating private ownership, began to develop independently, despite resistance from the peasants. The state, through a whole package of measures, sought large-scale modernization in agriculture. Science, literature and art reached a new flowering.

But the scandalous figure of Rasputin decisively contributed to the loss of prestige of the monarch. The First World War mercilessly exposed the shortcomings of the late tsarist system. These were primarily political weaknesses. In the military field, by the summer of 1915 it was even possible to take control of the situation at the front and establish supplies. In 1916, thanks to Brusilov's offensive, the Russian army even held most of the territorial gains of the Allies before the collapse of Germany. However, in February 1917, tsarism was approaching its death. The tsar himself was entirely to blame for this development of events. Since he increasingly wanted to be his own prime minister, but did not live up to this role, during the war no one could coordinate the actions of the various institutions of the state, primarily civil and military.

The provisional government that replaced the monarchy immediately placed Nicholas and his family under house arrest, but wanted to allow him to leave for England. However, the British government was in no hurry to respond, and the Provisional Government was no longer strong enough to resist the will of the Petrograd Council of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies. In August 1917, the family was transported to Tobolsk. In April 1918, local Bolsheviks achieved their transfer to Yekaterinburg. The king endured this time of humiliation with great calm and hope in God, which in the face of death gave him undeniable dignity, but which, even in the best of times, sometimes prevented him from acting rationally and decisively. On the night of July 16-17, 1918, the imperial family was shot. The liberal historian Yuri Gautier spoke with cold precision upon learning of the tsar’s assassination: “This is the denouement of yet another of the countless minor knots of our troubled times, and the monarchical principle can only benefit from it.”

The paradoxes of the personality and reign of Nicholas II can be explained by the objectively existing contradictions of Russian reality at the beginning of the 20th century, when the world was entering a new phase of its development, and the tsar did not have the will and determination to master the situation. Trying to defend the “autocratic principle,” he maneuvered: he either made small concessions or refused them. As a result, the regime rotted, pushing the country towards the abyss. By rejecting and slowing down reforms, the last tsar contributed to the beginning of the social revolution. This should be recognized both with absolute sympathy for the fate of the king, and with his categorical rejection. At the critical moment of the February coup, the generals betrayed their oath and forced the tsar to abdicate.

Nicholas II himself pulled the rug out from under his feet. He stubbornly defended his positions, did not make serious compromises, and thereby created the conditions for a revolutionary explosion. He also did not support the liberals, who sought to prevent the revolution in the hope of concessions from the tsar. And the revolution was accomplished. The year 1917 became a fatal milestone in the history of Russia.

On my own behalf, I can say that I am more of an adherent of the Orthodox-patriotic point of view.

Nicholas II Alexandrovich. Born on May 6 (18), 1868 in Tsarskoye Selo - executed on July 17, 1918 in Yekaterinburg. Emperor of All Russia, Tsar of Poland and Grand Duke of Finland. Reigned from October 20 (November 1), 1894 to March 2 (15), 1917. From the Imperial House of Romanov.

Full title of Nicholas II as Emperor: “By the advancing grace of God, Nicholas II, Emperor and Autocrat of All Russia, Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod; Tsar of Kazan, Tsar of Astrakhan, Tsar of Poland, Tsar of Siberia, Tsar of Tauride Chersonesus, Tsar of Georgia; Sovereign of Pskov and Grand Duke of Smolensk, Lithuania, Volyn, Podolsk and Finland; Prince of Estland, Livonia, Courland and Semigal, Samogit, Bialystok, Korel, Tver, Ugra, Perm, Vyatka, Bulgaria and others; Sovereign and Grand Duke of Novagorod of the Nizovsky lands, Chernigov, Ryazan, Polotsk, Rostov, Yaroslavl, Belozersky, Udorsky, Obdorsky, Kondiysky, Vitebsk, Mstislavsky and the entire Northern country; and the sovereign of Iversk, Kartalinsky and Kabardian lands and the Armenian region; Cherkassy and Mountain princes and other hereditary sovereign and owner, Sovereign of Turkestan; heir of Norway, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein, Stormarn, Ditmarsen and Oldenburg, and so on, and so on, and so on.”

Nicholas II Alexandrovich was born on May 6 (18th old style) 1868 in Tsarskoe Selo.

The eldest son of the Emperor and Empress Maria Feodorovna.

Immediately after birth, on May 6 (18), 1868, he was named Nikolai. This is a traditional Romanov name. According to one version, this was a “naming after an uncle” - a custom known from the Rurikovichs: it was named in memory of his father’s elder brother and mother’s fiancé, Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich (1843-1865), who died young.

Two great-great-grandfathers of Nicholas II were brothers: Friedrich of Hesse-Kassel and Karl of Hesse-Kassel, and two great-great-grandmothers were cousins: Amalia of Hesse-Darmstadt and Louise of Hesse-Darmstadt.

The baptism of Nikolai Alexandrovich was performed by the confessor of the imperial family, Protopresbyter Vasily Bazhanov, in the Resurrection Church of the Great Tsarskoye Selo Palace on May 20 of the same year. The successors were: Queen Louise of Denmark, Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark, Grand Duchess Elena Pavlovna.

From birth he was titled His Imperial Highness (sovereign) Grand Duke Nikolai Alexandrovich. After the death of his grandfather, Emperor Alexander II, as a result of a terrorist attack committed by the populists, on March 1, 1881, he received the title of heir to the crown prince.

In early childhood, the teacher of Nikolai and his brothers was the Englishman Karl Osipovich Heath (1826-1900), who lived in Russia. General G. G. Danilovich was appointed his official tutor as his heir in 1877.

Nikolai was educated at home as part of a large gymnasium course.

In 1885-1890 - according to a specially written program that combined the course of the state and economic departments of the law faculty of the university with the course of the Academy of the General Staff.

The studies were conducted for 13 years: the first eight years were devoted to subjects of an extended gymnasium course, where special attention was paid to the study of political history, Russian literature, English, German and French (Nikolai Alexandrovich spoke English as his native language). The next five years were devoted to the study of military affairs, legal and economic sciences necessary for a statesman. Lectures were given by world-famous scientists: N. N. Beketov, N. N. Obruchev, Ts. A. Cui, M. I. Dragomirov, N. H. Bunge, and others. They all just gave lectures. They had no right to ask questions to check how they had mastered the material. Protopresbyter John Yanyshev taught the Tsarevich canon law in connection with the history of the church, the most important departments of theology and the history of religion.

On May 6 (18), 1884, upon reaching adulthood (for the heir), he took the oath in the Great Church of the Winter Palace, as announced by the highest manifesto.

The first act published on his behalf was a rescript addressed to the Moscow Governor-General V.A. Dolgorukov: 15 thousand rubles for distribution, at the discretion of that person, “among the residents of Moscow who are most in need of help.”

For the first two years, Nikolai served as a junior officer in the ranks of the Preobrazhensky Regiment. For two summer seasons he served in the ranks of the Life Guards Hussar Regiment as a squadron commander, and then did a camp training in the ranks of the artillery.

On August 6 (18), 1892, he was promoted to colonel. At the same time, his father introduces him to the affairs of governing the country, inviting him to participate in meetings of the State Council and the Cabinet of Ministers. At the suggestion of the Minister of Railways S. Yu. Witte, Nikolai in 1892, in order to gain experience in government affairs, was appointed chairman of the committee for the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway. By the age of 23, the Heir was a man who had received extensive information in various fields of knowledge.

The educational program included travel to various provinces of Russia, which he made together with his father. To complete his education, his father allocated at his disposal the cruiser “Memory of Azov” as part of the squadron for a trip to the Far East.

In nine months, with his retinue, he visited Austria-Hungary, Greece, Egypt, India, China, Japan, and later, by land from Vladivostok through the whole of Siberia, he returned to the capital of Russia. During the trip, Nikolai kept a personal diary. In Japan, an attempt was made on Nicholas's life (the so-called Otsu Incident) - a shirt with blood stains is kept in the Hermitage.

Nicholas II's height: 170 centimeters.

Personal life of Nicholas II:

Nicholas II's first woman was a famous ballerina. They were in an intimate relationship in the period 1892-1894.

Their first meeting took place on March 23, 1890 during the final exam. Their romance developed with the approval of members of the royal family, starting from Emperor Alexander III, who organized this acquaintance, and ending with Empress Maria Feodorovna, who wanted her son to become a man. Matilda called the young Tsarevich Niki.

Their relationship ended after Nicholas II's engagement to Alice of Hesse in April 1894. By Kshesinskaya’s own admission, she had a hard time surviving this breakup.

Matilda Kshesinskaya

The first meeting of Tsarevich Nicholas with his future wife took place in January 1889 during Princess Alice’s second visit to Russia. At the same time, mutual attraction arose. That same year, Nikolai asked his father for permission to marry her, but was refused.

In August 1890, during Alice's 3rd visit, Nikolai's parents did not allow him to meet with her. A letter in the same year to Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna from the English Queen Victoria, in which the grandmother of the potential bride probed the prospects of a marriage union, also had a negative result.

However, due to the deteriorating health of Alexander III and the persistence of the Tsarevich, he was allowed by his father to make an official proposal to Princess Alice and on April 2 (14), 1894, Nicholas, accompanied by his uncles, went to Coburg, where he arrived on April 4. Queen Victoria and German Emperor Wilhelm II also came here.

On April 5, the Tsarevich proposed to Princess Alice, but she hesitated due to the issue of changing her religion. However, three days after a family council with relatives (Queen Victoria, sister Elizabeth Feodorovna), the princess gave her consent to the marriage and on April 8 (20), 1894 in Coburg at the wedding of the Duke of Hesse Ernst-Ludwig (Alice’s brother) and Princess Victoria-Melita of Edinburgh (daughter of Duke Alfred and Maria Alexandrovna) their engagement took place, announced in Russia with a simple newspaper notice.

In his diary Nikolai named this day “Wonderful and unforgettable in my life”.

On November 14 (26), 1894, in the palace church of the Winter Palace, the marriage of Nicholas II took place with the German princess Alice of Hesse, who after confirmation (performed on October 21 (November 2), 1894 in Livadia) took the name. The newlyweds initially settled in the Anichkov Palace next to Empress Maria Feodorovna, but in the spring of 1895 they moved to Tsarskoe Selo, and in the fall to their chambers in the Winter Palace.

In July-September 1896, after the coronation, Nikolai and Alexandra Feodorovna made a large European tour as a royal couple and visited the Austrian Emperor, the German Kaiser, the Danish King and the British Queen. The trip ended with a visit to Paris and a vacation in the empress’s homeland in Darmstadt.

In subsequent years, the royal couple gave birth to four daughters:

Olga(3 (15) November 1895;
Tatiana(29 May (10 June) 1897);
Maria(14 (26) June 1899);
Anastasia(5 (18) June 1901).

The Grand Duchesses used the abbreviation to refer to themselves in their diaries and correspondence "OTMA", compiled according to the first letters of their names, following in order of birth: Olga - Tatyana - Maria - Anastasia.

On July 30 (August 12), 1904, a fifth child was born in Peterhof and The only son- Tsarevich Alexey Nikolaevich.

All correspondence between Alexandra Feodorovna and Nicholas II (in English) has been preserved, only one letter from Alexandra Feodorovna has been lost, all her letters are numbered by the Empress herself; published in Berlin in 1922.

At the age of 9 he began keeping a diary. The archive contains 50 voluminous notebooks - the original diary for the years 1882-1918, some of them have been published.

Contrary to the assurances of Soviet historiography, the tsar was not among the richest people in the Russian Empire.

Most of the time, Nicholas II lived with his family in the Alexander Palace (Tsarskoe Selo) or Peterhof. In the summer I vacationed in Crimea at the Livadia Palace. For recreation, he also annually made two-week trips around the Gulf of Finland and the Baltic Sea on the yacht “Standart”.

I read both light entertainment literature and serious scientific works, often on historical topics - Russian and foreign newspapers and magazines.

I smoked cigarettes.

He was interested in photography, also loved watching movies, and all his children also took photographs.

In the 1900s, he became interested in the then new type of transport - cars. It has one of the largest car parks in Europe.

In 1913, the official government press organ wrote in an essay about the everyday and family side of the emperor’s life: “The Emperor does not like so-called secular pleasures. His favorite pastime is the hereditary passion of the Russian Tsars - hunting. It is organized both in permanent places of the Tsar’s stay, and in special places adapted for this purpose - in Spala, near Skierniewice, in Belovezhye.”

I had the habit of shooting crows, stray cats and dogs on walks.

Nicholas II. Documentary

Coronation and accession to the throne of Nicholas II

A few days after the death of Alexander III (October 20 (November 1), 1894) and his accession to the throne (the highest manifesto was published on October 21), on November 14 (26), 1894, in the Great Church of the Winter Palace, he married Alexandra Feodorovna. The honeymoon took place in an atmosphere of funeral services and mourning visits.

One of the first personnel decisions of Emperor Nicholas II was the dismissal of the conflict-ridden I.V. Gurko from the post of Governor-General of the Kingdom of Poland in December 1894 and the appointment of A.B. Lobanov-Rostovsky to the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs in February 1895 - after the death of N. K. Girsa.

As a result of the exchange of notes dated March 27 (April 8), 1895, “the delimitation of the spheres of influence of Russia and Great Britain in the Pamir region, east of Lake Zor-Kul (Victoria)” was established along the Pyanj River. The Pamir volost became part of the Osh district of the Fergana region, the Wakhan ridge on Russian maps received the designation of the ridge of Emperor Nicholas II.

The first major international act of the emperor was the Triple Intervention - a simultaneous (April 11 (23) 1895), on the initiative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, presentation (together with Germany and France) of demands for Japan to reconsider the terms of the Shimonoseki Peace Treaty with China, renouncing claims to the Liaodong Peninsula .

The first public appearance of the Emperor in St. Petersburg was his speech, delivered on January 17 (29), 1895 in the Nicholas Hall of the Winter Palace before deputations of the nobility, zemstvos and cities who arrived “to express loyal feelings to Their Majesties and bring congratulations on the marriage.” The delivered text of the speech (the speech was written in advance, but the emperor pronounced it only from time to time looking at the paper) read: “I know that recently in some zemstvo meetings the voices of people who were carried away by meaningless dreams about the participation of zemstvo representatives in the affairs of internal government have been heard. Let everyone know that, devoting all my strength to the good of the people, I will protect the beginning of autocracy as firmly and unswervingly as my unforgettable, late parent guarded it.”.

The coronation of the emperor and his wife took place on May 14 (26), 1896. The celebration resulted in mass casualties on the Khodynskoye field, the incident is known as Khodynka.

The Khodynka disaster, also known as the mass stampede, occurred in the early morning of May 18 (30), 1896 on the Khodynka field (northwestern part of Moscow, the beginning of modern Leningradsky Prospekt) on the outskirts of Moscow during the celebrations on the occasion of the coronation of Emperor Nicholas II on May 14 (26). . 1,379 people died in it and more than 900 were maimed. Most of the corpses (except for those identified immediately on the spot and handed over for burial in their parishes) were collected at the Vagankovskoye cemetery, where their identification and burial took place. In 1896, at the Vagankovskoye cemetery, at the mass grave, a monument was erected to the victims of the stampede on Khodynskoye Field, designed by the architect I. A. Ivanov-Shits, with the date of the tragedy stamped on it: “May 18, 1896.”

In April 1896, the Russian government formally recognized the Bulgarian government of Prince Ferdinand. In 1896, Nicholas II also made a big trip to Europe, meeting with Franz Joseph, Wilhelm II, Queen Victoria (Alexandra Feodorovna’s grandmother), the end of the trip was his arrival in the capital of the allied France, Paris.

By the time of his arrival in Britain in September 1896, there had been a sharp deterioration in relations between Great Britain and the Ottoman Empire, associated with the massacre of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, and a simultaneous rapprochement between St. Petersburg and Constantinople.

While visiting Queen Victoria in Balmoral, Nicholas, having agreed to jointly develop a project of reforms in the Ottoman Empire, rejected the proposals made to him by the English government to remove Sultan Abdul Hamid, retain Egypt for England, and in return receive some concessions on the issue of the Straits.

Arriving in Paris in early October of the same year, Nicholas approved joint instructions to the ambassadors of Russia and France in Constantinople (which the Russian government had categorically refused until that time), approved French proposals on the Egyptian issue (which included “guarantees of neutralization of the Suez Canal” - a goal which was previously outlined for Russian diplomacy by Foreign Minister Lobanov-Rostovsky, who died on August 30 (September 11), 1896).

The Paris agreements of the tsar, who was accompanied on the trip by N.P. Shishkin, aroused sharp objections from Sergei Witte, Lamzdorf, Ambassador Nelidov and others. However, by the end of the same year, Russian diplomacy returned to its previous course: strengthening the alliance with France, pragmatic cooperation with Germany on certain issues, freezing the Eastern Question (that is, supporting the Sultan and opposition to England’s plans in Egypt).

It was ultimately decided to abandon the plan for landing Russian troops on the Bosphorus (under a certain scenario) approved at a meeting of ministers on December 5 (17), 1896, chaired by the Tsar. In March 1897, Russian troops took part in the international peacekeeping operation in Crete after the Greco-Turkish War.

During 1897, 3 heads of state arrived in St. Petersburg to pay a visit to the Russian Emperor: Franz Joseph, Wilhelm II, and French President Felix Faure. During Franz Josef's visit, an agreement was concluded between Russia and Austria for 10 years.

The Manifesto of February 3 (15), 1899 on the order of legislation in the Grand Duchy of Finland was perceived by the population of the Grand Duchy as an encroachment on its rights of autonomy and caused mass discontent and protests.

The manifesto of June 28 (July 10), 1899 (published on June 30) announced the death of the same June 28 “heir to the Tsarevich and Grand Duke George Alexandrovich” (the oath to the latter, as the heir to the throne, was previously taken along with the oath to Nicholas) and read further: “From now on, until the Lord pleases to bless us with the birth of a son, the immediate right of succession to the All-Russian throne, on the exact basis of the main State Law on Succession to the Throne, belongs to our dear brother, Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich.”

The absence in the manifesto of the words “heir to the crown prince” in the title of Mikhail Alexandrovich aroused bewilderment in court circles, which prompted the emperor to issue a personal imperial decree on July 7 of the same year, which ordered the latter to be called “sovereign heir and grand duke.”

According to the data of the first general census conducted in January 1897, the population of the Russian Empire was 125 million people. Of these, 84 million had Russian as their native language, 21% of the Russian population were literate, and 34% among people aged 10-19 years.

In January of the same year it was carried out currency reform, which established the gold standard of the ruble. Transition to the gold ruble, among other things, was a devaluation of the national currency: on imperials of the previous weight and fineness it was now written “15 rubles” - instead of 10; However, the stabilization of the ruble at the “two-thirds” rate, contrary to forecasts, was successful and without shocks.

Much attention was paid to the work issue. On June 2 (14), 1897, a law was issued on limiting working hours, which established a maximum working day limit of no more than 11.5 hours on ordinary days, and 10 hours on Saturdays and pre-holidays, or if at least part of the working day fell on night time.

In factories with more than 100 workers, free medical care was introduced, covering 70 percent of the total number of factory workers (1898). In June 1903, the Rules on Remuneration for Victims of Industrial Accidents were supremely approved, obliging the entrepreneur to pay benefits and pensions to the victim or his family in the amount of 50-66% of the victim’s maintenance.

In 1906, workers' trade unions were created in the country. The Law of June 23 (July 6), 1912 in Russia introduced compulsory insurance of workers against illnesses and accidents.

A special tax on landowners of Polish origin in the Western Region, introduced as punishment for the Polish Uprising of 1863, was abolished. By decree of June 12 (25), 1900, exile to Siberia as a punishment was abolished.

The reign of Nicholas II was a period of economic growth: in 1885-1913, the growth rate of agricultural production averaged 2%, and the growth rate of industrial production was 4.5-5% per year. Coal production in the Donbass increased from 4.8 million tons in 1894 to 24 million tons in 1913. Coal mining began in the Kuznetsk coal basin. Oil production developed in the vicinity of Baku, Grozny and Emba.

The construction of railways continued, the total length of which, amounting to 44 thousand kilometers in 1898, by 1913 exceeded 70 thousand kilometers. In terms of the total length of railways, Russia surpassed any other European country and was second only to the United States, but in terms of the provision of railways per capita, it was inferior to both the United States and the largest European countries.

Russo-Japanese War 1904-1905

Back in 1895, the emperor foresaw the possibility of a clash with Japan for dominance in the Far East, and therefore prepared for this struggle - both diplomatically and militarily. From the tsar's resolution on April 2 (14), 1895, at the report of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, his desire for further Russian expansion in the Southeast (Korea) was clear.

On May 22 (June 3), 1896, a Russian-Chinese agreement on a military alliance against Japan was concluded in Moscow; China agreed to the construction of a railway through Northern Manchuria to Vladivostok, the construction and operation of which was provided to the Russian-Chinese Bank.

On September 8 (20), 1896, a concession agreement for the construction of the Chinese Eastern Railway (CER) was signed between the Chinese government and the Russian-Chinese Bank.

On March 15 (27), 1898, Russia and China signed the Russian-Chinese Convention of 1898 in Beijing, according to which Russia was granted lease use for 25 years of the ports of Port Arthur (Lushun) and Dalniy (Dalian) with adjacent territories and waters; In addition, the Chinese government agreed to extend the concession it granted to the CER Society for the construction of a railway line (South Manchurian Railway) from one of the points of the CER to Dalniy and Port Arthur.

On August 12 (24), 1898, according to the order of Nicholas II, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Count M. N. Muravyov, handed a government message (circular note) to all representatives of foreign powers staying in St. Petersburg, which read, among other things: “To put a limit to continuous armaments and to find means to prevent misfortunes that threaten the whole world - this is now the highest duty for all States. Filled with this feeling, the Emperor deigned to order me to contact the Governments of states, whose Representatives are accredited to the Supreme Court, with a proposal to convene a conference to discuss this important task.”.

The Hague Peace Conferences took place in 1899 and 1907, some of whose decisions are still in effect today (in particular, the Permanent Court of Arbitration was created in The Hague). For the initiative to convene the Hague Peace Conference and their contribution to its holding, Nicholas II and the famous Russian diplomat Fyodor Fedorovich Martens were nominated in 1901 for the Nobel Peace Prize. To this day, the UN Secretariat contains a bust of Nicholas II and his Address to the powers of the world on the convening of the first Hague Conference.

In 1900, Nicholas II sent Russian troops to suppress the Yihetuan uprising together with the troops of other European powers, Japan and the United States.

Russia's lease of the Liaodong Peninsula, the construction of the Chinese Eastern Railway and the establishment of a naval base in Port Arthur, and Russia's growing influence in Manchuria clashed with the aspirations of Japan, which also laid claim to Manchuria.

On January 24 (February 6), 1904, the Japanese ambassador handed the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs V.N. Lamzdorf a note, which announced the termination of negotiations, which Japan considered “useless,” and the severance of diplomatic relations with Russia. Japan recalled its diplomatic mission from St. Petersburg and reserved the right to resort to “independent actions” as it deemed necessary to protect its interests. On the evening of January 26 (February 8), 1904, the Japanese fleet attacked the Port Arthur squadron without declaring war. The highest manifesto, given by Nicholas II on January 27 (February 9), 1904, declared war on Japan.

The border battle on the Yalu River was followed by battles at Liaoyang, the Shahe River and Sandepu. After a major battle in February - March 1905, the Russian army abandoned Mukden.

After the fall of the Port Arthur fortress, few people believed in a favorable outcome of the military campaign. Patriotic enthusiasm gave way to irritation and despondency. This situation contributed to the strengthening of anti-government agitation and critical sentiment. The emperor for a long time did not agree to admit the failure of the campaign, believing that these were only temporary setbacks. He undoubtedly wanted peace, only an honorable peace, which a strong military position could provide.

By the end of the spring of 1905, it became obvious that the possibility of changing the military situation existed only in the distant future.

The outcome of the war was decided by the sea battle of Tsushima 14-15 (28) May 1905, which ended in the almost complete destruction of the Russian fleet.

On May 23 (June 5), 1905, the emperor received, through the US Ambassador to St. Petersburg Meyer, a proposal from President T. Roosevelt for mediation to conclude peace. The answer did not take long to arrive. On May 30 (June 12), 1905, Foreign Minister V.N. Lamzdorf informed Washington in an official telegram about the acceptance of T. Roosevelt’s mediation.

The Russian delegation was headed by the Tsar's authorized representative S. Yu. Witte, and in the USA he was joined by the Russian ambassador to the USA Baron R. R. Rosen. The difficult situation of the Russian government after the Russo-Japanese War prompted German diplomacy to make another attempt in July 1905 to tear Russia away from France and conclude a Russian-German alliance: Wilhelm II invited Nicholas II to meet in July 1905 in the Finnish skerries, near the island of Bjorke. Nikolai agreed, and at the meeting signed the agreement, returning to St. Petersburg, he abandoned it, since on August 23 (September 5), 1905, a peace treaty was signed in Portsmouth by Russian representatives S.Yu. Witte and R.R. Rosen. Under the terms of the latter, Russia recognized Korea as Japan's sphere of influence, ceded to Japan Southern Sakhalin and the rights to the Liaodong Peninsula with the cities of Port Arthur and Dalniy.

American researcher of the era T. Dennett stated in 1925: “Few people now believe that Japan was deprived of the fruits of its upcoming victories. The opposite opinion prevails. Many believe that Japan was already exhausted by the end of May, and that only the conclusion of peace saved it from collapse or complete defeat in a clash with Russia.". Japan spent about 2 billion yen on the war, and its national debt increased from 600 million yen to 2.4 billion yen. The Japanese government had to pay 110 million yen annually in interest alone. The four foreign loans received for the war placed a heavy burden on the Japanese budget. In the middle of the year, Japan was forced to take out a new loan. Realizing that continuing the war due to lack of funding was becoming impossible, the Japanese government, under the guise of the “personal opinion” of War Minister Terauchi, through the American ambassador, back in March 1905, brought to the attention of T. Roosevelt the desire to end the war. The plan was to rely on US mediation, which is what ultimately happened.

The defeat in the Russo-Japanese War (the first in half a century) and the subsequent suppression of the unrest of 1905-1907, subsequently aggravated by the emergence of rumors about influences, led to a decline in the authority of the emperor in ruling and intellectual circles.

Bloody Sunday and the first Russian revolution of 1905-1907.

With the beginning of the Russo-Japanese War, Nicholas II made some concessions to liberal circles: after the murder of the Minister of Internal Affairs V.K. Plehve by a Socialist Revolutionary militant, he appointed P.D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky, who was considered a liberal, to his post.

On December 12 (25), 1904, the highest decree was given to the Senate “On plans for improving the state order,” which promised the expansion of the rights of zemstvos, insurance of workers, emancipation of foreigners and people of other faiths, and the elimination of censorship. When discussing the text of the Decree of December 12 (25), 1904, he, however, privately told Count Witte (according to the latter’s memoirs): “I will never, under any circumstances, agree to a representative form of government, because I consider it harmful for the person entrusted to me.” God of the people."

January 6 (19), 1905 (on the feast of Epiphany), during the blessing of water on the Jordan (on the ice of the Neva), in front of the Winter Palace, in the presence of the emperor and members of his family, at the very beginning of the singing of the troparion, a shot was heard from a gun, which accidentally (according to the official version) there was a charge of buckshot left after the exercises on January 4th. Most of the bullets hit the ice next to the royal pavilion and the facade of the palace, the glass of which was broken in 4 windows. In connection with the incident, the editor of the synodal publication wrote that “one cannot help but see something special” in the fact that only one policeman named “Romanov” was mortally wounded and the pole of the banner of “the nursery of our ill-fated fleet” - the banner of the naval corps - was shot through.

On January 9 (22), 1905, in St. Petersburg, on the initiative of priest Georgy Gapon, a procession of workers took place to the Winter Palace. On January 6-8, priest Gapon and a group of workers drew up a Petition on Workers' Needs addressed to the Emperor, which, along with economic ones, contained a number of political demands.

The main demand of the petition was the elimination of the power of officials and the introduction of popular representation in the form of a Constituent Assembly. When the government became aware of the political content of the petition, it was decided not to allow workers to approach the Winter Palace, and, if necessary, to detain them by force. On the evening of January 8, the Minister of Internal Affairs P. D. Svyatopolk-Mirsky notified the emperor of the measures taken. Contrary to popular belief, Nicholas II did not give the order to shoot, but only approved the measures proposed by the head of government.

On January 9 (22), 1905, columns of workers led by priest Gapon moved from different parts of the city to the Winter Palace. Electrified by fanatical propaganda, the workers stubbornly pressed toward the city center, despite warnings and even cavalry attacks. To prevent a crowd of 150,000 from gathering in the city center, the troops were forced to fire rifle volleys at the columns.

According to official government data, on the day of January 9 (22), 1905, 130 people were killed and 299 wounded. According to the calculations of the Soviet historian V.I. Nevsky, there were up to 200 killed and up to 800 wounded. On the evening of January 9 (22), 1905, Nicholas II wrote in his diary: "Hard day! Serious riots occurred in St. Petersburg as a result of the workers’ desire to reach the Winter Palace. The troops had to shoot in different places in the city, there were many killed and wounded. Lord, how painful and difficult!”.

The events of January 9 (22), 1905 became a turning point in Russian history and marked the beginning of the First Russian Revolution. The liberal and revolutionary opposition placed all the blame for the events on Emperor Nicholas.

Priest Gapon, who fled from police persecution, wrote an appeal on the evening of January 9 (22), 1905, in which he called on the workers for an armed uprising and the overthrow of the dynasty.

On February 4 (17), 1905, in the Moscow Kremlin, Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, who professed extreme right-wing political views and had a certain influence on his nephew, was killed by a terrorist bomb.

On April 17 (30), 1905, a decree “On strengthening the principles of religious tolerance” was issued, which abolished a number of religious restrictions, in particular in relation to “schismatics” (Old Believers).

Strikes continued in the country, unrest began on the outskirts of the empire: in Courland, the Forest Brothers began to massacre local German landowners, and the Armenian-Tatar massacre began in the Caucasus.

Revolutionaries and separatists received support with money and weapons from England and Japan. Thus, in the summer of 1905, the English steamer John Grafton, which ran aground, was detained in the Baltic Sea, carrying several thousand rifles for Finnish separatists and revolutionary militants. There were several uprisings in the navy and in various cities. The largest was the December uprising in Moscow. At the same time, Socialist Revolutionary and anarchist individual terror gained great momentum. In just a couple of years, revolutionaries killed thousands of officials, officers and police officers - in 1906 alone, 768 were killed and 820 representatives and agents of the government were wounded.

The second half of 1905 was marked by numerous unrest in universities and theological seminaries: due to the unrest, almost 50 secondary theological educational institutions were closed. The adoption of a temporary law on university autonomy on August 27 (September 9), 1905, caused a general strike of students and stirred up teachers at universities and theological academies. Opposition parties took advantage of the expansion of freedoms to intensify attacks on the autocracy in the press.

On August 6 (19), 1905, a manifesto was signed on the establishment of the State Duma (“as a legislative advisory institution, which is provided with the preliminary development and discussion of legislative proposals and consideration of the list of state revenues and expenses” - the Bulygin Duma) and the law on the State Duma and regulations on elections to Duma.

But the revolution, which was gaining strength, overstepped the acts of August 6: in October, an all-Russian political strike began, over 2 million people went on strike. On the evening of October 17 (30), 1905, Nikolai, after psychologically difficult hesitations, decided to sign a manifesto, which commanded, among other things: "1. To grant the population the unshakable foundations of civil freedom on the basis of actual inviolability of the individual, freedom of conscience, speech, assembly and unions... 3. Establish as an unshakable rule that no law can take effect without the approval of the State Duma and that those chosen by the people are guaranteed the opportunity to truly participation in monitoring the regularity of actions of the authorities assigned to us".

On April 23 (May 6), 1906, the Basic State Laws of the Russian Empire were approved, which provided for a new role for the Duma in the legislative process. From the point of view of the liberal public, the manifesto marked the end of the Russian autocracy as the unlimited power of the monarch.

Three weeks after the manifesto, political prisoners were amnestied, except for those convicted of terrorism; The decree of November 24 (December 7), 1905 abolished preliminary general and spiritual censorship for time-based (periodical) publications published in the cities of the empire (April 26 (May 9), 1906, all censorship was abolished).

After the publication of the manifestos, the strikes subsided. The armed forces (except for the navy, where unrest took place) remained faithful to the oath. An extreme right monarchist public organization, the Union of the Russian People, arose and was secretly supported by Nicholas.

From the First Russian Revolution to the First World War

On August 18 (31), 1907, an agreement was signed with Great Britain to delimit spheres of influence in China, Afghanistan and Persia, which generally completed the process of forming an alliance of 3 powers - the Triple Entente, known as Entente (Triple-Entente). However, mutual military obligations at that time existed only between Russia and France - according to the agreement of 1891 and the military convention of 1892.

On May 27 - 28 (June 10), 1908, a meeting between the British King Edward VII and the Tsar took place - on the roadstead in the harbor of Revel, the Tsar accepted from the King the uniform of the admiral of the British fleet. The Revel meeting of the monarchs was interpreted in Berlin as a step towards the formation of an anti-German coalition - despite the fact that Nicholas was a staunch opponent of rapprochement with England against Germany.

The agreement concluded between Russia and Germany on August 6 (19), 1911 (Potsdam Agreement) did not change the general vector of the involvement of Russia and Germany in opposing military-political alliances.

On June 17 (30), 1910, the law on the procedure for issuing laws relating to the Principality of Finland, known as the law on the procedure for general imperial legislation, was approved by the State Council and the State Duma.

The Russian contingent, which had been stationed there in Persia since 1909 due to the unstable political situation, was reinforced in 1911.

In 1912, Mongolia became a de facto protectorate of Russia, gaining independence from China as a result of the revolution that took place there. After this revolution in 1912-1913, Tuvan noyons (ambyn-noyon Kombu-Dorzhu, Chamzy Khamby Lama, noyon Daa-ho.shuna Buyan-Badyrgy and others) several times appealed to the tsarist government with a request to accept Tuva under the protectorate of the Russian Empire. On April 4 (17), 1914, a resolution on the report of the Minister of Foreign Affairs established a Russian protectorate over the Uriankhai region: the region was included in the Yenisei province with the transfer of political and diplomatic affairs in Tuva to the Irkutsk Governor-General.

The beginning of military operations of the Balkan Union against Turkey in the fall of 1912 marked the collapse of the diplomatic efforts undertaken after the Bosnian crisis by the Minister of Foreign Affairs S. D. Sazonov towards an alliance with the Porte and at the same time keeping the Balkan states under his control: contrary to the expectations of the Russian government, the troops of the latter successfully pushed back Turks and in November 1912 the Bulgarian army was 45 km from the Ottoman capital of Constantinople.

In connection with the Balkan War, the behavior of Austria-Hungary became increasingly defiant towards Russia, and in connection with this, in November 1912, at a meeting with the emperor, the issue of mobilizing troops of three Russian military districts was considered. Minister of War V. Sukhomlinov advocated this measure, but Prime Minister V. Kokovtsov managed to convince the emperor not to make such a decision, which threatened to drag Russia into the war.

After the actual transition of the Turkish army under German command (German General Liman von Sanders at the end of 1913 took over the post of chief inspector of the Turkish army), the question of the inevitability of war with Germany was raised in Sazonov’s note to the emperor dated December 23, 1913 (January 5, 1914), Sazonov’s note was also discussed at the meeting of the Council of Ministers.

In 1913, a wide celebration of the 300th anniversary of the Romanov dynasty took place: the imperial family traveled to Moscow, from there to Vladimir, Nizhny Novgorod, and then along the Volga to Kostroma, where the first tsar was called to the throne in the Ipatiev Monastery on March 14 (24), 1613 from the Romanovs - Mikhail Fedorovich. In January 1914, the solemn consecration of the Fedorov Cathedral, erected to commemorate the anniversary of the dynasty, took place in St. Petersburg.

The first two State Dumas were unable to conduct regular legislative work: the contradictions between the deputies, on the one hand, and the emperor, on the other, were insurmountable. So, immediately after the opening, in a response to Nicholas II’s speech from the throne, the left Duma members demanded the liquidation of the State Council (the upper house of parliament) and the transfer of monastery and state-owned lands to the peasants. On May 19 (June 1), 1906, 104 deputies of the Labor Group put forward a land reform project (project 104), the content of which was the confiscation of landowners' lands and the nationalization of all land.

The Duma of the first convocation was dissolved by the emperor by a personal decree to the Senate of July 8 (21), 1906 (published on Sunday, July 9), which set the time for convening the newly elected Duma on February 20 (March 5), 1907. The subsequent highest manifesto of July 9 explained the reasons, among which were: “Those elected from the population, instead of working on legislative construction, deviated into an area that did not belong to them and turned to investigating the actions of the local authorities appointed by us, to pointing out to Us the imperfections of the Fundamental Laws, changes to which may to be undertaken only by our royal will, and to actions that are clearly illegal, as an appeal on behalf of the Duma to the population.” By decree of July 10 of the same year, the sessions of the State Council were suspended.

Simultaneously with the dissolution of the Duma, I. L. Goremykin was appointed to the post of Chairman of the Council of Ministers. Stolypin's agricultural policy, successful suppression of the unrest, and bright speeches in the Second Duma made him the idol of some right-wingers.

The second Duma turned out to be even more left-wing than the first, since the Social Democrats and Socialist Revolutionaries, who boycotted the first Duma, took part in the elections. The government was ripening the idea of ​​dissolving the Duma and changing the electoral law.

Stolypin did not intend to destroy the Duma, but to change the composition of the Duma. The reason for the dissolution was the actions of the Social Democrats: on May 5, at the apartment of a Duma member from the RSDLP Ozol, the police discovered a meeting of 35 Social Democrats and about 30 soldiers of the St. Petersburg garrison. In addition, the police discovered various propaganda materials calling for the violent overthrow of the state system, various orders from soldiers of military units and fake passports.

On June 1, Stolypin and the chairman of the St. Petersburg Judicial Chamber demanded that the Duma remove the entire Social Democratic faction from Duma meetings and lift immunity from 16 members of the RSDLP. The Duma responded to the government's demands with a refusal; the result of the confrontation was the manifesto of Nicholas II on the dissolution of the Second Duma, published on June 3 (16), 1907, along with the Regulations on elections to the Duma, that is, a new electoral law. The manifesto also indicated the date for the opening of the new Duma - November 1 (14), 1907. The act of June 3, 1907 in Soviet historiography was called the “June Third Coup”, since it contradicted the manifesto of October 17, 1905, according to which no new law could be adopted without the approval of the State Duma.

Since 1907, the so-called "Stolypin" agrarian reform. The main direction of the reform was to assign lands, previously in the collective ownership of the rural community, to peasant owners. The state also provided extensive assistance to peasants in purchasing landowners' lands (through lending from the Peasant Land Bank) and subsidized agronomic assistance. When carrying out the reform, much attention was paid to the fight against striping (a phenomenon in which a peasant cultivated many small strips of land in different fields), and the allocation of plots to peasants “in one place” (cuts, farmsteads) was encouraged, which led to a significant increase in the efficiency of the economy.

The reform, which required a huge amount of land management work, unfolded rather slowly. Before the February Revolution, no more than 20% of communal lands were assigned to peasant ownership. The results of the reform, obviously noticeable and positive, did not have time to fully manifest themselves.

In 1913, Russia (excluding the Vistlensky provinces) was in first place in the world in the production of rye, barley and oats, in third (after Canada and the USA) in wheat production, in fourth (after France, Germany and Austria-Hungary) in production potatoes. Russia has become the main exporter of agricultural products, accounting for 2/5 of all world agricultural exports. Grain yield was 3 times lower than in England or Germany, potato yield was 2 times lower.

The military reforms of 1905-1912 were carried out after the defeat of Russia in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, which revealed serious shortcomings in the central administration, organization, recruitment system, combat training and technical equipment of the army.

In the first period of military reforms (1905-1908), the highest military administration was decentralized (the Main Directorate of the General Staff, independent of the War Ministry, was established, the State Defense Council was created, inspector generals were subordinate directly to the emperor), the terms of active service were reduced (in the infantry and field artillery from 5 to 3 years, in other branches of the military from 5 to 4 years, in the navy from 7 to 5 years), the officer corps was rejuvenated, the life of soldiers and sailors was improved (food and clothing allowances) and the financial situation of officers and long-term servicemen.

In the second period (1909-1912), the centralization of senior management was carried out (the Main Directorate of the General Staff was included in the Ministry of War, the Council of State Defense was abolished, inspector generals were subordinate to the Minister of War). Due to the militarily weak reserve and fortress troops, the field troops were strengthened (the number of army corps increased from 31 to 37), a reserve was created in the field units, which during mobilization was allocated for the deployment of secondary ones (including field artillery, engineering and railway troops, communications units) , machine gun teams were created in regiments and corps air detachments, cadet schools were transformed into military schools that received new programs, new regulations and instructions were introduced.

In 1910, the Imperial Air Force was created.

Nicholas II. A thwarted triumph

World War I

Nicholas II made efforts to prevent war in all the pre-war years, and in the last days before its outbreak, when (July 15 (28), 1914) Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia and began bombing Belgrade. On July 16 (29), 1914, Nicholas II sent a telegram to Wilhelm II with a proposal to “transfer the Austro-Serbian issue to the Hague Conference” (to the International Court of Arbitration in The Hague). Wilhelm II did not respond to this telegram.

At the beginning of WWII, opposition parties in both the Entente countries and Russia (including the Social Democrats) considered Germany the aggressor. in the fall of 1914 he wrote that it was Germany that started the war at a time convenient for it.

On July 20 (August 2), 1914, the emperor gave and by the evening of the same day published a manifesto on the war, as well as a personal highest decree, in which he, “not recognizing it possible, for reasons of a national nature, to now become the head of our land and sea forces intended for military operations,” ordered Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich to be Supreme Commander-in-Chief.

By decrees of July 24 (August 6), 1914, the sessions of the State Council and the Duma were interrupted from July 26.

On July 26 (August 8), 1914, a manifesto on the war with Austria was published. On the same day, the highest reception of members of the State Council and the Duma took place: the emperor arrived at the Winter Palace on a yacht together with Nikolai Nikolaevich and, entering the Nicholas Hall, addressed those gathered with the following words: “Germany and then Austria declared war on Russia. That huge upsurge of patriotic feelings of love for the Motherland and devotion to the throne, which swept like a hurricane across our entire land, serves in my eyes and, I think, in yours, as a guarantee that our great Mother Russia will bring the war sent by the Lord God to the desired end . ...I am confident that each and every one of you in your place will help me endure the test sent down to me and that everyone, starting with me, will fulfill their duty to the end. Great is the God of the Russian Land!”. At the conclusion of his response speech, the Chairman of the Duma, Chamberlain M.V. Rodzianko, said: “Without differences of opinions, views and beliefs, the State Duma, on behalf of the Russian Land, calmly and firmly says to its Tsar: “Be brave, Sovereign, the Russian people are with you and, firmly trusting in the mercy of God, will not stop at any sacrifice until the enemy is broken.” and the dignity of the Motherland will not be protected".

During the period of Nikolai Nikolaevich's command, the tsar traveled to Headquarters several times for meetings with the command (September 21 - 23, October 22 - 24, November 18 - 20). In November 1914 he also traveled to the south of Russia and the Caucasian Front.

At the beginning of June 1915, the situation on the fronts deteriorated sharply: Przemysl, a fortress city captured with huge losses in March, was surrendered. At the end of June Lvov was abandoned. All military acquisitions were lost, and the Russian Empire began losing its own territory. In July, Warsaw, all of Poland and part of Lithuania were surrendered; the enemy continued to advance. The public started talking about the government's inability to cope with the situation.

Both from public organizations, the State Duma, and from other groups, even many grand dukes, they started talking about creating a “Ministry of Public Trust.”

At the beginning of 1915, troops at the front began to experience a great need for weapons and ammunition. The need for a complete restructuring of the economy in accordance with the demands of the war became clear. On August 17 (30), 1915, Nicholas II approved documents on the formation of four Special Meetings: on defense, fuel, food and transportation. These meetings, consisting of government representatives, private industrialists, members of the State Duma and the State Council and headed by the relevant ministers, were supposed to unite the efforts of the government, private industry and the public in mobilizing industry for military needs. The most important of these was the Special Conference on Defense.

On May 9 (22), 1916, All-Russian Emperor Nicholas II, accompanied by his family, General Brusilov and others, reviewed troops in the Bessarabia province in the city of Bendery and visited the infirmary located in the city Auditorium.

Along with the creation of special meetings, in 1915 Military-Industrial Committees began to emerge - public organizations of the bourgeoisie that were semi-oppositional in nature.

Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich’s overestimation of his abilities ultimately led to a number of major military mistakes, and attempts to deflect the corresponding accusations from himself led to the fanning of Germanophobia and spy mania. One of these most significant episodes was the case of Lieutenant Colonel Myasoedov, which ended with the execution of an innocent man, where Nikolai Nikolaevich played the first violin along with A.I. Guchkov. The front commander, due to the disagreement of the judges, did not approve the sentence, but Myasoedov’s fate was decided by the resolution of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich: “Hang him anyway!” This case, in which the Grand Duke played the first role, led to an increase in clearly oriented suspicion of society and played a role, among other things, in the May 1915 German pogrom in Moscow.

Failures at the front continued: on July 22, Warsaw and Kovno were surrendered, the fortifications of Brest were blown up, the Germans were approaching the Western Dvina, and the evacuation of Riga began. In such conditions, Nicholas II decided to remove the Grand Duke, who could not cope, and himself stand at the head of the Russian army.

On August 23 (September 5), 1915, Nicholas II assumed the title of Supreme Commander-in-Chief, replacing Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich in this post, who was appointed commander of the Caucasian Front. M.V. Alekseev was appointed chief of staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief.

The soldiers of the Russian army greeted Nicholas's decision to take up the post of Supreme Commander-in-Chief without enthusiasm. At the same time, the German command was satisfied with the resignation of Prince Nikolai Nikolaevich from the post of Supreme Commander-in-Chief - they considered him a tough and skillful opponent. A number of his strategic ideas were assessed by Erich Ludendorff as extremely bold and brilliant.

During the Sventsyansky breakthrough on August 9 (22), 1915 - September 19 (October 2), 1915, German troops were defeated and their offensive was stopped. The parties switched to positional warfare: the brilliant Russian counterattacks that followed in the Vilna-Molodechno region and the events that followed made it possible, after the successful September operation, to prepare for a new stage of the war, no longer fearing an enemy offensive. Work began to begin throughout Russia on the formation and training of new troops. Industry was rapidly producing ammunition and military equipment. This speed of work became possible due to the emerging confidence that the enemy’s advance had been stopped. By the spring of 1917, new armies were created, provided with equipment and ammunition better than ever before during the entire war.

The autumn conscription of 1916 put 13 million people under arms, and losses in the war exceeded 2 million.

During 1916, Nicholas II replaced four chairmen of the Council of Ministers (I. L. Goremykin, B. V. Sturmer, A. F. Trepov and Prince N. D. Golitsyn), four ministers of internal affairs (A. N. Khvostov, B. V. Sturmer, A. A. Khvostov and A. D. Protopopov), three foreign ministers (S. D. Sazonov, B. V. Sturmer and N. N. Pokrovsky), two military ministers (A. A. Polivanov, D.S. Shuvaev) and three ministers of justice (A.A. Khvostov, A.A. Makarov and N.A. Dobrovolsky).

By January 1 (14), 1917, changes had also occurred in the State Council. Nicholas expelled 17 members and appointed new ones.

On January 19 (February 1), 1917, a meeting of high-ranking representatives of the Allied powers opened in Petrograd, which went down in history as the Petrograd Conference: from Russia’s allies it was attended by delegates from Great Britain, France and Italy, who also visited Moscow and the front, had meetings with politicians of different political orientations, with the leaders of the Duma factions. The latter unanimously told the head of the British delegation about an imminent revolution - either from below or from above (in the form of a palace coup).

Nicholas II, hoping for an improvement in the situation in the country if the spring offensive of 1917 was successful, as agreed upon at the Petrograd Conference, did not intend to conclude a separate peace with the enemy - he saw the victorious end of the war as the most important means of strengthening the throne. Hints that Russia might begin negotiations for a separate peace were a diplomatic game that forced the Entente to accept the need to establish Russian control over the Straits.

The war, during which there was a widespread mobilization of the working-age male population, horses and massive requisition of livestock and agricultural products, had a detrimental effect on the economy, especially in the countryside. Among the politicized Petrograd society, the authorities were discredited by scandals (in particular, related to the influence of G. E. Rasputin and his henchmen - “dark forces”) and suspicions of treason. Nicholas’s declarative commitment to the idea of ​​“autocratic” power came into sharp conflict with the liberal and leftist aspirations of a significant part of the Duma members and society.

Abdication of Nicholas II

The general testified about the mood in the army after the revolution: “As for the attitude towards the throne, as a general phenomenon, in the officer corps there was a desire to distinguish the person of the sovereign from the court filth that surrounded him, from the political mistakes and crimes of the tsarist government, which clearly and steadily led to the destruction of the country and the defeat of the army . They forgave the sovereign, they tried to justify him. As we will see below, by 1917, this attitude among a certain part of the officers was shaken, causing the phenomenon that Prince Volkonsky called a “revolution on the right,” but on purely political grounds.”.

Forces opposed to Nicholas II were preparing a coup d'etat starting in 1915. These were the leaders of various political parties represented in the Duma, and major military officers, and the top of the bourgeoisie, and even some members of the Imperial Family. It was assumed that after the abdication of Nicholas II, his minor son Alexei would ascend the throne, and the tsar’s younger brother, Mikhail, would become regent. During the February Revolution, this plan began to be realized.

Since December 1916, a “coup” in one form or another was expected in the court and political environment, the possible abdication of the emperor in favor of Tsarevich Alexei under the regency of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich.

On February 23 (March 8), 1917, a strike began in Petrograd. After 3 days it became universal. On the morning of February 27 (March 12), 1917, the soldiers of the Petrograd garrison revolted and joined the strikers; only the police provided resistance to the rebellion and unrest. A similar uprising took place in Moscow.

On February 25 (March 10), 1917, by decree of Nicholas II, meetings of the State Duma were stopped from February 26 (March 11) until April of the same year, which further inflamed the situation. Chairman of the State Duma M.V. Rodzianko sent a number of telegrams to the emperor about the events in Petrograd.

Headquarters learned about the beginning of the revolution two days late, according to reports from General S.S. Khabalov, Minister of War Belyaev and Minister of Internal Affairs Protopopov. The first telegram announcing the beginning of the revolution was received by General Alekseev only on February 25 (March 10), 1917 at 18:08: “I report that on February 23 and 24, due to a shortage of bread, a strike broke out in many factories... 200 thousand workers... At about three o'clock in the afternoon on Znamenskaya Square, police officer Krylov was killed while dispersing the crowd. The crowd is scattered. In addition to the Petrograd garrison, five squadrons of the Ninth Reserve Cavalry Regiment from Krasnoe Selo hundred of the Leningrad Guards are taking part in suppressing the unrest. a combined Cossack regiment from Pavlovsk and five squadrons of the Guards Reserve Cavalry Regiment were called to Petrograd. No. 486. Sec. Khabalov". General Alekseev reports to Nicholas II the contents of this telegram.

At the same time, the palace commandant Voyekov reports to Nicholas II a telegram from the Minister of Internal Affairs Protopopov: "Bid. To the palace commandant. ...On February 23, a strike broke out in the capital, accompanied by street riots. The first day about 90 thousand workers went on strike, the second - up to 160 thousand, today - about 200 thousand. Street riots are expressed in demonstrative processions, some with red flags, destruction of some shops, partial cessation of tram traffic by strikers, and clashes with the police. ...the police fired several shots in the direction of the crowd, from where they fired back. ...bailiff Krylov was killed. The movement is unorganized and spontaneous. ...Moscow is calm. Ministry of Internal Affairs Protopopov. No. 179. February 25, 1917".

Having read both telegrams, Nicholas II on the evening of February 25 (March 10), 1917, ordered General S. S. Khabalov to put an end to the unrest by military force: “I command you to stop the riots in the capital tomorrow, which are unacceptable during the difficult times of the war with Germany and Austria. NICHOLAY".

On February 26 (March 11), 1917 at 17:00 a telegram from Rodzianko arrives: “The situation is serious. There is anarchy in the capital. ...There is indiscriminate shooting on the streets. Troop units shoot at each other. It is necessary to immediately entrust a person with confidence to form a new government.”. Nicholas II refuses to respond to this telegram, telling the Minister of the Imperial Household Fredericks that “again this fat man Rodzianko wrote me all sorts of nonsense, to which I won’t even answer him”.

The next telegram from Rodzianko arrives at 22:22, and also has a similar panic character.

On February 27 (March 12), 1917 at 19:22, a telegram from War Minister Belyaev arrives at Headquarters, declaring the almost complete transition of the Petrograd garrison to the side of the revolution, and demanding the sending of troops loyal to the tsar; at 19:29 he reports that the Council of Ministers has declared a state of siege in Petrograd. General Alekseev reports the contents of both telegrams to Nicholas II. The Tsar orders General N.I. Ivanov to go at the head of loyal army units to Tsarskoye Selo to ensure the safety of the imperial family, then, as Commander of the Petrograd Military District, take command of the troops that were supposed to be transferred from the front.

From 11 pm to 1 am, the Empress sends two telegrams from Tsarskoye Selo: “The revolution yesterday took on terrifying proportions... Concessions are necessary. ...Many troops went over to the side of the revolution. Alix".

At 0:55 a telegram from Khabalov arrives: “Please report to His Imperial Majesty that I could not fulfill the order to restore order in the capital. Most of the units, one after another, betrayed their duty, refusing to fight against the rebels. Other units fraternized with the rebels and turned their weapons against the troops loyal to His Majesty. Those who remained faithful to duty fought against the rebels all day, suffering heavy losses. By evening, the rebels captured most of the capital. Small units of various regiments gathered near the Winter Palace under the command of General Zankevich remain faithful to the oath, with whom I will continue to fight. Lieutenant General Khabalov".

On February 28 (March 13), 1917, at 11 am, General Ivanov alerted the Battalion of St. George's Knights of 800 people, and sent it from Mogilev to Tsarskoye Selo via Vitebsk and Dno, leaving himself at 13:00.

The battalion commander, Prince Pozharsky, announces to his officers that he will not “shoot at the people in Petrograd, even if Adjutant General Ivanov demands it.”

Chief Marshal Benkendorf telegraphs from Petrograd to Headquarters that the Lithuanian Life Guards Regiment shot its commander, and the battalion commander of the Preobrazhensky Life Guards Regiment was shot.

On February 28 (March 13), 1917 at 21:00, General Alekseev orders the Chief of Staff of the Northern Front, General Yu. N. Danilov, to send two cavalry and two infantry regiments, reinforced with machine-gun teams, to help General Ivanov. It is planned to send approximately the same second detachment from the Southwestern Front of General Brusilov as part of the Preobrazhensky, Third Rifle and Fourth Rifle regiments of the Imperial Family. Alekseev also proposes, on his own initiative, to add one cavalry division to the “punitive expedition”.

On February 28 (March 13), 1917 at 5 a.m. the tsar departed (at 4:28 a.m. the Litera B train, at 5:00 a.m. the Litera A train) for Tsarskoye Selo, but was unable to travel.

February 28, 8:25 General Khabalov sends a telegram to General Alekseev about his desperate situation, and at 9:00 - 10:00 talks with General Ivanov, stating that “At my disposal, in the Main building. Admiralty, four guards companies, five squadrons and hundreds, two batteries. Other troops went over to the side of the revolutionaries or remain, by agreement with them, neutral. Individual soldiers and gangs roam around the city, shooting at passers-by, disarming officers... All stations are in the power of the revolutionaries, strictly guarded by them... All artillery establishments are in the power of the revolutionaries.”.

At 13:30 Belyaev’s telegram is received about the final capitulation of units loyal to the Tsar in Petrograd. The king receives it at 15:00.

On the afternoon of February 28, General Alekseev tries to take control of the Ministry of Railways through a fellow (deputy) minister, General Kislyakov, but he convinces Alekseev to reverse his decision. On February 28, General Alekseev stopped all combat-ready units on the way to Petrograd with a circular telegram. His circular telegram falsely stated that the unrest in Petrograd had subsided and there was no longer any need to suppress the rebellion. Some of these units were already an hour or two away from the capital. They were all stopped.

Adjutant General I. Ivanov received Alekseev’s order already in Tsarskoye Selo.

Duma deputy Bublikov occupies the Ministry of Railways, arresting its minister, and prohibits the movement of military trains for 250 miles around Petrograd. At 21:27, a message was received in Likhoslavl about Bublikov’s orders to the railway workers.

On February 28 at 20:00 the uprising of the Tsarskoye Selo garrison began. The units that remain loyal continue to guard the palace.

At 3:45 am the train approaches Malaya Vishera. There they reported that the path ahead was captured by rebel soldiers, and at the Lyuban station there were two revolutionary companies with machine guns. Subsequently, it turns out that in fact, at the Lyuban station, the rebel soldiers plundered the buffet, but did not intend to arrest the tsar.

At 4:50 a.m. on March 1 (14), 1917, the Tsar orders to turn back to Bologoye (where they arrived at 9:00 a.m. on March 1), and from there to Pskov.

According to some evidence, on March 1 at 16:00 in Petrograd, the cousin of Nicholas II, Grand Duke Kirill Vladimirovich, went over to the side of the revolution, leading the Guards naval crew to the Tauride Palace. Subsequently, monarchists declared this slander.

On March 1 (14), 1917, General Ivanov arrives in Tsarskoye Selo and receives information that the Tsarskoye Selo guards company has rebelled and left for Petrograd without permission. Also, rebel units were approaching Tsarskoe Selo: a heavy division and one guards battalion of the reserve regiment. General Ivanov leaves Tsarskoe Selo for Vyritsa and decides to inspect the Tarutinsky regiment transferred to him. At the Semrino station, railway workers are blocking his further movement.

On March 1 (14), 1917 at 15:00 the royal train arrives at the Dno station, at 19:05 in Pskov, where the headquarters of the armies of the Northern Front of General N.V. Ruzsky was located. General Ruzsky, due to his political convictions, believed that the autocratic monarchy in the twentieth century was an anachronism, and did not like Nicholas II personally. When the Tsar's train arrived, the general refused to arrange the usual ceremony of welcoming the Tsar, and appeared alone and only after a few minutes.

General Alekseev, who in the absence of the Tsar at Headquarters assumed the responsibilities of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, on February 28 receives a report from General Khabalov that he has only 1,100 people left in the loyal units. Having learned about the beginning of unrest in Moscow, on March 1 at 15:58 he telegraphed to the Tsar that “The revolution, and the latter is inevitable, once unrest begins in the rear, marks the shameful end of the war with all the grave consequences for Russia. The army is too closely connected with the life of the rear, and we can say with confidence that unrest in the rear will cause the same in the army. It is impossible to demand from the army that it fight calmly when there is a revolution in the rear. The current young composition of the army and the officer corps, among which a huge percentage are called up from the reserves and promoted to officers from higher educational institutions, does not give any reason to believe that the army will not react to what will happen in Russia.”.

After receiving this telegram, Nicholas II received General N.V. Ruzsky, who spoke in favor of establishing in Russia a government responsible to the Duma. At 22:20 General Alekseev sends Nicholas II a draft of the proposed manifesto on the establishment of a responsible government. At 17:00 - 18:00 telegrams about the uprising in Kronstadt arrive at Headquarters.

On March 2 (15), 1917, at one in the morning, Nicholas II telegraphed General Ivanov “I ask you not to take any measures until my arrival and report to me,” and instructs Ruzsky to inform Alekseev and Rodzianko that he agrees to the formation of a responsible government. Then Nicholas II goes into the sleeping car, but falls asleep only at 5:15, having sent a telegram to General Alekseev: “You can announce the presented manifesto, marking it Pskov. NICHOLAY."

On March 2, at 3:30 a.m., Ruzsky contacted M.V. Rodzianko, and during a four-hour conversation he became familiar with the tense situation that had developed by that time in Petrograd.

Having received a recording of Ruzsky’s conversation with M.V. Rodzianko, Alekseev on March 2 at 9:00 ordered General Lukomsky to contact Pskov and immediately wake up the Tsar, to which he received the answer that the Tsar had only recently fallen asleep, and that Ruzsky’s report was scheduled for 10:00 .

At 10:45 Ruzsky began his report by informing Nicholas II of his conversation with Rodzianko. At this time, Ruzsky received the text of a telegram sent by Alekseev to the front commanders on the question of the desirability of abdication, and read it to the tsar.

On March 2, 14:00 - 14:30, responses from the front commanders began to arrive. Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich stated that “as a loyal subject, I consider it the duty of the oath and the spirit of the oath to kneel and beg the sovereign to renounce the crown in order to save Russia and the dynasty.” Also in favor of abdication were Generals A. E. Evert (Western Front), A. A. Brusilov (South-Western Front), V. V. Sakharov (Romanian Front), Commander of the Baltic Fleet Admiral A. I. Nepenin, and General Sakharov called the Provisional Committee of the State Duma “a bandit group of people who took advantage of a convenient moment,” but “while sobbing, I have to say that abdication is the most painless way out,” and General Evert noted that “you cannot count on the army in its current composition to suppress unrest... I am taking all measures to ensure that information about the current state of affairs in the capitals does not penetrate the army in order to protect it from undoubted unrest. There are no means to stop the revolution in the capitals.” The commander of the Black Sea Fleet, Admiral A.V. Kolchak, did not send an answer.

Between 14:00 and 15:00, Ruzsky entered the tsar, accompanied by generals Danilov Yu.N. and Savich, taking with him the texts of the telegrams. Nicholas II asked the generals to speak out. They all spoke in favor of renunciation.

Around 15:00 on March 2 the tsar decided to abdicate in favor of his son during the regency of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich.

At this time, Ruzsky was informed that representatives of the State Duma A.I. Guchkov and V.V. Shulgin had moved to Pskov. At 15:10 this was reported to Nicholas II. Representatives of the Duma arrive on the royal train at 21:45. Guchkov informed Nicholas II that there was a danger of unrest spreading at the front, and that the troops of the Petrograd garrison went over to the side of the rebels immediately, and, according to Guchkov, the remnants of loyal troops in Tsarskoye Selo went over to the side of the revolution. After listening to him, the king reports that he has already decided to renounce for himself and his son.

March 2 (15), 1917 at 23 hours 40 minutes (in the document the time of signing was indicated by the tsar as 15 hours - the time of decision making) Nikolai handed over to Guchkov and Shulgin Manifesto of renunciation, which read, in part: “We command our brother to rule over the affairs of the state in complete and inviolable unity with the representatives of the people in legislative institutions, on those principles that will be established by them, taking an inviolable oath to that effect.”.

Guchkov and Shulgin also demanded that Nicholas II sign two decrees: on the appointment of Prince G. E. Lvov as head of government and Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich as supreme commander-in-chief, the former emperor signed the decrees, indicating in them the time of 14 hours.

After this, Nikolai writes in his diary: “In the morning Ruzsky came and read his long conversation on the phone with Rodzianko. According to him, the situation in Petrograd is such that now the ministry from the Duma is seemingly powerless to do anything, since the social-democratic party, represented by the working committee, is fighting it. My renunciation is needed. Ruzsky conveyed this conversation to headquarters, and Alekseev to all commanders in chief. By 2½ o'clock answers came from everyone. The point is that in the name of saving Russia and keeping the army at the front calm, you need to decide to take this step. I agreed. Headquarters sent a draft manifesto. In the evening, Guchkov and Shulgin arrived from Petrograd, with whom I talked and gave them the signed and revised manifesto. At one o'clock in the morning I left Pskov with a heavy feeling of what I had experienced. There is treason, cowardice, and deceit all around.”.

Guchkov and Shulgin leave for Petrograd on March 3 (16), 1917 at three o’clock in the morning, having previously informed the government by telegraph the text of the three accepted documents. At 6 am, the temporary committee of the State Duma contacted Grand Duke Mikhail, informing him of the abdication of the former emperor in his favor.

During a meeting on the morning of March 3 (16), 1917 with Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich Rodzianko, he declared that if he accepted the throne, a new uprising would immediately break out, and consideration of the issue of the monarchy should be transferred to the Constituent Assembly. He is supported by Kerensky, opposed by Miliukov, who stated that “the government alone without a monarch... is a fragile boat that can sink in the ocean of popular unrest; “Under such conditions, the country may be in danger of losing all consciousness of statehood.” After listening to the Duma representatives, the Grand Duke demanded a private conversation with Rodzianko, and asked whether the Duma could guarantee his personal safety. Having heard that he cannot, Grand Duke Mikhail signed a manifesto renouncing the throne.

On March 3 (16), 1917, Nicholas II, having learned about the refusal of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich from the throne, wrote in his diary: “It turns out that Misha renounced. His manifesto ends with a four-tail for elections in 6 months of the Constituent Assembly. God knows who convinced him to sign such disgusting stuff! In Petrograd, the unrest stopped - if only it continued like this.". He draws up a second version of the renunciation manifesto, again in favor of his son. Alekseev took the telegram, but did not send it. It was too late: two manifestos had already been announced to the country and the army. Alekseev, “so as not to confuse minds,” did not show this telegram to anyone, kept it in his wallet and handed it to me at the end of May, leaving the high command.

March 4 (17), 1917, the commander of the Guards Cavalry Corps sends a telegram to Headquarters to the Chief of Staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief “We have received information about major events. I ask you not to refuse to place at the feet of His Majesty the boundless devotion of the Guards Cavalry and the willingness to die for your beloved Monarch. Khan of Nakhichevan". In a reply telegram, Nikolai said: “I never doubted the feelings of the Guards cavalry. I ask you to submit to the Provisional Government. Nikolay". According to other sources, this telegram was sent on March 3, and General Alekseev never handed it over to Nikolai. There is also a version that this telegram was sent without the knowledge of the Khan of Nakhichevan by his chief of staff, General Baron Wieneken. According to the opposite version, the telegram, on the contrary, was sent by the Khan of Nakhichevan after a meeting with the commanders of the corps units.

Another well-known telegram of support was sent by the commander of the 3rd Cavalry Corps of the Romanian Front, General F. A. Keller: “The Third Cavalry Corps does not believe that You, Sovereign, voluntarily abdicated the throne. Command, King, we will come and protect You.". It is not known whether this telegram reached the Tsar, but it reached the commander of the Romanian Front, who ordered Keller to surrender command of the corps under threat of being charged with treason.

On March 8 (21), 1917, the executive committee of the Petrograd Soviet, when it became known about the tsar’s plans to leave for England, decided to arrest the tsar and his family, confiscate property and deprive them of civil rights. The new commander of the Petrograd district, General L. G. Kornilov, arrives in Tsarskoye Selo, arresting the empress and setting up guards, including to protect the tsar from the rebellious Tsarskoye Selo garrison.

On March 8 (21), 1917, the tsar in Mogilev said goodbye to the army, and issued a farewell order to the troops, in which he bequeathed to “fight until victory” and “obey the Provisional Government.” General Alekseev transmitted this order to Petrograd, but the Provisional Government, under pressure from the Petrograd Soviet, refused to publish it:

“For the last time I appeal to you, my beloved troops. After my abdication for myself and for my son from the Russian throne, power was transferred to the Provisional Government, which arose at the initiative of the State Duma. May God help him lead Russia along the path of glory and prosperity. May God help you, valiant troops, to defend Russia from the evil enemy. For two and a half years, you have carried out heavy combat service every hour, a lot of blood has been shed, a lot of effort has been made, and the hour is already approaching when Russia, bound with its valiant allies by one common desire for victory, will break the last effort of the enemy. This unprecedented war must be brought to complete victory.

Whoever thinks about peace, who desires it, is a traitor to the Fatherland, its traitor. I know that every honest warrior thinks like this. Fulfill your duty, defend our valiant Great Motherland, obey the Provisional Government, listen to your superiors, remember that any weakening of the order of service only plays into the hands of the enemy.

I firmly believe that the boundless love for our Great Motherland has not faded in your hearts. May the Lord God bless you and may the Holy Great Martyr and Victorious George lead you to victory.

Before Nicholas leaves Mogilev, the Duma representative at Headquarters tells him that he “must consider himself as if under arrest.”

Execution of Nicholas II and the royal family

From March 9 (22), 1917 to August 1 (14), 1917, Nicholas II, his wife and children lived under arrest in the Alexander Palace of Tsarskoye Selo.

At the end of March, the Minister of the Provisional Government P. N. Milyukov tried to send Nicholas and his family to England, in the care of George V, for which the preliminary consent of the British side was obtained. But in April, due to the unstable internal political situation in England itself, the king chose to abandon such a plan - according to some evidence, against the advice of Prime Minister Lloyd George. However, in 2006, some documents became known indicating that until May 1918, the MI 1 unit of the British Military Intelligence Agency was preparing for an operation to rescue the Romanovs, which was never brought to the stage of practical implementation.

In view of the strengthening of the revolutionary movement and anarchy in Petrograd, the Provisional Government, fearing for the lives of the prisoners, decided to transfer them deep into Russia, to Tobolsk, they were allowed to take the necessary furniture and personal belongings from the palace, and also offer service personnel, if desired, to voluntarily accompany them to the place of the new placement and further service. On the eve of departure, the head of the Provisional Government, A.F. Kerensky, arrived and brought with him the brother of the former emperor, Mikhail Alexandrovich. Mikhail Alexandrovich was exiled to Perm, where on the night of June 13, 1918 he was killed by local Bolshevik authorities.

On August 1 (14), 1917, at 6:10 a.m., a train with members of the imperial family and servants under the sign “Japanese Red Cross Mission” departed from Tsarskoye Selo from the Aleksandrovskaya railway station.

On August 4 (17), 1917, the train arrived in Tyumen, then those arrested on the ships “Rus”, “Kormilets” and “Tyumen” were transported along the river to Tobolsk. The Romanov family settled in the governor's house, which was specially renovated for their arrival.

The family was allowed to walk across the street and boulevard to services at the Church of the Annunciation. The security regime here was much lighter than in Tsarskoye Selo. The family led a calm, measured life.

At the beginning of April 1918, the Presidium of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee (VTsIK) authorized the transfer of the Romanovs to Moscow for the purpose of their trial. At the end of April 1918, the prisoners were transported to Yekaterinburg, where a private house was requisitioned to house the Romanovs. Five service personnel lived with them here: doctor Botkin, footman Trupp, room girl Demidova, cook Kharitonov and cook Sednev.

Nicholas II, Alexandra Fedorovna, their children, Doctor Botkin and three servants (except for the cook Sednev) were killed with bladed weapons and firearms in the “House of Special Purpose” - Ipatiev’s mansion in Yekaterinburg on the night of July 16-17, 1918.

Since the 1920s, in the Russian diaspora, on the initiative of the Union of Devotees of the Memory of Emperor Nicholas II, regular funeral commemorations of Emperor Nicholas II were carried out three times a year (on his birthday, namesake day and on the anniversary of his assassination), but his veneration as a saint began to spread after the end of Second World War.

On October 19 (November 1), 1981, Emperor Nicholas and his family were canonized by the Russian Church Abroad (ROCOR), which then had no church communion with the Moscow Patriarchate in the USSR.

Decision of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church dated August 14, 2000: “To glorify the royal family as passion-bearers in the host of new martyrs and confessors of Russia: Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Maria and Anastasia” (their memory - 4 July according to the Julian calendar).

The act of canonization was received ambiguously by Russian society: opponents of canonization claim that the proclamation of Nicholas II as a saint was of a political nature. On the other hand, in part of the Orthodox community there are ideas circulating that glorifying the king as a passion-bearer is not enough, and he is a “king-redeemer.” The ideas were condemned by Alexy II as blasphemous, since “there is only one redemptive feat - that of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

In 2003, in Yekaterinburg, on the site of the demolished house of engineer N. N. Ipatiev, where Nicholas II and his family were shot, the Church on the Blood was built in the name of All Saints who shone in the Russian land, in front of which a monument to the family was erected Nicholas II.

In many cities, the construction of churches began in honor of the holy Royal Passion-Bearers.

In December 2005, a representative of the head of the “Russian Imperial House” Maria Vladimirovna Romanova sent to the Russian Prosecutor’s Office an application for the rehabilitation of the executed former Emperor Nicholas II and members of his family as victims of political repression. According to the statement, after a number of refusals to satisfy, on October 1, 2008, the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation decided to rehabilitate the last Russian Emperor Nicholas II and members of his family (despite the opinion of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation, which stated in court that the requirements for rehabilitation do not comply with the provisions of the law due to that these persons were not arrested for political reasons, and no judicial decision was made to execute them).

On October 30 of the same 2008, it was reported that the General Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation decided to rehabilitate 52 people from the entourage of Emperor Nicholas II and his family.

In December 2008, at a scientific and practical conference held on the initiative of the Investigative Committee under the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation, with the participation of geneticists from Russia and the United States, it was stated that the remains found in 1991 near Yekaterinburg and interred on June 17, 1998 in the Catherine's chapel of the Peter and Paul Cathedral (St. Petersburg), belong to Nicholas II. In Nicholas II, the Y-chromosomal haplogroup R1b and the mitochondrial haplogroup T were identified.

In January 2009, the Investigative Committee completed a criminal investigation into the circumstances of the death and burial of the family of Nicholas II. The investigation was closed “due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution and the death of those who committed premeditated murder.” A representative of M.V. Romanova, who calls herself the head of the Russian Imperial House, stated in 2009 that “Maria Vladimirovna fully shares on this issue the position of the Russian Orthodox Church, which has not found sufficient grounds for recognizing the “Ekaterinburg remains” as belonging to members of the royal family.” Other representatives of the Romanovs, led by N.R. Romanov, took a different position: the latter, in particular, took part in the burial of the remains in July 1998, saying: “We came to close the era.”

On September 23, 2015, the remains of Nicholas II and his wife were exhumed for investigative actions as part of establishing the identities of the remains of their children, Alexei and Maria.

Nicholas II in cinema

Several feature films have been made about Nicholas II and his family, among which are “Agony” (1981), the English-American film “Nicholas and Alexandra” (Nicholas and Alexandra, 1971) and two Russian films “The Regicide” (1991) and “ Romanovs. The Crowned Family" (2000).

Hollywood made several films about the supposedly saved daughter of the Tsar Anastasia, “Anastasia” (Anastasia, 1956) and “Anastasia, or the Mystery of Anna” (Anastasia: The Mystery of Anna, USA, 1986).

Actors who played the role of Nicholas II:

1917 - Alfred Hickman - The Fall of the Romanovs (USA)
1926 - Heinz Hanus - Die Brandstifter Europas (Germany)
1956 - Vladimir Kolchin - Prologue
1961 - Vladimir Kolchin - Two Lives
1971 - Michael Jayston - Nicholas and Alexandra
1972 - - Kotsyubinsky family
1974 - Charles Kay - Fall of Eagles
1974-81 - - Agony
1975 - Yuri Demich - Trust
1986 - - Anastasia, or the mystery of Anna (Anastasia: The Mystery of Anna)
1987 - Alexander Galibin - The Life of Klim Samgin
1989 - - Eye of God
2014 - Valery Degtyar - Grigory R.
2017 - - Matilda.

Professor Sergei Mironenko about the personality and fatal mistakes of the last Russian emperor

In the year of the 100th anniversary of the revolution, conversations about Nicholas II and his role in the tragedy of 1917 do not stop: truth and myths are often mixed in these conversations. Scientific director of the State Archive of the Russian Federation Sergei Mironenko- about Nicholas II as a man, ruler, family man, passion-bearer.

“Nicky, you’re just some kind of Muslim!”

Sergei Vladimirovich, in one of your interviews you called Nicholas II “frozen.” What did you mean? What was the emperor like as a person, as a person?

Nicholas II loved the theater, opera and ballet, and loved physical exercise. He had unpretentious tastes. He liked to drink a glass or two of vodka. Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich recalled that when they were young, he and Niki once sat on the sofa and kicked with their feet, who would knock whom off the sofa. Or another example - a diary entry during a visit to relatives in Greece about how wonderfully he and his cousin Georgie were left with oranges. He was already quite a grown-up young man, but something childish remained in him: throwing oranges, kicking. Absolutely alive person! But still, it seems to me, he was some kind of... not a daredevil, not “eh!” You know, sometimes meat is fresh, and sometimes it’s first frozen and then defrosted, do you understand? In this sense - “frostbitten”.

Sergey Mironenko
Photo: DP28

Restrained? Many noted that he very dryly described terrible events in his diary: the shooting of a demonstration and the lunch menu were nearby. Or that the emperor remained absolutely calm when receiving difficult news from the front of the Japanese War. What does this indicate?

In the imperial family, keeping a diary was one of the elements of education. A person was taught to write down at the end of the day what happened to him, and thus give himself an account of how you lived that day. If the diaries of Nicholas II were used for the history of weather, then this would be a wonderful source. “Morning, so many degrees of frost, got up at such and such time.” Always! Plus or minus: “sunny, windy” - he always wrote it down.

His grandfather Emperor Alexander II kept similar diaries. The War Ministry published small memorial books: each sheet was divided into three days, and Alexander II managed to write down his entire day on such a small sheet of paper all day, from the moment he got up until he went to bed. Of course, this was a recording of only the formal side of life. Basically, Alexander II wrote down who he received, with whom he had lunch, with whom he had dinner, where he was, at a review or somewhere else, etc. Rarely, rarely does something emotional break through. In 1855, when his father, Emperor Nicholas I, was dying, he wrote down: “It’s such and such an hour. The last terrible torment." This is a different type of diary! And Nikolai’s emotional assessments are extremely rare. In general, he apparently was an introvert by nature.

- Today you can often see in the press a certain average image of Tsar Nicholas II: a man of noble aspirations, an exemplary family man, but a weak politician. How true is this image?

As for the fact that one image has become established, this is wrong. There are diametrically opposed points of view. For example, academician Yuri Sergeevich Pivovarov claims that Nicholas II was a major, successful statesman. Well, you yourself know that there are many monarchists who bow to Nicholas II.

I think that this is just the right image: he really was a very good person, a wonderful family man and, of course, a deeply religious man. But as a politician, I was absolutely out of place, I would say so.

Coronation of Nicholas II

When Nicholas II ascended the throne, he was 26 years old. Why, despite his brilliant education, was he not ready to be a king? And there is evidence that he did not want to ascend the throne and was burdened by it?

Behind me are the diaries of Nicholas II, which we published: if you read them, everything becomes clear. He was actually a very responsible person, he understood the whole burden of responsibility that fell on his shoulders. But, of course, he did not think that his father, Emperor Alexander III, would die at 49, he thought that he still had some time left. Nicholas was burdened by the ministers' reports. Although one can have different attitudes towards Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich, I believe he was absolutely right when he wrote about the traits characteristic of Nicholas II. For example, he said that with Nikolai, the one who came to him last is right. Various issues are being discussed, and Nikolai takes the point of view of the one who came into his office last. Maybe this was not always the case, but this is a certain vector that Alexander Mikhailovich is talking about.

Another of his features is fatalism. Nikolai believed that since he was born on May 6, the day of Job the Long-Suffering, he was destined to suffer. Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich told him: “Niki (that was Nikolai’s name in the family), you're just some kind of Muslim! We have the Orthodox faith, it gives free will, and your life depends on you, there is no such fatalistic destiny in our faith.” But Nikolai was sure that he was destined to suffer.

In one of your lectures you said that he really suffered a lot. Do you think that this was somehow connected with his mentality and attitude?

You see, every person makes his own destiny. If you think from the very beginning that you are made to suffer, in the end you will in life!

The main misfortune, of course, is that they had a terminally ill child. This cannot be discounted. And it turned out literally immediately after birth: the Tsarevich’s umbilical cord was bleeding... This, of course, frightened the family; they hid for a very long time that their child had hemophilia. For example, the sister of Nicholas II, Grand Duchess Ksenia, found out about this almost 8 years after the heir was born!

Then, difficult situations in politics - Nicholas was not ready to rule the vast Russian Empire in such a difficult period of time.

About the birth of Tsarevich Alexei

The summer of 1904 was marked by a joyful event, the birth of the unfortunate Tsarevich. Russia had been waiting for an heir for so long, and how many times had this hope turned into disappointment that his birth was greeted with enthusiasm, but the joy did not last long. Even in our house there was despondency. The uncle and aunt undoubtedly knew that the child was born with hemophilia, a disease characterized by bleeding due to the inability of the blood to clot quickly. Of course, the parents quickly learned about the nature of their son’s illness. One can imagine what a terrible blow this was for them; from that moment on, the empress’s character began to change, and her health, both physical and mental, began to deteriorate from painful experiences and constant anxiety.

- But he was prepared for this from childhood, like any heir!

You see, whether you cook or not, you can’t discount a person’s personal qualities. If you read his correspondence with his bride, who later became Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, you will see that he writes to her about how he rode twenty miles and feels good, and she writes to him about how she was in church, how she prayed. Their correspondence shows everything, from the very beginning! Do you know what he called her? He called her “owl”, and she called him “calf”. Even this one detail gives a clear picture of their relationship.

Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna

Initially, the family was against his marriage to the Princess of Hesse. Can we say that Nicholas II showed character here, some strong-willed qualities, insisting on his own?

They weren't entirely against it. They wanted to marry him to a French princess - because of the turn in the foreign policy of the Russian Empire from an alliance with Germany and Austria-Hungary to an alliance with France that emerged in the early 90s of the 19th century. Alexander III wanted to strengthen family ties with the French, but Nicholas categorically refused. A little-known fact - Alexander III and his wife Maria Feodorovna, when Alexander was still just the heir to the throne, became the successors of Alice of Hesse - the future Empress Alexandra Feodorovna: they were the young godmother and father! So, there were still connections. And Nikolai wanted to get married at all costs.

- But he was still a follower?

Of course there was. You see, we must distinguish between stubbornness and will. Very often weak-willed people are stubborn. I think that in a certain sense Nikolai was like that. There are wonderful moments in their correspondence with Alexandra Fedorovna. Especially during the war, when she writes to him: “Be Peter the Great, be Ivan the Terrible!” and then adds: “I see how you smile.” She writes to him “be,” but she herself understands perfectly well that he cannot be, by character, the same as his father was.

For Nikolai, his father was always an example. He wanted, of course, to be like him, but he couldn’t.

Dependence on Rasputin led Russia to destruction

- How strong was Alexandra Feodorovna’s influence on the emperor?

Alexandra Fedorovna had a huge influence on him. And through Alexandra Feodorovna - Rasputin. And, by the way, relations with Rasputin became one of the rather strong catalysts for the revolutionary movement and general dissatisfaction with Nicholas. It was not so much the figure of Rasputin himself that caused discontent, but the image created by the press of a dissolute old man who influences political decision-making. Add to this the suspicion that Rasputin is a German agent, which was fueled by the fact that he was against the war with Germany. Rumors spread that Alexandra Fedorovna was a German spy. In general, everything rolled along a well-known road, which ultimately led to renunciation...

Caricature of Rasputin

Peter Stolypin

- What other political mistakes became fatal?

There were many of them. One of them is distrust of outstanding statesmen. Nikolai could not save them, he could not! The example of Stolypin is very indicative in this sense. Stolypin is truly an outstanding person. Outstanding not only and not so much because he uttered in the Duma those words that are now being repeated by everyone: “You need great upheavals, but we need a great Russia.”

That's not why! But because he understood: the main obstacle in a peasant country is the community. And he firmly pursued the policy of destroying the community, and this was contrary to the interests of a fairly wide range of people. After all, when Stolypin arrived in Kyiv as prime minister in 1911, he was already a “lame duck.” The issue of his resignation was resolved. He was killed, but the end of his political career came earlier.

In history, as you know, there is no subjunctive mood. But I really want to dream up. What if Stolypin had been at the head of the government longer, if he had not been killed, if the situation had turned out differently, what would have happened? If Russia had so recklessly entered into a war with Germany, would the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand be worth getting involved in this world war?..

1908 Tsarskoye Selo. Rasputin with the Empress, five children and governess

However, I really want to use the subjunctive mood. The events taking place in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century seem so spontaneous, irreversible - the absolute monarchy has outlived its usefulness, and sooner or later what happened would have happened; the personality of the tsar did not play a decisive role. This is wrong?

You know, this question, from my point of view, is useless, because the task of history is not to guess what would have happened if, but to explain why it happened this way and not otherwise. This has already happened. But why did it happen? After all, history has many paths, but for some reason it chooses one out of many, why?

Why did it happen that the previously very friendly, close-knit Romanov family (the ruling house of the Romanovs) turned out to be completely split by 1916? Nikolai and his wife were alone, but the whole family - I emphasize, the whole family - was against it! Yes, Rasputin played his role - the family split largely because of him. Grand Duchess Elizaveta Feodorovna, sister of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, tried to talk to her about Rasputin, to dissuade her - it was useless! Nicholas's mother, Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna, tried to speak - it was useless.

In the end, it came to a grand-ducal conspiracy. Grand Duke Dmitry Pavlovich, the beloved cousin of Nicholas II, took part in the murder of Rasputin. Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich wrote to Maria Feodorovna: “The hypnotist has been killed, now it’s the hypnotized woman’s turn, she must disappear.”

They all saw that this indecisive policy, this dependence on Rasputin was leading Russia to destruction, but they could not do anything! They thought that they would kill Rasputin and things would somehow get better, but they didn’t get better - everything had gone too far. Nikolai believed that relations with Rasputin were a private matter of his family, in which no one had the right to interfere. He did not understand that the emperor could not have a private relationship with Rasputin, that the matter had taken a political turn. And he cruelly miscalculated, although as a person one can understand him. So personality definitely matters a lot!

About Rasputin and his murder
From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

Everything that happened to Russia thanks to the direct or indirect influence of Rasputin can, in my opinion, be considered as a vengeful expression of the dark, terrible, all-consuming hatred that for centuries burned in the soul of the Russian peasant in relation to the upper classes, who did not try to understand him or attract him to your side. Rasputin loved both the empress and the emperor in his own way. He felt sorry for them, as one feels sorry for children who have made a mistake due to the fault of adults. They both liked his apparent sincerity and kindness. His speeches - they had never heard anything like it before - attracted them with its simple logic and novelty. The emperor himself sought closeness with his people. But Rasputin, who had no education and was not accustomed to such an environment, was spoiled by the boundless trust that his high patrons showed him.

Emperor Nicholas II and Supreme Commander-in-Chief led. Prince Nikolai Nikolaevich during the inspection of the fortifications of the Przemysl fortress

Is there evidence that Empress Alexandra Feodorovna directly influenced her husband’s specific political decisions?

Certainly! At one time there was a book by Kasvinov, “23 Steps Down,” about the murder of the royal family. So, one of the most serious political mistakes of Nicholas II was the decision to become the supreme commander in chief in 1915. This was, if you like, the first step to renunciation!

- And only Alexandra Fedorovna supported this decision?

She convinced him! Alexandra Feodorovna was a very strong-willed, very smart and very cunning woman. What was she fighting for? For the future of their son. She was afraid that Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich (Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Army in 1914-1915 - ed.), who was very popular in the army, will deprive Niki of the throne and become emperor himself. Let's leave aside the question of whether this really happened.

But, believing in Nikolai Nikolaevich’s desire to take the Russian throne, the empress began to engage in intrigue. “In this difficult time of testing, only you can lead the army, you must do it, this is your duty,” she persuaded her husband. And Nikolai succumbed to her persuasion, sent his uncle to command the Caucasian Front and took command of the Russian army. He did not listen to his mother, who begged him not to take a disastrous step - she just perfectly understood that if he became commander-in-chief, all failures at the front would be associated with his name; nor the eight ministers who wrote him a petition; nor the Chairman of the State Duma Rodzianko.

The emperor left the capital, lived for months at headquarters, and as a result was unable to return to the capital, where a revolution took place in his absence.

Emperor Nicholas II and front commanders at a meeting of Headquarters

Nicholas II at the front

Nicholas II with generals Alekseev and Pustovoitenko at Headquarters

What kind of person was the empress? You said - strong-willed, smart. But at the same time, she gives the impression of a sad, melancholy, cold, closed person...

I wouldn't say she was cold. Read their letters - after all, in letters a person opens up. She is a passionate, loving woman. A powerful woman who fights for what she considers necessary, fighting for the throne to be passed on to her son, despite his terminal illness. You can understand her, but, in my opinion, she lacked breadth of vision.

We will not talk about why Rasputin acquired such influence over her. I am deeply convinced that the matter is not only about the sick Tsarevich Alexei, whom he helped. The fact is, the empress herself needed a person who would support her in this hostile world. She arrived, shy, embarrassed, and in front of her was the rather strong Empress Maria Feodorovna, whom the court loved. Maria Feodorovna loves balls, but Alix doesn’t like balls. St. Petersburg society is accustomed to dancing, accustomed, accustomed to having fun, but the new empress is a completely different person.

Nicholas II with his mother Maria Fedorovna

Nicholas II with his wife

Nicholas II with Alexandra Feodorovna

Gradually, the relationship between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law gets worse and worse. And in the end it comes to a complete break. Maria Fedorovna, in her last diary before the revolution, in 1916, calls Alexandra Fedorovna only “fury.” “This fury” - she can’t even write her name...

Elements of the great crisis that led to abdication

- However, Nikolai and Alexandra were a wonderful family, right?

Of course, a wonderful family! They sit, read books to each other, their correspondence is wonderful and tender. They love each other, they are spiritually close, physically close, they have wonderful children. Children are different, some of them are more serious, some, like Anastasia, are more mischievous, some smoke secretly.

About the atmosphere in Nikolai’s family II and Alexandra Feodorovna
From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

The Emperor and his wife were always affectionate in their relationships with each other and their children, and it was so pleasant to be in an atmosphere of love and family happiness.

At a costume ball. 1903

But after the murder of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich (Governor General of Moscow, uncle of Nicholas II, husband of Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna - ed.) in 1905, the family locked themselves in Tsarskoye Selo, not a single big ball again, the last big ball took place in 1903, a costume ball, where Nikolai dressed as Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, Alexandra dressed as the queen. And then they become more and more isolated.

Alexandra Fedorovna did not understand a lot of things, did not understand the situation in the country. For example, failures in the war... When they tell you that Russia almost won the First World War, do not believe it. A serious socio-economic crisis was growing in Russia. First of all, it manifested itself in the inability of the railways to cope with freight flows. It was impossible to simultaneously transport food to large cities and transport military supplies to the front. Despite the railway boom that began under Witte in the 1880s, Russia, compared to European countries, had a poorly developed railway network.

Groundbreaking ceremony for the Trans-Siberian Railway

- Despite the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway, was this not enough for such a large country?

Absolutely! This was not enough; the railways could not cope. Why am I talking about this? When food shortages began in Petrograd and Moscow, what does Alexandra Fedorovna write to her husband? "Our Friend advises (Friend – that’s what Alexandra Fedorovna called Rasputin in her correspondence. – ed.): order one or two wagons with food to be attached to each train that is sent to the front.” To write something like this means that you are completely unaware of what is happening. This is a search for simple solutions, solutions to a problem whose roots do not lie in this at all! What is one or two carriages for the multimillion-dollar Petrograd and Moscow?..

Yet it grew!

Prince Felix Yusupov, participant in the conspiracy against Rasputin

Two or three years ago we received the Yusupov archive - Viktor Fedorovich Vekselberg bought it and donated it to the State Archive. This archive contains letters from teacher Felix Yusupov in the Corps of Pages, who went with Yusupov to Rakitnoye, where he was exiled after participating in the murder of Rasputin. Two weeks before the revolution he returned to Petrograd. And he writes to Felix, who is still in Rakitnoye: “Can you imagine that in two weeks I have not seen or eaten a single piece of meat?” No meat! Bakeries are closed because there is no flour. And this is not the result of some malicious conspiracy, as is sometimes written about, which is complete nonsense and nonsense. And evidence of the crisis that has gripped the country.

The leader of the Kadet Party, Miliukov, speaks in the State Duma - he seems to be a wonderful historian, a wonderful person, but what does he say from the Duma rostrum? He throws accusation after accusation at the government, of course, addressing them to Nicholas II, and ends each passage with the words: “What is this? Stupidity or treason? The word “treason” has already been thrown around.

It's always easy to blame your failures on someone else. It’s not us who fight badly, it’s treason! Rumors begin to circulate that the Empress has a direct golden cable laid from Tsarskoe Selo to Wilhelm’s headquarters, that she is selling state secrets. When she arrives at headquarters, the officers are defiantly silent in her presence. It's like a snowball growing! The economy, the railway crisis, failures at the front, the political crisis, Rasputin, the family split - all these are elements of a great crisis, which ultimately led to the abdication of the emperor and the collapse of the monarchy.

By the way, I am sure that those people who thought about the abdication of Nicholas II, and he himself, did not at all imagine that this was the end of the monarchy. Why? Because they had no experience of political struggle, they did not understand that horses cannot be changed in midstream! Therefore, the commanders of the fronts, one and all, wrote to Nicholas that in order to save the Motherland and continue the war, he must abdicate the throne.

About the situation at the beginning of the war

From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

At the beginning the war was successful. Every day a crowd of Muscovites staged patriotic demonstrations in the park opposite our house. People in the front rows held flags and portraits of the Emperor and Empress. With their heads uncovered, they sang the national anthem, shouted words of approval and greeting, and calmly dispersed. People perceived it as entertainment. Enthusiasm took on more and more violent forms, but the authorities did not want to interfere with this expression of loyal feelings, people refused to leave the square and disperse. The last gathering turned into rampant drinking and ended with bottles and rocks being thrown at our windows. The police were called and lined up along the sidewalk to block access to our house. Excited shouts and dull murmurs from the crowd could be heard from the street all night.

About the bomb in the temple and changing moods

From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

On the eve of Easter, when we were in Tsarskoe Selo, a conspiracy was discovered. Two members of a terrorist organization, disguised as singers, tried to sneak into the choir, which sang at services in the palace church. Apparently, they planned to carry bombs under their clothes and detonate them in the church during the Easter service. The emperor, although he knew about the conspiracy, went with his family to church as usual. Many people were arrested that day. Nothing happened, but it was the saddest service I have ever attended.

Abdication of the throne by Emperor Nicholas II.

There are still myths about the abdication - that it had no legal force, or that the emperor was forced to abdicate...

This just surprises me! How can you say such nonsense? You see, the renunciation manifesto was published in all newspapers, in all of them! And in the year and a half that Nikolai lived after this, he never once said: “No, they forced me to do this, this is not my real renunciation!”

The attitude towards the emperor and empress in society is also “steps down”: from admiration and devotion to ridicule and aggression?

When Rasputin was killed, Nicholas II was at headquarters in Mogilev, and the Empress was in the capital. What is she doing? Alexandra Fedorovna calls the Petrograd Chief of Police and gives orders to arrest Grand Duke Dmitry Pavlovich and Yusupov, participants in the murder of Rasputin. This caused an explosion of indignation in the family. Who is she?! What right does she have to give orders to arrest someone? This proves 100% who rules us - not Nikolai, but Alexandra!

Then the family (mother, grand dukes and grand duchesses) turned to Nikolai with a request not to punish Dmitry Pavlovich. Nikolai put a resolution on the document: “I am surprised by your appeal to me. No one is allowed to kill! A decent answer? Of course yes! No one dictated this to him, he himself wrote it from the depths of his soul.

In general, Nicholas II as a person can be respected - he was an honest, decent person. But not too smart and without a strong will.

“I don’t feel sorry for myself, but I feel sorry for the people”

Alexander III and Maria Feodorovna

The famous phrase of Nicholas II after his abdication: “I don’t feel sorry for myself, but feel sorry for the people.” He really rooted for the people, for the country. How much did he know his people?

Let me give you an example from another area. When Maria Feodorovna married Alexander Alexandrovich and when they - then the Tsarevich and the Tsarevna - were traveling around Russia, she described such a situation in her diary. She, who grew up in a rather poor but democratic Danish royal court, could not understand why her beloved Sasha did not want to communicate with the people. He doesn’t want to leave the ship on which they were traveling to see the people, he doesn’t want to accept bread and salt, he’s absolutely not interested in all this.

But she arranged it so that he had to get off at one of the points on their route where they landed. He did everything flawlessly: he received the elders, bread and salt, and charmed everyone. He came back and... gave her a wild scandal: he stomped his feet and broke a lamp. She was terrified! Her sweet and beloved Sasha, who throws a kerosene lamp on the wooden floor, is about to set everything on fire! She couldn't understand why? Because the unity of the king and the people was like a theater where everyone played their roles.

Even chronicle footage of Nicholas II sailing away from Kostroma in 1913 has been preserved. People go chest-deep into the water, stretch out their hands to him, this is the Tsar-Father... and after 4 years these same people sing shameful ditties about both the Tsar and the Tsarina!

- The fact that, for example, his daughters were sisters of mercy, was that also theater?

No, I think it was sincere. They were, after all, deeply religious people, and, of course, Christianity and charity are practically synonymous. The girls really were sisters of mercy, Alexandra Fedorovna really assisted during operations. Some of the daughters liked it, some not so much, but they were no exception among the imperial family, among the House of Romanov. They gave up their palaces for hospitals - there was a hospital in the Winter Palace, and not only the emperor’s family, but also other grand duchesses. Men fought, and women did mercy. So mercy is not just ostentatious.

Princess Tatiana in the hospital

Alexandra Fedorovna - sister of mercy

Princesses with the wounded in the infirmary of Tsarskoe Selo, winter 1915-16

But in a sense, any court action, any court ceremony is a theater, with its own script, with its own characters, and so on.

Nikolay II and Alexandra Fedorovna in the hospital for the wounded

From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

The Empress, who spoke Russian very well, walked around the wards and talked for a long time with each patient. I walked behind and not so much listened to the words - she told everyone the same thing - but watched the expressions on their faces. Despite the empress's sincere sympathy for the suffering of the wounded, something prevented her from expressing her true feelings and comforting those to whom she addressed. Although she spoke Russian correctly and almost without an accent, people did not understand her: her words did not find a response in their souls. They looked at her in fear when she approached and started a conversation. I visited hospitals with the emperor more than once. His visits looked different. The Emperor behaved simply and charmingly. With his appearance, a special atmosphere of joy arose. Despite his small stature, he always seemed taller than everyone present and moved from bed to bed with extraordinary dignity. After a short conversation with him, the expression of anxious expectation in the eyes of the patients was replaced by joyful animation.

1917 - This year marks the 100th anniversary of the revolution. How, in your opinion, should we talk about it, how should we approach discussing this topic? Ipatiev House

How was the decision made about their canonization? “Digged”, as you say, weighed. After all, the commission did not immediately declare him a martyr; there were quite big disputes on this matter. It was not for nothing that he was canonized as a passion-bearer, as one who gave his life for the Orthodox faith. Not because he was an emperor, not because he was an outstanding statesman, but because he did not abandon Orthodoxy. Until the very end of their martyrdom, the royal family constantly invited priests to serve mass, even in the Ipatiev House, not to mention Tobolsk. The family of Nicholas II was a deeply religious family.

- But even about canonization there are different opinions.

They were canonized as passion-bearers - what different opinions could there be?

Some insist that the canonization was hasty and politically motivated. What can I say to this?

From the report of Metropolitan Juvenaly of Krutitsky and Kolomna, pChairman of the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints at the Bishops' Jubilee Council

... Behind the many sufferings endured by the Royal Family over the last 17 months of their lives, which ended with execution in the basement of the Ekaterinburg Ipatiev House on the night of July 17, 1918, we see people who sincerely sought to embody the commandments of the Gospel in their lives. In the suffering endured by the Royal Family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom, the evil-conquering light of Christ's faith was revealed, just as it shone in the life and death of millions of Orthodox Christians who suffered persecution for Christ in the twentieth century. It is in understanding this feat of the Royal Family that the Commission, in complete unanimity and with the approval of the Holy Synod, finds it possible to glorify in the Council the new martyrs and confessors of Russia in the guise of the passion-bearers Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Maria and Anastasia.

- How do you generally assess the level of discussions about Nicholas II, about the imperial family, about 1917 today?

What is a discussion? How can you debate with the ignorant? In order to say something, a person must know at least something; if he does not know anything, it is useless to discuss with him. So much garbage has appeared about the royal family and the situation in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century in recent years. But what is encouraging is that there are also very serious works, for example, studies by Boris Nikolaevich Mironov, Mikhail Abramovich Davydov, who are engaged in economic history. So Boris Nikolaevich Mironov has a wonderful work, where he analyzed the metric data of people who were called up for military service. When a person was called up for service, his height, weight, and so on were measured. Mironov was able to establish that in the fifty years that passed after the liberation of the serfs, the height of conscripts increased by 6-7 centimeters!

- So you started eating better?

Certainly! Life has become better! But what did Soviet historiography talk about? “Aggravation, higher than usual, of the needs and misfortunes of the oppressed classes,” “relative impoverishment,” “absolute impoverishment,” and so on. In fact, as I understand it, if you believe the works I named - and I have no reason not to believe them - the revolution occurred not because people began to live worse, but because, paradoxical as it may sound, it was better began to live! But everyone wanted to live even better. The situation of the people even after the reform was extremely difficult, the situation was terrible: the working day was 11 hours, terrible working conditions, but in the village they began to eat better and dress better. There was a protest against the slow movement forward; I wanted to go faster.

Sergey Mironenko.
Photo: Alexander Bury / russkiymir.ru

They don’t seek good from good, in other words? Sounds threatening...

Why?

Because I can’t help but want to draw an analogy with our days: over the past 25 years, people have learned that they can live better...

They don’t seek good from goodness, yes. For example, the Narodnaya Volya revolutionaries who killed Alexander II, the Tsar-Liberator, were also unhappy. Although he is a king-liberator, he is indecisive! If he doesn’t want to go further with reforms, he needs to be pushed. If he doesn’t go, we need to kill him, we need to kill those who oppress the people... You can’t isolate yourself from this. We need to understand why this all happened. I don’t advise you to draw analogies with today, because analogies are usually wrong.

Usually today they repeat something else: the words of Klyuchevsky that history is an overseer who punishes for ignorance of its lessons; that those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat its mistakes...

Of course, you need to know history not only in order to avoid making previous mistakes. I think the main thing for which you need to know your history is in order to feel like a citizen of your country. Without knowing your own history, you cannot be a citizen, in the truest sense of the word.

Nature did not give Nicholas the properties important for the sovereign that his late father possessed. Most importantly, Nikolai did not have the “mind of the heart” - political instinct, foresight and that inner strength that those around him feel and obey. However, Nikolai himself felt his weakness, helplessness before fate. He even foresaw his bitter destiny: “I will undergo severe trials, but will not see reward on earth.” Nikolai considered himself an eternal loser: “I succeed in nothing in my endeavors. I have no luck”... Moreover, he not only turned out to be unprepared for ruling, but also did not like state affairs, which were torment for him, a heavy burden: “A day of rest for me - no reports, no receptions... I read a lot - again they sent heaps of papers…” (from the diary). He didn’t have his father’s passion or dedication to his work. He said: “I... try not to think about anything and find that this is the only way to rule Russia.” At the same time, dealing with him was extremely difficult. Nikolai was secretive and vindictive. Witte called him a “Byzantine” who knew how to attract a person with his trust and then deceive him. One wit wrote about the king: “He doesn’t lie, but he doesn’t tell the truth either.”

KHODYNKA

And three days later [after the coronation of Nicholas on May 14, 1896 in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin] on the suburban Khodynskoye field, where public festivities were supposed to take place, a terrible tragedy occurred. Thousands of people, already in the evening, on the eve of the day of festivities, began to gather there, hoping in the morning to be among the first to receive at the “buffet” (of which a hundred were prepared) the royal gift - one of 400 thousand gifts wrapped in a colored scarf, consisting of a “food set” ( half a pound of sausage, sausage, sweets, nuts, gingerbread), and most importantly - an outlandish, “eternal” enameled mug with a royal monogram and gilding. The Khodynskoe field was a training ground and was all pitted with ditches, trenches and holes. The night turned out to be moonless, dark, crowds of “guests” arrived and arrived, heading to the “buffets”. People, not seeing the road in front of them, fell into holes and ditches, and from behind they were pressed and pressed by those who were approaching from Moscow. […]

In total, by morning, about half a million Muscovites had gathered on Khodynka, compacted into huge crowds. As V. A. Gilyarovsky recalled,

“steam began to rise above the million-strong crowd, similar to swamp fog... The crush was terrible. Many became ill, some lost consciousness, unable to get out or even fall: deprived of feelings, with their eyes closed, compressed as if in a vice, they swayed along with the mass.”

The crush intensified when the bartenders, fearing the onslaught of the crowd, began handing out gifts without waiting for the announced deadline...

According to official data, 1,389 people died, although in reality there were much more victims. The blood ran cold even among seasoned military men and firefighters: scalped heads, crushed chests, premature babies lying in the dust... The king learned about this disaster in the morning, but did not cancel any of the planned festivities and in the evening he opened a ball with the charming wife of the French ambassador Montebello... And although the tsar later visited hospitals and donated money to the families of the victims, it was too late. The indifference shown by the sovereign to his people in the first hours of the disaster cost him dearly. He received the nickname "Nicholas the Bloody".

NICHOLAS II AND THE ARMY

When he was heir to the throne, the young Sovereign received thorough combat training, not only in the guard, but also in the army infantry. At the request of his sovereign father, he served as a junior officer in the 65th Moscow Infantry Regiment (the first time a member of the Royal House was assigned to the army infantry). The observant and sensitive Tsarevich became familiar with the life of the troops in every detail and, having become Emperor of All Russia, turned all his attention to improving this life. His first orders streamlined production in the chief officer ranks, increased salaries and pensions, and improved soldiers' allowances. He canceled the passage with a ceremonial march and run, knowing from experience how difficult it was for the troops.

Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich retained this love and affection for his troops until his martyrdom. Characteristic of Emperor Nicholas II’s love for the troops is his avoidance of the official term “lower rank.” The Emperor considered him too dry, official and always used the words: “Cossack”, “hussar”, “shooter”, etc. It is impossible to read the lines of the Tobolsk diary of the dark days of the cursed year without deep emotion:

December 6. My name day... At 12 o'clock a prayer service was served. The riflemen of the 4th regiment, who were in the garden, who were on guard, all congratulated me, and I congratulated them on the regimental holiday.”

FROM THE DIARY OF NICHOLAS II FOR 1905

June 15th. Wednesday. Hot quiet day. Alix and I took a very long time at the Farm and were a full hour late for breakfast. Uncle Alexey was waiting for him with the children in the garden. Took a long trip in a kayak. Aunt Olga arrived for tea. Swimmed in the sea. After lunch we went for a drive.

I received stunning news from Odessa that the crew of the battleship Prince Potemkin-Tavrichesky that arrived there had mutinied, killed the officers and taken possession of the ship, threatening unrest in the city. I just can't believe it!

Today the war with Turkey began. Early in the morning, the Turkish squadron approached Sevastopol in the fog and opened fire on the batteries, and left half an hour later. At the same time, “Breslau” bombarded Feodosia, and “Goeben” appeared in front of Novorossiysk.

The scoundrel Germans continue to retreat hastily in western Poland.

MANIFESTO ON THE DISSOLUTION OF THE 1st STATE DUMA JULY 9, 1906

By Our will, people chosen from the population were called to legislative construction […] Firmly trusting in the mercy of God, believing in the bright and great future of Our people, We expected from their labors the good and benefit for the country. […] We have planned major transformations in all sectors of the people’s life, and Our main concern has always been to dispel the people’s darkness with the light of enlightenment and the people’s hardships by easing land labor. A severe test has been sent down to Our expectations. Those elected from the population, instead of working on legislative construction, deviated into an area that did not belong to them and turned to investigating the actions of local authorities appointed by Us, to pointing out to Us the imperfections of the Fundamental Laws, changes to which can only be undertaken by Our Monarch’s will, and to actions that are clearly illegal, such as an appeal on behalf of the Duma to the population. […]

Confused by such disorders, the peasantry, not expecting a legal improvement in their situation, moved in a number of provinces to open robbery, theft of other people's property, disobedience to the law and legitimate authorities. […]

But let our subjects remember that only with complete order and tranquility is a lasting improvement in the people’s life possible. Let it be known that We will not allow any self-will or lawlessness and with all the might of the state we will bring those who disobey the law to submission to our Royal will. We call on all right-thinking Russian people to unite to maintain legitimate power and restore peace in our dear Fatherland.

May peace be restored in the Russian land, and may the Almighty help us to carry out the most important of our royal labors - raising the well-being of the peasantry. an honest way to expand your land holdings. Persons of other classes will, at Our call, make every effort to carry out this great task, the final decision of which in the legislative order will belong to the future composition of the Duma.

We, dissolving the current composition of the State Duma, confirm at the same time Our constant intention to keep in force the very law on the establishment of this institution and, in accordance with this Decree of Ours to the Governing Senate on July 8th, set the time for its new convening on February 20, 1907 of the year.

MANIFESTO ON THE DISSOLUTION OF THE II STATE DUMA JUNE 3, 1907

To our regret, a significant part of the composition of the second State Duma did not live up to our expectations. Many of the people sent from the population began to work not with a pure heart, not with a desire to strengthen Russia and improve its system, but with a clear desire to increase unrest and contribute to the disintegration of the state. The activities of these individuals in the State Duma served as an insurmountable obstacle to fruitful work. A spirit of hostility was introduced into the environment of the Duma itself, which prevented a sufficient number of its members who wanted to work for the benefit of their native land from uniting.

For this reason, the State Duma either did not consider the extensive measures developed by our government at all, or delayed discussion or rejected it, not even stopping at rejecting laws that punished the open praise of crimes and especially punished the sowers of trouble in the troops. Avoiding condemnation of murders and violence. The State Duma did not provide moral assistance to the government in establishing order, and Russia continues to experience the shame of criminal hard times. The slow consideration by the State Duma of the state painting caused difficulties in the timely satisfaction of many urgent needs of the people.

A significant part of the Duma turned the right to interrogate the government into a way of fighting the government and inciting distrust of it among broad sections of the population. Finally, an act unheard of in the annals of history took place. The judiciary uncovered a conspiracy by an entire part of the State Duma against the state and tsarist power. When our government demanded the temporary, until the end of the trial, removal of the fifty-five members of the Duma accused of this crime and the detention of the most incriminated of them, the State Duma did not fulfill the immediate legal demand of the authorities, which did not allow any delay. […]

Created to strengthen the Russian state, the State Duma must be Russian in spirit. Other nationalities that were part of our state should have representatives of their needs in the State Duma, but they should not and will not appear in a number that gives them the opportunity to be arbiters of purely Russian issues. In those outskirts of the state where the population has not achieved sufficient development of citizenship, elections to the State Duma should be temporarily suspended.

Holy Fools and Rasputin

The king, and especially the queen, were susceptible to mysticism. The closest maid of honor to Alexandra Fedorovna and Nicholas II, Anna Alexandrovna Vyrubova (Taneeva), wrote in her memoirs: “The Emperor, like his ancestor Alexander I, was always mystically inclined; The empress was equally mystically inclined... Their Majesties said that they believe that there are people, as in the time of the Apostles... who possess the grace of God and whose prayer the Lord hears.”

Because of this, in the Winter Palace one could often see various holy fools, “blessed” people, fortune tellers, people supposedly capable of influencing people’s destinies. This is Pasha the perspicacious, and Matryona the barefoot, and Mitya Kozelsky, and Anastasia Nikolaevna Leuchtenbergskaya (Stana) - the wife of Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich Jr. The doors of the royal palace were wide open for all sorts of rogues and adventurers, such as, for example, the Frenchman Philip (real name Nizier Vashol), who presented the empress with an icon with a bell, which was supposed to ring when people “with bad intentions” approached Alexandra Feodorovna. .

But the crown of royal mysticism was Grigory Efimovich Rasputin, who managed to completely subjugate the queen, and through her, the king. “Now it is not the tsar who rules, but the rogue Rasputin,” Bogdanovich noted in February 1912. “All respect for the tsar has disappeared.” The same idea was expressed on August 3, 1916 by former Minister of Foreign Affairs S.D. Sazonov in a conversation with M. Paleologus: “The Emperor reigns, but the Empress, inspired by Rasputin, rules.”

Rasputin […] quickly recognized all the weaknesses of the royal couple and skillfully took advantage of it. Alexandra Fedorovna wrote to her husband in September 1916: “I fully believe in the wisdom of our Friend, sent to Him by God, to advise what you and our country need.” “Listen to Him,” she instructed Nicholas II, “...God sent Him to you as an assistant and leader.” […]

It got to the point that individual governors-general, chief prosecutors of the Holy Synod and ministers were appointed and removed by the tsar on the recommendation of Rasputin, transmitted through the tsarina. On January 20, 1916, on his advice, V.V. was appointed chairman of the Council of Ministers. Sturmer is “an absolutely unprincipled person and a complete nonentity,” as Shulgin described him.

Radzig E.S. Nicholas II in the memoirs of those close to him. New and recent history. No. 2, 1999

REFORM AND COUNTER-REFORMS

The most promising path of development for the country through consistent democratic reforms turned out to be impossible. Although it was marked, as if by a dotted line, even under Alexander I, later it was either subject to distortion or even interrupted. Under that autocratic form of government, which throughout the 19th century. remained unshakable in Russia, the final word on any issue about the fate of the country belonged to the monarchs. They, by the whim of history, alternated: reformer Alexander I - reactionary Nicholas I, reformer Alexander II - counter-reformer Alexander III (Nicholas II, who ascended the throne in 1894, also had to undergo reforms after his father’s counter-reforms at the beginning of the next century) .

DEVELOPMENT OF RUSSIA DURING THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS II

The main executor of all transformations in the first decade of the reign of Nicholas II (1894-1904) was S.Yu. Witte. A talented financier and statesman, S. Witte, having headed the Ministry of Finance in 1892, promised Alexander III, without carrying out political reforms, to make Russia one of the leading industrialized countries in 20 years.

The industrialization policy developed by Witte required significant capital investments from the budget. One of the sources of capital was the introduction of a state monopoly on wine and vodka products in 1894, which became the main revenue item of the budget.

In 1897, a monetary reform was carried out. Measures to increase taxes, increased gold production, and the conclusion of external loans made it possible to introduce gold coins into circulation instead of paper bills, which helped attract foreign capital to Russia and strengthen the country's monetary system, due to which state income doubled. The reform of commercial and industrial taxation carried out in 1898 introduced a trade tax.

The real result of Witte's economic policy was the accelerated development of industrial and railway construction. In the period from 1895 to 1899, an average of 3 thousand kilometers of tracks were built in the country per year.

By 1900, Russia took first place in the world in oil production.

By the end of 1903, there were 23 thousand factory enterprises operating in Russia with approximately 2,200 thousand workers. Politics S.Yu. Witte gave impetus to the development of Russian industry, commercial and industrial entrepreneurship, and the economy.

According to the project of P.A. Stolypin, agrarian reform began: peasants were allowed to freely dispose of their land, leave the community and run farmsteads. The attempt to abolish the rural community was of great importance for the development of capitalist relations in the countryside.

Chapter 19. The reign of Nicholas II (1894-1917). Russian history

BEGINNING OF THE FIRST WORLD WAR

On the same day, July 29, at the insistence of the Chief of the General Staff Yanushkevich, Nicholas II signed a decree on general mobilization. In the evening, the head of the mobilization department of the General Staff, General Dobrorolsky, arrived at the building of the St. Petersburg main telegraph and personally brought there the text of the decree on mobilization for communication to all parts of the empire. There were literally a few minutes left before the devices were supposed to start transmitting the telegram. And suddenly Dobrorolsky was given the tsar’s order to suspend the transfer of the decree. It turned out that the tsar received a new telegram from Wilhelm. In his telegram, the Kaiser again assured that he would try to reach an agreement between Russia and Austria, and asked the Tsar not to complicate this with military preparations. After reading the telegram, Nikolai informed Sukhomlinov that he was canceling the decree on general mobilization. The Tsar decided to limit himself to partial mobilization directed only against Austria.

Sazonov, Yanushkevich and Sukhomlinov were extremely concerned that Nikolai had succumbed to the influence of Wilhelm. They were afraid that Germany would get ahead of Russia in the concentration and deployment of the army. They met on the morning of July 30 and decided to try to convince the king. Yanushkevich and Sukhomlinov tried to do this over the phone. However, Nikolai dryly announced to Yanushkevich that he was ending the conversation. The general nevertheless managed to inform the tsar that Sazonov was present in the room, who would also like to say a few words to him. After a short silence, the king agreed to listen to the minister. Sazonov asked for an audience for an urgent report. Nikolai was silent again, and then offered to come to him at 3 o’clock. Sazonov agreed with his interlocutors that if he convinced the Tsar, he would immediately call Yanushkevich from the Peterhof Palace, and he would give an order to the main telegraph to the officer on duty to communicate the decree to all military districts. “After this,” Yanushkevich said, “I will leave home, break the phone, and generally make it so that I can no longer be found for a new cancellation of the general mobilization.”

For almost an entire hour, Sazonov proved to Nikolai that war was inevitable anyway, since Germany was striving for it, and that under these conditions, delaying general mobilization was extremely dangerous. In the end, Nikolai agreed. […] From the lobby, Sazonov called Yanushkevich and reported the tsar’s sanction. “Now you can break your phone,” he added. At 5 pm on July 30, all the machines of the main St. Petersburg telegraph started knocking. They sent out the tsar's decree on general mobilization to all military districts. On July 31, in the morning, it became public.

The beginning of the First World War. History of Diplomacy. Volume 2. Edited by V. P. Potemkin. Moscow-Leningrad, 1945

THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS II IN THE ASSESSMENTS OF HISTORIANS

In emigration, there was a split among researchers in assessing the personality of the last king. The debates often became harsh, and the participants in the discussions took opposing positions, from praise on the conservative right flank to criticism from liberals and denigration on the left, socialist flank.

The monarchists who worked in exile included S. Oldenburg, N. Markov, I. Solonevich. According to I. Solonevich: “Nicholas II, a man of “average abilities,” faithfully and honestly did everything for Russia that He knew how to do, that He could. No one else was able or able to do more”... “Left-wing historians speak of Emperor Nicholas II as mediocrity, right-wing historians as an idol whose talents or mediocrity are not subject to discussion.” […].

An even more right-wing monarchist, N. Markov, noted: “The sovereign himself was slandered and defamed in the eyes of his people, he could not withstand the evil pressure of all those who, it would seem, were obliged to strengthen and defend the monarchy in every possible way” […].

The largest researcher of the reign of the last Russian Tsar is S. Oldenburg, whose work remains of paramount importance in the 21st century. For any researcher of the Nicholas period of Russian history, it is necessary, in the process of studying this era, to get acquainted with the work of S. Oldenburg “The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II”. […].

The left-liberal direction was represented by P. N. Milyukov, who stated in the book “The Second Russian Revolution”: “Concessions to power (Manifesto of October 17, 1905) not only could not satisfy society and the people because they were insufficient and incomplete. They were insincere and deceitful, and the power that gave them did not for a moment look at them as if they had been ceded forever and finally” […].

Socialist A.F. Kerensky wrote in “History of Russia”: “The reign of Nicholas II was fatal for Russia due to his personal qualities. But he was clear about one thing: having entered the war and linking the fate of Russia with the fate of the countries allied with it, he did not make any tempting compromises with Germany until the very end, until his martyrdom […]. The king bore the burden of power. She weighed him down internally... He had no will to power. He kept it according to oath and tradition” […].

Modern Russian historians have different assessments of the reign of the last Russian Tsar. The same split was observed among scholars of the reign of Nicholas II in exile. Some of them were monarchists, others had liberal views, and others considered themselves supporters of socialism. In our time, the historiography of the reign of Nicholas II can be divided into three directions, such as in emigrant literature. But in relation to the post-Soviet period, clarifications are also needed: modern researchers who praise the tsar are not necessarily monarchists, although a certain tendency is certainly present: A. Bokhanov, O. Platonov, V. Multatuli, M. Nazarov.

A. Bokhanov, the largest modern historian in the study of pre-revolutionary Russia, positively assesses the reign of Emperor Nicholas II: “In 1913, peace, order, and prosperity reigned all around. Russia confidently moved forward, no unrest occurred. Industry worked at full capacity, agriculture developed dynamically, and every year brought greater harvests. Prosperity grew, and the purchasing power of the population increased year by year. The rearmament of the army has begun, a few more years - and Russian military power will become the first force in the world” […].

Conservative historian V. Shambarov speaks positively about the last tsar, noting that the tsar was too lenient in dealing with his political enemies, who were also enemies of Russia: “Russia was destroyed not by autocratic “despotism,” but rather by the weakness and toothlessness of power.” The Tsar too often tried to find a compromise, to come to an agreement with the liberals, so that there would be no bloodshed between the government and part of the people deceived by the liberals and socialists. To do this, Nicholas II dismissed loyal, decent, competent ministers who were loyal to the monarchy and instead appointed either unprofessionals or secret enemies of the autocratic monarchy, or swindlers. […].

M. Nazarov in his book “To the Leader of the Third Rome” drew attention to the aspect of the global conspiracy of the financial elite to overthrow the Russian monarchy... […] According to the description of Admiral A. Bubnov, an atmosphere of conspiracy reigned at Headquarters. At the decisive moment, in response to Alekseev’s cleverly formulated request for abdication, only two generals publicly expressed loyalty to the Sovereign and readiness to lead their troops to pacify the rebellion (General Khan Nakhichevansky and General Count F.A. Keller). The rest welcomed the abdication by wearing red bows. Including the future founders of the White Army, Generals Alekseev and Kornilov (the latter then had the task of announcing to the royal family the order of the Provisional Government for its arrest). Grand Duke Kirill Vladimirovich also violated his oath on March 1, 1917 - even before the Tsar’s abdication and as a means of putting pressure on him! - removed his military unit (the Guards crew) from guarding the royal family, came to the State Duma under a red flag, provided this headquarters of the Masonic revolution with his guards to guard the arrested royal ministers and issued a call for other troops to “join the new government.” “There is cowardice, treason, and deceit all around,” these were the last words in the tsar’s diary on the night of his abdication […].

Representatives of the old socialist ideology, for example, A.M. Anfimov and E.S. Radzig, on the contrary, negatively assess the reign of the last Russian Tsar, calling the years of his reign a chain of crimes against the people.

Between two directions - praise and overly harsh, unfair criticism are the works of Ananich B.V., N.V. Kuznetsov and P. Cherkasov. […]

P. Cherkasov adheres to the middle in his assessment of the reign of Nicholas: “From the pages of all the works mentioned in the review, the tragic personality of the last Russian Tsar appears - a deeply decent and delicate man to the point of shyness, an exemplary Christian, a loving husband and father, faithful to his duty and at the same time an unremarkable statesman an activist, a prisoner of once and for all acquired convictions in the inviolability of the order of things bequeathed to him by his ancestors. He was neither a despot, much less an executioner of his people, as our official historiography claimed, but during his lifetime he was not a saint, as is sometimes now claimed, although by martyrdom he undoubtedly atoned for all the sins and mistakes of his reign. The drama of Nicholas II as a politician lies in his mediocrity, in the discrepancy between the scale of his personality and the challenge of the time” […].

And finally, there are historians of liberal views, such as K. Shatsillo, A. Utkin. According to the first: “Nicholas II, unlike his grandfather Alexander II, not only did not give overdue reforms, but even if they were wrested from him by force by the revolutionary movement, he stubbornly strove to take back what was given “in a moment of hesitation.” All this “driven” the country into a new revolution, making it completely inevitable... A. Utkin went even further, agreeing to the point that the Russian government was one of the culprits of the First World War, wanting a clash with Germany. At the same time, the tsarist administration simply did not calculate the strength of Russia: “Criminal pride destroyed Russia. Under no circumstances should she go to war with the industrial champion of the continent. Russia had the opportunity to avoid a fatal conflict with Germany.”