The Romanov Family

[radiojane]

As I understand it the Czar was overthrown. The revolutionists forced him out of power and took him and his family as prisoners to prevent their return to power.

[Dulcinea]

Ok can someone explain in Cliff Note terms why they were inprisoned to start with?

Due to a disasterous war with Germany (part of WWI) and the questionable regency by Alexandra while he was at the front, Nicholas the II abdicated the throne (pretty much forced) for himself and his son, in favor of his brother. The brother refused to be Tsar so a provisional government was set up and the family was kept under house arrest in the Alexander Palace (right outside of St. Petersburg where they normally lived) until it could be decided what to do with them...The talk was letting them leave the country for England, but George V was worried about how it would look, basically, so there was much hemming and hawing.

During this time, the soviets rose to power and pretty much became hostile toward the family and moved them from the Alexander Palace to Siberia and eventually a house in Ekaterineburg. The Soviets (The Red Army) were engaged in a civil war with parts of the country who did not want them to take over and as the other army (the White Army) started making progress near where the Tsar and his family were imprisoned. It was determined that they had to be killed so they would not become a rallying point for the White Army if they were captured. I think killing all of them and not just the former Tsar and the former Tsarvitch was simply eaiser for the Red Army instead of allowing the women and retainers to safely leave the country.

In addition to the Tsar and his immediate family, many other family members were murdered as well, including the Tsarina's sister who had become a nun.

[Patience54]

In answer to the above question, I found this on answers.yahoo.com posted by a Russian History buff named "Chels"
I also recommend the Nonfiction Book by Nicholas Sparks, entitled, "Nicholas and Alexandra" it was a best seller in the 1970's.... about the Romanov family...

"Tsar Nicolas II wasn't very good at his job, But he was a really good man and he loved the Russian people. But Russia got into WWI. the war dragged on a lot longer then it was expected to.

Nicolas's son the Tsarevich Alexei (heir to the trown) had hemophilia (a diease that provents blood from clotting) he could die from a small scratch. He was in so much pain so often because of inturnal bleeding. his parents found a man how could help him. he was a peasant named Rasputin. he lessend Alexei's pain by praying over him. The Tsar and his wife kept Alexei's disease a secret from the people of Russia because they didn't want them to worry, so the people didn't know why Rasputin was around the royal family. The russians were confused and upset to see this dirty man with the royal family. They thought he was trying to get power and that he was using the Tsar. The people were mad at Nicolas for allowing Rasputin to have power.

Also the Tsar's wife Tsarina Alexandra was from Germany. Russia was fighting against Germany in the War, and many Russians hated Germany and the Germans. There were some rumors that Alexandra was spying for Germany. She really wasn't she was very loyal to Russia.

It also didn't help Nicolas's popularity any that the war was lasting so long and costing so many lives.

Nicolas ended up abdicating his thrown.

a group called the Bolsheviks took advantage of this weak time and imprisoned and brutally executed the Tsar and his family for power.
Source(s):

Years of research. I love history and the Romanovs."

• 4 years ago
• Report Abuse

[Ted Challinor]

For those interested in this, beg,steal or borrow Nicholas & Alexandra by Robert K Massie. It is THE account of the last of the Romanovs and their downfall. Recommended over and over again here http://www.amazon.com/Nicholas-Alexa.../dp/0345438310

....and adapted into a good British film in 1971

[havoc]

For those interested in this, beg,steal or borrow Nicholas & Alexandra by Robert K Massie. It is THE account of the last of the Romanovs and their downfall. Recommended over and over again here http://www.amazon.com/Nicholas-Alexa.../dp/0345438310

....and adapted into a good British film in 1971

Absolutely! Both the book and the film are riveting. When I taught high school World History, I showed the video in class.

.

[Miho]

Thank you for that explanation.

[Dulcinea]

Absolutely! Both the book and the film are riveting. When I taught high school World History, I showed the video in class.

The book is wonderful. I didn't really like the movie very much (aside from the costumes). I would also recommend "A Lifelong Passion" which is a book that tells the story of Nicholas and Alexandra through their own letter and diary entries and the letters and diary entries of others. It is an excellent "first hand" account.

Several fiction books have come out in the last few years as well. I've read most of them, but the best was "The Kitchen Boy" by Robert Alexander. He followed it up with two more fiction books about the family, but this was by far the best.

Beware, however that most fiction books tend to go on the theory that one or more of the family survived. While I never believed (and we now know) that was not the case, they can be interesting in how it is presented.

[Dave62]

I recommend reading The Last Tsar By Edvard Radzinsky. I've always wondered why the Bolsheviks didn't imprison and murder the dowager Empress, her daughters Olga and Xenia, along with Olga's and Xenia's husbands and children? After all, so many other Romanovs (male and female) suffered the same fate as the Tsar. I "enjoy" the movie Nicholas and Alexandra, but after reading Radzinsky's book you'll realize that so many other people (not included in the film) remained loyal to (and stayed with) the Tsar & Tsarina & their children after his abdication. Nearly all were eventually murdered by the Bolsheviks. It's because of the survivors' memoirs that we know what captivity was like for the Imperial family. The movie made it appear that only a male (tutor?) and a female (nurse?) stayed with them. In the film, Alexei had so many temper-tantrums I expected his head to start spinning around "Linda Blair-Exorcist" style. Most memoirs of the royal family describe a gentler Alexei than the bratty one portrayed on film. Even the film's Tsar shouted in some scenes, whereas one of his many ministers in actuality once exclaimed "I wish he [the Tsar] would get ANGRY about something for once", instead of being casually fatalistic (the Tsar attributed his misfortunes to the fact that he was born on the feast day of Job). I really enjoy Lionel Barrymore's performance as Rasputin in Rasputin and the Empress. Apparently MGM failed to realize that many of the people portrayed in this film were in fact still very much alive and very litigious ... MGM ended up being sued by those unhappy with the way they were portrayed, and from that point on films started to include the basic message in their credits that "any similarity to actual persons living or dead is coincidental." This is probably why Ingrid Bergman's 1950's film Anastasia omitted both Olga and Xenia from its storyline. Both of the Tsar's sisters were still alive at the time the film was made, whereas the dowager Empress (played by Helen Hayes in the film) had died back in 1928. Olga actually met with "Anna Anderson" and was presumably pressured by the dowager Empress et al. relatives to declare Anderson an impostor, although Olga admitted "in her heart" that she felt that Anderson was probably Anastasia.

[Ted Challinor]

oh God Dulcinea I purposely didn't mention 'A lifelong passion' cos I read it just once and it moved me to tears...still have it, virtually untouched.
Listen, come the revolution I would be first to man the barricades!!! - but if someone mentioned the Romanovs and I'd be telling everyone to go home, it's not worth it....

[jhpeters2]

As is typical, children are murdered at the behest of marxists. One must break a few eggs to make an omelette. Noble intentions or not, why did the bolsheviks need to kill little girls? Why? Why? Evidently murder solves everything.... Name the marxist that intoned that. I dare you. Hint his initials were JS.

[Dave62]

As is typical, children are murdered at the behest of marxists. One must break a few eggs to make an omelette. Noble intentions or not, why did the bolsheviks need to kill little girls? Why? Why? Evidently murder solves everything.... Name the marxist that intoned that. I dare you. Hint his initials were JS

Yet for some unknown reason the Bolsheviks spared the cook’s little-boy assistant. (The cook himself was also murdered, along with Dr. Botkin, a valet and a maid.) The day of the execution, the boy was taken away under the pretext that his uncle had come to visit him, and Alexandra’s last diary entry includes a comment about this incident, ending with “wonder if it’s true and if we will ever see him again?”

Further recommended reading: chapter 15 of Dead Men Do Tell Tales by William R Maples PhD. He (along with several other experts) was invited by the Russians to examine the Imperial skeletal remains to try and determine what was left of whom, who was missing, etc.