Literally this video has cleared my misconceptions about Nicholas 2's reign . What I realized is that the communist regime brainwashed the facts ( brainwashing at its best) Had Russia's political situation been stable, it would have become more powerful than it was.
@@jmeyer3rn I agree completely. I love the whole family but those four girls are my heart and soul. I felt a strong connection to Olga from the moment I first saw her. I asked her to be my patron saint during a dark time in my life and I received a powerful response within minutes. I really believe she chose me. Life hasn't been the same for me since; it's been so much better.
@@buffettfan just a beautiful, tender message. These young children, really, were really truly royal. They learned to take care of hideous war injuries with their mother’s lead. I can’t imagine a monarchy torn to shreds like they were. I understand no form of government is perfect. Certainly a democratic republic is in shreds right now. I fear for Americans becoming the hirelings of the Chinese for God’s sake. And I don’t use God’s name lightly here. This family is with God, and it is a beautiful family and an example for us all ended tragically way too soon.
Thanks for this clip!! I am a Romanov enthusiast, and this clip shows there me there is a lot to learn of the Tsar & his family. Once again, thanks for this clip, which helps me learn more new things of the Romanov family!!
Nicholas was the leader Russia needed and the right one as he did his best to make it a better place. It was unfair how he was demonized and wrongfully forced to abdicate as Russia was put in the wrong hands.
The Romanov Royal Martyrs if only he and his family stayed in power Russia would’ve been saved from all the horrors of the Soviet Union and the current corruption it’s facing today.
Very interesting evidence it seems that the eternal true enemy of Russia in whatever its form is the West, the first Romanovs had not only imposed serfdom but had belittled Russian history, manipulated and distorted it severly, Russias true history goes back to Scythia/Sarmartia called the Father of Nations by Greek historians such as Herodotus and as Russia being the true Mongolians, the word Mongol goes back to the names Gog and Magog the semi-legendary founders of the nations of the Scythians of whose direct descendants were the Russians, the words Gog and Magog are related to the Russian word "Mog" meaning "Might", Mongol is a derivative of Magogli essentiallt the descendants of Gog and Magog, the Germans at the head of the Catholic church had actually cut the connection of the Russians and the Scythians only in the 19th century before that everyone considered Russians direct descendants of these peoples.
I BELIEVE, (IF), RUSSIA, had stayed the country it was,(Kept royalty,as head of state), it WOULD HAVE, BECOME A GREATER COUNTRY,than it is !, (NO, GULAGS / CONCENTRATION/ DEATH CAMPS ETC). SWEDEN, ANDREW DENMARK, have PROVED THIS !
I’m an American convert to Orthodoxy and have a soft spot for the Russia that the Soviets destroyed, and for the Romanovs. However, isn’t it fair to criticize how he handled WW1 and that he miscalculated how dire things had gotten for the lower class in Russia?
I believe the entire western world would be. I also believe dark forces behind the revolution are still around and now executing in full speed their world dominance.
This is an interesting video, but I am afraid it either overlooks important details or completely neglects others about the reign of Nicholas II. You fail to mention Rasputin and he is a critical figure in the private and public lives of the Tsar's family. He negatively influenced important decisions and appointments and this ultimately was the Tsar's fault. There are a plethora of primary source documents that show that Nicholas (in his own words) was deeply lacking in self-confidence. He failed to push Stolypin's land reforms, which even Lenin was afraid might be successful. The list of historical evidence and reasons for his ineptitude are quite lengthy and well supported. Even the monarchists and extreme right-wing factions of Nicholas's day were deeply troubled at his poor leadership. None of that makes him a bad man and certainly I agree, to an extent, that darker forces within and without wished to see his downfall, but that does not change the fact that he was "weak-willed" (in his own words written to his wife). Even Peter Gilliard, tutor to Nicholas's son in his book, 13 Years at the Russian Court presents a balanced view of his gentle nature but weak leadership.
Mind you he wasn’t supposed to be the tzar. But also, from my research and understanding, Rasputin was mostly close with the Tzarina. NOT the Tzar himself.
One thing I read in the book is a simple thing. Tsar Nicholas dressed in a plain uniform no more decorated than the ordinary soldier. He was not pretentious. He seems a very humble individual, quite unlike his British cousin George V. They could have almost been twins. But I have never seen a photo of George without a shiny kingly uniform. Hmmm.
There are plenty of photos of Nicholas in very decorated uniform! And why oh why do people slander George! Do they not remember how close Nicky and Georgy were, and how fond they were of each other? I doubt Nicholas would be happy to hear how bad his cousin's reputation often is today.
Reading the book changed the way I look at Czar Nicholas II and his reign.I learned that he introduced a lot of beneficial reforms in his empire, and that he had genuine concern for Russia. I think that the very fact that he and his family chose to share Russia's fate even after his abdication is proof enough of how much he loved his country.
@@RomanovRoyalMartyrs Your channel is illuminating an is doing much to shed the light of truth on this troubled period of history. There is however one question I have long wished to ask you. What is your opinion of the epic 1971 film 'Nicholas and Alexandra'? I saw it when it premiered 50 years ago and found it to be an impressive effort which I have watched countless times over the intervening years. Yes, I am aware that there were many historical errors and inconsistancies which were utilized in the name of artistic license, but this is common practice in many motion pictures which deal with true events. In my view, full marks were earned by the entire cast with special mention to Michael Jayston. His performance was superb and deserved an Academy Award. He even bore a striking resemblance to the Tsar! Also, I found the settings and the costumes to be flawless, particularly the military uniforms. In short, I greatly admire this film. What do you think?
@@jacksonreilly3441 thank you for your kind words. Unfortunately, the film "Nicholas and Alexandra" has an abundance of historical inaccuracies (to put it mildly). Having said that, we do agree that the acting is superb, but that does not justify the distortion of history presented in the movie.
@@RomanovRoyalMartyrs You are quite right of course. As I did mention, there were many errors made for what I consider "artistic license" The first time I saw it in 1971, I noticed about half a dozen and then more with each subsequent viewing. Nevertheless, I still love the film as what I think of as historical fiction and watch it about once or twice each year.I guess it is what is referred to as a guilty pleasure!
1000th like ! This week was baptised in the Orthodox and took the name Nicholas as tsar Nicholas II is the man who planted the seed for my faith in orthodoxy ❤️☦️
Insightful and fascinating video about the life Tsar Nicholas II he was a good loving man who dearly loved his family but Nicholas II trusted the wrong people in his inner circle 🔵
Woodrow Wilson was thrilled when Tsar Nicholas abdicated; for a learned man he was very stupid. All that happened is that Russia, which had always been a friend of the United States, soon became its implacable enemy, which it is even to this day. The world, in general, was better off with Imperial Russia, but so it was with Austria Hungary and Imperial Germany also.
Yes, but he was thrilled because he thought Kerensky and the republican forces would take over Russia, not the Soviets. If only Kerensky hadn't announced his intention to continue the war. He would have had more public support.
Russia was never friend of the US. Imperial Russia often ignored America and its shenanigans since it had nothing to do with it. The only interaction was the Alaska purchase which happened only cause Aleksandr II lost the Crimean war and the country needed money. Otherwise Alaska would have remained a Russian domain to these days.
I am glad to have you, fritzbasset8645 telling us what the world needed. Surely, your unbiased infallible views have come purely from rational, faithful and holistic research, and not from some western perspective!
Beautiful video, I loved all of it. Thank you. Terrible sad ending to this patriotic and kind man. The Tzar was a victim of his immense kindness and loyalty to his people whom he loved as he did his beloved Country. Being too good was his fault that's why he was assassinated as was his adorable wife and beautiful inocent children, all done by order of criminal sadic rulers of his time. God always put things in its place, it may take time but He always does. So much so that that what exactly was done after so many decades passed. May God keep their inocent souls in eternal peace. Glory to Russia and its good people. I certainly am going to by the book sugested.
Nicholas failure is not what Soviet put on him, rather his own doing. He lacked of the ability and political shrewdness to rule in the time of turbulence. His wife was no help either. The royal family did not give him adequate education and support to survive in his position. If he was a competent (sharp minded) Tsar, he would not have underestimated his opponents.
From young age he was everything christianity was, during his reign he built 50,000 churches across the country. He was a man of god, a kind one...but not stupid. Thank you Tsar Nicolai, Serbia owes you everything!
And you also have to remember that Nicholas was blamed for every single thing that happened to Russians because there was so much propaganda against the Tsar and the Royal monarchy which had links to Germany and Britain. There were many reasons that the bureaucrats and Russia did not want Nicholas and his family to survive, never mind hold. I feel a deep connection with the tzar and his family and I've never known why exactly. There's just something very moving not just about the fact of their death, but just the type of people they were and what they tried to do for their family.
He was not weak and he was not stupid. Tsar Nicholas was a very intelligent kind and thoughtful man who never wanted to be the head of any government, never mind Russia. But when he became the tsar, he did the best job he could. And he paid dearly for all the mistakes that were made in his name. It is shameful what they did to him in his family, They could have just let them go. He didn't want Power. He was more concerned about his family's well-being. And if there was ever a zar of Russia that cared about his people, it would have been Nicholas. Because he was that type of person, who was thoughtful and intelligent and sensitive
@@brober if I remember right he didn't even want to be Tsar. Plus seeing his grandfather on his death bed after Alexander's assassination probably didn't help his nerves
@@anthonyreynolds1995 Nicholas would have made a fine Constitutional monarch like his look a like cousin George V. But as a absolute autocrat he was a disaster for Russia.
@@brober The beginning of the 20th century's tragedy of Russia was the assassination of Alexander ii (1891). He not only abolished serfdom (1861). He was planning to introduce a constitution and set up a two-house legislature (Along the lines of the UK's) [Anarchists/Internationalists and the Muslims in Chechnya/Dagestan didn't like him] (History rolls onward ^^ ... Jus' sayin') Yes, Nicholas ii was a lousy Tsar! He should have abdicated (early on) in favor of his younger brother, Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich. However, neither Nicholas ii mother or his wife wanted him to abdicate. Within the marriage, his wife was the stronger personality.
@@here_we_go_again2571 If his father Alexander III had not died at 48yo and lived another 20 years the history of Russia would have been totally different.
"tsar feodore IV": what would you do if I told you that tsar nicholas had secret grandchildren and I decended from nicholas ? Saint Rasputin told nickolas that if he or one of his family kill rasputin none of them would remain alive if they stay in russia. I suspect one of the daughters did it by encouragement from yusipov (? "pope" pious 12) and later he tried to undo the damage he had done by joining the nazis. Help bring me into power over russia and bellorussia and ukraine..
Hi, I really love this channel. I want to learn everything I can about Russian history... I was a bit taken aback by some of the statements made in this video. Every country has its blemishes, I am an American and as everyone knows we have our fair share. However I feel like some things stated in this video were to almost one up other countries to make Russia look flawless. I'm just here to be educated. There were several unnecessary "shots" taken at other countries and its not right. I have learned A LOT of the information provided in this video elsewhere without the truly snide remarks... I don't believe the Romanovs were evil or stupid and I'm here to learn more about them and the rest of Russia. Don't ruin this lovley channel by putting other countries' flaws center stage to drive home points and facts that we're all here to educate ourselves about in the first place...
@@unclenelvis I am paraphrasing... An honestly I didn't get through the entire video because I was so dissapointed. When they give the example of serfdom, and that it didn't last as long as people think it did, that it was brought about by "western minded rulers" "Peter the first" and "German Empress Catherine the II". That it was ended relatively peacefully unlike slavery in the United States that took a war and half a million dead to end. Are these factual statements? Yes.. Are they nessicary? No. Especially in the way they were presented.
@@unclenelvis I did provide one, though there were many.. Though I didn't really owe you any reply.. I don't spend all of my time on RUclips... Im sorry I even entertained your request as you were so rude and impatient...
This video is not just about Nicholas but at a deeper level about a long-standing malaise between east and west which split politically in 395 and religiously in 1053. Materialism, the enlightenment, science and communism did come from the west, and Russia and the east became intoxicated by it. Nicholas at heart may have wanted to return to a time before that happened but he also enjoyed western habits like smoking and tennis so it’s complex. The west too had a more innocent time to look back to and slavery which had been so uncommon in the Middle Ages came back with a vengeance during the time of the renaissance and the discovery. What I found really insightful about the film was the part on World War I and America waiting for the monarchy to be toppled in russia before coming in in the side of the Allies. And a few decades before Germany started to rattle feathers in the 1900s, Russia was considered by the British to be the main adversary. That explains Lloyd Georges statement after Nicholas abdication. When you think of how loyal Nicholas was to his Allie’s launching offensives to relieve German pressure and divert German resources from the west , it shows that here again he was betrayed. I commend the video for shedding light from another interesting perspective.
Listen to Benjamin Friedmans speech. Americans were backing the Germans until the Tsar abdicated, and then everything turned on a dime. Destroying Tsarist Russia was the actual main motivation of WW I in the first place.
I once read that in American and Britian they ran newspapers saying the tsar was executed under treason and the rest of the family was alive, this propaganda of course. Britian also payed a ton of money to the Bolsheviks and there were many talks among French aristocrats to get rid of Nicholas, if the French were doing that then others were
I always thought he was a good and holy man. So glad to have watched this video. Also his beautiful wife and family. So glad the Russian Orthodox Church has made them Saints
Royal Romanov Matyr Russia made a great mistake abolishing the mistake and the West made a big mistake in ending Nicholas’s reign. If the Revolution didn’t happen then Russia would of been a much better place to live. While he wasn’t flawless nor incapable of making mistakes he was still a impressive and capable emperor and leader. Tsar really needs a Tsar badly as it’s current leader is running Russia to the ground with his reign.
He wasn’t just naive he was detrimentally incompetent. The catalogue of his mistakes and failures would be fascinating and almost comical if the consequences weren’t so absolutely dire. He truly is history’s biggest failson.
Thank you for these fascinating videos. It means so much to me to find a source which can help unravel the web of lies I was taught in school regarding the Russian Revolution and more 🙏♥️
He was a weak leader. He ignored the rumblings of revolution. His extended family and members of his Duma tried to warn him. He let the Czarina control the government while he was gone which was a disaster. He was preoccupied with family and simple matters rather than the well being of his people and the running of the country. This video portray's Russia as being so advanced. However, if this were true at this time, why was their military capability so far behind in equipment and preparedness? If their grain and food production so so great, why were people starving and why did they storm Petrograd in search of food? Sad what they did to his family but this video paints him as blameless. He was not cut out for this job and 300 years of rule was lost because of his incompetence.
Thank you so much for this video! My family was a noble family in Russia who served the Czars and I think it is so tragic what happened to them. I hope more truth about how wonderful Czar Nicholas II really was is put out there because the truth needs to come out. He truly was a kind man and my great grandfather was killed by the Bolsheviks because he defended the Czar
his incompetence, tone deafness, deep antisemitism, and cynicism do enough damage to his reputation amongst actual historians. his allowing Rasputin & Alix to choose ministers during the war was one of the final straws
honestly the more i learn about the King, the Kaiser and the Tsar the sadder it gets, they weren't perfect, but definetly deserved better, Wilhelm being treated as if he was the devil himself and as the only one to blame for the war (which then the second war showed the world what a actual devil was like) Nicholas being mocked and disrespected for his good nature and kindness(and the second war again showed why thats was important in a leader with Stalin causing so much death for his people both during and before the war, being so cold blooded that he left even his own son to die) and George who even though wanted to help Nicolas, was unable to do anything, since even though he had a title of a king in actuality he was nothing but a dog on a leash in the british's hand, having no actual power
Although I agree with the video, the only problem was a unjust mischarectorization of Kaiser Wilhelm as a war monger, like the tsar himself it was the minister of Germany who were the probelm.
Excuse me, but Japan desperately tried to negotiate with Russia to avoid conflict and war. Backdoor negotations, bribery, colonial deals is Asia, Japan tried to offer other ways to avoid a war. But Nicholas insisted, due to his expansionist aims and legacy for his reign. The surprise attack is part of Japan’s strategy, so what? They won. It is not Japan’s fault that Russia was ill-prepared in all levels. Nicholas and his generals even looked down on Japan’s military might thinking it would be a ‘quick win’. Well look what happens when blind arrogance prevails..
At the timestamp 12:50 a lot of rather preposterous inaccuracies are spoken. The independence of the caucasus countries, such as Azerbaijan and Georgia are reduced to the "greed" of foreign powers for the "oil and manganese". Georgia declared independence itself, not any Italians. Ever heard of the Transcaucasian Federation? The West was clearly supporting the White Army over Ukraine and Poland. If the whites stood any chance they would have stood on their side against all the newly independent states. "The west gave its arms to the Poles" they barely did and the few divisions that came were purely Polish Blue Army. Britain refused to support Poland even against the Bolshevik invasion. Also, you claim that Poland invaded and occupied Kiev and Smolensk, that's entirely false. Poland just regained independence and tried to reunite its territories Russia, Prussia and Austria took from it during the partitions. Smolensk was never reached. The last time Poland had Smolensk was in 1610. The Kiev offensive of 1920 was together with the Ukrainian forces of Petlura against the Bolsheviks, not the Whites.
I have always admired Tsar Nicholas and never believed him to have been weak or unintelligent. He never expected to become Tsar at 26 and was overawed by the responsibilities he inherited when his father died. Having said that, he stepped up manfully with an unshakeable faith in God to the tasks ahead. Like all mortals, he made mistakes but he persevered in his royal duties as "Batiushka Tsar" of his people and his memory should never be sullied. It angers me every time I read derogatory comments about this great and humble God-fearing sovereign. I look forward to your new video.
Xenophobia? Wasn't the Romanov dynasty antisemitic? The pogoms? A much revered man here in Melbourne, Australia was Simcha Myer Baevski, who escaped poverty and pogroms in the Russian Empire in 1899. He became known as Sidney Myer, who went on to own the largest and most famous Myer department stores here. Myer set up a philanthropic foundation, that among other work atm is involved in Community Refugee Sponsorship
@@debbieanne7962 yes they should have said in Russia proper as the Pale of Settlement where the pogroms mainly occurred was in Ukraine/Poland and then part of the Russian Empire. Nicholas in private blamed the Jews for being the authors of their own misfortune but he did not command the pogroms or support them. The empress Alexandra was more sympathetic to the Jewish plight and wrote to him to improve their conditions before the revolution. .
"tsar feodore IV":did he also own meijer supermarket in america ? What would you do if I told you that tsar nicholas had secret grandchildren and I decended from nicholas and meijer supermarket put drugs in my food?
@Debbie Pretty After the assassination of Alexander II, his son, Alex III (a total anti-semite), put into effect a raft of blatantly ant-jewish laws - this vid repeats the comical canard that they were enacted to "protect" the jews - the result was a mass jewish emigration which didn't end until WWI which made departing Russia impossible. Nicholas did nothing to revoke/repeal these laws, which doubtless resulted in many Jews joining revolutionary organisations.
@@condelevante4 This is absolutely true, gifted comment. Emperor Nicholas II himself never ordered any pogroms, not even Alexander III. Yes! Nicholas II got the pogroms stopped, but should have hit hard on those who caused these damn pogroms. The emperor should have taken better care of his large Jewish population. True, no country in Europe had a particularly loving relationship with its Jewish peoples. The Nordic countries had the best relationship with their Jewish minority. It is also worth mentioning that the pogroms (persecutions) of the Jews became even worse after 1917, most widespread in western Ukraine.
When he met with a group of political moderates who asked for some liberalizing reforms, he told them their ideas were “senseless dreams,” and that he would reign in in the manner of “My unforgettable father,” a hard-hearted ultraconservative.
Nicholas' lifetime guiding principle, was unfortunately "what would daddy do?". Weak was always the wrong word for him - "stubborn" being better a better label- thus he never willingly reversed a policy of his father's - however wrong-headed.
Everytime I'd heard about Tsar Nicholas II being an idiot or something, I was always fast to doubt those statements. It's a shame how modern perspectives slander him so much.
Narrator: "do not call Nicholas intellectually limited." Also Narrator: "He was not an intellectual. And there have been no great rulers who were intellectuals." Saying this all with a straight face 😂
I too was taught that he was incompetent, but the more I read and learn outside of the polish state education programme it turns out he was the next reformer tsar, I remember, Poland had two distinct factions, one pro central powers, one pro entente and pro russian, Warsaw flourished, industry grew, maybe he was put on the throne too early, but this shows the issue in a new light, that he did the best he could with the cards that were dealt to him, ultimately russia fell to bolshevism and cultural destruction, and poland was coup'd by a socialist who was from the pro central powers faction
Yeah the two factions you are talking about is Endecja, who accepted all the repressions of the Tsarist Regime and on the other side the Pilsudski faction that wanted real independence and wasn't "pro-central power". He refued to give an oath to the German Emperor and was arrested for that. Of course Pilsudski was fighting on the side of Austria agianst Russia and it was the right choice as it turns out. Russia collapsed into civil war and soon the central powers lost too, which gave the opportunity to create an independent state.
@@jamahariya piłsudski refused to accept to attack the reds cause according to him the reds were better, this is why the whites lost at the moment when the reds were weakest, piłsudski said no to the UK and France to kill communism, some foresight
the stats on literacy rate in the russian empire is just blatantly false. In 1897, literacy in the Russian Empire was only 28.4 percent. In 1916, just before the revolution, literacy was at 56 percent. The Soviets made illiteracy a huge national issue, pushing through education reforms and programs for adult learners, and achieved 75 percent literacy by 1937.
Russia probably had he most repressive government in all of Europe. Czar Nicholas II was an absolute monarch, and monarchy is a form of tyranny. This is a fact regardless of the personal character of Nicholas. He was certainly not the worst of Russia Czar. Probably just an mediocrity. He might have survived had he kept Russia out of World War I. Perhaps he might have fared better if he'd not taken command of the Russian army, hopelessly outclassed by the German army, as his command meant he would get the blame for the disasters at the Front.
This is the reason why I sympathize and support the monarchy as a monarchist, I am disgusted with people like the soviets for betraying a good man like him
The crack elite guards had gone to the front and had been killed off By 1917. Their replacements were untested and defected. The promises and dreams of the resolution fooled everyone.
As each of us watch this as students of History. I hope everyone knows that this could all happen again. And we must not allow any people on this planet to be demonized and vilified. We must always seek the truth. And we must always defend Liberty where it is at risk. What if Tsar Nicholas and his family were able to go to Britain, think of what Russia would be today. Think about if World War I never happened, what would the world be like. We must not allow these things to happen again anywhere. Evil comes of itself, when good people do nothing.
It's a sad yet interesting turn of events as you continue watching this. Everything that is mentioned, particularly the role of the allied forces when Czar Nicholas and Russia need them most - is most intriguing... some may be shocked but i'm not. Competition between the super powers is no new thing. I can easily believe your assertions... as sad as this is to say. Russia needed Great Britain & USA yet they failed to come to aid. So sad... however the Romanovs (peace be upon them) are forever immortalised now with this newfound information. We must remember these wrongs, acknowledge the truth and spread it so we can learn from the wrongs of the past and never repeat them again.
(03:09): "It was precisely the treachery of untrustworthy and incompetent careerists that brought about the Tsar’s abdication." There is a word in Russian for such scoundrels, and it is BOYAR KRAMOLNIKH!
serfdom was liquidated by Aleksander III but the laws that he created made the situation rather worse . Most of peasants were ignorant . they had to rent their lands and often fell in debths . Of course he was a little bit naive . But also most of his suppoters even relatives betrayed him
He was a good man who loved his family, but just wasn't good as a leader. Worse is that because of the mindset behind the Czars, it helped bring about his end since he could have stepped down, but sadly he didn't.
He was an okay leader. He made reforms in education and health care. He was completely incompetent as a general though. And he never should have declared war on the Triple Alliance. But he felt compelled because he saw himself as the protector of all Slavs.
Nicholas the II is a Emperor which had his story completely messed up, despite doing everything he could, just like the Last brazillian Emperor, D.Pedro the II
Serfdom in Russia existed long before Peter the Great and was not a western import. In fact by the early 12th century the peasantry of the Kievan Russ were being turned into slaves of sorts. There was a rule that allowed the peasantry to leave their estate on Yuri's day but that was revoked by Boris Godunov in 1597. False Dimitry I reinstated this law in 1605 but it was fully repealed once again in 1649 by Tsar Alexei. Moreover to sImply claim that Stolypin gave to the poor is misleading as he partly broke up the communal land system and thereby confiscated land from the poor. He never confiscated land from the aristocracy. It is widely suspected that Stolypin was murdered on the orders of embittered conservatives and Nicholas actually stoped the investigation into who was responsible for Stolypin's murder. In the late 19th century and first decade of the 20th century Pogroms were the worst in Russia. From 1903 to 1906 up to 2500 jews were murdered, more so than those murdered in France, Germany and Austria Hungary combined during this period. The riots were not effectively discouraged given that many local government officials took part in them and few perpetrators were punished, not to mention that from 1881 to 1917 jews were discriminated against which only encouraged anti semitic sentiment. The Jews did not move to the the Russian empire fleeing persecution from Western Europe, their ancestors had been living in what was then the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth when it was partitioned in the 18th century. In fact starting from the early 19th century and up to the empire collapse the jews fled en masse to the USA. The Pale of Settlement where many jews were forced to start was not because the government wanted to protect them it was because it was anti semitic and wanted to segregate from the rest of society much like the apartheid government did in South Africa. Their were plenty of Eastern Europeans who served as guards in Nazi concentration camps and took part in pogroms and helped the Nazis round up jews during the Second World War. Japan attacked Russia in large part because the Russians refused to guarantee to the Japanese that they would stay out of Korea, war could have been avoided had the Russians simply kept to Manchuria but some in the Russian government wanted a war to distract from domestic issues and Nicholas was persuaded by the Kaiser to not back down. Whats more Russia leading up to the Russo-Japanese war spent up to 18% of it's budget on military spending which though less than it's neighbors was not exactly a small number.
Putin said something in an interview like the woke crisis that we are living in the West already happened in Russia. I understand better now. Thanks. ❤
Anyone have an answer for this Tzar Nicholas II related question, bear with me my facts are cloudy. This is in fact a true story but I am finding a tough time finding any mention of it online Do not even know what keywords to type into google to find this. but here goes: Two hundred or so yrs before Nicholas IIs reign, a Tzar or a member of the russian Clergy who was known to be a little crazy, wrote a secret letter, adressing "The future Tsar in the year 1901. The letter was kept under lock and key until its opening. It was a big event in russia when Nic and his wife came to the Kremlin or wherever to claim the letter. And after reading they never revealed its contents, but said they left very distraught and as white as a ghost. Rumor has it they were told of the impending end of their dynasty via prophesy? Where can I find mention of this?
As always, thanks for sharing! In my opinion, Nicholas II wasn’t the best. He tried his best as he loved his country. But which sovereign with good intentions is great? He cannot bebés compared with other great Tsars/Emperors/Kings as all were in different circumstances. Regardless of his good intentions, good or bad decisions, German wife, Rasputin or any other thing, too much things, event, countries, people, idiologies were against him and he would have eventually fallen.
Certainly the education about Russian history in the west has been abysmal. The education about the West's own history in the West is poor. Mark Twain noted that history is written in fluid prejudice. It is amazing how hardly any history about the strength of the US-Russian friendship during the 19th century is ever taught. Nicholas II's grandfather Alexander II was Abraham Lincoln's greatest ally during the US Civil War and sent his navies from St Petersburg to New York City and from Vladivostok to San Francisco to assist the Union Navy in patrol and as a discouragement to Great Britain and France from forcing Lincoln to recognize the Confederacy in Great Britain's case from storming the Anaconda Blockade to get the Confederacy's cotton, which fueled Britain's economy like OPEC's oil does the world's today. France had designs o Mexico that would be more easily realized with a splintered US. Also, Alexander II freed the serfs two years before Lincoln penned the Emancipation Proclamation. Six Russian sailors are buried on Mare Island north of San Francisco, the oldest US military cemetery on the west coast. They died helping to put out a fire in San Francisco. It was from that trusted alliance that we and Russia struck the bargain for Alaska. Seward had been Lincoln's Secretary of State and he carried on through Andrew Johnson's term to secure that real estate in 1867 off the great relationship he had with Russian Ambassador the US and then Foreign Minister Eduard Andreevich Stoeckl cultivated during the US Civil War. It is also fascinating to remember de Tocqueville's prediction about the enterprising US republic and the emerging Russian Eurasian hegemony how each nation as destined to greatness and to gold the future of half the world in their hands. He made that prediction in the 1830s when none of that was certain. Sad that even with honest reasons for our current adversarial positions, that none of this history is also shared where we can understand that we had a great relationship with Russia for much of our history and we should always hope that we can work toward that again. We are allies now with many nations who were our enemies long since Russia was our only friend in need and in deed during the greatest threat our nation ever faced.
This video is so good and give information shortly but effective, the basic facts that are very important in this. Thank you The Romanov Royal Martyrs for telling the truth about Nicholas II.
Listening to the Revolutions podcast and it seems that Nicholas, though a good husband and father, was a terrible leader. He believed he understood the Russian people better then they did themselves. His death was a crime, his overthrow no.
Remember Russia up to WWI was in great progress in all areas, especially agricultural / industrial. During Nicholas II there were no large death toll, due to drought / famine, the Tsar's government took care of starving people were taken off. Directly opposite the Bolsheviks, who gave Ukraine Holodomor, but also starved the other peoples of the Soviet Union.
From what I read, and seeing this video, Tzar Nicholas, was certainly a kind man, Tragically Killed with his Family, a Dark period for Russian History.... Rest in Peace To the Romanovs ❤
Tsar Nicolas was horrified when he became Tsar. Too young and unprepared - his older brother died, pushing Nicholas to the throne. He tried very hard but he was eaten alive along with his lovely family. RIP to the Romonovs. 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
If you ever read Gulag Archipelago the auther Solzhenitzyn remarked that what the traded the Tsar for was far worse than anything that came before even people like Lenin were simply shipped away as opposed to being sent to camps to die
I'm not sure what to think of this video tbh. I feel like some of the problems that happened under his reign are being downplayed here and it suggests that he never made any bad decisions. I don't think he was "reactionary" (that was pretty much his father). I think he was convinced that liberalism was unsafe. Serfdom was not a Russian thing, but Russia was among the last to abolish it. Many of the problems the empire had been due to Nicholas I (1825-1855?) and his refusal to modernize. what sources are there that the peaceful protest on Bloody Sunday was anything but peaceful? As for the stampede at his coronation, no one said that he was responsible for the stampede. Rather, it was his "slow" response to the tragedy. He could've ignored the advisor who told him not to cancel that party with the French. I don't think he was as weak as most people made him out to be, but to say he wasn't easily swayed is way too simplistic. What I will agree in this video was everything that said about Alix.
It’s clear that what your saying about Nicholas II is mostly from Western Propaganda. Nicholas II didn’t think liberalism was safe but radical fare left revolutionary ideology and wasn’t adverse to change. Alexander III had no problem with change only change that would doom Russia. While Nicholas I wasn’t wild about modernization he did allow to happen as the economy increased, gave the empire education, more architectural projects happened and Russian literature flourished under his reign. He also despised serfdom and only allowed it to continue so chaos won’t happen in the empire. He just thought it would decay Russian Society. Also Nicholas II has inept ministers who caused problems in his reign and Nicholas did showed that he cared about them by giving them his money and meeting with them. Also The Book Royal Romanov Matyr revealing the truth about what actually happened in Nicholas II’s reign. Also The Royal Romanov Matyr isn’t saying that Nicholas II is perfect nor a flawless leader it’s saying that Nicholas was too soft on the revolutionaries and that lead to problems in Russia. Good leaders and rulers make bad decisions being a good ruler or leader doesn’t mean your a perfect one. Like what The Mad Monarchist said Nicholas II’s reign wasn’t a series of disasters as it was portrayed as. Also like what The Mad Monarchist said Nicholas II being easily swayed wasn’t true in the least bit that was history being written by the Revolutionaries.
I don't know if this is historically accurate. In the last czars series, it says Nicholas was an antisemitic man. Of course, there can be many different points of view, and only God knows the truth.
Literally this video has cleared my misconceptions about Nicholas 2's reign . What I realized is that the communist regime brainwashed the facts ( brainwashing at its best)
Had Russia's political situation been stable, it would have become more powerful than it was.
It's tragic how badly they are slandered.
@@buffettfan indeed
I think Nicholas and his wife and children were such an amazing and Christian family. Sadly way too much went against them. Holy Martyrs.
@@jmeyer3rn I agree completely. I love the whole family but those four girls are my heart and soul. I felt a strong connection to Olga from the moment I first saw her. I asked her to be my patron saint during a dark time in my life and I received a powerful response within minutes. I really believe she chose me. Life hasn't been the same for me since; it's been so much better.
@@buffettfan just a beautiful, tender message. These young children, really, were really truly royal. They learned to take care of hideous war injuries with their mother’s lead. I can’t imagine a monarchy torn to shreds like they were. I understand no form of government is perfect. Certainly a democratic republic is in shreds right now. I fear for Americans becoming the hirelings of the Chinese for God’s sake. And I don’t use God’s name lightly here. This family is with God, and it is a beautiful family and an example for us all ended tragically way too soon.
I will forever be horrified by all the Soviets did to Russia. 70 years of cultural destruction. It was a disgraceful era.
And murderous
You speak truth! Many of us in the US call those kind of horrible people Democrat's as they want to do the same.
I agree the West should of stopped them from taking over and brought Nicholas II back to power we wouldn’t have the Cold War nor The Soviet Union.
Joan Lewallen Russia as empire with a monarch was much better there was no good reason to overthrow him nor abolish the monarchy at all.
Maureen Barnes and nightmarish, inhumane and pure evil.
You can see the kindness in his eyes, his smile. very handsome man
Thanks for this clip!! I am a Romanov enthusiast, and this clip shows there me there is a lot to learn of the Tsar & his family. Once again, thanks for this clip, which helps me learn more new things of the Romanov family!!
Treason all around and the Tsar was betrayed to death.
One of the most slandered and misunderstood men in history! I am enjoying the book so much. What a wonderful man he was!
Thank you so much for your kind words and your positive feedback!
Nicholas was the leader Russia needed and the right one as he did his best to make it a better place. It was unfair how he was demonized and wrongfully forced to abdicate as Russia was put in the wrong hands.
The Romanov Royal Martyrs if only he and his family stayed in power Russia would’ve been saved from all the horrors of the Soviet Union and the current corruption it’s facing today.
Very interesting evidence it seems that the eternal true enemy of Russia in whatever its form is the West, the first Romanovs had not only imposed serfdom but had belittled Russian history, manipulated and distorted it severly, Russias true history goes back to Scythia/Sarmartia called the Father of Nations by Greek historians such as Herodotus and as Russia being the true Mongolians, the word Mongol goes back to the names Gog and Magog the semi-legendary founders of the nations of the Scythians of whose direct descendants were the Russians, the words Gog and Magog are related to the Russian word "Mog" meaning "Might", Mongol is a derivative of Magogli essentiallt the descendants of Gog and Magog, the Germans at the head of the Catholic church had actually cut the connection of the Russians and the Scythians only in the 19th century before that everyone considered Russians direct descendants of these peoples.
I BELIEVE, (IF), RUSSIA, had stayed the country it was,(Kept royalty,as head of state), it WOULD HAVE, BECOME A GREATER COUNTRY,than it is !, (NO, GULAGS / CONCENTRATION/ DEATH CAMPS ETC). SWEDEN, ANDREW DENMARK, have PROVED THIS !
I’m an American convert to Orthodoxy and have a soft spot for the Russia that the Soviets destroyed, and for the Romanovs. However, isn’t it fair to criticize how he handled WW1 and that he miscalculated how dire things had gotten for the lower class in Russia?
Agree, I think Nicholas tried his best, but one man's best is hardly enough to save an empire.
... he was lied to re War circumstances. Also, re the serfs, he got tremendous pushback from the aristocracy.
Did anyone else do better?
Jewish Supremacy is the greatest threat to our civilization
I truly believe just from learning about this man, that if they had survived, Russia would be a much better place today.
of course!! it most certainly would
I believe the entire western world would be. I also believe dark forces behind the revolution are still around and now executing in full speed their world dominance.
This is an interesting video, but I am afraid it either overlooks important details or completely neglects others about the reign of Nicholas II. You fail to mention Rasputin and he is a critical figure in the private and public lives of the Tsar's family. He negatively influenced important decisions and appointments and this ultimately was the Tsar's fault. There are a plethora of primary source documents that show that Nicholas (in his own words) was deeply lacking in self-confidence. He failed to push Stolypin's land reforms, which even Lenin was afraid might be successful. The list of historical evidence and reasons for his ineptitude are quite lengthy and well supported. Even the monarchists and extreme right-wing factions of Nicholas's day were deeply troubled at his poor leadership. None of that makes him a bad man and certainly I agree, to an extent, that darker forces within and without wished to see his downfall, but that does not change the fact that he was "weak-willed" (in his own words written to his wife). Even Peter Gilliard, tutor to Nicholas's son in his book, 13 Years at the Russian Court presents a balanced view of his gentle nature but weak leadership.
Rasputin was not as bad as depicted in the press and the media. You have to delve a bit deeper.
Rasputin was anty war.
Mind you he wasn’t supposed to be the tzar. But also, from my research and understanding, Rasputin was mostly close with the Tzarina. NOT the Tzar himself.
@kyleighwhite1409 She was very close to her husband. Rasputin knew that and used it to his benefit.
Rasputin was ignored for the most part by Tsar Nicholas II.
I've always had an ambivalence towards the Tsars. With documentaries like this, I have a new respect for Nicholas II. Thanks ☺️!
The victors, who assassinated half of the Russian tsars, have re-written history.
One thing I read in the book is a simple thing. Tsar Nicholas dressed in a plain uniform no more decorated than the ordinary soldier. He was not pretentious. He seems a very humble individual, quite unlike his British cousin George V. They could have almost been twins. But I have never seen a photo of George without a shiny kingly uniform. Hmmm.
What are you talking about?
There are a ton of pictures of King George V in ordinary clothing.
this is an evidence/fact free zone. carry on ;)@@Anglo-Saxon9
There are plenty of photos of Nicholas in very decorated uniform!
And why oh why do people slander George! Do they not remember how close Nicky and Georgy were, and how fond they were of each other? I doubt Nicholas would be happy to hear how bad his cousin's reputation often is today.
Reading the book changed the way I look at Czar Nicholas II and his reign.I learned that he introduced a lot of beneficial reforms in his empire, and that he had genuine concern for Russia. I think that the very fact that he and his family chose to share Russia's fate even after his abdication is proof enough of how much he loved his country.
You are so "spot on" with your comment! Only if more people could see that..
@@RomanovRoyalMartyrs Your channel is illuminating an is doing much to shed the light of truth on this troubled period of history. There is however one question I have long wished to ask you. What is your opinion of the epic 1971 film 'Nicholas and Alexandra'? I saw it when it premiered 50 years ago and found it to be an impressive effort which I have watched countless times over the intervening years. Yes, I am aware that there were many historical errors and inconsistancies which were utilized in the name of artistic license, but this is common practice in many motion pictures which deal with true events. In my view, full marks were earned by the entire cast with special mention to Michael Jayston. His performance was superb and deserved an Academy Award. He even bore a striking resemblance to the Tsar! Also, I found the settings and the costumes to be flawless, particularly the military uniforms. In short, I greatly admire this film. What do you think?
@@jacksonreilly3441 thank you for your kind words. Unfortunately, the film "Nicholas and Alexandra" has an abundance of historical inaccuracies (to put it mildly). Having said that, we do agree that the acting is superb, but that does not justify the distortion of history presented in the movie.
@@RomanovRoyalMartyrs You are quite right of course. As I did mention, there were many errors made for what I consider "artistic license" The first time I saw it in 1971, I noticed about half a dozen and then more with each subsequent viewing. Nevertheless, I still love the film as what I think of as historical fiction and watch it about once or twice each year.I guess it is what is referred to as a guilty pleasure!
I read the Robert K. Massie biography. It too left me me with the impression that I had been mistaught in school about the last Tsar.
1000th like !
This week was baptised in the Orthodox and took the name Nicholas as tsar Nicholas II is the man who planted the seed for my faith in orthodoxy ❤️☦️
Glory to God! Welcome home, brother.
How beautiful! Congratulations and God bless you. ❤️✝️
you are blesssed! wow! what a great Saint to have!!!😍👍👍👍👍
A wholehearted thank you for this video. The misconceptions and lies about Nicholas and Alexandra have been perpetuated far too long.
Insightful and fascinating video about the life Tsar Nicholas II he was a good loving man who dearly loved his family but Nicholas II trusted the wrong people in his inner circle 🔵
Ο Νικολαϊ ΙΙ δεν αγαπουσε μονο την Οικογενεια του αλλα και την Αγια Ορθοδοξη Ρωσια 🇷🇺🇬🇷🇷🇺🇬🇷🇷🇺🇬🇷
Yeah, his wife and her "friend".
Woodrow Wilson was thrilled when Tsar Nicholas abdicated; for a learned man he was very stupid. All that happened is that Russia, which had always been a friend of the United States, soon became its implacable enemy, which it is even to this day. The world, in general, was better off with Imperial Russia, but so it was with Austria Hungary and Imperial Germany also.
Yes, but he was thrilled because he thought Kerensky and the republican forces would take over Russia, not the Soviets.
If only Kerensky hadn't announced his intention to continue the war. He would have had more public support.
Austria Hungary was pure cancer
No, all of those tyrannical empires had to die.
Russia was never friend of the US. Imperial Russia often ignored America and its shenanigans since it had nothing to do with it. The only interaction was the Alaska purchase which happened only cause Aleksandr II lost the Crimean war and the country needed money. Otherwise Alaska would have remained a Russian domain to these days.
I am glad to have you, fritzbasset8645 telling us what the world needed. Surely, your unbiased infallible views have come purely from rational, faithful and holistic research, and not from some western perspective!
Thank you very much for sharing this intersting video. Some myths really seem to die hard.
Beautiful video, I loved all of it. Thank you. Terrible sad ending to this patriotic and kind man. The Tzar was a victim of his immense kindness and loyalty to his people whom he loved as he did his beloved Country. Being too good was his fault that's why he was assassinated as was his adorable wife and beautiful inocent children, all done by order of criminal sadic rulers of his time. God always put things in its place, it may take time but He always does. So much so that that what exactly was done after so many decades passed. May God keep their inocent souls in eternal peace. Glory to Russia and its good people.
I certainly am going to by the book sugested.
Nicholas failure is not what Soviet put on him, rather his own doing. He lacked of the ability and political shrewdness to rule in the time of turbulence. His wife was no help either. The royal family did not give him adequate education and support to survive in his position. If he was a competent (sharp minded) Tsar, he would not have underestimated his opponents.
I bought your book after being fascinated by these documentaries, thanks for sharing.
From young age he was everything christianity was, during his reign he built 50,000 churches across the country. He was a man of god, a kind one...but not stupid. Thank you Tsar Nicolai, Serbia owes you everything!
Excellent video! Maybe the best I've seen on the misconceptions about Nicholas.
And you also have to remember that Nicholas was blamed for every single thing that happened to Russians because there was so much propaganda against the Tsar and the Royal monarchy which had links to Germany and Britain. There were many reasons that the bureaucrats and Russia did not want Nicholas and his family to survive, never mind hold. I feel a deep connection with the tzar and his family and I've never known why exactly. There's just something very moving not just about the fact of their death, but just the type of people they were and what they tried to do for their family.
Love the summary thank you for it.
Thank you! I’ve been waiting for this video!
He was not weak and he was not stupid. Tsar Nicholas was a very intelligent kind and thoughtful man who never wanted to be the head of any government, never mind Russia.
But when he became the tsar, he did the best job he could. And he paid dearly for all the mistakes that were made in his name.
It is shameful what they did to him in his family, They could have just let them go. He didn't want Power. He was more concerned about his family's well-being. And if there was ever a zar of Russia that cared about his people, it would have been Nicholas. Because he was that type of person, who was thoughtful and intelligent and sensitive
Tsar nicholas looks like kind and good man.
He was. Unfortunately he was a lousy Tsar.
@@brober if I remember right he didn't even want to be Tsar. Plus seeing his grandfather on his death bed after Alexander's assassination probably didn't help his nerves
@@anthonyreynolds1995 Nicholas would have made a fine Constitutional monarch like his look a like cousin George V. But as a absolute autocrat he was a disaster for Russia.
@@brober
The beginning of the 20th century's
tragedy of Russia was the assassination
of Alexander ii (1891).
He not only abolished
serfdom (1861).
He was planning to introduce a
constitution and set up a two-house
legislature (Along the lines of the UK's)
[Anarchists/Internationalists and the
Muslims in Chechnya/Dagestan didn't
like him]
(History rolls onward ^^ ... Jus' sayin')
Yes, Nicholas ii was a lousy Tsar!
He should have abdicated (early on)
in favor of his younger brother,
Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich.
However, neither Nicholas ii mother
or his wife wanted him to abdicate.
Within the marriage, his wife was
the stronger personality.
@@here_we_go_again2571 If his father Alexander III had not died at 48yo and lived another 20 years the history of Russia would have been totally different.
To get to the bottom of recent history and historical figures is a difficult task as the mountain of anti Russian propaganda is overwhelming.
"tsar feodore IV": what would you do if I told you that tsar nicholas had secret grandchildren and I decended from nicholas ? Saint Rasputin told nickolas that if he or one of his family kill rasputin none of them would remain alive if they stay in russia. I suspect one of the daughters did it by encouragement from yusipov (? "pope" pious 12) and later he tried to undo the damage he had done by joining the nazis. Help bring me into power over russia and bellorussia and ukraine..
because they all went to America where they came from.
Hi, I really love this channel. I want to learn everything I can about Russian history... I was a bit taken aback by some of the statements made in this video. Every country has its blemishes, I am an American and as everyone knows we have our fair share. However I feel like some things stated in this video were to almost one up other countries to make Russia look flawless. I'm just here to be educated. There were several unnecessary "shots" taken at other countries and its not right. I have learned A LOT of the information provided in this video elsewhere without the truly snide remarks... I don't believe the Romanovs were evil or stupid and I'm here to learn more about them and the rest of Russia. Don't ruin this lovley channel by putting other countries' flaws center stage to drive home points and facts that we're all here to educate ourselves about in the first place...
Can you give an example of what you describe? Thanks.
@@unclenelvis I am paraphrasing... An honestly I didn't get through the entire video because I was so dissapointed. When they give the example of serfdom, and that it didn't last as long as people think it did, that it was brought about by "western minded rulers" "Peter the first" and "German Empress Catherine the II". That it was ended relatively peacefully unlike slavery in the United States that took a war and half a million dead to end. Are these factual statements? Yes.. Are they nessicary? No. Especially in the way they were presented.
@@Geoemt911 so no examples then? Oh well.
@@unclenelvis I did provide one, though there were many.. Though I didn't really owe you any reply.. I don't spend all of my time on RUclips... Im sorry I even entertained your request as you were so rude and impatient...
@@Geoemt911 oh I’m sorry I didn’t mean to offend you. Can you highlight what I said that was impatient and rude? Thanks.
This video is not just about Nicholas but at a deeper level about a long-standing malaise between east and west which split politically in 395 and religiously in 1053. Materialism, the enlightenment, science and communism did come from the west, and Russia and the east became intoxicated by it.
Nicholas at heart may have wanted to return to a time before that happened but he also enjoyed western habits like smoking and tennis so it’s complex. The west too had a more innocent time to look back to and slavery which had been so uncommon in the Middle Ages came back with a vengeance during the time of the renaissance and the discovery.
What I found really insightful about the film was the part on World War I and America waiting for the monarchy to be toppled in russia before coming in in the side of the Allies. And a few decades before Germany started to rattle feathers in the 1900s, Russia was considered by the British to be the main adversary. That explains Lloyd Georges statement after Nicholas abdication. When you think of how loyal Nicholas was to his Allie’s launching offensives to relieve German pressure and divert German resources from the west , it shows that here again he was betrayed.
I commend the video for shedding light from another interesting perspective.
Listen to Benjamin Friedmans speech. Americans were backing the Germans until the Tsar abdicated, and then everything turned on a dime. Destroying Tsarist Russia was the actual main motivation of WW I in the first place.
I once read that in American and Britian they ran newspapers saying the tsar was executed under treason and the rest of the family was alive, this propaganda of course. Britian also payed a ton of money to the Bolsheviks and there were many talks among French aristocrats to get rid of Nicholas, if the French were doing that then others were
I always thought he was a good and holy man. So glad to have watched this video. Also his beautiful wife and family. So glad the Russian Orthodox Church has made them Saints
Royal Romanov Matyr Russia made a great mistake abolishing the mistake and the West made a big mistake in ending Nicholas’s reign. If the Revolution didn’t happen then Russia would of been a much better place to live.
While he wasn’t flawless nor incapable of making mistakes he was still a impressive and capable emperor and leader. Tsar really needs a Tsar badly as it’s current leader is running Russia to the ground with his reign.
The west didn't end Nicholas' reign. The Russian revolution, led by Russians, ended it.
May they RIP, great video! ☦️ Hopefully when they taxed the rich it didn’t cause prices of goods to go up like in America.
He wasn’t just naive he was detrimentally incompetent. The catalogue of his mistakes and failures would be fascinating and almost comical if the consequences weren’t so absolutely dire. He truly is history’s biggest failson.
It's not his fault his dad never thought him how to take care of a country
Thank you for these fascinating videos. It means so much to me to find a source which can help unravel the web of lies I was taught in school regarding the Russian Revolution and more 🙏♥️
You're very welcome!
“The truth cannot be concealed.” It is never too late to show justice, love, and compassion.
He was a weak leader. He ignored the rumblings of revolution. His extended family and members of his Duma tried to warn him. He let the Czarina control the government while he was gone which was a disaster. He was preoccupied with family and simple matters rather than the well being of his people and the running of the country. This video portray's Russia as being so advanced. However, if this were true at this time, why was their military capability so far behind in equipment and preparedness? If their grain and food production so so great, why were people starving and why did they storm Petrograd in search of food? Sad what they did to his family but this video paints him as blameless. He was not cut out for this job and 300 years of rule was lost because of his incompetence.
of course you are correct. your points are just the tip of the iceberg in the case against 'saint' Nicky. hagiography is not history....
Thank you so much for this video! My family was a noble family in Russia who served the Czars and I think it is so tragic what happened to them. I hope more truth about how wonderful Czar Nicholas II really was is put out there because the truth needs to come out. He truly was a kind man and my great grandfather was killed by the Bolsheviks because he defended the Czar
My Dad named his Siberian Husky Nico after Czar Nicholas, wish I could ask him more about that dog.
Get the book. I did and you won’t be sorry! A real treasure!
He was so unprepared. His father put him down constantly instead of teaching him. Nicholas II's family was murdered because Alexander III was inept.
I think he gets put into view in unflattering light due to his family being so close to Resputin and all the things people believe about him
his incompetence, tone deafness, deep antisemitism, and cynicism do enough damage to his reputation amongst actual historians. his allowing Rasputin & Alix to choose ministers during the war was one of the final straws
honestly the more i learn about the King, the Kaiser and the Tsar the sadder it gets, they weren't perfect, but definetly deserved better, Wilhelm being treated as if he was the devil himself and as the only one to blame for the war (which then the second war showed the world what a actual devil was like) Nicholas being mocked and disrespected for his good nature and kindness(and the second war again showed why thats was important in a leader with Stalin causing so much death for his people both during and before the war, being so cold blooded that he left even his own son to die) and George who even though wanted to help Nicolas, was unable to do anything, since even though he had a title of a king in actuality he was nothing but a dog on a leash in the british's hand, having no actual power
Although I agree with the video, the only problem was a unjust mischarectorization of Kaiser Wilhelm as a war monger, like the tsar himself it was the minister of Germany who were the probelm.
Excuse me, but Japan desperately tried to negotiate with Russia to avoid conflict and war. Backdoor negotations, bribery, colonial deals is Asia, Japan tried to offer other ways to avoid a war. But Nicholas insisted, due to his expansionist aims and legacy for his reign. The surprise attack is part of Japan’s strategy, so what? They won. It is not Japan’s fault that Russia was ill-prepared in all levels. Nicholas and his generals even looked down on Japan’s military might thinking it would be a ‘quick win’. Well look what happens when blind arrogance prevails..
So interesting!
Thank you.Excellent presentation. It brought
tears to my eyes. It’s sad but they’re in a better
place. God bless their souls. Rest In Peace
🙏🙏🙏💒❤️
At the timestamp 12:50 a lot of rather preposterous inaccuracies are spoken.
The independence of the caucasus countries, such as Azerbaijan and Georgia are reduced to the "greed" of foreign powers for the "oil and manganese".
Georgia declared independence itself, not any Italians. Ever heard of the Transcaucasian Federation?
The West was clearly supporting the White Army over Ukraine and Poland. If the whites stood any chance they would have stood on their side against all the newly independent states.
"The west gave its arms to the Poles" they barely did and the few divisions that came were purely Polish Blue Army. Britain refused to support Poland even against the Bolshevik invasion.
Also, you claim that Poland invaded and occupied Kiev and Smolensk, that's entirely false.
Poland just regained independence and tried to reunite its territories Russia, Prussia and Austria took from it during the partitions. Smolensk was never reached. The last time Poland had Smolensk was in 1610. The Kiev offensive of 1920 was together with the Ukrainian forces of Petlura against the Bolsheviks, not the Whites.
I have always admired Tsar Nicholas and never believed him to have been weak or unintelligent. He never expected to become Tsar at 26 and was overawed by the responsibilities he inherited when his father died. Having said that, he stepped up manfully with an unshakeable faith in God to the tasks ahead. Like all mortals, he made mistakes but he persevered in his royal duties as "Batiushka Tsar" of his people and his memory should never be sullied. It angers me every time I read derogatory comments about this great and humble God-fearing sovereign. I look forward to your new video.
Xenophobia? Wasn't the Romanov dynasty antisemitic? The pogoms? A much revered man here in Melbourne, Australia was Simcha Myer Baevski, who escaped poverty and pogroms in the Russian Empire in 1899. He became known as Sidney Myer, who went on to own the largest and most famous Myer department stores here. Myer set up a philanthropic foundation, that among other work atm is involved in Community Refugee Sponsorship
A blatant lie that pogoms did not take place in the Russian Empire!
@@debbieanne7962 yes they should have said in Russia proper as the Pale of Settlement where the pogroms mainly occurred was in Ukraine/Poland and then part of the Russian Empire. Nicholas in private blamed the Jews for being the authors of their own misfortune but he did not command the pogroms or support them. The empress Alexandra was more sympathetic to the Jewish plight and wrote to him to improve their conditions before the revolution. .
"tsar feodore IV":did he also own meijer supermarket in america ? What would you do if I told you that tsar nicholas had secret grandchildren and I decended from nicholas and meijer supermarket put drugs in my food?
@Debbie Pretty After the assassination of Alexander II, his son, Alex III (a total anti-semite), put into effect a raft of blatantly ant-jewish laws - this vid repeats the comical canard that they were enacted to "protect" the jews - the result was a mass jewish emigration which didn't end until WWI which made departing Russia impossible. Nicholas did nothing to revoke/repeal these laws, which doubtless resulted in many Jews joining revolutionary organisations.
@@condelevante4 This is absolutely true, gifted comment. Emperor Nicholas II himself never ordered any pogroms, not even Alexander III. Yes! Nicholas II got the pogroms stopped, but should have hit hard on those who caused these damn pogroms. The emperor should have taken better care of his large Jewish population. True, no country in Europe had a particularly loving relationship with its Jewish peoples. The Nordic countries had the best relationship with their Jewish minority. It is also worth mentioning that the pogroms (persecutions) of the Jews became even worse after 1917, most widespread in western Ukraine.
When he met with a group of political moderates who asked for some liberalizing reforms, he told them their ideas were “senseless dreams,” and that he would reign in in the manner of “My unforgettable father,” a hard-hearted ultraconservative.
Nicholas' lifetime guiding principle, was unfortunately "what would daddy do?". Weak was always the wrong word for him - "stubborn" being better a better label- thus he never willingly reversed a policy of his father's - however wrong-headed.
@@johnvonundzu2170 very true. The Jews certainly didn’t fare well under the Romanovs.
He was too kind that was his problem, he should have not gone to war and crushed his enemies and hanged their leaders.
RIP Tzar Nikolaj thank you! You are always in Serbians hearts.
I read the book is really a great book! Thank you for such a great history of them.
Thank you so much for this video, which is like a breath of fresh air amid lies.
Everytime I'd heard about Tsar Nicholas II being an idiot or something, I was always fast to doubt those statements. It's a shame how modern perspectives slander him so much.
Tsar Nicholas Romanov II was truly a peace maker & ahead of his time. Their death was an international tragedy of global consequences.
What are your sources? Especially about WW1
This book is so wonderful. This family are truly Royal Martyrs.
Narrator: "do not call Nicholas intellectually limited."
Also Narrator: "He was not an intellectual. And there have been no great rulers who were intellectuals."
Saying this all with a straight face 😂
I'm guessing the five languages that Tsar Nicholas II spoke fluently were Russian, English, French, German and...Danish, because of his mother?
Thank you for this!
I too was taught that he was incompetent, but the more I read and learn outside of the polish state education programme it turns out he was the next reformer tsar, I remember, Poland had two distinct factions, one pro central powers, one pro entente and pro russian, Warsaw flourished, industry grew, maybe he was put on the throne too early, but this shows the issue in a new light, that he did the best he could with the cards that were dealt to him, ultimately russia fell to bolshevism and cultural destruction, and poland was coup'd by a socialist who was from the pro central powers faction
Yeah the two factions you are talking about is Endecja, who accepted all the repressions of the Tsarist Regime and on the other side the Pilsudski faction that wanted real independence and wasn't "pro-central power". He refued to give an oath to the German Emperor and was arrested for that.
Of course Pilsudski was fighting on the side of Austria agianst Russia and it was the right choice as it turns out. Russia collapsed into civil war and soon the central powers lost too, which gave the opportunity to create an independent state.
@@jamahariya piłsudski refused to accept to attack the reds cause according to him the reds were better, this is why the whites lost at the moment when the reds were weakest, piłsudski said no to the UK and France to kill communism, some foresight
Wow! Most thought provoking! It actually makes sense.
the stats on literacy rate in the russian empire is just blatantly false.
In 1897, literacy in the Russian Empire was only 28.4 percent. In 1916, just before the revolution, literacy was at 56 percent. The Soviets made illiteracy a huge national issue, pushing through education reforms and programs for adult learners, and achieved 75 percent literacy by 1937.
Russia probably had he most repressive government in all of Europe. Czar Nicholas II was an absolute monarch, and monarchy is a form of tyranny. This is a fact regardless of the personal character of Nicholas. He was certainly not the worst of Russia Czar. Probably just an mediocrity. He might have survived had he kept Russia out of World War I. Perhaps he might have fared better if he'd not taken command of the Russian army, hopelessly outclassed by the German army, as his command meant he would get the blame for the disasters at the Front.
This is the reason why I sympathize and support the monarchy as a monarchist, I am disgusted with people like the soviets for betraying a good man like him
Why was the Czar not surrounded by bodyguards who would have given their lives for their Sovereign?
He was, but they defected.
You missed out an 'a': they defecated!
Не Царя,а императора.Быть ДОБРУ.
The crack elite guards had gone to the front and had been killed off By 1917. Their replacements were untested and defected.
The promises and dreams of the resolution fooled everyone.
As each of us watch this as students of History. I hope everyone knows that this could all happen again.
And we must not allow any people on this planet to be demonized and vilified. We must always seek the truth. And we must always defend Liberty where it is at risk. What if Tsar Nicholas and his family were able to go to Britain, think of what Russia would be today. Think about if World War I never happened, what would the world be like. We must not allow these things to happen again anywhere. Evil comes of itself, when good people do nothing.
It's a sad yet interesting turn of events as you continue watching this. Everything that is mentioned, particularly the role of the allied forces when Czar Nicholas and Russia need them most - is most intriguing... some may be shocked but i'm not. Competition between the super powers is no new thing. I can easily believe your assertions... as sad as this is to say. Russia needed Great Britain & USA yet they failed to come to aid. So sad... however the Romanovs (peace be upon them) are forever immortalised now with this newfound information. We must remember these wrongs, acknowledge the truth and spread it so we can learn from the wrongs of the past and never repeat them again.
You either reign tyranny over the tyrants, or the tyrants reigns tyranny over you.
(03:09): "It was precisely the treachery of untrustworthy and incompetent careerists that brought about the Tsar’s abdication." There is a word in Russian for such scoundrels, and it is BOYAR KRAMOLNIKH!
serfdom was liquidated by Aleksander III but the laws that he created made the situation rather worse . Most of peasants were ignorant . they had to rent their lands and often fell in debths . Of course he was a little bit naive . But also most of his suppoters even relatives betrayed him
Your confusing Alexander with Nicholas
He was a good man who loved his family, but just wasn't good as a leader. Worse is that because of the mindset behind the Czars, it helped bring about his end since he could have stepped down, but sadly he didn't.
He was an okay leader. He made reforms in education and health care. He was completely incompetent as a general though. And he never should have declared war on the Triple Alliance. But he felt compelled because he saw himself as the protector of all Slavs.
Tsar Nicholas II was NOT a direct descendant of King Henry VII. 👑💍🇷🇺
Nicholas the II is a Emperor which had his story completely messed up, despite doing everything he could, just like the Last brazillian Emperor, D.Pedro the II
Serfdom in Russia existed long before Peter the Great and was not a western import. In fact by the early 12th century the peasantry of the Kievan Russ were being turned into slaves of sorts. There was a rule that allowed the peasantry to leave their estate on Yuri's day but that was revoked by Boris Godunov in 1597. False Dimitry I reinstated this law in 1605 but it was fully repealed once again in 1649 by Tsar Alexei.
Moreover to sImply claim that Stolypin gave to the poor is misleading as he partly broke up the communal land system and thereby confiscated land from the poor. He never confiscated land from the aristocracy. It is widely suspected that Stolypin was murdered on the orders of embittered conservatives and Nicholas actually stoped the investigation into who was responsible for Stolypin's murder.
In the late 19th century and first decade of the 20th century Pogroms were the worst in Russia. From 1903 to 1906 up to 2500 jews were murdered, more so than those murdered in France, Germany and Austria Hungary combined during this period. The riots were not effectively discouraged given that many local government officials took part in them and few perpetrators were punished, not to mention that from 1881 to 1917 jews were discriminated against which only encouraged anti semitic sentiment.
The Jews did not move to the the Russian empire fleeing persecution from Western Europe, their ancestors had been living in what was then the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth when it was partitioned in the 18th century. In fact starting from the early 19th century and up to the empire collapse the jews fled en masse to the USA.
The Pale of Settlement where many jews were forced to start was not because the government wanted to protect them it was because it was anti semitic and wanted to segregate from the rest of society much like the apartheid government did in South Africa. Their were plenty of Eastern Europeans who served as guards in Nazi concentration camps and took part in pogroms and helped the Nazis round up jews during the Second World War.
Japan attacked Russia in large part because the Russians refused to guarantee to the Japanese that they would stay out of Korea, war could have been avoided had the Russians simply kept to Manchuria but some in the Russian government wanted a war to distract from domestic issues and Nicholas was persuaded by the Kaiser to not back down.
Whats more Russia leading up to the Russo-Japanese war spent up to 18% of it's budget on military spending which though less than it's neighbors was not exactly a small number.
Putin said something in an interview like the woke crisis that we are living in the West already happened in Russia. I understand better now. Thanks. ❤
Να Βαζετε και ελληνικούς υπότιτλους και Ρωσικους παρακαλω , παρολο αυτα Ωραιο Βιντεο
Anyone have an answer for this Tzar Nicholas II related question, bear with me my facts are cloudy. This is in fact a true story but I am finding a tough time finding any mention of it online Do not even know what keywords to type into google to find this. but here goes:
Two hundred or so yrs before Nicholas IIs reign, a Tzar or a member of the russian Clergy who was known to be a little crazy, wrote a secret letter, adressing "The future Tsar in the year 1901. The letter was kept under lock and key until its opening. It was a big event in russia when Nic and his wife came to the Kremlin or wherever to claim the letter. And after reading they never revealed its contents, but said they left very distraught and as white as a ghost. Rumor has it they were told of the impending end of their dynasty via prophesy?
Where can I find mention of this?
I love this video rip to the Tsar and his Family.
More of this. Especially about the former South Vietnam too.
He had the greatest moustache in human history.
Very insightful. Thanks.
As always, thanks for sharing!
In my opinion, Nicholas II wasn’t the best. He tried his best as he loved his country. But which sovereign with good intentions is great? He cannot bebés compared with other great Tsars/Emperors/Kings as all were in different circumstances.
Regardless of his good intentions, good or bad decisions, German wife, Rasputin or any other thing, too much things, event, countries, people, idiologies were against him and he would have eventually fallen.
Certainly the education about Russian history in the west has been abysmal. The education about the West's own history in the West is poor. Mark Twain noted that history is written in fluid prejudice. It is amazing how hardly any history about the strength of the US-Russian friendship during the 19th century is ever taught. Nicholas II's grandfather Alexander II was Abraham Lincoln's greatest ally during the US Civil War and sent his navies from St Petersburg to New York City and from Vladivostok to San Francisco to assist the Union Navy in patrol and as a discouragement to Great Britain and France from forcing Lincoln to recognize the Confederacy in Great Britain's case from storming the Anaconda Blockade to get the Confederacy's cotton, which fueled Britain's economy like OPEC's oil does the world's today. France had designs o Mexico that would be more easily realized with a splintered US. Also, Alexander II freed the serfs two years before Lincoln penned the Emancipation Proclamation.
Six Russian sailors are buried on Mare Island north of San Francisco, the oldest US military cemetery on the west coast. They died helping to put out a fire in San Francisco. It was from that trusted alliance that we and Russia struck the bargain for Alaska. Seward had been Lincoln's Secretary of State and he carried on through Andrew Johnson's term to secure that real estate in 1867 off the great relationship he had with Russian Ambassador the US and then Foreign Minister Eduard Andreevich Stoeckl cultivated during the US Civil War.
It is also fascinating to remember de Tocqueville's prediction about the enterprising US republic and the emerging Russian Eurasian hegemony how each nation as destined to greatness and to gold the future of half the world in their hands. He made that prediction in the 1830s when none of that was certain. Sad that even with honest reasons for our current adversarial positions, that none of this history is also shared where we can understand that we had a great relationship with Russia for much of our history and we should always hope that we can work toward that again. We are allies now with many nations who were our enemies long since Russia was our only friend in need and in deed during the greatest threat our nation ever faced.
Yes. Russia must stop isolating themselves today.
This video is so good and give information shortly but effective, the basic facts that are very important in this. Thank you The Romanov Royal Martyrs for telling the truth about Nicholas II.
Nicholas II put his family before his country thereby destroying both.
Listening to the Revolutions podcast and it seems that Nicholas, though a good husband and father, was a terrible leader. He believed he understood the Russian people better then they did themselves. His death was a crime, his overthrow no.
Remember Russia up to WWI was in great progress in all areas, especially agricultural / industrial. During Nicholas II there were no large death toll, due to drought / famine, the Tsar's government took care of starving people were taken off. Directly opposite the Bolsheviks, who gave Ukraine Holodomor, but also starved the other peoples of the Soviet Union.
Well looks like Russian likes dictators 😅
@@kaycemartin8486 They love them. The tsars were dictators. So were the Communists. And so is Putin.
From what I read, and seeing this video, Tzar Nicholas, was certainly a kind man, Tragically Killed with his Family, a Dark period for Russian History.... Rest in Peace To the Romanovs ❤
The idea that Alexandra was pro-German came from the fact that she was German. It was a falsehood drawn up by her opponents
Tsar Nicolas was horrified when he became Tsar. Too young and unprepared - his older brother died, pushing Nicholas to the throne. He tried very hard but he was eaten alive along with his lovely family. RIP to the Romonovs. 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
If you ever read Gulag Archipelago the auther Solzhenitzyn remarked that what the traded the Tsar for was far worse than anything that came before even people like Lenin were simply shipped away as opposed to being sent to camps to die
The western empires were very cunning than the tsarist Russia😭
I'm not sure what to think of this video tbh. I feel like some of the problems that happened under his reign are being downplayed here and it suggests that he never made any bad decisions. I don't think he was "reactionary" (that was pretty much his father). I think he was convinced that liberalism was unsafe. Serfdom was not a Russian thing, but Russia was among the last to abolish it. Many of the problems the empire had been due to Nicholas I (1825-1855?) and his refusal to modernize. what sources are there that the peaceful protest on Bloody Sunday was anything but peaceful? As for the stampede at his coronation, no one said that he was responsible for the stampede. Rather, it was his "slow" response to the tragedy. He could've ignored the advisor who told him not to cancel that party with the French. I don't think he was as weak as most people made him out to be, but to say he wasn't easily swayed is way too simplistic. What I will agree in this video was everything that said about Alix.
It’s clear that what your saying about Nicholas II is mostly from Western Propaganda. Nicholas II didn’t think liberalism was safe but radical fare left revolutionary ideology and wasn’t adverse to change.
Alexander III had no problem with change only change that would doom Russia. While Nicholas I wasn’t wild about modernization he did allow to happen as the economy increased, gave the empire education, more architectural projects happened and Russian literature flourished under his reign. He also despised serfdom and only allowed it to continue so chaos won’t happen in the empire. He just thought it would decay Russian Society.
Also Nicholas II has inept ministers who caused problems in his reign and Nicholas did showed that he cared about them by giving them his money and meeting with them. Also The Book Royal Romanov Matyr revealing the truth about what actually happened in Nicholas II’s reign.
Also The Royal Romanov Matyr isn’t saying that Nicholas II is perfect nor a flawless leader it’s saying that Nicholas was too soft on the revolutionaries and that lead to problems in Russia. Good leaders and rulers make bad decisions being a good ruler or leader doesn’t mean your a perfect one.
Like what The Mad Monarchist said Nicholas II’s reign wasn’t a series of disasters as it was portrayed as. Also like what The Mad Monarchist said Nicholas II being easily swayed wasn’t true in the least bit that was history being written by the Revolutionaries.
AMERICAN CHRISTIAN HERE . ARMY VET TOO. IVE SEEN COMMUNISM UP HAND . STATIONED ON THE DMZ KOREA . WOULD OF BEEN LOYAL TO CZAR
I don't know if this is historically accurate. In the last czars series, it says Nicholas was an antisemitic man. Of course, there can be many different points of view, and only God knows the truth.
THKS FOR THE THUMBS UP!!!!
hes pretty misunderstood, just like kaiser wilhelm.
Superb video certainly destroys the prevailing myths concerning this godly yet misrepresented man.
"Confirmation Bias: A RUclips Video"
Better confirmation bias than Soviet lies.