When Nicholas II began to rule. Emperor Nicholas II and his family

Nicholas 2nd (May 18, 1868 - July 17, 1918) - the last Russian emperor, son of Alexander 3rd. He received an excellent education (he studied history, literature, economics, law, military affairs, mastered three languages ​​perfectly: French, German, English) and ascended to the throne early (at the age of 26) due to the death of his father.

Let's supplement the short biography of Nicholas II with the history of his family. On November 14, 1894, the German princess Alice of Hesse (Alexandra Feodorovna) became the wife of Nicholas 2nd. Soon their first daughter, Olga, was born (November 3, 1895). In total, there were five children in the royal family. Daughters were born one after another: Tatiana (May 29, 1897), Maria (June 14, 1899) and Anastasia (June 5, 1901). Everyone was expecting an heir who was supposed to take the throne after his father. On August 12, 1904, Nikolai’s long-awaited son was born, they named him Alexei. At the age of three, doctors discovered he had severe hereditary disease- hemophilia (incoagulability of blood). Nevertheless, he was the only heir and was preparing to rule.

On May 26, 1896, the coronation of Nicholas II and his wife took place. IN holidays A terrible event occurred, called Khodynka, as a result of which 1,282 people died in a stampede.

During the reign of Nicholas II, Russia experienced rapid economic growth. The agricultural sector strengthened - the country became Europe's main exporter of agricultural products, and a stable gold currency was introduced. The industry was actively developing: cities were growing, enterprises were being built, railways. Nicholas II was a reformer; he introduced a rationed day for workers, provided them with insurance, and carried out reforms in the army and navy. The Emperor supported the development of culture and science in Russia.

But, despite significant improvements, popular unrest occurred in the country. In January 1905 it happened, the stimulus for which was. As a result, it was adopted on October 17, 1905. It talked about civil liberties. A parliament was created, which included the State Duma and the State Council. On June 3 (16), 1907, the Third June Revolution took place, which changed the rules of elections to the Duma.

In 1914, it began, as a result of which the situation within the country worsened. Failures in battles undermined the authority of Tsar Nicholas 2nd. In February 1917, an uprising broke out in Petrograd and reached enormous proportions. On March 2, 1917, fearing mass bloodshed, Nicholas II signed an act of abdication.

On March 9, 1917, the Provisional Government arrested everyone and sent them to Tsarskoye Selo. In August they were transported to Tobolsk, and in April 1918 - to their final destination - Yekaterinburg. On the night of July 16-17, the Romanovs were taken to basement, the death sentence was read out and the execution was carried out. After a thorough investigation, it was determined that no one from the royal family managed to escape.

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

KHODYNKA

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

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

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

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

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

NICHOLAS II AND THE ARMY

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

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

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

FROM THE DIARY OF NICHOLAS II FOR 1905

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

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

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

The scoundrel Germans continue to retreat hastily in western Poland.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Holy Fools and Rasputin

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

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

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

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

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

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

REFORM AND COUNTER-REFORMS

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

DEVELOPMENT OF RUSSIA DURING THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS II

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

BEGINNING OF THE FIRST WORLD WAR

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

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

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

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

THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS II IN THE ASSESSMENTS OF HISTORIANS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The biography of any statesman is inseparable from the history of the country he represents. This is especially true of monarchs to whom fate has entrusted (usually regardless of their personal wishes) control of an entire empire.

Nicholas II(1868-1918) became the last Russian Tsar. Together with him, the former monarchical Rus', peasant and Orthodox Rus' disappeared forever. The reign of Nicholas 2 from 1894-1917.

Nikolai was born in May 1868 in Tsarskoye Selo. He received an excellent upbringing: at first he was taught an extended gymnasium course, then lectures on economics, politics, and jurisprudence were added. His father carefully chose mentors for him and tried to give his son extensive knowledge, realizing that he would have to solve a variety of issues while at the top state power. Nikolai traveled a lot, was in Japan, China, Greece, India, and traveled all over Siberia. By the time of his coronation, the young man already had considerable life experience and information about his native country and the world around him. It would seem that the political situation was also very favorable. The common people still firmly believed in the Tsar-Father, pinning hopes on him for a better future. But then the first tragedy happened, which no one expected, least of all the newly-made sovereign: the death of 1,300 people on the Khodynka field. It was 1896, many people had gathered to celebrate the coronation of Nicholas, and were expecting the promised free treat. But due to poor organization and uncoordinated actions of the police, a stampede occurred and 1,300 people died. This was the first alarm bell - fate seemed to warn Nicholas that his reign would not be prosperous.

Then it happened Bloody Sunday, when a completely peaceful procession of workers heading to the Tsar with requests for help was shot. The workers drew up a petition about their needs and intended to deliver it directly into the hands of the sovereign. After the police shot unarmed people, Nikolai received the terrible nickname “Bloody,” although he himself not only did not participate in these events, but did not even know about them - the tsar was not in the city.

After 1905, the passage of time seemed to accelerate several times. A socio-political crisis is brewing, there is a war with Japan, and Stolypin is carrying out his agrarian reforms against the backdrop of an extremely unstable situation. Nikolai is at the epicenter of events, but it is as if he does not make the necessary decisions himself, but submits to the inexorable march of time: he issues a manifesto on the State Duma, takes command of the army, then tries to take measures to quickly end the outbreak of the First World War. Almost the entire time he was in power, the last Russian sovereign kept a diary, where events of a global and all-Russian scale are on the same line as family meetings and dinners. Apparently, Nikolai Alexandrovich was a rather reserved person, who experienced a lot inside, without splashing out his emotions even on the pages of his diary, where he only recorded the facts with the pedantry of a chronicler.

Those around him often spoke of the sovereign as a person with a rather weak will, and mentioned that he succumbed to the influence of the empress. In general, he was much more drawn to a peaceful life, not connected with government concerns: hunting, walking, reading. He was interested in cars and photography, and spent a lot of time with his family. Perhaps the emperor missed something important during these calm activities in turbulent times. And then - like thunder over his head - renunciation.

And then - arrest, life with his family in the Alexander Palace, where he went from being a master to a prisoner. Then - exile to Tobolsk, a quiet existence filled with simple labor (cultivating a garden, chopping wood) and, of course, reflection. About Russia, about his fate, about the fate of his children - what was Nikolai Alexandrovich thinking about at that time? Last year own life?…
The family was shot in Yekaterinburg in Ipatiev’s house. And again, fate seemed to curl up in a cruel smile: the Romanov dynasty began with the Ipatiev Monastery in Kostroma, from where young Mikhail was called to the throne, and ended in the Ipatiev House of Yekaterinburg.

What was it like the last king from the Romanov family? Of course, he was neither the villain that the Soviet government portrayed him as, nor the angel that they are trying to portray him as today. Nikolai Alexandrovich was an ordinary person with all his strengths and weaknesses, he simply could not do anything in the current situation, not even retain power.
Could anyone else do it? Has anyone been able to do this?

Information about Nicholas 2 briefly.

The birth of children is a joy, and in the imperial family it is a double joy, especially if a boy is born, since boys provided “stability” ruling dynasty. In general, since the time of Paul I, who had four sons, the problem of an heir throughout the 19th century. Was not relevant for the imperial family. There was always a “reserve” in a direct descending line, which made it possible for the country to painlessly replace emperors or crown princes who “retired” for various reasons.

All Russian empresses gave birth at home, that is, in those imperial residences in which they found themselves at the time of birth. As a rule, during childbirth or in the immediate vicinity of the delivery room, all relatives who happened to be nearby were present. And the husband literally “held his wife’s hand” while in the maternity room. This tradition dates back to the Middle Ages, in order to verify the truth of the family and the heir.

Starting from Paul I, all imperial families had many children. There could be no talk of any birth control. Empresses, crown princesses and grand duchesses gave birth as much as “God gave.” The exemplary family man Nicholas I and his wife had 7 children, four sons and three daughters. In the family of Alexander II and Empress Maria Alexandrovna, despite the latter’s poor health, there were eight children - two daughters and six sons. The family of Alexander III and Empress Maria Feodorovna had six children, one of whom died in early age. There are three sons and two daughters left in the family. Five children were born into the family of Nicholas II. For Nicholas, the absence of an heir could result in serious political consequences - numerous male relatives from the younger branches of the Romanov dynasty were ready with great desire to inherit the throne, which did not suit the royal spouses at all.

The birth of children in the family of Nicholas II.

The first birth of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna was difficult. Nikolai’s diary mentions the time - from one in the morning until late in the evening, almost a day. As the king’s younger sister recalled, Grand Duchess Ksenia Alexandrovna, “the baby was dragged with tongs.” Late in the evening of November 3, 1895, the Empress gave birth to a girl, whom her parents named Olga. The pathological birth was apparently caused both by the poor health of the empress, who was 23 years old at the time of birth, and by the fact that she suffered from sacrolumbar pain from adolescence. Pain in her legs haunted her all her life. Therefore, household members often saw her in a wheelchair. After a difficult birth, the Empress “got back on her feet” only on November 18, and immediately sat down in a wheelchair. “I sat with Alix, who rode in a moving chair and even visited me.”

Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna

The Empress gave birth again less than two years later. This pregnancy was also difficult. On early stages During pregnancy, doctors feared a miscarriage, since the documents vaguely mention that the empress got out of bed only on January 22, 1897, i.e. I stayed there for about 7 weeks. Tatyana was born on May 29, 1897 in the Alexander Palace, where the Family moved for the summer. Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich wrote in his diary: “In the morning God gave Their Majesties... a daughter. The news spread quickly and everyone was disappointed as they were expecting a son.”

Grand Duchess Tatiana Nikolaevna

In November 1998, it turned out that the Empress was pregnant for the third time. As with the first birth, she immediately sits in a stroller, since she cannot walk due to pain in her legs, and rides around the halls of the Winter Palace “in armchairs.” On June 14, 1899, the third daughter, Maria, was born in Peterhof. The succession of daughters in the royal family caused a persistent mood of disappointment in society. Even the tsar’s closest relatives repeatedly noted in their diaries that the news of the birth of another daughter caused a sigh of disappointment throughout the country.

Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna

The beginning of the fourth pregnancy was confirmed by court doctors in the fall of 1900. The waiting became unbearable. In the diary of Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich it is written: “She has become very prettier... that’s why everyone is anxiously hoping. That this time there will be a son." On June 5, 1901, the Tsar’s fourth daughter, Anastasia, was born in Peterhof. From Ksenia Alexandrovna’s diary: “Alix feels great - but, my God! What a disappointment! Fourth girl!

Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna

The empress herself was in despair. Her fifth pregnancy began in November 1901. Since this pregnancy royal family associated exclusively with the “passes” of the court psychic Philip, it was hidden even from close relatives. On Philip's recommendation, the Empress did not allow medical workers to visit her until August 1902, i.e. almost until the due date. Meanwhile, labor still did not occur. Finally, the empress agreed to allow herself to be examined. After examining Alix, obstetrician Ott announced that “The Empress is not pregnant and has never been pregnant.” This news dealt a terrible blow to Alexandra Fedorovna’s psyche. The child she had been carrying since November simply did not exist. This came as a shock to everyone. A message was published in the official Government Gazette that the Empress’s pregnancy ended in a miscarriage. After this, the police ordered to exclude from the opera “Tsar Saltan” the words “the queen gave birth that night to either a son or a daughter, not a dog, not a frog, but an unknown animal.”

The Empress with Tsarevich Alexei

It's paradoxical that after unsuccessful pregnancy, the empress did not lose faith in Philip. In 1903, following Philip’s advice, the whole family visited the Sarov Hermitage. After visiting the village of Diveyevo, the empress became pregnant for the sixth time. This pregnancy ended with the successful birth of Tsarevich Alexei on July 30, 1904. Nicholas wrote in his diary: “An unforgettable great day for us, on which the mercy of God so clearly visited us. At 1.4 days Alix had a son, who was named Alexei during prayer. Everything happened remarkably quickly – for me, at least.” The Empress gave birth to an heir very easily, “in half an hour.” In her notebook she wrote: “weight – 4660, length – 58, head circumference – 38, chest – 39, on Friday, July 30, at 1:15 p.m.” Against the backdrop of the festive bustle, the royal parents were consumed with worry that alarming signs of a terrible illness might appear. A number of documents indicate that the parents learned about the heir's hemophilia literally on his birthday - the baby began bleeding from the umbilical wound.

Tsarevich Alexey

Igor Zimin, " Child's world imperial residences."

The article is devoted short biography Nicholas II - the last Russian Emperor. The reign of Nicholas II became turning point in the history of Russia and was accompanied by the greatest events.

Nicholas before his accession

Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov was born in 1868. Alexander III raised his children harshly. Their day was scheduled almost minute by minute, and this routine resembled military discipline. At the same time, Nicholas II, as heir, received enhanced education. He knew several languages ​​and was creative. Higher education the future emperor received under the leadership of Pobedonostsev, which certainly influenced his reign.
In 1887, Nikolai began military service in the Preobrazhensky Regiment. Colleagues noted his simplicity and courtesy. The heir, accustomed from childhood to a clear daily routine, extremely liked the service.
In 1890 he completed his studies. Nikolai was very happy about this. Service high nobility accompanied by an active social life. Nikolai becomes a regular participant in balls and social evenings. Government activities did not attract him. Nikolai avoided working in government agencies in every possible way.

Brief biography of Nicholas II: years of reign

Alexander III died in 1894. The heir was proclaimed Emperor Nicholas II, who was completely unprepared for such a change in his life. It was a bad omen that just a week after the death of his father, Nicholas married Princess Alice of Hesse, named Alexandra Fedorovna in Orthodoxy.
The life of the imperial family was successful. Nikolai became the father of four daughters, until finally in 1904 the long-awaited boy Alexei was born. This event was noisily celebrated throughout Russia. However, the boy soon discovered dangerous disease- hemophilia. This heavy load Nicholas II carried it through the rest of his life.
The illness of the heir connected Nicholas II with the name of G. Rasputin, who gained the trust of the imperial family for his supposedly divine gift of healing. Rasputin provided big influence on Nicholas II, which caused a negative attitude towards the emperor even in the highest circles.
Nicholas II was a soft and indecisive person. Russia was experiencing a rise in the revolutionary movement, and the emperor, not noticing the serious danger, relied on the inviolability of the autocracy based on Orthodox people. The revolutionary events of 1905, reinforced by failures in Russian-Japanese war, showed the illusory nature of the emperor’s ideas. Nicholas II was forced to sign a decree convening the State Duma. Subsequently, all the actions of the emperor were forced.
The work of the State Duma has shown that Russia needs serious reforms. However, during the reign of Nicholas II, attempts at reform were associated with the name of one person - P. A. Stolypin. After his murder, it became clear that reforms could only be carried out by force.
Nicholas II, dissatisfied with the work of the Duma, disperses three groups of deputies. After the adoption of a number of laws restricting voting rights, he convened the Fourth Duma, which served its due term.
In 1914, the First World War began. Nicholas II enters the war, which is accompanied by an increase in patriotic sentiments. It would seem that the situation is improving. However, it is gradually becoming clear that Russia is not ready for war. Military failures again lead to the growth of the revolutionary movement.
Nicholas II did not fully understand the full scale of the processes taking place in Russia. February Revolution and the unanimous demand for abdication shocked him. But there was nowhere to go, and on March 2, 1917, he signed this renunciation. An event of enormous importance took place - the Russian autocracy ceased to exist.
Nikolai and his family were under arrest for some time in Tsarskoe Selo. Then they were transported to Tobolsk, where the prisoners were kept more roughly. The last refuge of the imperial family was Yekaterinburg. Nikolai, his wife and children were kept on a soldier's ration. In July 1918, the entire family was mercilessly shot.