Featured Who's on these pins? One looks like Rasputin.

I don't recall any writing in the memoirs about his job. Remember him mentioning that his wife, Princess Irina, worked for a fashion house as an assistant or apprentice, and later established her own fashion business, not quite successful.

 

Old Rasputin wasn't smart enough to escape,if he had, he'd probably be a 120 yr old reality star on U.S. television.

 

Or an Instagram influencer.

 

Or someone's VP candidate.

 

Somewhere other than the USA, since he wasn't born here and naturalized citizens can't be President re: the Constitution. VPs have to be too, since the reason the job exists is in case the President can't do her/his job for whatever reason. (like he's dead)

 

I would say that Rasputin used to be an influential man, a "grey cardinal" behind the scene. No need to have official titles to be de facto the ruler of the country, and many historians claim he indeed ruled Russia between 1905 and 1916. How was this possible - the Tsaritsa sought and took his advice on everything, including state matters and decisions, and the Tsar sought and took the advice of the Tsaritsa on everything. So indirectly Rasputin was the ruler. Historians say that this was a public secret and the reason Rasputin was so much hated by the high society, and eventually killed by members of it. Russian aristocrats were convinced that he was leading Russia to disaster, and of course could not forgive his peasant background and lack of education.

At the end of the day the great love and devotion of Nikolay II to his wife (something that deserves respect on its own but apparently it is not applicable to rulers) costed them the throne and the lives, and the lives of their children, and the devastation of the whole country.

 

that...does not surprise me. (the term in English is Gray Eminence - a reference to Cardinal Richelieu) It's openly thought here that Edith Wilson ran the White House for a while when her husband Woodrow Wilson was President. He had a stroke in office, and in those days there was no real treatment. He was officially never "stepped down" for the duration and was supposably making decisions. Many consider it likely that Edith was really in charge although at the time women could not vote. Illegal if she got caught, but no one wanted to know about it.

 

Thank you, evelyb30! Grey eminence, I will remember.
Didn't know the story of Edith and Woodrow Wilson, interesting one. But in thier case there was a valid reason for the First Lady to rule, as the President was not able to do it. While Nikolay II was healthy and sane. He just loved his wife and could not resist her willingness to interfere. Unfortunately, the Russian Tsaritsa did not have the abilities of the American First Lady, and the advice given to her husband proved to be catastrophic. And had consequences not only for Russia but for the entire globe.

 

Actually, a First Lady has no constitutional role and it would cause all kinds of ruckus if it happened now. Back then they could get away with it as long as no one looked too closely. The Vice President should have taken over for the duration.

The Russian mess with Rasputin... all I know is it was a disaster.

 

I understand it was kind of cheating the system and should not have happened. My point is that no matter how unlawful it was, it was at least successful for the country. While in Russia it was not. The reign of Nikolay II was a chain of wrong decisions and miscalculations, although he did not appear to be particularly unfitted for the job, there are worse examples in their history. He was just an ordinary tsar as governing capabilities, and quite special in terms of personal life, I haven't read about any other monarch to be so devoted husband and father. He possessed human virtues that proved unsuited for ruling an empire. And also the bad luck to govern in such tulmultous period of social unrest and a world war. All these contributed to the consequent events.

 

If he'd been a Constitutional monarch he'd have done fine, from the sound of it. Too bad no one made that change; it would have changed the World and possibly stopped two wars.

 

I agree completely.
Actually, according to Radzinsky's book, Nikolay II opposed till the very last moment, actually even beyond it, to the change of the constitutional order proposed to him by his counsellors and not once, and refused to give up the absolute monarch power he had ( самодержавие in Russian). He agreed at last when it was too late to stop the rolling avalanche. And he did it at the advice of his wife, and she most probably was influenced by Rasputin - the above chain reaction that has led to catastrophic results.
According to Radzinsky, Nikolay II often promised things and then backtracked and changed his mind. And the usual suspect behind this was his wife. She was very proud mother and wanted their son to inherit the same status as his predecessors. Not very clever woman, she did not pay attention to the real world events. So one day the Tsar promised the decree abolishing the absolutism, the same day in the evening had a chat with his wife and the next day refused to issue the decree. Several times. He was so much in love that he never accused her for anything even after their imprisonment and the increasing danger for their lives.

 

Uhmmm... ack. No wonder the Revolution then, especially since he had a history of repeatedly breaking promises.

 

Yes, Nikolay II helped very much the revolution. He had good advisors and associates but did not listen to them, or more correctly, he listened to them but also to his wife and when opinions clushed, he was sidining with the wife. Nothing so wrong but she was not good at politics. There were also other reasons for the revolution but his wife was a major one.
For instanse, Sergei Witte proposed constitutional reform as early as 1905 but was ostracised by the court aristocracy. Very good statesman.

 

It's too bad he had to drag the whole country into Revolution when he had good advice years earlier.