Fun Fact: The dragon tattoo that’s on his arm that you can see in the video is very much real, and he had it done when he visited Japan, a country he’d later go to war with. When he first arrived he wished to take a Japanese wife during his stay, but opted not to because “it was before easter. He was also almost assassinated by a former samurai. One woman even killed herself as a result of the incident even though she had no relations to samurai nor Nicholas himself.
At 1:33, if you pay attention, Tsar Nicholas II has a dragon tattoo on his arm. This is a real thing that he actually got and isn't something that History Matters made up. When Tsar Nicholas II was crown prince, he paid a diplomatic visit to Japan and had a dragon tattoo done on himself cause he thought it looked cool. He also got part of his head sliced off by a rogue policeman while on his tour which nearly caused a diplomatic incident with Japan.
I'm assuming this visit was to flex Russia's muscles at Japan in attempt to get them to hold off on expansionist tendencies or else face war with the Russian Empire. I know they ended up going to war in 1904, with Japan winning in 1905 and becoming the first East Asian country since Mongolia to defeat a major western power in a war.
Another reason the Finns wouldn’t accept Nicolas is that he’d tried to “Russify” Finland after the 1905 revolution. When he did that he took away a lot of their sovereignty they’d had for 100 years. Plus Lenin was ALSO in finland at the time and that would’ve just been awkward
Something not really talked about is that Wilhelm II offered him asylum after England revoked their offer. The Russian government hid the offer from the Tsar, so Wilhelm dispatched a courier to try and reach him personally. Unfortunately the bolsheviks took power before he could be reached.
Wilhelm II also initially offered a ‘passage’ for the family to safely pass through Germany and then to wherever. Even with that, Alexandra refused any offers from Wilhelm II or anything from Germany. He also wanted the Romanovs be handed over unharmed as part of the Brest-Litovsk treaty, but lenin declined. Wilhelm has been grossly downplayed on his efforts to save the Romanovs, he deserves to be credited. He tried.
Fun fact: one member of the Romanov immediate family (Alexei's dog Joy) actually survived and was rescued by a British officer who took him back to Britain. Other members of the extended family were rescued by Britain in 1919. Also, the anti-German sentiment in Britain that prevented the Romanov's rescue was such that the royal family ended up changing their name, from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to the current Windsor.
In Belgium, the royals didn't abandon the name Saxe-Coburg completely, they just started to use "king XY of Belgium" instead. But they are still part of the same dynasty. Ferdinand I. of Bulgaria was part of a cadet branch - btw the last heir to the bulgarian throne Simeon von Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is a politician in Bulgaria and served as prime minister already. The kingdom of Portugal was ruled by yet another cadet branch, too. So this dynasty was and is kind of like a "modern" version of the Habsburg. Another small fun fact to end this comment - The younger sister of the current belgian king, Princess Astrid of Belgium, is married to the head of a cadet branch of the house of Habsburg-Lorraine, so maybe some day in the future, the Habsburg will make a comeback.
@@RinoGato The King in Belgium is "of **the Belgians**" specifically. Other members of the extended royal family often use "of Belgium" as if it were a surname and not just part of a title, though.
@@oliverraven currenct king of the belgians is Philippe of Belgium, or am I wrong? And yes, I said they use of Belgium, but unlike the Windsor, they didn't abandon Saxe-Coburg-Whatever completely. They just prefer to use of Belgium.
@@RinoGato Yes, that is one way of putting it! The title of the monarch is "King/Queen of the Belgians", but the person currently carrying out that role probably has on his ID card 'Philippe of Belgium'.
We have to face facts about Nicholas. As Barbara Tuchman in "the Guns of August" said of him..and I'm paraphrasing..."his mind was so shallow as to be all surface." He just was NOT a bright guy. Good father, loving husband...but not a deep thinker. Sitting down and making a plan with trusted subordinates to get himself and his family to safety was way..WAY beyond his capacity. Nicholas simply hoped. Hoped his family would be held, but treated well..perhaps hoped the Whites could get him out of his predicament, and hoped that those Bolshevik guardsmen would do the same. His hope got him shot, carted off in a wagon, and dumped in a minepit. He's a "martyr and passion bearer" for the Russian Orthodox Church today, and the faithful pray to him for intercession. Fat lot of good being slow in deep thought but rich in holiness got him, right? But, what's left of him is enshrined in St Petersburg again, among a bunch of other dead Romanov's, so, I guess that's something?
Nice touch that George and Nicholas looked identical in this video. IRL they looked so much alike sometimes members of their own staffs got them confused. Particularly if George wore a Russian uniform or Nicholas wore a British one, which they did sometimes for ceremonial purposes.
There's a photo from Edward VII 's funeral. They're walking 3 abreast (George V, Wilhelm II, Nicholas II). Similar uniforms, same beards. Could be triplets.
I've recently learned something ironical : Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany was angry at the bolcheviks for executing the Romanovs since they were relatives and also, he believed in the divine right of monarchs to rule.
He's lucky he ran to the Netherlands after WW1 and didn't meet the same fate as the tsar and also didn't risk being executed by the Énteté for war crimes.
It would have been funny and awkward if Nicholas went to exile in Netherlands Just imagine him and Wilhelm sipping on tea and talking about how they started war and lost thier crowns.
Why didn’t he just go to Iran and hide there until the war was over.Then he could just go the raj and go to Britain or be with his cousin wilhelm in Holland
@@anasslasry6962 Putting aside the fact that it was practically impossible for him to get there, since every way Turkey was in the way... Why would he hide in Africa? For what reason would he go there? Almost every single country is a European colony at this point. They've wouldn't take him for the same reason their mother countries wouldn't take him.
If someone wanted to know why Finns did not want him was the fact that most of his reign he tried Russificate Finland. Finnish people who had got used to the autonomy given to them by Alexander I and further amplified by Alexander II and them recognizing finnish people as their own entity. Nicholas II tried to turn finnish people to russians and gave the governor-general Bobrikov dictatorial powers. They kept going with the russification attempts to the February Revolution in Russia. After the October Revolution in December 6 1917 Finland declared its independence. Nikolai II was not popular and most likely would have got shot if he tried to come to Finland.
@@unclenogbad1509 No, he respected him. He was his Tsar. Mannerheim was a general in the russian Tsar's army. He was even one point was part of the Imperial entourage. Mannerheim never was pro-finnish but as he hated communism and was from Finland he ended up there and him being one of the most experienced military leaders Finland had it was not surprise he ended up as the head of the military.
@@Wezqu Also, contrary to the video visualization, the Finnish government wasn't very keen on Mannerheim either. Being a Russian General was kinda sus.
Some more factors: when he abdicated, he was out in the West, so he had to travel back to reunite with his family, losing time. Also, his children caught *measles in early 1917 which meant that they couldn't travel, and by the time they were well again, it was too late.
He was actually south of St. Petersburg on the Russian/German front. And his children had the measles, which was a serious illness at that time. Watch the documentary "Nicholas and Alexandra". It explains all of that.
I believe Nicholas was separated from the rest of his family as he was traveling back from the frontlines, I don’t believe he would have left the country by himself. By the time he got back to where his family was staying, they’d already been placed under house arrest.
Literally not how it happened. They were planning on trials, only for the adults, but they got invaded by foreign mercenaries first and the detainment estate (house arrest) was overrun.
@@nunesv5882 Luxembourg definitely got it worse. She was in hiding and got sold out by hostile members of her former organisation because they only thought she was gonna be banned from parliament or something.
@@jayayerson8819 I'm not sure what you mean. The people keeping the Romanovs had a direct line to the Kremlin. The Whites didn't get anywhere near the house for months. Lenin ordered them shot under the pretense that the whites were getting close, and then he covered up his involvement.
The Whites severed communication, and being cut-off the decision to shoot The Romanovs was made locally, fearing that perhaps the counter-revolution was about to overthrow The Bolshevics.
Nicholas shot himself to foot there. Finns hated Nicholas for trying to Russify Finland and had revoked many aspects of our autonomy. But if it had been Alexander II asking for refuge, Finland would have absolutely granted it, for he was very liked in Finlanf for his reforms.
You forgot to mention that the Kaiser promised safe passage to any vessel taking the Czar out of Russia. It was all arranged and the Kerensky government had agreed to release him when the allies refused him asylum. A few days latter Lenin siezed power and the family was moved from Petrograd to Tobolisk in Siberia making any chance of rescue nearly impossible.
@commonsense5125: You make no sense and are an idiot. Nicholas II abdicated to the Provisional Government with the hopes of with moving to England or the Crimea and living quietly in March 1917. Asylum efforts failed but the family was located outside St. Petersburg which made train travel risky as there was still extreme dislike towards the Romanovs. To get them out of the minds of the public,after verifying Nicholas and wife Alexandra did not sell out the country, Alexander Kerensky, head of the government moved them to the backward town of Tobolsk in August 1917 where attitudes towards the Romanovs was kinder. The Bolsheviks took control in November 1917 and plans were eventually made to put Nicholas on trial. To soothe the different Bolshevik regions, the family was given to the Bolshevik Urals where they arrived in April 1918 and were shot three months later when White forces advanced on Ekaterinburg.
They were actually moved to Tobolsk when Kerensky was Premiere. Then when Lenin became dictator, he moved the family to Yekaterinberg, where they were eventually executed.
I wonder if the Brits (when they withdrew King George V offer of sanctuary to the Tsar) ever considered modifying the offer instead -- say as an offer of sanctuary, but in Australia or western Canada. I believe at the time Britain still controlled both places foreign policy, both destinations would have likely involved an exit through the Pacific (away from the main fighting) and both areas were also far enough away as to minimize public furor (out of sight, out of mind).
That is what I thought, they Don't need to bring them to England just send them to Australia, Canadá, New Zealand or Caribbean, with low profile and just be cool for a time and they could live
@@unclenogbad1509 I hate this argument. If you actually watch the film it’s incredibly obvious that the issue isn’t the size of the debris chunk they’re on, it’s the fact that whatever it is isn’t a raft, was never meant to support the weight of two grown adult, and quickly started sinking when they both initially tried to get on it at the same time. Rose didn’t abandon Jack, only one of them could’ve survived and Jack chose to allow himself to die so she could live.
@@thelittleredhairedgirlfrom6527 Yes, I know, it's a romantic movie and the conventions have to be observed. Really, though, couldn't she have used that whistle straight away, while he was still hanging on?
@@unclenogbad1509 To my recollection she didn’t have the whistle yet, one of the crew members had the whistle and she took it after that guy died. Even if she had the whistle tho it wouldn’t have done shit since all the lifeboats were still sailing away since they were full of women and children, and it wasn’t until much later once they’d reached the rescue ship and offloaded the women and kids that any of the lifeboats went back for the people in the water, most of whom (including Jack) were already dead by this point. Rose herself was barely clinging onto life and the rescuers almost missed her.
I read long ago that King Alfonso XIII, King of Spain at that time, tried to bring the Tsars to Spain. In the end it was not achieved, but they did manage to bring in many of the relatives of the tsars. That is why the current heirness to the Russian throne was born in Spain.
There is an actual heir of the throne? Last time, I checked, each of the existing Romanovs has no right to the throne due to the succession laws of Russian Empire - you lose all rights when choose morganatic marriage .
The book 'The race to save the Romanovs' by Helen Rappaport is an excellent book about this time period. It describes both foreign and domestic attempts to rescue the family but also the complicated political situation that prevented it. Actually a lot of stuff happened between the Bolsheviks capturing them and then being shot, which is a very interesting read.
Hello. Hopefully somebody could answer this: Was anybody not able to save the family? When the whole family was massacred in July 1918 they were held captived in a house, not in a prison o jail, and some of the guards were friendly with them. Besides that, the front lines of the white Russian army an the the red communist army were only 30 or 40 kilometers away from where the family was held. They could even heard the bombs and explosions of the battlefield. The family could have escaped and ran toward the white Russian army, which would have received them, and from there, maybe emigrate to the United States, since nobody in Europe wanted to take them. Maybe they could have applied to Spain, since it was still a monarchy and neutral. This would have been possible, right?
@@oscarlpf1 I have read an account on the Internet that George V sent MI6 agents to scope out the house the Bolsheviks had the Romanov's in but it was that heavily guarded on the outside that any rescue attempt would have been a bloodbath. It would have taken a small army to fight the defenses and even then, the family would probably have been killed whilst the rescuers were fighting the guards outside
That book's blurb states, with regard to the failure of anyone to save the Russian Imperial Family, that "[i]t was not, ever, a simple case of one British King’s loss of nerve." Since that had always been my (ill-informed) opinion, I shall definitely give that book a read. Thank you for the recommendation.
Bizarre Fact: When the biography was being written about an early Hollywood producer, whose family were not only Jewish but of Russian descent, a copy of a letter written to Nicholas was found among his papers. In it , the producer said that though his family had been driven to emigrate by pogroms, he still considered himself Russian by birth. As a result he felt sorry for Nicholas and his family and their loss of status. As a result he offered the ex-Tsar a job as an actor in his studio!! Just think of it, if he had accepted, the ex-monarchs of Europe could have become Hollywood stars!!!
I'd also note that they didn't just kill him, but his young children and entire family. I don't necessarily judge these things as they aren't unheard of in any time period; however, I wouldn't omit them.
It's a point worth making, especially since Nicholas was devoted to his family and would never have accepted exile if that meant leaving any of them behind.
Unheard of is not a measuring stick for anything. Atrocity is atrocity, nomatter how normalized it becomes in a society. Yes, for being such a legit form of govt that the ppl would so appreciate on their own without force, I don't see the need to off literally anyone who could claim the tiniest bit of right to the throne. The US and UK didn't undertake any such insanity to stop being monarchies.
@@seanservo3105 perhaps, but my point is that it was a politically expedient move rather than motivated entirely by malice. I also find it atrocious, but as the French Revolution has proved: rebellion and overthrowing a monarchy is a much more nasty business than simply rebelling to control a colonial possession (the U.S.). In the annals of history killing opposing political dynasties was quite common, and while I personally find it repellant, the prospect of war brought on by rivals that were allowed to gain power was equally so. That being said, I think they would've been better served in the international community if they'd exiled them. But then again the Soviets were never too concerned with appearing blood thisty.
@SymphonyBrahms Like this video said, the Russian government offered him to Finland but our government refused. Also Nicholas had been popular in Finland and its was believed until very late that it was scheming bureaucrats and nobles who were to blame with issues in Finland. Even though he had later become more unpopular I would say he was still more popular in Finland than in other places in Russia (not saying much, but he wasn’t loathed). The government just didn’t want to get involved into something controversial
I honestly do feel bad for George V. He knew if he saved the Romanovs, the Labour Party and Socialist elements would be furious, and with his German family and name, he was already teetering on Revolution. He had to sacrifice his cousin to save his own family and country. It’s not a choice I’d wish on anyone.
I don't think teetering is the right word. The monarchy was still popular across the Empire during World War I despite the rise of the Labour Party. Lots of people may want their employers to be more generous but going against the King is too far.
Well it’s not a wise choice in hindsight anyway. The royal family now is proving its irrelevance to the country and only the queen is barely keeping it on the throne… the sacrifice only delayed the inevitable.
@@walterfielding9079 The Imperial Family was also immensely popular in 1914 having just celebrated 300 years of Romanov rule in 1911, and that all collapsed in a fascinatingly quick space of time. George knew there were already people who were getting sick and tired of the conditions the war was forcing on them and if he maintained the status quo, he would face the same fate as it didn’t really take that many people to topple the monarchy and the Romanovs were immensely more powerful than the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha so the change wouldn’t have been nearly as drastic for the British people. George V was right to be afraid and his decisions to make the monarchy more popular with the people probably saved his dynasty.
Especially Alexei. He had a miserable short life suffering from haemophilia. At one point; he begged his mother to kill him to make the pain end, only to get better. Couldn't even enjoy his life like other children because of the risk of a fatal bleed, had his leg swell to an unnatural size when he tried once. All that pain, all that suffering, only to be murdered because of who he was.
Well part of the issue as explained was basically them being a symbol for revolution or a reason to restore the monarchy. So essentially… you didn’t want to leave any of them alive because “they are the rightful heir to the throne.”
@@alexjv1370 They already failed in that regard then. Numerous male Romanovs already escaped Russia, so funny enough killing Nicholas actually made foreign resistance easier, not harder. Also the daughters + Alexandra + the 4 servants who also died in that basement had no claim to the throne. Where is the logic there?
I love the detail he puts in his videos . The Russian soldiers were carrying mosin nagant rifles which is historically accurate. Most channels just put what's rifle in soldiers hands
I visited the British Imperial War Museum in London a couple of years ago and was surprised by its Great War section. It said toward the end of the exhibit “Russia has failed us” and it essentially said “finally the U.S. joined.” I was shocked because Russia’s royal family was executed and Russia’s czar resembled Britain’s king but the exhibit threw Russia under the bus. Plus, it didn’t seem the exhibit appreciated the United States’ involvement but expected it in a war in Europe.
@@Valencetheshireman927 the fuck? America had no part in the events leading up to the first world war. They joined after germany refused to abandon their stance of unrestricted submarine warfare. And because the French and British owed money to the US, and can't collect repayment from a conquered nation.
Britain was hostile to Russia from approximately the 1740s and arguably still is :) Britain has had short bouts of tolerance though, usually when they desperately needed Russian troops to absorb German or French munitions but after that it's back to the norm. Historically British claims on Russian intransience tend to be light on context as you have pointed out. Note that at the time many people openly stated the Russia had dragged Britain into the war with zero credibility.
That's an oversimplification. Read Helen Rapaport's book to get the true perspective of how weak the provisional government was at this point. They did nothing because they had no options that would work.
What I love the most in your channel is that you reply to questions that I never thought about them. And that´s awesome! I never lose one of your videos! Keep up the good job!
That tattoo on the Tsars arm is hilarious, especially when you consider that he did get a dragon tattoo when he went to Japan, although I don’t recall exactly where.
@@lixobounce6588 also, in British elections you don't vote for the PM, just your own local MP. The people who _could_ vote for Churchill did vote for him. The people who couldn't vote for him mostly voted Labour.
King George felt haunted by the fact that he was - for all intents and purposes - powerless to save his cousin, but he saw the pattern that was befalling all of the other european monarchies at the time and did what none of them were quick enough to do: adapt and evolve, even if that meant watching his own relatives crumble and burn.
@chrismaddock5790: He wasn’t powerless. The Prime Minister, Lloyd-George offered asylum but George V applied effort to rescind it. He was afraid that his family-with a German name and German born Queen would be removed too. He at least could have gotten the immediate family out of the country but did nothing. George V was a selfish stuck up ass whose wife later bought or stole the Romanovs family jewels. Your analysis is immature and very poor.
The British prime minister and Parliament forbade George to bring the tsar to England. And they have all the power, not the king. They took control in 1688 when they kicked out James II and installed William and Mary as rulers.
An interesting video idea could be 'Why was Kerensky able to flee Russia?' He was President of the Provisional government but managed to get away, died in 1970
Slight correction: Nicholas was shot dead, not because the Soviets actually wanted him dead(at that point at least), but because at the time in the civil war, they were losing ground to the White army, which was about to retake the former Tsar's residence. Fearing that the liberation of the Tsar would boost the morale of the White Army and grant legitimacy to the opposing government, they decided that killing him and his entire family was the best choice for the war effort. If this was not the case, the world would not even know that the Tsar was summarily executed. Doesn't help the utopian image the communists were trying to portray.
Yep, and as I mentioned upthread the Bolsheviks weren't a monolith and those advocating an extra-legal murder per-empted the Bolsheviks who opposed it.
There's also the fact that a lot of allied countries weren't very friendly towards Russia as it was becoming more and more apparent that they were going to withdraw from the armed conflict. When Russia sued for peace with the central powers, there was a sentiment of betrayal floating in the air.
Чел, ты чушь несёшь. Армия 1917 года, которая была внутренне подавленна и при этом разваливалась из-за Февральских настрений, сдерживала Турцию, Болгарию, так как фронт румын прорвали (они потом ещё себе Бессарабию отжали, вот такая благодарность), Австро-Венгрию и Греманию, я был бы не удивлён если Россия подписала бы мирный договор но они держались до последнего, в том числе мой прапрадед отдал жизнь за эту бессмысленную войну. А вот мир подписали именно большевики отдав огромные земли. И знаете что, кто-то тогда из Антанты попытался реально вернуть власть временному правительству? Нет. И все потому что исход войны к тому времени был предрешён и на самом деле добрым союзникам даже оказалось выгодно что мы проиграли под конец и не пришлось делиться с нами. В общем политика вещь циничная.
@@ВездесущаяСущность западный дискурс обычно не учитывает большую часть событий, можешь даже не пытаться, западные люди могут думать только о себе. Отвратительная трагедия для них это повод посраться и упустить суть, попутно восхваляя свою нацию. Ну и с ростом популярности социализма любые аргументы, которые выставляют социализм в негативном свете игнорятся. Рассказываешь людям, что у тебя 10 родственников большевики уебали за маслобойню, так они тебе скажут, что это мало.
In all fairness Russia did have a massive hand in starting the war, arguably second only to Austria-Hungary (Since they turned a regional conflict between A-H and Serbia into a global one even if you wanted to argue it was for a noble reason) so when they sued for peace without involving the other Entente powers they basically left the problem of the entire world war in their hands. If the rest of the Entente then lost the war, the Central Powers might have been able to force very harsh terms on the Entente (Though maybe not as harsh as Versailles since a mainland invasion of Britain or Japan wasn't possible unlike Germany which was on the brink of collapse internally and externally). Likely harsher than the peace that Russia got Maybe I'm biased, being British, but it was a betrayal. Justified? Maybe. Necessary? Absolutely. But a betrayal nonetheless
Fyodor Dostoyevsky once wrote: "And what is it in us that is mellowed by civilization? All it does, I'd say, is to develop in man a capacity to feel a greater variety of sensations. And nothing, absolutely nothing else. And through this development, man will yet learn how to enjoy bloodshed. Why, it has already happened . . . . Civilization has made man, if not always more bloodthirsty, at least more viciously, more horribly bloodthirsty" - From his book 'Notes from Underground' Part 1, Chapter 7 (page 23)
You also forgot to include Romania in the list of possible places for the Romanovs to go. (Btw we did not capitulate we were still fighting in 1917 okay stop with that nonsense). Now at first glance it would have been an ideal option. It had a common border with Russia, its royal family was related to the tsar through Queen Maria and they were of they still had unoccupied territory. But the problem is that in Romania, there were about a third of the russian army on the front and most of them were communist sympathizees. So having the tsar nearby was not a good ideacause they would have most likely mutinied if not tried to occupy the rest of Romania (which still happened in 1917 at the battle of Galați)
@@potato88872 well,that dosent necesy means that you cant give refuge to foregin rulers who had no power,since Nicholas wasnt the tsar by that time gemrany will most likly not care about him or see that as helping the enemy
Woah fucking NICE!!! Just realized… 1 MILLION!!!!!!!!! I’m a huge stem guy but I love learning about history on my free time and this is my favorite history channel. Keep up the great work, and CONGRATS!!!
And most people who whitewash him have no idea how his regime operated and how oppressive it was. Really the pre-Khrushchev USSR was just a continuation of many of its themes.
@@jameslawrie3807 doesn't mean he deserved to have his entire family executed. China did well in ending their monarchy by legitimately making the emperor a regular ass dude who worked and lived a normal life.
@@williamthebonquerer9181 they were on the same scales, it was extremely close. The pogroms, russification programs and institutional terror killed similar amounts as the lenin-stalin USSR. Nicolas was a cruel autocrat who had morals when it suited him, a trial wouldve been better and killing his family as well was despicable but killing the Tsar was not a unpopular opinion in much of the former Russian Empire.
From what little I know, the Scottish had their own, separate, disagreements with their king. For instance the imposition of the English book of Common Prayer, and being treated as a lesser kingdom.
@@boozecruiser So is literally every video on this channel. There isn't a single educational TH-camr who doesn't use publicly-available sources. You seem to have missed the point. Why go to school when all that stuff is freely available for you to look up?
Nicholas made a lot of big mistakes, but the biggest was leaving the Winter Palace in 1905 instead of meeting Father Gapon and accepting his petition. The Bloody Sunday massacre that resulted from him ignoring Father Gapon lost him both the faith of his people and the respect of foreigners.
Spreading misinformation with no sources to hundreds of thousands of people while sitting on a million subs? Yeah, it's the perfect TH-cam history combo.
@@socracle2774 What's wrong with this video then? I mean I have seen some mistakes in his videos, but most of the time he took a different interpretation or viewpoint hence making his research wrong. Still a good history channel though.
If only he didn't try to Russify Finland. He could have been Grand Duke of Finland. But with with Finland being Lutheran I think he might have become a Lutheran.
This kinda reminds me of something similar in Mexico, as Mexico was once an empire (twice; first from 1821-1823, second from 1864-1867) with two emperors, the first and second Mexican Emperor, Agustin de Iturbide and Maximilian I of Mexico would end up in a somewhat similar situation. The first emperor would go into exile after his reign of under a year came to an end but would return to Mexico where he would be arrested and executed upon his arrival. While the second emperor, Maximilian, who was placed on the throne by the French, would have a chance to flee to avoid capture after ruling for 4 years but refused because he didn't want to abandon his supporters which would end with his capture, trial and execution.
I read a biography of a person associated with the Imperial court. It said that there was a boat waiting somewhere on or near the Black sea,. This person, the family and some other prominent people made it to the boat but the Imperial family didn't. Whether true or not, this might be a great video.
There were a number of Russian royals who had fled to the Crimea, a Russian port on the Black Sea. Nicholas' mother and one of his sisters were there. Right before the Bolsheviks captured the Crimea, a British naval destroyer rescued all of them. Nicholas wanted to go to the Crimea and settle there, but he was being held prisoner by the Bolsheviks in St. Petersburg hundreds of miles to the north. And the Bolsheviks would never have let him escape Russia.
Fun Fact: The dragon tattoo that’s on his arm that you can see in the video is very much real, and he had it done when he visited Japan, a country he’d later go to war with. When he first arrived he wished to take a Japanese wife during his stay, but opted not to because “it was before easter. He was also almost assassinated by a former samurai. One woman even killed herself as a result of the incident even though she had no relations to samurai nor Nicholas himself.
Why wanted the Samurai, Nicholas dead?
Why did that woman kill herself?
I also wanted to write the dragon tattoo thing :)
Damn, that was a wild ride
-can have Japanese wife
-chooses not to because it's before Easter
-goes to war with the country
-refuses to elaborate any further
-leaves
At 1:33, if you pay attention, Tsar Nicholas II has a dragon tattoo on his arm. This is a real thing that he actually got and isn't something that History Matters made up. When Tsar Nicholas II was crown prince, he paid a diplomatic visit to Japan and had a dragon tattoo done on himself cause he thought it looked cool. He also got part of his head sliced off by a rogue policeman while on his tour which nearly caused a diplomatic incident with Japan.
Yeah I'm impressed they put that detail in
History matter has lots of small details, rlly shows how good his content is
King Alexander I of Yugoslavia had russian two-headed eagle tattoo on his chest. Fun fact.
I'm assuming this visit was to flex Russia's muscles at Japan in attempt to get them to hold off on expansionist tendencies or else face war with the Russian Empire. I know they ended up going to war in 1904, with Japan winning in 1905 and becoming the first East Asian country since Mongolia to defeat a major western power in a war.
Frederik IX of Denmark also has one. There’s a picture of him showing that and his kingly-chest off online
Another reason the Finns wouldn’t accept Nicolas is that he’d tried to “Russify” Finland after the 1905 revolution. When he did that he took away a lot of their sovereignty they’d had for 100 years.
Plus Lenin was ALSO in finland at the time and that would’ve just been awkward
the meeting would have been hilarious.
I want someone make smthg about it.
Lenin was just another leader of a party at that time. Not unknown of course but not exactly viewed as the first contender to power.
Just imagining it like the drive past meme from Umbrella Academy.
Wouldn’t it have been easier for the Tzar to flee to Iran?
you know Finland is more than just Helsinki right?
Something not really talked about is that Wilhelm II offered him asylum after England revoked their offer. The Russian government hid the offer from the Tsar, so Wilhelm dispatched a courier to try and reach him personally. Unfortunately the bolsheviks took power before he could be reached.
Fun fact both Russia and Germany lost their empires in WW1 including Turkey (ottoman)
Do you have a source per chance?
@@sirsteam6455 It's from a primary source document in the Corfu papers.
@@blackhawk5712 thx
Wilhelm II also initially offered a ‘passage’ for the family to safely pass through Germany and then to wherever. Even with that, Alexandra refused any offers from Wilhelm II or anything from Germany. He also wanted the Romanovs be handed over unharmed as part of the Brest-Litovsk treaty, but lenin declined. Wilhelm has been grossly downplayed on his efforts to save the Romanovs, he deserves to be credited. He tried.
Fun fact: one member of the Romanov immediate family (Alexei's dog Joy) actually survived and was rescued by a British officer who took him back to Britain. Other members of the extended family were rescued by Britain in 1919.
Also, the anti-German sentiment in Britain that prevented the Romanov's rescue was such that the royal family ended up changing their name, from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to the current Windsor.
In Belgium, the royals didn't abandon the name Saxe-Coburg completely, they just started to use "king XY of Belgium" instead. But they are still part of the same dynasty.
Ferdinand I. of Bulgaria was part of a cadet branch - btw the last heir to the bulgarian throne Simeon von Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is a politician in Bulgaria and served as prime minister already. The kingdom of Portugal was ruled by yet another cadet branch, too.
So this dynasty was and is kind of like a "modern" version of the Habsburg.
Another small fun fact to end this comment - The younger sister of the current belgian king, Princess Astrid of Belgium, is married to the head of a cadet branch of the house of Habsburg-Lorraine, so maybe some day in the future, the Habsburg will make a comeback.
Nicholas should've tried to flee to Germany LOL...
and beg the Kaiser for mercy
@@RinoGato The King in Belgium is "of **the Belgians**" specifically. Other members of the extended royal family often use "of Belgium" as if it were a surname and not just part of a title, though.
@@oliverraven currenct king of the belgians is Philippe of Belgium, or am I wrong? And yes, I said they use of Belgium, but unlike the Windsor, they didn't abandon Saxe-Coburg-Whatever completely. They just prefer to use of Belgium.
@@RinoGato Yes, that is one way of putting it! The title of the monarch is "King/Queen of the Belgians", but the person currently carrying out that role probably has on his ID card 'Philippe of Belgium'.
In summation, Tsar Nicholas II didn't flee Russia for one very simple reason: he couldn't.
Well there are always reasons and justifications for actions but he was free for two days and whatever that meant in an unstable country.
Read this in 10 minute history's voice lmao
He should have thought about this before abdicating, you know "go to the front" and just leave.
We have to face facts about Nicholas. As Barbara Tuchman in "the Guns of August" said of him..and I'm paraphrasing..."his mind was so shallow as to be all surface." He just was NOT a bright guy. Good father, loving husband...but not a deep thinker. Sitting down and making a plan with trusted subordinates to get himself and his family to safety was way..WAY beyond his capacity. Nicholas simply hoped. Hoped his family would be held, but treated well..perhaps hoped the Whites could get him out of his predicament, and hoped that those Bolshevik guardsmen would do the same. His hope got him shot, carted off in a wagon, and dumped in a minepit. He's a "martyr and passion bearer" for the Russian Orthodox Church today, and the faithful pray to him for intercession. Fat lot of good being slow in deep thought but rich in holiness got him, right? But, what's left of him is enshrined in St Petersburg again, among a bunch of other dead Romanov's, so, I guess that's something?
@@michaelfisher7170 Good answer.
Nice touch that George and Nicholas looked identical in this video. IRL they looked so much alike sometimes members of their own staffs got them confused. Particularly if George wore a Russian uniform or Nicholas wore a British one, which they did sometimes for ceremonial purposes.
Would be hilarious if they wore each other’s clothes to fuck with people.
There's a photo from Edward VII 's funeral. They're walking 3 abreast (George V, Wilhelm II, Nicholas II). Similar uniforms, same beards. Could be triplets.
Kaiser Wilhelm II was also a cousin of both and shared a more distant, yet noticeable resemblance.
@@winnienguyen4420 they all have cool mustaches
Which leads me to a conspiracy theory: They actually switched shortly before the civil war and it was actually George that got killed. 👀
It’s sickening how the innocent kids got murdered for evils they had no part in
I understand your point, but the Bolsheviks didnt really have a choice as their royal blood meant they could later claim the russian throne
I understand your point, but the Bolsheviks didnt really have a choice as their royal blood meant they could later claim the russian throne
@@monzar7268 please do not justify murder of innocent children
@@monzar7268 I mean they had the choice to just not kill them but I agree that once they had made that decision there was no point in half measures
@@siggi3712 Copy paste!
I've recently learned something ironical : Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany was angry at the bolcheviks for executing the Romanovs since they were relatives and also, he believed in the divine right of monarchs to rule.
Yeah but he wasn't an absolute autocrat like Nicholas.
@@regularguy2807 Indeed, Germany and Russia were different in their types of monarchy.
He's lucky he ran to the Netherlands after WW1 and didn't meet the same fate as the tsar and also didn't risk being executed by the Énteté for war crimes.
@@esochibuike8477 Indeed! Did you type "Énteté" by mistake or on purpose? 😃
I like the Idea of a German Kaiser, Russian Tsar and British King, all of whom are cousins forced into Exile together in some wacky alternate timeline
It would have been funny and awkward if Nicholas went to exile in Netherlands
Just imagine him and Wilhelm sipping on tea and talking about how they started war and lost thier crowns.
They were family and incredibly close friends, it wouldn't have been that weird
Wow how fruitfull talk they could have
For once this is a questions I’ve often asked myself and want answer for.
Same
Yes me too
Why didn’t he just go to Iran and hide there until the war was over.Then he could just go the raj and go to Britain or be with his cousin wilhelm in Holland
@@oldchannel.466 why didn't he hide in africa?
@@anasslasry6962 Putting aside the fact that it was practically impossible for him to get there, since every way Turkey was in the way...
Why would he hide in Africa? For what reason would he go there?
Almost every single country is a European colony at this point. They've wouldn't take him for the same reason their mother countries wouldn't take him.
If someone wanted to know why Finns did not want him was the fact that most of his reign he tried Russificate Finland. Finnish people who had got used to the autonomy given to them by Alexander I and further amplified by Alexander II and them recognizing finnish people as their own entity. Nicholas II tried to turn finnish people to russians and gave the governor-general Bobrikov dictatorial powers. They kept going with the russification attempts to the February Revolution in Russia. After the October Revolution in December 6 1917 Finland declared its independence. Nikolai II was not popular and most likely would have got shot if he tried to come to Finland.
November 6 (to do with hanging on to the Julian calendar several centuries after everybody else) but yeah, appreciate everything else you've posted.
At the same time, Mannerheim, like a true Chad he was, kept a portrait of Nicholas in his living room just because he could.
@@ForOne814 Did he throw darts at it?
@@unclenogbad1509 No, he respected him. He was his Tsar. Mannerheim was a general in the russian Tsar's army. He was even one point was part of the Imperial entourage. Mannerheim never was pro-finnish but as he hated communism and was from Finland he ended up there and him being one of the most experienced military leaders Finland had it was not surprise he ended up as the head of the military.
@@Wezqu Also, contrary to the video visualization, the Finnish government wasn't very keen on Mannerheim either. Being a Russian General was kinda sus.
'France was not exactly in a loving German's kind of mood at the moment' - well that's funny
Having 1.4 million French dead during the great war wasn't exactly "funny" ... but i get what you mean ...
Well that's because the French don't have much of a sense of humor
@@hiimjustin8826 France, the newest member of the no humor axis
@@razzledazzle488 we must expand no humor zone
It's pretty shady once you realize france and Russia were allies in the war
Some more factors: when he abdicated, he was out in the West, so he had to travel back to reunite with his family, losing time. Also, his children caught *measles in early 1917 which meant that they couldn't travel, and by the time they were well again, it was too late.
He was actually south of St. Petersburg on the Russian/German front. And his children had the measles, which was a serious illness at that time. Watch the documentary "Nicholas and Alexandra". It explains all of that.
@@SymphonyBrahms He was out in the west, as I said. But yes, the kids had measles not typhus.
I believe Nicholas was separated from the rest of his family as he was traveling back from the frontlines, I don’t believe he would have left the country by himself. By the time he got back to where his family was staying, they’d already been placed under house arrest.
That is exactly what happened.
"Unlifed" isn't a word I realized I needed in my vocabulary.
Came here to say this.
It sounds like how someone would say death in Newspeak from 1984 tbh.
@@walsh9080 Jeorge temfield (with J) was recently unlifed by thomas enfield yesterday after both got into a drunken brawl over a prostitute.
Inhumed is a poetic one too, when used to refer to the act of killing a person.
Oh! I thought he said "unliked".
"Who then realized a trial, would take time or something, just shot him."
Germany: "DAMNNNNN"
The Rosa Luxembourg treatment
Literally not how it happened.
They were planning on trials, only for the adults, but they got invaded by foreign mercenaries first and the detainment estate (house arrest) was overrun.
@@nunesv5882 Luxembourg definitely got it worse. She was in hiding and got sold out by hostile members of her former organisation because they only thought she was gonna be banned from parliament or something.
@@jayayerson8819 I'm not sure what you mean. The people keeping the Romanovs had a direct line to the Kremlin. The Whites didn't get anywhere near the house for months. Lenin ordered them shot under the pretense that the whites were getting close, and then he covered up his involvement.
The Whites severed communication, and being cut-off the decision to shoot The Romanovs was made locally, fearing that perhaps the counter-revolution was about to overthrow The Bolshevics.
Meant to say this on your last episode, but congrats on hitting a million subscribers. Here’s to the next million 🥳
For a short moment, I thought, you wanted to say that this is his last episode
It's crazy to think he's just now at 1 million his videos have had quality like a big Chanel from day one
Huge achievement deserving of a ton of praise!
Here's to the first billion 🍾
Nicholas shot himself to foot there. Finns hated Nicholas for trying to Russify Finland and had revoked many aspects of our autonomy. But if it had been Alexander II asking for refuge, Finland would have absolutely granted it, for he was very liked in Finlanf for his reforms.
2 Russophobes who burn in hell
Nicky and Alix were both rather difficult people, Alix moreso.
You forgot to mention that the Kaiser promised safe passage to any vessel taking the Czar out of Russia. It was all arranged and the Kerensky government had agreed to release him when the allies refused him asylum. A few days latter Lenin siezed power and the family was moved from Petrograd to Tobolisk in Siberia making any chance of rescue nearly impossible.
@commonsense5125: You make no sense and are an idiot. Nicholas II abdicated to the Provisional Government with the hopes of with moving to England or the Crimea and living quietly in March 1917. Asylum efforts failed but the family was located outside St. Petersburg which made train travel risky as there was still extreme dislike towards the Romanovs. To get them out of the minds of the public,after verifying Nicholas and wife Alexandra did not sell out the country, Alexander Kerensky, head of the government moved them to the backward town of Tobolsk in August 1917 where attitudes towards the Romanovs was kinder. The Bolsheviks took control in November 1917 and plans were eventually made to put Nicholas on trial. To soothe the different Bolshevik regions, the family was given to the Bolshevik Urals where they arrived in April 1918 and were shot three months later when White forces advanced on Ekaterinburg.
They were actually moved to Tobolsk when Kerensky was Premiere. Then when Lenin became dictator, he moved the family to Yekaterinberg, where they were eventually executed.
Q: Why didn't the Tsar flee Russia?
A: Because he wasn't about to go roamin'-off.
Thank you.
get out
Remove yourself from the premises plz
OMG
dad joke time!
That’s absolutely appalling and I love it.
George V probably left his cousin in russia so the british didn't get confused and switch their king with a guy that looks exactly the SAME.
lmao, the resemblance is amazing
I mean, George did take Nicholas’s sister Xenia if it’s any consolation
George didn't want to let his cousin Nickolas crash at one of his castles
@@LaneCorbett I mean, it’s not like Nicholas would’ve actually been living in any of them
@@Edmonton-of2ec I mean come on one of several Castles would have been fine. Hell send them up to Scotland
If you didn't get the joke, it's just Tsarcasm
why am i not surprised
* comedic rimshot *
door's that way
Thats perfect.
You're so punny ... my head my head is painful 😅
Rest in peace Olga, Anastasia, Tatiana, Maria and young Alexei.
I wonder if the Brits (when they withdrew King George V offer of sanctuary to the Tsar) ever considered modifying the offer instead -- say as an offer of sanctuary, but in Australia or western Canada. I believe at the time Britain still controlled both places foreign policy, both destinations would have likely involved an exit through the Pacific (away from the main fighting) and both areas were also far enough away as to minimize public furor (out of sight, out of mind).
That is what I thought, they Don't need to bring them to England just send them to Australia, Canadá, New Zealand or Caribbean, with low profile and just be cool for a time and they could live
I wonder if the children could have been allowed to leave Russia, at least the daughters.
Really what a coincidence, I was literally just talking about the Tsar a couple minutes ago.
Scar Nicholas 2 when?
(holding up sign) *S O O N*
Scar Nicholas, now make Mad Maximilian of Mexico Based man
@@MonsieurDean *Scar Nicholas and Baron Ungern-Sternberg running through a field of flowers*
"Anti-Communist crusading"
Somehow when one channel talks, the others also talks the same subject as well. This happened before
2:06 act of abandoning is the rose leaving jack to freeze to death, couldnt agree more
Yeah, plenty of room on that raft. God, I hate that film.
@@unclenogbad1509 I hate this argument. If you actually watch the film it’s incredibly obvious that the issue isn’t the size of the debris chunk they’re on, it’s the fact that whatever it is isn’t a raft, was never meant to support the weight of two grown adult, and quickly started sinking when they both initially tried to get on it at the same time. Rose didn’t abandon Jack, only one of them could’ve survived and Jack chose to allow himself to die so she could live.
@@thelittleredhairedgirlfrom6527 Yes, I know, it's a romantic movie and the conventions have to be observed. Really, though, couldn't she have used that whistle straight away, while he was still hanging on?
@@unclenogbad1509 To my recollection she didn’t have the whistle yet, one of the crew members had the whistle and she took it after that guy died. Even if she had the whistle tho it wouldn’t have done shit since all the lifeboats were still sailing away since they were full of women and children, and it wasn’t until much later once they’d reached the rescue ship and offloaded the women and kids that any of the lifeboats went back for the people in the water, most of whom (including Jack) were already dead by this point. Rose herself was barely clinging onto life and the rescuers almost missed her.
@@unclenogbad1509 What about Eternals, do you hate that film too?
I read long ago that King Alfonso XIII, King of Spain at that time, tried to bring the Tsars to Spain. In the end it was not achieved, but they did manage to bring in many of the relatives of the tsars. That is why the current heirness to the Russian throne was born in Spain.
So, both modern Queen of Russia and Roman Emperor are Spanish. Interesting...
There is an actual heir of the throne? Last time, I checked, each of the existing Romanovs has no right to the throne due to the succession laws of Russian Empire - you lose all rights when choose morganatic marriage .
@@mdokuch96 if im not mistaken the russian orthodox church does recognize her as the heir
@@billylauwda9178 two questions:
1) Which of two "Russian Orthodox" churches?
2) What has the church to do with the succession laws?
@@mdokuch96 1. There are two?
2. They shouldnt be able to do so but eh?
Nicholas: can I pls flee?
George: N O
Nicholas: *dies*
George: Wasnt expecting that
Nicholas: “BREH”
Nobody expects the Russian Inquisition
All he needed was James Bissonette to bail him out of exile.
Tell that to Trotsky
Preferred to not get involved
@James Bissonette A wise decision
James bissonette
@@jamesbissonette8002 the legend himself!
1:32 Fun fact: Nicholas actually had a dragon tattoo. Nice attention to detail about the Tsar
"Think about what you did"
The book 'The race to save the Romanovs' by Helen Rappaport is an excellent book about this time period. It describes both foreign and domestic attempts to rescue the family but also the complicated political situation that prevented it. Actually a lot of stuff happened between the Bolsheviks capturing them and then being shot, which is a very interesting read.
Hello. Hopefully somebody could answer this: Was anybody not able to save the family? When the whole family was massacred in July 1918 they were held captived in a house, not in a prison o jail, and some of the guards were friendly with them. Besides that, the front lines of the white Russian army an the the red communist army were only 30 or 40 kilometers away from where the family was held. They could even heard the bombs and explosions of the battlefield. The family could have escaped and ran toward the white Russian army, which would have received them, and from there, maybe emigrate to the United States, since nobody in Europe wanted to take them. Maybe they could have applied to Spain, since it was still a monarchy and neutral. This would have been possible, right?
I wonder then will Canada or Mexico take the US President when the revolution comes. ?
@@darrylknight2675 Mexico took Trotsky. But they failed to save his life from the ice axe. Stalin agents were everywhere. 😟😟😟
@@oscarlpf1 I have read an account on the Internet that George V sent MI6 agents to scope out the house the Bolsheviks had the Romanov's in but it was that heavily guarded on the outside that any rescue attempt would have been a bloodbath. It would have taken a small army to fight the defenses and even then, the family would probably have been killed whilst the rescuers were fighting the guards outside
That book's blurb states, with regard to the failure of anyone to save the Russian Imperial Family, that "[i]t was not, ever, a simple case of one British King’s loss of nerve." Since that had always been my (ill-informed) opinion, I shall definitely give that book a read. Thank you for the recommendation.
Bizarre Fact: When the biography was being written about an early Hollywood producer, whose family were not only Jewish but of Russian descent, a copy of a letter written to Nicholas was found among his papers. In it , the producer said that though his family had been driven to emigrate by pogroms, he still considered himself Russian by birth. As a result he felt sorry for Nicholas and his family and their loss of status. As a result he offered the ex-Tsar a job as an actor in his studio!!
Just think of it, if he had accepted, the ex-monarchs of Europe could have become Hollywood stars!!!
I'd also note that they didn't just kill him, but his young children and entire family. I don't necessarily judge these things as they aren't unheard of in any time period; however, I wouldn't omit them.
It's a point worth making, especially since Nicholas was devoted to his family and would never have accepted exile if that meant leaving any of them behind.
Unheard of is not a measuring stick for anything. Atrocity is atrocity, nomatter how normalized it becomes in a society. Yes, for being such a legit form of govt that the ppl would so appreciate on their own without force, I don't see the need to off literally anyone who could claim the tiniest bit of right to the throne. The US and UK didn't undertake any such insanity to stop being monarchies.
@@seanservo3105 perhaps, but my point is that it was a politically expedient move rather than motivated entirely by malice. I also find it atrocious, but as the French Revolution has proved: rebellion and overthrowing a monarchy is a much more nasty business than simply rebelling to control a colonial possession (the U.S.). In the annals of history killing opposing political dynasties was quite common, and while I personally find it repellant, the prospect of war brought on by rivals that were allowed to gain power was equally so. That being said, I think they would've been better served in the international community if they'd exiled them. But then again the Soviets were never too concerned with appearing blood thisty.
@@alanpennie8013 its a hereditary system The Tsar is dead long live the Tsar, In this case the gap between the Tsars was a few seconds
It was a sign of things to come.
If the Revolutionary Guard doesn't show up in 15 minutes, you are legally allowed to leave.
Welcome back to a new episode of “huh, I really never thought about that… but now that I have, yeah I’m really interested, what happened there?”
Ur pfp is so outdated
Your little bits of humour you sprinkle in kill me every time, love the channel.
I love how fluid everything is, the little details in the animation are much more smooth now. It’s nice.
Nicholas being an exile in Finland just fascinates me somehow
Not possible. He was under heavy guard in Russia. And the Finns hated him because he had wanted to annex Finland and make it a part of Russia.
@SymphonyBrahms
Like this video said, the Russian government offered him to Finland but our government refused.
Also Nicholas had been popular in Finland and its was believed until very late that it was scheming bureaucrats and nobles who were to blame with issues in Finland. Even though he had later become more unpopular I would say he was still more popular in Finland than in other places in Russia (not saying much, but he wasn’t loathed). The government just didn’t want to get involved into something controversial
I honestly do feel bad for George V. He knew if he saved the Romanovs, the Labour Party and Socialist elements would be furious, and with his German family and name, he was already teetering on Revolution.
He had to sacrifice his cousin to save his own family and country. It’s not a choice I’d wish on anyone.
I don't think teetering is the right word. The monarchy was still popular across the Empire during World War I despite the rise of the Labour Party. Lots of people may want their employers to be more generous but going against the King is too far.
Well it’s not a wise choice in hindsight anyway. The royal family now is proving its irrelevance to the country and only the queen is barely keeping it on the throne… the sacrifice only delayed the inevitable.
@@walterfielding9079 The Imperial Family was also immensely popular in 1914 having just celebrated 300 years of Romanov rule in 1911, and that all collapsed in a fascinatingly quick space of time.
George knew there were already people who were getting sick and tired of the conditions the war was forcing on them and if he maintained the status quo, he would face the same fate as it didn’t really take that many people to topple the monarchy and the Romanovs were immensely more powerful than the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha so the change wouldn’t have been nearly as drastic for the British people.
George V was right to be afraid and his decisions to make the monarchy more popular with the people probably saved his dynasty.
The British Empire wasn't teetiring on Revolution at all. It wasn't even close.
@@Alusnovalotus well, british royal family will inevitably lose it's political power but i doubt that they would get shot afterwards
I always feel infinitely sorry for the children of Nicholas because they were innocent and still got murdered.
Especially Alexei. He had a miserable short life suffering from haemophilia. At one point; he begged his mother to kill him to make the pain end, only to get better. Couldn't even enjoy his life like other children because of the risk of a fatal bleed, had his leg swell to an unnatural size when he tried once. All that pain, all that suffering, only to be murdered because of who he was.
Well part of the issue as explained was basically them being a symbol for revolution or a reason to restore the monarchy. So essentially… you didn’t want to leave any of them alive because “they are the rightful heir to the throne.”
@@alexjv1370 All it did was give the new government a bad reputation.
I feel sorry for the entire family.
@@alexjv1370 They already failed in that regard then. Numerous male Romanovs already escaped Russia, so funny enough killing Nicholas actually made foreign resistance easier, not harder. Also the daughters + Alexandra + the 4 servants who also died in that basement had no claim to the throne. Where is the logic there?
1:09 I like your new SMLE, it looks very detailed
2:00 That's legitimately the best scene in all your videos!
I love the detail he puts in his videos . The Russian soldiers were carrying mosin nagant rifles which is historically accurate. Most channels just put what's rifle in soldiers hands
2:07 the Titanic reference killed me, well done lol
I visited the British Imperial War Museum in London a couple of years ago and was surprised by its Great War section. It said toward the end of the exhibit “Russia has failed us” and it essentially said “finally the U.S. joined.” I was shocked because Russia’s royal family was executed and Russia’s czar resembled Britain’s king but the exhibit threw Russia under the bus. Plus, it didn’t seem the exhibit appreciated the United States’ involvement but expected it in a war in Europe.
You can count the instances where the British portrayed Russia in a positive light on one finger. And even that'd be the middle finger.
America arrived late, were the Europeans supposed to madly praise the Americans for joining the war over three years late?
@@Valencetheshireman927 the fuck? America had no part in the events leading up to the first world war. They joined after germany refused to abandon their stance of unrestricted submarine warfare. And because the French and British owed money to the US, and can't collect repayment from a conquered nation.
@@Valencetheshireman927 The American Civil War actually started in 1858 but both sides turned up late.
Britain was hostile to Russia from approximately the 1740s and arguably still is :)
Britain has had short bouts of tolerance though, usually when they desperately needed Russian troops to absorb German or French munitions but after that it's back to the norm. Historically British claims on Russian intransience tend to be light on context as you have pointed out.
Note that at the time many people openly stated the Russia had dragged Britain into the war with zero credibility.
Until today, I never knew I needed to see the Tsar with a snake tattoo before.
Nicholas II had a dragon tattoo on his arm, which he got in Japan. He also had a 9 inch scar on his head, which he also got from Japan.
"as such the provincial government took a brave step, they did nothing"
lol History Matters is still a legend
That's an oversimplification. Read Helen Rapaport's book to get the true perspective of how weak the provisional government was at this point. They did nothing because they had no options that would work.
This channel constantly answers the question that no one asked but that everyone wants the answer too
What I love the most in your channel is that you reply to questions that I never thought about them. And that´s awesome! I never lose one of your videos! Keep up the good job!
"...unliked by Bolshevik revolutionaries"
I'd hate to see what unfriended looked like.
Unlifed apparently.
He said "unlifed". Meaning killed.
That tattoo on the Tsars arm is hilarious, especially when you consider that he did get a dragon tattoo when he went to Japan, although I don’t recall exactly where.
On his arm.
@@WalkingTaako42 I thought it was on his chest
Figured, just wasn’t sure.
@@RayFog1 Same.
Left arm
Video idea: why did Churchill lose the post war elections, by a landslide too.
So much great topics for videos but since we get just 1 video à week might take time.
he is a great wartime leader but i think that he's rather horrible at peacetime
@@lixobounce6588 also, in British elections you don't vote for the PM, just your own local MP.
The people who _could_ vote for Churchill did vote for him. The people who couldn't vote for him mostly voted Labour.
@@lixobounce6588 I mean, he made it clear he had nothing to offer but blood, sweat, and tears lol
This aged well
Giving George and Nicky the Rose and Jack treatment was bloody brilliant, I spit soda out my nose. I love you, man!
King George felt haunted by the fact that he was - for all intents and purposes - powerless to save his cousin, but he saw the pattern that was befalling all of the other european monarchies at the time and did what none of them were quick enough to do: adapt and evolve, even if that meant watching his own relatives crumble and burn.
@chrismaddock5790: He wasn’t powerless. The Prime Minister, Lloyd-George offered asylum but George V applied effort to rescind it. He was afraid that his family-with a German name and German born Queen would be removed too. He at least could have gotten the immediate family out of the country but did nothing.
George V was a selfish stuck up ass whose wife later bought or stole the Romanovs family jewels. Your analysis is immature and very poor.
The British prime minister and Parliament forbade George to bring the tsar to England. And they have all the power, not the king. They took control in 1688 when they kicked out James II and installed William and Mary as rulers.
indeed@@SymphonyBrahms
The emeritus queen Sofia of Spain said something "you are King not to be happy"
2:38 this is the first time i have seen a history matters character with non straight arms
What about when they hold guns and stuff?
Nicholas II: Come on George, you can get me out, right?
George V: ...
Nicholas II: You can get me out, right?
He couldn't give him refuge. Parliament forbade him to do so.
An interesting video idea could be 'Why was Kerensky able to flee Russia?'
He was President of the Provisional government but managed to get away, died in 1970
Kerensky just managed to get out through Finland before the Bolsheviks could arrest him.
Slight correction: Nicholas was shot dead, not because the Soviets actually wanted him dead(at that point at least), but because at the time in the civil war, they were losing ground to the White army, which was about to retake the former Tsar's residence. Fearing that the liberation of the Tsar would boost the morale of the White Army and grant legitimacy to the opposing government, they decided that killing him and his entire family was the best choice for the war effort. If this was not the case, the world would not even know that the Tsar was summarily executed. Doesn't help the utopian image the communists were trying to portray.
Yep, and as I mentioned upthread the Bolsheviks weren't a monolith and those advocating an extra-legal murder per-empted the Bolsheviks who opposed it.
Can you expect anything more from communists? Murderous animals, each and every one.
James Bisonette could have easily have a good place for Tsar Nicholas II
Let's just give him the tsar's place as ruler of the russian empire instead
I'm hoping it's 6 feet of Russian soil
@@ecurewitz TBH I would be satisfied with any kind of regolith, in any location. It's been a long time since he would have died of old age.
I would have just takened the children, forcibly if need be.
There's also the fact that a lot of allied countries weren't very friendly towards Russia as it was becoming more and more apparent that they were going to withdraw from the armed conflict. When Russia sued for peace with the central powers, there was a sentiment of betrayal floating in the air.
@پیاده نظام خان "That old lie: Dulce et Decorum est pro patria mori."
Чел, ты чушь несёшь. Армия 1917 года, которая была внутренне подавленна и при этом разваливалась из-за Февральских настрений, сдерживала Турцию, Болгарию, так как фронт румын прорвали (они потом ещё себе Бессарабию отжали, вот такая благодарность), Австро-Венгрию и Греманию, я был бы не удивлён если Россия подписала бы мирный договор но они держались до последнего, в том числе мой прапрадед отдал жизнь за эту бессмысленную войну. А вот мир подписали именно большевики отдав огромные земли. И знаете что, кто-то тогда из Антанты попытался реально вернуть власть временному правительству? Нет. И все потому что исход войны к тому времени был предрешён и на самом деле добрым союзникам даже оказалось выгодно что мы проиграли под конец и не пришлось делиться с нами. В общем политика вещь циничная.
@@ВездесущаяСущность западный дискурс обычно не учитывает большую часть событий, можешь даже не пытаться, западные люди могут думать только о себе. Отвратительная трагедия для них это повод посраться и упустить суть, попутно восхваляя свою нацию. Ну и с ростом популярности социализма любые аргументы, которые выставляют социализм в негативном свете игнорятся. Рассказываешь людям, что у тебя 10 родственников большевики уебали за маслобойню, так они тебе скажут, что это мало.
In all fairness Russia did have a massive hand in starting the war, arguably second only to Austria-Hungary (Since they turned a regional conflict between A-H and Serbia into a global one even if you wanted to argue it was for a noble reason) so when they sued for peace without involving the other Entente powers they basically left the problem of the entire world war in their hands. If the rest of the Entente then lost the war, the Central Powers might have been able to force very harsh terms on the Entente (Though maybe not as harsh as Versailles since a mainland invasion of Britain or Japan wasn't possible unlike Germany which was on the brink of collapse internally and externally). Likely harsher than the peace that Russia got
Maybe I'm biased, being British, but it was a betrayal. Justified? Maybe. Necessary? Absolutely. But a betrayal nonetheless
Nice and informative a history matters standard!
"Because a trial would take time or something, they just shot him"I love that humour so much
Fyodor Dostoyevsky once wrote:
"And what is it in us that is mellowed by civilization? All it does, I'd say, is to develop in man a capacity to feel a greater variety of sensations. And nothing, absolutely nothing else. And through this development, man will yet learn how to enjoy bloodshed. Why, it has already happened . . . . Civilization has made man, if not always more bloodthirsty, at least more viciously, more horribly bloodthirsty"
- From his book 'Notes from Underground' Part 1, Chapter 7 (page 23)
Well these days, civilized societies generally don't make a point of genociding their enemies and raping and enslaving anyone who was left
Ah, I see that you are a Man of Culture.
Dostoevsky had seen things that would drive most of us mad.
One of the greatest writers in history. I recently read crime and punishment and I really like it
Thank God for social media addiction then.
I love the addition of the dragon tattoo. Nice little touch.
As a Brit, I genuinely laughed at the "enjoy the summer clip" 1:59
Tsar: "Finland, Mother Russia doesn't like me anymore. Can I stay with you?"
Finland: ***ANGRY INDEPENDENCE NOISES***
You try to make us Russians, so take a hike.
He was not a popular Tzar in Finland because of his Russofication programme in the early 1900's.
You also forgot to include Romania in the list of possible places for the Romanovs to go. (Btw we did not capitulate we were still fighting in 1917 okay stop with that nonsense).
Now at first glance it would have been an ideal option. It had a common border with Russia, its royal family was related to the tsar through Queen Maria and they were of they still had unoccupied territory.
But the problem is that in Romania, there were about a third of the russian army on the front and most of them were communist sympathizees. So having the tsar nearby was not a good ideacause they would have most likely mutinied if not tried to occupy the rest of Romania (which still happened in 1917 at the battle of Galați)
You guys signed a frikking armistice
@@potato88872 well,that dosent necesy means that you cant give refuge to foregin rulers who had no power,since Nicholas wasnt the tsar by that time gemrany will most likly not care about him or see that as helping the enemy
What about Greece?
@@januarysson5633 Good luck getting passed the Ottomans until 1918.
@@potato88872 in 1918. Three months after the russians. And we returned
Woah fucking NICE!!! Just realized… 1 MILLION!!!!!!!!! I’m a huge stem guy but I love learning about history on my free time and this is my favorite history channel. Keep up the great work, and CONGRATS!!!
The lynched family and the shot with them wearing fake noses and glasses was gold!
Trotsky's facial expressions killed me
>:(
And an ice pick killed him.
@@Sharnoy1 Yeah I visited his house in Mexico City where the Deed was done. It is a museum.
He was "funny lookin".
I am loving Franz-Joseph's redesign!
And none of his family were harmed after the war
Nicholas directly (mis) managed the Russian Army during WW1, which means he couldn't blame the generals for losing. No wonder everyone hated him.
And most people who whitewash him have no idea how his regime operated and how oppressive it was. Really the pre-Khrushchev USSR was just a continuation of many of its themes.
@@jameslawrie3807 doesn't mean he deserved to have his entire family executed. China did well in ending their monarchy by legitimately making the emperor a regular ass dude who worked and lived a normal life.
Neither did he ever blame his generals, he took responsibility and voluntarily abdicated the throne.
@@jameslawrie3807the reds were far worse than the tsar it's not even close.
@@williamthebonquerer9181 they were on the same scales, it was extremely close. The pogroms, russification programs and institutional terror killed similar amounts as the lenin-stalin USSR. Nicolas was a cruel autocrat who had morals when it suited him, a trial wouldve been better and killing his family as well was despicable but killing the Tsar was not a unpopular opinion in much of the former Russian Empire.
2.08.
Congrats for hitting a million subscribers by the way!
Great video as always. Fun fact: I love your graphics.
Idea for a video: What was Scotland doing during the English Civil War and the Commonwealth? Since Charles was also their King too.
You mean, War of Two Roses?
You do realise this stuff is freely available for you to look up?
@Ben oh, OK
From what little I know, the Scottish had their own, separate, disagreements with their king. For instance the imposition of the English book of Common Prayer, and being treated as a lesser kingdom.
@@boozecruiser So is literally every video on this channel. There isn't a single educational TH-camr who doesn't use publicly-available sources. You seem to have missed the point.
Why go to school when all that stuff is freely available for you to look up?
Why did Nicholas never leave Russia.
Short answer: having no friends kind of sucks.
Allying with France was the mistake that took his life and his country.
@@bingobongo1615 declarinf war on the austro-hungarian was also a mistake that cost him his life and his country.
Nicholas made a lot of big mistakes, but the biggest was leaving the Winter Palace in 1905 instead of meeting Father Gapon and accepting his petition. The Bloody Sunday massacre that resulted from him ignoring Father Gapon lost him both the faith of his people and the respect of foreigners.
Welcome to Episode 2 of “Question I never had but now am fiercely interested in”
The humor is some of the most clever I've had the pleasure of making me smirk and occasionally chuckle.... Occasionally
So many people had to despise the last tzar for his death to take place when it did. It's astounding how many enemies he made before he died.
Chinese: allow their emperor to live so he turns into a law abiding communist
Russians: haha Tsar and Family go BRRRRRRR
Sun Yat Sen had already allowed it so the Communists couldn't touch him.
"Evacuate? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances!"
History Matters, the channel all history creators really want to be...
I miss the 10min sometimes but yeah as a History TH-camrs fan I agree with you 100%
@@jonathanrobinson407 nah, the 3 minutes are best and have no filler
@@karlik4861 I love fillers :)
Spreading misinformation with no sources to hundreds of thousands of people while sitting on a million subs? Yeah, it's the perfect TH-cam history combo.
@@socracle2774 What's wrong with this video then? I mean I have seen some mistakes in his videos, but most of the time he took a different interpretation or viewpoint hence making his research wrong. Still a good history channel though.
Not only set you the empire on fire, but also gave her South Sakhalin, nice
upd 0:36
I love your deadpan humor so much
Imagine being a tsar and no one wanting you 😔
Nicholas II could be the second coming of the Christ and still no one would want his pathetic ass.
I'm celebrating the glorious return of "Fun fact: No."
Also Skye Chappelle. I'm glad she's been back.
This sponsor is a woman?
@@Ivan_Maslov This is a traditionally feminine name.
Skye is a woman name? Good to know, thank you
@@MomMom4Cubs I have seen both men and women with that name.
@@SusanOnTVShows I thought this name was for men only
1:32 That's some attention to detail. He really had that tattoo, made it during his visit to Japan when he was the crown prince.
History Matters little Lego people are goated animations
Thank you for once more answering a question I never asked but wondered why I hadn't ever asked it when I saw your video.
Can you do a video on the Polish-Soviet war during the 1920s?
That would be a lot longer than three minutes I think, especially if the Ukrainian shenanigans are covered.
@@jameslawrie3807 thats the point
How Lviv ended up in Poland after the collapse of the empires should be short enough. And the Ukrainian shenanigans will still be there.
Well, had this happened then I think the British would have confused Nicholas with George
You gave up the Russian throne, but look on the bright side.
You're still the grand duke of Finland.
If only he didn't try to Russify Finland. He could have been Grand Duke of Finland. But with with Finland being Lutheran I think he might have become a Lutheran.
@@carterbentonjr399 Many countries have had a monarch that is not of the majority religion.
Also his predecessors used to be very loved in Finland.
Queen Elizabeth II is also the Duke of Normandy!
Your animations are getting better and better!! keep it up
This channel asks questions I never knew I had
This kinda reminds me of something similar in Mexico, as Mexico was once an empire (twice; first from 1821-1823, second from 1864-1867) with two emperors, the first and second Mexican Emperor, Agustin de Iturbide and Maximilian I of Mexico would end up in a somewhat similar situation. The first emperor would go into exile after his reign of under a year came to an end but would return to Mexico where he would be arrested and executed upon his arrival. While the second emperor, Maximilian, who was placed on the throne by the French, would have a chance to flee to avoid capture after ruling for 4 years but refused because he didn't want to abandon his supporters which would end with his capture, trial and execution.
Anyone else here SICK of habeas corpus getting in the way of a unilateral strike of absolute justice?
I read a biography of a person associated with the Imperial court. It said that there was a boat waiting somewhere on or near the Black sea,. This person, the family and some other prominent people made it to the boat but the Imperial family didn't. Whether true or not, this might be a great video.
Archangel (if free of ice) or Murmansk (if that could be used at the time) seem more suitable for escaping to the UK.
There were a number of Russian royals who had fled to the Crimea, a Russian port on the Black Sea. Nicholas' mother and one of his sisters were there. Right before the Bolsheviks captured the Crimea, a British naval destroyer rescued all of them. Nicholas wanted to go to the Crimea and settle there, but he was being held prisoner by the Bolsheviks in St. Petersburg hundreds of miles to the north. And the Bolsheviks would never have let him escape Russia.
I love how you just gave him the dragon tatoo!
Idk how you do it, topic selection 10/10