On the night of July 17 marks the 100th anniversary of the execution of Tsar Nikola1ai the Bloody, his family and his associates on the verdict of the Uralsovet. Undoubtedly, this date will be marked by monarchical and ecclesiastical circles with the another wave of sobbings and tears about the ideal family man Nikolai Aleksandrovich, another curses against the Bolsheviks and arguments about "what Russia we lost"! Well, there are fans of the "rotten", they can not forbid such an enthusiasm. But after all, there are facts of history, there are testimonies of contemporaries, they can not be overwhelmed by emotions!
We will talk about these facts, first of all, about what this crowned ruler of the Russian Empire brought to the people, what events are the main events in his reign, why "the monkish monarchist's" V.V. Shulgin bitterly said - in the February Revolution in Petrograd there would not be twenty people who wanted to speak in defense of the monarchical order.
Key events of the reign of Nicholas II:
- "Khodynka" on May 18 (old style) in 1896. 1389 people died. 1300 received serious injuries.
- Russian-Japanese war of 1904-1905, provoked by the expansionist policy of the tsarist government. 400 thousand killed, wounded, sick and captured Russian soldiers.
- Bloody Sunday, January 9, 1905. About 4,600 people were killed and wounded by the tsarist troops.
- 1905-1909 years. Almost 20,000 people were shot by decisions of the "military field" and "military" courts of tsarist Russia. The number of political prisoners exceeded 100,000 people.
- The monstrous human slaughter - the Great War of 1914-1918, in which the country was drawn by the efforts of the ruling elite headed by Nikolai teh Bloody to achieve goals alien to the people. Over three million people died on the battlefields.
The defender of Nicholas II will not fail to stress: he, Nikolai, knew many foreign languages, was very well-bred (implied - a peaceful, flexible) person. And in the wars he was taken in by deception. No, gentlemen. It was not so. A.N. Kuropatkin in his (published!) diary explains the psychology of the Sovereign: "I told Witte that our Emperor had grandiose plans in his head: to take Manchuria for Russia and go to Russia's annexation of Korea. Dreams of his power to take Tibet too. He wants to take Persia, to seize not only the Bosporus, but also the Dardanelles. What we ministers, according to local circumstances, detain the sovereign in the implementation of his dreams and everything is disappointing, he still thinks he is right, that he understands better than us the questions of Russia's glory and good. Therefore, every Ugly Uprising who sings in unison seems to the Emperor more understanding of his plans than we ministers ... Witte told me that he fully agrees with my diagnosis. "
Maybe the monarchy, Nicholas II defended the Orthodox Church? Let's read the facts of February-March 1917. At the end of February 1917, in spite of the political events taking place in Petrograd, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), according to Protopresbyter of the military and naval clergy G. Shavelsky, "reigned over the cemetery."
Behind this silence antimonarchic moods were concealed. They were manifested in the reaction of the members of the Synod to appeals to them in those days from citizens and state officials of Russia with requests for the support of the monarchy. Thus, such a request contained a telegram from the Ekaterinoslav Division of the Union of the Russian People of February 23, 1917. The deputy of the Synodal Chief Procurator, Prince N.D. Zhevakhov. In the midst of strikes, on February 26, he proposed to the chairman of the Synod, Metropolitan of Kiev, Vladimir (Bogoyavlensky), to issue an appeal to the population in defense of the monarch - "a warning, formidable warning to the Church, entailing, in case of disobedience, a church punishment." The proclamation was offered not only to read from the church pulpits, but also to paste around the city. Metropolitan Vladimir refused to help the falling monarchy, despite the urgent requests of Zhevakhov. On February 27, the Procurator-General N.P. Raev addressed the synod to condemn the revolutionary movement, noting that the troublemakers "consist of traitors, beginning with members of the State Duma and ending with workers." The Synod rejected this proposal, responding to the chief procurator, that it is still unknown where the treason comes from above or below.
On March 2, 1917 in the chambers of the Moscow Metropolitan a private meeting of members of the Synod and representatives of the Moscow clergy was held. Members of the Synod recognized the need to immediately establish contact with the Executive Committee of the State Duma. This fact gives grounds to assert that the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church recognized the Provisional Government even before Nicholas II abdicated from the throne, which took place on the night of 2 to 3 March.
The first officially-solemn meeting of the Holy Synod took place on March 4 after the coup d'état. It was presided over by Metropolitan Vladimir of Kiev and attended by the new Synodal Chief Procurator. On behalf of the Provisional Government, V.N. Lvov announced the release of the ROC from the guardianship of the state, which had a disastrous effect on church and social life. Members of the Synod expressed sincere joy at the advent of a new era in the life of the Orthodox Church. The members of the Holy Synod addressed the chief procurator and co-pastors with a salutatory word, which spoke of the great prospects for the Russian church that opened after the "revolution gave us (the ROC) freedom from Caesar Papism." At the same time, from the hall of meetings of the Synod, on the initiative of the Chief Prosecutor, the royal thrown was placed in the archives, which in the eyes of the hierarchs was "a symbol of Caesar Papism in the Russian Church," that is, a symbol of the enslavement of the church by the state. It is quite significant that the first-present member of the Synod, Metropolitan Volodymyr, helped to render it to the chief prosecutor. It was decided that thrown be transferred to a museum.
On March 9, the synod addressed with the message "To the faithful children of the Orthodox Russian Church over the current events". There was an appeal to trust the Provisional Government. "The will of God was accomplished," the message began, "Russia has embarked on the path of a new state life. May God bless our great homeland with happiness and glory on its new path." Thus, the synod actually recognized the coup d'etat as legitimate, officially proclaimed the beginning of a new state life for Russia, and declared revolutionary events as the "will of God" that had come to pass.
On March 4, 1917, the Synod received numerous telegrams from Russian bishops asking for a form of prayer for power. In response, two days later, the first member of the Synod, Metropolitan of Kiev, Vladimir, dispatched on his behalf all the dioceses of the ROC telegrams (66 inside Russia and 1 - in New York) with the order that "prayers should be taken for the God-guarded Power of Russia and the Blessed Provisional Government of her." Thus, on March 6, the Russian episcopate ceased to offer prayers for the Tsar.
Modern monarchists, supporters of the "white guard", nationalists are very fond of sighing over some "lost Russia", destroyed by the "bloodthirsty Bolsheviks". It is, of course, the Russian Empire, which for them is the embodiment of "paradise on earth." But was it so for ordinary citizens of the country? Let's see what contemporaries say about this. These are not the words of anybody, but the Minister of Agriculture of 1915-1916 A.Naumov, a very reactionary monarchist, and of course - not a Bolshevik and a revolutionary at all: "Russia does not actually get out of the state of hunger in one or another province, both before the war and during the war." And then he also follows: "Prosperity with speculation in bread, predation, bribery; commission agents supplying grain, make a fortune without leaving the phone. And amid the complete poverty of some - the insane luxury of others. Two steps from the convulsions of starvation death - the orgies of satiety. Around the manors of the powerful are dying villages. They, meanwhile, are busy building new villas and palaces."
Writer V.G. Korolenko, who lived in the village for many years, who was in the early 1890s in other starving regions and organized canteens for hungry people and distributing food loans: "You are a new person, you come across a village with dozens of typhoid patients, as a sick mother leans over the cradle of a sick child to feed him, loses consciousness and lies over him, and there is no one to help, because the husband on the floor mumbles in incoherent delirium. And you are horrified. And the "old campaigner" was used to it. He had already experienced it, he was already horrified twenty years ago, recovered, overcooked, calmed down ... Typhus? But this is always with us! Quinoa? Yes, we have it every year! .. ».
What about children? It turns out that even according to the official statistics of the Tsarist statistics, at least 43% of 6 to 7 million babies born each year did not live to be a year old. In other words, every year in the Empire millions of children died - from hunger, disease, epidemics, poisoning. During the years 1880-1916, no less than 158 million children died, including 96.8 million children during the reign of Nicholas II.
"It's not just ruin, but the direct extinction of the Russian peasantry has been going on with an astonishing rapidity in the last decade," V.I. Lenin after studying hundreds of statistical documents, memoirs, testimonies of eyewitnesses at the end of the XIX century (Lenin, PSS, v. 5, p. 297).
Well, how is the last Russian Tsar Nicholas II? What did he do? Perhaps the tsar was worried with all his heart for the crisis situation in his Empire? Well no! Once he told the Minister of Foreign Affairs, S.D. Sazonov: "I try not to think about anything seriously, otherwise I would have been in a coffin a long time ago." The mentor of the Crown Prince Alexei Pierre Gilliard, who was permanently with the Romanov family from the end of 1905 to May 1918, said: "The task that fell to his lot was too heavy, it exceeded his strength. He himself felt it."
The autumn appeal of 1916 put under the gun 13 million people, and the losses in the war exceeded 2 million. M.K. Lemke, the head of the Stavka press office, testified to the astonishingly indifferent attitude of the tsar to human losses. In 1916, his reaction to the report of the huge losses (up to 50%) in the 5th Army Corps was: "... are they still dying, we will make do with others, we will still have enough."
Rasputin was far from the first in a colorful series of charlatans, fools and "miracle workers", to whom the last ruler of the Russian Empire listened. They flocked to the emperor's residence in Tsarskoye Selo near St. Petersburg, but were almost unknown to the general public. This is Matronushka Bosonozhka, and idiot epileptic Daria Osipova, and Mitka Kolyaba. The latter was born in 1865 and lived in Kozelsk, near the Optina desert. From birth he was maimed: lame, weak-minded, deaf, half-blind and almost dumb, with stumps instead of hands. Mitka communicated with others with the help of guttural screams, cries, growls and swings of his stumps.
And this Nicholas the Bloody, the Russian Orthodox Church made in 2000 a saint by "class" "passion-bearers." This scandalous act caused great controversy in the church circles themselves. So Metropolitan Nicholas of Nizhny Novgorod: "... when all the bishops signed the canonization act, I marked with my signature that I signed everything except the third paragraph. In the third paragraph the king-father was walking, and under his canonization I did not sign. ... he is a traitor to the state. ... he, you can say, sanctioned the collapse of the country. And otherwise no one will convince me. " The attribution of Nicholas II to the saints is, of course, a purely political step, clearly fixing the ROC's ideological position as fiercely anti-Soviet. He was really right, L.N. Tolstoy, when he sharply criticized the Church for what, in his opinion, its interests are higher than the original Christian ideals.
Someone who defends the monarchy, "embarrass" - but the Bolsheviks seized the huge wealth of the church (recall: aimed at saving millions from starvation). For clarity in understanding the problem of seizure, it should be recalled that for two hundred years of the synodal administration of the church, introduced by Peter I, there were state persecutions at the ROC, especially during the reign of Catherine II. Nearly all the land (about 8.5 million dessiatins) and over 900,000 peasant souls were male by the church; 754 of the 954 previously existing monasteries were closed.
Well, the crown argument of "grief-patriots": the Bolsheviks killed the "Russian" king ... But who said that he is Russian?! The Ambassador of France to Russia in 1915-1916, Maurice Palaeologus calculated that Nicholas II is only "Russian" by blood, while the rest is German.
The authoritative "Gotha Almanac" clearly states that the "Holshtein-Gottorp-Romanovs" dynasty ruled Russia. The "Romanovs" are only the surname of their ancestors, and in the life of Russia the Holstein-Gottorp house rules ruled for centuries. Well, who is the ancestor of the Romanovs? We take the official history of the "House of the Romanovs", published by 1913. The ancestor of the House - Glanda-Kambila Divonovic from the House of Nedron Vedavitovich, of "Prussian-Lithuanian" origin, moved to Russia in 1283 and was baptized in the church as Ivan Kobyl. From this it went the Zakharyiny-Romanovs. This is the story behind these Romanovs.
For several decades the history of the remains of the Romanov family has been dragging on.
Analyzing the structure of the DNA of the Ekaterinburg remains and comparing them with the analysis of the DNA of Nicholas II's brother Grand Duke George Romanov, Tikhon Kulikovsky-Romanov's native nephew, Tatsuo Nagai, professor of the Tokyo Institute of Microbiology, came to the conclusion that the remains discovered near Yekaterinburg do not belong to Nikolai Romanov and the members his family.
The arguments of Tatsuo Nagai are strong. Unlike the government commission, he took for comparison the closest relatives. The Japanese took advantage of the fact that in the young years the future emperor visited Japan and was assassinated. The Japanese retained his handkerchief, a vest, a sofa on which he was sitting, and a sword that had been used to strike him. All this is in the museum of Otsu. Japanese scientists studied the DNA of the blood, which remained on the scarf after the wound, and the DNA from the bones of the skeleton, discovered in Yekaterinburg. The answer is unambiguous - the bones from Ekaterinburg have nothing to do with the person of Nikolai Romanov.
Additional arguments. In the diaries of Nicholas II, when he was in Tobolsk, there is a note: "I was sitting at the dentist." In all of Tobolsk, at the time there was only one dentist: Maria Lazarevna Rendel. She left her son with a record of Nicholas II's teeth. She told me what seals she applied. Compared with the jaws of the skeleton of the "alleged Nicholas Romanov". It turned out - nothing matches.
In the State Archives of the Russian Federation on Bolshaya Pirogovskaya, 17 - records of the medical officer Eugen S. Botkin. In one of the diaries there is a phrase: "Nicholas II unsuccessfully climbed on a horse." Fell, fractured leg, pain localized, cast plaster. " But there is not a single fracture on the skeleton, which is being tested for the skeleton of the former emperor.
Patriarch Alexy II on the eve of the Council of Bishops of 2000, who performed the act of glorifying the royal family, spoke about the remains found near Yekaterinburg: "We have doubts about the authenticity of the remains, and we can not call on believers to worship falsehoods ..." Alexis II repeatedly positively responded on the results of research by Tatsuto Nagai.
On the question of relics, the government of the Russian Federation contrasts the authoritative scientific experts opinion with the highest hierarchs of the ROC with its thoroughly politicized "opinion." "I will spin what I want." On October 23, 1993, by order of the government of the Russian Federation, a commission was established to study the issues related to the research and reburial of the remains of the former Russian Emperor Nicholas II and his family members. Until 1997, its chairman was the Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Yuri Yarov, then - Deputy Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov. On February 27, 1998, the Russian government decided to bury the remains of Nicholas II and his family in St. Peter and St. Paul's Cathedral. The burial took place on July 17, 1998. The decision on the remains was taken not by the court, but by the government of the Russian Federation of the times of Chernomyrdin! Piquant detail: the house of Ipatiev, where the execution of the Romanovs occurred, was demolished at the direction of B. Yeltsin, the first secretary of the Sverdlovsk Regional Committee of the CPSU, in September 1977.
On July 17, 1918 there was no "execution of the royal family." Colonel Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov was shot. We should not go on about the various demagogues-monarchists. The Tsar were abolished de facto during the February Revolution of 1917, and de jure on September 1, 1917, still under the Provisional Government. And now, as in 1917, most of the citizens of Russia prefer the republic over all other forms of government. These are the results of a survey conducted by the All-Russian Public Opinion Center (VCIOM). This state system - the republic - was named the most suitable by 88 percent of respondents.
S.V. Khristenko
