The Romanovs

1. The Romanovs The downfall of the Russian Tsar

2. Nicholas II and Alexandra Married in 1894

4. Olga, Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia

5. Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich

6. Grigori Rasputin

7. Rasputin’s prophesy and death "If I am killed," he told the Tsar and his court, "by my own people, by the peasants, then you will continue to rule in peace and harmony. However, if I am killed by the noble class, then within two years, you and your children and all the royal family will be no more.”

8. Exile to Siberia Ipatiev House

9. Execution on July 17, 1918

10. Secret burial and missing bodies

11. Analysis of Nicholas’ rule Historian Barbara Tuchman gives a damning evaluation of his reign: [The Russian Empire] was ruled from the top by a sovereign who had but one idea of government—to preserve intact the absolute monarchy bequeathed to him by his father—and who, lacking the intellect, energy or training for his job, fell back on personal favorites, whim, and other devices of the empty-headed autocrat. His father, Alexander III, who deliberately intended to keep his son uneducated in statecraft until the age of thirty, unfortunately miscalculated his own life expectancy, and died when Nicholas was twenty-six. The new Czar, now forty-six, had learned nothing in the interval, and the impression of imperturbability he conveyed was in reality apathy—the indifference of a mind so shallow as to be all surface. When a telegram was brought to him announcing the annihilation of the Russian fleet at Tsushima, he read it, stuffed it in his pocket, and went on playing tennis.

12. Analysis continued Robert K. Massie provides a more sympathetic view of the Tsar: ... there still are those who for political or other reasons continue to insist that Nicholas was "Bloody Nicholas." Most commonly, he is described as shallow, weak, stupid—a one-dimensional figure presiding feebly over the last days of a corrupt and crumbling system. This, certainly, is the prevailing public image of the last Tsar. Historians admit that Nicholas was a "good man"—the historical evidence of personal charm, gentleness, love of family, deep religious faith and strong Russian patriotism is too overwhelming to be denied—but they argue that personal factors are irrelevant; what matters is that Nicholas was a bad tsar... Essentially, the tragedy of Nicholas II was that he appeared in the wrong place in history.

13. Revisionist History? Now that you know the facts about the Romanovs, what would you think if it were twisted around for political reasons? Example…Rasputin is maligned by the princes and his death is mythologized to cause the people to believe he corrupted the Tsar and family. Or the revolutionaries lie about the Tsar trying to escape in order for them to have reason to kill him and his family? How do you feel about people changing these stories for entertainment vs. political reasons? Movies, historical fiction, kids books…