Question by Californiagirl: Was the Romanov Family liked? ?
When the Romanovs ruled, did the people of Russia like them and their rule? I know the people who were fighting agaisnt the Romanov’s during the revolution were probably not quite smitten with them(lol) but was that just a group of people who didn’t like them, or was most of the people of Russia behind the revolution and they didn’t like the Romanovs? Just curious
Answers and Views:
Answer by blackjack432001
for a family that ruled russia for about 600 years, you’d think the family would’ve learned a thing or two on either how to rule (or how not to), but as forrest gump would say, ‘stupid is as stupid does’. the romanov family was vast and during those 600 years of russian rule, some of the romanovs were liked but usually by their peers. the russian people had little or nothing close to what the uber-rich ruling family had. if anything, it was a love/hate thing. however, in the 92 years since their violent end, the feelings for nicholas II and his family has softened considerably. i don’t care what kind of life you had, what you did or failed to do but nobody, and i mean NOBODY deserves to die as they did. the russian people of the 21st century feels that way, too. sad! very sad in that it could’ve been avoided but the world turned it’s back when nicholas and family needed a safe haven.
Answer by dougger
For most of its history the Tzar was adored and respected by the people far enough away to not know him. All the flaws in the Russian Imperial system tended to be attributed to the boyars (princes) around the Tzar or the bureaucracy. In fact it was only the tremendous inefficiency and universal corruption that made life possible in many areas but this also worked as a large tax.
THe love and respect for the Tzar was not quite fair, the final decisions were with the Tzar with only some restriction from legal bodies. Even through out the 1800’s the huge mass of people trusted the Tzar. A long tradition held that anybody could put a petition before the Tzar and he would personally make a ruling. The Tzars often used this tradition to manipulate public opinion taking up the oddest and most trivial cases that resulted in favorable press (one Tzar by decree restored a woman’s virginity after a marriage was annulled).
The lower and middle classes had an almost mystical faith and trust in the good will of the Tzar. A few of the peasant revolts were directed against the local aristocrats and beaurocrats trusting that once the Tzar heard about the problem he would interene on their behalf. They were all sady mistaken. .
This trust and faith weakened very quickly closer to the center of power. Historically much of the boyar class, the landed aristocracy and higher ranking military people did not have all that much affection for the Tzar (at times they were just short of declared war) but held him in sufficient awe that no group large enough to have an effect ever got organized. (Ivan the Terrible is a bad translation, it probably is better to translate his name as Ivan the Awesome.) The few feeble attempts at insurrection were easily put down.
Not until 1905 (roughly) did signficant opposition to the Tzar get organized and it was built by intellectuals who appealed to a very poor working class in the cities after all attempts for nearly 100 years to organize the huge peasantry- by far the majority- consistently failed. Nothing could convince them the Tzar was not their truest friend.
Answer by Ms. Vader
If you’re speaking about the whole Romanov rule its kind of hard to define. Because you had your great Romanovs who truly did try to help their country and make it progessive. But then you have rulers like Nicholas II and several others who just turned the country backwards instead of forwards.
It seems as though you’re focusing on Nicholas II and his reign so I’ll try to stick to that. Nicholas II was a weak ruler. He hardly did anything for the country and the major population, peasants. Then he goes and gets them invovled in WWI. The man hardly took any advice, since he believed in “sovereignity”….then his wife didn’t help matters by encouraging his belief and “Divine Right” and having people like Rasputin around. This just alienated people who were actually trying to help him rule Russia. To further alienate him from his people was his wife, Alix (later Alexandra). She was largely disliked for intense faith and for being German-born (she was an outsider who had no charm, came off as aloof, etc.). Oh, and he used the secret police to his advantage, add on to the anti-sementic programs he pushed….yeah, all together he was disliked by the Russian people. Making way for Lenin and the Communist. He most def. had it coming. His kids? No. They were innocent and didn’t deserve that.
Nickname: Bloody Nicholas (Bloody Sunday, etc.)
Now if Alexander II actually didn’t get assassinated (and got some of his reforms through), I think Russia would’ve turned out a little better. But then his son and Nicholas II just screwed it all up, for lack of a better word.
Its weird how he got to be made a saint. IMO, he was a good father but a horrible leader. Doesn’t qualify you as a Saint though.
Read all the answers in the comments.
Know better? Leave your own answer!