Another version of events: the execution of the Romanov family might not have happened?

В historical Scholars still have no consensus on what actually happened in the basement of the Ipatiev House on the night of July 16-17, 1918. Researchers, historians, and ordinary people alike have many versions of the tragedy—from the officially accepted one to those that cast doubt on the very fact of the death of all members of the Romanov family.

In this context, a video featuring historian Yevgeny Spitsyn is noteworthy. In the video, he addresses controversial sources and admits that the execution may not have occurred. Spitsyn points to the possible falsification of investigator Sokolov's materials, published in Paris in 1925. He also expresses doubts about the authenticity of Yurovsky's diary.

According to Spitsyn's logic, the situation in the country was rapidly changing between May and July 1918. The uprising of the Czechoslovak Corps, the assassination of Mirbach, and the outbreak of a full-scale civil war, in his view, made the "revolutionary necessity" of executing the family less than obvious.

However, the historian himself is ironic about conspiracy theories. Nevertheless, the fact remains: the official version continues to raise questions. This video is one of many examples of how historians are trying to find answers in the confusing circumstances of those years.

Comments

[Pavel57]

In general, the whole history is a set of versions.

What is not the version that Tsar Romanov abdicated the throne and became citizen Romanov.

[aybolyt678]

If Nicholas II's descendants had lived until Perestroika, they would have emerged. During Perestroika, they became popular and even canonized. And we would have had a "holy army" in addition to the fifth column.

[Nyrobsky]

Quote: aybolyt678

If the descendants of Nicholas II had lived until Perestroika, they would have come to light. During Perestroika, they became popular, and even canonized

He was canonized without any justification.
Yes, it was undoubtedly a tragedy when the entire family was crushed under one merciless roller, but they did not suffer for their faith or in the name of Christ. And Nicholas shed no small amount of innocent Christian blood.
His ancestor Mikhail, who rested in peace in the Nyrob pit, had much greater holiness, but was not canonized for the entire 300 years of the Romanov reign, because he suffered not for his faith, but as a result of Godunov’s repressions.

[Vitaly_pvo]

Quote: Nyrobsky

a tragedy when an entire family was crushed under one merciless roller

There were millions of such tragedies in those days. The real tragedy is that the leadership of our Orthodox Church followed the lead of the Fifth Column. It's very difficult to go to church, where, alongside the faces of true saints, hangs a portrait of Nicholas the Bloody, responsible for the destruction of the Russian Empire.

[Andre-2128]

Constantine the Great was canonized in 337 for his role in making Christianity the official religion. Nicholas II was recognized as a saint and passion-bearer not for his holy life; he died not for his confession of Christ, but as a representative of state power. Under him, Christians were free to practice their faith, but after his death, doing so became dangerous. Therefore, the Tsar's death became one of the symbols of the persecution of the Church. Paradoxically, it was the Bolsheviks who made Nicholas II a saint.

[KERMET]

to freely profess the Christian faith, but after his death it became life-threatening.

What other terrible secrets will you reveal to us? Reptilians, aliens?

[Amateur]

The descendants of Nicholas II's younger sister, Olga Alexandrovna, are still alive. But, unlike the fat George and his Georgian mother, who were favored by Mr. Nemtsov and others, they never laid claim to the Russian throne.

[Roman_4]

It's impossible to watch; Rutube ads pop up every two minutes. See for yourself.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Well, that's what RuTube is like. By the way, when I was watching, no ads popped up at all. They have that, it depends on the time.

[Rostislav Prokopenko]

not a single ad for the entire 13 minutes

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

I can say one thing for sure, Nikolay signed the death sentence for his children on March 2, 1917, PERSONALLY

[novel66]

Even earlier - July 28, 1914. And even after Khodynka, one should have thought about it

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Quote: novel xnumx

Even earlier - July 28, 1914. And even after Khodynka, one should have thought about it

Well, we can get to the decisions of Catherine the Great that gave a lot of concessions to the nobility, but still, when he signed the abdication, he should have understood that the children were now death row prisoners, specifically children.
but judging by everything, thinking was not his strong point

[novel66]

That's the whole problem. "Master of the Russian land"...

[Dart2027]

Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

but still, when signing the abdication, he must have understood that the children are now death row inmates, precisely children

So his children were held hostage, and he himself was effectively captured.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Quote: Dart2027

So his children were hostages.

If I had been smarter, I would have tried to accept the fight. There was a chance to save myself. Signing the abdication was a one-way ticket.

[Dart2027]

Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

If I had been smarter, I would have tried to fight, there would have been a chance to save myself.

So how? Yes, he had a chance, but not at that time, about 10 years earlier.
Moreover, he abdicated in favor of his brother Mikhail, and he agreed to the elections.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Quote: Dart2027

Well, and in what way?

Only the dead have no chance; it was he who unleashed the civil war with his abdication

Quote: Dart2027

In addition, he abdicated in favor of his brother Michael.

the whole family is impotent

[Dart2027]

Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

Only the dead have no chance

These are beautiful words, what exactly he could do.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

On the last day, probably nothing, although without signing the abdication, he would not have allowed the conspirators to be legalized

[Dart2027]

Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

On the last day there will probably be nothing

That's the point. Nicholas II made a ton of mistakes, but he should have taken action much earlier.

[Revolver]

Quote: Dart2027

abdicated in favor of his brother Mikhail

Which was completely legal and preserved the monarchical order in the country.
But Mikhail abdicated without specifying a beneficiary (and there were still the Romanovs with rights of succession!), thereby signing the death warrant for the entire dynasty, including himself. And for the many millions more who died in the Civil War and the surrounding events.
If he had Faberge, he should have at least tried to reign.

[tank64rus]

Mikhail was the first to don the red ribbon and lead the Guards Naval Crew to the State Duma for the oath of office. So, the choice of heir to the throne was somewhat unfortunate.

[Revolver]

Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

Well, we can get to the decisions of Catherine the Great that gave a lot of concessions to the nobility.

The Romanov reign began with the execution of an innocent child, when Marina Mnishek's three-year-old son by the [false] Dmitry was hanged "for his evil deeds." What evil deeds did he commit at age three?
And so it ended with the execution of innocent children in the basement. As the Hindus would say, Karma.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Quote: Nagan

And so it ended with the execution of innocent children in the basement.

Well, I wouldn't call it karma, but the idiocy of the leaders who systematically led the country into the abyss.

[Carmela]

Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

When he signed the abdication, he must have understood that children are now death row inmates, precisely children

He hoped to go to England or Canada, but his English cousin deceived him.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Quote: Carmela

but his English cousin deceived him.

He should have understood that the children would not be safe in either England or Canada.

[Carmela]

Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

He should have understood that the children would not be safe in either England or Canada.

In my opinion, Nikolai Alexandrovich was a real idiot. And yes, he ruined not only the country and his family, but also millions of people died prematurely as a result of the wars he got involved in and the post-revolutionary civil war, and millions more were forced to emigrate, their lives essentially ruined as well. Well-educated people worked as chauffeurs, prostitutes, and other such jobs in Paris and Berlin.
But as always, if things had turned out differently in the past, you and I simply wouldn't be here. Other people would be alive.

[Seaflanker]

On the day of the Khodynka tragedy, Chinese Chancellor Li Hongzhang was in Russia for the coronation of Nicholas II. After the disaster, Nicholas II still attended the gala dinner and lavish ball. Russian Finance Minister Sergei Witte asked Li Hongzhang, "What would they do in China if something like this happened?" Li Hongzhang replied that they would have kept it from the emperor, but if the emperor had learned of it, it would have been absolutely impossible for him to have gone out to the entertainment that evening.

[Andre-2128]

Another coincidence with the French Revolution is the events at Khodynka. On May 16, 1770, the future King Louis XVI married Marie Antoinette, daughter of the Austrian Emperor Francis I, in Paris. On May 30, 1770, public celebrations were held in Paris on what is now the Place de la Concorde to celebrate the wedding. Free wine, bread, and meat were distributed at the treasury's expense. A fireworks display was also set off. The rockets, exploding with a crackling and hissing sound among the crowd, caused widespread panic. The crowd scattered in all directions. A stampede ensued. Many people fell into construction pits under the pressure of the crowd and were trampled. Ultimately, 139 people died. The dead were buried in the cemetery of Sainte-Madeleine. 23 years later, the bodies of the executed Marie Antoinette and King Louis XVI would be dumped into a mass grave at the same cemetery. The stampede at Khodynka Field occurred on May 18th according to the Old Style calendar, and on May 30th according to the New Style calendar—the same day as the stampede at Place de la Concorde.

[Andre-2128]

After Khodynka, Nicholas II went to a ball hosted by the French ambassador. The Tsar was fervently persuaded to do so. In 1896, it was Gustave Louis Lannes, Marquis de Montebello. A ball on the day of the French Khodynka—that's bad form! Or something else entirely? For some reason, they all like to stick their hands down their coat tails.

[alexoff]

And if he had refused to sign, would he have continued to reign? It was purely a formality. If he hadn't signed the paper, they wouldn't have arrested the citizen, but the emperor, as if that would have given him some kind of invulnerability.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Quote from alexoff

They would have arrested not a citizen, but the emperor

what did the maneuver give?

[alexoff]

He had no one to maneuver with except his own body. All his other orders were not going to be carried out.

[Vasilenko Vladimir]

Quote from alexoff

All his other orders were not going to be carried out.

It's not your fault, the same wild division remained faithful until the last
Just nicknames like marked, wanted to be good for everyone, well, marked like nicknames

[alexoff]

Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir

It's not your fault, the same wild division remained faithful until the last

And where was she, in Petrograd, perhaps? And to whom was she loyal—to Nicholas II or to the Emperor of All Russia, who was supposed to be replaced by a more sensible one?

[PavelKosse]

The time frame in which the story of the Romanovs' execution was once again brought to light is indicative.
I remember in the early 90s, somewhere in the Sverdlovsk region, they dug up remains, and DNA tests matched. So, there were no doubts back then.
Well, what do we want to hear now?
How far can the rebellious "electorate" go?

[Reptiloid]

Quote: Pavel Kosse

The time frame in which the story of the Romanovs' execution was once again brought to light is indicative....?

Didn't you know that "Tsarist Days" are held annually? One way or another, the topic always comes up. As for which media it will be in, well, it depends.

[andrey martov]

They say it wasn't the real Tsar they shot! The real Tsar, they say, hid under the ice of Antarctica, in New Russia, near New Swabia!

[glock-17]

Spitsyn is a historian-propagandist who will fulfill the agenda assigned to him. He will whitewash whoever needs to be whitewashed, even if historical facts and common sense contradict it.

[Yun Klob]

At least as late as 1995, a military medical specialist who took part in identifying the remains of the "royal family" claimed that they did not belong to the Romanovs.

[Doctor]

At least as late as 1995, a military medical specialist who took part in identifying the remains of the "royal family" claimed that they did not belong to the Romanovs.

What kind of specialist, full name?


My professor, the head of the forensic medicine department, Professor Dzhuvalyakov, was on the commission for the forensic examination of the remains, along with 50 other top forensic experts in the country.
Everything is clear there. IT'S THEM.

http://www.tzar-nikolai.orthodoxy.ru/ost/exp/expert.htm

[Yun Klob]

He also told me from the Military Medical Academy that many people valued having the opportunity to identify the royal family in their careers. And so they did.

[Doctor]

He also told me from the Military Medical Academy that many people valued having the opportunity to identify the royal family in their careers. And so they did.

Yun, the goal wasn't to IDENTIFY. The important thing was to establish the TRUTH. If they'd confirmed it wasn't the Tsar, no one would have scolded them. Well, not a king, and that's good, they probably fled to Argentina, and Messi is their descendant.
Moreover, the remains were repeatedly examined later, including by international commissions, and everything was confirmed.

Participating in the study is honorable, regardless of the outcome, and most importantly, RESPONSIBLE. Do you think they all conspired to sign fake signatures on something like this? The remains remain, they can be re-examined later, but this is a death sentence for the career of the previous commission.

[Yun Klob]

I did not take part in the work of the commission, but I said what a member of this commission said.

[Senior seaman]

One way or another, there are no descendants of Nicholas II now.
The rest is talk for the benefit of the poor.

[Sergey Tkach]

"Oh, these fairy tales, oh, these storytellers" (c)
This is about conspiracy theories, conspiracy theorists, etc.

[Eugene Zaboy]

Historical scholarship remains divided on what actually happened in the basement of the Ipatiev House on the night of July 16-17, 1918. Researchers, historians, and the general public alike have espoused many versions of the tragedy, from the officially accepted one to those that cast doubt on the very fact of the death of all members of the Romanov family.

The goal is to cover up the crime. It's as if there was no murder, since there's no clear evidence. More than 100 years have passed, but admitting the obvious is shameful and scary. That's why articles like this appear. Wouldn't it be simpler to tell the truth, draw conclusions, and move on with your life?

[Salimi from Iran]

Never mind. But the mystery of Stalin's death is truly serious. That strange order to "everyone sleep"—for the first time... and death that very same night.

[Gennady_but_not_a_crocodile]

In history courses, students are taught two episodes in Russian history as examples of "complete research." One of them is the execution of the Romanovs. Everything has been researched. All sources are uniform, consistent, internally and inter-connected, and completely authentic. There are no alternative interpretations of the topic, and if they do appear, they will cause a furor in the academic world, a bombshell. So, any side effects about the execution are simply fabrications.
I won't write about the second fully researched element of Russian history - the locals will peck me to death

[Totor5]

Lenin was busy with the Socialist Revolutionary uprising in Moscow; I don't think he cared about the Tsar when other leftists were firing cannons. Especially since there are documents about negotiations to exchange the Tsar for German communists.

It wasn't Lenin who arrested the Tsar, but liberals like Kerensky. And when the government changed and the case against the Tsar fell apart, Lenin essentially had no use for him.

[Totor5]

If Lenin had wanted to kill the Tsar, he could have been officially executed. But it was all done dirty and secretly—clearly the work of ultra-fanatical terrorists. Incidentally, when the Tsar's family was being transported, the convoy was attacked, the train was shot at, and so on. Security was tightened. I don't think the authorities would have carried out such a dirty execution if they had planned it.

The country was in a period of struggle between communists, liberals, and leftists of various stripes, with a host of terrorist groups carrying out their own executions, regardless of the changing governments. Although they later merged with the official Bolsheviks, they each held their own views. The struggle against them culminated in the terror of the 1930s and the wars with the Trotskyists.
It's a bit like in Ukraine, when they tied people to poles and handed out weapons from the planes. It's a power vacuum, which we haven't taken advantage of now.

[Doctor]

If Lenin had wanted to kill the Tsar, he could have been officially executed. But it was all done dirty and secretly—clearly the work of ultra-fanatical terrorists. Incidentally, when the Tsar's family was being transported, the convoy was attacked, the train was shot at, and so on. Security was tightened. I don't think the authorities would have carried out such a dirty execution if they had planned it.

The country was in a period of struggle between communists, liberals, and leftists of various stripes, with a host of terrorist groups carrying out their own executions, regardless of the changing governments. Although they later merged with the official Bolsheviks, they each held their own views. The struggle against them culminated in the terror of the 1930s and the wars with the Trotskyists.
It's a bit like in Ukraine, when they tied people to poles and handed out weapons from the planes. It's a power vacuum, which we haven't taken advantage of now.

Any surviving family member is a potential heir. And that means restoring the monarchy. The death of the royal family was beneficial and even necessary for absolutely ALL the groups you listed, and especially for Lenin. He clearly understood what awaited him if he failed.

[Totor5]

If you don't know, even the Whites didn't fight for the restoration of the monarchy, but for democracy.
The monarchy was no longer possible—the people had had enough of it, as had the elite, and the Tsar himself had rejected it. Public support was zero. And he wasn't the last Tsar; there was another one after him who rejected it. So, technically, Nicholas II wasn't the last Tsar, but the penultimate one.

As for the heirs who need to be killed off...well, they recently came to St. Petersburg.
And the Tsar had plenty of other relatives in Europe, and all of them, in principle, could have laid claim to the throne according to your scheme - here it turns out that what is needed is not execution, but genocide.
And the servants had nothing to do with it at all - why them?
They would have convicted and executed only the Tsar's family, but no—someone needed this bloody massacre and subsequent cover-up. The Bolsheviks officially executed many people and had no need to hide bodies like bandits. Nothing prevented them from sentencing the Tsar. And even more so—negotiating an exchange, as documented in the German archives, that an exchange of the Tsar's family for German communists was being prepared, was utter nonsense. And the authorities also had no reason to attack the Tsar's convoys. And then they suddenly decided to kill everyone in the night and then dispose of the bodies like bandits.

[Doctor]

If you don't know, even the Whites didn't fight for the restoration of the monarchy, but for democracy.
The monarchy was no longer possible—the people had had enough of it, as had the elite, and the Tsar himself had rejected it. Public support was zero. And he wasn't the last Tsar; there was another one after him who rejected it. So, technically, Nicholas II wasn't the last Tsar, but the penultimate one.

There were all sorts of Whites there, including monarchists. And the people would have accepted the restoration of the monarchy completely calmly, especially with a new tsar. Even now, we have quite a few such people.

And the servants had nothing to do with it at all - why them?
They would have convicted and executed only the Tsar's family, but no—someone needed this bloody massacre and subsequent cover-up. The Bolsheviks officially executed many people and had no need to hide bodies like bandits. Nothing prevented them from sentencing the Tsar. And even more so—negotiating an exchange, as documented in the German archives, that an exchange of the Tsar's family for German communists was being prepared, was utter nonsense. And the authorities also had no reason to attack the Tsar's convoys. And then they suddenly decided to kill everyone in the night and then dispose of the bodies like bandits.

The servants were witnesses, because everyone understood perfectly well that this was a crime. If it had been with the court, as you suggest, then Botkin would have survived.
But what kind of court could there be, how do you even imagine it, who is the Chairman of the Court, Dzerzhinsky? Who is he under international law? And most importantly, what charges will the prosecutor bring against Nikolai, and most importantly, against his minor children?

[Totor5]

Judging by the way the churches were destroyed, the people not only wouldn't have supported the monarchy, but they'd already given up on the idea of ​​anointing it. And as the English agent wrote in his memoirs and reports, the people weren't the least bit bothered by the murder of the royal family, and joked about it on the trams. So I don't think the monarchy had any chance after all this time and its complete discrediting by war, famine, and two revolutions. Society was rather seething and eager for a new way of life. The outskirts didn't want to be subjects at all.
Personally, I believe the monarchy had already outlived its usefulness during the February Revolution. By the October Revolution, no one cared about it anymore, and the war was now between democrats and communists, not monarchists. And neither would have allowed the Tsar to return...and he himself wanted to leave Russia with his family, not fight for the throne. That's a fact.

[White wind]

If the Whites had won the civil war, the Bolsheviks would have been declared traitors to the Fatherland, German spies, and terrorists. Those who were caught would have been put on trial. The situation in the country would have calmed down. And people would have gone to church again instead of destroying it. People are generally very suggestible. It's entirely possible that after the military dictatorship, a constitutional monarchy would have been established. And in modern history textbooks, the Bolsheviks would be mentioned merely as troublemakers, working for German money to pull Russia out of the war and plunge it into civil war and chaos. And no one would have had the slightest doubt about this, for history is written by the victors.

[Totor5]

One could argue the same about France, but in reality it is unlikely.

[Bogalex]

By the way, the main photograph shows George V, King of Great Britain (or perhaps even an AI "creation"), but not his relative Nikolai Alexandrovich Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov, Emperor of All Russia.

[tank64rus]

They were absolutely similar in appearance, and even their photo together was featured on magazine covers. Cousins, which didn't stop Georg from betraying his cousin. The Bible has long written about something similar.

[Jurkovs]

She died, so she died. And the historian Spitsyn is spoken of badly on the Internet; he's not respected.

[pavel.tipin]

Perhaps the Emperor and his family's personal funds were stored in some banks in the West. The bankers ordered the family's assassination to gain access to these funds.

[tank64rus]

England had a keen interest in the Romanovs' death. On the "advice" of the then Minister of Finance, 50% of Russia's gold reserves and the Romanov family's jewels were transferred to England at the start of World War I. This minister later became an English baron in exile. Therefore, George VI, incidentally Nicholas II's cousin, refused to accept the Romanov family into England, as proposed by the Provisional Government. Gorby forgave this debt. After the Civil War of 1862-1865, the United States created its Federal Reserve System to loan Russia 250 million gold rubles, which they pledged to repay with interest upon the Russian Emperor's demand in the future. The Bolsheviks actually planned to try Nicholas II in an open court in Moscow, which would have greatly strengthened their position in the legitimacy of their power from a political standpoint. But such behind-the-scenes details of international politics could have surfaced during the trial, damaging the credibility of the "respected powers of this world." In general, the Romanov family was doomed from the very beginning, as soon as they lost power.

[Totor5]

Nicholas was tried under Kerensky, and the case fell apart. It was under him, not the Bolsheviks, that he was arrested. He was a locomotive for the Bolsheviks. Lenin didn't arrest the Tsar; on the contrary, he negotiated his exchange with Germany.

In England, there was a pile of Russian gold left on promissory notes from World War I, which was supposed to be returned at the end of the war, but was not returned because England did not recognize the Union as the legal successor.
In response, Lenin nationalized foreign capital under the pretext of compensation for the Intervention. Although Belgium suffered the most, negotiations on mutual exchanges were underway. In the end, everything remained as it was – England with the dough, we with the foreign factories... and Belgium (Europe) was left out in the cold. Everything is the same as now – even the amounts involved are similar: 300-500 billion dollars.

[Andre-2128]

A similar situation occurred during the French Revolution. The Grand Orient of France initiated France's entry into the war in support of the American colonists, and France contributed enormous sums of money and weapons to the rebels. Louis XVI even went into debt with Mayer Amschel Rothschild, and a financial crisis erupted in France. The Revolution wrote everything off, and the Americans said, "We borrowed from Louis, but we don't owe you anything." And so the debt hung in the balance.

[Andre-2128]

France's last Controller General of Finance, Calonne, emigrated to England, where he lived in Hyde Park Corner, near the residence of Lord Apsley (or perhaps even in the residence itself—history is silent on this point). He (coincidentally!) served as Lord Chancellor of Great Britain (the Minister of Justice, hierarchically above the Prime Minister) from 1771 to 1778 and as Lord President of the Privy Council, the authority responsible for drafting royal decrees, from 1779 to 1782. Calonne settled in the company of his brother, accompanied by two secretaries, three footmen, and an interpreter. Just like an official!

[White wind]

The Bolsheviks wanted to try Nicholas II in open court. That's true. However, after the Extraordinary Investigative Commission for the Provisional Government's investigation of the crimes of the tsarist government found no evidence of wrongdoing, Lenin and company realized they would have nothing to present at the trial. This would put the Bolsheviks themselves in an awkward position, to put it mildly.

[Martino]

La verità è che la famiglia Romanov si rifugiò a casa di Elis Presley salvando la vita.

[Oleg Valov]

I'm so tired of this discussion of this last tsar, who was insignificant for Russia.☹️
They finished them all off, and that's right!

Otherwise, until now, with every storm over Russia, a tribe of his supporters would have arisen again, to bring another relative to the throne.

Well, if someone can’t sit still, then start from the theory of the Bible or Darwin.
We are all brothers and sisters from one ancestor.
I am the descendant of the son of God! 😏
And you too! 🤪
That's all there is to it: someone, somewhere, gave birth to someone.

[White wind]

Correct. Better is Comrade Stalin with his forced Ukrainization.

[Dmitry Rigov]

So Stalin himself said that "A son is not responsible for his father." By this logic, the children should have been released.

[anclevalico]

Let me remind you that for some individuals who have lost their human form, the Tsar was killed along with his children and those loyal to him. How much of an animal do you have to be to approve of this is a rhetorical question.

[Oleg Valov]

Do you consider the destruction of 12,868 settlements—burned or completely destroyed—in Belarus during WWII humane?
And more than 3 million citizens killed, including hundreds of thousands of children?
After all, all of Europe and the USA still don’t recognize this as genocide?
And he considers it normal.
You don't judge them, do you? ☹️

You, a liberal and democrat with a rotten consciousness.

You probably forgot that Nicholas II Romanov led Russia to destruction.
It was his rule over Russia that led to its collapse.
And not only because of severe social catastrophes, unsuccessful wars and inflexible domestic policies.
He was a talentless man and a coward. And history has proven it.

For some reason, we only remember the Khodynka stampede and Bloody Sunday. School curriculum?🤪
But we absolutely do not talk about him when, due to his stupidity, jealousy and lack of will, he made a strategic miscalculation and dragged the empire into the First World War.
How many millions died there?
Including children?
I don't hear the answer?
Is it the military's fault again?

All of them Romanovs were dictators, bastards and scoundrels.
And about Peter I, too, only the positive side is praised, but his dictatorship and reprisals are discussed in silence.

However, I have not heard of other good kings, queens, etc.
They did it right!
There is no point in leaving this on earth.

The time will come when he will be thrown out of the Peter and Paul Cathedral.
It was a strategic mistake to canonize him in 1981, and then, under Boris Yeltsin, to bury him with honors. And who was the one to be canonized? The expert examination also provided an unconvincing answer, and its members were divided. That's when other authorities were brought in: foreign geneticists, including Pavel Ivanov and Peter Gill.
Well, then the Government Commission, led by Boris Nemtsov, officially confirmed the authenticity based on a complex of anthropological, historical and genetic examinations.
How much were they paid from the Russian budget?
And how can you trust them?

[steelmaker]

A very competent historian! That's why he's never invited to any shows. Can you imagine if he declared on some show that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should be renamed the Ministry of the Concerned? He's telling the truth! The authorities restrict people like him from communicating.

[Rostislav Prokopenko]

Clifford Simak's novella "Goblin's Keep" features a Time Institute with a functioning time machine.
Until something similar happens, there will be more versions than you can handle.

[anclevalico]

Right up until the 20s, there were tours of the Ipatiev House, to the execution site, complete with photos of grinning visitors. I saw it just recently, but I can't remember where. Surrealism...

[crossbow]

Evgeny Spitsyn has always distinguished himself with a deep and comprehensive study of our country's historical events. I have the utmost respect for him. There is another version of the Romanovs' death. The fact is that, when the Federal Reserve System was created in 1913, major American financial magnates offered Nicholas II the chance to become a shareholder. He allegedly agreed and contributed his own capital. At that time, he was certainly one of the richest men in the world. However, American Jews viewed him very negatively because he limited the rights of their fellow Jews in the Russian Empire. Moreover, as has now become known, the activities of revolutionaries such as Trotsky and Sverdlov (who were ethnic Jews) were directly supported by certain American financiers. The ensuing revolution could have been profited from by appropriating Nicholas II's share in the Federal Reserve System. To achieve this, the entire royal family would have had to be eliminated first, to prevent any direct lawsuits. It appears that Sverdlov himself, who died some time after the royal family's execution, also looked into this matter. I would like to discuss this theory with professional historians.