Russians remember murdered tsar

[[R_H]]

BBC

Thousands of Russians have been taking part in events to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the assassination of Tsar Nicholas II and his family.

Russian Orthodox Christians held a service in Yekaterinburg, where the royal family were killed, and then followed an 18km (11-mile) procession.

Another service was taking place in the cathedral in St Petersburg where the bodies of the family now lie.

Russia's last emperor was shot dead by Bolshevik revolutionaries in 1918.

Nicholas, his wife Alexandra, their five children, doctor and three servants were killed on the night of 16-17 July, 1918.

The Romanov family have now been canonised as saints by the Orthodox Church, which has enjoyed a post-Soviet revival.

Renewed popularity

At dawn on Thursday, the faithful packed the Church on the Blood in Yekaterinburg in the Ural Mountains, on the site where the family were killed.

Bishops in red and gold robes wafted incense over the congregation, while many more stood on the surrounding hillside.

Then many of them, carrying icons and flags, joined a procession to Ganina-Yama, where the family's bodies were dumped in a mineshaft.

The renewed popularity of the Romanovs is an astonishing transformation that mirrors the huge changes in Russia itself, says the BBC's James Rodgers in Moscow.

For most of the last century, Tsar Nicholas II was officially reviled as a tyrant. To Russia's Soviet regime, he personified all they had tried to destroy in the revolution of 1917.

Now, almost two decades after the end of the communist state which the Bolsheviks fought to create, the tsar is revered as a saint - a martyr who died for his faith.

Just before the 90th anniversary of his death, Nicholas II pulled into the lead in an online poll to decide on the greatest hero in Russian history.

It is perhaps a sign of the country's confusion over its own past, our correspondent says, that he is battling it out for top spot with the Soviet dictator, Josef Stalin.

Why were the Romanovs canonized, and why is Nicholas II seen as the greatest hero in Russian history? [/url]

[Illuminatus Primus]

Because the Russian Orthodox Church's main function is to uphold the monarchist state. There's no conception of genuine separation from the affairs of state in Russian Orthodoxy. Its a state propaganda service.

[Glocksman]

Because the Russian Orthodox Church's main function is to uphold the monarchist state. There's no conception of genuine separation from the affairs of state in Russian Orthodoxy. Its a state propaganda service.

I'm sure Stas will correct me on this if I'm wrong, but it seems as if Putin's Russian Federation is even more advanced than the Communists in it's willingness to exploit prejudices and ignorance for popular gain.

Then again I'm an American who has suffered under two terms of Bush the Lesser, so who am I to talk?

[Pelranius]

Fortunately, there seems to be little chance of a restoration of the Russian monarchy, no matter what the Grand Duchess claims.

It always seemed to me that something bad was bound to happen to Nicholas II for his supporters in the Black Hundreds launching pogroms against every minority in Russia.

[K. A. Pital]

Because the Russian Orthodox Church's main function is to uphold the monarchist state. There's no conception of genuine separation from the affairs of state in Russian Orthodoxy. Its a state propaganda service.

All that is true. Russian monarchist nutjobs have infiltrated the ROC so heavily that everything in it revolves around upholding the concept of the Tsar.

More than that, Nicholas II was NOT seen as the greatest hero in Russia's history.

The "Name of Russia" project was an open poll for all Russians to vote for the greatest historical persons, but uncannily, Stalin, Lenin and Vysotsky (a Soviet singer, very very famous and respected here) took the first three places.

After that, a functioner official from "United Russia" spoke on TV that "ungodly communists CANNOT win the poll" and "RALLY the Orthodox youth and faithful to vote for Nicholas II in the Name of Russia" and all that crap.

Then all the Orthodox guys spam-voted the NoR project, allowing Nicholas II to beat Stalin, Vysotski and Lenin.

[Gandalf]

If you were going to nominate a monarch, why not Peter The Great or possibly even Alexander I? They were certainly better than Nick 2.

Interestingly, Stalin's considered to be a Russian. I would not have seen that coming.

[Tiriol]

Because the Russian Orthodox Church's main function is to uphold the monarchist state. There's no conception of genuine separation from the affairs of state in Russian Orthodoxy. Its a state propaganda service.

All that is true. Russian monarchist nutjobs have infiltrated the ROC so heavily that everything in it revolves around upholding the concept of the Tsar.

More than that, Nicholas II was NOT seen as the greatest hero in Russia's history.

The "Name of Russia" project was an open poll for all Russians to vote for the greatest historical persons, but uncannily, Stalin, Lenin and Vysotsky (a Soviet singer, very very famous and respected here) took the first three places.

After that, a functioner official from "United Russia" spoke on TV that "ungodly communists CANNOT win the poll" and "RALLY the Orthodox youth and faithful to vote for Nicholas II in the Name of Russia" and all that crap.

Then all the Orthodox guys spam-voted the NoR project, allowing Nicholas II to beat Stalin, Vysotski and Lenin.

Strangely enough one could see the deposed and mrudered Tsar as "the greatest historical person" in that he was stupid enough to allow his empire to turn against him and against itself, to become entangled in "War To End All Wars" and to allow millions to die because some misplaced sense of noblessé obligé and to enrage even the usually subservient Finns into open revolt.

A great historical person? Perhaps. Good one, wise one or beneficial one to Russia? No.

[Tiriol]

If you were going to nominate a monarch, why not Peter The Great or possibly even Alexander I? They were certainly better than Nick 2.

Interestingly, Stalin's considered to be a Russian. I would not have seen that coming.

That is an interesting question. Maybe the Russian Orthodox Church wanted to have its martyred Royal family on the pedestral?

[Illuminatus Primus]

If you were going to nominate a monarch, why not Peter The Great or possibly even Alexander I? They were certainly better than Nick 2.

Interestingly, Stalin's considered to be a Russian. I would not have seen that coming.

Christians' fetishistic fixation with martyrs; the ROC has identified Nicholas II with a martyr for Russian Orthodoxy (since the subsequent Provisional Government oversaw a fall in prestige by the ROC, and the following Bolshevik regime was anti-clerical and anti-religious). Peter the Great does not fit the Christian martyrdom narrative, and moreover, he was a drunken libertine who enjoyed hanging out with rogues and mocking and blaspheming the church, and also stripped it of its Patriarchate and subordinated it to a mundane ministry (the College [Ministry] of Ecclesiastics was too obvious, and renamed to the Most Holy Synod). Not a good candidate for ROC lionizing.

[CJvR]

Why were the Romanovs canonized, and why is Nicholas II seen as the greatest hero in Russian history?

Think about who came after him...
With successors like those it is hard not to be remembered fondly.

[K. A. Pital]

Think about who came after him...
With successors like those it is hard not to be remembered fondly.

There's hardly a single person alive now who lived under the Tsar, so it's certainly not remembrance. After all, during his "benevolent" rule, the average Russian was expected to live as long as a Chinese or Indian, around 30 years. Would you also say that people have kind remembrances of Stalin because those who came after him were worse than him? Stalin outdoes every single politician including other former Soviet leaders, and even Lenin.

The poll only indicates how many Russians could have been assembled for a flashmob to vote for either person, not where the real sympathies of the population lie.

[CJvR]

Would you also say that people have kind remembrances of Stalin because those who came after him were worse than him? Stalin outdoes every single politician including other former Soviet leaders, and even Lenin.

Hardly, he get that boost for living in intresting times, or rather making them intresting... Ceasar and Augustus fills countless history books while the Antonines at most get a honorable mentioning yet their time is generally considered to be the zenith of the empire.

[Patrick Degan]

Would you also say that people have kind remembrances of Stalin because those who came after him were worse than him? Stalin outdoes every single politician including other former Soviet leaders, and even Lenin.

Hardly, he get that boost for living in intresting times, or rather making them intresting... Ceasar and Augustus fills countless history books while the Antonines at most get a honorable mentioning yet their time is generally considered to be the zenith of the empire.

No, he gets the boost because he crash-industrialised the country and beat Hitler. Ruthless as he may have been, Russia rose from a semifeudal backwater to world power in just twenty years under Stalin, and that's what a lot of Russians credit him for.