July 14th, 2005, 05:08 PM
This is one of my favorite PoD's! What if shortly before Nikolai succeeded his father, he had married Princess Louise of Denmark (a cousine) instead of Alix (Alexandra).
Let's say that Tsarevitj Nikolai and his future wife had met during Nikolai’s visits to the Danish Court in Copenhagen and there had fallen deeply in love with the young princess.
Ok, it doesn't have to be a Danish princess, just some nice girl with some brains and better genes - meaning no bleeder disease!
How would things change?
PS: I have a ATL outlined, but would like to hear your opinions first!
July 14th, 2005, 05:42 PM
Note that Nicholas' limited abilities as a ruler might've brought the Revolution on anyway. Certainly neither the Russo-Japanese War nor the 1905 Revolution hinged on Alix's unpopularity.
One thing to look at is Alix's influcence, if any, on WWI command assignments. That being said, Russia's problems were infrastructural (both physically and politically) and I'm not sure Alix was more than an aggravating factor.
July 14th, 2005, 07:50 PM
What kind of influence would Rasputin have had? Are you saying none?
July 14th, 2005, 10:57 PM
What kind of influence would Rasputin have had? Are you saying none?
I was under the impression that he spend most of his time using Alix's influence on Nicholas to build a nest for himself in Petrograd by knocking those who complained about him out of the government.
Mind you, Alix did seem pretty hell-bent on maintaining the autocracy to the bitter end, so if another woman comes in (preferably one with no political ideas), we could actually see some reforms made during the war (numerous politicians tried to appeal to Nicholas to make changes, but they never got past Alix). If we're really, it just might head off the Revolution.
July 15th, 2005, 03:40 AM
What will their children be like? Will there be an attempt to unite Denmark with Russia?
July 15th, 2005, 03:48 AM
Truthfully, I don't think it would have made a difference. Russia had problems far beyind Rasputin and Alexis' hemnpohillia. The Communists were ready to have a revolution anyway. After all, look at what happened to the Kerensky government.
July 15th, 2005, 01:00 PM
This is fairly rough and probably needs some (a lot of, more likely) additional work, but I post it anyway. Basically, I think that the character of Tsar Nikolai II was such, that he could have turned out quite differently, and thus Russia as well, if his wife had been another...
The Good Tsar
Nikolai, the eldest son of Tsar Alexander III of Russia and Tsarina Marie Feodorovna – formerly princess Dagma of Denmark -, was born at Krasnoye Selo in May 1868.
Nikolai was brough up to believe that it was his sacred duty to uphold the principle of autocracy, the Holy Tsardom, but deep down he was far from autocratic by nature. Those who did not like Tsar Nikolai II or agree with him calls him a weak monarch, while those who truly believed in him calls him a liberal. Opinions are nearly equally divided on this matter. Fact is nonetheless that he was easily swayed by stronger personalities - the most important one was his wife to come, Tsarina Elena.
Nikolai was educated at home with his brother George. His formal education was completed before he reached the age of 20, and although Nikolai’s teachers were the best the Russian Empire had to offer, he was too immature to absorb all that they taught him. Tsarina Marie Feodorovna, like the other Danish princesses of her generation, was a devoted and somewhat possessive mother, whose sons therefore matured late.
To his admirers, Nikolai’s father, Alexander III, embodied all that a Russian autocratic Tsar should be, both in his physical appearance and in his resolute and authoritarian personality. Nikolai had lived in his father’s shadow all his life and came to the throne in November 1894 with no political ideas of his own and limited experience in government. Luckily he had a stout supporter and devoted ally in his intelligent wife.
Shortly before Nikolai succeeded his father, he had married the Princess Louise (1875-1926), yet another Danish princess, and Nikolai’s cousine – Louise’s father, Frederik VIII, was Tsarina Marie Feodorovna’s brother. Nikolai and his future wife had met during one of Nikolai’s many visits to the Danish Court in Copenhagen and had fallen deeply in love. Due to the close kinship, there was some worries on behalf of the Danish King and his Queen, but the dying Russian Tsar was happy to see his son married off the a sensible young lady of good standing and reputation. King Frederik VIII was in the end quite happy to secure future Russian friendship and support, and thus the marriage went along and the two got married in the spring of 1894 in St. Petersburg.
Louise took the name Elena when she converted to Russian Orthodoxy. She was not surprisingly very Danish in personality and values, but had a charming and open-minded way about her that made her adored by most Russians, but the nobility – as a Dane, she never really cared much for elaborate titles and high society. For most of her life, she was widely detested by the old Russian aristocracy, whereas the new aristocracy – newly ennobled as well as the rising class of noveau rich – and the Russian peasantry loved her with a passion. The ordinary Russians and the up and coming was not the only ones who loved the Danish Princess, her husband, Nikolai II, was absolutely smitten with her and he always sought her advice and help in times of decision or crisis.
The Tsar and his Danish wife had three children, Maria Katarina, Alexander and Christian. The first child, Maria Katarina, was born in the summer of 1895 in Anichkov Palace, where the Tsar and Tsarina lived. The next child, Alexander, the heir to the Throne of Russia, was born in 1897 and finally the last child, Christian was botn in 1900.
One of the reasone why Tsarina Elena was hated by the Russian nobility was her stand on social and economical issues. Serfdom, that in one form of another was till very real in Russian, and the extreme level of poverty among the Russian peasantry was anathema to her and she never stopped nudging her husband to do something. Furthermore she was a believer in some kind of parlamentarism as in her homeland and had a wide pietistic streak – she detested the flamboyant and extravagant life at the Court. Nikolai to a lesser degree shared some of her beliefs – in time he would share them all-, but had a more rational approach. Not only did conservative senior advisors warn him that the only alternative to autocratic rule was extreme socialist revolution, they were, not surprisingly, deadset angainst any reforms that would undermine their way of life and personal power. They, and Nikolai, originally feared that reforms would lead to the destruction not just of the Romanov Dynasty, but of the lives, property, and culture of Russia’s aristocracy and bourgeoisie. Nikolai’s advisers also argued that a multiethnic Empire acquired by conquest - such as the Russian one - could never be preserved by liberal or democratic means. Nikolai tended to believe them, but got more and more persuaded by his wife. It is rumoured, and very likely, that he was finally swayed by the jubilant masses of peasants who showed up during the couples extensive travels around Russia after the birth of Tsarevitj Alexander in 1898. Fact is that after 1898 the tour, Nikolai II would become known as the Father of Russia and somewhat less flattering the Peasant Tsar. Nonetheless Nikolai hsd found his mission in life, to drag Russia screaming and kicking into the 20th century and leave a sound state based on the people of Russia for the people of Russia, albeit led by his heir and future Romanovs.
July 16th, 2005, 06:28 AM
WI this united Russia and Scandinavia?
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.