Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
Banned
I'd like to thank Darkest for mentioning this bit of information.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khioniya_Kozmishna_Guseva
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khioniya_Kozmishna_Guseva
Rasputin assassinated before WWI
- Thread starter Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
- Start date
Perhaps a better question would be, what if Tsarevitch Alexei had not had hemophilia?
Alexei was Nicholas and Alexandra's only son, he had hemophilia and Rasputin seemed to be able to help the boy. That is how Rasputin got the influence he had with The Imperial Family.
If Alexei had not had hemophilia then Rasputin would not have been able to gain the confidence and get the influence he had with The Imperial Family.
It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Alexei had not had hemophilia. I don't know that it would have prevented the Russian Revolution or that it would have put The Tsar in a better frame of mind to be able to put down the revolution. But it would be interesting to see how that one change would have effected things and how if at all it would have butterflyed the situation.
Alexei was Nicholas and Alexandra's only son, he had hemophilia and Rasputin seemed to be able to help the boy. That is how Rasputin got the influence he had with The Imperial Family.
If Alexei had not had hemophilia then Rasputin would not have been able to gain the confidence and get the influence he had with The Imperial Family.
It would be interesting to know what would have happened if Alexei had not had hemophilia. I don't know that it would have prevented the Russian Revolution or that it would have put The Tsar in a better frame of mind to be able to put down the revolution. But it would be interesting to see how that one change would have effected things and how if at all it would have butterflyed the situation.
Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
Banned
Thank you, Mr Obvious, I'll make sure to repeat that story to the 1 board member in 50 who doesn't know it, right after I reveal to them that Israel has nukes and Russia is an oligarchy. I prefer my own POD though, which is why I posted it.
Mraow.
Someone's in a good mood.
A bizarre titbit of information, though, and quite dark. What do you think would be the main differences in terms of longer-term effects between your POD and the no Haemophillia one?
MrP
Banned
Didn't the Imperial Family surround itself with a host of dubious characters? I'd hazard a guess that one of them would become the focus for dissatisfaction instead of Rasputin. Probably die a lot easier, too, because of butterflies.
Don't really see it changing much . . . except by butterflies.
Don't really see it changing much . . . except by butterflies.
Rasputin was a symptom, not a cause. If it hadn't been him, it would have been someone else. It appears to have been the vogue in pre WW1 Russian high society to have your own holy man or dabble in spiritualism, etc. And Alexandra, I suppose, was especially vulnerable to such trends because of her character, her sense of isolation, and perhaps because of her highly emotional and mystical view of Russian society and religion which had all the marks of the convert.
Darkest
Banned
I disagree. This is one month before World War I begins. Are they going to find a holy man before then? Also, what of the ramifications of Rasputin's faction at the Kremlin suddenly crumbling away? What are the ramifications of Rasputin not being there to screw up the crucial first moments of the war?
I say, that Grigori Rasputin will be sorely missed by the Romanovs. Alexei is going to get sick sooner or later because of hemophilia, and his mother is going to start getting frantic for a Rasputin-like figure to calm him down. It is thought that Rasputin used aspirin to keep Alexei's hemophilia from acting up. Do his lackies know of this? Maybe. Might one of them replace Rasputin. There's a good chance. But are the Romanovs going to trust this New Monk as much? Is Tsar Nicholas going to go out into the front lines on the call of the new holy man? No.
Definite changes, mark my words. Also, consider the ramifications of the I-hate-Rasputin faction being completely delighted. Peasants and other monastic orders will be on high spirits. It could change the entire behavior and attitude of the populace.
I say, that Grigori Rasputin will be sorely missed by the Romanovs. Alexei is going to get sick sooner or later because of hemophilia, and his mother is going to start getting frantic for a Rasputin-like figure to calm him down. It is thought that Rasputin used aspirin to keep Alexei's hemophilia from acting up. Do his lackies know of this? Maybe. Might one of them replace Rasputin. There's a good chance. But are the Romanovs going to trust this New Monk as much? Is Tsar Nicholas going to go out into the front lines on the call of the new holy man? No.
Definite changes, mark my words. Also, consider the ramifications of the I-hate-Rasputin faction being completely delighted. Peasants and other monastic orders will be on high spirits. It could change the entire behavior and attitude of the populace.
Darkest
Banned
In World War I, if you are against butterflies, I would think that the most simple repercussions of killing Rasputin will manifest themselves in 1916. Grand Duke Nikolay will probably still choose the Lake Naroch area to lead an offensive. And he will probably still bungle the operation and screw everything over.
However, the Brusilov Offensive will not come into being. Without the Tsar's ear... it could just be a plan that remains on the drawing boards. General Alexei Evert gets his way, favoring to hold the Russian lines in a long defensive war. Germany continues their attack on Verdun. Austria-Hungary is well off. Italy's Sixth Battle of the Isonzo is different, probably failing to claim success, leading to demoralization of the Italians. Romania stays neutral far longer.
In all, probably bad news. However, the Russians will stay in the war longer. Without Rasputin, revolutionary forces are far weaker. And without the Brusilov Offensive, the February Revolution of 1917 is either inexistant or much weaker. Revolutionaries never take power.
What happens in the Great War after the lack of the Brusilov Offensive? Romania probably joins, and the Russians devote their resources to defending it from Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria. Parts of the country will be lost, but I believe Allied forces will do better in the Romanian campaign. The Germans have taken Verdun, but they never rush west after knocking Russia out of the war. However, there is less fervor for America to join the Allies, as they did not want to fight with the Russian despot (in OTL, when they dropped out of WWI, the US dropped in).
So, its difficult to measure what might happen. Even if they have extra numbers due to the lack of the Brusilov Offensive, and if there is less anger towards the royal family because of Rasputin, the Russians are going to be in deep trouble if they continue the war past the point where in OTL they quit. It could really go either way. Germany could win. The Allies could win. Maybe neither. If Germany wins, they might do so by making a favorable deal with the Romanovs, taking only a little bit of their territory. Or they might push for the independence of new German principalities all the way to the Ukraine (in which case, a revolution might erupt in Petrograd).
If the Allies win, with Russia on their side, the Russian Empire would be in dire straits, with anti-monarchist revolutionary forces knocking at their doorsteps. But, they would gain Poland. If President Wilson doesn't get involved, they might gain all of present-day Poland. Galicia. The Baltic states are theirs, the Ukraine is theirs, and maybe a Panslavic movement could bring Romania, Serbia/Yugoslavia into the fold. The Russians will be able to at the least demand of the Allies the annexation of Istanbul and the Bosphoros Strait, and protectorates of much of Turkey.
Hopefully the Russian Empire liberalizes and retains their earned territory. If so, a new superpower might be in the making.
However, the Brusilov Offensive will not come into being. Without the Tsar's ear... it could just be a plan that remains on the drawing boards. General Alexei Evert gets his way, favoring to hold the Russian lines in a long defensive war. Germany continues their attack on Verdun. Austria-Hungary is well off. Italy's Sixth Battle of the Isonzo is different, probably failing to claim success, leading to demoralization of the Italians. Romania stays neutral far longer.
In all, probably bad news. However, the Russians will stay in the war longer. Without Rasputin, revolutionary forces are far weaker. And without the Brusilov Offensive, the February Revolution of 1917 is either inexistant or much weaker. Revolutionaries never take power.
What happens in the Great War after the lack of the Brusilov Offensive? Romania probably joins, and the Russians devote their resources to defending it from Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria. Parts of the country will be lost, but I believe Allied forces will do better in the Romanian campaign. The Germans have taken Verdun, but they never rush west after knocking Russia out of the war. However, there is less fervor for America to join the Allies, as they did not want to fight with the Russian despot (in OTL, when they dropped out of WWI, the US dropped in).
So, its difficult to measure what might happen. Even if they have extra numbers due to the lack of the Brusilov Offensive, and if there is less anger towards the royal family because of Rasputin, the Russians are going to be in deep trouble if they continue the war past the point where in OTL they quit. It could really go either way. Germany could win. The Allies could win. Maybe neither. If Germany wins, they might do so by making a favorable deal with the Romanovs, taking only a little bit of their territory. Or they might push for the independence of new German principalities all the way to the Ukraine (in which case, a revolution might erupt in Petrograd).
If the Allies win, with Russia on their side, the Russian Empire would be in dire straits, with anti-monarchist revolutionary forces knocking at their doorsteps. But, they would gain Poland. If President Wilson doesn't get involved, they might gain all of present-day Poland. Galicia. The Baltic states are theirs, the Ukraine is theirs, and maybe a Panslavic movement could bring Romania, Serbia/Yugoslavia into the fold. The Russians will be able to at the least demand of the Allies the annexation of Istanbul and the Bosphoros Strait, and protectorates of much of Turkey.
Hopefully the Russian Empire liberalizes and retains their earned territory. If so, a new superpower might be in the making.
a. So far from the killing of Rasputin putting the peasantry into "high spirits", I'd suggest the opposite is true. A man of the people has been murdered by "them" would have been the reaction.
b. As for Rasputin's influence on the Tsar. Well, as far as I remember, among Rasputin's bits of advice were to cut down on anti-semitism and to ensure food supplies for the major cities- both ignored. Remember Nicholas's reply to the President of the Duma who had presented a report on Rasputin's misdeeds: " Rasputin is a simple peasant who can relieve the sufferings of my son by a strange power. The Tsarina's reliance upon him is a matter for the family and I will allow no one to meddle in my affairs." Nicholas saw Rasputin as a symbolic link with the peasantry rather than as an adviser.
c. The whole point about Rasputin is that he symbolised the Romanov alienation from the Russian upper class and was for the middle class a sign of Russian backwardness. His importance came from the deficiencies of the Tsar and Tsarina, which would have remained no matter what happened to Rasputin.
b. As for Rasputin's influence on the Tsar. Well, as far as I remember, among Rasputin's bits of advice were to cut down on anti-semitism and to ensure food supplies for the major cities- both ignored. Remember Nicholas's reply to the President of the Duma who had presented a report on Rasputin's misdeeds: " Rasputin is a simple peasant who can relieve the sufferings of my son by a strange power. The Tsarina's reliance upon him is a matter for the family and I will allow no one to meddle in my affairs." Nicholas saw Rasputin as a symbolic link with the peasantry rather than as an adviser.
c. The whole point about Rasputin is that he symbolised the Romanov alienation from the Russian upper class and was for the middle class a sign of Russian backwardness. His importance came from the deficiencies of the Tsar and Tsarina, which would have remained no matter what happened to Rasputin.
Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
Banned
The CP only advanced into the Ukraine in OTL because Trotsky let them.
No chance.
Romania's not a Slavic country, and just because Serbia is doesn't mean they'd enjoy being part of Russia.
Not in their weak position they won't.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
That is a pretty mild reaction, but then I guess you're probably getting used to being mistaken for Slavs.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
Rasputin is just not this important. He has become symbolic of many things, but whether or not he was killed is not going to have any notable impact on the course of WWI. Does anyone think that whether or not the Tsarina had a weird advisor around would be any more than a drop in the bucket of public resentment compared to a huge war going very badly, claiming milions upon millions of lives and causing enormous privation and suffering? Rasputin was just a convenient lightning rod AFTER the fact for the Reds to use to discredit the old order. If it had not been that, it would have been something like Alexandra's hat budget.
For instance, the Brusilov Offensive was not just some whacky idea dreamed up by some general that managed to get the ear of the Tsar, it was an important strategic direction taken in order to save France from the German attack on Verdun. The Tsar could have been vacationing on Mykonos and it still would have happened.
Killing Rasputin is not going to save Tsarist Russia, the Hapsburg monarchy, or change the future of the world. Unless he is replaced by someone who assassinates Nicholas or something like that.
For instance, the Brusilov Offensive was not just some whacky idea dreamed up by some general that managed to get the ear of the Tsar, it was an important strategic direction taken in order to save France from the German attack on Verdun. The Tsar could have been vacationing on Mykonos and it still would have happened.
Killing Rasputin is not going to save Tsarist Russia, the Hapsburg monarchy, or change the future of the world. Unless he is replaced by someone who assassinates Nicholas or something like that.
Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
Banned
If it doesn't stop at some point my reaction may not be so mild.
But what's even more annoying is the fact that, whenever I have to correct some misconception about Romania, I have this unshakable sensation that my tone somehow sounds nationalist. Even if it's the most matter-of-factual post I can come up with. It's annoying because I absolutely loathe Romanian nationalism, so the thought that I may somehow be associated with it is really killing me.
Another misconception in that post is the idea that Romanians would willingly accept Russian annexation/domination. The fact is that the 2 countries had a very serious argument in 1878. Romania had initially allied itself with Germany and A-H precisely as a form of protection against Russia. Bucharest was one of the better fortified cities in Europe when WWI started (thank you, Belgium) and the country's defenses had a tendency to point eastwards.
Darkest
Banned
VoCSe, I am truly embarrassed. I apologize for mistaking your people for Slavs. Please forgive me.
General Evert was really pushing for a defensive plan, while Brusilov wanted to push offensively. The Tsar made the decision, did he not, as Commander-in-Chief? There would be some difference.
That's the difference Rasputin made in the world. By sending Nicholas II to the front. Surely they would have made some strategic or tactical differences without the Tsar as commander-in-chief.
I'm not saying he's huge. But there are always butterflies. With Nicholas at home, tending to his family and keeping control, there is less resentment towards the upper class, because the German Tsarina and her strange monk-mystic doesn't take complete power.
Yeah, but if butterflies at Verdun, and the lack of Wilson declaring war causes the West to fall, where are the CP going to go next? Even if France and Britain keep the Krauts back, is the defensive line going to hold after an extended period of an extra year or two?
Wasn't Russia deemed the Mother Country, the Protector of the Slavs, etc. etc.? I'm not saying it would go down easily, but Russia might be able to do it.
True. But Britain and France had promised them those territories before. It would come up. And who knows, they might just be able to kill enough Turks so as to claim the Bosphorous Strait.
Also, without Wilson, that means a degree of less self-determination in the Treaty of Versailles. That means that France and Russia might be able to go at it and start snapping up territories. Not a lot of territory, with native resistance. But they'll be able to be more aggressive, at the least.
General Evert was really pushing for a defensive plan, while Brusilov wanted to push offensively. The Tsar made the decision, did he not, as Commander-in-Chief? There would be some difference.
That's the difference Rasputin made in the world. By sending Nicholas II to the front. Surely they would have made some strategic or tactical differences without the Tsar as commander-in-chief.
I'm not saying he's huge. But there are always butterflies. With Nicholas at home, tending to his family and keeping control, there is less resentment towards the upper class, because the German Tsarina and her strange monk-mystic doesn't take complete power.
Yeah, but if butterflies at Verdun, and the lack of Wilson declaring war causes the West to fall, where are the CP going to go next? Even if France and Britain keep the Krauts back, is the defensive line going to hold after an extended period of an extra year or two?
Wasn't Russia deemed the Mother Country, the Protector of the Slavs, etc. etc.? I'm not saying it would go down easily, but Russia might be able to do it.
True. But Britain and France had promised them those territories before. It would come up. And who knows, they might just be able to kill enough Turks so as to claim the Bosphorous Strait.
Also, without Wilson, that means a degree of less self-determination in the Treaty of Versailles. That means that France and Russia might be able to go at it and start snapping up territories. Not a lot of territory, with native resistance. But they'll be able to be more aggressive, at the least.
Now I come to think of it, there's an enjoyable novel by Donald Benson, AND HAVING WRIT, in which a disgraced Rasputin moves to America and becomes a power in the entertainment and information industry.
Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
Banned
No problem.
That didn't stop Bulgaria from declaring war on Russia. Without a lot of Russian boots on the ground in the western Balkans it won't work. The kind of pan-Slavists who love Russia so much that they'd desire its domination even after the fall of Serbia's enemies are clearly a minority. They'd need Russian help the same way Eastern European communists did after WWII.
They also promised Italy a big chunk of Dalmatia and a protectorate over Dalmatia, and it didn't happen. They promised Romania Transylvania then signed a secret agreement among themselves to ignore it. Promises are made to be broken. Actions speak louder than words. A fait accompli is more important than a piece of paper.
It's the boots on the ground that will matter most. How close will Russia get to the Straits in your TL?
Versailles may be without Wilson but it's not without Lloyd George. Britain's not going to sign away Constantinople if it doesn't have to, and it doesn't. Italy, Greece and Romania will agree with them, as might France.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
You're assuming he wouldn't have gone to the front anyway. You don't even know Rasputin really did tell him to do it, and if he did, it might have been because he knew he was already planning to - typical move by such people.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
I don't think you come off as very nationalist, otherwise you would have said "Take you fithly Turkish hands off my Dobruja, OH, land of my ancestors! For which so much proud Romanian blood has been shed!" in that previous thread.
The other problem that everyone in the Balkans had with Russia was that they were huge dicks about the whole pan-Slav or defender of Orthodoxy thing - the Bulgarians found them insufferably condescending and arrogant.
The other problem that everyone in the Balkans had with Russia was that they were huge dicks about the whole pan-Slav or defender of Orthodoxy thing - the Bulgarians found them insufferably condescending and arrogant.