I think most of us can agree that being killed in a cellar in the middle of the night with no trial was probably not a very fair fate for Nicholas II and especially for his wife and children*. But letting them go to exile in Paris to live out their days in luxury doesn't seem very right either, especially since there are political reasons why this is a bad idea for the Communists (as any surviving heir could be a rallying point for White forces).
But there must be something in the middle. A public trial for Nicholas II and a public execution? Internal exile for his family? Nothing seems particularly "fair" to me aside from, say, letting the wife and children escape to live as a middle class working family in Ohio or Manitoba or Western Australia or Uruguay or something, and perhaps executing Nicholas after a public trial (even if the verdict is assured), but it strikes me as an interesting discussion.
We can take inspiration, I guess, from other deposed monarchs - in particular, I like the example of Simeon II of Bulgaria, who was reigning king but a small child, who first joined Victor Emmanuel in Egypt before moving to Madrid, where he lived quite comfortably, attending an exclusive school and marrying into the local nobility. Karl I&IV of Austria-Hungary was exiled to Madeira, after two failed attempts to seize the throne of Hungary. Victor Emmanuel was, as mentioned, exiled to Alexandria, but he died before he could do too much.
Of course, none of those deposements were amid a bloody revolution like October Revolution and Russian Civil War. Emperor Puyi of China is perhaps the closest analogy, considering that the Republican Revolution there was hardly clean and peaceful, though he was a small child when it happened. He was exiled and then tried to reclaim the throne before eventually being used as a puppet by the Japanese in Manchuria.
So we see the danger of leaving spare monarchs hanging around. But still - killing children usually feels like murder.
* Not just the Romanov, but the Rowomanov and Rochildrenovs too
But there must be something in the middle. A public trial for Nicholas II and a public execution? Internal exile for his family? Nothing seems particularly "fair" to me aside from, say, letting the wife and children escape to live as a middle class working family in Ohio or Manitoba or Western Australia or Uruguay or something, and perhaps executing Nicholas after a public trial (even if the verdict is assured), but it strikes me as an interesting discussion.
We can take inspiration, I guess, from other deposed monarchs - in particular, I like the example of Simeon II of Bulgaria, who was reigning king but a small child, who first joined Victor Emmanuel in Egypt before moving to Madrid, where he lived quite comfortably, attending an exclusive school and marrying into the local nobility. Karl I&IV of Austria-Hungary was exiled to Madeira, after two failed attempts to seize the throne of Hungary. Victor Emmanuel was, as mentioned, exiled to Alexandria, but he died before he could do too much.
Of course, none of those deposements were amid a bloody revolution like October Revolution and Russian Civil War. Emperor Puyi of China is perhaps the closest analogy, considering that the Republican Revolution there was hardly clean and peaceful, though he was a small child when it happened. He was exiled and then tried to reclaim the throne before eventually being used as a puppet by the Japanese in Manchuria.
So we see the danger of leaving spare monarchs hanging around. But still - killing children usually feels like murder.
* Not just the Romanov, but the Rowomanov and Rochildrenovs too
:
