WI/AHC: Romanovs pull a successful escape

As in, similar to having a successful Bourbon escape from Varennes, or for a more modern (but different) version, Argo during the Iranian hostage crisis.

How could it happen? What would it look like? Who would pull it off? Where would they escape to?

What effects would this have on Russia? Could the Whites win as a result of this?
 
They were almost exiled to the UK. The romanovs were very intertwined with the British royal family and George V wanted to let them stay in Britain but one of his ministers told him that "If you give asylum to a deposed tyrant (as people thought the Tsar was) the people at present clambering for a republic in England, will use this against you."

I think if you somehow get rid of this idiotic minister then George V and Queen Mary would have gladly given the Romanovs asylum!
 
The Romanovs publicly say how awful the Bolsheviks are.

Who then come back and try and discredit the Romanovs, with a lot of focus on how much money they have looted over the years including taking it out if the country, and the Bolsheviks will probably be largely successful at that.

Raises the importance of the issue in the public mind and makes it harder if the British government in power still wants to provide military support to the white russians.
 
It's not really possible for them to escape unless they flee before the October Revolution for some reason.

If anyone gets close to rescuing them, the Bolsheviks are going to do...exactly what they did.

Abroad, they are unloved, and Britain sheltering them is going to cause unnecessary trouble. Unless they keep their mouths shut, the Soviets and their supporters are going to make a habit out of associating their critics abroad with them, with effect.
 
Is it possible the the Tsar and family could escape to Sweden? Would the Swedes allow them to stay? If they somehow survive how might it play on future battles with the Whites?
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
They were almost exiled to the UK. The romanovs were very intertwined with the British royal family and George V wanted to let them stay in Britain but one of his ministers told him that "If you give asylum to a deposed tyrant (as people thought the Tsar was) the people at present clambering for a republic in England, will use this against you."

I think if you somehow get rid of this idiotic minister then George V and Queen Mary would have gladly given the Romanovs asylum!


If they get asylum in Britain, maybe they'll be sent to live in a Crown Dependency, like the Isle of Mann as a compromise between King George and the Ministers. They're seen as helping the Tsar escape to the UK, but not onto the Home Islands. This would result in a more coordinated Monarchy revival as the Monarchy isn't so disorganized, although as they aren't martyred and have in fact run away from their country, this might be all for naught.

Depending on how things go, the Tsar may sway some influence on Mann- nothing major, just influence like a local celebrity would. Nicholas would help to try and coordinate the White Army, but with little success, and ends up being a silent figure who dies in the 20s/30s. Now if we see Tsar Alexei support fascism (based on being strongly influenced by the Military during WW1 and would have an anti-communist sentiment), we could see the ideology gain support in the UK, even if it's marginal. Paranoia about Fascism during the Second World War (assuming that the Tsar's survival doesn't butterfly away the war in broad strokes) would see Alexei sent to be Governor of an island colony somewhere (somewhere cold and miserable, like the Falklands) to stop him stirring trouble.

That's pretty much the first thing that came to mind when I saw your comment.
 
The thing is could the Bolsheviks behave like the Iranians and retaliate against the British for hosting the Czar just as the Iranians did over the Shah. If so, then the Communists taking Brits as hostages might prompt the Brits+Western powers to take a firmer stance in the foreign intervention in the Russian Civil War.
 
The thing is could the Bolsheviks behave like the Iranians and retaliate against the British for hosting the Czar just as the Iranians did over the Shah. If so, then the Communists taking Brits as hostages might prompt the Brits+Western powers to take a firmer stance in the foreign intervention in the Russian Civil War.

That would lead to a lot more bloodshed and death. Might the British try to stir the Muslims against the Godless Commies? Maybe try to get the Japanese take the Siberian East?
 
I could see the family embarking on a British battleship or other vessel before they were seized.

As for where to put them, Norfolk Island should keep them out of the way.

Is there room at Huis Doorn? It could be the Fletcher Memorial Home.
 
As in, similar to having a successful Bourbon escape from Varennes, or for a more modern (but different) version, Argo during the Iranian hostage crisis.

How could it happen? What would it look like? Who would pull it off? Where would they escape to?

What effects would this have on Russia? Could the Whites win as a result of this?

As I've said many times before, the shrewdest thing the Bolsheviks could have done would be to let Nicholas go abroad and then claim that he was masterminding every anti-Bolshevik movement in Russia--including the Anarchists and Left SRs (and of course was also behind every oppositionist movement in the CPSU in the 1920's). The truth is that the Romanovs, while alive, were not only useless but an embarrassment to the Whites. (It is significant that not one White leader officially proclaimed the restoration of the monarchy as a goal.) What really made them heroes to the Whites was precisely the fact of their murder by the Bolsheviks.
 
An easy out might be to have only SOME of the Royal Family escape - say Alexi and Anastasia, like the early rumors, make it out of the country, while the rest of the Royal Family still gets butchered in Yekartinburg.

This not only gives the remaining royals much more sympathy than OTL, but gives an incentive for a nation to grant them asylum.

So long as they live long enough to sire male heirs - Alexi especially, given his decedents would not have hemophilia - the Romanovs would have a strong claim to return after the fall of the Soviets.
 
The UK to start with, then to maybe South Africa or NZ. Out of harms way, and far enough away for no hands on with a civil war.
 
the Romanovs would have a strong claim to return after the fall of the Soviets.

They might return but they would have no chance of returning to power or probably even of becoming a serious political force. After all, there are plenty of ex-communist countries that had once been monarchist. How many have restored the monarchy after the fall of communism? OK, one ex-king did become prime minister https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simeon_Saxe-Coburg-Gotha but even he never really tried to re-establish the monarchy. Anyway, his success was both exceptional and short-lived. In any event, the Bulgarian monarchists had the advantage that their king had been overthrown not by internal revolution but by a foreign power. This gave the ex-king a certain nationalist appeal for a while.

Monarchism has been a negligible force in Russian politics since the fall of communism--and not *only* because of the difficulty of deciding who is the "rightful heir." For that matter, even during the Russian Civil War, not one of the White leaders made restoration of the monarchy part of his official program.
 
Nicolas and Alexandra are an embarrassment and would be a diplomatic embarrassment.

On the other hand, having some of the kids survive might be interesting.
One fun fact I came across was that Lord Mountbatten's childhood crush was Maria (and he kept a picture of her by his bed until his death.)

Another fact is two of the girls, probably Maria and Anastasia, survived the original execution (due to having jewelry sewn in their clothing) and had to be killed when they woke up screaming when their "corpses" were moved.

Doing something with these pieces of info might be fun/good points of divergence.
 
Nicolas and Alexandra are an embarrassment and would be a diplomatic embarrassment.

On the other hand, having some of the kids survive might be interesting.
One fun fact I came across was that Lord Mountbatten's childhood crush was Maria (and he kept a picture of her by his bed until his death.)

Another fact is two of the girls, probably Maria and Anastasia, survived the original execution (due to having jewelry sewn in their clothing) and had to be killed when they woke up screaming when their "corpses" were moved.

Doing something with these pieces of info might be fun/good points of divergence.

Maybe have a selfless sacrifice in which Nicholas gets some maids, dresses them up as the kids, and by the time the Soviets f Nd out and kill him and his wife, the kids are out of Communist hands.
 
If the Entente so much as look like they will attempt a rescue operation, the Tsar and his family will bite the dust. The Bolsheviks will not risk letting him become a figurehead for opposition to their regime.

However, there is another way to have the family rescued which is overlooked, is to have theGermans do it.

Looking at feasibility, it is much easier for the Germans to pull it off. Of course, it also seems counter-productive to rescue a man who's country you were just at war with, but take a look at some of these quotes from
George, Nicholas and Wilhelm: Three Royal Cousins and the Road to World War I

In Moscow, Nicholas’s old court chancellor, Benckendorff, brother of the former British ambassador, tried to get the German ambassador, Mirbach, to support a rescue mission. In Kiev, now occupied by the Germans, Mossolov attempted to persuade the German commanders to back a plan to travel up the Volga to Ekaterinburg. He wrote personally to the kaiser about it. He never received a reply. A former German ambassador to Petrograd told him with much embarrassment that the kaiser couldn’t reply without consulting his government, and the local German commanders refused to help.

The two cousins were also pretty close to eachother, even though their nations were enemies. The Bolsheviks would definitely be opposed to sending over the Tsar, but they would really have no choice.

The Germans could either
a) send a division or two up the Volga river to Yekaterinburg, take the Tsar, and return back to German lines. (not that likely) what is likely however, is

b) the Germans could easily just use threats to make the Bolsheviks hand over the Tsar. Operation Faustschlag had made it obvious that the Red army was in no condition to face the German army, and the Brest-Litovsk had left German troops only a few miles away from Leningrad, and about 320mi from Moscow (not a large distance considering how quickly the Germans took Ukraine). Taking both of these, which was feasible, would probably result in collapse for the Bolsheviks, so they would almost certainly agree to hand over the Tsar.

There were actually rumors that the treaty of Brest-Litovsk inculded a demand for the Russian royal family to be given to the Germans unharmed, iirc.

Anyway, if the Tsar was handed over to the Germans, it would probably be met somewhat bitterly by Nicholas and his family (they would be being taken captive by their enemy) but most likely with some relief as well. They would probably spend the rest of the war in some German palace, and I could see the Kaiser and some of the other princes developing plans to invade Soviet Russia and reinstall Nicholas as a pro-German monarch before the Germans lose. After the war finishes the I would think that the Tsar and his family would move the Britain, France, Denmark, or possibly the Netherlands with the Kaiser. (they were pretty close)(did I already mention that?:confused::p)
 
Does anyone have any thoughts on what a Romanov exile would look like (independently of what happens in Russia)? My thoughts:
Maybe have a selfless sacrifice...
Could be even easier, if Nicholas gets assassinated. Add to this that his son's health makes dying young more likely, and we're down to talking about Alexandra and her daughters. I imagine their exile would be pretty uneventful, aside from providing some tabloid fodder.
If the Entente so much as look like they will attempt a rescue operation, the Tsar and his family will bite the dust.
Supposing someone other than the Bolsheviks (or even aside from the Lenin led Bolsheviks) came to power in Russia? Would a different regime resulting from an altered Revolution find a Romanov exile more acceptable?
 
Does anyone have any thoughts on what a Romanov exile would look like (independently of what happens in Russia)? My thoughts:

Could be even easier, if Nicholas gets assassinated. Add to this that his son's health makes dying young more likely, and we're down to talking about Alexandra and her daughters. I imagine their exile would be pretty uneventful, aside from providing some tabloid fodder.

Supposing someone other than the Bolsheviks (or even aside from the Lenin led Bolsheviks) came to power in Russia? Would a different regime resulting from an altered Revolution find a Romanov exile more acceptable?
No Russian government is going to want the deposed head of state running around in foreign countries and potentially fomenting trouble. Bolshevik, Menshevik, SR, what have you, that's an obvious danger.

As for what happens if they make it out anyway? Expect a lot of people who were executed for Trotskyite plots to instead be executed for Trotsky-Bolshevik plots. If they end up in Britain, the Labour Party is going to have to make some decisions upon coming to power.

Some deranged British (or wherever they end up) leftist might put choose them as an assassination target a la Trotsky, which would end up embarrassing for all involved. Otherwise they eventually become tabloid fodder.

As for the hemophilia, note that any of Alexei's female children will be carriers, but his male children would not be. Wikipedia suggests that genetic testing has confirmed one of his sisters to have been a carrier, so it could pass down that way as well. Note also that the Romanovs have rules about morganatic vs. acceptable marriages, so the possible partners for a legitimate marriage would be potentially limited. Not that they will ever get the throne back, any more than most of the other deposed monarchs running around ever will.
 
No Russian government is going to want the deposed head of state running around in foreign countries and potentially fomenting trouble. Bolshevik, Menshevik, SR, what have you, that's an obvious danger.
I would think that Michael would be the main concern here, not a renounced Nicky, much less his daughters... though his son and son's sons may be another matter; speaking of...
As for the hemophilia, note that any of Alexei's female children will be carriers, but his male children would not be. Wikipedia suggests that genetic testing has confirmed one of his sisters to have been a carrier, so it could pass down that way as well.
That's a good point as well. My thinking on Alexei was he may stand a good chance of dying from a minor injury, preventing any chance of the line continuing through Nicholas.
Note also that the Romanovs have rules about morganatic vs. acceptable marriages, so the possible partners for a legitimate marriage would be potentially limited. Not that they will ever get the throne back, any more than most of the other deposed monarchs running around ever will.
True.
Some deranged British (or wherever they end up) leftist might put choose them as an assassination target a la Trotsky, which would end up embarrassing for all involved. Otherwise they eventually become tabloid fodder.
My thinking is, you get both -- Nicky is taken out by an assassination, which makes things tense for a bit before people lose interest, aside from coverage of his daughters and their romantic/marriage prospects. That work?
 
They might return but they would have no chance of returning to power or probably even of becoming a serious political force. After all, there are plenty of ex-communist countries that had once been monarchist. How many have restored the monarchy after the fall of communism? OK, one ex-king did become prime minister https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simeon_Saxe-Coburg-Gotha but even he never really tried to re-establish the monarchy. Anyway, his success was both exceptional and short-lived. In any event, the Bulgarian monarchists had the advantage that their king had been overthrown not by internal revolution but by a foreign power. This gave the ex-king a certain nationalist appeal for a while.

Monarchism has been a negligible force in Russian politics since the fall of communism--and not *only* because of the difficulty of deciding who is the "rightful heir." For that matter, even during the Russian Civil War, not one of the White leaders made restoration of the monarchy part of his official program.

You forgot Cambodia. The only former communist country in the world to date who shifted back to a monarchy after the fall of communism.

But I agree, the last of the Russian Tsars, especially that of Nicholas II so thoroughly discredited the monarchy that, while Russia has seen a much greater respect to its Tsarist past in recent memory, there is no support outside of die-hard monarchists (and the occassional ultra-nationalist) for its restoration. But hey, they're better off than many other pro-restorationist movements in Europe.
 
Top