Candidate of Historical Sciences P. Multatuli convincingly proves the spiritual, legal and historical inconsistency of the renunciation manifesto. Modern examination shows that the text of the renunciation is a fake.

From a spiritual point of view

“Glorified by the almighty God does not need human rehabilitation,” says P. Multatuli.

From a legal point of view

Laws Russian Empire did not have such articles as the abdication of the reigning monarch. Lawyers argue that the document has no legal force. The manifesto of Nicholas II was never published by the Senate, as required by the law of that time, and its drafting took place without the participation of the Sovereign himself, as the bearer of supreme power. That is, the very fact of the Emperor’s abdication of the throne does not exist.

From a historical point of view

The totality of historical sources indicates that by the beginning of 1916, a conspiracy between the liberal-cadet opposition and revolutionary groups that had close ties with certain political and financial forces of the West had finally taken shape, with the goal of overthrowing Emperor Nicholas II from the throne.

Later, a headquarters was created headed by A.I. Guchkov, who intended to replace the monarchical current ruler with a minor constitutional one.

The conspirators' plan was to seize the imperial train during one of the sovereign's trips to Headquarters. Having arrested the Sovereign, it was intended to immediately force him to abdicate in favor of Tsarevich Alexei during the regency of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich, and in case of refusal, to kill him. At the same time, a constitutional system would be introduced in the country.

The author of this plan was Guchkov. The corresponding manifestos were prepared in advance. It was supposed to do all this at night, and in the morning all of Russia and the army would know about the abdication. All this was accomplished in the fateful February-March days of the February Revolution of 1917.

However, A.F. had his own plans. Kerensky, who saw Russia after the coup only as a democratic republic, which would be headed not by a regency council, but by a constituent assembly. Those. not a monarchy in any form, but a republic. And Kerensky made Guchkov’s plan part of his plan, because he understood that acting openly would not achieve success.

Guchkov established contacts with the highest military command: Chief of Staff of Headquarters, Adjutant General M.V. Alekseev, Commander-in-Chief of the armies of the Northern Front, Adjutant General N.V. Ruzsky, Commander-in-Chief of the armies of the Southwestern Front, Adjutant General A.A. Brusilov, Alekseev’s deputy, cavalry general V.I. Gurko. They played decisive role in the success of the coup.

The question of renunciation was a foregone conclusion

On February 22, 1917, the Tsar was lured to Headquarters by General Alekseev and torn away from the capital, where riots immediately began. The sovereign's order to send troops to quell the unrest was not carried out. The sovereign was captured by the conspirators and deprived of his freedom.

What is the paper that is considered to be a manifesto?

Forgery of the abdication manifesto. GARF, f. 601, op. 1, building 2100a, l. 5.

“The so-called renunciation manifesto is a fabricated fake. It was compiled with gross violations of pre-revolutionary paperwork, has edits, erasures, and was printed using different typewriters,”– says P. Multatuli.

The back of the fake abdication manifesto. GARF, f. 601, op. 1, building 2100a, l. 5 rev.

It can be seen that the paper was torn, i.e. was compiled from pieces of different texts.

It can be seen that the letter “th” in the first half of the text is not printed, but in the second it is printed clearly and clearly.

It can be seen that the inscription “G. Pskov" was typed on a different typewriter.

Instead of the title preceding the manifesto, there is the inscription: “To the Chief of Staff.” It was about the chief of staff of the conspirators. It can be assumed that this is Kerensky, to whom Guchkov sent a telegram that the sovereign had agreed to abdicate.

The Tsar's signature was made in pencil and outlined through the glass.

Nicholas II always personally drafted the most important documents. Therefore, the inconsistency of the false manifesto is proven by another document: a draft of the draft manifesto of renunciation, compiled at the headquarters of the Supreme High Command. The main text is typewritten. But contains hand edits. At the end of the document, words written in Alekseev’s hand are the beginning of a fabricated manifesto of renunciation.

Thus, Nicholas II never wrote or signed a manifesto of abdication! He was captured by conspirators on a train at Pskov station. Bottom and forcibly deprived of power in favor of the provisional government.

There was no renunciation!

It was not the tsar who abdicated the throne, it was Russia who abdicated the tsar.

http://xn----7sbbz2c8a3d.xn--p1ai/facts/otrecheniya-ne-bylo?yclid=5920620749295984060

The Minister of the Court, Count Fredericks, did not countersign the falsified “abdication” of Tsar Nicholas II

A forged signature on a form with typewritten text, which was never put by the Minister of the Court of Emperor Nicholas II, Adjutant General Count Frederiks Vladimir Borisovich:

Of course, the Minister of the Court, Count Fredericks, had an excellent calligraphic handwriting, honed by decades of service, which cannot be said about the signature on the form of the forged Manifesto of Abdication (GARF, f. 601, op. 1, d. 2100a, l. 5), uncertainly drawn in ink over pencil. The spelling of most letters and the endings of the signature do not correspond to the authentic ones:

Moreover, the form itself was composed of two paper halves, which had previously been carefully glued together with a narrow strip of tissue paper, glued to the back of the document along a horizontal line running approximately along the transverse axis of symmetry of the sheet along the typewritten line “... WE considered it our duty conscience to ease the cramped conditions for OUR people...” (GA RF, f. 601, op. 1, d. 2100a, l. 5v.)

Count Fredericks V.B. During the interrogation carried out by the Extraordinary Investigative Commission of the Provisional Government about the “abdication” of Emperor Nicholas II, he stated that he was not with the Emperor at that time and even before March 2/15, 1917, he left for Petrograd and was arrested.

There were good reasons for Fredericks not being with the Tsar at that time. The first was stated by the Emperor himself: “There is information that they want to arrest you. For me it would be an even more insult if someone were arrested in my house, especially my minister of the court. Therefore, you will do me a favor if you go to Petrograd.”

Emperor Nicholas II and the Minister of the Court, Count Fredericks V.B.

To which Fredericks replied: “It pains me terribly, Your Imperial Majesty, to leave you at such a moment, but I will leave today.” Fredericks left on the same day, and was nevertheless arrested in Mogilev.

The second reason why Fredericks had to go to St. Petersburg was the looting and burning of his own house, after which Fredericks’s wife and daughters were taken to the Horse Guards hospital.

Sources:
1. Antonov B.I. “The Imperial Guard in St. Petersburg”, St. Petersburg, 2001, pp. 257-259 (according to the memoirs of Count V.B. Fredericks’ son-in-law - V.N. Voeikov).
2. Rostkovsky F.Ya. “Diary for recording... (1917: revolution through the eyes of a retired general)”, M., 2001, p.203.

From a letter from Empress Alexandra Feodorovna dated March 2/15, 1917, we also learn: “They burned the house of Fred (Eriks), his family in the Horse Guards. hospital."

It is widely known that the abdication of Nicholas II from the throne occurred on March 2 (15), 1917, in a train carriage at the Pskov station. But why do legends still circulate that this happened at a station with the ugly name Dno, 100 km from Pskov? Maybe because of the desire to theatricalize the situation? “Russia sank to the bottom in March 1917.” Sounds dramatic. Scary.

Read it today interesting material about the Malaya Vishera station and remembered that this town, one of the points of the Nikolaevskaya railway, entered the history of the events of 1917 in the most direct way: it was here that the royal train was stopped under the pretext that further points Lyuban and Tosno were occupied by rebels (which, by the way, is questioned by some researchers and is regarded as disinformation).

Having decided to clarify some points related to this stage of the revolution, I was surprised to notice that different sources call the place of abdication differently: some consider Pskov to be such (as I myself always believed), others - the Dno station. Most often, messages of the latter type are found, sometimes accompanied by metaphors like “Russia sank to the Bottom on March 1, 1917.” Russian Wikipedia (an unreliable source, but often quoted and used by everyone on the Internet) also gives the palm to Dn.

There are also messages like this:
Today, March 13, participants of the mixed procession from Moscow, St. Petersburg and Pskov erected a worship cross at the Dno railway station, where the last Russian Emperor Nicholas II abdicated the royal throne in 1917, Interfax writes.

However, in Pskov there is also a chapel called “Tsarskaya” and erected precisely in memory of the abdication of the Emperor, which, as Pskovites believe, happened in their city. And who is right in this situation?
I wasn't the first to ask this question. Here, for example: http://my-my.livejournal.com/106492.htm l (pay attention to the comments - there are different versions).

But you don’t need to be a great researcher to understand where one of the key events of 1917 actually happened. Sovereign Nicholas II himself tells us about this in his diary ( in bold highlighted by me):

March 1st. Wednesday
At night we turned back from M. Vishera, because Lyuban and Tosno were occupied by the rebels. Let's go to Valdai, Bottom and Pskov, where I stayed for the night. I saw Ruzsky. He, Danilov and Savvich were having lunch. Gatchina and Luga also turned out to be busy. Shame and shame! It was not possible to get to Tsarskoe. And thoughts and feelings are there all the time! How painful it must be for poor Alix to go through all these events alone! Lord help us!

March 2nd. Thursday
In the morning Ruzsky came and read his long conversation on the phone with Rodzianko. According to him, the situation in Petrograd is such that now the ministry from the Duma is seemingly powerless to do anything, because the social-democratic party, represented by the working committee, is fighting it. My renunciation is needed. Ruzsky conveyed this conversation to headquarters, and Alekseev to all commanders in chief. By 2½ o'clock answers came from everyone. The point is that in the name of saving Russia and keeping the army at the front calm, you need to decide to take this step. I agreed. Headquarters sent a draft manifesto. In the evening, Guchkov and Shulgin arrived from Petrograd, with whom I spoke and gave them the signed and revised manifesto. At one o'clock in the morning I left Pskov with a heavy feeling of what I had experienced. There is treason and cowardice and deceit all around!

Dno station appears in the diary on March 1, after which Pskov is immediately mentioned. And we are talking about abdication only the next day, March 2, when the emperor was already in Pskov. Therefore, it could only happen there.

Colonel Mordvinov, who accompanied the Emperor in those February-March days, writes practically nothing about the Dno station - he only mentions it as one of the points on the way, first to Tsarskoye Selo, and then, after changing the route, to Pskov. The same can be seen in the memoirs of General Dubensky, Shulgin’s memoirs, and other sources. None of the eyewitnesses speak of the Dno station as the place of the abdication of the Emperor. Official documents This is also not confirmed.

Thus, by comparing sources, we arrive at the conclusion that the story of the end of the Russian autocracy at the station with the telling name “Dno” is myth. Beautiful (“sank to the Bottom”), repeatable and replicable, but myth.

But here’s what’s still unclear: where did the legend about the Dno station come from? And why, given such an obvious misconception, do they continue to repeat it (the installation of a worship cross at the station is further confirmation of this)?

It’s also sad, of course, that everyone forgot about the Malaya Vishera station - but its importance in those days turned out to be no lower than Pskova!

It would be much more appropriate to place a worship cross here...

http://brusnik.livejournal.com/57698.html?media - link

On the abdication of Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II
from the Russian throne and about the abdication of supreme power

The abdication of Emperor Nicholas II is a key event February Revolution.

Date of Nicholas' abdication

Manifesto of renunciation

In the dead of night on May 2, Guchkov and Shulgin came to Emperor Nicholas, who was captured in the carriage, with a ready-made project for the emperor’s abdication of the throne. But Nikolai himself refused to sign this document. The reason for this is that the document obligated him to abandon his son, which he could not do. Then the emperor himself wrote a manifesto of abdication, in which he testified that he was abdicating the throne for himself and for his sick son. At the same time, he transfers power to his brother Mikhail.

In the text of the manifesto, he did not address his subjects. But this is what is customary to do if you abdicate the throne, he only turned to the chief of staff. Perhaps the king wanted to show everyone that he was forced to do this and tell the people that this was temporary and he would soon return power.

Reasons for the abdication of Nicholas II

The main reasons for abdication were:
- a very acute political situation in the country, military defeats of the army on the fronts of the First World War - this led to mass protests, anti-monarchist trends appeared, and the prestige of the tsarist government fell every day;
– poor awareness of the emperor about the events of the February Revolution (Petrograd, February 23, 1917). Nikolai was unable to reasonably assess the full extent of the risk in the current political situation;
– units loyal to the emperor were unable to act properly in the current situation;
– the emperor’s trust in the commanders of his troops (he always relied on their opinion when Once again he asked their advice, they said that abdication of the imperial throne is the only possible ways save the country from civil war).
Many believed that the empire's participation in the First World War was a mistake, that fighting urgently needed to be stopped, but Emperor Nicholas was not going to recall his troops because of his brother George V (King of Great Britain).

Abdication of Nicholas II briefly

Before his departure to Headquarters on February 21, 1917, Nikolai asks an internal affairs officer about the situation in the capital, he says that the matter is under control and there is no danger to the authorities. On February 22, the emperor leaves Tsarskoe Selo.
The emperor learns that unrest has broken out in the capital from his wife, who claimed that she did not learn about this from official sources. And already on February 25, an official letter arrived at Headquarters, which spoke of the beginning of the revolution. Immediately after this, the emperor orders it to stop through the use of military force.

The army begins to use firearms, as a result, many Protestants were killed or wounded. On February 26, the Senate announces its dissolution; in a telegram to Nicholas they write that the collapse of Russia is inevitable, and the Romanov dynasty will fall along with it. For some reason, the emperor himself does not respond to these telegrams.

On February 27, units of the Volyn Life Guards Regiment in the amount of 600 soldiers joined the revolution. On the same day, the Lithuanian and Preobrazhensky regiments also rebelled. If in the morning of this day there were no more than 10 thousand rebel fighters, then by the evening their number increased to 70 thousand. The Duma was captured by decree of Nicholas II.

The emperor is expected to give clear decrees on the current situation in the capital. He orders troops totaling 50 thousand people to be sent to Petrograd, but there were much more rebels, about 150 thousand. The Emperor hoped that the presence of units loyal to him would raise faith in the emperor among the rebel units and resolve the situation. Thus, bloodshed could have been avoided.

On the night of February 27-28, Nikolai goes to Tsarskoe Selo to his family. But the emperor failed to reach the end point; he had to turn around and go to the city of Pskov, where he reached only on March 1. By the time the emperor reached Pskov, the rebels had already won.

The emperor was begged to carry out reforms in favor of the rebels in order to retain power in the country and stop the revolution.
On March 1, the emperor received a message that Moscow had already been engulfed by the rebels, and the troops previously loyal to the emperor were going over to their side.
On May 2, the text of the abdication manifesto came to the emperor, then he turned to his generals, who advised one thing - abdication in favor of his brother Mikhail, who should become regent under the young heir Nicholas.

He announced that the emperor had abdicated the throne in two telegrams. The imperial retinue said that such a decision was too hasty, that there was still time to change everything, they begged him to postpone the sending of telegrams and cancel the signing of the manifesto.

Telegrams about the manifesto of Emperor Nicholas II were sent to all armies on all fronts, but Rodzianko tried to delay these messages in order to prevent panic among the troops.

It is still impossible to say for sure what really happened on that train and what were the reasons for Nikolai signing the renunciation manifesto. It is known that Nicholas II had to make a decision in a hasty environment and the constantly changing critical situation in the country.

The emperor tried to save the Romanov dynasty on the throne of the empire; he intended to carry out reforms on the night of March 1-2, which could resolve the situation through concessions in favor of the rebels. The Emperor wanted to transfer part of the power to the Duma, thereby limiting his power. However, perhaps even then such a step could not save the country from continued unrest and revolution. But already on the night of signing the document, strong pressure was exerted on him by his generals.

The emperor himself and all members of his family were killed on July 17, 1918 in one of the basements of Ipatiev’s mansion, Yekaterinburg. Cold steel and firearms were used, as a result all members of the Romanov dynasty were killed in cold blood.

Was significant event for Russian stories. The overthrow of the monarch could not happen in a vacuum; it was prepared. Many internal and external factors contributed to it.

Revolutions, regime changes, and overthrows of rulers do not happen instantly. This is always a labor-intensive, expensive operation, which involves both direct performers and the passive, but no less important for the result, corps de ballet. The overthrow of Nicholas II was planned long before the spring of 1917, when the historic abdication of the last Russian emperor from the throne took place. What paths led to the fact that the centuries-old monarchy was defeated, and Russia was drawn into revolution and a fratricidal Civil War?

Public opinion

The revolution occurs primarily in the heads; a change of the ruling regime is impossible without a lot of work on the minds of the ruling elite, as well as the population of the state. Today this technique of influence is called the “path of soft power.” IN pre-war years and during the First World War foreign countries, primarily England, began to show unusual sympathy towards Russia.

British Ambassador to Russia Buchanan, together with British Foreign Secretary Gray, organized two trips of delegations from Russia to Foggy Albion. First, Russian liberal writers and journalists (Nabokov, Egorov, Bashmakov, Tolstoy, etc.) went to warm up to Britain, followed by politicians (Miliukov, Radkevich, Oznobishin, etc.).

Meetings of Russian guests were arranged in England with all the chic: banquets, meetings with the king, visits to the House of Lords, universities. Upon their return, the returning writers began to write excitedly about how good it is in England, how strong its army is, how good parliamentarism is...

But the returning “Duma members” actually stood in the vanguard of the revolution in February 1917 and entered the Provisional Government. Well-established ties between the British establishment and the Russian opposition led to the fact that during the allied conference held in Petrograd in January 1917, the head of the British delegation, Milner, sent a memorandum to Nicholas II, in which he almost demanded that the people needed for Britain be included in the government. The king ignored this request, but “ necessary people"were already in the government.

Popular propaganda

How massive the propaganda and “people's mail” were in anticipation of the overthrow of Nicholas II can be judged by one interesting document - the diary of the peasant Zamaraev, which is kept today in the museum of the city of Totma, Vologda region. The peasant kept a diary for 15 years.

After the tsar’s abdication, he made the following entry: “Romanov Nikolai and his family have been deposed, are all under arrest and receive all food on a par with others on ration cards. Indeed, they did not care at all about the welfare of their people, and the people’s patience ran out. They brought their state to hunger and darkness. What was going on in their palace. This is horror and shame! It was not Nicholas II who ruled the state, but the drunkard Rasputin. All the princes were replaced and dismissed from their positions, including the commander-in-chief Nikolai Nikolaevich. Everywhere in all cities there is a new department, the old police are gone.”

Military factor

Father of Nicholas II Emperor Alexander III liked to repeat: “In the whole world we have only two faithful allies, our army and navy. “Everyone else, at the first opportunity, will take up arms against us.” The peacemaker king knew what he was talking about. How the “Russian card” was played in the First world war, clearly showed that he was right; the Entente allies turned out to be unreliable “Western partners.”

The very creation of this bloc was beneficial, first of all, to France and England. The role of Russia was assessed by the “allies” in a rather pragmatic manner. The French Ambassador to Russia, Maurice Paleologue, wrote: “In terms of cultural development, the French and Russians are not on the same level. Russia is one of the most backward countries in the world. Compare our army with this ignorant, unconscious mass: all our soldiers are educated; in the forefront are young forces who have proven themselves in art and science, talented and sophisticated people; this is the cream of humanity... From this point of view, our losses will be more sensitive than Russian losses.”

The same Paleologus on August 4, 1914 tearfully asked Nicholas II: “I beg Your Majesty to order your troops to go on an immediate offensive, otherwise french army risks being crushed..."

The Tsar ordered the troops who had not completed mobilization to advance. For the Russian army, the haste turned into a disaster, but France was saved. It is surprising to read about this now, given that by the time the war began, the standard of living in Russia (in major cities) was no lower than the standard of living in France. Involving Russia in the Entente is only a move in a game played against Russia. The Russian army seemed to the Anglo-French allies as an inexhaustible reservoir of human resources, and its onslaught was associated with a steam roller, hence one of Russia’s leading places in the Entente, in fact the most important link in the “triumvirate” of France, Russia and Great Britain.

For Nicholas II, the bet on the Entente was a losing one. The significant losses that Russia suffered in the war, desertion, and unpopular decisions that the emperor was forced to make - all this weakened his position and led to inevitable abdication.

Renunciation

The document on the abdication of Nicholas II is today considered very controversial, but the fact of the abdication itself is reflected, among other things, in the emperor’s diary:

“In the morning Ruzsky came and read his long conversation on the phone with Rodzianko. According to him, the situation in Petrograd is such that now the ministry from the Duma is powerless to do anything, since social workers are fighting it. -dem. the party represented by the working committee. My renunciation is needed. Ruzsky conveyed this conversation to headquarters, and Alekseev to all commanders in chief. By 2½ o'clock answers came from everyone. The point is that in the name of saving Russia and keeping the army at the front calm, you need to decide to take this step. I agreed. A draft manifesto was sent from Headquarters. In the evening, Guchkov and Shulgin arrived from Petrograd, with whom I talked and gave them the signed and revised manifesto. At one o'clock in the morning I left Pskov with a heavy feeling of what I had experienced. There is treason, cowardice, and deceit all around!”

What about the church?

To the surprise, official Church she reacted calmly to the renunciation of God’s Anointed. The official synod issued an appeal to the children of the Orthodox Church, recognizing the new government.

Prayerful remembrance stopped almost immediately royal family, words mentioning the Tsar and the Royal House were removed from the prayers. The Synod received letters from believers asking whether support by the Church was a crime of perjury. new government, since Nicholas II did not abdicate voluntarily, but was actually overthrown. But in the revolutionary turmoil, no one received an answer to this question.

To be fair, it should be said that the newly elected Patriarch Tikhon subsequently decided to hold memorial services everywhere commemorating Nicholas II as Emperor.

Shuffle of authorities

After the abdication of Nicholas II, the Provisional Government became the official body of power in Russia. However, in reality it turned out to be a puppet and non-viable structure. Its creation was initiated, its collapse also became natural. The Tsar had already been overthrown, the Entente needed to delegitimize power in Russia in any way so that our country could not participate in the post-war reconstruction of borders.

Do this with Civil War and the Bolsheviks coming to power was an elegant and win-win solution. The Provisional Government “surrendered” very consistently: it did not interfere with Leninist propaganda in the army, it turned a blind eye to the creation of illegal armed forces represented by the Red Guard, in every possible way persecuted those generals and officers of the Russian army who warned about the danger of Bolshevism.

Newspapers write

It is indicative how the world tabloids reacted to the February revolution and the news of the abdication of Nicholas II. The French press reported a version that the tsarist regime fell in Russia as a result of three days of a hunger riot. French journalists resorted to an analogy: the February Revolution is a reflection of the revolution of 1789. Nicholas II, like Louis XVI, was presented as a “weak monarch” who was “harmfully influenced by his wife,” the “German” Alexandra, comparing this with the influence of the “Austrian” Marie Antoinette on the king of France. The image of the “German Helen” came in very handy in order to once again show the harmful influence of Germany.

The German press gave a different vision: “The end of the Romanov dynasty! Nicholas II signed the abdication of the throne for himself and his minor son,” shouted the Tägliches Cincinnatier Volksblatt.

The news talked about the liberal course of the new cabinet of the Provisional Government and expressed hope for the Russian Empire to exit the war, which was the main goal of the German government. The February Revolution expanded Germany's prospects for achieving a separate peace, and they stepped up their offensive on a variety of fronts. “The Russian Revolution put us in a completely new position,” wrote Austria-Hungary Foreign Minister Chernin. “Peace with Russia,” wrote the Austrian Emperor Charles I to Kaiser Wilhelm II, “is the key to the situation. After its conclusion, the war will quickly come to a favorable end for us.”

Instructions

A number of events and upheavals that occurred during his reign led to the abdication of the throne of Nicholas II. His abdication, which took place in 1917, is one of the key events that led the country to the February Revolution, which occurred in 1917, and to the transformation of Russia as a whole. It is necessary to consider the mistakes of Nicholas II, which in their totality led him to his own renunciation.

The first mistake. Currently, the abdication of Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov from the throne is perceived differently by everyone. There is an opinion that the beginning of the so-called “royal persecution” began during the festivities on the occasion of the coronation of the new emperor. Then, on the Khodynka field, one of the most terrible and brutal stampedes in the history of Russia occurred, in which over 1.5 thousand civilians were killed and injured. The decision of the newly-crowned emperor to continue the festivities and give an evening ball on the same day, despite what had happened, was considered cynical. It was this event that made many people speak of Nicholas II as a cynical and heartless person.

Error two. Nicholas II understood that something needed to be changed in the management of the “sick” state, but he chose the wrong methods for this. The fact is that the emperor took the wrong path by declaring hasty war on Japan. This happened in 1904. Historians recall that Nicholas II seriously hoped to deal with the enemy quickly and with minimal losses, thereby awakening patriotism in Russians. But it became his fatal mistake: Russia then suffered a shameful defeat, lost Southern and Far Sakhalin and the Port Arthur fortress.

Error three. Major defeat in Russo-Japanese War did not go unnoticed by Russian society. Protests, unrest and rallies erupted across the country. This was enough to make the current leaders hate them. People throughout Russia demanded not only the abdication of Nicholas II from the throne, but also the complete overthrow of the entire monarchy. Discontent grew every day. On the famous “Bloody Sunday” on January 9, 1905, people came to the walls Winter Palace with complaints about an unbearable life. The Emperor was not in the palace at that time - he and his family were vacationing in the homeland of the poet Pushkin - in Tsarskoe Selo. This was his next mistake.

It was precisely the “convenient” coincidence of circumstances (the tsar was not in the palace) that allowed the provocation, which the priest Georgy Gapon had prepared in advance for this popular procession, to take over. Without the emperor and, especially, without his order, fire was opened on civilians. That Sunday, women, old people, and even children died. This forever killed the people’s faith in the Tsar and in the Fatherland. Then more than 130 people were shot, and several hundred were wounded. The emperor, having learned about this, was seriously shocked and depressed by the tragedy. He understood that the anti-Romanov mechanism had already been launched, and there was no turning back. But the king’s mistakes did not end there.

Error four. At such a difficult time for the country, Nicholas II decided to get involved in the First World War. Then, in 1914, a military conflict began between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, and Russia decided to act as the defender of the small Slavic state. This led her to a “duel” with Germany, which declared war on Russia. Since then, the Nikolaev country was fading away before his eyes. The emperor did not yet know that he would pay for all this not only with his abdication, but also with the death of his entire family. The war dragged on for many years, the army and the entire state were extremely dissatisfied with such a vile tsarist regime. Imperial power has actually lost its power.

Then a Provisional Government was created in Petrograd, consisting of the Tsar’s enemies - Miliukov, Kerensky and Guchkov. They put pressure on Nicholas II, opening his eyes to the true state of affairs both in the country itself and on the world stage. Nikolai Alexandrovich could no longer bear such a burden of responsibility. He decided to abdicate the throne. When the king did this, his entire family was arrested, and after some time they were shot along with the former emperor. It was the night of June 16-17, 1918. Of course, no one can say with certainty that if the emperor had reconsidered his views regarding foreign policy, then I wouldn’t have brought the country to the brink. What happened, happened. Historians can only speculate.