July 17, 1918, 1:30 a.m. You have just been awakened from a deep sleep after a normal day (or as normal as a day can be in your situation), and you wonder what all this could possibly be about. Unassuming, and hoping for the best you think, “This must be good news, after all, what can be worse than what they’ve done to us already?” They’ve taken your whole life away in a matter of months. Once a proud member of the imperial family, living a life sheltered from all the evils of the world, now you live in a small house in Ekaterinkburg, Siberia, with nothing more than the members of your family, a dog, a cook, a doctor, and a maid. And of course, a houseful of drunken Bolshevik soldiers, watching you every second, even when you need to use the lavatory. Even worse, night after night, they put everyone in your family in one room, and rape you one at a time, and force everyone to watch (Lovell 351).
So when you are pulled out of bed and given half an hour to dress and wash, you are strangely happy when you are given a reason for all this mayhem. “Unrest in the city required that they immediately dress and prepare to be moved to the safety of the sub-basement,” is what was told to your doctor, Dr.Botkin, by the soldier in charge, Yurovsky, and what Dr.Botkin relays to you (Lovell 53).
When eventually the whole family is in the basement, and you think all is well, Yurovsky says to you, “In view of the fact that? [your]? relatives continued their offensive against Soviet Russia, the Executive Committee of the Urals Soviet ?[has]? decided to shoot? [you]?” (Lovell 55) A Bolshevik firing squad enters the small room and reigns bullets on everyone. Now put yourself in another situation. It is December 11, 1792. You have ruled a great nation for many years, and have gone through many changes. On this particular day it is made clear that you no longer rule your country, and that a great mass of people with different ideas and political philosophies have taken over. Not only have they taken over, they have the fate of your life resting in their hands. At your trial, although you have an excellent lawyer, you end up being found guilty as charged of “conspiring against the people of France and? [are]? sentenced to death by the guillotine.” On that ill-fated day, you are escorted to the guillotine, and arrive there at about 10:00 a.m. You try to defend yourself, and say “I die innocent. I pardon my enemies and I hope that my blood will be useful to the French, that it will appease God’s anger?.” (Louis XVI, as quoted in Connelly and Hembree), and you are cut short as the drums roll and the shiny blade slices your neck.
The Essay on Project Management for Family Day
Company ABC is a small company consist of 100 employees in total. To facilitate bonding between the employees and their family and enhance relationships between co-workers, company ABC will make a family day that will be held in Chinese Garden on 1st of July 2013. In this family day, employees and their family will participate in some activities that has been arranged by company. Project Scope ...
(http://www.woodberry.org/acad/hist/FRWEB/TRIAL/event_trial.htm) Were these two terrifying situations really necessary? Did the Romanov family have to be put through such torture during the Russian Revolution in 1917-1918? And what about King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette during the French Revolution of 1789? Though there were many reasons that both events occurred, was it absolutely necessary for the ruling monarchs to be executed? Was the abdication of Czar Nicholas II, and the trial of Louis XIV not enough, and they had to be murdered? No, these two terrible occurrences were not necessary. Not to say that the actual revolutions themselves were unnecessary, when in fact they were, but the deaths of the former autocrats were not. They were not performed because the majority of the people in the country felt it was the right thing to do. In Russia, the people had a long history of political assassinations, and they began to become more of a common place activity than a last resort like executions are normally thought of as being. Although times were not peachy keen during the Russian Revolution, and there were many reasons for unhappiness, a portion of the “logic” behind the death’s of the Romanovs was based on false accusations and unclear situations, such as Bloody Sunday, the personal lives of the members of the imperial family (mostly Czarina Alexandra), and the so-called “Mad Monk” Rasputin.
The Essay on Events In The Industrial Revolution Lead To Major Problems
The industrial revolution has many events that have occurred between 1750-1830, most of which were negative effects on the people of this time era. These negative effects are leading to big problems like: over-population, diseases, life expectancy drop, high crime rates, homelessness, low education for children, and a huge drop in the literacy rate. However there were a couple positive effects of ...
This was also the case in the French Revolution, in which hatred of the monarch and his wife were not based solely (though largely) on domestic problems, but on the personality of Marie Antoinette. Also, a primary reason of the execution of Louis XIV was to instill fear disguised as nationalism, and was used as a contest between revolutionaries to see who would take over the country. Plus, afterwards, although there were many changes in both countries, neither one was happy (in fact, some felt worse off), and the executions which were supposed to solve everything, indeed solved nothing. Most people, or should I say, most Americans (because in some countries, such as Japan, suicide is often seen as an honorable and acceptable way to solve problems when you feel you are at the end of your rope), view people who commit suicides as cowards. Very rarely are they looked at as victims of a cruel world, because they are totally in control of themselves, and could have used a multitude of different ways to solve their problem. This is similar to someone killing an important person in their country because they don?t want to try other ways of resolving disputes, or they feel the problem is just to great, and the only way to fix it is to start from scratch (the Nihilist view), and not because they absolutely have to.
Over the course of Russian history, one begins to see the execution of political figures happening more and more frequently (and unsuccessful assassination attempts even more often), and can only logically conclude that they were done less and less out of necessity and more and more because they seemed like the easy way out. The trend of political assassination in Russia began in 1878, when a revolutionary was jailed and “flogged”, and a Nihilist girl was offended and “decided to avenge this insult and ambushed the general in his anteroom. When he appeared, she took a revolver out of her muff and fired but only wounded him.” (Hingley 31).
The Essay on Russian Revolution Of 1917
Picture living in 12 below zero temperatures without food and heat. These were the conditions for the Russian citizens during 1916 and 1917. People were starving without any food or heat and their children were off fighting in a war with over 1,700,000 dying men. What were all of them fighting for? The country? Why would a fellow human being want to risk his life for the country when the country ...
This incident sparked a new theory of “if you kill enough people, the whole system will go under.” The People’s Will emerged from this theory, and it dedicated itself to executing the czar. Their leader, A.I. Zhelyabov, speaking on the goal of the radical group, was quoted as saying, “It is our task to free the nation from the yoke of the existing government, to carry out political revolution, and to hand over supreme power to the people.” (De Wilde 1).
This statement sounds like logical thinking when one is feeling oppressed, however the only way they reached for their goal was to assassinate the czar, Alexander II. In 1879, they planted explosives along the track on which his train was supposed to be traveling, and none of the bombs fulfilled their purpose (Hingley 31).
They tried again, a year later, this time placing the bomb in the Czar’s palace, and their attempt, once again, failed (Hingley 31).
On March, 1, 1881, they finally ‘succeeded’, and Czar Alexander II was no more, although success was only bittersweet because his son, Alexander III only ended up abolishing all his father’s reforms, and “quickly stamped out any revolutionary groups, including the People’s Will.” (De Wilde 2) Twenty years later, in 1901, the Minister of Education was shot and killed, and only three years later, two Ministers of the Interior were also assassinated. After the revolution of 1905, the trend of assassination grew stronger. In 1906-1907 alone, over 4,000 people of all ranks of government were murdered by terrorists (Hingley 55).
This way of ridding the country of people who stood in someone’s way was not limited to revolutionaries, illustrated by Prince Felix Yusupov and others in their attempt, and eventual success of murdering the not-so-willing-to-die Rasputin. Unclear situations and events, the personal lives of the Romanov’s, and the controversial role of Gregory Rasputin, all led to the death of the imperial family. Although each of these things when taken at a glance seem to give good reason for the distrust and hatred of the Romanov’s, but when examined more closely, it is evident that most of the “reasons” were rumors and lies, or simply misunderstood, and are absolutely no reason for disliking someone, and definitely no reason for murdering them. One situation that led to many revolts, and intense dislike for the Czar was one in which he had little to no control over. In 1904, the Russian police had given Father Gregory Gapon money and permission to begin an organization called the “Assembly of Russian Factory Workers.” When members of the Assembly were fired from the Putilov factory in December, 1904 without explanation, the result was a “city-wide general strike in January 1905”, and the decision for the Assembly of Russian Factory Workers to “organize a mass march on the Winter Palace with a petition for Czar Nicholas.” (Zelnik 214) This “petition included a demand for a constitution, but its style was humble, and the general mood of the march?[when it occurred on January 9, 1905]? was more suitable for a picnic than for a revolution. They had their wives and children with them, and carried portraits of the Tsar and icons as a sign that they were still loyal to Nicholas and to the Church.” (Hingley 49) The peaceful procession ended up failing because protesters did not stay behind police barriers when ordered to do so, and the troops in the area open fired on the crowd, killing over 100 people. It was the responsibility of the Minister of the Interior and the police to control the masses of people, and they had failed to do so. The Czar had no involvement in the events of that day, which came to be called Bloody Sunday, seeing as that he was not at the palace at the time and had no way of communicating with those in charge. Nevertheless, “it was the mild and well-meaning Nicholas himself who received most of the blame and even the nickname Nicholas the Bloody.” (Hingley 51).
The Essay on Ivan The Terrible Russian Russia Nicholas
RUSSIA IN THE 1800 S Since the reign of Ivan the Terrible, the Russian Tsars had followed a fairly consistent policy of drawing more political power away from the nobility and into their own hands. This centralization of authority in the Russian state had usually been accomplished in one of two ways-either by simply taking power from the nobles and braving their opposition (Ivan the Terrible was ...
The people’s feelings towards Czarina Alexandra were those of unfamiliarity, scorn, and dislike because of her personal life, which very few people knew about. The Czarina had been a German princess, which already started her off on the wrong foot with the Russian civilians. Her pronounced interest in mystics and the like were looked at as tying her even more closely to her German heritage. Her mother-in-law, Dowager Empress Marie, hated her, and refused to hand over the customary things that go along with being Czarina, such as attendance at society functions, special jewelry, etc., and made Alexandra self-conscious. The treatment she received made her want to spend more time with herself and her children than making public appearances, and thus she was looked upon as being unfeeling and unconcerned with the Russian people. (Lovell 28) However, she has been described as “a misunderstood and unloved czarina, she who had such a deep feeling for the true essence of Russia. For what surrounded her- the world of Grand Dukes, the world of palace officials- was that other Russia, that Parisian, elegant, superficial Russia, with its enormous extravagance, its love of the good life, and its lack of morals.” (Anna Anderson, as quoted in Lovell 15).
The Essay on Why Did The Bolsheviks Appeal To The People Of Russia In 1917?
The Bolsheviks appealed to the people of Russia in 1917 mainly because Russian society craved change. The tsar was now a part of the past and Russian society wanted to try something new. This is mainly why the Bolshevik party appealed to the people of Russia in 1917. The initial triumph of the Bolshevik Revolution at the end of October, 1917 did not mean that the entire population of Russia had ...
Also, “charitable causes were of the most heartfelt concern. During the entire reign of my parents, my mother had long, serious conversations, often in the presence of my father, with? representatives of spiritual Russia. She did this in order to find out how progress and spiritual cultivation could be brought in the most splendid manner to the? simple classes of the Russian people.” (Anna Anderson as quoted in Lovell p.39).
Even worse for Alexandra, another thing that received her the scorn of the court circles was the rumor that she was involved in a lesbian relationship with Anna Viroubova, because she was one of the few people that the Czarina trusted and spent time with, especially while her husband was away leading his troops in World War I (Lovell 42).
Equally detrimental to the reputation of the Romanov’s was their relationship with Rasputin. He was a mysterious man, but the family put this aside because of his miraculous ability to temporarily heal Czarevitch Alexis when he would fall down or hurt himself, and suffer the effects of the hereditary disease hemophilia. Although his conduct was questionable when out in the city of St.Petersburg, he was nothing more than a close friend and advisor to the Nicholas and Alexandra. Contrary to popular belief at the time, Rasputin had not had an affair with Alexandra, and did not engage in wild orgies with her and her daughters. Anastasia said, “He never touched us. I saw him maybe once during the war. These terrible stories that you hear are the work of creators. He was a saint. He was God’s gift to Russia.” (Anna Anderson, said to Milukoff, quoted in Lovell 42) And although he was not skilled in political matters and shouldn’t have been advising the Czarina in the absence of the Czar, he was the only person aside from Anna Viroubova that she trusted and didn?t feel was conspiring against her. Rumors such as those that surrounded the Czarina are fit for lunch-time gossip, and are definitely not things that can even partly justify regicide. “Russia’s rulers always had the theoretical option of abdicating their great-power aspirations. But to do so would have threatened to undermine the entire regime, dynasty and all. It is hard to imagine a Romanov ruler openly agreeing to renunciation of great-power status, which would have entailed the closing of the Black Sea to Russian shipping, the resurrection of an independent Poland, perhaps even the abandonment of Peter the Great’s Baltic conquests and withdrawal from Central Asia?A Russian ruler who openly repudiated these ambitions effectively abandoned his claim to be emperor, and to rule- and, quite conceivably, the moral and political support of the gentry ?lite.” (Zelnik 209) Yet that is what Czar Nicholas II had done, he had officially abdicated, making their execution simply a superfluous activity, and merely another way for the up and coming Bolshevik party to seize control. After he wrote “?In agreement with the Imperial Duma We have thought it well to renounce the Throne of the Russian Empire and to lay down the supreme power. As We do not wish to part from Our beloved son, We transmit the succession to Our brother, the Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich, and give him Our blessing to mount the Throne of the Russian Empire?.”(Abdication of Nicholas II, World War I Document Archive) on March 15, 1917, he was technically powerless. So what purpose did murdering he and his family serve? Similar in the areas of the feelings towards the Czar/King’s wife, and the superfluous nature of the event, was the execution of King Louis XVI. Marie Antoinette was the wife of Louis XVI, and unlike Czarina Alexandra who was distrusted and disliked, Marie was bitterly hated. She was born in Austria, and although she was loved in the beginning, later on she was called such names as the “Austrian bitch” and the “Austrian whore.” In 1770, she married Louis XVI, who was then still a prince. She did not have to entertain any responsibilities of being the queen, and thus had no worries. She was admired because she willingly interacted with her subjects, and was so kind to the peasants. Marie would follow her husband in a separate coach on days when he went hunting, for sometimes peasants would get hurt, and often she would bring the wounded back with her for treatment. She loved the fact that they loved her, and it didn?t seem like she would do anything to ruin that. In a letter to her mother in 1773, Antoinette wrote, “As for honors, we received all that we could possibly imagine; but they, though very well in their way, were not what touched me most. What was really affecting was the tenderness and earnestness of the poor people, who, in spite of the taxes with which they are overwhelmed, were transported with joy at seeing us. ? I cannot describe to you, my dear mamma, the transports of joy and affection which every one exhibited towards us. Before we withdrew we kissed our hands to the people, which gave them great pleasure. What a happy thing it is for persons in our rank to gain the love of a whole nation so cheaply. Yet there is nothing so precious; I felt it thoroughly, and shall never forget it.” (Marie Antionette quoted in Halsall,”Letter to Her Mother, 1773).
The Term Paper on Running Head History Of Microsoft Internet Browser
Running head: HISTORY OF MICROSOFT INTERNET BROWSER History of Microsoft Internet Browser December 21, 2008 History of Microsoft Internet Browser Introduction Microsoft Internet Explorer is one of the most popular web browsers. It is a default web browser for the Microsoft Windows operating systems, preinstalled on all modern Windows systems. Internet Explorer supports such features like auto- ...
However much she enjoyed the happiness of her people, she kept an exclusive circle of friends, but ended up alienating others. Those whom were upset set out to destroy her by publishing all her faults in all kinds of propaganda, such as cartoons, songs, poems, magazines, and pamphlets. They made it known that she had many affairs and lovers aside from her husband, including other women, and she became increasingly less and less popular. Another problem people had with her personal life was the way she spent her money. Because the were so terribly off, having to wait in bread lines for food, every purchase she made to them symbolized the wasting of their tax money and hard work. Fake versions of an autobiography were published in 1781, 1783, and 1793, which said, “Catherine de Medici, Cleoptra, Agrippina, Messalina, my deeds have surpassed yours, and if the memory of your infamies still provokes a shudder, if its frightful detail makes the hair stand on end and tears pour from the eyes, what sentiments will issue from knowledge of the cruel and lascivious life of Marie-Antoinette?barbaric Queen, adulterous wife, woman without morals, soiled with crime and debauchery, these are the titles that are my decorations.” (Marie Antionette, found in Schama, used in Nong, Chantal).
This is only one example of the degrading propaganda that infiltrated French streets and made a mockery of the Queen. With so many terrible things in print, and receiving so little information from Marie Antoinette herself, people hated her more and more until they went so far as to want her to die. (Nong) On October 5, 1789, people broke into the palace during a march and tried to murder Marie Antionette. They failed, but the king was forced to return to Paris with the people, and he and his wife were held as prisoners. The revolution continued around them as the National Assembly stated many reforms and sought to satisfy the people. Even high nobility gave up their privileges for equality. On June 2, 1791, after almost two years of imprisonment, Louis XVI and Marie Antionette attempted to flee Paris, but with no intent or purpose of regaining power. He had officially given up, and posed little or no threat to the budding freedom of the French people. “The National Convention then voted to execute Louis XVI as a show of contempt to the monarchy.” (Hilton 11) “Contempt” is no reason to kill someone, as any sane person knows. In this case, a human’s life was simply viewed as the embodiment of all monarchies, and no one took into account the personal feelings of his relatives or friends. A trial for the king would have been sufficient, for he had obviously given up. In both revolutions, the people ended up going through a complete circle, ending up just as unhappy, and just as oppressed, however it was by different people whom had seemed so promising in the beginning. The executions of both had little or no impact on the final outcome of the situations of both Russia and France. The reasons for both regicides do not have a solid foundation, and I think both actions were done hastily with little thought to what they would accomplish, and how they would help the plight of the people in both cases.
Bibliography:
“Abdication of Nicholas II.” 14 May 1996. 7 March 2000. Microsoft Internet Explorer. De Wilde, Geoffrey Michael. “The People’s Will.” 9 April 2000. Microsoft Internet
Explorer. Halsall, Paul. “Modern History Source Book: Edmund Burke: The Death of Marie Antoinette.” August 1997. 28 March 2000. Microsoft Internet Explorer. Halsall, Paul. “Modern History Sourcebook: Marie Antoinette, Letter to Her Mother.” November 1998. 28 March 2000. Microsoft Internet Explorer. Hilton, Rodney. “The French Revolution. 7 March 2000. Microsoft Internet Explorer. Hingley, Ronald. A People in Turmoil: Revolutions in Russia. England: The Bodley Head Ltd, 1970. Lewis, Gwynne. “The People and the French Revolution.” 28 March 2000. Microsoft Internet Explorer Lovell, James Blair. Anastasia: The Lost Princess. Washington, DC: Regnery Gateway. 1991. Nong, Chantal. “Marie Antoinette.” 24 March 2000. Microsoft Internet Explorer. “Trial and Execution of Lous XVI.” 11 April 2000. Microsoft Internet Explorer http://www.woodberry.org/acad/hist/FRWEB/TRIAL/event_trial.htm> Zelnik, Reginald E. Russia: A History of Reform: Revolutionary Russia. New York: Oxford University Press. 1997.
