The following article (click HERE to read) by Georgy Manaev was published in July 12th 2019 edition of ‘Russia Beyond’. Sadly, it is yet another negative assessment of Nicholas II, filled with the same nonsense, myths and lies, which have endured for more than a century now.
Below, are my comments regarding two of Manaev’s misconceptions:
The author Georgy Manaev quotes Alexander Guchkov about the Emperor: “Are we dealing with a normal person?”, yet fails to mention that Guchkov along with Pavel Milyukov, openly discussed a treasonous plot to oust Nicholas II from the throne.
And again, Nicholas II is criticized that his diaries lack “little to no information about politics, international relations or court intrigues.”
Manaev adds: “in other words, the things that should have been of interest to a Russian tsar during one of the most difficult periods of Russian history. Instead, about 90 percent of the diary is dedicated to his daily routines.”
Like a broken record, Manaev rehashes one of the most popular criticisms against Nicholas II.
Russian historian Alexander Nikolaevich Bokhanov (1944-2019) wrote:
“For more than 38 years, Nicholas Alexandrovich wrote a few sentences every evening in his diary. After the fall of the monarchy, both scholars and laymen began to study his diaries, interested to learn what kind of man and monarch he was. Sadly, the crushing majority of them stuck with a negative assessment of Nicholas II.
“Their conclusions, however, were based on his diaries, which in all fairness do not offer any broad historical conclusions. Nevertheless they have been made and continue to be made to the present day. In actuality, Nicholas II’s diaries are often nothing more than a daily list of meetings and events which allow one, fully and accurately, to establish only two biographical aspects about him: where he was and whom he dealt with.
“His diaries are a completely personal and official document reflecting the daily events, nothing more. His diary entries rarely reflect any emotion, and with the passage of time they disappear almost completely. Any kind of political judgement or evaluation are extremely rare.
“In keeping a diary, Nicholas II was not thinking about leaving a historical testimony for his descendants. He never would have imagined that his daily, terse, personal remarks would be studied for political purposes. Only during the last months of his life, finding himself in the degrading position of a prisoner, did he record on paper his pain for the fate of his dearly beloved Russia.”
Click HERE to listen to my interview, in which I discuss Guchkov and Milyukov, who openly discussed a treasonous plot to oust Nicholas II from the throne.
© Paul Gilbert. 12 July 2019