Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Which was the most beautiful of Nicholas and Alexandra's daughters?

The court at the time considered it to be Tatiana, the second oldest, who lookest the least like the others. But I always thought the middle child, Marie, was the prettiest.

by Anonymousreply 17705/10/2013

In the picture at the OP, the children are, from L to R: Marie, Tatiana, Anastasia, Olga, Alexis.

by Anonymousreply 103/30/2013

This is a photo from when they were older: from L to R, Olga, Tatiana, Marie, Anastasia.

Olga looked very worn and drawn by this time--and Anastasia was not as pretty as she was when she was a child. In this picture I think Tatiana is the loveliest, though Marie is at a bad angle.

by Anonymousreply 203/30/2013

Tatiana was the most strikingly pretty one.

by Anonymousreply 303/30/2013

They all look pretty well-fed, don't they?

by Anonymousreply 403/30/2013

That Titty-Anna was tres jolie.

by Anonymousreply 503/30/2013

This good-looker was their great-grandmother:

by Anonymousreply 603/30/2013

Anastasia looked like a baby-dyke in the making...

by Anonymousreply 703/30/2013

Weren't they all killed when they were still pretty young or am I really stupid and ignorant?

by Anonymousreply 803/30/2013

Fuck the girls. The Czarevitch was darling. But to fuck him would have been to kill him, the poor little anticoagulator.

Such a loss.

by Anonymousreply 903/30/2013

Anastasia is defs gay and Marie looks like a school marm.

by Anonymousreply 1003/30/2013

Tatiana is weird looking.

by Anonymousreply 1103/30/2013

Another weird photo of Tatiana. She looks like a cross between Winona Ryder and PeeWee Herman

by Anonymousreply 1203/30/2013

OP: The one on the far left.

Funny how the Romnovs are cousins to the Windsors (nee Saxe-Coburg and Gotha), yet they were far more attractive. None of the trolls in the British royal family have sharply defined classic good looks (okay, maybe Philip).

by Anonymousreply 1303/30/2013

Tatiana looks like a young Margaret Hamilton here.

by Anonymousreply 1403/30/2013

Right there with you, R8. I thought the same thing.

by Anonymousreply 1503/30/2013

Tatiana had almond shaped eyes like her father, the other girls took after their mother. I think Tatiana has a bit of Kate Moss or Mila Jovovich feature to her. Anastasia gets all the press but she was rather dumpy looking and supposedly a spoiled little show-off who thought she was funny.

by Anonymousreply 1603/30/2013

It's funny how Nicholas II, George V and Wilhelm II all looked so similar as cousins. Victoria's genes were strong.

by Anonymousreply 1703/30/2013

How were Victoria's genes passed to Nicholas II, last Tsar of all the Russias?

Only by marriage, yes?

by Anonymousreply 1803/30/2013

Marie was considered to be the most beautiful princess at the time.

by Anonymousreply 1903/30/2013

r19: no, Tatiana was.

[quote]She was considered the most beautiful of the four grand duchesses by many courtiers.

by Anonymousreply 2003/30/2013

Olga was 23 when she was murdered; Tatiana was 21; Marie was nearly 18; Anastasia was 17; Alexis was 13.

by Anonymousreply 2103/30/2013

None were beautiful when they were older. The father was really handsome though. And they all looked like Queen Victoria (ugh) in some way - no surprise they were cousins. All royalty in Europe are cousins, kissing cousins, German cousins.

by Anonymousreply 2203/31/2013

Victoria was his grandmother, r18.

by Anonymousreply 2303/31/2013

Nicholas was not related to Victoria and was not a close cousin to Kaiser Wilhelm.

Fun fact: the closest living relative to the Romanov children is Prince Phillip. His mother was niece to their mother Alexandra and and his father was first cousin to Nicholas.

by Anonymousreply 2403/31/2013

they had a very dreadful dead. First the Bolsheviks tried to shoot them, but there where diamonds sewed in the girls dresses (to hide them from the communists) - it had the same effect as amail shirt and the bullets recoiled. They then tried to stab them with their bayonets but again they couldn't really perforate through all the jewelry. It took more than twenty minutes until they were dead

by Anonymousreply 2503/31/2013

Thank you, r24.

I did not think Nicholas was related to Queen Victoria but so many people believe this to be so. I knew she was not his grandmother as r23 does.

Yes, a maternal aunt was married to QV's eldest son, so that was just a connection by marriage.

by Anonymousreply 2603/31/2013


by Anonymousreply 2703/31/2013


by Anonymousreply 2803/31/2013

For true beauty, one had to look to their cousins.

by Anonymousreply 2903/31/2013

Tatiana was the most Slavic looking of the siblings. I suppose the court valued those looks more...

by Anonymousreply 3003/31/2013

Their great-uncle Serge was drop dead handsomest of the Romanov clan.

Consuelo Vanderbilt, then the Duchess of Marlboro, said that the Grand Duke was one of the handsomest men she had ever seen.

by Anonymousreply 3103/31/2013

That story is kind of absurd about them having to be stabbed? What? Were they so stupid that they didn't know to shoot them in the head? Sorry but it makes little sense to me. Besides, how many diamonds could they have had? An extremely weird story...does everyone believe it? Why wouldn't they have given them simple dresses, like the workers wore? I can understand in a revolution, that hatred runs high and the innocent get killed but saying they could not be shot because of diamonds?

by Anonymousreply 3203/31/2013

It's an old canard, r32.

Yes, the women all had jewels sewn into their clothing, but the net effect, in minutes, was that all were dead.

by Anonymousreply 3303/31/2013

I believed it for so long. It's a horrible and yet fascinating story and I'm a bit peeved that R33 has killed it for me.


by Anonymousreply 3403/31/2013

R24, you're right. I get confused with these convoluted relationships.

I think they all look similar because that was the "look" to go for in those days. I think George V and Nicholas II may have been 5th cousins, though.

by Anonymousreply 3503/31/2013

R23 - George V and Nicolas II were first cousins - their mothers were sisters (Queen Alexandra and the Dowager Empress Marie).

by Anonymousreply 3604/01/2013

Definitely Marie.

by Anonymousreply 3704/01/2013

I found this which explains the relationships and why Nickolas completely misread the situation he was in and really did not expect to go to war with Germany, and did expect his cousins in England to rescue him from the Bolsheviks. Poor dumb ass:

"Nicholas II was married to Alexandra, the daughter of Princess Alice - a daughter of Queen Victoria. Kaiser Wihelm's mother was Victoria, the eldest daughter of Queen Victoria. So Alexandra and Kaiser Wilhelm II were first cousins.

Nicholas II was the first cousin of King George V of England as both of their mothers Marie and Alexandra were the daughters of King Christian IX of Denmark. Wilhelm II and George V were first cousins because Wilhelm's mother, Victoria was the sister of Edward VII, the father of George V.

The relationship between Nicholas II and Kaiser Wilhelm II might be more direct if you go back to either Tsar Paul 1 or Tsar Alexander II through marriages between the two royal families of Romanov and Hohenzollern"

by Anonymousreply 3804/01/2013

Ah yes, r36, through the Danish line.

by Anonymousreply 3904/01/2013

[quote]George V and Nicholas II may have been 5th cousins

First cousins, their mothers were sisters.

by Anonymousreply 4004/01/2013

Consuela needed glasses badly. I can't see any handsome looks through all that gross facial hair.

It kind of sucked that their other royal relatives let them die without a rescue attempt. Same with Marie and Louis. You'd have thought that Marie's Austrian relatives would attempt something. Royals don't really seem to have anyone looking out for them.

by Anonymousreply 4104/01/2013

They were suppose to see to their people and they didn't. People have to be extremely unhappy to rise up as one and change a government.

by Anonymousreply 4204/01/2013

Marie as very pretty but Tatiana was striking and her look would have been perfect for the 1920's had she lived. The real beauty of the family was considered to be their fist cousin Princess Irina, who later married Prince Felix Yousoupoff who was one of the murders of Rasputin.

by Anonymousreply 4304/01/2013

There are two problems with evaluating their beauty. One, you can't see them move or their emotions.

Olga was intelligent, warm and open. She changed during the war. Olga became withdrawn and nervous. She was a nurse, She worked too hard and performed too many horrible surgeries. Her duties had to be curtailed. She had a type of nervous breakdown. Olga also knew how much her parents were hated at the end. She was very close to her father. Olga was religious in a Orthodox Russian way - more emotional. Nicholas had plans for Olga to succeed him if Aleksey died.

Tatiana was exotic looking. She was reserved and quiet (like her mother). She spoke softly and had beautiful elegant movements. Men of the time were attracted to her most. She was very thin and liked fashion. She didn't get so emotionally involved in her work as a nurse and was better at it - like her mother and grandmother, Alice. Tatiana was religious like her mother in a protestant "Victorian" way - both Germanic and English at the same time. Tatiana was expected to marry and move to England. She could have married David or his brother. Who knows.

Marie looks very pretty in her pictures. She was still very young (imagine these girls were so sheltered they were 2 years behind other aristocratic kids in their social development). She was the goof-up of the family and was called a tomboy. Marie wanted a husband and a family, she was a dreamer, fun and 'casual' in her relations with others. They say she fell in love with one of the officers in Tolbolsk. The guards liked her the best - she was not reserved like her older sisters. She would have stayed in Russia and married there.

I think Anastasia would have ended up looking like her Aunt Victoria of Milford Haven and her other Aunt Irene of Prussia. I would call it a horsey Princess Anne sort of look. She was lots of fun and a practical joke player. Anastasia was the closest to Aleksey and she felt his unbearable suffering more than any of his sisters. She told jokes and goofed around to cheer him up and distract the family. It worked. When she was in Siberia they said she gained weight and was getting fat. Alexandra was too concerned about her daughter's weight.

by Anonymousreply 4404/01/2013

Irina was elegant and pretty, but not very intelligent and had a passive personality. Why she married Felix I will never know. She had the fashion business in Paris after the war, which wasn't a success. She had Felix had a lot of money to throw away.

by Anonymousreply 4504/01/2013

Felix was a good-looking guy, and also was sexually ambiguous.

The were many stories circulating about good looking Felix in St. Petersburg at the time.

He was only allowed to marry Irina after visiting the Dowager Empress Marie, quelling some rumors, and winning her over to his side.

Felix had wonderful personal charm.

Go to AlexanderPalace.Org, and to find Felix's autobiography.

In on short chapter he writes about his sexual initiation by a wealthy Argentinian cattle rancher's son and the son's girlfriend at a resort in France. His first sex was a three-way!

I think I recall Felix writes he was about 14 at the time.

I believe Contrexeville in the Vosges Mountains, the resort favored by the Russian aristocracy, was the scene of this encounter. He was visiting there with his mother, Zinaida, who was tres jolie in her own right.

by Anonymousreply 4604/01/2013

"It kind of sucked that their other royal relatives let them die without a rescue attempt."

They tried it before, but it didn't work.

by Anonymousreply 4704/01/2013

Who is Irina?

by Anonymousreply 4804/01/2013

For r40 --

She was Felix's wife. Also the Tsar's niece.

by Anonymousreply 4904/01/2013

(19) Nicholas II was not related to Queen Victoria except by marriage. wife's grandmother Nicky II and King George v were first cousins however becuae their mothers were sisters. Empress alexandra and George vi were first,cousins because her mother was his father's sister. Nicolases paternal grandmother was a grat aunt or something like that of Alexandra's, maybe a distant cousin, not sure, but Nicky Nd Alex were only very very very distantly related except of course by marriage. Prince Phillip, Duke of E is a grand nephew of empress Alexandra. The children who were killed were first cousins to his mother. Prince Phillipmhimself, and hence Chuck, Willienand Harry are direct descendants of the Tsars throughnPhillips grandmother Grand Ditchess Olga, Queen of Greece. Thusnthe seniormbritish royals have always taken the Romanov murders very seriously. Both Betty and Phil were CLOSLEY related. Thismis one family tree you do NOT want to climb.

by Anonymousreply 5004/01/2013

Thanks, R49. Fascinating people.

by Anonymousreply 5104/01/2013

[quote]That story is kind of absurd about them having to be stabbed? What? Were they so stupid that they didn't know to shoot them in the head? ....An extremely weird story...does everyone believe it?

According to eyewitnesses who were there and who were interviewed years later, the victims who survived the initial volley of shots were running around the room screaming making it impossible to shoot them in the head. That's when the assassins began to stab them with bayonets to finish them off.

And same interviews confirmed that the daughters and servants had jewels sewn into their clothes, which were removed before the bodies were destroyed.

by Anonymousreply 5204/01/2013

I recently saw the Faberge exibit. It had 5 of the eggs created for the Czar, the most stunning was the Winter crystal egg, with diamond snowflakes. They also displayed Royal picture frames, model solders, and the like. Faberge's "Bread and butter" was obviously items like Umbrella handles and cigarette boxes, as the exibit was overran with them. Will post the photo I bought of the royal family in a faberge frame when I can scan it.

by Anonymousreply 5304/01/2013

I'm sure there was a fair amount of poking with bayonets to see if they were dead and to figure out why they bullets were deflected. I read an account that said the executioners had to leave the room as it was filled with smoke and toxic fumes from the guns. Once the smoke dissipated, they returned to finish the job.

Why weren't they executed more publicly?

by Anonymousreply 5404/01/2013

[quote]Why weren't they executed more publicly?

My memory isn't great but I believe the decision was made suddenly and it was done secretly because those supportive of the Romanovs (or at least of keeping them alive) were closing in nearby. The White army I believe - the Romanovs were being held by the Red Army in Ekaterinberg.

by Anonymousreply 5504/01/2013

Excellent memory, r55.

That's what I have read too.

The White Army was close and the Bolsheviks feared they might retake Ekaterinburg.

So the order came from Moscow: "Liquidate."

by Anonymousreply 5604/01/2013

No one was really sure what to do with them. Trotsky wanted to put them on trial. Lenin didn't know what to do. The proximity of a White army near Ekaterinberg led to a hasty decision to massacre them in the middle of the night like a gangland rubout.

It told the world how the soviet regime was going to operate from then on.

by Anonymousreply 5704/01/2013

You have to remember that the diamonds owned by the tsar's daughters were almost staggering to our imagination. The stones were probably 10 times the size of an engagement ring for a modern middle class frau. Picture a necklace with 100 such stones each. A girdle full of them would possibly deflect bullets, or at least slow them down enough to not kill the grand duchesses immediately.

by Anonymousreply 5804/01/2013

Do you think they were rapied first?

by Anonymousreply 5904/01/2013

r31 he looks like the Colorado movie theater killer.

by Anonymousreply 6004/01/2013

I really don't think they needed to murder the children. That was uncalled for. Was there any outrage in the press over that?

by Anonymousreply 6104/01/2013

no rape r59. Not that the assassins were above it, but the story was that they wanted to catch the victims off guard and surprise them, so as to finish them off quickly with as little mess as possible.

So they herded them into the basement in the middle of the night with the idea that they were going to "move" them elsewhere. Instead once they had them together they pulled out their guns, announced they were going to kill them and then fired away.

by Anonymousreply 6204/01/2013

I thought it was a toss-up between Tatiana and Maria. Tatiana was beautiful in a more elegant way than Maria, but Maria was beautiful in a more warm, open way. Reportedly Lord Mountbatten was very interested in Maria after seeing a picture of her.

I think I liked Maria best of all the Romanov sisters. In addition to being beautiful she was a sweet, loving girl that everyone seemed to fall for.

by Anonymousreply 6304/01/2013

They all need mascara desperately.

by Anonymousreply 6404/01/2013

I guess everyone knows the story of Anna Anderson, the woman who claimed to Anastasia. A lot of people believed her, but when her DNA was tested it was proven once and for all that she was not Anastasia.

It's hard to fathom the stupidity of the people who believed her. Not only did she not resemble Anastasia (except for the large nose) but she wanted people to believe that she somehow escaped being killed by the assassins. They were all herded into a cellar and shot at close range, probably hundreds of times. Anyone still moving was stabbed to death. Now really: how could anyone have survived THAT?

by Anonymousreply 6504/01/2013

For r60 --

Better picture?

Bing his images: "Grand Duke Serge images"

Handsome man.

by Anonymousreply 6604/01/2013

OMG OP, look at the size of Marie's arm and hands. Kind of takes away from her natural beauty.

And it reminds me of a certain portrait...

by Anonymousreply 6704/01/2013

As a boy Louis Mountbatton went to Russia with David - they met Marie. There are pictures of them at Peterhof. Victoria, Marchioness of Milford Haven was his mother and Alexandra's sister. Victoria was visiting Alexandra with her daughter at the time WWI broke out. She had to leave her jewel box behind.

It took 20 minutes to kill the girls - it was awful carnage.

by Anonymousreply 6804/01/2013

Reverse Mirabal Sisters (they were pretty Dominican rebels who got massacred by Trujillo's fascist regime).

Ask me which ones I feel sorrier for.

by Anonymousreply 6904/01/2013

Ask me whether I care which you feel sorrier for, r69.

by Anonymousreply 7004/01/2013

Well do you?

by Anonymousreply 7104/01/2013

I think it's safe to say we can feel equally sorry for any young children who get massacred, but that's just me.

by Anonymousreply 7204/01/2013

I read somewhere that they were raped after they were murdered, R62

by Anonymousreply 7304/01/2013

No rape, r73, but the bass player died of a heroin overdose.

by Anonymousreply 7404/01/2013

Mom was the true beauty.

by Anonymousreply 7504/01/2013

Google images don't work on DL, r75

by Anonymousreply 7604/01/2013

Tsarina Alexandra

by Anonymousreply 7704/01/2013

The Empress' last photo, in captivity in Tobolsk.

Looking kinda rough here.

by Anonymousreply 7804/01/2013

The dresses in those final photos don't look like they'd conceal diamonds very well.

Just sayin'.

by Anonymousreply 7904/01/2013

Were they raped? There's no evidence that they were. But the crazy Anna Anderson said that the Bolshevicks gang-raped them ALL, including the Tsar. Only the dying little tsarevich Alexei was spared. That tale comes from "Anastasia: The Lost Princess" by James Blair Lovell. Lovell swallowed Anderson's story hook, line and sinker. He believed wholeheartedly that she was the Grand Duchess, although she was obviously a nutjob. Another one of her stories was that ALL the royal family escaped the Bolshevicks and that their "exact doubles" were killed in their place. Anderson was batshit crazy, but her supporters figured she was driven insane by seeing her family assassinated in front of her and from almost getting killed herself, so they took her craziness in stride and believed in her anyway.

Another one of her supporters is Peter Kurth, who wrote "Anastasia: the Riddle of Anna Anderson." His book has one purpose: to make Anna Anderseon credible and her detractors ignorant and obstinate. Kurth is one weird queen; on an airplane he had such a hysterical fit f anger (he didn't like where he was seated and couldn't find his laptop) that he was booted from the plane and arrested. DNA has proved that Anderson was a fake, but Kurth will not accept it. He thinks the DNA was tampered with, that there's a conspiracy to discredit Anderson's claim, that evil forces are at work...he is quite the wack-a-doo, as are practically all of Anderson's supporters are. They simply won't accept reality. They want the fairy tale.

by Anonymousreply 8004/01/2013

If any of you are interested, and if you have an hour or so to kill, the motion picture "Nicholas & Alexandra" (1971) is on YouTube.

It's not 100% historically accurate, but close enough for entertainment purposes.

My favorite scene is when the Tsar's mother, the Dowager Empress, confronts her son in Kiev during WWI when the war is going horribly for the Russians and Russia is in utter chaos.

[ "Do you *believe* that, Nicky?" -- Irene Worth is superb! ]

Here's the film's trailer:

by Anonymousreply 8104/01/2013

What is the best book on this subject?

by Anonymousreply 8204/01/2013

The Robert K. Massie book is a very goo d starting place.

by Anonymousreply 8304/01/2013


by Anonymousreply 8404/01/2013

I always thought Tatiana was a real looker. Marie was beautiful. Her first cousin, Prince Louis of Batenbur, later Lord Louis !ountbatten, and still later the Earl of Burma was in love with her. He had hoped to marry her and kept her picture by his bedside till the day he died.

by Anonymousreply 8504/01/2013

Nicholas and Alexandra is Ineed brilliant. The movie is very accurate.. I am not aware of any hostorical inaccuracies.,although I suppose there are some. Massie's Peter the Great is a towering achievement, but the movie is a work f fiction. Massie's new catherine the great is largely plagerized and warmed over stuff based on research used by writers of much better ct. T g books

by Anonymousreply 8604/01/2013

I have always been interested in this story.

by Anonymousreply 8704/01/2013

For r86

by Anonymousreply 8804/01/2013

Here are the girls in color.

All very sad.

by Anonymousreply 8904/01/2013

Queen Marie of Romania hoped for a union between her oldest son Carol and Olga. The Romanian and Russian royal families met and the pair did not hit it off. Empress Alexandra wasn't doing much to encourage the union, she had no plans for her daughters to leave Russia and probably would have approved unequal marriages for them with Russian gentlemen. Alix and Marie (first cousins and related on both Marie's mother and fathers side) also did not hit it off, the flamboyant Marie finding Alix weird and shy. Carol did not prove to be good husband material anyway, he was abusive and unfaithful to Marie's next match, Helen of Greece.

by Anonymousreply 9004/01/2013

[quote] Why she married Felix I will never know.

Money, money, money and lots of it.

by Anonymousreply 9104/01/2013

I am Marie of Romania.

by Anonymousreply 9204/01/2013

Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song, A medley of extemporanea. And love is a thing that can never go wrong, And - what R92 said

by Anonymousreply 9304/01/2013

In the 1950s play ANASTASIA and the subsequent film version, is Ingrid Bergman's character taken for the real thing by the end of the story?

If so, I guess that's why the play has never been revived on Broadway.

by Anonymousreply 9404/01/2013

I knew Anastasia when I was Count of Freedonia. Hail, Hail Freedonia.

by Anonymousreply 9504/01/2013

They clearly did not have the hair care advantages of our time.

by Anonymousreply 9604/01/2013

In the movie, I don't there is ever a completely definitive answer, but the viewer is led to believe she is Anastasia. However, in the end she turns away from the life and runs off to live a new life with the Yul Brenner. Helen Hayes reaction make you believe this really is her granddaughter. Helen is quite good in this.

I read the Massey book a number of years ago. I liked it, but I think there has been some criticism that it is a little too flattering to the royal couple. Still I think it is a good start. I also read the Kitchen Boy a number of years ago. A bit of historical fiction of their last days. It had a fairly unlikely ending, but it is a quick read and gave a glimpse of the royal family at their last place of imprisonment (I am not sure how historically accurate it was considered).

by Anonymousreply 9704/01/2013

Has anyone ever seen the nude swimming home movie of Nicholas and his entourage?

It was shown on WPIX Channel 11 (a local NYC station) in the 1950s as part of a show on the Russian Revolution.

As I recall, there was some quote too from Will Rogers about there not being a bathing suit in all of Russia and the home movie proved it.

by Anonymousreply 9804/01/2013

I didn't see the movie except for a few clips, one of which showed a reunion between Anastasia and The Dowager Empress. In reality that never happened and most people who knew the real Anastasia discounted her as a fake. She couldn't speak Russian! She had a Polish accent! She had no family resemblance either.

I'm glad Prince Philip's DNA was finally put to some good use in discounting that nut.

by Anonymousreply 9904/01/2013

The sad thing is that for all their (Nicholas and Alexandra's) love for their children, they were in good part responsible for their deaths.

Alexandra by being such a bitch (let's not kid ourselves, unlike the idiotic Marie Antoinette, Alexandra was a meddling, extremely disagreeable woman), and Nicholas for being such a pussy whipped man (first by his mother, then by his wife).

Personally, I think that the Children, and even tho the three older daughters were young women, were completely innocent of all that happened and it was a murder most foul.

Imagine the terror a 13 year old boy must have felt seeing his father and mother getting killed before his eyes (Nicholas and Alexandra were killed first, and they didn't suffer at all), and then getting butchered with his sisters (whom he adored, they were an extremely close family). After being stabbed multiple times with the bayonets, he was finished by a bullet to the head at close range.

PS: The servants were innocent also.

by Anonymousreply 10004/01/2013

Yes - the movie, is only loosely based on the Anastasia story. Much of it is fabricated for the sake of drama. It is pretty much pure fiction and not really a biography of Anna/fake Anastasia. Ingrid and Yul run away from the claims of the Romanov legacy to start a life together, which, of course Anna does not do. Still, while they never happened, the Hayes/Bergman scenes are probably the best thing of the movie.

R100 - I think that is the criticism I read of the Massey book, that it whitewashed Alexandra's meddling a little too much. It stressed more how they couple loved each other and their children and glossed over some of their more arrogant moves that helped seal their fates.

by Anonymousreply 10104/01/2013

[post by racist shit-stain # 2 removed.]

by Anonymousreply 10204/01/2013

^ Well, excuse us for not liking the murder of innocent children.

by Anonymousreply 10304/01/2013

[post by racist shit-stain # 2 removed.]

by Anonymousreply 10404/01/2013

Ooh -- r103 got DRAGGED!

by Anonymousreply 10504/01/2013

R103 clearly prefers to lament the murder of five innocent children while the mass murders of other innocent, yet not noble, children mean what to him? "They were dirty and smelly, after all!" he probably echos...

by Anonymousreply 10604/01/2013

^ Do your research, the murdered Romanovs didn't murder any children at all.

Yes it's true they were a very autocratic nation, but actually till the last years of the XIX century, people in Russia didn't had it worse than in other places of the World.

by Anonymousreply 10704/01/2013

^learn to read, eh?

by Anonymousreply 10804/01/2013

The movie Nicholas & Alexandra gives a feel for the fumbling tsar, the domineering and crazy tsarina as well as the mystery of Rasputin.

It depicts the era very well, too.

However there are inconsistencies. The year of Stolypin's assassination is all wrong. He was murdered almost 3 years before the tercentenary. And the Romanovs did not live in a log cabin in exile in Tobolsk, Siberia. They lived in the Governor's Mansion. No palace, but you could call it a villa.

They also left out major characters like Alexandra's best friend, Anna Vyrubova.

But I still highly recommend it.

by Anonymousreply 10904/01/2013

You know like in England were children as young as 7 or 8 till the early decades of the XIX century could and were executed for petty crimes, in Russia they didn't execute children, and for a brief period, they actually abolished the capital punishment.

by Anonymousreply 11004/01/2013

[post by racist shit-stain # 2 removed.]

by Anonymousreply 11104/01/2013

What they replaced the Romanovs with wasn't exactly progress, I heard.

by Anonymousreply 11204/01/2013

^ Lol!! yes, more people died of hunger in Russia in the 30's than in the whole decades of the XIXth Century combined.

by Anonymousreply 11304/01/2013

[post by racist shit-stain # 2 removed.]

by Anonymousreply 11404/01/2013

I've never read anybody was raped. I did read it took twenty minutes and was a really fuck up. Part of the problem was the room filled with smoke. The bayoneting was somewhat attempted, but foiled by the jewels in the corsets. In the end, they were all shot, but some of the girls suffered horribly because again the jewels in the clothes deflecting many of the wounds to the upper body, meaning they had to take one in the head to avoid suffering. I don't think there was time to rape anybody. They took the bodies immediately to dispose of them, another ham fisted effort.

by Anonymousreply 11504/01/2013

"Brutal but still progress."

You're a moron grasping at straws. With anger issues.

by Anonymousreply 11604/01/2013

To the child murder celebrating troll, I bet you really pop a champagne bottle every time you read about the awful fates of the son of Louis and Marie Antoinette, the daughter of Charles I, or the awful murder of the infant of Caligula.

by Anonymousreply 11704/01/2013

R117, no one is cheering the murder of children. But all the children you cite who died horribly in times of revolution were heirs to vast power and privilege in social systems that had turned corrupt and ineffectual. Had they lived they too would have become the oppressors. Their gruesome deaths were a direct result of their parents' failures as leaders to ensure the stability of their respective realms.

by Anonymousreply 11804/01/2013

[post by racist shit-stain # 2 removed.]

by Anonymousreply 11904/01/2013

I am in the middle of trying to read the Robert Massie biography of Peter the Great, although have temporarily abandoned it. It's boring, descriptive but not analytical and padded out with lots of side stories. I don't get a sense of Peter the Great at all from it, what made him tick, why he developed the way he did. It's not even great on the details of his life - suddenly he's married, suddenly he has a child, without at any point it first being said that he got married and his wife was pregnant.

So, I probably won't be reading his "The Romanovs: the Final Chapter".

by Anonymousreply 12004/02/2013

I don't understand why, when things got unstable, they didn't send the Tsarina and all the kids out of the country. THey could've gone on some extended visit toAMerica or to school in the UK or something.Leave the Tsar behind to deal with his mess and get the hell out. But no, she was entralled by Rasputin, and they were a smothery family and there it is.

by Anonymousreply 12104/02/2013

[quote]I don't understand why, when things got unstable, they didn't send the Tsarina and all the kids out of the country.

I don't either, perhaps they thought that would be poorly received and only hasten what would happen. I thought Marie Antoinette and co. left at the last minute because they really weren't aware of what was happening outside their palace.

by Anonymousreply 12204/02/2013

They all bear a striking resemblance to Janelle on Teen Mom.

by Anonymousreply 12304/02/2013

[quote]I don't understand why, when things got unstable, they didn't send the Tsarina and all the kids out of the country.

Sending a royal family out of the country is like a captain abandoning ship. Sure, it is done, but it is tacitly admitting that all is lost and you are not to be respected.

by Anonymousreply 12404/02/2013

"I read the Massey book a number of years ago. I liked it, but I think there has been some criticism that it is a little too flattering to the royal couple"

Thisisctrue. It also white washed their anti semitism. I've actually discussed this with Peter Kurth, who guess with me.

by Anonymousreply 12504/02/2013

Of all people, Rasputin was NOT antisemitic, he even had a Jewish secretary/assistant

by Anonymousreply 12604/02/2013

I understand that the family leaving the country looks bad, but who gives a shit when your lives are at stake. At the very least, he could have sent his wife & kids away for a vacation or to "tour Europe," etc.

If my memory serves, in the movie, he went off to fight the Germans, and left wifey at home to run things which she couldn't do bcz she was too preoccupied with Alexi and Rasputin. If that was true to the real story, then Nicholas was indeed a horse's ass.

The film portrayed him as a weak, inept, entitled, bungling fool. His wife was also inept, but she was a stubborn, entitled, determined, strong woman. Just not real smart, and very paranoid.

Neither one of them had the vaguest notion of how to handle power. It's as if they were on their own cloud. You'd think as devoted as they were to the kids, they'd have thought to get them out.

Even the nobility couldn't have faulted them if the Empress took Alexi and the girls off to have him looked at for his medical condition, that was one obvious pretext.Of course she wouldn't leave Rasputin. It's almost as if Raspitin was an enemy plant. He couldn't have done more harm if he'd tried.

by Anonymousreply 12704/02/2013

[R. 127}

It would have been difficult to send his wife and kids anywhere in the middle of WWI.

by Anonymousreply 12804/02/2013

Rasputin was close to the Jewish community in Russia. They paid him money to him - he was like a type of lobbyist for them. This made Rasputin even more hated by right-wing politicians, the aristocracy and military. At the time of the revolution Nicholas decided to give full civil rights to the Jews. The legislation was being submitted to the new Duma session. This was one of the reasons the military and the Romanov family refused to support Nicholas II during the revolution, which can really be called a military coup as well. Nicholas was anti-Semitic, but his views changed over time. The government also needed a loan from America and the US refused to grant it if these rights were not granted. We don't know how much influence Rasputin might have had over the Tsar on the issue of Jewish rights, but it was one of the reasons he was killed.

by Anonymousreply 12904/02/2013

Robert Massie's most recent book is a biography of Catherine the Great, undubtedly the most distinguished Russian monarch between Peter the Great and Nicholas II.

by Anonymousreply 13004/02/2013

Nicholas and Alexandra had no illusions about their own fate after the revolution, however they thought the children would be safe. They all stayed together for Alexis. The family had always been extremely protective of him and if the family had broken up he would have certainly died within a few months. His illness completely set the agenda for the family.

by Anonymousreply 13104/02/2013

I've always wanted to see that old MGM film Rasputin and the Empress with all 3 Barrymores; Ethel as the Empress, Lionel as Rasputin and John, I guess, as the Czar.

Does anyone know it? Is it any good? Truthful? It never seems to be on TCM.

by Anonymousreply 13204/02/2013

I saw it decades ago as a tiny child! My Gradma learned to speak English from watching TV, old movies. As usual Lionel devoured the role. I remember Ethel as Alexandria, but not John. How could they ever cast a brother & sister as husband & wife. That's gross even for the Barrymores.

Didn't Alan Rickman make a movie about Rasputin?

by Anonymousreply 13304/02/2013

Ethel Barrymore's voice is supposed to duplicate the way Alexandra spoke (slow and quietly), her friend Elinor Glyn who had met the Empress in Russia and was the source.

by Anonymousreply 13404/02/2013

R133, The Barrymore siblings did not play husband and wife in that movie. Lionel was Rasputin, Ethel was Alexandra (no 'i' in her name) and John played a Russian count based on Felix Yusupov, one of Rasputin's assassins.

by Anonymousreply 13504/02/2013

Is it true Rasputin was hung like a horse?

by Anonymousreply 13604/02/2013

He died over 96 years ago, R136. You'll have to ask Cher.

by Anonymousreply 13704/02/2013

There is no evidence that the mummified penis on display in Russia is his. He was probably impotent in the last ten years of his life. There was no viagra in those days.

by Anonymousreply 13804/02/2013

R132 I have that film. Found the DVD in a bargain bin. Not very good, not very accurate, but is has its moments. The acting was not very good, as with many early talkies, they hired theater actors who really didn't know how to subdue their broad theater performances for the camera. eventually the Barrymores would be masters of the art of film acting, but not yet.interesting movie if you can find it. I think I saw it on you tube once.

by Anonymousreply 13904/02/2013

[quote] He was probably impotent in the last ten years of his life

How do you know this?

by Anonymousreply 14004/02/2013

If memory serves me correctly, Nicholas tried to seek shelter for him and his family by escaping to England but his cousin George V refused to grant him asylum. The reason being that the British government was deathly afraid of the communist stirrings in their own country and were worried that protecting the Romanovs would incite a communist uprising in the British Isles.

by Anonymousreply 14104/02/2013

If there were ever two people who should NOT have been rulers it was Nicholas II and Alexandra. He was weak and not very intelligent; she was a depressive (ironically her nickname as a child was "Sunny" and Nicholas continued to call her that), stubborn as a mule, and morbidly religious. Theirs was a love match, but the two of them were an absolute disaster as Czar and Czarina.

by Anonymousreply 14204/02/2013

Fun fact about the Barrymore's movie: it is what prompted the "All characters appearing in this work are fictitious.." disclaimer in films.

by Anonymousreply 14304/02/2013

The minor squabbles over the innocent deaths of the proletariat versus the innocent deaths of the ruling class notwithstanding, this has been a great thread. Fascinating.

by Anonymousreply 14404/02/2013

When I saw Nicholas & Alexandra the woman who played Alexandra, Janet Suzmann got on my last nerve! She was insufferable. And I want to slap both of them in the face, viciously and repeatedly. He was exasperating. What a fucking candyass.

by Anonymousreply 14504/02/2013

Their stepdaughter India

by Anonymousreply 14604/02/2013

To further illuminate the reason disclaimers are used in movies now, as per r143, it is because of the Yusupov Rule:

"" Yusupov and his wife successfully sued MGM through the English courts for invasion of privacy and libel in connection with the 1932 film Rasputin and the Empress. The alleged libel was not that the character based on Felix had committed murder, but that the character based on Irina, called "Princess Natasha" in the film, was portrayed as having been seduced by the lecherous Rasputin.[12] In 1934, the Yusupovs were awarded £25,000 damages, an enormous sum at the time, which was attributed to the successful arguments of their counsel Sir Patrick Hastings. The disclaimer which now screens at the end of every American film, "The preceding was a work of fiction, any similarity to a living person etc.," first appeared as a result of the legal precedent set by the Yusupov case.[13]

by Anonymousreply 14704/02/2013

George VI in Britain was prevailed upon to take the Romanovs in, but he discreetly declined -- they were very unpopular and he was worried about his own position. By then many members of European royal circles had seen the revolution coming a mile away and tried to warn Nicholas and Alexandra, but the family -- particularly the cold, paranoid tsarina -- refused to listen. Which also explains why they did not get out sooner. Denial.

by Anonymousreply 14804/02/2013

I loved discovering this guy in the link below in my poking around Alexander Palace dot org. An American black man in service to the Court of Nicholas II! Who knew?

There's a lot of really nifty stuff there. Click on "Visit the Alexander Palace Time Machine" at the lower left.

This site is like the Smithsonian. You cannot see it all in one sitting. If you like this period of history, you'll come back again and again.

An actor portraying Jim Hercules is seen briefly in "Nicholas & Alexandra".

He and another doorman are fully decked out in full and resplendent Abyssinian Guards regalia.

And the Southern Magnolia grandiflora tree seedlings were picked up by a Imperial Russian Navy ship on a port of call visit to New Orleans in the late 19th century. They were planted on the site of the last Tsar's new palace in Crimea called "Livadia." Today these trees are huge. You can search using "Livadia + magnolias."

Livadia was the site of the Yalta Conference by the Big Three during WWII: Stalin, Roosevelt, and Churchill. There were famous pictures taken of the three taken on the palace grounds. Roosevelt looks half dead.

by Anonymousreply 14904/02/2013

Can someone tell me how "royal" were the Russian royal family considered compared to other royals throughout Europe and why? I know the British Royals were more royal than the Portuguese Royals, I guess because the former was an Empire, but wasn't Russia also an Empire? Weren't the Russian dynasty older than the British?

by Anonymousreply 15004/02/2013

The Russian dynasty was on par with the other "top shelf" European royals, prior to the revolution. The general population in much of Europe may have seen the Romanovs as a bit too exotic but among other royals the Romanovs were top of the line.

Earlier in the thread a couple of people did the 'so and so is related to so and so, and then whosit is related to whatsit *and* so and so, and then whatsit is also related to so and so through the blah blah blah blah.

The more connections and the closer the blood relation you have to other top royal families, the more you're a top royal yourself.

by Anonymousreply 15104/02/2013

The Russian Dynasty was not on a par with European royalty. They were considered "Asiatics" by the Germans, Danish, Dutch, English etc.

The Europeans did marry into the Russian royal family, but not that many.

by Anonymousreply 15204/02/2013

Nicholas and Alexandra both had close relatives among European royalty. The grand duchesses were already marked out for marriages among European royal houses.

by Anonymousreply 15304/02/2013

You know, I think you've touched upon a bias or a prejudice, if you will, about the Russians. I think among the aristocracy, at some point in the late 18th and the 19th century, there was a conscious attempt to make Russia more acceptably "European," since the perception was that Russians, in some quarters, were a race unto themselves and very Asiatic, but not quite Asian.

Sort of like the Turks. OF course the fact that they embraced Christianity was very important to their level of acceptance to European upper classes although even in the advent of WW2 they were considered very exotic, not "normal" Europeans.

by Anonymousreply 15404/03/2013

R153 - there were actually few possible choices. Alexandra would not have wanted a marriage with the German or Austrian houses. Outside of Romania, Serbia and Bulgaria there were no Orthodox royal families. Great Britain was really the only real possibility. George and Mary were good friends with Nicholas and Alexandra, closer than people think because of the ultimate betrayal. They were seriously planning and hoping for a marriage between both families. At some point Alexandra realized that all of the girls might marry Russians and she started to make long-term plans for them staying in Russia. The Okhrana reported that Rasputin was said to be impotent and just 'watched'. If he drank as much as they say it's possible that could have caused it.

by Anonymousreply 15504/03/2013

[quote] The Russian Dynasty was not on a par with European royalty. They were considered "Asiatics" by the Germans, Danish, Dutch, English etc.

Stuff and nonsense. Nicholas's mother was Danish. Alexandra was German. The Romanoffs were barely Romanoff, they'd so intermarried with German and Danish princesses. The language of the Russian court was French.

The women did have to convert to Russian Orthodoxy, but most did so in a nominal sense. It was only Alexandra who ridiculously plunged into mystical Russian orthodoxy.

Someone who literally "did the math" figured out that Alexis Romanoff was about 1/300th Russian

by Anonymousreply 15604/03/2013

How silly gay men are.

by Anonymousreply 15704/03/2013

I think the girls could have married into the Greek Royal Family too, who were similarly orthodox.

by Anonymousreply 15804/03/2013

[quote]How silly gay men are.

This is actually probably one of the least silly threads on DL.

by Anonymousreply 15904/03/2013

Forgot about the Greeks...

by Anonymousreply 16004/03/2013

Add my vote to Her Imperial Highness, the Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna as the prettiest of OTMA!

by Anonymousreply 16104/03/2013

None of those girls should quit their day jobs with those looks.

Slap a babushka on anyone of them and you can see her out in a potato field.

by Anonymousreply 16204/03/2013

To be fair R162 the standards for beauty have changed since then. Remember, ladies did not wear makeup. That was for whores and actresses. I once read that bad teeth and pockmarked skin were so common in the Elizabethan era that a woman could be declared a beauty and still have missing teeth and terrible skin. Smallpox scars were even considered a sign of a strong constitution as it meant they beat the disease that killed so many others.

by Anonymousreply 16304/03/2013

It was very difficult to find someone on par with a tsar's daughter. In the distant past, tsars' daughters became nuns because nobody in Russia was their aristocratic equal. Peter the Great broke with tradition by wrestling power from the Russian orthodox church. Up until his time, the church held equal power with the tsar. Peter was a europhile who despised many things about Russia. Basically, he despised russian things that he didn't agree with, and idolized Russian things he did agree with.

Russia had been violently xenophobic before Peter. They did not allow foreigners to have permanent residence in Russia. Peter brought Dutch shipbuilders, and German and Scottish military people to Russia. He wanted to learn whatever he could from them. He also took a page from the roman emperors and dissolved the old Tsarist guard regiment and instituted his own of men who were strictly loyal to him and not to the state. He made people wear western clothing. He wrestled power from the old boyar families and gave money, land and titles to his loyalists.

Peter changed the role of women. Prior to him, women were secluded and lived separately from men in quarters called "terem" (which is no doubt related to the word "harem" from the Muslim rulers of Russia starting from 1200s through 1400s). Peter made women wear western style clothing and forced them to learn to dance and appear with men in public ceremonies. So the daughters of the tsar were freed from terem and nunneries, but still had to find husbands who were orthodox and were either Russian Grand Dukes or foreign orthodox princes.

Olga and her family visited Romania in 1914 before the war broke out. It was to visit the crown prince and perhaps arrange a marriage. But neither the crown prince nor Olga were keen on the match. There was a russian grand Duke named Dmitri who might have made a husband for Olga, but he was involved in the murder of Rasputin, so Alexandra refused to consider him. With the war keeping young men occupied with the military and keeping young royal women in their home countries pretending to be nurses, thoughts of foreign marriages were postponed.

by Anonymousreply 16404/03/2013

In that first photo, I'd give it to Olga.

by Anonymousreply 16504/03/2013

One thing I only recently realized is the Grand Duchesses were various shades of blonde.Maria's hair was the darkest.Tatiana was the closets to Alexandra's coloring, who was actually blonde that had a copper auburn tinge.There is a clipping of Nicholas's hair, he was a gingery auburn. Their hair photographed much darker.Alexis resembled Tatiania. After having the measles their heads were shaved and they had themselves photographed. They were are attractive-Anastasia did get a bit dumpy at one point,as did Marie . They often wore wigs but there is a series of snapshots where the Grand Duchess unexpectedly removed their hats and had themselves photographed with some the guards. There also is a photo of Tatiania and a child with her hair only beginning to grow out.

Olga had a broad Slavic face and a gap between her front teeth.Tatiania was considered the most beautiful and was the natural leader. Marie was a flirt, Anastasia the cut up. They all had their flirtations with various military officers but were so sheltered that even the older two seemed much younger than their years. Slept in camp beds, cold baths until they were 16. Kind of surprisingly they were allowed to smoke, were very athletic and tanned themselves on their way to their annual vacation at Livandia.

Marie was chosen to accompany N&A when Alexandra chose to go with Nicholas from Tobolsk. Alexis had injured himself sliding down stairs and actually never walked again.He had an history of daredevil behavior He was not well enough to travel and she was forced to chose either staying with her desperately ill son or accompaning the Tsar who potentially was being taken to be tried and she chose her husband as she felt she could help defend him.

The children and remaking staff followed a month after.The men were locked in their rooms and the grand duchess forbidden to lock their door. There are implications something may have happened to the girls or specifically Olga on a ship when they traveled to Ekaterinburg. She was withdrawn and grew very thin afterwards. Marie was given a birthday cake by one of the guards and caught in a "compromising" situation which resulted in a changing of the guard and apparently ostracization by Alexandra.

As far as jewels sewn in their corsets acting almost as bullet proof vests that is true. A documentary using two of the actual weapons from the assassination proved that . The forensic evidence showed likewise no one survived.Burnt fragments of bones found at a second site were proven to be Alexis and either Anastasia or Marie though photographic and but one skull found at the other site resemble Anastasia basd on reconstruction and photographic foresenics .

Lots of homosexuality in the Romanov closet. Uncle Kyril liked young soldiers, stable boys and bathhouses. Uncle Serge was a sadist who liked to dream up drunken naked maneuvers for his military corps. He was married to Alexandra's sister Ella, was blown to pieces by anassasin's bomb.ella retreated to the convent. She and other Romanov relatives were thrown alive in a mine shaft followed by grenades.

There are at least 2 photos of Nicholas swimming in the nude(rear shots). He was about 5'7" and consided to be in excellent shape.He had a Jewish and a ballerina as mistresses before marriage. A picture of Alexis naked was pasted in one of the grand duchess's photo their letters N&A discussed Olga's mood swings when Mme Beeker was visiting and in one Nicholas wrote he hoped Mme Beeker would not be visiting when he came home from the front during the war.Apparently they had an active sex life up to the end. Condoms were found in their room in the House of the Special Purpose.

Nicholas was only 1/156 Russian, Alexis 1/256.

by Anonymousreply 16604/04/2013

Is this the new GH thread?

by Anonymousreply 16704/04/2013

r167 --

Did you mean Uncle K. R.?

Konstantine Konstantinovich Romanov?

See the "Private Life" section in the link.

by Anonymousreply 16804/04/2013

Who is Mme Beeker?

by Anonymousreply 16904/04/2013

Mme Becker-nickname for their periods

by Anonymousreply 17004/14/2013

The most famous beauty during the reign of Nicholas II was Felix Yusupov in drag. He even is rumoured to have fooled the Prince of Wales. (Felix was Rasputin's murderer.)

by Anonymousreply 17104/14/2013

Anyone ever see a shirtless pic of the tsar? Hairy guy?

by Anonymousreply 17204/15/2013

I'd completely misread the part about Mme Becker. I thought it was a woman Olga had a crush on and became overemotional during the visits. Ha, ha.

by Anonymousreply 17304/15/2013

The Tsar's ass-NSFW

by Anonymousreply 17404/25/2013

The Tsar nude frontal

He also a had a dragon tattoo on his right inner forearm

by Anonymousreply 17504/25/2013

He had a six pack

by Anonymousreply 17604/25/2013

This is quite a find and it include 4 photos of the girls in profile.

by Anonymousreply 17705/10/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!