Nicholas II, son of Alexander III and Princess Dagmar of Denmark, is one
of those tantalising personalities whom one knows to be in themselves
far removed from subtlety, yet whom one cannot honestly pretend to
understand. He came to the throne an unknown man, eagerly scrutinised by
every moderate reformer in Russia. He departs from it with his
personality and actions still largely enveloped in mystery. This
obscurity is, as I said, not due to any depth or subtlety in the mind of
the Tsar; it is due rather to the weakness of his character. Two sets of
influences surrounded him, bending to their will his frail personality
and substituting their cupidity or prejudice for his native impulses.
The inner circle was that of his family, in which his mother and uncles
were the leading and most mischievous figures. The outer circle was the
ring of adventurers or reactionaries whom the strength of his older
relatives or the febrility of his own character invested successively
with ministerial power. Beyond these, again, were the religious
charlatans who at times preyed upon the superstition of the Tsar and
Tsarina, the great body of ecclesiastical and other officers whose
interest it was to maintain the existing system, and the doctrinaire
conservatives who, with purblind eyes, insisted upon the isolation of
Russia from the progress of the world. Through this maze of intrigue and
influence it is difficult to reach the personality of Nicholas II with
confidence, and the fierce partisianship of writers on both sides in the
great struggle increases our task of disentangling the precise parts in
the final catastrophe.
It seems, however, to be an error to regard the last of the Romanoffs as
a mere puppet, a tearful and hysterical implement, of the reactionary
influences which surrounded him. Nicholas had not the robustness of his
father, whose dwarf intellect had been lodged in the frame of a Russian
giant, but he was stronger than many literary portraits of him suggest
to us. His education had been severely controlled. Distinguished experts
had taught him those branches of culture--law, history, and political
economy--which were deemed necessary in a successor of Alexander III,
and a rigorous physical training had braced the comparative feebleness
of his person. He swam and rowed with skill, he played tennis and
hunted, and throughout his reign he loved a long walk, often of ten or
fifteen miles, and would at times burden himself with all the equipment
of a common infantryman. It is said that the sabre-cut on the head which
he received from a Japanese fanatic in 1891, when he made a tour of the
Empire and further Asia, injured his brain and led to nervous
instability; but this is one of the many statements of revolutionary
writers which have not been checked by sober criticism. He came to the
throne in 1894, a cool, self-possessed, carefully-educated young man of
twenty-six, and some hope was excited in the breast of moderate Russian
liberalism.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account