
Remains of the murdered Romanovs 'authentic' - Four_Star
https://www.dw.com/en/russia-remains-of-the-murdered-romanovs-authentic/a-44700092
======
crshults
My son asked me the other night how long we were going to live which took me
down the Oldest_people[0] rabbit-hole on wikipedia. On the page for
Jeanne_Calment[1] I found this interesting line:

"She considered the most important historical event in her lifetime to have
been the Russian Revolution of 1917 and the execution of the Russian imperial
family, a view shared by many fellow centenarians."

Goes to show just how impactful this act must have been.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_people](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_people)
[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Calment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Calment)

~~~
TangoTrotFox
I can only imagine, but one thing that's really striking to me is how
incredibly long the Soviet Union lasted. There have been a lot of awful things
that have happened in history, but they tend to go as rapidly as they come
especially when it comes to major powers in modern times. For instance the
entire era of Nazi Germany was a mere 12 years from start to finish! The
Soviet Union lasted for 69 years.

And the USSR itself was a communistic nation where the government even
thinking you said the wrong thing was enough to get disappeared. And tens of
millions citizens were killed by this government in its efforts to maintain
itself. And then there was the fact that the economic system itself was
failing as evidenced from decades of completely unnecessary shortages on
pretty much everything. There was a joke within the Soviet Union that the only
thing that's permanent within the union are temporary shortages. Of course,
again, say such a joke to the wrong person and get disappeared.

Imagine living your entire life from birth to your sixties under such a
system. I find it remarkable how little focus is given to things like lessons
from the USSR as opposed to e.g. lessons from the Nazis.

~~~
myth_drannon
I think more comparable with Nazism would be Stalinizm. It didn't last that
long(although the horrors done to the Soviet people in that short time are
unimaginable). Most of Soviet Union's history and the Cold War is relatively
calm if I just subjectively compare to our times.

~~~
Fins
Mass slaughter started well before Stalin, so at least 30+ years. What
followed was calm compared to Stalin, or to North Korea, but nevertheless you
wouldn't want to compare it to saner parts of the world.

~~~
lostlogin
When are you saying the slaughter started? 30 years pre-Stalin takes you back
to before communist rule by my estimate, however there are a variety of points
you can measure from.

~~~
Fins
Slaughter started with Lenin (not even counting the Civil War), so from the
revolution to 1953 give you a bit over 30 years, give or take.

------
lostlogin
There is a great book on the Romanovs by Montifiore which covers the grisly
end and the events leading up to it.

It’s well worth reading his other books on Russia, particularly Young Stalin
as it covers the same time period and gives a good sense of the chaos and
confusion of the revolution.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/22/books/review/the-
romanovs...](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/22/books/review/the-
romanovs-1613-1918-by-simon-sebag-montefiore.html)

------
InitialLastName
> Researchers exhumed Nicholas's father Alexander III — himself assassinated
> in 1881 — to prove "they are father and son."

Alexander III was Nicholas II's father. He died in 1894 of illness (I don't
see any hint of assassination). The Alexander who was assassinated in 1881 was
Nicholas II's grandfather, Alexander II. Which body got exhumed?

------
gabaix
In Yekaterinburg lies the “Church on the blood”, an impressive edifice with
portraits of the Romanov. The museum beneath the church has many details of
their lives and how they got executed. It is a place not to miss and a
traumatic experience, for who wants to understand Russian history.

------
sndean
Somewhat related: I remember it being a little disturbing to learn that during
this period (and for a long time before) the leaders of the most powerful
countries were related.

Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, and King George V of
the United Kingdom were first cousins. Not to mention leaders of Norway,
Denmark, and others.

Considering that, it's almost surprising how _stable_ the time was.

~~~
rossdavidh
Stable...until it went completely bonkers in WW1. The flipside of "stability"
is often "unable to change course when something bad happens". The fundamental
problem in WW1 is nobody on any side willing to admit this wasn't working for
them. In France the and U.K., they could have electoral upheavals. In Russia,
Austro-Hungary, Germany, and the Ottoman Empire, they monarchies were all
eliminated either during WW1 or immediately after, in large part because they
couldn't change course. Stability is only a virtue if you're not screwing up.

~~~
flukus
> Stable...until it went completely bonkers in WW1

Even WW1 was stable compared to some of the all in brawls that plagued Europe,
at least you knew who was on which side for the most part. By comparison look
at the Thirty Years War:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War#Involvement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War#Involvement)

------
madengr
Every year in (private) school we watched Nicholas and Alexandra. The grade
school kids were sent out before the ending.

~~~
verbify
Why every year? That seems excessive.

~~~
madengr
Don’t know. Probably to instill in us the dangers of communism.

~~~
Maybestring
Of course, the liberal revolution in France took the same step.

They had trials, but it really just came down to, 'The king is guilty of
having been king.' The royal family is an existential threat to the new
government.

~~~
rixed
In both instances, there was a civil war with one side having the royal family
arrested, and the other side fighting to free them and reestablish the
monarchy. Eliminating the royal family imply there is no going back possible,
which must erode significantly the will to fight the civil war, no?

------
rossdavidh
Too late to disprove the several Anastasia pretenders, though:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Duchess_Anastasia_Nikola...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Duchess_Anastasia_Nikolaevna_of_Russia)

------
Melchizedek
_Nicholas II, his German-born wife and their five children were shot by
Bolsheviks as a consequence of the October Revolution_

They were not "shot as a consequence of". They were deliberately murdered
under direct orders from Lenin, Dzerzhinsky, et al.

They were all brought together in a room and were shot and _stabbed_ in a
process that took about _20 minutes_. Their bodies were then desecrated and
disposed of.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_the_Romanov_famil...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_the_Romanov_family#Execution)

~~~
lostlogin
He was a terrible leader. Racist and horrifically anti Semitic, aggressive,
incompetent as a military leader and in domestic policy. The number of deaths
directly attributable to him is right up there with most the other Russian
leaders. This doesn’t justify what happened to him, but certainly helps
explain it.

~~~
tzahola
>Racist and horrifically anti Semitic

Just like basically everyone else at the time.

~~~
lostlogin
To be clear, his anti-semitism extended to support of murderous pogroms. This
wasn’t common elsewhere.

~~~
tzahola
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hep-
Hep_riots](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hep-Hep_riots)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-
Catholicism_in_the_United...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-
Catholicism_in_the_United_Kingdom)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dechristianization_of_France_d...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dechristianization_of_France_during_the_French_Revolution)

~~~
lostlogin
The first and last are 100 years earlier and the second two relate to
catholics.

I may be missing your point but you don’t give any context to those sources.

~~~
tzahola
Yes, catholics. Why does it matter? Persecution is persecution, be it against
jews, catholics, protestants, muslims, atheists, whatever.

Also, you’re saying “100 years earlier” as if that’s a long timespan in
history. I know, the USA is not much older than that, but in Europe, 100 years
is nothing.

And considering that ~40 years after the last Russian pogroms there was this
thing called “the Holocaust”, I’m not really convinced that antisemitism was a
thing of the past in Western Europe either.

~~~
lostlogin
You are right, it’s still there and does periodically make it into the news
(eg the U.K. Labour Party is still struggling with anti-semitism this week).
[https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/...](https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/17/labour-
agrees-to-fresh-antisemitism-consultation-after-stormy-debate)

The cited persecution of Catholics was and is still undoubtably, but it things
happening around the turn of the 20th century in Britain really weren’t of the
same nature as what was happening in Russia, not at all. British weren’t
raping and killing Catholics in massive waves of concerted violence with state
involvement and approval and that’s exactly what was happening in Russia
around that time. 100 years is relatively short time but I definitely argue
that a lot has changed and the level of violence is declining. Pinker has some
good article on the subject of violence but which notably don’t say anything
about violence toward small groups, though say a lot about the larger picture.

[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/steven-pinker-
thi...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/steven-pinker-this-is-
historys-most-peaceful-time-new-study-not-so-fast/)

[https://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/pinker07/pinker07_index.htm...](https://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/pinker07/pinker07_index.html)

