It is no longer a secret for anyone that the history of Russia has been distorted. This is especially true for the great people of our country. Who are presented to us in the form of tyrants, crazy or weak-willed people. One of the most slandered rulers is Nicholas II.
However, if we look at the numbers, we will see that much of what we know about the last king is a lie.
In 1894, at the beginning of the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, Russia had 122 million inhabitants. 20 years later, on the eve of World War I, its population increased by more than 50 million; thus, in Tsarist Russia the population increased by 2,400,000 per year. If the revolution had not happened in 1917, by 1959 its population should have reached 275,000,000.
Unlike modern democracies, Imperial Russia built its policy not only on deficit-free budgets, but also on the principle of significant accumulation of gold reserves. Despite this, state revenues from 1.410.000.000 rubles in 1897, without the slightest increase in the tax burden, steadily grew, while government spending remained more or less at the same level.
Over the last 10 years before the First World War, the excess of state revenues over expenditures was expressed in the amount of 2.400.000.000 rubles. This figure seems all the more impressive since during the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, railway tariffs were lowered and redemption payments for land that were transferred to the peasants from their former landowners in 1861, and in 1914, with the outbreak of war, and all types of drinking taxes, were canceled.
During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, by the law of 1896, a gold currency was introduced in Russia, and the State Bank was allowed to issue 300,000,000 rubles in credit notes unsecured with gold reserves. But the government not only never exercised this right, but, on the contrary, ensured the paper circulation of gold cash by more than 100%, namely: by the end of July 1914, credit notes were in circulation in the amount of 1.633.000.000 rubles, while the gold reserve in Russia it was equal to 1.604.000.000 rubles, and in foreign banks 141.000.000 rubles.
Sustainability money circulation was such that even during the Russo-Japanese War, accompanied by widespread revolutionary unrest within the country, the exchange of credit notes for gold was not suspended.
In Russia, taxes, before the First World War, were the lowest in the whole world.
The burden of direct taxes in Russia was almost four times less than in France, more than four times less than in Germany and 8.5 times less than in England. The burden of indirect taxes in Russia was on average half that in Austria, France, Germany and England.
The total amount of taxes per capita in Russia was more than half as much as in Austria, France and Germany and more than four times less than in England.
Between 1890 and 1913 Russian industry quadrupled its productivity. Her income was not only almost equal to the income received from agriculture, but goods covered almost 4/5 of the domestic demand for manufactured goods.
Over the last four years before World War I, the number of newly established joint stock companies increased by 132%, and the capital invested in them almost quadrupled.
In 1914, there were 2,236,000,000 rubles in deposits in the State Savings Bank.
The amount of deposits and equity in small credit institutions (on a cooperative basis) was in 1894 about 70,000,000 rubles; in 1913 - about 620,000,000 rubles (an increase of 800%), and by January 1, 1917 - 1,200,000,000 rubles.
On the eve of the revolution, Russian agriculture was in full bloom. In the two decades leading up to the 1914-18 war, grain harvest doubled. In 1913, in Russia, the yield of the main cereals was 1/3 higher than that of Argentina, Canada and the United Kingdom. States combined.
During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, Russia was the main breadwinner Western Europe.
Russia supplied 50% of the world import of eggs.
In the same period, sugar consumption per inhabitant increased from 4 to 9 kg. in year.
On the eve of World War I, Russia produced 80% of the world's flax production.
Thanks to the large irrigation work in Turkestan, undertaken during the reign of the Emperor Alexander III, the cotton harvest in 1913 covered all the annual needs of the Russian textile industry. The latter doubled its production between 1894 and 1911.
The railway network in Russia covered 74,000 versts (one verst equals 1,067 km), of which the Great Siberian Way (8,000 versts) was the longest in the world.
In 1916, i.e. in the midst of the war, more than 2,000 miles of railways were built, which connected the Arctic Ocean (port of Romanovsk) with the center of Russia.
In Tsarist Russia in the period from 1880 to 1917, i.e. in 37 years, 58.251 km were built. For 38 years of Soviet power, i.e. by the end of 1956, only 36,250 km had been built. roads.
On the eve of the 1914-18 war. the net income of the state railways covered 83% of the annual interest and the amortization of the state debt. In other words, the payment of debts, both internal and external, was provided in a proportion of more than 4/5 by the income alone that russian state from the operation of their railways.
It should be added that the Russians railways, in comparison with others, for passengers were the cheapest and most comfortable in the world.
The industrial development in the Russian Empire was naturally accompanied by a significant increase in the number of factory workers, whose economic well-being, as well as the protection of their life and health, were the subject of special concerns of the Imperial government.
It should be noted that it was in Imperial Russia, and moreover in the 18th century, during the reign of Empress Catherine II (1762-1796), for the first time in the whole world, that laws on working conditions were issued: the labor of women and children was prohibited, in factories a 10-hour working day was set, etc. It is characteristic that the code of Empress Catherine regulating child and female labor, printed in French and latin, was banned for promulgation in France and England as "seditious".
During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, before the convocation of the 1st State Duma, special laws were issued to ensure the safety of workers in the mining industry, on the railways and in enterprises that are especially dangerous for the life and health of workers.
Child labor under the age of 12 was prohibited, and minors and females could not be hired for factory work between 9 pm and 5 am.
The amount of penalty deductions could not exceed one third of the salary, and each penalty had to be approved by the factory inspector. Penalty money went to a special fund designed to meet the needs of the workers themselves.
In 1882, a special law regulated the work of children from 12 to 15 years old. In 1903, workers' elders were introduced, who were elected by the factory workers of the respective shops. The existence of workers' unions was recognized by law in 1906.
At that time, the Imperial social legislation was undoubtedly the most progressive in the world. This prompted Taft, the then President of the Union. States, two years before the 1st World War, to publicly declare, in the presence of several Russian dignitaries: "Your Emperor has created such perfect working legislation that no democratic state can boast of."
During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, public education reached extraordinary development. In less than 20 years, loans allocated to the Ministry of Public Education, from 25.2 mil. rubles increased to 161.2 mil. This did not include the budgets of schools that received their loans from other sources (military schools, technical schools), or supported by local self-government bodies (zemstvos, cities), whose loans for public education increased from 70,000,000 rubles. in 1894 to 300,000,000 rubles. in 1913
At the beginning of 1913, the total budget of public education in Russia at that time reached a colossal figure, namely 1/2 billion rubles in gold.
Initial training was free of charge by law, and from 1908 it became compulsory. Since this year, about 10,000 schools have been opened annually. In 1913 their number exceeded 130,000.
By the number of women enrolled in higher education educational institutions, Russia ranked first in Europe in the twentieth century, if not in the whole world.
The reign of Nicholas II was the period of the highest rates of economic growth in the history of Russia. For 1880-1910 the growth rate of Russian industrial production exceeded 9% per year. According to this indicator, Russia came out on top in the world, ahead of even the rapidly developing United States of America (although it should be noted that on this issue different economists give different assessments, some put the Russian Empire first, others - the United States, but the fact that the pace growth rates were comparable - an indisputable fact). In the production of the most important agricultural crops, Russia has come out on top in the world, growing more than half of the rye produced in the world, more than a quarter of wheat, oats and barley, and more than a third of potatoes. Russia has become the main exporter of agricultural products, the first "granary of Europe". It accounted for 2/5 of all world exports of peasant products.
The successes in agricultural production were the result of historical events: the abolition of serfdom in 1861 by Alexander II and the Stolypin land reform during the reign of Nicholas II, as a result of which more than 80% of the arable land was in the hands of the peasants, and almost all of it in the Asian part. The area of \u200b\u200bthe landowners' lands was steadily declining. The granting of the right to freely dispose of their land to the peasants and the abolition of communities was of enormous state significance, the benefits of which, first of all, the peasants themselves were aware.
The autocratic form of government did not impede Russia's economic progress. According to the manifesto on October 17, 1905, the population of Russia received the right to personal inviolability, freedom of speech, press, assembly and association. Political parties grew in the country, thousands were published periodicals... Parliament was elected by free expression - The State Duma... Russia was becoming a legal state - the judiciary was practically separated from the executive.
The rapid development of the level of industrial and agricultural production and a positive trade balance allowed Russia to have a stable gold convertible currency. The emperor attached great importance to the development of railways. Even in his youth, he participated in the laying of the famous Siberian road.
During the reign of Nicholas II, the best working legislation for those times was created in Russia, providing rationing of working hours, the selection of workers' elders, remuneration in case of accidents at work, compulsory insurance of workers against illness, disability and old age. The emperor actively contributed to the development of Russian culture, art, science, reforms of the army and navy.
All these achievements are economic and social development Russia are the result of natural historical process development of Russia and are objectively associated with the 300th anniversary of the reign of the House of Romanov.
French economist Teri wrote: "No European nation has achieved similar results."
The myth is that the workers were very poor.
1. Workers. The average wage of a worker in Russia was 37.5 rubles. Let's multiply this amount by 1282.29 (the ratio of the exchange rate of the tsarist ruble to the current one) and we get the amount of 48,085 thousand rubles at the modern conversion.
2. Janitor 18 rubles or 23,081 rubles. on modern money
3. Second lieutenant (modern analogue - lieutenant) 70 rubles. or 89 760 p. on modern money
4. Policeman (ordinary police officer) 20, 5 p. or 26 287 p. on modern money
5. Workers (Petersburg). It is interesting that the average salary in St. Petersburg was less and amounted to 22 rubles 53 kopecks by 1914. Multiply this amount by 1282.29 and get 28890 Russian rubles.
6.Kukhka 5 - 8 rubles. or 6.5.-10 thousand for modern money
7. Primary school teacher 25 p. or 32050 p. on modern money
8. Gymnasium teacher 85 rub. or 108 970 p. on modern money
9 .. Senior janitor 40 p. or 51,297 p. on modern money
10..Camming overseer (modern analogue - precinct) 50 rub. or 64 115 for modern money
11. Paramedic 40 rub. or 51280 p.
12. Colonel 325 rub. or 416,744 p. on modern money
13. Collegiate assessor (middle class official) 62 rubles. or 79,502 p. on modern money
14. Privy councilor (high-class official) 500 or 641,145 for modern money. The same amount received an army general
And how much, you ask, did the groceries cost then? A pound of meat in 1914 cost 19 kopecks. The Russian pound weighed 0.40951241 grams. This means that a kilogram, if it were then a measure of weight, would cost 46.39 kopecks - 0.359 grams of gold, that is, in today's money, 551 rubles 14 kopecks. Thus, the worker could buy 48.6 kilograms of meat with his salary, if, of course, he wanted to.
Wheat flour 0.08 rub. (8 kopecks) \u003d 1 lb (0.4 kg)
Rice lb 0.12 p. \u003d 1 lb (0.4 kg)
Sponge cake 0.60 p. \u003d 1 lb (0.4 kg)
Milk 0.08 p. \u003d 1 bottle
Tomatoes 0.22 rub. \u003d 1 lb
Fish (pike perch) 0.25 rub. \u003d 1 lb
Grapes (raisins) 0.16 p. \u003d 1 pound
Apples 0.03 RUB \u003d 1 lb
A very decent life !!!
Hence the opportunity to support a large family.
Now let's see how much it cost to rent a house. Housing rent in St. Petersburg cost 25, and in Moscow and Kiev 20 kopecks per square yard per month. These 20 kopecks today are 256 rubles, and a square yard is 0.5058 m². That is, the monthly rent of one square meter in 1914 cost 506 today's rubles. Our clerk would rent an apartment of one hundred square yards in St. Petersburg for 25 rubles a month. But he did not rent such an apartment, but was content with a basement and an attic closet, where the area was smaller and the rental rate was lower. Such an apartment was rented, as a rule, by titular advisers who received a salary at the level of an army captain. The bare salary of the titular counselor was 105 rubles a month (134,640 rubles) a month. Thus, a 50-meter apartment cost him less than a quarter of his salary.
The myth of the weakness of the character of the king.
French President Loubet said: “They usually see Emperor Nicholas II as a kind, generous, but weak person. This is a deep mistake. He always has long thought out plans, the implementation of which is slowly achieved. Under apparent timidity, the king has a strong soul and a courageous heart, unshakably faithful. He knows where he is going and what he wants. "
The royal service required the strength of character that Nicholas II possessed. During the Holy Coronation to the Russian Throne on May 27, 1895, Metropolitan Sergius of Moscow, in his address to the Tsar, said: “As there is no higher, so there is no more difficult on earth royal power, there is no burden heavier than the king's ministry. Through the visible anointing, may an invisible power from above be given to you, acting to elevate your royal prowess ... "
A number of arguments refuting this myth are given in the above-mentioned work by A. Eliseev.
So, in particular, S. Oldenburg wrote that the Tsar had an iron hand, many are only deceived by the velvet glove worn on it.
The presence of a strong will in Nicholas II is brilliantly confirmed by the events of August 1915, when he assumed the duties of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief - against the wishes of the military elite, the Council of Ministers and everything “ public opinion". And, I must say, he coped with these responsibilities brilliantly.
The emperor did a lot to improve the country's defenses, having learned the hard lessons of the Russo-Japanese war. Perhaps his most significant act was the revival of the Russian fleet, which saved the country at the beginning of the First World War. It happened against the will of military officials. The emperor was even forced to dismiss the Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich. Military historian G. Nekrasov writes: “It should be noted that, despite its overwhelming superiority in forces in the Baltic Sea, the German fleet made no attempt to break through to the Gulf of Finland in order to bring Russia to its knees with one blow. Theoretically, this was possible, since most of the military industry Russia. But on the way of the German fleet stood ready to fight Baltic Fleet, with ready mine positions. The cost of the breakthrough for the German fleet was becoming unacceptably expensive. Thus, by the mere fact that he achieved the re-creation of the fleet, Emperor Nicholas II saved Russia from imminent defeat. This should not be forgotten! "
We should especially note that the Emperor made absolutely all important decisions, contributing to victorious actions, himself - without the influence of any "good geniuses". The opinion that the Russian army was led by Alekseev, and the Tsar was in the post of Commander-in-Chief for the sake of formality, is completely unfounded. This false opinion is refuted by Alekseev's own telegrams. For example, in one of them, when asked to send ammunition and weapons, Alekseev replies: "I cannot resolve this issue without the Highest permission."
The myth that Russia was a prison of peoples.
Russia was a family of peoples thanks to the balanced and thoughtful policy of the Tsar. The Russian Tsar-Father was considered the monarch of all peoples and tribes living on the territory of the Russian Empire.
He pursued a national policy based on respect for traditional religions - the historical subjects of state building in Russia. And this is not only Orthodoxy, but also Islam. So, in particular, the mullahs were supported by the Russian Empire and received a salary. Many Muslims fought for Russia.
The Russian tsar honored the feat of all peoples who served the Fatherland. Here is the text of the telegram, which serves as a vivid confirmation of this:
TELEGRAM
The Ingush regiment hit the German Iron Division like an avalanche. He was immediately supported by the Chechen regiment.
In the history of the Russian Fatherland, including our Preobrazhensky regiment, there was no case of a cavalry attack on an enemy unit of heavy artillery.
4.5 thousand killed, 3.5 thousand taken prisoner, 2.5 thousand wounded. In less than 1.5 hours, the iron division ceased to exist, with which the best military units of our allies, including the Russian army, were afraid to come into contact.
Send on my behalf, on behalf of the royal court and on behalf of the Russian army, fraternal heartfelt greetings to the fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters and brides of these brave eagles of the Caucasus, who laid the foundation for the end to the German hordes with their immortal feat.
Russia will never forget this feat. Honor and praise to them!
With fraternal greetings, Nicholas II.
The myth that Russia under the tsar was defeated in the First World War.
S.S. Oldenburg in his book "The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II" wrote: "The most difficult and most forgotten feat of Emperor Nicholas II was that under incredibly difficult conditions he brought Russia to the threshold of victory: his opponents did not allow her to cross this threshold."
General N. A. Lokhvitsky wrote: “... It took Peter the Great nine years to turn the conquered Narva into the Poltava victors.
The last Supreme Commander of the Imperial Army, Emperor Nicholas II, did the same great job in a year and a half. But his work was appreciated by his enemies, and between the Tsar and his Army, and the victory "became a revolution."
A. Eliseev cites the following facts. The Tsar's military talents were fully revealed in the post of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. The very first decisions of the new commander-in-chief led to a significant improvement in the situation at the front. So, he organized the Vilna-Molodechno operation (September 3 - October 2, 1915). The sovereign managed to stop a major German offensive, as a result of which the city of Borisov was captured. A timely directive was issued to them ordering an end to panic and retreat. As a result, the onslaught of the 10th German army was stopped, which was forced to retreat - in places completely disordered. The 26th Mogilev Infantry Regiment of Lieutenant Colonel Petrov (a total of 8 officers and 359 bayonets) made their way to the Germans in the rear and during a surprise attack captured 16 guns. In total, the Russians managed to capture 2,000 prisoners, 39 guns and 45 machine guns. “But the most important thing,” notes the historian P. V. Multatuli, “the troops have again gained confidence in the ability to beat the Germans.”
Russia has definitely begun to win the war. After the failures of 1915 came the triumphant 1916 - the year of the Brusilov breakthrough. During the fighting on the Southwestern Front, the enemy lost 1.5 million people killed, wounded and taken prisoner. Austria-Hungary was on the verge of defeat.
It was the Emperor who supported the Brusilov offensive plan, with which many military leaders did not agree. Thus, the plan of the Chief of Staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief MV Alekseev provided for a powerful blow to the enemy by forces of all fronts, with the exception of Brusilov's front.
The latter believed that his front was also quite capable of an offensive, with which the other front commanders disagreed. However, Nicholas II resolutely supported Brusilov, and without this support, the famous breakthrough would have been simply impossible.
The historian A. Zayonchkovsky wrote that the Russian army had reached "in terms of its size and technical supply of everything it needed the greatest development for the entire war." The enemy was opposed by more than two hundred combat-ready divisions. Russia was preparing to crush the enemy. In January 1917, the 12th Russian army launched an offensive from the Riga bridgehead and caught the 10th German army by surprise, which found itself in a disastrous situation.
General Ludendorff, the chief of staff of the German army, who can in no way be suspected of sympathizing with Nicholas II, wrote about the situation in Germany in 1916 and the growth of Russia's military power:
“Russia is expanding its military formations. The reorganization undertaken by her gives a great increase in strength. In her divisions she left only 12 battalions each, and in the batteries only 6 guns each, and from the battalions and guns liberated in this way, she formed new combat units.
The battles of 1916 on Eastern Front showed an increase in the military equipment of the Russians, an increase in the number of firearms supplies. Russia has moved some of its factories to the Donetsk Basin, dramatically increasing their productivity.
We understood that the numerical and technical superiority of the Russians in 1917 would be felt by us even more sharply than in 1916.
Our situation was extremely difficult and there was almost no way out of it. There was nothing to think about their own offensive - all reserves were necessary for defense. Our defeat seemed inevitable ... it was difficult with food. The rear was also badly damaged.
The prospects for the future were extremely bleak. "
Moreover, as Oldenburg writes, on the initiative of the Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich, in the summer of 1916, a commission was established to prepare a future peace conference in order to determine in advance what Russia's wishes would be. Russia was to receive Constantinople and the Straits, as well as Turkish Armenia.
Poland was to be reunited in personal union with Russia. The sovereign announced (at the end of December) c. Wielepolski that he thinks of a free Poland as a state with a separate constitution, separate chambers and its own army (apparently, he meant something like the position of the Kingdom of Poland under Alexander I).
Eastern Galicia, Northern Bukovina and Carpathian Rus were to be included in Russia. The creation of a Czechoslovak kingdom was planned; on Russian territory, regiments of prisoners of Czech and Slovaks were already being formed.
B. Brazol "The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II in Figures and Facts"
Nicholas II was born in 1868 and went down in history as the last emperor of the Russian Empire. The father of Nicholas II was Alexander III, and his mother was Maria Fedorovna.
Nicholas II had three brothers and two sisters. He was the oldest, so after the death of Alexander III in 1894 it was he who took the throne. Nicholas II's contemporaries note that he was a fairly simple person to communicate
The period of the reign of Nicholas II was marked by a fairly rapid development of the economy of the Russian Empire. However, at the same time, social and political contradictions and revolutionary movements were growing in Russia.
For more than twenty years of reign, Nicholas II did a lot for the Russian Empire.
First of all, it should be noted that during his reign, the population of the Russian Empire increased by almost 50 million people, that is, by 40%. And the natural population growth has increased to 3,000,000 people a year. At the same time, the general standard of living has increased significantly.
Thanks to the active development of agriculture, as well as more thoughtful communication routes, the so-called "hunger years" at the beginning of the twentieth century were quickly eliminated. A poor harvest now did not mean that there would be famine, since a poor harvest in some areas was compensated by a good harvest in others. Under Nicholas II, the harvest of cereals increased significantly.
Coal production has increased significantly. During the entire reign of Nicholas II, it has almost quadrupled.
Also, during the reign of Nicholas II, the metallurgical industry increased significantly. For example, pig iron smelting has increased almost fourfold, and copper production has increased fivefold. Thanks to this, a fairly rapid growth began in the field of mechanical engineering. Consequently, the number of workers also increased from 2,000,000 to 5,000,000.
The length of railways and telegraph poles has increased significantly. It is also worth noting that under Nicholas II, the army of the Russian Empire increased significantly. Nicholas II managed to create the world's most powerful river fleet.
Under Nicholas II, the level of education of the population increased significantly. The production of books also increased.
Finally, it should be said that over the entire period of the reign of Nicholas II, the treasury of the Russian Empire increased significantly. At the beginning of his reign, it was 1,200,000,000 rubles, and at the end - 3,500,000,000 rubles.
All this testifies to the fact that Nicholas II was a very talented ruler. According to his contemporaries, if everything went on like this, then by the 1950s the Russian Empire would have become the most developed country in all of Europe.
Let's take a closer look at his reign:
When they talk about Nicholas II, two polar points of view are immediately identified: the Orthodox-patriotic and the liberal-democratic. For the former, Nicholas II and his family are the ideal of morality, the image of martyrdom; his rule is the highest point of Russia's economic development in its entire history. For others, Nicholas II is a weak personality, a weak-willed person who failed to save the country from revolutionary madness, who was completely under the influence of his wife and Rasputin; Russia during his reign is seen as economically backward.
The attitude to the personality of the last Russian emperor is so ambiguous that there can be no consensus on the results of his reign.
When they talk about Nicholas II, two polar points of view are immediately identified: the Orthodox-patriotic and the liberal-democratic. For the former, Nicholas II and his family are the ideal of morality, the image of martyrdom; his rule is the highest point of Russia's economic development in its entire history. For others, Nicholas II is a weak personality, a weak-willed person who failed to save the country from revolutionary madness, who was completely under the influence of his wife and Rasputin; Russia during his reign is seen as economically backward
Let's look at both points of view and draw our own conclusions.
Orthodox-patriotic point of view
In the 1950s, a report by the Russian writer Brazol Boris Lvovich (1885-1963) appeared in the Russian diaspora. During the First World War, he worked in Russian military intelligence.
Brazol's report is entitled “The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II in Figures and Facts. The answer to slanderers, dismembered and Russophobes. "
This report begins with a quote from the famous economist of the time Edmond Teri: “If the affairs of the European nations from 1912 to 1950 go the same way as they did from 1900 to 1912, Russia by the middle of this century will dominate Europe both politically and both economically and financially ”. (Economist Europeen magazine, 1913).
Here are some data from this report.
On the eve of the First World War, the population of the Russian Empire was 182 million, and during the reign of Emperor Nicholas II it increased by 60 million.
Imperial Russia built its fiscal policy not only on deficit-free budgets, but also on the principle of a significant accumulation of gold reserves.
During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, by the law of 1896, a gold currency was introduced in Russia. The stability of monetary circulation was such that even during the Russo-Japanese War, accompanied by widespread revolutionary unrest within the country, the exchange of credit notes for gold was not suspended.
Before World War I, taxes in Russia were the lowest in the entire world. The burden of direct taxes in Russia was almost 4 times less than in France, more than 4 times less than in Germany and 8.5 times less than in England. The burden of indirect taxes in Russia was, on average, half that in Austria, France, Germany and England.
Between 1890 and 1913 Russian industry quadrupled its productivity. Moreover, it should be noted that the growth in the number of new enterprises was not achieved due to the emergence of fly-by-night firms, as in modern Russia, but at the expense of actually working factories and plants that manufactured products and created jobs.
In 1914, the State Savings Bank had deposits for 2,236,000,000 rubles, i.e. 1.9 times more than in 1908.
These indicators are extremely important for understanding that the population of Russia was by no means poor and saved a significant part of their income.
On the eve of the revolution, Russian agriculture was in full bloom. In 1913, the yield of the main cereals in Russia was 1/3 higher than that of Argentina, Canada and the United States of America combined. In particular, the collection of rye in 1894 yielded 2 billion poods, and in 1913 - 4 billion poods.
During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, Russia was the main breadwinner of Western Europe. At the same time, special attention is drawn to the phenomenal growth in the export of agricultural products from Russia to England (grain and flour). In 1908 858.3 million pounds were exported, and in 1910 2.8 million pounds, i.e. 3.3 times.
Russia supplied 50% of the world's eggs. In 1908, 2.6 billion pieces worth 54.9 million rubles were exported from Russia, and in 1909 - 2.8 million pieces. worth 62.2 million rubles. The export of rye in 1894 amounted to 2 billion poods, in 1913: 4 billion poods. Sugar consumption in the same period of time increased from 4 to 9 kg per year per person (then sugar was a very expensive product).
On the eve of the First World War, Russia produced 80% of the world's flax production.
In 1916, that is, in the midst of the war, more than 2,000 versts of railways were built, which connected the Arctic Ocean (port of Romanovsk) with the center of Russia. The Great Siberian Way (8.536 km) was the longest in the world.
It should be added that Russian railways, in comparison with others, were the cheapest and most comfortable in the world for passengers.
During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, public education reached extraordinary development. Primary education was free by law, and from 1908 it became compulsory. Since this year, about 10,000 schools have been opened annually. In 1913 their number exceeded 130,000. At the beginning of the 20th century, Russia ranked first in Europe, if not in the entire world, in terms of the number of women studying in higher educational institutions.
During the reign of Tsar Nicholas II, the government of Peter Arkadievich Stolypin carried out one of the most significant and most brilliant reforms in Russia - the agrarian reform. This reform is associated with the transition of the form of ownership of land and land production from communal to private land. On November 9, 1906, the so-called "Stolypin Law" was issued, which allowed the peasant to leave the Community and become the individual and hereditary owner of the land he cultivated. This law was a huge success. Immediately, 2.5 million petitions were filed for cuts from family peasants. Thus, on the eve of the revolution, Russia was already ready to turn into a country of owners.
For the period 1886-1913. Russia's exports amounted to 23.5 billion rubles, imports - 17.7 billion rubles.
Foreign investment in the period from 1887 to 1913 increased from 177 million rubles. up to 1.9 billion rubles, i.e. increased by 10.7 times. Moreover, these investments were channeled into capital-intensive production and created new jobs. However, what is very important, the Russian industry was not dependent on foreigners. Enterprises with foreign investments accounted for only 14% of the total capital of Russian enterprises.
The abdication of Nicholas II from the throne was the greatest tragedy in the thousand-year history of Russia.
By the decision of the Bishops' Council of March 31 - April 4, 1992, the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints was instructed "to start researching materials related to the martyrdom of the Tsar's Family while studying the exploits of the new martyrs of Russia."
Excerpts from "BASIS FOR CANONIZING THE ROYAL FAMILY
FROM THE REPORT OF THE METROPOLITAN OF KRUTITSKY AND KOLOMENSKOYE JUVENAL,
CHAIRMAN OF THE SINODAL COMMISSION FOR THE CANONIZATION OF SAINTS ".
“As a politician and statesman, the Sovereign acted on the basis of his religious and moral principles. One of the most common arguments against the canonization of Emperor Nicholas II is the events of January 9, 1905 in St. Petersburg. In the historical note of the Commission on this issue, we point out: having got acquainted on the evening of January 8 with the content of the Gapon petition, which bore the character of a revolutionary ultimatum, which did not allow entering into constructive negotiations with representatives of the workers, the Tsar ignored this document, illegal in form and undermining the prestige of an already shaken wars of state power. Throughout January 9, 1905, the Tsar did not make a single decision that determined the actions of the authorities in St. Petersburg to suppress mass protests of workers. The order to the troops to open fire was given not by the Emperor, but by the Commander of the St. Petersburg Military District. Historical data do not allow us to detect in the actions of the Sovereign in the days of January 1905 a conscious evil will, turned against the people and embodied in specific sinful decisions and actions.
With the outbreak of World War I, the Tsar regularly travels to Headquarters, visits military units of the active army, dressing points, military hospitals, rear factories, in a word, everything that played a role in the conduct of this war.
From the very beginning of the war, the Empress devoted herself to the wounded. After completing the courses of sisters of mercy together with the eldest daughters - Grand Duchesses Olga and Tatiana - she took care of the wounded for several hours a day in the Tsarskoye Selo hospital.
The Emperor viewed his tenure as the Supreme Commander-in-Chief as a fulfillment of a moral and state duty to God and the people, however, always presenting leading military specialists with a broad initiative in solving the entire set of military-strategic and operational-tactical issues.
The Commission expresses the opinion that the very fact of the abdication of the Throne of Emperor Nicholas II, directly related to his personal qualities, as a whole, is an expression of the historical situation in Russia at that time.
He made this decision only in the hope that those who wanted him to be removed would still be able to continue the war with honor and would not ruin the cause of saving Russia. He was afraid then that his refusal to sign the abdication would not lead to civil war in view of the enemy. The Tsar did not want even a drop of Russian blood to be shed because of him.
Spiritual reasons why the last Russian Tsar, who did not want to shed the blood of his subjects, decided to renounce the Throne in the name of inner peace in Russia, gives his act truly moral character... It is no coincidence that during the discussion in July 1918 at the Council Council of the Local Council of the issue of commemorating the murdered Tsar for the dead, His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon made a decision on a widespread funeral service commemorating Nicholas II as Emperor.
Behind the many sufferings endured by the Royal Family in the last 17 months of their life, which ended with the execution in the basement of the Yekaterinburg Ipatiev House on the night of July 17, 1918, we see people sincerely striving to embody the commandments of the Gospel in their lives. In the sufferings endured by the Royal Family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom, the light of Christ's faith conquering evil was revealed, just as it shone in the life and death of millions of Orthodox Christians who endured persecution for Christ in the 20th century.
It is in comprehending this feat of the Royal Family that the Commission, in complete unanimity and with the approval of the Holy Synod, finds it possible to glorify in the Cathedral the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in the face of the Passion-Bearers of Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Maria and Anastasia.
Liberal Democratic Perspective
When Nicholas II came to power, he had no program other than a firm intention not to surrender his autocratic power, which his father had given him. He always made decisions alone: \u200b\u200b"How can I do this if it is against my conscience?" - this was the basis on which he made his political decisions or rejected the options offered to him. He continued to pursue the controversial policies of his father: on the one hand, he tried to achieve social and political stabilization from above by preserving the old estate-state structures, on the other, the industrialization policy pursued by the Minister of Finance led to enormous social dynamics. The Russian nobility launched a massive offensive against the state's economic policy of industrialization. Having removed Witte, the tsar did not know where to go. Despite some reformist steps (for example, the abolition of corporal punishment of peasants), the tsar, under the influence of the new Minister of Internal Affairs, Plehve, decided in favor of the policy of all-round preservation social structure peasantry (preservation of the community), although the kulak elements, that is, the richer peasants, was facilitated to leave the peasant community. The tsar and the ministers did not consider reforms necessary in other areas either: on the labor question, only a few minor concessions were made; instead of guaranteeing the right to strike, the government continued its repression. The policy of stagnation and repression, which at the same time in a cautious manner continued the economic policy, the king could not satisfy anyone.
At the meeting of representatives of the zemstvos on November 20, 1904, the majority demanded a constitutional regime. The forces of the progressive local nobility, rural intelligentsia, city government and wide circles of the urban intelligentsia, united in opposition, began to demand the introduction of a parliament in the state. They were joined by the Petersburg workers, who were allowed to form an independent association, headed by priest Gapon, they wanted to submit a petition to the tsar. The lack of general leadership under the already actually dismissed minister of the interior and the tsar, who, like most ministers, did not understand the seriousness of the situation, led to the disaster of Bloody Sunday on January 9, 1905. Army officers, who were supposed to hold back the crowd, in panic ordered to shoot at peaceful people. 100 people were killed and more than 1,000 were allegedly injured. Workers and intellectuals reacted with strikes and protest demonstrations. Although the workers for the most part put forward purely economic demands and the revolutionary parties could not play an important role either in the movement led by Gapon or in the strikes that followed Bloody Sunday, a revolution began in Russia.
When the revolutionary and opposition movement in October 1905 reached its climax - a general strike, which practically paralyzed the country, the tsar was forced to turn again to his former Minister of the Interior, who, thanks to a very beneficial peace treaty for Russia, he concluded with the Japanese in Portsmouth ( USA), has gained universal respect. Witte explained to the tsar that he must either appoint a dictator who would fiercely fight the revolution, or must guarantee bourgeois freedoms and elective legislature. Nikolai did not want to drown the revolution in blood. Thus, the fundamental problem of constitutional monarchies - the creation of a balance of power - has been exacerbated by the actions of the prime minister. The October Manifesto (October 17, 1905) promised bourgeois freedoms, an elective assembly with legislative powers, an expansion of the suffrage and, indirectly, equality of religions and nationalities, but did not bring the country the peace that the tsar expected. Rather, it caused serious riots that broke out as a result of clashes between loyal to the tsar and the revolutionary forces, and led to pogroms in many regions of the country, directed not only against the Jewish population, but also against representatives of the intelligentsia. The development of events since 1905 has become irreversible.
However, in other areas there were positive changes that were not blocked at the political macro level. The economic growth rate has again almost reached the level of the nineties. In the countryside, the Stolypin agrarian reforms aimed at creating private ownership began to develop independently, despite resistance from the peasants. The state with a whole package of measures achieved large-scale modernization in agriculture... Science, literature and art have reached a new heyday.
But the scandalous figure of Rasputin decisively contributed to the loss of the monarch's prestige. The first world War ruthlessly exposed the shortcomings of the late tsarist system. These were primarily political weaknesses. In the military field, by the summer of 1915, it was even possible to seize the situation at the front and arrange supplies. In 1916, thanks to the Brusilov offensive, the Russian army owned even most of the territorial gains of the allies before the collapse of Germany. Nevertheless, in February 1917, tsarism was approaching its demise. In this development of events, the king himself was fully to blame. Since he increasingly wanted to be his own prime minister, but did not correspond to this role, during the war, no one could coordinate the actions of various state institutions, primarily civilians with the military.
The provisional government, which replaced the monarchy, immediately took Nicholas and his family under house arrest, but wanted to allow him to leave for England. However, the British government was in no hurry to respond, and the Provisional Government was no longer strong enough to resist the will of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers 'and Soldiers' Deputies. In August 1917, the family was moved to Tobolsk. In April 1918, local Bolsheviks secured their transfer to Yekaterinburg. The tsar endured this time of humiliation with great calmness and hope in God, which in the face of death gave him undeniable dignity, but which, even in the best times, sometimes prevented him from acting rationally and decisively. On the night of July 16-17, 1918, the imperial family was shot. Liberal historian Yuri Gauthier spoke out with cold precision upon learning of the Tsar's assassination: "This is the denouement of one more of the countless secondary nodes of our time of troubles, and the monarchical principle can only benefit from this."
The paradoxes of the personality and reign of Nicholas II can be explained by the objectively existing contradictions of Russian reality at the beginning of the 20th century, when the world entered a new phase of its development, and the tsar did not have the will and determination to master the situation. Trying to defend the "autocratic principle", he maneuvered: he made small concessions, then he refused them. As a result, the regime rotted, pushing the country towards the abyss. Rejecting and slowing down reforms, the last tsar contributed to the beginning of the social revolution. This should be recognized both with absolute sympathy for the fate of the king, and with his categorical rejection. At the critical moment of the February coup, the generals changed their oaths and forced the tsar to abdicate.
Nicholas II himself knocked the ground out from under his feet. He stubbornly defended his positions, did not make serious compromises and thereby created the conditions for a revolutionary explosion. He also did not support the liberals, who sought to prevent the revolution in the hope of concessions from the tsar. And the revolution took place. 1917 became a fatal milestone in the history of Russia.
From myself, I can say that I am more of an adherent of the Orthodox-patriotic point of view.
At the beginning of the 20th century, Western journalists vied with each other about the Russian economic miracle.
The Russian Empire came out on top in the world in terms of economic growth.
Thanks to the wise rule of Emperor Nicholas II, successes were achieved in all areas of the country's life: economy, science, education, social and military spheres.
What was done:
- 90% of the land was transferred to the peasants;
- 5.5 km of railways were built per day;
- the largest export of agricultural products in the world has been established;
- the ruble was the 3rd currency in the world and was only converted into gold;
- birth rate growth - 2.5 million per year;
- 85% of young Russians were literate by 1916.
In terms of industrial production, Russia ranked 4th in Europe and 5th in the worldyielding to critical indicators only the USA, Germany, Great Britain and France. In terms of growth rates of national income and labor productivity, Russia ranked 1st in the world.
The plan for the electrification of the country was approved back in 1909., the beginning of its implementation was planned for 1915, but because of the war it was moved to 1920. After the revolution, the GOELRO plan was appropriated by the Bolsheviks.
2000 km of railways were built annually. The Great Trans-Siberian Railway, which entered the Guinness Book of Records as the longest road in the world and which connected the Far East with the European part of Russia, is the brainchild of Nicholas II.
From 1895 to 1906 the river fleet doubled. It was the largest in the world.
In the production of the main types of agricultural products, Russia took the 1st place. It accounted for 2/5 of all world exports of agricultural products.
Thanks to the progressive Stolypin reform, which the emperor approved and promoted in every possible way, in 1916 already 90% of the land belonged to peasants... According to the All-Russian Census of 1917, peasants carried out 89.3% of crops and owned 94% of agricultural animals. What, then, did Lenin's "Decree on Land" proclaim?
During the reign of Nicholas II the ruble was converted into gold and did not depend on the currencies of other states... The royal ruble was ahead of the mark, franc and other foreign currencies, second only to the pound sterling and the dollar. "Russia owes its metal gold circulation exclusively to Emperor Nicholas II"- wrote the minister of the tsarist government S. Yu. Witte.
Russia was not a raw material appendage! The emperor categorically prohibited the export of round (unprocessed) timber from Russia and the export of crude oil. Russia supplied only oil products abroad, and Russian motor oil was the best in the world.
The population of Russia for 23 years of the reign of Nicholas II has grown by more than 60 million people! After 1917, the population only decreased (by 65 million after repressions, famines and the Great Patriotic War).
There were colossal achievements in the spheres of invention, science, education, medicine, culture, and in the social sphere. Thus, spending on education and culture increased during the reign of Nicholas II by 8 times and more than 2 times ahead of the costs of France and 1.5 times - of England. Medicine was free, Russia was second in Europe and third in the world in terms of the number of doctors. In 1908, a free elementary education... By 1916, the number of literate people in the Empire was more than 50%, among the youth - 85%.
Under the last Emperor, Russia became the pinnacle of Russian civilization, possessing political, economic, military power, the highest culture and advanced science.
Could this have happened with a weak ruler? ..
Testimonies of historians and politicians - contemporaries of Nicholas II - about the qualities of the Emperor:
“They say about the Russian Emperor that he is available to various influences. This is deeply wrong. The Russian Emperor himself carries out his ideas. He protects them with constancy and great strength... He has maturely thought out and elaborate plans. He works incessantly to implement them. "
Emile Loubet, former President of the French Republic
“His manners are so humble and he shows so little outward determination that it is easy to conclude that he lacks a strong will; but the people around him assure that he has a very definite will, which he knows how to implement in the most calm way.
German diplomat Count Rex
“The sovereign had a velvet glove over his iron hand. His will was not like a thunderous blow. It did not manifest itself in explosions or violent collisions; it rather resembled the steady run of a stream from a mountain height to the plain of the ocean. He bends around obstacles, deviates to the side, but, in the end, with constant constancy comes closer to his goal. "
After the deputy and former prosecutor of Crimea Natalia Poklonskaya in early November attracted the attention of the public with a post on her blog: “There is no statesmanwho would have been as slandered as the last Russian Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich. For many decades, the people heard only mockery and hatred in relation to their slain Tsar. Party ideologists, publicists, writers, artists, screenwriters, directors competed with each other in an effort to discredit the Holy Name of the Sovereign. "
Since these words immediately triggered a real campaign of denigrating both Poklonskaya and the last Russian emperor on the part of various left-wing politicians, I want to devote a few lines to trying to tell the reader why talking about Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich we are talking about the best ruler of Russia for the last hundred years. From the story about his achievements, naturally comes an understanding of why the Bolsheviks and their modern ideological heirs still hate him and try to associate his name with the image of a "weak" and "unlucky" ruler.
First of all, it is necessary to reject the accusations that the tsar, they say, “he himself is the culprit of the revolution”, which have been established both in the left and in the right environment. As I already had the opportunity to write, the revolution in Russia was the result of a long work by external forces to overthrow one of the most powerful world powers, which turned out to be a competitor and a threat to too many countries interested in weakening the empire. You can cite as many stories of Soviet historiography about the crisis, the impact of the war, and other factors as you like, in any case, it is obvious that the revolution was not the result of natural preconditions, but the consequence of a conspiracy supported from abroad.
Let's move on to the question of whether Nicholas II was a good ruler. To do this, we will define, if possible, objective criteria for assessing the quality of the ruler. If we talk about what can be called the unique competences of the monarch, it would be correct to divide them into two groups. Those that are characteristic of the monarch as an autocratic ruler and those that distinguish the monarch in the constitutional system of power. And these groups are very different, which is very important for us, since Nicholas II was the only ruler of Russia who managed to find himself both in the role of an autocrat and in the role of a constitutional monarch.
The autocrat monarch is, first of all, the head of all branches of state power, which are not divided in him, but are united. An autocratic ruler is a leader who is the shepherd of the people, or as Nikolai Aleksandrovich himself quite rightly wrote: "the owner of the Russian land." Therefore, for him, such criteria as the will necessary to carry out his course and prevent falling under the influence of certain clans, the level of education ensuring the high competence of the ruler, the ability to select those people who will directly work on state tasks, to implement plans transformations and themselves to propose such plans, as well as the ability of the monarch as a diplomat.
In terms of the quality of education, Nicholas II of all the rulers who followed him received the best education and was the most prepared for his place. The future emperor received an excellent average and higher education - both in an expanded scope - under the guidance of outstanding teachers who were the best scientists of their time (Dragomirov, Kui, Obruchev, Bunge - this is just a small part of the great experts in their field, involved in the formation of the future emperor). He brilliantly completed the higher course of general education, legal and military sciences and, among other things, was fluent in four languages: Russian, French, English and German. Just as well he went through the all-round military training, theoretical and combat training, available only to the heir to the throne, in all kinds of weapons - infantry, cavalry and artillery, as well as in the navy. Lenin with his correspondence legal education, and even more so following him soviet leaders just ignorant, in comparison with the emperor.
If we consider the strong-willed qualities of the emperor, then, of course, I address all those interested in this topic to the famous work "Emperor Nicholas II, as a man of strong will." Let me just remind you that the myth of the weak-willed tsar was specially created by his enemies and murderers in order to justify the need for a revolution and the atrocities they commit. In reality, Nikolai Alexandrovich was a strong-willed ruler who could force anyone to pursue the policy he needed and break the resistance of the most powerful opponents. It was through the efforts of Nicholas II that peace with Japan in 1905 was relatively beneficial, although a considerable part of the elite was ready for big concessions. It was the emperor who bore the brunt of governing the country during the years of the uprisings of 1905-1907 and was able to calm the society, and then by all means contribute to a phenomenal rise in the country. It was the monarch who took over the leadership of the army in the most difficult time of 1915 and was able to arrange things so that the German offensive was stopped, and then the Russians themselves began to attack the opponents.
Nicholas II, a diplomat, was certainly inferior to such a virtuoso as his ancestor Alexander I. But this does not mean that he can be rated low. The services of the emperor in the sphere of Russian diplomacy are very great. He became one of the three heads of the most powerful military bloc that existed at that time in the world. Relations with most of the countries of the world under Nicholas II were very good and Russia, not only was not a "rogue country", but was one of the recognized great powers with the highest authority. The personal diplomacy of the emperor allowed him, in parallel with work in the direction of the Russian-French-British alliance, to act in relation to Germany. It is impossible to call it otherwise than virtuoso diplomacy!
Let's take a look at the results of the emperor's reforms, assessing both his work with cadres and willful ability to carry out reforms. In this case, the example of Nikolai is unique in that he was the only ruler of Russia, all of whose reforms were not only carried out, but also proved to be successful. While Lenin was only destroying the legacy that he inherited from the empire, and his followers tried to compensate for these destruction with a lot of blood, Nikolai selected prominent administrators and reformers to his circle.
I will list only the most important reforms: the tax reform (started by Alexander III) was successfully carried out, the growth of budget revenues amounted to more than 50% according to its results, the currency reform was carried out so successfully that the Russian gold imperial became one of the world currencies, and was used even by the Bolsheviks 10 years later after the revolution, the financial reform allowed the country to have such a stable budget that even the Russo-Japanese War, and then the First World War, had much less impact on Russia's finances than other participating countries.
The state of Russia's finances during the reign of Nicholas II can be called ideal, and the level of the gold reserve of that time was achieved only under Stalin and Putin. The Russian empire, to which the Bolsheviks diligently created the image of a "country enslaved by debts", had a debt less than that of France and comparable to the debt of England or Austria-Hungary. Payments on public debt, per citizen, in Russia were among the lowest in the world.
Reforms in industry have led to unprecedented economic growth, which eventually brought Russia to 3-4 place (different researchers evaluate our result slightly differently) in the world in terms of GDP. Whole new industries arose in the country - the automotive industry, aircraft construction, the chemical industry, and the electric power industry. The empire under Nicholas II was able to produce the most complex technical objects at that time, such as battleships and heavy aircraft. On the scale of our days, this is tantamount to the availability of spacewalk technology. By the way, it should be borne in mind that the Soviet Union, despite all the desire, could not build a single battleship.
Reforms in the road structure led to the fact that the length of the empire's railways was the second in the world, after the United States. The pace of road construction was one of the highest in the world, and no country built roads comparable to the Trans-Siberian Railway, which passed through the cold expanses of Siberia. Large bridges across the rivers were actively built, which serve us to this day. Even the bridge to the Crimea, which began to be built only now, was planned for construction under Nikolai Alexandrovich.
In the field of education, the results were outstanding, despite the Bolsheviks' desire to portray Russia as a "dark kingdom." The level of the empire's gymnasium education is unattainable to this day, being closer to the modern university than in high school... University education was considered one of the best in the world, and Russian scientists and engineers were valued as specialists even after the revolution. In 1908, a universal education program was approved in Russia, which was to be completed between 1919 and 1924. There were 140 thousand schools in the Russian Empire. IN Russian Federation today we have 55 thousand schools with about the same population. Education was absolutely accessible to all classes and a talented peasant could count on free education both at the gymnasium and at the university.
The peasant and land reforms led to the fact that the debts on redemption payments were finally closed, and the peasants were able to leave the community, or move to the East of the empire, where the state allocated them land for free and helped them settle in a new place. As a result, Russia was an agricultural superpower, the world's # 1 exporter of grain and oil. Factory legislative reforms limited the working day and introduced the most modern social protection measures for the time. The Russian worker before the World War was one of the least exploited workers in the world. The standard of living of the country's population was constantly growing. The rate of this growth is incomparable with even the most profitable years in terms of oil prices in the 2010s era.
The military reform was carried out according to the estimates of our opponents very quickly and very effectively. The combat readiness of the Russian army before the World War was estimated extremely high, the popularity of the army in society was high. The army received the most modern equipment. The program of building a fleet was successfully implemented, which was supposed to bring the empire into the ranks of the four great maritime powers of that time. Soviet historians talked a lot about the "shell famine" during the war, "forgetting" that it took place not only in Russia, but also in all countries participating in the war. The Russian army successfully coped with the German army, which was considered the best in the world, did not retreat having lost most of the European territory of the country and steadfastly held the front.
Nicholas II also successfully carried out political reform. Russia became a constitutional monarchy, a really working multi-party system was established. Freedom of speech was not an empty declaration, but the everyday life of any citizen of the empire who could easily open a printing house, publishing house or publish a newspaper, including with public money, even without significant start-up capital. The political palette of that time is so rich that it seems unattainable even today.
Now let's move on to the criteria for evaluating a constitutional monarch. Here, one more skill is added to the above qualities - the ability of the ruler to establish communication within the elites. To tie the national elites together, to be able to direct them to the solution of national goals not by order, but by indirect methods, to discourage the elite from striving for conspiracies, to smooth out contradictions. Unfortunately, in this area, the skills of Nikolai Alexandrovich were insufficient. To a large extent, the blame for this lies with his father, Alexander III, who did not like society and limited his circle of contacts to business issues. At the same time, the father and grandfather of Alexander III, being autocratic rulers, were at the same time the most effective communicators who literally personally knew most of the top of Russia, constantly communicated with everyone and skillfully supported their course among high society. Unfortunately, it is from the era of Alexander III that the time begins when part of the Russian elite begins to implicitly play against their monarch.
Of course, an autocrat monarch can rule and be isolated from the top of society, while being very successful. But a constitutional ruler is a different kind of political figure, where his communication skills among the elite become extremely important. Of course, this problem would be gradually resolved, and the emperor changed over time, he confidently relied on the Russian people, equalizing the estates in rights, democratizing society, giving it a more nationalistic character, according to the behests of his father. Unfortunately, just at this time Russia found itself in a situation where the elite cheated on their monarch and prepared a conspiracy against him. This is where the emperor lost.
A successful ruler, reformer, military man, who else from the rulers of Russia in the XX, and even in the XXI centuries, can boast of such brilliant results? He was certainly not a mediocre and weak ruler. Therefore, Nicholas II should still be recognized as one of the outstanding rulers of the Russian state.