# Tsar Nicholas the Second and Pre-Revolutionary Russia



## Sasyexa (Dec 13, 2021)

This is a translation of a series of articles about Nicholas II by Elena Il'yina - Восстановим историческую справедливость! . Accompanied by English-subtitled videos.

*Fact 1: The abdication of Tsar Nicholas II is a lie!*


_View: https://youtu.be/oxtA1SwmqMY?list=PLav-Xs_e25S3lNkO9EwxXC6VI6wkE6MBW_​


*What is new to you in this article?*

100 years after the October Revolution, a major lie about Emperor Nicholas II is revealed!

How did General Alexeev forge the manifesto on the abdication of Nicholas II?

Candidate of Historical Sciences Peter Multatuli: "The so-called Manifesto of Renunciation is a forgery".


*From a spiritual point of view*​"He who is glorified by Almighty God needs no human rehabilitation", says P. Multatuli.





*From a legal point of view*​The laws of the Russian Empire did not have such articles as the abdication of the reigning monarch. Lawyers argue that the document has no legal force. The Manifesto of Nicholas II was never published by the Senate, as required by law at the time, and its preparation was not attended by the Emperor himself, as the bearer of supreme power. That is, the fact of the abdication of the Emperor does not exist.

*From a historical point of view*​The body of historical evidence shows that by the beginning of 1916 a conspiracy of the liberal and Kadet opposition and revolutionary factions, closely allied to certain political and financial forces in the West, had been finally formed, whose aim was to overthrow the Emperor Nicholas II.

Later, a staff headed by A.I. Guchkov was established, which envisioned replacing the current monarchical ruler with a minor constitutional ruler.

The conspirators' plan was to seize the imperial train during one of the tsar's trips to the Stavka. Arresting the Emperor, it was intended to immediately force him to abdicate in favor of Tsesarevich Alexei under the regency of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich, and in case of refusal - to kill him. At the same time a constitutional order would be introduced in the country.

The author of this plan was Guchkov. Appropriate manifestos were prepared in advance. It was planned to perform all this during the night and in the morning the whole Russia and the army would know about the abdication. All this was done in the fateful days of February and March of the February Revolution in 1917.

But A. F. Kerensky had his own plans, and after the coup he saw Russia only as a democratic republic, which would be headed not by a council of regents, but by a constituent assembly. That is, not a monarchy in any form, but a republic. And Kerensky made Guchkov's plan part of his plan, because he understood that by acting openly, he would not succeed.

Guchkov established connections with the supreme military command: Adjutant General M. Alexeyev, the chief of staff of the Stavka, Adjutant General N. Ruzsky, the commander-in-chief of the armies of the Northern Front, Adjutant General A. Brusilov, Adjutant General V. Gurko, the commander-in-chief of the armies of the South-Western Front, General of cavalry. They played a crucial role in the success of the coup.

*The question of abdication was foregone.*

On February 22, 1917 the Emperor was lured to Stavka by General Alexeev and torn from the capital, which immediately began rioting. The sovereign's order to send troops to suppress the unrest was not carried out. The Tsar was seized by the conspirators and imprisoned.




*What is the paper that is commonly thought of as a manifesto?*

"The so-called Manifesto of Renunciation is a forgery. It was drawn up with gross violations of pre-revolutionary paperwork, has edits, erasures, printed using different typewriters", says P. Multatuli.

We can see that the paper was torn, i.e. was made up of pieces of different texts.

It can be seen that the letter "й" in the first half of the text was not printed fully, but in the second half it was clearly and distinctly printed.

It can be seen that the inscription "Г. Псков" was printed on a different typewriter.

Instead of the title introducing the manifesto there is the inscription: "To the Chief of Staff". It was talking about the chief of staff of the conspirators. We can assume that it was Kerensky, to whom Guchkov sent a telegram stating that the Tsar had agreed to the abdication.

The signature of the Emperor was made in pencil and traced through the glass.

Nicholas II always personally drew up the most important documents. Therefore, another document proves the invalidity of the fake manifesto: a draft of the manifesto on the abdication, made at the headquarters of the Supreme Command. The basic text is typewritten. But it contains changes by hand. At the end of the document written by the hand of Alexeev are the words, which are the beginning of a trumped-up manifesto of abdication.

*Thus, Nicholas II never wrote or signed the Manifesto of Renunciation!* He was captured by the conspirators in the train at the Pskov station Dno and forcibly deprived of power in favor of the Provisional Government.

*There was no abdication!

It was not the Tsar who abdicated from the throne, it was Russia who abdicated from the Tsar.*

Source


*Fact 2: Nicholas II is one of the strongest rulers in Russia. The myth about the weak ruler is debunked!*
"His will resembled the steady running of a stream from a mountain height..."


_View: https://youtu.be/0oNJ4HBTenI?list=PLav-Xs_e25S3lNkO9EwxXC6VI6wkE6MBW_​


At the beginning of the twentieth century, Western journalists vied with one another to write about the Russian economic miracle.

The Russian Empire was ranked first 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 kilometers of railroads per day were built;
the largest export of agricultural products in the world was established;
the ruble was the 3rd currency in the world and only convertible to gold;
birth rate growth of 2.5 million a year;
85% of young Russians were literate by 1916.



*In terms of industrial production, Russia ranked fourth in Europe and fifth in the world*, second only to the United States, Germany, Great Britain and France. *In terms of growth rates of national income and labor productivity, Russia ranked first in the world*.




*The plan of electrification of the country was approved back in 1909*, its implementation was planned for 1915, but because of the war it was postponed until 1920. After the revolution, the GOELRO plan was appropriated by the Bolsheviks.

2,000 km of railroads 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, was the brainchild of Nicholas II.

From 1895 to 1906 the river fleet doubled in size. It was the biggest in the world.

*By the production of major agricultural products Russia came in first place. It accounted for 2/5 of the world exports of agricultural products.*

Thanks to the progressive Stolypin reform, which was approved and strongly promoted by the Tsar, in 1916 *over 90% of the land belonged to the peasants*. According to the All-Russian District Census of 1917, peasants owned 89.3% of the crops and 94% of the livestock. What did Lenin's "Decree on Land" proclaim then?



​During the reign of Nicholas II, *the ruble was convertible to gold and did not depend on the currencies of other countries*. The tsarist ruble was ahead of the mark, franc and other foreign currencies, second only to the pound sterling and the dollar. "_Russia owed its metallic gold circulation exclusively to Emperor Nicholas II_", wrote S. Yu. Witte, a minister of the tsarist government.

*Russia was not a raw materials appendage!* The Emperor expressly forbade the export of round (uncut) wood and crude oil from Russia. Only Russian oil products were supplied abroad, and Russian motor oil was the best in the world.

*The population of Russia for 23 years of the reign of Nicholas II grew by more than 60 million people!* After 1917, the population only decreased (by 65 million after the repressions, famine and the Great Patriotic War).




Colossal achievements were made in the fields of invention, science, education, medicine, culture, and the social sphere. For example, spending on education and culture during the reign of Nicholas II increased eightfold and was more than twice as much as that of France and 1.5 times as much as that of England. Medicine was free, and by the number of doctors Russia was second in Europe and third in the world. In 1908 free primary education was introduced. By 1916 over 50% of the population of the empire was literate, among young people - 85%.

Under the last Emperor Russia became the pinnacle of Russian civilization, possessing political, economic, military power, the highest culture and advanced science.

Could it happen under a weak ruler?

Testimonies of historians and politicians - contemporaries of Nicholas II - about the qualities of the Emperor:

_"It is said of the Russian Emperor that he is accessible to various influences. This is deeply untrue. The Russian Emperor pursues his own ideas. He defends them with consistency and great strength. He has maturely thought out and carefully worked out plans. On the realization of them he works tirelessly."_

-Former President of the French Republic, Émile Loubaix​
_"His manners are so modest 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 us that he has a very definite will, which he is able to carry out in the calmest manner."_

-The German diplomat Count Rex​
_"The sovereign, on top of his iron hand, had a velvet glove. His will was like no thunderbolt. It did not manifest itself in explosions or violent clashes; it was more like the steady run of a stream from a mountain height to the plain of the ocean. It skirts obstacles, deviates sideways, but, in the end, approaches its goal with unwavering consistency."_

-Professor of History S. S. Oldenburg​
*Nicholas II is one of the strongest rulers of Russia and of the world! This is proven by his deeds and the successes of Russia during his reign.

The myth of the weak ruler has been debunked!*

Expert opinion [video unavailable, so here's a different one]:


_View: https://youtu.be/lc1eZ3JuU2Y_​
А. Borisyuk:

_"In Soviet times, one of the main myths was born, the myth of the dark pre-revolutionary kingdom. That is, during the Soviet era they created the illusion of a leap from the dark kingdom to a bright future. And to do this, they created this very "dark kingdom" in the minds of people. I am showing that there was no "dark kingdom" and that the history of Russia's success is not just 70 years of Soviet times. It's a thousand years of history...

Practically all the technologies of the 20th century and modern ones were born in pre-revolutionary Russia"._

*Sources:*

Боханов А. В. Николай II. – М.: Вече, 2008. – (Императорская Россия в лицах).
Бразоль Б. Л. Царствование Императора Николая II (1894 – 1917) в цифрах и фактах. – URL: http://legitimist.ru/lib/ideology/003_b_brazol_carstvovanie_imperatora_nikolaya_ii_v.pdf
Кафенгауз Л.Б. Эволюция промышленного производства с 1887 по 1926 годы. – М.: Эпифания, 1994. — 849 с. — (Памятники экономической мысли).
Ольденбург С.С. Царствование Императора Николая II. – URL: http://www.e-reading.mobi/bookreader.php/150563/Ol'denburg_-_Carstvovanie_imperatora_Nikolaya_II.html.
Платонов О.А. История русского народа в XX веке. – URL: profilib.com.


*Fact 3: Nicholas II was never "bloody"*
A New Look at the First Russian Revolution of 1905 and "The Bloody Sunday"


_View: https://youtu.be/v2_mVYyJ3h0?list=PLav-Xs_e25S3lNkO9EwxXC6VI6wkE6MBW_​


In Soviet times, all the textbooks told us about the rotten tsarist regime and the bloody Nicholas II. The Soviet Union has been gone for more than a quarter of a century, but the myths of Soviet propaganda still live on in our minds.

*You'll find out in this short article:*


Where did the nickname "bloody" came from.
What compensation the Czar awarded to the families of those killed and maimed at Khodynka Field and during the procession on January 9, 1905.
"Bloody Sunday" - a peaceful march or a political provocation of the revolutionaries?
Compare for yourself: the number of executions under the tsar and during the terror of the Bolsheviks.



Where did the nickname "bloody" come from? It is associated with two events: the Khodynka tragedy and "The Bloody Sunday". But it is enough to compare the number of victims of these tragedies with the consequences of the revolutionary terror of 1905-1910 and repressions of the 1930s by the Soviet government to understand who was a bloody terrorist in reality.




*Crowds on Khodynka Field.
May 30, 1896.*




*January 9, 1905. A group of demonstrators blocked by troops*​
The *Khodynka tragedy* took place in Moscow in May 1896 and is associated with the coronation of Tsar Nicholas II.

After the coronation, according to tradition, there were to be festivities for the people: huge tables were set up on Khodynka Field near the city walls. The townspeople and peasants were invited to a lavish festive meal as guests of the Emperor. Early in the morning, even before dawn, *more than half a million people* gathered on Khodynka.

"_Due to the unexpected number of people gathered, the police were unable to cope with the crowd, and at the moment the distribution of gifts began there was an incredible crush. After 10-15 minutes order was restored, but it was too late. There were 1282 dead and several hundred wounded on the spot_".

-Historian S.S. Oldenburg​The Bolsheviks used this tragedy as an excuse to label Nicholas II as "bloody".

Of course, Nicholas II was not personally responsible for this tragedy, but like any head of state, he took full responsibility for what had happened. He ordered to issue 1,000 rubles to each family of those killed on Khodynka field, assigned personal pensions to the families of the dead and maimed, established a special orphanage for orphaned children, and assumed all the costs of the funeral at his expense.

None of the participants in the tragedy blamed the 26-year-old Tsar, who had just ascended the throne. When the tsar visited the wounded in hospital, many of them worried and tearfully asked the tsar to forgive them, "unwise", who had spoiled "such a holiday".

"_By coincidence, on the day of the misfortune a brilliant reception was scheduled at the French embassy, for which our allies the French had long prepared, having expended enormous means and much effort on these celebrations. At the presentation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Sovereign, with a heavy heart, decided not to cancel His visit, lest He should provoke political quarrels. He put the duty of royal service above all else. At the appointed hour the Emperor arrived at the French embassy, stayed there for the minimum time stipulated by protocol, and then departed, instructing the ambassador to convey His gratitude to the French people for their friendly feelings towards Russia... His courageous gesture was rightly appreciated in the foreign press, especially the French. As for the Russian liberal public and the leftist press, they tried, for propaganda purposes, to use this incident to represent the Emperor as a heartless, ruthless and cruel man_."

-Historian E.E. Alferyev​Another event is associated with the *"bloody Sunday" of January 9, 1905*.

One of the key figures in the conspiracy was the priest G. Gapon, organizer of the strike and a mass march of workers to the tsar with a petition.

Calling for a "peaceful march", at one of the meetings Gapon addressed the workers:

"_If... they won't let us through, we will force our way through. If the troops shoot at us, we will defend ourselves. Part of the troops will come over to our side, and then we will have a revolution. We'll set up barricades, smash up armory stores, smash up the prison, occupy the telegraph office and the telephone. The SRs promised bombs... and ours will take it._" (Iskra newspaper No. 86 of 1905).

The St. Petersburg Committee of the Bolsheviks issued a proclamation:

"_Not to beg or even demand from the tsar, not to humiliate ourselves before our sworn enemy, but to throw him off the throne and expel with him the whole autocratic gang - only in this way can we win freedom."_

_

_
This is what the petrels of the "peaceful" march looked like.​
This was purely a* political provocation by the revolutionaries, who attempted, under the difficult conditions of the Russian-Japanese war, to present political demands to the tsarist authorities on behalf of the people*.

On Sunday morning, January 9, 1905 demonstrators marched from all over the city to the Winter Palace. In addition to the banners (taken by force from the church), red banners and banners with the slogans "Down with autocracy!", "Long live the revolution!" and "To arms, comrades!" appeared over the crowds.

"_The first to open fire were the provocateurs of the "peaceful" procession. The first to be killed were the police. In response, a company of the 93rd Irkutsk Infantry Regiment opened fire on the armed demonstration. There was no other way out for the police officers in principle. They were doing their duty_."

-Historian A. Borisyuk​A peaceful march turned into an armed clash with law enforcement. The result was casualties on both sides.

*From the report of the director of the police department, A. A. Lopukhin*:​​"_Electrified by the agitation, the crowds of workers, defying the usual general police measures and even the attacks of the cavalry, persistently strode toward the Winter Palace, and then, irritated by the resistance, began to attack the military units themselves. This state of affairs necessitated the adoption of emergency measures to restore order, and the military units had to act against the huge crowds of workers with firearms._​​_...The crowd set up a barricade with a red flag on the 4th line of Vasilevsky Island. In the same area two more barricades made of planks were erected, and there was also an attack on the building of the 2nd police station of Vasilevsky Island, whose premises were broken, as well as attempts to damage telephone and telegraph messages._​​_Shots were fired from the windows of houses near the barricade and the Schaff's factory of cold steel arms was looted, and the crowd tried to arm themselves with stolen blades, most of which however were taken away._​​_...The same day on Petersburg side 5 private shops and on Vasilevsky Island 2 state liquor stores were plundered_.​


​Further on the report said that "in January 9th there turned out to be 96 people killed (including the warden) and up to 333 wounded, of whom 34 died before January 27th (including one assistant bailiff)", *i.e. the total number of the killed was 130 people. The reports about "thousands of victims", spread by the liberal press in the country and abroad did not correspond to the facts*.

On the same day, the workers expressed complete remorse about what had happened in an appeal to the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg: "Only through our darkness did we allow certain persons alien to us to express political desires on our behalf".

Once again the tsar shows mercy and concern for the victims. He orders to allocate 50,000 rubles of his own funds to help the families of the dead and wounded (this was reported in the "Bulletin of St. Petersburg. Hradonachstvo" 16 of January 20, 1905). History knows of no other such case in which, during a difficult war, funds were allocated for charitable assistance to the families of the victims of an *anti-state *demonstration.

The question arises whether the decision to use weapons was not a mistake. Perhaps the authorities should have made concessions to the workers?

The historian S.S. Oldenburg, a contemporary of those events, gives an unambiguous answer: "_Concession to the advancing crowd either leads to the collapse of power or to even worse bloodshed"_.

After January 1905, a real *revolutionary terror* unfolded in the country.

"_The turmoil that began in January 1905 engulfed the entire empire. Dozens of people died daily at the hands of terrorists. From January 1905 to 1907 terrorists killed 9 thousand people, from January 1908 to January 1910 - 7 thousand 634 people. The total number of victims of terror was 16,634 people. It is noteworthy that the Russian liberal intelligentsia "traditionally" sympathized not with the victims of terror, but with terrorists, in whom progressives saw the front line of the struggle against the hated autocracy_."

-Candidate of Historical Sciences P.V. Multatuli​So what is the fault of Nicholas II? That he defended his people and the existing state system from turmoil?

Nicholas II did not need mass repression against the entire nation.

The subsequent crackdown on terrorists and rioters led to the fact that by early 1908 the revolutionary moods in the country were suppressed, the wave of bloody crimes was stopped, and life returned to normal.

*Let us compare a few figures.*

Under Nicholas II in 1908 (a record number of executions), *1,300* people were executed.

According to official OGPU-NKVD data (_source: O.B. Mozokhin_) :

- In 1921, when the Russian Civil War was in full swing, *9,701* people were executed by the OGPU:

- In 1937 (the height of Stalin's repressions), *353074* people were subjected to capital punishment!

The result of tsarist repressions was 7.5 times less than in the early years of Soviet power, and 270 times less than in one of the worst years of Stalinism.

And this is if we compare it with the official data of the OGPU-NKVD.

But there are other statistical sources.



​Thus, A.I. Ivanov's study "Demographic Losses of Russia - USSR" provides other figures based on archival statistical data. It speaks about "_the total losses of the country's population with the formation of the Soviet state, caused by its domestic policy, its conduct of the civil and world war in 1917-1959_".

The author cites such figures:

"1_. The establishment of Soviet power in 1917-1929. The number of human losses - *more than 30 million people*.

2. the costs of building socialism (collectivization, industrialization, elimination of the kulaks and the remnants of the "old classes") 1930-1939. - *22 million people*."_

(Published in the journal "Russian Renaissance" #16 for 1981)

*Total - more than 52 million people*.

So who is really bloody?

*Proclaiming Nicholas II as bloody, the ideologists of the Soviet regime tried to draw attention away from their bloody crimes.

The label "bloody" should be forever removed from the name of Emperor Nicholas the Second!*

Expert opinion:


_View: https://youtu.be/sDF_8fjWwvA?list=TLGG9iX2zfDKzQsxMjEyMjAyMQ_​
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences V.M. Lavrov:

"_The Bolsheviks used to say, and now the Communists continue to say, that Nicholas II was bloody. It is the communists who should be silent. No one in Russian history was more bloody than their leaders Lenin and Stalin!_"

*Sources:*

Алферьев Е.Е. Император Николай II как человек сильной воли. Глава IX. Русско-японская война 1904-1905 гг. Заключение мира на выгодных условиях, благодаря непоколебимой воле Императора Николая II. – URL: http://litresp.ru/chitat/ru/А/alferjev-e-e/imperator-nikolaj-ii-kak-chelovek-siljnoj-voli/11
Борисюк А.А. Миф 9 Николай II «кровавый». – URL: http://nick2.ru/nikolaj-krovavyj-razoblachaem-mif/
Первая русско-японская революция. Интервью П.В. Мультатули журналу «Православие и современность». – URL: Первая русско-японская революция | Николай II
Иванов А.И. Демографические потери России – СССР. – URL: Демографические потери России - СССР. А. И. Иванов - Журнал "Русское Возрождение". № 16. 1981 г. (IV) - Журнал "Русское Возрождение" - Архивы - Россия в красках
Мозохин О.Б. Статистика репрессивной деятельности органов безопасности СССР. – URL: 1938 | Проект «Исторические Материалы»
Ольденбург С.С. Царствование Императора Николая II. – URL: http://www.e-reading.mobi/bookreader.php/150563/Ol'denburg_-_Carstvovanie_imperatora_Nikolaya_II.html


*Fact 4: Nicholas II did not lose the Russo-Japanese War*
Doctor of History V.M. Lavrov: "Maybe we should have continued the war. But on the other hand - 200 thousand people. After all, it was the Christian tsar who said: "Let's not ruin people"


_View: https://youtu.be/5nkNopDB_-g?list=PLav-Xs_e25S3lNkO9EwxXC6VI6wkE6MBW_
​


*What the history textbooks did not pay attention to*:

Why did the country's economic growth under Nicholas II and Russia's desire to cooperate with neighboring countries provoke so much hatred from the developed world powers?

Who prepared and provoked the conflict between Japan and Russia?

Is $50 million in 1905 a lot? Is that enough money to ruin Russia?

"Bloody Sunday" - a provocation of the world powers to weaken Russia!

Academician AN Sakharov: Portsmouth Peace Treaty "grew on the basis of the common interest of not victorious Japan and not losing the war Russia.




​Russo-Japanese war was a reaction of several states - Japan, Great Britain and USA - on successfully developing Great Asian program of Emperor Nikolai II, who aspired to "cut a window to Asia" and to provide Russia with an access to non-freezing seas. Thanks to the Trans-Siberian Railway the possibility of rapid transfer of Russian goods, military equipment and troops to the Far East increased dramatically.

Foreign powers did not want to put up with this. By pitting Japan against Russia in the war they pursued the goal of depleting the strong rivals who held leading positions in politics and economics. It was the United States and Britain that supplied Japan with coal, warships and weapons for the war with Russia. *A total of 40% of Japan's military expenditures were foreign capital*.

Russo-Japanese War broke out in January 1904. Japan began warfare, contrary to international custom, without a declaration of war, launching a surprise attack on the Russian squadron, standing on the outer roads of Port Arthur.

The first year of the war ended unsuccessfully for Russia: the fall of Port Arthur and a number of defeats in Manchuria. This was due to a number of reasons.

Russians hadn't yet had time to concentrate large forces in Manchuria. They had forces in the Far East over a huge territory of Manchuria, Primorye and Transbaikalia. Japanese troops outnumbered Russian troops in military equipment and strength by more than two times.

In addition, the railroads in February 1904 could pass only one supply line, the Trans-Siberian, with only four pairs of trains a day.




All these difficulties were successfully overcome. By early summer 1905, a powerful army, perfectly armed and numerically superior to the enemy, was concentrated in the theater of military operations, and the influx of forces continued at a rapid pace. The Russians were ready to throw the Japanese into the sea.

By this point Russia was in a stable economic position, while Japan was completely exhausted. The exchange rate of the ruble was still high. Whereas the yen had plummeted, and Japan's national debt had quadrupled. A telling fact: the tax burden due to military expenditures increased in Japan by 85%, while in Russia - only 5%.

*However, a more serious danger than the Japanese threatened Russia from the "internal enemy"*. They tried to break Russia from within with the help of revolutionary parties, widely supported by the leftist intelligentsia and the notorious "public". Taking advantage of the war, these forces fomented turmoil in the country to overthrow the existing state system.

In January 1905 strikes broke out all over Russia. At a time when the country so badly needed resources for victory, the leading factories, which produced these resources, stopped!

The peaceful march of the workers on January 9, 1905, through the efforts of the organizers themselves, turned into an armed clash with the forces of law and order (see Fact 3 for details).

"Bloody Sunday" served as the beginning of the Russian Revolution and mass terror, the victims of which were thousands of officials, statesmen, representatives of the authorities.

This raises the question: who so generously financed the revolutionaries and supplied them with weapons? *A huge role was played by Japanese, British and American money*. The cause of the fight against Russian statehood brought together completely heterogeneous forces: Japanese diplomatic circles, British parliamentarians, American millionaires, Russian Social Revolutionaries, Bolsheviks and others.

In his memoirs, the prominent SRist Boris Savinkov wrote about one such fact:

_"A member of the Finnish party, Connie Cilliacus, informed the central committee that through him a donation of one million francs was received for the Russian revolution from American millionaires. And the Americans made it a condition that this money should go to arm the people and be distributed among all the revolutionary parties. The Central Committee accepted this sum, deducting 100,000 francs for the militant organization."_

Especially distinguished in subsidizing the revolutionaries was Jacob Schiff, owner of the banking house of "Kuhn, Leb & Co." in New York.

Not far behind America was Japan, whose military situation was worsening by the day. Only domestic turmoil in Russia could save it.



​Japanese Colonel Motojiro Akashi was actively engaged in subversive activities against the Russian state. Akashi developed a plan to assist the Russian revolutionaries.

In the intercepted spy document there were precise indications as to whom, in what quantity and for what purpose the considerable sums of Japanese money were intended:

_"The Japanese government, with the help of its agent Akashi, gave 15,300 pounds sterling, that is 382,500 francs, for the purchase of 14,500 rifles to various revolutionary groups. In addition, they gave 4,000 (100,000 francs) to Socialist revolutionaries and for the purchase of a yacht with the maintenance of the crew, 4,000 pounds (100,000 francs)."_

Weapons and ammunition for the Russian revolutionaries were prepared so much that it was necessary to purchase a 315-ton steamboat, "John Grafton", which managed to make three trips to deliver the cargo. Other vessels were also purchased.

The Japanese government transferred no less than 1 million yen (about 5 billion yen or 35 million dollars at today's rate) during the war, which was at that time a huge sum.

The English journalist E. Dillon in his book "The Decline of Russia" wrote:

_"The Japanese distributed money to Russian revolutionaries of known shades, and considerable sums were spent on this. I must say that this is an indisputable fact."_

Jurist, publicist A. Yu. Sorokin states:

_*"The total amount of foreign money directed 'to the revolution' in Russia was at least $50 million."*_

Under the tutelage of Japan, the liberal, socialist, and nationalist branches of the anti-Russian forces colluded. In autumn 1904 they held a meeting in Paris, which issued a resolution on the "destruction of the Autocracy" and the establishment of a "free democratic system". Its participants recognized the "usefulness" for the "liberation" of Russia of its defeat in the war with Japan and urged to contribute to it in any way possible.

The revolutionaries were directly preparing a bloody provocation and revolt. "Only I must wait," said Gapon, "for some external event; _let Arthur fall_.

It is now clear that the events of January 9, 1905 have a completely different background than has been presented so far in all the textbooks.

*In fact, it was a prearranged provocation - one of the first attempts at a color revolution in Russia!*




Under these very difficult circumstances, the Emperor made the wisest decision to conclude a peace treaty with Japan - in response to Japan's repeated offers.

But the tsar stressed at once: "_I am ready to end by peace the war which I have not begun, if only the conditions offered will be in accord with the dignity of Russia.* I do not consider us defeated, our troops are intact, and I believe in them*."_

Although the situation on the front allowed to continue the war, but internal turmoil threatened the destruction of the state.

In addition, *as a Christian, Nicholas II no longer wanted to shed Russian blood*. After hearing the report of Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich, that for the final victory it would take another year of fighting and 200 thousand losses, the Emperor decided not to ruin people and begin negotiations for peace offered by Japan.

All the humiliating clauses Japan put forward for Russia were irrevocably rejected by Nicholas II. The Emperor said: "_Any decent Russian agrees to continue the war to the end, if Japan will insist on two points: *not one inch of our territory and not one ruble payment for the war expenses*_."



​*The peace treaty was signed on August 23 (September 5), 1905*. The head of the Japanese delegation, Komura, announced in a steady voice that the Japanese government, in order to restore peace, accepted Russia's conditions. Those present, including the head of the Russian delegation, S.Y. Witte, were stunned. Nobody expected that the Japanese would refuse the contributions and agree to return half of Sakhalin which they had seized for free.

According to the academician A.N. Sakharov, the Portsmouth peace treaty, which ended the Russian-Japanese war, "grew out of the common interest of *not having won Japan, and not having lost the war Russia*".

Revolutionaries and opposition fanned the myth of the "defeat of tsarism" and the "national disgrace" that befell Russia, although it was their subversive activities that forced the tsar to negotiate and end the war.

*Thus, the world powers, simultaneously supporting both the external and internal enemy of Russia, made great efforts to overthrow the Tsarist regime in 1905. But to carry out a color revolution in Russia was not possible.

Nicholas II did not lose the Russo-Japanese war!

"Bloody Sunday" - a provocation of the world powers to weaken Russia!*

Expert opinion:


_View: https://youtu.be/lDgRU2t66ec?list=TLGGtxbSNWkxB48xMjEyMjAyMQ_​
Doctor of Historical Sciences, academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences V.M. Lavrov:

"_Maybe we should have continued the war. But on the other hand - 200 thousand people. After all, it was the Christian tsar who said: "Let us not destroy people." Could Lenin have said, "Let us not destroy people"? Could Stalin have said, "Let us not destroy people"? But Nicholas II said and saved many lives!_"

*Sources:*

Алферьев Е.Е. Император Николай II как человек сильной воли. Глава IX. Русско-японская война 1904-1905 гг. Заключение мира на выгодных условиях, благодаря непоколебимой воле Императора Николая II. – URL: http://litresp.ru/chitat/ru/А/alferjev-e-e/imperator-nikolaj-ii-kak-chelovek-siljnoj-voli/11
Первая русско-японская революция. Интервью П.В. Мультатули журналу «Православие и современность». – URL: Первая русско-японская революция | Николай II
Сахаров А.Н. Размышления о русско-японской войне 1904-1905 гг. // Вопросы истории. 2007. №4. С.3-15. – Русская императорская армия [Электронный ресурс]. – URL: http://regiment.ru/Lib/C/165.htm
Сорокин А. «Союзнички»: японская разведка и российские революционеры в 1904-1905 гг. – URL: "Союзнички": японская разведка и российские революционеры в 1904-1905 гг.


*Fact 5: Nicholas II led the country to the threshold of victory in World War I. He was prevented from crossing this threshold by traitors*


_View: https://youtu.be/6UcpXZDMC9g?list=PLav-Xs_e25S3lNkO9EwxXC6VI6wkE6MBW_​


*You will learn about the largest coup d'état in Russian history.

 A successful ruler is a talented military leader:*

What qualities and skills of Emperor Nicholas II helped him rebuild a broken army and lead it to victory in a matter of months?
What actions of Nicholas the Second astonished even Winston Churchill?
*Confession of Sinners:*

An ardent supporter of the February coup, P.N. Milyukov recalled, "We knew that victories for the Russian army were coming in the spring of 1917. In that case, the prestige and charm of the Tsar among the people would again become so strong and enduring that all our efforts to undermine and overthrow the throne of the autocrat would be in vain. That is why we had to resort to a rapid revolutionary explosion.
Conspirator N. I. Guchkov wrote: "In the autumn of 1916, the plot of a palace coup was born.
Connie Cilliacus, a member of the Finnish party, said that the Americans set the condition that the transferred money would go to arm the Russian people... they would exterminate themselves.






At the beginning of World War I the offensive of the Russian army was successful.

However, in 1915 the situation on the Eastern Front changed for the worse. The winter offensive of ill-prepared Russian army turned into a German counter-offensive in August. The Russian army was rapidly losing lost ground. Supreme Command was unable to cope with the situation, and the morale of the army was undermined.

Here is how military historian A.A. Kersnovsky describes the situation: "_The apparatus of the Stavka began to show shortcomings. At the end of July it began to be noticed, and in mid-August it finally became clear that it was no longer able to control events. The grand retreat showed the absence of a general guiding idea. The troops were left to their own devices. <...> Physically and mentally exhausted fighters, losing faith in their strength, began to surrender in tens of thousands. If June was a month of bloody losses, August 1915 may be called a month of mass surrenders. A military disaster was looming over Russia, but this catastrophe was prevented by the Tsar."_

August 23 (September 5), 1915 Emperor Nicholas II took over the Supreme Command, once again taking upon himself the heavy cross of imperial duty.

In this regard Kersnovsky wrote: "_History has often seen monarchs becoming the leaders of victorious armies for the easy laurels of victory. But she had never yet met a crowned ruler, who took upon himself the cross to lead an army, seemingly hopelessly defeated, knowing in advance that here he could be crowned not with laurels, but only thorns_."



​The decision of the Sovereign to assume the duties of Supreme Commander-in-Chief caused acute dissatisfaction among both the liberal part of society and the ministers. They tried to force him to abandon this decision. Thus, the chairman of the State Duma M. V. Rodzianko, in a letter to the Tsar, insisted on keeping this post for the Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich, and afterwards most of the members of the Council of Ministers asked the Tsar to abandon this step. Even the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna was against the decision of her son.

But the Tsar again showed his firm will and his decision remained unchanged.




Some critics pointed out that the tsar was completely unprepared for the position of Supreme Commander. However, as a cesarevitch, Nicholas brilliantly underwent comprehensive combat training in all branches of service - infantry, cavalry, artillery and navy. He knew the armed forces from the inside, paid close attention to weapons and personnel of the top military command.

Of course, the tsar could not lead all major military operations alone, without the help of military specialists. But it was in the selection of such specialists that the strengths of Nicholas II as a military commander became apparent. He appointed the most prominent figure in this war, General Alexeev, as Chief of Staff.

After Nicholas II took the supreme command, the general crisis on the Eastern Front was overcome. The titanic efforts of the Emperor, his skillful organization of the high command, his knowledge in the military field, his unwavering faith in victory inspired many.

In the short term the "shell hunger" was overcome, the supply was established, and the morale of the army was raised.

In 1916 the "lost" Russian army responded with a powerful offensive. A large-scale operation (Brusilovsky breakthrough) was carried out, during which the armies of Austria-Hungary and Germany suffered a heavy defeat, and the Russian troops occupied Bukovina and Eastern Galicia.

The British politician W. Churchill praised the efforts of Russia and her monarch:

"_Few episodes of the Great War are more striking than the resurrection, rearmament, and renewed gigantic effort of Russia in 1916. It was the last glorious contribution of the tsar and the Russian people to the cause of victory... By the summer of 1916 Russia, which 18 months before that had been almost unarmed and which in 1915 had suffered a continuous series of terrible defeats, had indeed succeeded, by her own efforts and with the help of the Allies, in fielding - organizing, arming and supplying - 60 army corps instead of the 35 with which she had begun the war_."

The emperor was confident of the victory to come. He told V. I. Mamontov: "_...I am now quite calm and confident about the future. I work hard and am aware of all our military activities, I am convinced that the victory is guaranteed for us."_

*The victory parade was scheduled for the summer of 1917. And it could have taken place, if not for the treachery of the tsar's entourage.*

One of the main instigators of the February coup, P.N. Milyukov recalled:

_"We knew that in the spring (referring to the spring of 1917 - auth. - ed.) the Russian army was going to win. In that case the prestige and charm of the Tsar among the people would again become so strong and enduring that all our efforts to undermine and overthrow the throne of the autocrat would be in vain. That is why we had to resort to a rapid revolutionary explosion."_

The organizer of the conspiracy, N.I. Guchkov, wrote:

_"In the autumn of 1916 a plan was born for a palace coup, as a result of which the tsar would be forced to sign an abdication with the transfer of the throne to the legitimate heir."_

Ministers of the State Duma, members of high society, generals from the Stavka and the higher command of the fronts were involved in and supported the coup d'etat. Some deliberately betrayed, others cowardly submitted to the traitors, even though they showed sympathy for the Emperor, while others, wresting the abdication from the Emperor, lied to him that it was done in favor of the heir, but in reality sought to overthrow the monarchy in Russia.

The "allied" Britain also had a hand in the destruction of the Russian Empire. In his report in Paris on April 8, 1917 a French intelligence officer Captain de Malacy reported: "_The prominent organizer (of the conspiracy - author - editor) was the British Ambassador Sir George Buchanan, who led everything with Guchkov. In the days of the revolution, Russian agents in British service handed out bundles of rubles to soldiers, urging them to wear red cockades_". Member of the conspiracy knyaz' Vladimir Obolensky confirmed in his memoirs that many meetings were held at Buchanan's.

On March 1, 1917, the tsar was left alone, practically captive on the train, betrayed by his subordinates, separated from his family.

"_Treason, cowardice, and deceit everywhere_", Nikolai Alexandrovich wrote in his diary.

History professor Sergei Oldenburg wrote in his book "_The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II": "The most difficult and most forgotten exploit of Emperor Nicholas II was that he led Russia to the threshold of victory under incredibly difficult conditions: his enemies did not let it cross this threshold_."




*To rearm the army and help the families of the dead and wounded, the Emperor invested his entire inheritance of 200 million rubles* (i.e. about today's $10-20 billion). Soviet historians kept silent about this fact. And for modern officials and leaders of countries such selflessness and sacrifice of the Russian monarch is a feat that cannot be repeated.

*Nicholas II did not lose World War I! By an incredible effort he created all the prerequisites for victory.

Russia's victory in the war was prevented by the treachery of the higher ranks.*

Expert opinion:


_View: https://youtu.be/aOulbqaJwGI?list=TLGG29fW5LAunkwxMzEyMjAyMQ_​
Vladimir Lavrov, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences:

_"Nicholas II was winning the war! Lenin lost it by concluding the Brest-Litovsk peace treaty. Few people have read it. But what was in that treaty? They lost Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltics; they undertook to demobilize both the old army and the newly created Red Army. But what is a country without an army? In addition, a contribution in gold."_

*Sources:*

«Действия элит бездумно вели Россию к февральскому перевороту». Беседа с епископом Егорьевским Тихоном (Шевкуновым). – URL: «Действия элит бездумно вели Россию к Февральскому перевороту». Епископ Тихон (Шевкунов) / Православие.Ru
Керсновский А.А. История русской армии. – URL: http://fb2.booksgid.com/content/E5/anton-kersnovskiy-istoriya-russkoy-armii/180.html
Ольденбург С.С. Царствование Императора Николая II. – URL: http://www.e-reading.mobi/bookreader.php/150563/Ol'denburg_-_Carstvovanie_imperatora_Nikolaya_II.html
Уинстон Черчилль о Николае II. – URL: Уинстон Черчилль о Николае II | Николай II

*Fact 6: Nicholas II ruled in an atmosphere of envy, gossip and intrigue of secular society*
Betrayal of the elite - one of the main reasons for the fall of the autocracy and the collapse of the entire country​


Doctor of History A.N. Bokhanov: "Petersburg society at that time was a fair of human vanity, a celebration of conceit and human ambition, where simple and genuine thoughts and actions had no place."

By denying the Russian culture, discrediting the monarch, the court nobility betrayed the Tsar, Russia and God. And this betrayal by members of the royal family, princes, government officials and military generals was the first major cause of the fall of the autocracy.

*What questions historians have been searching for answers to for more than 100 years*:


What was it about Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna that troubled the human conscience, preventing people from settling comfortably on earth without God?
What is the difference between satisfying one's own ambitions or truly serving one's country?
Why were the wishes of Alexandra Feodorovna and her daughters to work in the royal hospitals condemned by high society at the time?
Who among the members of the Romanov royal family vilified the monarch and his family in front of all the people?
Why were Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna not influenced by immoral society?
Disorderly relationships, promiscuous marriages, a desire for conflict and gossip, a thirst for constant revelry, the rude imposition of one's own interests - what other qualities were the higher Russian elite contaminated by?






*Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna surrounded by courtiers*​
In the memoirs of his contemporaries, the Emperor Nicholas II and the entire royal family appear in radically different images, as if they were completely different people. To find the truth, it is enough to understand what motivated the people who left their memoirs: love and devotion to the royal couple or envy and resentment. Motive is always at the heart of actions.

During the reign of Nicholas II, the moral state of society, especially the members of the royal family, was one of the main reasons for the fall of the monarchy.



*Opinion*:

Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna, the younger sister of Nicholas II, recalling in exile the attitude of the Romanov dynasty toward the Tsar and Tsarina and family traditions, said: "There is no doubt that the collapse of the Russian Empire was facilitated by the last generation of Romanovs. The fact is that all those fateful years the Romanovs, who should have been the most steadfast and faithful defenders of the throne, did not meet the standards of morality and did not adhere to family traditions.


Already in the nineteenth century, the Imperial family greatly increased, as families often had five or six children. Individual clans and parties began to arise and the rivalry between them. Not all members of the family led such an impeccable life as Alexander III and his son Nicholas II. But if under Alexander III, who ruled the family brutally, with the help of orders, the members of the family restrained themselves for fear of the Emperor's anger, then under a more delicate sovereign, which was Nicholas II, all their dislike for the royal family and the desire to assert themselves manifested in full measure.

Certainly many of the Romanovs possessed sufficient intelligence and ability to serve the Czar and their motherland, but chose to channel these abilities into satisfying their own ambitions.




*Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna. 1908*​Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna recalled: "Most of us annoyed Nicky and even made scenes in his presence to satisfy our own interests, our petty thoughts. ... Too many of us Romanovs were selfish, eaten by an insatiable appetite for pleasure and honor. This was made clear most conspicuously by the appalling indiscretions exhibited by the last generation of our family in matters of marriage. The family scandals that followed one after another could not help but shock Russian society. But did any of them care what impression they made?"

Immediately after the accession of Emperor Nicholas II there was a series of matrimonial riots as the Grand Dukes Romanovs, in violation of existing law, began to enter into unequal marriages. Even Nicholas II's brother Mikhail Alexandrovich married a scandalous divorced woman.

In contrast to similar members of the dynasty, Nicholas II was crystal clear - he was a model of an excellent family man and a deeply religious man. He dealt with matters of state while secular society fostered gossip in the salons and lounges. He preferred quiet family evenings to revelry and balls. Morally and spiritually he was far above the majority of his entourage and the dynasty, and therefore the so-called high society had to bring him down to their level, mix him with dirt. It was not for nothing that Lili Den, a friend of the Empress, aptly called this part of society "secular rabble".

Thus intrigue and gossip were born in the salons of Olga Feodorovna, Princess of Baden, wife of Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolayevich (the fourth son of Emperor Nicholas I), who was known as "the first gossiper of the Empire". Anyone who did not fawn over her became her personal enemy. Brutal slander spread from her living rooms, discrediting the royal family.

After the death of their mother, the "Mikhailovichs" continued to play their games. Years later, already in exile, Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich, grandson of Nicholas I, wrote memoirs filled with insinuations against his cousin Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna.




*Olga Feodorovna, Princess of Baden, wife of Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolayevich (left), and Maria Pavlovna, wife of Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich*​
The court of Maria Pavlovna, wife of Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich (the third son of Emperor Alexander II), who was called "Mikhen" in kindred circles, was not far behind in its manifestations of hatred and generating lies. Mikhen especially disliked Alexandra Feodorovna.

As General A.A. Mosolov, who was acquainted with court life, wrote: "Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna, a clever and imperious woman, wanted to become the Empress's confidante and guardian, but immediately received a cold and decisive rebuff, thanks to which she began to dislike the Empress.



​Even the dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna disapproved of her daughter-in-law and tried to direct her life. And after the slanders she allowed herself to criticize the tsarina in the presence of others.

"Thus," concluded A.A. Mosolov, "the Tsarina had against her the Court of the Dowager Empress and the powerful court of Maria Pavlovna, to which all St. Petersburg society adhered."

Why did Alexandra Feodorovna not please the higher society? The same reason as her husband Nicholas II. She was too sincere and wholehearted, a deep and passionate believer in God. All thoughts and feelings of the Tsarina were exalted and noble (as evidenced by her diaries and correspondence), she was ready to help and helped many at the call of her soul. She did not want and did not know how to be flattering and hypocritical, to participate in endless empty ceremonies. Such things were not forgiven or forgotten.

Alexandra Fyodorovna quickly recognized the falsehood and hostility of the aristocracy. Soon after her marriage, the Tsarina, with her usual shrewdness, wrote to her German friend the Prussian baroness Rantzau: "I feel that all those who surround my husband are insincere and that no one does their duty for the sake of duty and for Russia. All serve Him because of career and personal gain."

Everything was blamed on the Empress: the wrong "fold of the lips," the wrong facial expression, too often she nodded her head in greeting, did not support the idea of a ball in 1907, referring to the post-war mourning... Even the fact that the Empress had attracted her elder daughters to assist in surgical operations in the hospital, were condemned by society.




*Empress Alexandra Feodorovna and Grand Duchesses Olga and Tatiana with the wounded and medical personnel in the infirmary*​
Often those who had direct contact with the Grand Duchess were surprised at the extent to which their judgments about her did not correspond to reality. For example, a senior nurse at the Tsarskoselsky Hospital, V. I. Chebotareva, who for many months watched the Tsarina and the Grand Duchesses during their work in the hospital, made a very revealing entry in her diary in February 1917: "The rumor has attributed all failures, all changes in appointments to the Grand Duchess. The hair stands on end: no matter what they accuse Her of, each stratum of society from its own point of view, but a common, united gust - dislike and distrust... but if you look into Her clear, intelligent eyes, you will understand that She is incapable of a low action - so direct and clear.

Nicholas II, whose narrow family circle never discussed anyone behind the scenes, did not gossip, deeply resented this feature of the aristocracy. In the memoirs of the French ambassador to Russia, Maurice Paleologue, a phrase of the Emperor at a reception in Tsarskoye Selo is recorded: "These miasmas of Petrograd ... You can feel them here at a distance of 22 versts, and this foul spirit comes not from the people's quarters, but from the salons. What a disgrace! What a nothingness! Can one be so devoid of conscience, patriotism, and faith?"



*Opinion:*

Doctor of History A.N. Bokhanov describes aristocratic circles of that time: "During the reign of Nicholas II the dignified and court world was already so 'liberated', so 'emancipated' that the Tsar and Tsarina were seen by many as people 'of the public'. The times of reverent and awe-inspiring attitude toward royalty have fallen into oblivion. Claims of a philistine nature were often made against the Crowned Rulers, forgetting and unwilling to remember that they were elevated to this place by God.


The gossip of high society was multiplied by the press, repeated by laymen, and relished by unscrupulous historians. If the Romanovs themselves allowed themselves to blacken the monarch, who embodied the highest power, God's anointed, then what about the other classes?

"The living rooms of lordly mansions, the aristocratic salons of the capital, and the private rooms of fashionable restaurants and expensive taverns became arenas for heated discussion. Here was formed what in Russia was considered "public opinion". And it was not shaping up in favor of the new monarch. Gradually it spread to different social strata, and by the beginning of the 20th century a critical attitude towards the autocracy became a "good tone" in the circles of the so-called progressive society. To be called a "progressive" was quite easy: one had only to speak out against "despotism", criticizing and ridiculing all endeavors of the authorities. Petersburg society at that time was a fairground of human vanity, a triumph of conceit and human ambition, where simple and genuine thoughts and deeds had no place", Bokhanov rightly notes. And he draws an unambiguous conclusion: "This public anti-Tsar psychosis made a revolutionary catastrophe inevitable".

The more the Tsar and Tsarina did for the benefit of the Fatherland, the louder were the voices of their opponents. Moral lifestyle, devotion to God, pursuit of Russian spiritual traditions, the high human qualities of the monarchs - all this was a mute reproach to many representatives of high society, wallowing in envy, gossip, intrigue and a desire for pleasure. Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna "troubled the human conscience, preventing people from settling comfortably on earth without God. Therefore the lives of the holy ascetics were inevitably accompanied by blasphemy and slander.

It is on this basis of prejudiced "public opinion", abounding in intrigue and slander, was born a conspiracy of ministers and generals, which led to a coup d'etat in February 1917. In six months the power of the traitors also fell.



*Fact:*

Not even nine months after the October Revolution, the new government killed the Tsar and the entire royal family - the last monarchs of Russia, who embodied the power of God on earth, the symbol of autocracy. What happened next is known to everyone: the millions of victims of the civil war, famine and repression. Sowing the wind, the country reaped the storm.


*By denying Russian culture and discrediting the monarch, the court nobility betrayed the tsar, Russia and God. And this betrayal of the elite was the first major cause of the fall of the autocracy.*

Expert opinion:


_View: https://youtu.be/l7LYAK-nWwc?list=TLGGA9PFfY-rhkExMzEyMjAyMQ_​
"Revolution is a phenomenon caused by a split among the elites." - Doctor of History Kirill Solovyov and historian, political scientist Alexei Martynov - about the factors that led to the revolution of 1917.

Fragment from the film "The Country that We Don't Pity".

*Sources:*

12 встреч с Николаем II. Встреча вторая: Алиса. – URL: Встреча  вторая.  Алиса. — 12 встреч с Николаем II.
Боханов А.Н. Святая царица. – М.: Вече, 2006. – 304с.
Боханов А.Н. Николай II. – М.: Вече, 2008. – 528 с.
Мемуары Великой Княгини Ольги Александровны / Запись Я. Ворреса. – М.: Захаров, 2003. – 272 с.


----------



## Sasyexa (Dec 15, 2021)

_View: https://youtu.be/7O2e3j7IInU_​


----------



## Sasyexa (Dec 16, 2021)

Григорий Распутин - оболганная жизнь
Grigori Rasputin: Belied Life - Belied Death
*Grigory Rasputin: Slandered Life. The Secret Hidden for 100 Years*




December 17 (30), 2016 was the 100th anniversary of the death of Grigory Yefimovich Rasputin.

The villainous murder of Rasputin was preceded by inhuman slander and lies aimed at discrediting the royal family, depriving the country of a strong monarchical power, weakening Russia, which by that time held a leading place in the political and economic life among the world powers.

In our time, interest in the royal theme, the personality of Rasputin does not fade. More and more there are publications where the events and personalities are presented in the light of truth. We offer for your attention one of such publications, *"Grigory Rasputin: the belied life, the belied death"*. The author of the article is a Russian philologist and writer *Tatyana Mironova*.

*Falsification of identity - creation of a double*​
Fabrication of historic documents and lies with reference to «eyewitnesses’ reports» are well-developed and time-tested methods used by history falsifiers. But creating a completely false personality, presenting a person as someone else is a sophisticated fraudulent invention with no precedents in the history of the Judaic hatred towards a Christian state.

Grigory Rasputin was hateful to the enemies of the Tsar. They targeted Grigory Yefimovich when their real aim was the Tsar’s family and the Monarchy itself. False accusations were made against Grigori Rasputin and his personality was fabricated. The intellectual society in Russia longed for rumors and trusted them more than newspapers. Even Admiral Kolchak criticized the Tsar for having Rasputin as his close friend though he never met Rasputin. Here is a good example of how it worked. When Admiral Kolchak was serving in the Pacific Fleet, he hardly managed (according to him) to suppress the officers’ revolt in response to the rumor that Rasputin arrived in Vladivostok and wished to attend the warships. Kolchak himself was indignant at Rasputin but soon the rumors turned out wrong. Grigory Yefimovich was not in Vladivostok but aversion to the Elder after this case remained with Kolchak, as he himself confessed.

The French ambassador Maurice Paleologue also wrote about Rasputin but only on the basis of gossip and rumors circulating in Petersburg, retelling various lies. He met Rasputin only once at a party at Countess L. and this meeting did not give him reasons to think bad of Rasputin. The only thing he noticed was «a man with shrewd eyes» who looking at the arrogant Frenchman said: «There are fools everywhere» and left. Paleologue did not think it referred to him and that’s the only reason he gave a precise quote in his memoirs.

Who hated Grigory Yefimovich and why? Who and what did he interfere with? What was he hated for?

In 1912, when Russia was ready to intervene in the Balkan conflict, Rasputin was begging the Tsar on his knees not to start military actions and, of course, he prayed to God to guide the Tsar’s heart. According to Count Witte, «he (Rasputin) revealed all the disastrous consequences of the European conflict and thus turned history around. The war was prevented». The power of Rasputin’s prayers was so horrifying to the initiators of the war in which Russia had to be involved so that, according to Engels, «crowns would fall to the ground», that these initiators decided to kill Grigory Rasputin upon their new attempt to start the world war on the same date and hour when Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated in Sarajevo which triggered World War I. Rasputin was wounded heavily and while he was unconscious and could not pray, the Tsar had to start a nation-wide mobilization in response to the declaration of war by Germany against Russia. The enemies of Russia realized the threat to their destructive, anti-Russian and anti-monarchy plans which Rasputin presented. Purishkevich said in the Duma representing everyone who hated the monarchical Russia about the main obstacle to overthrowing the Tsar: «While Rasputin is alive, we cannot win».

Meanwhile Grigory Yefimovich Rasputin was just a humble religious man deeply convinced that his power rested in belief in God of those asking for prayers. Grigory Efimovich found himself in Saint Petersburg in 1904 to ask for permission to build the Church of Protection of the Holy Virgin in his native village of Pokrovskoye. It was the time when the Tsarevich was just born and his parents realized that hourly prayers to God were needed to save the child’s life. Looking around for potential heirs to the Imperial throne in Russia, the Tsar could see no one with a pure and believing heart who could take over and rule Russia.

The little Aleksey Nikolayevich given to the Tsar’s family by prayers of Seraphim of Sarov was the only hope of the Tsar for the well-being of the country he deeply and truly loved. He was like a ray of sun, a kind, bright child and a true consolation to the Tsar’s family who was afraid to think of anything bad happening to him. He was given to the Tsar by prayers of a holy man and could be kept alive only by the prayers of another holy man. He suffered from hemophilia which was painful and dangerous but not fatal. The sons of Tsarevich Aleksey could be absolutely healthy. God sent to the Tsar’s family a holy man who could pray for their son.

Grigory Yefimovich Rasputin was introduced to the Tsar in October 1905. Grigory Yefimovich at the first meeting with the Tsar and Tsarina knew about his godsent purpose and spent all his remaining life serving the Tsar. He stopped his pilgrimage and stayed in Saint Petersburg gathering around him people devoted to the Tsar. Most importantly he was close by every time the Tsarevich needed him as his prayers for the child (probably even unexpectedly for Rasputin himself) were heard and answered by God. This godly help to the Tsarevich was a sign for the Tsar that in the most difficult times of his tsardom God sent him a spiritual mentor. According to Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna, the Tsar and the Tsarina «saw in him a rustic whose true devotion made him a holy man». The honest investigator V.M. Rudnev, a member of the Emergency Commission of the Provisional Government, wrote in his official investigation report that the Tsar and the Tsarina were deeply convinced that Rasputin was a holy man, the only one who could pray to God for the Tsar, Tsar’s family and Russia.



​There are true facts supported by many witnesses when Rasputin saved Tsarevich Alexey’s life. In 1907 when the Tsarevich was three years old, he had a strong bleeding which started from his leg in the Tsarskoye Selo Park. Grigory Yefimovich was sent for, he prayed and the bleeding stopped. In October 1912 in Spala, the Tsar’s hunting area in Poland, Tsarevich Alexey Nikolayevich was almost hopeless after a serious injury and his doctors Fedorov and Rauhfus insisted on publishing bulletins about the Tsarevich’s health. The Tsarina however did not expect much help from the doctors. Instead she was hoping for the grace of God. At that time Rasputin was in his home village of Pokrovskoye. Anna Vyrubova sent a telegram to Rasputin following the Tsarina’s request. A response from Rasputin arrived promptly: «God saw your tears. Do not worry. Your Son will live». An hour after the telegram was received, the Tsarevich’s condition improved drastically. He was no longer in danger.

In 1915 when the Tsar followed the troops, he took Alexey Nikolayevich with him. On the way his nose started bleeding. The train turned back as the Tsarevich was bleeding to death. He was in his room, with «his small pale face and bloodstained cotton in his nostrils». Grigory Yefimovich was sent for. «He arrived at the palace and went to the Tsarevich’s room accompanied by his parents. According to them he came up to the Tsarevich’s bed, made the sign of the cross upon him and said to his parents that it was not serious and they had nothing to worry about. Then he turned away and left. The bleeding stopped… The doctors could not understand how that happened».

Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna wrote: «There were thousands and thousands of people who firmly believed in the power of prayers and healing faculties of this man». Grigory Yefimovich regularly healed people with the help of God.

The prayers for the Tsarevich and his health were just a small part of what Rasputin did for his Tsar. He often saw the sophisticated lies and evil schemes plotted behind the Tsar’s back. He warned the Tsar against many decisions potentially dangerous for the country. He was against convening the last Duma, asked not to publish the seditious speeches pronounced at the Duma meetings. Just before the February Revolution he insisted on bringing food supplies to Petrograd – bread and butter from Siberia. He even thought of pre-packaging flour and sugar to avoid lines which gave a start to disturbances in the artificially created bread crisis and which were skillfully transformed into a «revolution». These are just some of Rasputin’s prophesies for the war and pre-revolutionary Russia in 1914-1917. Grigory was able to see people’s true nature and thus knew the souls and true intentions of the people close to the Tsar. He realized that Grand Duke Nicholas Nikolaevich being the Commander in Chief would not only bring failure to the army but also presented danger to the monarchy. Rasputin insisted that the Tsar should himself be the Commander in Chief and success of the Russian army followed immediately.

Rasputin’s clairvoyance amazed everyone who met him. According to the words of Grigory Yefimovich’s daughter Varvara written down by N.A. Sokolov in 1919, once a woman came to Rasputin’s apartment. «Dad approached her and said: «Just give me what you are holding in your right hand. I know what it is». The lady took her hand out of her sleeve and handed him a revolver».

Rasputin was all-knowing and his God-given far-sightedness was acknowledged not only by those who were spiritually close to him. Rasputin’s murderer Felix Yusupov wrote in desperation: «I have been studying occultism for a long time and I can assure you people like Rasputin with such magnetic power come along once in several centuries… No one can replace Rasputin, thus his elimination will have positive consequences for the revolution». The enemies of the Tsar intending to overthrow him by «disturbing the public» concentrated their efforts on false allegations against Rasputin. A special conference was even convened in 1912 in Basel which decided that all effort should be concentrated on discrediting Rasputin. Talking about the hardships caused by libel Grigory Yefimovich wrote to Metropolitan Antony (Vadkovsky) who stopped communication with Rasputin: «That’s all because I’m with the Tsar’s family. That’s what I suffer for». He wrote to Metropolitan Antony (Khrapovitsky) who believed accusations against Rasputin: «Do not take it unkindly. I will do no harm to you and _if I have fallen in your eyes, then pray, pray for Grigory and let the Jews criticize me if they wish»_.

The bishops and metropolitans in whose eyes Rasputin «fell» did not believe the Jewish newspapers but how were they to ignore the words of Bishop Feofan (Bystrov). A woman came to confess to him and told about the «frivolous behavior» of Rasputin. Bishop Feofan who could not imagine anyone lying in front of the cross and Gospel believed the woman. Feofan broke the seal of confession and revealed what he had heard to the Tsarina and synodic metropolitans. Feofan was used by the libelers and far-sighted Rasputin expected that: «They will send evil people, and evil tongues are worse than demons – not afraid of holy cathedrals, Holy Communion or anything else».

How could Grigory Yefimovich explain his non-existing sins and whom could he explain them to? The Tsar and the Tsarina every day saw and felt his holy help and did not believe any libel. The others – bishops, Feofan who broke the seal of confession (that woman later confessed to libel), just criticized and accused the Tsar and the Tsarina for their closeness to Grigory. Grigory Yefimovich did not made excuses to anyone. He just prayed to God and his prayers are his acquittal for all times: «It is hard to live with all these wrongful accusations. God, they write horrible things! Give me patience and seal the lips of the enemies! Or grant me Your help and the eternal happiness of Your bliss». «Oh the miserable devil brought entire Russia against me as if I am a criminal! The devil is always left with nothing. God, save us!».

Praying for the Tsar and Tsarevich, Grigory Yefimovich prepared them too for the last expiatory heroic deed for Russia: «God will never leave you but console and strengthen… God’s bliss is with you, the Tsar and with your children». He sincerely explained to the Tsar’s family the essence of the divine revelation about his service to the Tsar: «I am confident that you have learned from me. Later when hardships follow you will be ready and understand it». He sent to the Tsar his gold cross. A cross as a gift always meant that with the cross the person would receive grief and sufferings. The Tsar did not wear this gift from Grigory Yefimovich and gave it to Yuliya Den who lost it. After Rasputin’s death the Tsar had the cross returned to him and put it on. The Tsar’s wore Rasputin’s gift till the last days of his life.

Going though all the sufferings for the Christ the Tsar’s family recalled the prophecies made by Rasputin and realizing that these trials were sent by God were getting ready for their last days. They remembered that Grigory had predicted that they would visit his native village when they were on a ship going through the Pokrovskoye village to Tobolsk. Later when the Tsar, Tsarina and Grand Duchess Mariya Nikolaevna were riding through Pokrovskoye, they stopped at the house of their holy man. Grigory Yefimovich predicted that long ago and told about that not only to the Tsarina but to many others as well, including Yuliya Den: «They must come. Of their own will or not they will come to Tobolsk. Before they die, they will see my native village».

They knew about the prophetic consolation sent by Grigory Yefimovich to their little son Aleksey and of course knew what it was about: «My dear boy! Look at Jesus! Do you see his wounds? He suffered once and then became strong and powerful. You will be strong and happy too. We will live and will die. See you soon». They remembered that Rasputin had promised them that Tsarevich Aleksey would be healthy by 13-14 years, he would no longer be sick. They realized that Rasputin’s prophetic words written down by the Tsarina (in her notes) were about their fate: «God, your servants will be abused. Your enemies say lies, disgrace the words of the Anointed one. Oh grief! Tell us: we killed a holy man and he did not speak against us, let us go and confess our sins. The sun has gone down and there is no light! Too late!».

This person, the Tsar’s Friend (in the most important meaning of this word) who always spiritually accompanied the Tsar in his devotion as the Lord’s Anointed, was murdered first spiritually by libel and accusations in order to separate Rasputin from the Tsar and break this holy union, a strong wall between the Tsar and His enemies willing to see Russia fall. Many people from close or far, those who believed these lies talked to the Tsar and Tsarina, wrote them insulting letters, threatened them and demanded to banish Rasputin from the court! Could the Tsar and Tsarina do that? Would Peter the Great stop seeing the Holy Bishop Mitrofany of Voronezh if the boyars demanded that? Would Alexander III banish John of Kronstadt who was maliciously called in Petersburg «the Rasputin of Alexander III»? Libel did not affect the Tsar and his family. The monarchy remained indestructible by prayers of the holy man Grigory. Libel however affected the crowd of intellectuals who forgot about their devotion to the Tsars.

Almost all memoirs about Grigory Yefimovich Rasputin have one surprising flaw. Most memoirists never met Grigory Rasputin or saw him in passing or from afar. However all «memoirists» both those who sympathized with the Tsar’s family and those who did not, had the same attitude towards Rasputin and described him with the same words: a drunkard with an unrestricted sexual life, uncontrollable and selfish, Khlyst. What did they know about him? But for rumors, what could the Duma freemasons Pavel Miluykov and Alexander Kerensky, poet Zinaida Gippius, poet Alexander Blok and the English ambassador James Buchanan say about Rasputin? They all wrote in their memoirs: «I have never sought a meeting with Rasputin as I did not consider it necessary to establish a personal relationship with him». They never even met Rasputin but were zealously reporting the rumors about him. General Sukhomlinov saw him only once at the Sevastopol railway station in 1912: «Walking back and forth on the platform he was staring at me but his stare had absolutely no effect on me». However this did not prevent the General from telling in his memoirs all rumors he had heard about Rasputin and putting the blame for his resignation on Rasputin. Archpriest Shavelsky saw Rasputin «twice and from afar: first time on the platform at the Tsarskoye Selo railway station and in 1913 at the Romanov festivities in Kostroma». Shavelsky could not remember anything improper about his personal meetings with Rasputin. However he remembered well the rumors about Rasputin and the Tsar’s children he had heard from the governess of Grand Duchesses Ms. Sofiya Ivanovna Tuytcheva, a mentally-ill woman (who was dismissed for that reason) who came to Shavelsky for «advice». General V.N. Voyekov and resident tutor P. Zhilyar who were sincerely fond of the Tsar’s family could hardly say that they knew Rasputin. Zhilyar wrote about his only meeting with Rasputin: «Once I met him in the hall on my way out. I was looking at him while he was taking off his coat. He was tall with an exhausted face and had grayish blue eyes looking from under heavy eyebrows. He had long hair and a big beard like peasants do». How could «several moments» be enough to describe him as a «drunkard and debauchee ruling the country»? The book by Zhilyar published in Vienna in 1921 had an ambiguous title: «Emperor Nicholas II and his family. After personal memories of Pierre Zhilyar, the former tutor of Tsarevich Aleksey Nikolaevich». What does «after personal memories» mean? Does it mean that someone retold Zhilyar’s memories? How can we know that those writing after Zhilyar’s memories did not put some of their own ideas in the book as it happened in numerous republications of Anna Taneeva’s (Vyrubova) memoirs when tendentious inserts were made by unknown editors and the most important passages were taken out of the book? The court superintendant General Voyenkov spoke to Rasputin once «with a special purpose – to make his own opinion of Rasputin». Voyenkov’s opinion of Grigory was unfavorable though he noticed nothing bad during his talk with Rasputin: «He seemed a shrewd man trying to pretend being something else than he really was. At the same time I could feel an amazing magnetic power in him!». Voyenkov was shocked by a difference between the Rasputin he saw and the Rasputin whose image was formed in general public according to rumors. The surprising part is that Voyenkov preferred believing rumors than his own eyes.

Fortunately some other people wrote memoirs as well. General Kurlov published his book titled «The Fall of the Imperial Russia» in Berlin in 1923. The General never belonged to the Rasputin’s circle so his enemies could not accuse the General of being biased. Moreover, he was a professional policeman, director of the Police Department, head of the Chief Prison Administration and a friend of the Minister of the Interior. He had huge experience dealing with people with criminal intentions and deeds and that’s the image created for Rasputin in the general public. He had no reasons to defend Rasputin and the Tsar’s family after 1911 as with Stolypin’s assassination his own life and career were destroyed. Kurlov described Rasputin as he himself saw him. «I was in the Minister’s office when the courier on duty brought Rasputin in. A thin man with a dark beard and shrewd clever eyes approached the Minister. He sat at a big round table with Stolypin and started explaining to him that all these accusations against him were false and he was just a harmless religious man… Afterwards I told the Minister of my impression of him. I thought Rasputin was that type of a sly hard-headed Russian man and he did not seem a charlatan to me». «I first talked to Rasputin in the winter of 1912 at one of my acquaintances’… I had the same impression of his appearance as when I had seen him in the Minister’s office… Rasputin treated me with great distrust knowing that I served for the deceased Minister who he could, not without reason, consider as his enemy… This time I was impressed with Rasputin’s deep knowledge of the Scripture and religious issues. He was self-composed and did not mention once his closeness to the Tsar’s family. I did not notice any signs of his hypnotic power and after our conversation I thought to myself that most of the rumors (which Petersburg is always so greedy for) of his influence on the people around him were not true» . Next time Kurlov met him «Rasputin showed vivid interest in the war as I had just arrived from the battle grounds. He asked my opinion of the possible outcome and emphasized that he considered the war with Germany a huge disaster for Russia… Being against the war he still considered that it should be completed and with great patriotism he talked about God helping the Tsar and Russia… That means that accusations of high treason against Rasputin are false just as accusations against the Tsarina… I talked to Rasputin several times during his last months. I met him at Badmaev’s and was impressed with his innate intellect and practical understanding of the current political issues».



​Thus libel had no effect on the Tsar’s family. Rasputin’s prayers served as a protective shield for them. The enemy of the monarchy and the Tsar’s family Felix Yusupov talked about that to freemason V.I. Maklakov: «The Tsar believes in Rasputin so much that if there were an uprising and people were going to the Tsarskoye Selo, the troops sent against them would either run away or join the rebels and the Tsar would be left alone with Rasputin, if Rasputin told him «Do not be afraid», the Tsar would not give in». That’s why a decision was taken to kill the Tsar’s friend leaving the Tsar’s family alone, without spiritual and religious support. The public murder of Rasputin required making the general public want this murder. The flow of false accusations had to be multiplied to discredit the Tsar’s family. A Judaic scheme was invented for that with the use of a Rasputin impersonator.

The first suspicions about the Rasputin’s impersonator used to discredit the Tsar’s family arose soon after Rasputin’s murder. An evidence of it is a story told by the cossack chieftain of the Don Troops Count Grabbe that soon after Rasputin’s murder he «was invited for breakfast by Duke Andronnikov who reportedly used Rasputin’s help in his affairs. Entering the dining room Grabbe was shocked to see Rasputin standing in the adjacent room. A man who looked exactly like Rasputin was standing next to the table. Andronnikov looked at his guest inquiringly. Grabbe pretended not to have noticed the likeness of that man with Rasputin. The man stood there for a while, then left the room and never appeared again». While Grigory was still alive, such «impersonator» could appear in any improper places, drink, make scenes and play around with women. Daily reports about that were published in newspapers always eager for dirty details. Such impersonator could leave the apartment on Gorokhovaya Street and go to a prostitute which was recorded in daily reports of security agents. Yuliya Den wrote in bewilderment: «They reported that Rasputin had been debauching in the capital while in fact he was in Siberia at that time».

One story connected with the Rasputin impersonator was told by Nadezhda Teffi in her memoirs. In 1916 Teffi who at that time worked for the Russkoye Slovo newspaper, writer Vasily Rozanov working for the Novoye Vremya and Izmailov from the Birzhevuye Vedomosty newspaper were invited for dinner to a publisher to whom Manasevich («well-known in the literary circles») suggested «inviting some writers interested to see Rasputin». The writers arrived at the said time and saw «Rasputin». «He was wearing a wool grey Russian caftan and high varnished boots. He was restless, turned round all the time and fidgeted on his chair… He was quite tall and lean with a sparse beard and a thin face with a long fleshy nose. He was staring with his closely set shrewd eyes from under strands of oily hair… He would say something and then look around as if asking everyone whether they were happy with what he had said or were surprised». The writer immediately noticed that there was something artificial about the situation. «Something in Rasputin’s manner – his anxiety or desire to please – showed that he knew who he dealt with. He felt like he was surrounded by «hostile journalists» and pretended to be a pious man». These thoughts made the meeting «boring» for Teffi. It seemed that «Grishka was acting out a certain scenario». He said a couple of words about the «heavenly»: «I want to go back to Tobolsk and pray. It is nice to pray in my native village», and then he immediately started convincing a lady next to him to drink: «Drink, I tell you, God will forgive you!», then explicitly started inviting her over to his place. Finally he had his poems brought and recited one of them: «Mountains are high and beautiful. But my love is higher and more beautiful for my love is for God», then he wrote a couple of lines himself «in a hardly decipherable handwriting» – «God is love. You are free to love. God forgive. Grigory». Then the host approached Rasputin looking worried and said there was a call from the Tsarskoye Selo. Rasputin left the table and did not come back.

This was not the last meeting with the Rasputin impersonator. A second invitation followed a few days later. «Manasevich came, insisted on our coming (just like an entrepreneur! – said Teffi) and showed a precise guest list». Most of them _did not know each other_ and came just to see Rasputin. The same scenario was acted out as a broken record: religious talks, sweet talking to ladies, speaking about the Tsarina with a dirty undertone. «The host was constantly filling up his glass saying that was his favorite wine». «Rasputin» got drunk, then loud music started playing. «Rasputin jumped up and started dancing… as if someone called for him. He seemed lost and tense… as if in a hurry and _not of his free_ _will_ he was deliriously jumping around. Rozanov exclaimed: «Khlyst!»… Suddenly Rasputin stopped. Immediately. The music stopped too as if _the musicians knew what to do_».

The writer’s intuition made Teffi suspect that «some unknown things, evil deeds were done at these meetings». Her suspicion was confirmed. Drunken «Grishka» gave away that he knew they were reporters. Teffi wrote: «That was really strange. We were not seeking to meet him. We were _invited to meet him_ and moreover advised not to tell who we were as «Grisha did not like reporters» and avoided them. It turned out that our identity was known to Rasputin and he did not hide from us. On the contrary he wanted to establish a closer relationship. What kind of game was this? Was it all arranged by Manasevich? What for? We did not know». It was indeed done by Manasevich (who was a Jew) for one reason. He wanted the writers and reporters see the «real Rasputin» – drunk, amorous and selfish, belonging to the Khlysty sect. «Anyone I told about this meeting with Rasputin showed incredible interest. They asked about each word Rasputin said and wanted a detailed description of his appearance. Most importantly they all wanted to know if they could go to these meetings», wrote Teffi. This is just what Manasevich wanted.




The director of these «Rasputin» performances Manasevich-Manuylov, who was a Jew, was a professional swindler. Long before the Rasputin performances he was widely advertising his connections in the upper circles offering patronage in various affairs in exchange for large sums of money – from permission to open a barber shop to a petition for arrested people and assignment to a state position. He could instantly satisfy requests by talking on the phone with either the Minister of the Interior or the Head of the Government who assured him on the phone that the issues his petitioners asked for would be solved in the near future. Manasevich took a fee for his services from people who believed in his authorities and further avoided them accepting new petitioners. His fraudulent activity most often remained unpunished. His petitioners did not have any witnesses and primarily asked Manasevich for something illegal so they did not make official claims against him.

When Manasevich started his performances with the impersonator, his benefits doubled. His schemes often worked due to the magic power of Rasputin’s name. This surely lead to increased accusations against Rasputin which Manasevich was obviously paid for. The absence of punishment was guaranteed here as well. The «performances» described by Teffi were not illegal. The impersonator never introduced himself as Grigory Rasputin. The guests were just told in advance that they would meet Rasputin. The impersonator did not usually say anything bad about the Tsar’s family but he talked about his closeness to the Tsar and the Tsarina which discredited them as such a rascal was accepted by the Tsar. If the police were to come to such a meeting and asked this «Grishka» for his documents, he would innocently hand over his passport with his real name, thus avoiding any responsibility for this «show». Such schemes were frequent and impudent due to the lack of punishment. The story of a debauch in the Moscow restaurant "Yar" is one of them.

On March 26th, 1915 Grigory arrived in Moscow and left the city on the same day. However the report by Colonel Martynov said that «according to Colonel Semenov of the second section of the Suchshevsky Police Department of Moscow» on March 26th around 11 p.m. Rasputin arrived at the "Yar" restaurant with a widow Anisya Reshetnikova, reporter Nikolay Soedov and an unidentified young woman. Later they were joined by _Semen Lazarevich Kugulsky, the publisher and editor of the Novosti Sezona newspaper_. They drank a lot. Inebriated Rasputin started dancing, behaved improperly, bragged of his power over the «old woman» (that’s how this man referred to the Tsarina). Around 2 a.m. they left the restaurant. Martynov attached a hand-written note by Rasputin taken by the police from a singer in the restaurant. The handwriting looked like that of Rasputin but it was not actually written by him: «Your beauty is higher than the mountains. Grigory». The content of the note is directly related to what Rasputin’s impersonator wrote for Teffi: «Mountains are high and beautiful. But my love is higher and more beautiful». This is more than just a coincidence. It indicated that one and the same person impersonated Rasputin in the restaurant and during the meeting with the writers. The note was the only «documented evidence» in the debauch case in the "Yar" restaurant. There were no witnesses or participants of the «orgy». Thus the Tsarina had good reasons to write to the Tsar: «He (holy man Grigory) was belied. As if they couldn’t have called the police and arrest him immediately».

The Moscow restaurant "Yar" hosted Rasputin’s impersonator and his false party. They used the usual scenario: drinking, frivolous behavior with ladies, mentioning the Tsar’s family and Khlysty ecstatic dancing. If the police had arrived, they would have discovered that this man was not Rasputin and Anisya Reshetnikova, a pious widow of 76 years old, had never been to the restaurant. However the Jewish journalist Semen Lazarevich Kugulsky was real and he most probably directed and staged this «orgy». He made sure the debauch in the "Yar" restaurant got to the newspapers with numerous indecent details prior to investigation. The State Duma later made an inquiry about the incident in the "Yar" restaurant and cancelled it purposefully, spreading the rumors that the Duma was not allowed to investigate the case as the Tsar’s family was «afraid of the truth». That started a whole new wave of accusations and criticisms – a drunken man with unrestricted sexual desires, the favorite of the Tsar’s family!

That was how skillfully and audaciously the Rasputin impersonator was introduced to the public. Though the impersonator’s actions, his words, notes and even his appearance (long fleshy nose, sparse beard, shifty eyes) were quite different from pious Rasputin, he was consistently presented and eagerly accepted as the holy man and friend of the Tsar’s family.

Let’s now have a look at the so-called «notes» by Rasputin which were used for fabrication of his personality. Two letters were written to the Russkoye Slovo newspaper addressed in uneven handwriting to «Grigory Spiridonovich Petrov and Editor of the Rutskoye Slovo from Grishatka Rasputin, Pokrovskoye Village, Tobolsk Guberniya» [imagine a few grammatical mistakes here].

These letters are included in the inventories as hand-written by Grigory Rasputin. However the first attentive reading reveals two important circumstances making their authenticity doubtful. First, the author of the letters made his handwriting look like the awkward writing of an illiterate peasant and tried to write letters not evenly on line but jumping here and there, specially distorting some letters making them unrounded and with no right slant characteristic for cursive handwriting of an educated person. He tried to show that the author of the letter was not used to writing a lot however some letters are written with calligraphic precision which can be acquired only in spelling lessons at school.

Sometimes the author accidentally went back to his own handwriting and then we see a hand of an educated person accustomed to doing paper work. The letters then have a strong right slant, they are rounded, written on a straight line without jumping. Some of the letters forming the basis for cursive writing are written particularly skillfully. If we compare these letters to the documents truly handwritten by Grigory, even a cursory look at them shows their difference from the fabricated letters. The actual handwriting of Rasputin though uneven and with unconnected letters is still quite confident. There are very few variations of letters.

The second reason to believe the letters were not written by Grigory Rasputin is corrections to letters made in the entire text to make it look untidy and «illiterate». The forger changed letters in some words and introduced spelling mistakes to the already written correct words _(kh*o*dit – kh*a*dit, ruga*tsya* – ruga*ts*a, otpravim*sya* – otpravim*se*)_. In his attempt to make it sound authentic he even invented a non-existing word («estim»).

The forgery also displays awkward imitation of the folk language in the letters. Here are these non-convincing writings filled with folk phrases and sayings.

Letter 1. «Shame on you, Grisha, for removing me from my native land. What kind of politician are you? You just get crazier going around with the crazy. You, dear, do not blame Grisha if he did not do right. Grishka Rasputin».

Letter 2. «To Grisha Petrov. Why do you, Grisha, use such a language, want to go around with sabers – so you don’t want to be a saber-fencer either. You might soon get it. Anything might happen. If someone is published in «Russkoye Slovo». Grishkas never ask Grishkas not to be sly in brandishing «sabers» for lasciviousness. And, heh, Grisha, Grisha, don’t be shy. Should I beg your pardon when you are already ivying me absolutely for nothing, and in such a way that I am totally terrified. When not much depends on me. You know not much although are bold. I mean no evil to you. I mean no evil to you, I even never wished you to be weak not to yank that much. And you got so bitter that glued me up in stench with horrid worms. Beware, God might punish you for that. I don’t mean to threaten you, I’m just appealing to your conscience and the truth. And don’t deny you’ve been playing the fox. Whatever you try to do with the sabers you can do it this way or another. The village of Pokrovskoye, Tobolsk gubernia. Grisha Rasputin».



> Письмо 1-е. "И какъ тебе Гриша нестыдно ругатца кады ты меня естимъ атъ обчества удаляешь енъ отъ естова легче только экъ ты .Какой же ты палитикъ съ палитиками изъ руцкаго слова. Чай ты знашь у безымныхъ хватитъ безумства. Ты смотри светикъ не тисни ужъ Гришатку если он опросто волосится, опростоволосился печатно. Еп. Грщька Распутинъ"
> 
> Письмо 2-е. "Грише Петрову Что, Гриша, ты, ругаешься такъ съ саблями хочешь хадить – стало быть саблеромъ быть тоже енъ хочешь – то може скоро попадешь. Енъ может усяко бывываетъ. Ежель у каго пратекцiя въ Ручком словъ печатается. Гришки нъ просятъ Гришекъ не пастесняться ерыкать "саблями" за руспутство и ахъ Гриша Гриша, не смущайся Ведь не просить же мнъ у тебя прощенIя кагда ты меня ведь уже истинно совершенно напрасно пыряешь да еще так даже что в ужасъ меня всего просто бросаетъ. Когда от енъ отъ мяне многое независить Ты де ведь енъ многое не знаешь а прытко норовишь Я же тебе зла не желаю самъ-то я дюже въ надеже даже енъ было, что тебе силы не хватило такъ дергать. А ты жъ озлобился такъ что дажить въ смрадъ каком-то съ козявками страшеннымъ меня запечаталъ. Смотри богъ тебя Самъ за это хватитъ. Я тебе грожу ничего и только совестью и истиной. И не отрицайете что где наковырялъ здесь. Богъ-то въсурьезъ ковырнетъ всего какъ ты тутъ не пробничай съ саблями что жъ можно ходить так едак и вотъ едакъ  с другого конца можно тоже. Село Покровское Тобольской губернии. Гриша Распутинъ".



Grigori Rasputin used the west Siberian dialect and his pronunciation did not include such forms as _«*u*syako»_ which stands for _«vsyako»_ or _«myane»_ more characteristic of the Belorussian language. Grigory Yefimovich pronounced the pronoun on’ as [on] and not as given in the letters and is characteristic of only the western and Belorussian dialects – _en’_. This en is used as a flourish to imitate the language of people.

The author of the forged letters filled them with folk words _(nadezha, edak i vot edak i s drugogo kontsa, ezhel, erykat, pyryat, duyzhe)_ and even distorted a word on the envelope (instead of _«redactor»_ – _«ledakhtor»_). The name of the newspaper _Russkoye Slovo_ he wrote as _«Rutskoye Slovo»_. However Grigory Yefimovich, judging by his real letters and telegrams, seldom used substandard language. His speech was simple but not illiterate. It was not filled with local words. If Rasputin did use them, they were rare and carefully selected.

Thus, a study of the language and handwriting of the letters allegedly written by Grigory Rasputin proves that he did not write them. The style of these letters gives away their author. It was neither a linguist nor a writer for the letters are forged unskillfully both linguistically or stylistically. He was most probably a reporter familiar with the Russian folk speech in its Belorussian or western dialect.

We identified only these two letters as forged and not written by Rasputin himself. However they are still listed as his authentic letters. Hundreds of forged notes with well-known spelling mistakes were circulating in Saint Petersburg and were delivered to various state officials. The civil servants receiving such notes from lying petitioners were familiar neither with Rasputin’s handwriting nor with him and the swindlers did not deal with Shturmer and Protopopov, the ministers who knew Rasputin well. Any high-ranked civil servant should have been full of indignation at an impossibly brazen request filed by a petitioner accompanied by a letter «from Grishka». The Tsar was informed of such cases immediately and that was exactly what the Jewish swindlers wanted.

Thus Duke Zhevakhov wrote in his memoirs that a certain man named Dobrovolsky referring to Rasputin wished «to be appointed vice-director of the Holy Synod secretariat». When Zhevakhov expressed his fair indignation to Rasputin, he was surprised to hear the following response: «Ministers should not believe each impostor… You yelled at me but did not ask if I sent him to you. Maybe he came himself and used me as a pretext… Show him to the door».

Due to the existence of the Rasputin impersonator, police reports picture two Rasputins. The first is pious and virtuous, goes to church and attends liturgies, lights up candles, goes to see patients and heals them, accepts visitors and his spiritual followers and has meals with them and (as people really close to him said) does not eat meat or pastries and does not drink wine. He follows strict abstinence. Any money given to him as a gift by petitioners he immediately gives away to other visitors. Most importantly he respects and worships the Tsar’s family. The other Rasputin is drunk for weeks, goes to prostitutes, accepts bribes, debauches in restaurants breaking plates and mirrors and speaks poorly about the Tsar’s family.

Time will come and new evidence and documents will become available proving the existence of the Rasputin impersonator used by the enemies of the Russian imperial state.


*Belied Murder – Disguised Ritual*​
Not only Grigory Rasputin’s life was belied, distorted and fabricated but the truth about his death was concealed too. The dreadful murder was purposefully presented wrong with the only purpose of disguising the ritual nature of this crime.

There are numerous discrepancies in the description of Grigory Rasputin’s murder regarding the evidence considered as documented proof. The so-called diary by Vladimir Purishkevich telling about the preparation of the murder and the murder itself was published in 1923 after the author’s death. The style of the diary is boastful and grandiloquent as if the author wrote it not for himself but for general public. Otherwise it is hard to explain why Purishkevich in his own diary on many occasions mentioned his devotion to the Tsar and Russia, explained to himself the details of his own life, for instance, that his wife and sons served at a hospital train, or described the interior of his own apartment. It is also clear that the diary was written a long time after Rasputin’s murder although its dates (from November 19th to December 19th, 1916) seem to indicate the current events. Indeed it would be absolutely insane to write about preparing and committing the murder, destroying the evidence and naming all the accomplices (including his wife) to this crime in the days when it all was done. An imminent investigation and search could reveal the diary as the main evidence of the crime. No matter who wrote the diary, Purishkevich himself or someone else under his name, it was written long after the murder, probably after the Tsar’s abdication as on March 4th, 1917 the Minister of Justice ordered to stop the investigation of Rasputin’s murder and there was no longer a threat of legal proceedings.

The memoirs by F.F. Yusupov, another accomplice to the murder, were published much later than Purishkevich’s diary – in 1927. In further editions of his memoirs in spite of various revisions and additions, Yusupov followed the same line of events when telling about Rasputin’s murder as described by Purishkevich. The evidence of two Rasputin’s murderers did not contradict each other. However these two documents which gave a similar description of the circumstances of Rasputin’s murder did not agree in material aspects with the police documents on Rasputin’s murder known from the memoirs by S.V. Zavadsky who in 1916 was the public prosecutor of the Petrograd Appellate Court, and from the autopsy done by Professor D.N. Kosorotov. The comparison of Grigory Rasputin’s murder story according to Purishkevich and Yusupov, on the one hand, and the police documents, on the other, makes us suspect that the murderers intentionally distorted the events in their memoirs.

The first surprising thing is that Purishkevich and Yusupov were not aware of what Grigory Rasputin was wearing on the night of the murder. They did not know what he wore under his fur coat as if he did not take it off in the dining room at Yusupov’s palace, as they wrote in their memoirs. Purishkevich wrote that Rasputin wore boots, velvet pants and _a silk beige shirt with silk embroidery_. Yusupov repeated his words saying that Grigory Yefimovich wore boots, velvet pants and _a white shirt with embroidered cornflowers_. However the public prosecutor of the appellate court Zavadsky wrote that the murdered wore _a blue silk shirt with golden embroidery_. He also had a gold bracelet with the Tsar’s monogram on his hand and a gold cross around his neck. Although both the bracelet and the cross are eye-catching details, the murderers did not mention them. The blue silk shirt which Grigory wore on his last night was also mentioned by Ekaterina Pecherkina, a servant at Rasputin’s house, who saw Grigory last late that night when Felix Yusupov came to fetch him.

There is another more significant discrepancy between the memoirs and the police files in how Grigory was actually murdered. Purishkevich witnessed that Rasputin had three gunshot wounds: Yusupov shot him _in his chest, around his heart_. About half an hour later Rasputin allegedly got up and ran to the yard where Purishkevich shot him _in the back_ or, as _it «seemed» to him_, in the _head_. Yusupov wrote he did not see Purishkevich shooting in the yard. He just confirmed that he killed Rasputin by shooting him _in the chest, around his heart_.

However the police files completely exclude the shot in the heart. They said that Grigory Rasputin died from three lethal gunshot wounds – _in the liver (abdomen), kidneys (back) and brain (head)_. Yuliya Den also wrote about the fatal wounds of Grigory as she knew about them from her conversations with the Tsarina and Anna Vurybova in Tsarskoye Selo: «Grigory Yefimovich had wounds in the head, at the side and in the back». The forensic experts claimed that with the first wound in the liver a person could live _no longer than 20 minutes_ thus Rasputin could not «resurrect» in half an hour and start running. There was no shot in the heart in the dining room as stated by both murderers.

Let us quote the forensic expert Professor D.N. Kosorotov: «The autopsy revealed _numerous injuries most of which were inflicted post-mortem_. The entire right side of the head was split due to the fall of the body from the bridge. Death resulted from _excessive bleeding_ caused by a _bullet wound in the abdomen_. The shot was made almost point-blank from the left to the right through the stomach and liver which caused disruption of the right side of the liver. Bleeding was profuse. The autopsy also revealed a bullet wound in the back around the spine with disruption of the right kidney and another gunshot wound in the forehead at close range (and not from behind as stated by Purishkevich! – T.M.), at that time he was probably already dead or dying. The organs in the chest cavity were intact and were examined only briefly. There were no signs of death by drowning. The lungs were not inflated and there was no water or foamy fluid in the respiratory tract. Rasputin was already dead when his body was thrown into the water». The report by Professor Kosorotov showed that Grigory Rasputin was bleeding to death but neither Yusupov nor Purishkevich mentioned excessive bleeding. There were no traces of blood according to their memoirs.

There are also discrepancies between the evidence of Purishkevich and Yusupov and the official police files regarding how the body was drowned. Purishkevich said that Rasputin’s body _was wrapped in blue cloth, tied and then thrown in the Nevka river from the bridge_. The _fur coat and one boot_ were thrown in the water after the body. The fur coat was wrapped around weights and chains prepared for drowning the body but left in the car in a hurry. They planned to burn the fur coat in a hospital train but failed to fulfill their plan. The coat did not fit in the furnace and Purishkevich’s wife for some reason bluntly refused from cutting it into pieces. The second boot, according to Purishkevich, was left in the dining room of Yusupov’s house. Yusupov did not participate in drowning the body and retold what he had been told that _«the body was wrapped in the beaver coat», «Rasputin’s arms and legs were tied tight with ropes»_.

Now let’s turn to the police files. «The body was discovered by a policeman… He saw blood stains on the bridge and under the bridge next to a quite large ice-hole there was a high winter boot. About one hundred steps away from the hole the policeman noticed a big black area under the water which he could see through the ice as the snow was blown away from it. It turned out to be Rasputin’s body _in the fur coat and one boot_ which lay on a shallow space». The pictures of the murdered Rasputin (the only evidence kept in the case files, all the other documents from it disappeared) showed that Rasputin wore a fur coat and one boot (the other boot was lost when the body was falling into the water from the bridge).

Both Yusupov and Purishkevich for some reason tried to prove that Rasputin took off his coat and spent two hours in Yusupov’s dining room, where he was later fatally wounded and then murdered in the yard of Yusupov’s palace. Then on the basis of the police files we should admit the impossible – the murderers spent over two hours with Rasputin and did not remember the color of his shirt, did not notice whether the first bullet hit him in the chest or belly, that after the fatal shot they dressed the body in the fur coat and boots, caught him running and shot again in the yard and after that took the body to drown it.

However the readiness with which Purishkevich and Yusupov confessed the murder had a magical effect on Zavadsky and he accepted their version of the murder with several corrections which he had to make due to the obvious facts discovered upon investigation – the color of Rasputin’s shirt, time of the murder, the character of the wounds. «If the experts are right then we have to believe the following sequence of events: the first shot was made from the front when Rasputin was standing in Yusupov’s study. Got wounded Rasputin turned around and started running towards the yard through the side door. The second shot got him in the back. However Rasputin managed to run to the gate where he fell down. Someone approached him from behind and shot in the back of his head». Zavadsky made an attempt to bring together the facts discovered by the police and confessions of the murderers so he talked about «a shot in the back of the head» though the post-mortem picture of Grigory showed a bullet wound in the forehead which was also confirmed by the autopsy report of Professor Kosorotov and memoirs by Yuliya Den.

Why were Purishkevich and Yusupov not aware of apparent facts of the murder discovered by the police? The key to this mystery may be found in the following fact confirmed by Prosecutor Zavadsky on the basis of the case files: «On the night of the murder before 1 a.m. duke Yusupov dressed as a chauffeur came to fetch Rasputin but did not take him directly to his palace. Rasputin died two hours later and he was probably murdered immediately after he was brought to the palace».

What happened during those two night hours which Purishkevich and Yusupov diligently tried to explain by drinking tea with Grigory Yefimovich and treating him to wine and pastries laced with cyanide? The forensic expert Kosorotov wrote that Rasputin’s body suffered sophisticated tortures – terrible wounds in the head, pulled hair, a huge wound in the temple and a lacerated wound in the side made by a special tool like a spur, bruises on the face and the whole body. Yusupov and Purishkevich again diligently tried to convince everyone that they inflicted these wounds to already dead Rasputin in a fit of frenzy. However Professor Kosorotov is convinced that _*not all the wounds*_ were inflicted to the dead body. The Minister of the Interior Alexander Protopopov who by the order of the Tsarina supervised the investigation, made a very important statement in his interview to Ya. Naumov from the Novoye Vremya newspaper: «This was not just a murder… it was done by exasperated people who _*turned the murder into a torture»*_.

Intra vitam tortures of Rasputin are a fact established by the investigation and that’s what Purishkevich and Yusupov tried to conceal by confessing to abusing the dead body.

The readiness of Purishkevich and Yusupov to confess was an obvious attempt to cover the other participants of the murder. They insisted that from 1 a.m. to 4 a.m. Rasputin was at Yusupov’s palace. However they did not know what he had on and where Rasputin’s wounds were. Felix Yusupov confessed to one of the shots, the other two were assigned to Purishkevich. They insisted that the shots were made within one hour although with the first wound Rasputin could not live for over 20 minutes while all the three wounds were inflicted while Rasputin was still alive. Purishkevich and Yusupov stated that Grigory’s arms and legs were tied after his death to make it easier to take him through the city by car and drown in the river. However posthumous pictures from the police files showed the scraps of rope around Rasputin’s wrists as handcuffs. He still had enough power to break the rope and raise the right hand for his last sign of the cross. He was tied prior to the long torture and was still tied when they murdered him. We will probably never know whether that happened in Yusupov’s palace or in any other place prepared by the villains for that purpose. Yusupov and Purishkevich could not give a comprehensive explanation of how the fur coat and boots «removed» from Rasputin’s body in the basement of the palace were still on him when his body was found under ice. The postmortem pictures of Grigory Rasputin showed him lying on the ice in just a shirt. The fur coat was cut, removed from his body and placed next to him on the ice. These significant discrepancies between the memoirs and the police files can be explained by the fact that neither Purishkevich nor Yusupov were real murderers. They were accomplices or were just used to disguise the ritual murder.

The Tsar and the Tsarina must have known or could have guessed about the ritual character of Rasputin’s murder so the forensic examination was assigned to Professor Kosorotov of the Russian Military Medical Academy. Professor Kosorotov was also an expert in the case of the ritual murder by Beilis of Andrei Yushchinsky, an orthodox boy. It was obvious to the Tsar that those whom the entire Petersburg congratulated with the «patriotic deed» were only indirect participants of the murder. Here is an entry in the Tsar’s diary: «At 9 a.m. our entire family drove past the photography building and went to the right to the field where a sad scene opened to our eyes. The coffin with the body of Grigory killed at night on December 17th by _monsters in Yusupov’s house_ was already put in the ground». The Tsar did not name the murderers who confessed to the crime but said that Rasputin was murdered by _monsters_ thus emphasizing the fanatic character of the crime. The punishment of the false murderers was also symbolic. The Tsar sent Felix Yusupov to his estate in Kurskoe and ordered Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich to join the field forces in Persia. Purishkevich who left on December 17th with his sanitary train was not punished at all. This lack of punishment definitely alarmed the real murderers who expected further investigation. Realizing how shaky the confessions of the self-accused murderers were they further tried to hide any evidence of the ritual crime by burning Grigory’s body after the Tsar’s abdication.

Both the Tsar and any Christian person familiar with the Judaic rituals could suggest that the murder was ritual on the basis of the circumstances of the crime – tortures, tied arms and legs, excessive bleeding and then immediate death and drowning of the body (not burying or hiding) done by Christian separatists who were later claimed as actual murderers.

According to Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich, both Dmitri Pavlovich and Yusupov confessed to him that «they participated in the murder but refused to _name the main murderer_». Later when Felix Yusupov told his relatives about Rasputin’s murder with the non-existing shot in the heart, someone asked him if he ever had any remorse for killing a person. «Never» responded Yusupov with a smile. «I killed a dog». Yusupov did not lie. He really killed one of his dogs to disguise the human blood or imitate Rasputin’s murder in the yard of his own house. Several years later Purishkevich’s diary was published. It was an attempt to assert a certain version of the murder according to which Grigory Rasputin was murdered by noble Christians, members of the imperiality. Three years after publication of the diary, Felix Yusupov published his memoirs entitled «Rasputin’s End» where he gave the same description of the circumstances of the murder given by Purishkevich but totally ignored the investigation files which had become known by that time due to publications by Prosecutor Zavadsky.

The investigation of Rasputin’s murder lasted for about two months and was hastily closed on March 4th, 1917. Grigory’s body was burnt overnight from March 10th to 11th and a symbolic inscription in German was made on a birch tree at that place: «Hier ist der Hund begraben» («The dog is buried here») and after that: «Here the body of Grigory Rasputin was burnt overnight from March 10th to March 11th, 1917».

In 1917 after abdication of the Tsar the Byloe magazine published the case files about Grigory Rasputin’s murder but only the records of interrogation of Yusupov, family members of Grigory Yefimovich, yard-keepers, policemen and janitors. The forensic and investigation reports were not published. Any further literary or historic publications on this topic served to convince everyone that Purishkevich and Yusupov had told the truth.

The murder on December 17th, 1916 was a prototype to the murder in Yekaterinburg on July 17th, 1918. «Oh this horrible 17th», wrote the Tsarina to her relatives from exile. Indeed the Manifesto was published on October 17th, 1907. Elder Grigory was tortured and murdered on December 17th, 1916. On July 17th Tsar Nicholas II and his Family were murdered. Gunshots and tortures, cuts and bruises on the children’s bodies, drowning the bodies in the mine water and later removal of the bodies and their burning on monstrous ritual fires… All that was accompanied by a periphrasis from Heine in German: «Belsatzar ward in selbiger Nacht von seinen Knechten umgebracht» («This night the White Tsar was murdered by his people»). Next to it there was a cabbalistic inscription: «Here upon the order of the secret powers the Tsar was sacrificed for the destruction of the state. All nations are informed thereof».

Everything the Tsar’s family suffered was first suffered by their Holy Man. He was tortured with knives and «spurs» and then killed thrice. His body was drowned in the river, then poured with gasoline and burnt. Two inscriptions were made confirming the ritual character of the murder one of which was in German. There were no graves of either Grigory or the Tsar’s family. The Tsarina knew they would share the same fate from a prophesy of a staritsa who threw under her feet eight dolls, pouring red liquid on them and put them on fire.

The tortures and murder of Grigory Rasputin served the Jews and their supporters in many ways. By abusing the name of the Tsar’s friend they abused the Tsar himself. People were shocked at how such a bad person as Rasputin could be the friend of the Tsar and Tsarina and stopped believing in the monarchy itself. At the same time discrediting Grigory Yefimovich by the Jews was supposed to make the Tsar believe the false accusations and waive him from the court. When the attempts at Grigory’s spiritual murder failed, they killed him physically for without this murder the Judaic powers would not have been able to destroy the Russian Tsar.

*Sources:*

(1.) Records of interrogation of Admiral Kolchak by the Extraordinary Investigation Committee in Irkutsk in January – February 1920 // The Archives of the Russian Revolution. – V.10. – М. – 1991.
(2.) Birzhevuey Vedomosty, 1914, July 14th.
(3.) Interrogation of V.A. Maklakov by N.A. Sokolov // Regicide Investigation. Secret documents. – М. – 1993.
(4.) Warres Yen. The Last Grand Duchess. – М. – 1998.
(5.) Notes by V.M. Rudnev. «The Truth about the Russian Tsar’s Family and Evil Powers» // The Russian Archives. – М. – 1998.
(6.) A.A. Taneeva (Vyrubova). Pages of My Life. – М. 2000.
(7.) N.A. Sokolov. Preliminary Investigation of 1919-1920. // Regicide Investigation. Secret documents. – М. – 1993.
(8.) Interrogation of V.A. Maklakov by N.A. Sokolov // Regicide Investigation. Secret documents. – М. – 1993.
(9.) T.I. Groyan. Martyr for the Christ and the Tsar. – М. – 2000.
(10.) Yu.A. Den. Real Tsarina. – М. -1998.
(11.) V.A. Sukhomlinov. Memoirs // Grigori Rasputin. Collection of historic materials. – М. – 1997. – V.2.
(12.) Father Georgi Shavelsky. Memoirs of the Last Archpriest of the Russian Army and Fleet// Grigori Rasputin. Collection of historic materials. – М. – 1997. – V.2.
(13.) P. Zhilyar. Emperor Nicholas II. After personal memories of Pierre Zhilyar, the former tutor of Tsarevich Aleksey Nikolayevich // Grigori Rasputin. Collection of historic materials. – М. – 1997. – V.2.
(14.) V.N. Voyenkov. With the Tsar and Without the Tsar. Memoirs of the Last Court Superintendant of the Tsar Nicholas II. – М. – 1994.
(15.) P.G. Kurlov. The fall of the Imperial Russia // Grigori Rasputin. Collection of historic materials. – М. – 1997. – V.2.
(16.) Interrogation of V.A. Maklakov by N.A. Sokolov // Regicide Investigation. Secret documents. – М. – 1993.
(17.) M.V. Rodzyanko. The fall of the Empire. – Kharkov. – 1990.
(18.) N.A. Teffi. Rasputin. Memoirs // Grigori Rasputin. Collection of historic materials. – М. – 1997. – V.2.
(19.) O.A. Platonov. Nicholas II in Secret Correspondence. – М. -1996.
(20.) State Russian Library, funds 251, 25, 61.
(21.) N.D. Zhevakov. Memoirs of the Friend of the Holy Synod Public Prosecutor. – М. – 1993.
(22.) V.M. Purishkevich. Diary // Grigori Rasputin. Collection of historic materials. – М. – 1997. – V.4.
(23.) F.F. Yusupov. Rasputin’s End (Memoirs) // Grigori Rasputin. Collection of historic materials. – М. – 1997. – V.4.
(24.) S.V. Zavadsky. On the Eve of Great Breakdown // The Archives of the Russian Revolution. – V.8. – М. – 1991.
(25.) Byloe, 1917, N1.
(26.) О.А. Platonov. Prologue to Regicide. – М. – 2001.
(27.) The Last Minister of the Old Government. // Novoye Vremya. – N14731. – March 19th / April 1st, 1917.
(28.) Diary by Emperor Nicholas II. – М. – 1991.
(29.) Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovch. Book of Memoirs. // Nicholas II. Memoirs. Diaries. – Saint Petersburg. – 1994.
(30.) T.E. Melnik-Botkina. Memoirs about the Tsar’s Family and Their Life before and after the Revolution. – М. – 1993.
(31.) F.P. Kupchinsky. How I burnt Grigori Rasputin // Solntse Rossii. – N369-11. – 1917.


----------



## Sasyexa (Dec 17, 2021)

Для очернения образа Г.Е. Распутина работали его двойники.

*To besmirch the image of Rasputin the doubles were used*




We publish a foreword to the book "Grigory Rasputin the New. A Life of an Experienced Wanderer. My Thoughts and Reflections", published in 2002 by the publishing house "Lestvitsa".

In Russian history, Grigory Rasputin is one of the most vilified people, whose official biography does not include any real events.

Grigory Yefimovich Rasputin (09/22.01.1869 - 17/30.12.1916) was born in the village Pokrovskoye, Tyumen' region. He and his sister Theodosia were the only who remained in the family of 9, the sister later married and moved to another village. The surname "Rasputin" comes from the word "распутье", which means crossroads.

God's gifts of clairvoyance and healing manifested themselves in childhood. He knew who of his fellow villagers would soon die, who stole what. He could sit near the stove and say: "A stranger is coming to see us". And indeed, soon he was knocking. One day his father said that their horse had sprained its ligament. He went to her and prayed and said to her: "Now you will feel better". The horse got better. From then on he became sort of the village vet. Then it spread to people.

With his future wife Dubrovina Paraskeva Fydorovna Rasputin met during a pilgrimage to Abalaksky monastery when he was 18 years old. The marriage produced 7 children, of whom three survived.

Many people in Tsarist Russia lived by the Orthodox traditions of Holy Russia - mostly in the spring (during Lent) or autumn (after harvest) people went to holy monasteries. Ordinary people made pilgrimages mostly on foot, eating and sleeping at their host, who readily performed this God-pleasing task. So did Rasputin. He visited the nearby Tyumen' and Abalaksky monasteries, Verkhotursky St. Nicholas monastery, Sedmiozersk and Optina monasteries, Pochayev Lavra. He repeatedly went on pilgrimage to Kiev and Kiev-Pechersk Lavra. Later he visited New Athos and Jerusalem. Always till his death he farmed his own land (sowing and harvesting) without hiring helpers.

He arrived in St. Petersburg in late autumn 1904 at the rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, Bishop Sergei Stragorodsky (future patriarch) with a letter of recommendation from the vicar of the Kazan diocese Khrisan (Schetkovsky), who introduced him to some people in St. Petersburg society. Rasputin was looking for money to build a new church in the village of Pokrovskoye, and in the end the money for the construction was given by the Tsar himself.

He was also in Kronstadt with Fr. John, who at one time was also called a sectarian, a lecher, a greedy man for his communication with Tsar Alexander III. Received the sacrament from the hands of Fr. John. According to the memoirs of Rasputin's daughter Matryona, Fr. John came out of the altar and asked: "Who is here praying so fervently?" During the conversation, he said: "It will be for you by your name" (the name "Grigory" means "awake").

For many representatives of the high society “after eternal intrigue and evil of secular life”, as well as in that troubled time when monarchists in high positions were killed by explosions of bombs and shots, conversations with him served as a consolation. Scientists and priests found it interesting. Although Grigory was sparsely literate, he knew the Holy Scriptures by heart and knew how to interpret it. Bishop Alexy (Molchanov) of Tobolsk considered Rasputin "an Orthodox Christian, a very intelligent man, spiritually minded, seeking the truth of Christ, who could give good advice to those who need him".

He did not refuse anyone in need. He gave money from grateful donors to the poor, consoled with advice and explanations of those who came to him to share their concerns. When he was in Petrograd, every day he had about a hundred visitors at his apartment.

He did the same in his native village of Pokrovskoye. According to the memoirs of the 90s' old-timers of the village, he helped to dress the children for school, arrange a wedding for his son, get a horse, and so on.

In addition to cases of stopping bleeding in an heir with hemophilia (including when the heir was in Poland, and Rasputin was in the village of Pokrovskoye, and he was sent a telegram), there are cases when, through the prayers of Rasputin, the Lord healed and eased the suffering of O.V. Lakhtina (intestinal neurasthenia), son of A.S. Simanovich (Witt's dance), A.A. Vyrubova (crushed bones in a train wreck), daughter of P.A. Stolypin (torn off legs when a bomb exploded by terrorists in the dacha).

Rasputin was an opponent of the war, he said that this was death for Russia, but if we were to fight, then we had to bring it to a victorious end. Approved when the Tsar introduced prohibition in 1914 and replaced the commander-in-chief in 1915 as Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich, who brought the army to retreat. On his advice, during the war years, the empress and her eldest daughters graduated from courses and worked as sisters of mercy, while the younger ones darned clothes for soldiers and prepared bandages and lint in the Tsarskoye Selo hospital (the only case in history).

He could refuse to meet with a duke or a count and walk on foot to the outskirts of the city to meet with a craftsman or a simple peasant. Dukes and counts, as a rule, do not forgive such independence for a “common man”. The epicenter of backbiting comes from the palace of Nicholas II's uncle duke Nikolai Nikolaevich and his wife Stana Nikolaevna with her sister Militsa. It was through these sisters that Grigory Rasputin first met the royal couple in November 1905. But after the Tsarina's quarrel with the sisters and the failure for Nikolai Nikolaevich to use Rasputin to influence the Tsar, his family and his entourage in 1907 became unfriendly to the royal family and especially to their friend Rasputin. Many people from secular society were indignant at the royal family, which brought a simple peasant closer to themselves, and not from among the well-born and famous.

In 1910, in order to undermine the throne and the entire Russian state, some newspapers joined in to slander Rasputin, the newspapers in which people believed as much as we now believe in the media. Provincial newspapers often borrowed articles from metropolitan newspapers.

In 1912, Hieromonk Iliodor (Trufanov), who knew Rasputin, renounces Christ (sends a written renunciation to the synod), apologizes to the Jews and begins to write a slanderous book about Rasputin and the royal family, "The Holy Devil", some episodes from which were published in imperial Russia. and it is published in full in Russia after the February revolution.

In 1914, a petty bourgeois woman Khioniya Guseva attempted a murder on the life of Rasputin in the village of Pokrovskoye (stabs him in the stomach with a dagger). When the police find out that she is a follower of Iliodor-Trufanov, he flees responsibility abroad. Unlike us, the enemies of our Fatherland know perfectly well who is for them and who is against them, and Iliodor-Trufanov, who has already returned to Soviet Russia, gets a job on the recommendation of F.E. Dzerzhinsky in the Cheka for special affairs.

To create the image of Rasputin as a drunkard, a khlyst and a depraved person, his doubles were used.




*The Real G.E. Rasputin*




*Photos of Rasputin's look-alikes from the book*​Reputable journalists and writers were invited to a meeting with his double and his fans, so that they would later write and tell their friends about Rasputin's behavior (memoirs of the writer N.A. Teffi). The existence of a double was also evidenced by the ataman of the Don army, Count D.M. Grabbe, who talked about how, shortly after the murder of Rasputin, the famous duke Andronnikov, who allegedly did business through Rasputin, invited him to breakfast. Entering the dining room, Grabbe was amazed to see Rasputin in the next room. Not far from the table stood a man who looked like Rasputin as a carbon copy. Andronnikov looked inquisitively at his guest. Grabbe pretended not to be amazed at all. The man stood, stood, left the room and did not appear again.

General V.F. Dzhunkovsky - Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and head of the gendarme corps, while he was in this post. Under his patronage, a case was fabricated in 1915 about Rasputin's unbridled behavior in the Moscow restaurant "Yar" without a single witness testimony from a real person, meanwhile, widely covered in the press, and the diaries of external observation of Rasputin, allegedly to protect his life after the assassination attempt, were subjected to literary processing.

In conjunction with the double, the owner of the St. Petersburg restaurant "Villa Rode" A.S. Rode. Articles about Rasputin's fights in this restaurant were regularly printed in newspapers.

After the Bolshevik revolution, duke Andronnikov and General Dzhunkovsky were accepted and worked in the organs of the Cheka, and the merchant A.S. Rode was appointed director of the House of Scientists in Petrograd.

Fake letters from the Empress and her daughters to Rasputin circulated through the secular salons, talking about a carnal connection between them, allegedly donated by Rasputin to Iliodor-Trufanov when he was in contact with him. At the front, rumors spread that the empress (by birth German) with Rasputin surrendered Russia to Germany with the alleged weakness of the Tsar because of the love of alcohol. Rasputin was credited with influencing state affairs, all the unpopular dismissals and appointments, the actions of the authorities that were objectionable to society. Duma leaders, in the future Februaryists, spoke out and spoke from the rostrum against Rasputin.

A woman came to confession to the confessor of the royal family, Archimandrite Feofan (Bystrov).

Rasputin spoke of the highest Christian virtue - love, understandable even not to all Christians, not to mention the people of this world, and it was conveniently turned into carnal "love", understandable to everyone. Likewise, humility was turned into thoughtless submission.

It must be said that all those close to the royal family, the royal ministers, in general the monarchists, were attacked and ridiculed. As the tsarist doctor E.S. Botkin: “If it were not for Rasputin, the opponents of the Tsar's family and those who prepared the revolution would have created him with their conversations from Vyrubova, if it were not for Vyrubova, out of me or whoever you want”.

Many people, including those who later left their memoirs in exile, who did not know Rasputin personally, formed their opinion about him according to rumors circulating in their circle of contacts. The Tsar himself repeatedly arranged tacit checks of "facts", but they were not confirmed.

*Believing in the slander against the tsarist family and its friend Rasputin, the Russian people calmly accepted the February revolution, the overthrow of the Tsar and even the murder of the Tsar's family.*

Rasputin told his family that he would not live to see 1917 and would die in terrible agony. Before going with F.F. Yusupov to his house, he burned all correspondence, put on a new shirt. They killed him as a martyr: they beat him with a whip, beat an eye, pulled out shreds of hair, made an incision under the left hypochondrium (in the image of Christ). Then they threw him into the ice-hole alive, because the lungs were full of water.

All this was shown by the investigation, contrary to the official version - the shooting, about which those who declared themselves murderers talked about (but according to their testimony it is clear that they did not know what kind of shirt Rasputin had, that is, they did not see him without outer clothing). Found not far from the hole under the ice. The fingers of the right hand, freed from the rope, were folded into the sign of the cross as a symbol of victory over death.

Immediately after the abdication of the Tsar, by order of A.F. Kerensky, Rasputin's body was dug up and burned in the suburbs of Petrograd, the case on his murder was closed, Khionia Guseva was released (in 1919 she would also encroach on the life of Patriarch Tikhon with a dagger), Rasputin's spiritual father, Fr. Makariy (Polikarpov) Verkhotursky. The Revolutionary Synod sent all monarchist hierarchs to retirement, including Bishop Isidor (Kolokolov) who served the funeral service for Rasputin. After the Bolshevik revolution, Rasputin's daughter Matryona emigrated with her husband, the second daughter died of typhus, his wife and son were exiled as special settlers, where they died. Church and Rasputin's house in the village Pokrovskoe were destroyed. The main reason for the burning of the bodies of the royal family and Rasputin is the concealment of the method of murder (whoever was actually shot was not burned).



​In films, books - the creation of the external image of a huge, tall and terrible man. In reality, Rasputin was of poor health, physically not very strong, short in stature (as can be seen from the photograph, and the empress, as you know, was of average height).

All films, all foreign and domestic literature (the exceptions are books: I.V. Evsin "The Slandered Elder", T.L. Mironova "From Under the Lie," O.A. Platonov "Life for the Tsar" and the doc. film "Martyr for Christ and for the Tsar, Grigory the New" directed by V. Ryzhko, as well as the book with the same title by the nun Nicholaia (Groyan) and V.L. Smirnov, "The unknown about Rasputin"), fake diaries of a friend of the queen A. A. Vyrubova, Rasputin himself and memories of his daughter Matryona, allegedly his secretary A.S. Simanovich, the names of restaurants, alcohol and tobacco products - all aimed at vilification of Rasputin, which pursues three goals:

1) *Discrediting the monarchy*. Calling it imperialism, tsarism, the tsarist regime, we are told that the Tsar himself with his wife and friend Rasputin caused the fall of the autocracy, revolutions and subsequent troubles in Russia.

2) *Discrediting the Orthodox faith*. "The royal family and Rasputin were Orthodox, but what were they doing."

3) *Discrediting the Russian people*. Because Rasputin is a representative of the common people, the idea of this people as the source of everything bad and unclean, and not the source of a godly life and loyalty to the king.

Blackening of Rasputin is constantly being done (new books, films are being published) in order to foster a persistent rejection in all generations of Russian people (and the whole world), and therefore a non-return to their Christian statehood - Orthodoxy, monarchy, nationality.

On the contrary, in tsarist Russia a secular society was the one that was decaying, that stood between the Tsar and the people. It despised the common people at the expense of which it lived, it considered monarchy an obstacle to progress according to the Western model, and a scornful and mocking attitude towards Orthodoxy was a sign of good form (many were engaged in occultism). In his last letter, Rasputin said that in 25 years there would be no nobles in Russia.

Many people refer to the negative attitude of the canonized saints towards Rasputin, but no one speaks of a subsequent change in their opinion. After the Bolshevik revolution, Bishop Germogen (Dolganov) (whose attendant was at one time Iliodor-Trufanov) sent a letter to the royal family in Tobolsk apologizing for his statements, served as a requiem for Rasputin, for which he was drowned in the river Tour, opposite the village Pokrovskoe. The Empress's sister Elizaveta Fyodorovna sent the royal family in Yekaterinburg a small copy of the newly appeared icon of the Mother of God "Reigning" and a letter of forgiveness for their condemnation, believing in the slander against Rasputin.

Truth is one, and it is with God. The Lord does not give His gifts to ordinary sinful people, let alone outright sinners. And icons of ordinary people do not stream myrrh, but only of the righteous, and there are no exceptions to this phenomenon (as the icon of Rasputin, painted by Tobolsk Orthodox Christians, who did not wait for his canonization, streams myrrh).




*Myrrh-streaming icon of G.E. Rasputin*​If you read Rasputin's works "Life of an Experienced Wanderer" and "My Thoughts and Reflections", you can see for yourself that he is a deeply religious Orthodox Christian.

The Lord will question every person for failing to obey His commandment, "Thou shalt not condemn", all the more so when the one condemned is innocent. One's guilt is greater in the case of speaking out publicly and seducing others into this sin.

Those people who believe that Rasputin stopped the blood of the heir by witchcraft blaspheme the Holy Spirit, because they do not agree with the decision of the Orthodox Church to canonize the royal family. Because according to the canons of the Orthodox Church, excommunication from church communion, and even less canonization, is imposed for turning to the sorcerers. And, as you know, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is not forgiven either in this or in the next century.

Source (deleted):
Источник: Житие опытного странника, Мои мысли и размышления [Григорий Распутин] (fb2) читать онлайн | КулЛиб электронная библиотека


----------



## Oracle (Jan 1, 2022)

Thank you @Sasyexa. When we covered Rasputin in high school it was all the same propaganda as you have described. It was so bad that it was suspicious and even then I questioned what I was being told. I also saw one of those movies you spoke of, an old black and white, focusing on him being shot repeatedly but still coming on waist deep in water towards his killers.
I think it's safe to say anyone who the media demonises to such an extent is likely to be the opposite to their portrayal.

I started reading Nicholas  ll's diary ( or perhaps it was his  wife or daughter's) of he and his family's last weeks after being deposed, early last year, and it was very sad. Indeed he did seem like a good and pious man, though much in awe of his father. You have made me want to go back to it and pick it up where I left off.


----------



## Udjat (Mar 18, 2022)

Hello everyone and hope all is well!  I have been waiting to discuss this with someone for a long time.  I remember when I was in high school, my history teacher started to teach us about the Russian revolution, and as a gooney teen, I did not realize how important it was for me to have learned of such things.  Now, as I am older, my love for the search of real history led me to the book "Rasputin", by Douglas Smith, I believe.  I must say it changed they way I look at religion even more so and it made me realize that religion can be a dangerous weapon, if used for bad intent.  I am not referring to Rasputin.  I believe him to be a patsy, just like Oswald.  He was just a scapegoat. If you think about it, the Romanov's were in a great position to begin a legacy of a new way of Russian life.  But, because of the dark entity, and it's control over egotistical men whom devour greed voraciously, any goodness or outlook of change or hope would be relinquished.  Back then mysticism was very big, probably because of coming out of a great reset.  The Russian revolution and other similar events seem to share a common thread of events that lead to such happenings.  I am of in great hopes that the answer is not that we as humans, are intrinsically evil.


----------

