If Alexandra's personality was ill-suited for being the Russian Empress, what personality would have been well-suited?
Was she really? Okay Iâm going to play the devilâs advocate.The context and the hazards of life played a key role in shaping Alexandra. You are going to say âlike any otherâ and of course you are right but in Alixâs case to say the odds were against her is an understatement.
Iâm not a big fan of what if in history but surely without the illness of Alexei a lot would have been different. Yes Alexandra would still be a very private person and would have sought the same cocooning lifestyle that she actually led. However perhaps her character would have been less neurotic, less worrisome and her health a bit better. I donât want to go on the psychological path either but to see her son so sick because of âherâ it must have been terrible for her emotionally. She became even more withdraw. Yet, I donât think itâs fair to call her a recluse because she made a hell of a lot of efforts. Such as during the Spala crisis in 1912 where Alexeiâs nearly died. Iâm sure I already quoted Gilliard in a previous ask but Iâm going to quote him again:
âI could see the Tsaritsa in the front row, smiling and talking gaily to her neighbors. When the play was over, I went out by the service door and found myself in the corridor opposite Alexis Nicolaievichâs room from which a moaning sound came distinctly to my ears. Suddenly I noticed the Tsaritsa running up holding her long, awkward train in her two hands. I shrank back against the wall and she passed me without observing my presence. There was a distracted and terror-stricken look on her face. I returned to the dining room. There were all happy. Footmen in livery were handing around refreshments and everyone was laughing and exchanging jokes⊠A few minutes later the Tsaritsa came back. She had resumed the mask. She smiled pleasantly at the guests who crowded around her. But I noticed that the Tsar, even while engaged in conversation, had taken up a position from which he would watch the door, and I caught the despairing glance which the Tsaritsa threw him as she came in. The scene⊠suddenly brought home to me the tragedy of a double life.â
She was also present during the visit of PoincarrĂ© in Russia in 1914. Maurice PalĂ©ologue write how ill at ease she appeared during the never ending official dinner. Yet she was there (and for the rest of the visit) very conscious of her role as consort. I would like to add on that note that public duties were quite different from what we expect today from the royals (they better work hard or itâs the guillotine). All joke aside, the public role was far smaller. If we look into British history Queen Alexandra nor Queen Mary, before WWI, had tremendous public engagements. In that respect they lived the same pattern of the aristocracy.
Now if you look into history what qualities were expected, traditionally, from an Empress?
Noble character  âïž She was a good person, very devoted to her family and adopted country.Â
Good moral âïžAlexandra received the traditional and conservative aristocratic upbringing of her time.Â
Charming/Sociable  ââïžWell this was her biggest problem and probably why so many people think she was ill suited for the job. She was awkward in society especially with people from the Court which jeopardize the equilibrum between the sovereign and the nobility. But here is why I think it wouldnât have been THAT bad if circumstances had been different. Alexandra is always compared to her mother-in-law. Itâs true Maria was a wonderful hostess and liked society very much. But the lavish lifestyle of Maria and the Court was coming to an end. So in that regard, Alexandraâs lack of enthusiasm for balls or other court ceremonies might not have been such a huge problem. She could have found her niche if she had played the card of the modest Empress who helped the poorer. However she didnât like to promote her good deeds to the public. So her poor public image wascaused by circumstances outside her control AND her unwillingness to step into a role that she would have created.Â
Dignified âïž She knew the protocol and the decorum that comes with it. Can we talk about how she went full regalia for the opening of the State Duma in 1906. She literally used the largest tiara she owned which screamed AUTOCRACY. (tbh we could talk for hours about this event which is so interesting & sad *one foot in the future and the other in the past*).
Charitable workâïž Very devoted in that aspect, financed several hospitalsâŠÂ
Humble âïžOnce she was in Yalta in a shop someone asked her to take her umbrella outside in case it scratchs the floor. She did as she was told without as much as batting an eyelid. She was far from being arrogant however there is this paradoxical and annoying aspect of Alexandraâs personnality: she was humble yet very conscious of her position aannd she bought the whole great Russian myth of the distant Tsar who knew better than anyone.
Wife and mother âïž Devoted to her family to the core. Â
Religiousâïž Deeply religious woman. Perhaps too much with every years that passed but who can blame her when you know how ill Alexei was.Â
No political inclination â Well you canât really ask from someone not to have opinions. In Alexandraâs case it miiiiiight had got out of hand at the end of the reign. She wasout of touch with national life. She clunge to the unrealistic vision of Russia. It is very apparent in this letter that she wrote to Nicholas in 1916 : â Be Peter the Great, Ivan the Terrible, Emperor Paul - crush them all under you. [âŠ] I really cannot understand. I am but a woman, but my soul and brain tell me it would be the saving of Russia. [âŠ] Remember even M. Philippe said one dare not give constitution, as it would be your Russiaâs ruin, and all true Russians say the same.â It is chilling how much out of touched she was.Â
Donât get me wrong Iâm not giving her excuses. Certain aspects of her personality were quite conservative and traditional. What her aunt Victoria, German empress, wrote about her is pretty spot on: âAlix is very imperious and will always insist on having her own way ; she will never yield one iota of the power she will imagine she wields ; I use the word â imagine â advisedly, because my niece is given to very exaggerated ideas as to her own cleverness and importance.â What I would like to add is the context that I mentioned earlier. Contrary to Maria who had more than a decade before becoming Empress, Alexandra was only 22 when she married AND became Empress. All eyes were on her, expecting from her to hold her role and lead society.Â
++Â Maria might have had most of high society in her pocket but it didnât mean she was wiser than Alexandra. For instance she was against Nicholasâ solding crown land to the government, which the later would sold to peasants.Â
I think with this question of who would have been better, we are looking for some kind of savior. My 21th century self who knows what happened would tell you that Nicholas needed someone more lucid, grounded and perceptive. Someone who could have encouraged him to let go of the nonsense that was autocracy. Not someone who would have encouraged him like Alix did. But is it really realistic to expect this clairvoyance from a young woman who surely would have been brought up with the values of her time ? Not sure. Of course there is always a counterexample, for instance Alixâs aunt, Victoria. She is an anomaly in the landscape of princesses of the 19th century. She was lucky (or unlucky we could talk about it) to have received from her father a liberal education AND she married someone, Friedrich *aka thebestmanwhoeverlived* who shared most of her views. And even with the best will in the world they struggle so much and faced a wall of rejection. Of course Prussia was not Russia. It was just to underline that everyone can rise above its own education Fritz is the perfect exemple of that. But it is so rare and the political context of Russia was such a mess that it is not as if the whole Russian Revolution wouldnât have happened if Nicholas had married a wisest woman. There is no question ask that Alexandra played a part in the whole debacle of the fall of the Empire but it is a small part. Â
The crux of the issue wasnât Alexandraâs personnality. The real issue was the outdated, unfair and backward system of autocracy. Nicholas and Alexandra inherited a time bomb. Yet I donât believe in fatality and Nicholas had numerous occasion to change things but he didnât. On top of that you add their personnal tragedies such as Alexeiâs illness and you get the tragic events that unfolded.
pixelskylines
romaincrisis
