Nicholas II: The Last Of The Tsars

by Marc Ferro

For this important new biography, Ferro has searched extensively in Russian archives to illuminate Nicholas's character. What emerges is a vivid portrait of a reluctant leader, a young man forced by the death of his father into a role for which he was ill-equipped. A conformist andtraditionalist, Nicholas admired the order, ritual, and ceremony identified with the intangible grandeur of autocracy, and he hated everything that might shake that autocracy--the intelligentsia, the Jews, the religious sects. His reign, as Ferro documents, was one of continual ahumiliating war with Japan; the 1905 revolution that forced Nicholas to accept a constitutional assembly, the Duma; the international crisis of 1914, leading to World War I; and finally the Revolution of 1917, forcing his abdication. Throughout, we see a Tsar who was utterly opposed to change and tothe ferment of ideas that stirred his country, who felt it was his duty to preserve intact the powers God had entrusted in him. Ferro also provides an intimate portrait of Nicholas's personal his wife Alexandra; his four daughters, Olga, Tatiana, Maria, and Anastasia, sisters so close theysigned letters "OTMA," the initials of their Christian names; his son and heir Alexis, who suffered from hemophilia; and the various figures in the court, most notably Rasputin, whose ability to revive the frequently ailing Alexis made him indispensable to the Tsaritsa. (Ferro recounts that, whenAlexandra heard of Rasputin's murder, she collapsed in anguish, certain her son was lost; but when Nicholas heard the news while with the army, he simply walked off whistling cheerfully.) Perhaps most intriguing is Ferro's chapter on the fate of the Tsar and his family, examining all the rumors andcontradictory testimony that swirl around this still cloudy event. Ferro concludes that Alexandra and her daughters may have survived the revolution, and the woman who later surfaced in Europe claiming to be Anastasia may well have been so.This authoritative biography by one of the world's great historians shines a bright light on an ordinary man raised to an extraordinary station, who carried an unwanted burden, which crushed him.

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, Russia, Royalty, Russian History, Romanovs

320 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1990

About the author

Marc Ferro (born 24 December 1924 in Paris) was a French historian. He worked on early twentieth-century European history, specialising in the history of Russia and the USSR, as well as the history of cinema.

He was Director of Studies in Social Sciences at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales. He was a co-director of the French review Annales and co-editor of the Journal of Contemporary History.

He also directed and presented television documentaries on the rise of the Nazis, Lenin and the Russian revolution, and on the representation of history in cinema.

Reviews

[Belinda Vlasbaard · Rating 4 out of 5]

4 stars - English Ebook

One of the world's preeminent historians, Marc Ferro is a leading member of the Annales School of France and a recognized authority on early twentieth-century European history.

For well over two decades, in volumes such as The February Revolution of 1917 and October 1917, he has demonstratedan unsurpassed skill in capturing the social and political forces that led to the Russian Revolution.

Now Ferro turns his considerable talents to the biography of one of the pivotal figures of that era, Nicholas II, the last Tsar of Russia. For this important new biography, Ferro has searched extensively in Russian archives to illuminate Nicholas's character.

What emerges is a vivid portrait of a reluctant leader, a young man forced by the death of his father into a role for which he was ill-equipped. A conformist and
traditionalist, Nicholas admired the order, ritual, and ceremony identified with the intangible grandeur of autocracy, and he hated everything that might shake that autocracy--the intelligentsia, the Jews, the religious sects.

His reign, as Ferro documents, was one of continual trouble: a humiliating war with Japan; the 1905 revolution that forced Nicholas to accept a constitutional assembly, the Duma; the international crisis of 1914, leading to World War I; and finally the Revolution of 1917, forcing his abdication.

Throughout, we see a Tsar who was utterly opposed to change and the ferment of ideas that stirred his country, who felt it was his duty to preserve intact the powers God had entrusted in him.

Ferro also provides an intimate portrait of Nicholas's personal life: his wife Alexandra; his four daughters, Olga, Tatiana, Maria, and Anastasia, sisters so close they
signed letters "OTMA," the initials of their Christian names; his son and heir Alexis, who suffered from hemophilia; and the various figures in the court, most notably Rasputin, whose ability to revive the frequently ailing Alexis made him indispensable to the

When Alexandra heard of Rasputin's murder, she collapsed in anguish, certain her son was lost; but when Nicholas heard the news while with the army, he simply walked off whistling cheerfully.

Perhaps the most intriguing is the chapter on the fate of the Tsar and his family, examining all the rumors and contradictory testimony that swirl around this still cloudy event.

It concluded that Alexandra and her daughters may have survived the revolution, and the woman who later surfaced in Europe claiming to be Anastasia may well have been so.


This authoritative biography by one of the world's great historians shines a bright light on an ordinary man raised to an extraordinary station, who carried an unwanted burden, which crushed him.

[Sergio Muñoz · Rating 4 out of 5]

La principal queja que he oído y leído de éste libro es su enfoque en el entorno de Nicolás II más que en el zar mismo. Decirlo es no entender el tema que se aborda. Un desperdicio de tinta hubiera sido hablar del zar, de su personalidad y sus decisiones, sin tocar la familia, sociedad y corte que le tocó vivir. Es una pérdida de tiempo tratar de entender a alguien como él, tan producto de su entorno como su entorno de él, sin conocer éstas tres. Nicolás Romanov fue el último autócrata, un soberano que respondía a nadie, a ningún gabinete o parlamento, sino, según su lógica, al poder autócrata delegado por Dios a sus antepasados para que él pasara a su hijo. Al coronarse, se convirtió en más que un individuo, Nicolás se transmutó en la punta y a la vez la base de todo un sistema. Su persona era una concentración de poder inconcebible en nuestros tiempos, y tal peso lo hundió, tanto como él hundió a su pueblo en un vacío desesperante del que la única salida pareció ser la más histérica de las rebeldías. Se lee más bien como un conjunto de ensayos cortos cuyo tema en común es el monarca, que saltan y regresan en el tiempo abordando aspectos específicos de su reinado, la transformación gradualmente más radical que experimentó la sociedad rusa por las represiones, los caprichos del zar y su familia que estorbaban su propio gobierno, la ingenuidad de sus creencias incompatibles con la realidad y demás idiosincracias abordadas una mirada objetiva y la sensatez de saber cuándo hacer a un lado la prosa del narrador para dar paso a los testimonios más poderosos. Con sobriedad y autoridad, Ferro relata en pocas páginas la caída de un sistema que duró más de trescientos años.

[Sylvanna · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the books that drove me into reading Russian lit. Call it hokey but I feel you can understand a people by reading the subjects they choose to put in their fictitious story's . This is a great book but I warn it might start an addiction with the Russian people ! :)

[Jodi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although Ferro does an excellent job covering the fascinating topic of Nicholas II, a more scholarly text would be Edvard Radzinsky's title. Not to imply Ferro wrote a light-weight book. That is not the case; it is clear Ferro had access to Russian archives and flushed out Nicholas' personality beyond the official role he had to play. Ferro gives a great view of the traditionalist in Nicholas and his inability to recognize the need for change. Given the historical context of his family (the assassination of his grandfather and the government's reactionary instincts), his own indecisive personalty and the fear for his heir, Nicholas' responses are not surprising, if they are not understandable.

[Dimitrii Ivanov · Rating 4 out of 5]

Популярная (т.е. без сносок, хотя и с опорой на свежие тогда исследования) биография последнего императора России, вполне трезвая и взвешенная - за исключением последней главы, почти что отправляющейся в страну теорий заговора, касающихся выживания семьи быв. полковника Романова после июля 1918 г. Кроме этого замечаний мало - разве что паршивое качество репродукций фото, использование в качестве источника "дневника Вырубовой" работы Щёголева и Толстого, а также - это к переводчице - всюду вместо "главнокомандующий" стоит "генералиссимус".

[Gustavo Barroso · Rating 4 out of 5]

Um livro bastante pormenorizado, revela os extensos conhecimentos do autor sobre o tema. Mas consegue apresentar todos os detalhes sem comprometer a facilidade e interesse da leitura. Avança com uma hipótese "inconfessável", a da sobrevivência de elementos da família Romanov. Afinal, apenas o Czar teria sido executado. Será?

[Cabe Cupit · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good account of the life and death of Nicholas II. This book is pretty good but at times the writing can be a little bit difficult to follow. The chapters are set up in a way that makes it difficult to put down the book and find a solid stopping point so it can cause issues. Overall, a decent read for learning a bit more about Nicholas II.

[Diana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another book I read for my paper on Rasputin. It had some great information on Rasputin's interactions with Nicholas II why the Russian people felt Rasputin made it seem he was the one running the country, instead of Nicholas.

[SimplyReads · Rating 4 out of 5]

The concluding section of the book, which focuses on the execution of the Romanovs and the myth surrounding Anastasia, stands out as one of the most compelling and intriguing narrativisation of historical events.

[Evelyn Pecht · Rating 2 out of 5]

I skimmed through the tedious parts ...

[Matthew William]

Good biography. Very academic.

[Nikki Vachon · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was honestly surprised at how invested in this book I got. Last chapter was a little dense and dry for me, but: my first real dig into Russian history, and I’ll bet it won’t be my last.

[Andrew Roy · Rating 2 out of 5]

I dont like how this was written, very boring, not written well and I even looked up some of the books named and the books either were not by the author mentioned or dont even exist at all.

[Skittler · Rating 2 out of 5]

Should be titled 'Talk about everything but Nicholas II'. This book isn't really about Nicholas II at all. It goes into more detail about ministers and the people under him than the man himself. Most of the time it just rambles on about the different rebellions and revolutions and totally forgets what the book is supposed to be about. If you want to learn a little about Russian history pre-Lenin then it's an average read, but I wanted to know more about the Tsar than I did the Ministers of Interior of Russia. It goes from one topic and timeline to the next. Not a good read and a very messy "biography".

[David Elkin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I did enjoy the book. I learned some things about the family I did not know, but I found the ending with the speculation about the survival of the family, what may have happened, why the Whites and the Reds added their spins to the tale of their murder made it a great finish.

It was a decent overview of Nicholas and his life, but I would have liked more meat on that bone.

[Amie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not exactly what I was expecting. I thought it would be more of a history of NIcholas, but I feel like I got more of a history on Russia than anything else.

All the theories about what really happened to the family is interesting though. Even after all these years, do we really know for sure?

[:) · Rating 2 out of 5]

Many inaccuracies.