The last days of the monarchy. Why Nicholas II abdicated the throne

- abdication of the throne of Emperor Nicholas II. Over the 100-year period since February 1917, many memoirs and studies on this topic have been published.

Unfortunately, deep analysis was often replaced by very categorical assessments based on the emotional perception of those ancient events. In particular, it is widely believed that the act of abdication itself did not comply with the laws of the Russian Empire in force at the time of its signing and was generally made under serious pressure. Obviously, it is necessary to consider the question of the legality or illegality of the abdication of Nicholas II itself.

It cannot be categorically stated that the act of renunciation is a consequence of violence, deception and other forms of coercion in relation to Nicholas II.

“The act of renunciation, as is clear from the circumstances of the signing... was not a free expression of His will, and is therefore null and void,”

Many monarchists argued. But this thesis is refuted not only by eyewitness accounts (many of them can be cited), but also by the emperor’s own entries in his diary (for example, an entry dated March 2, 1917).

“In the morning Ruzsky came and read a very long conversation on the phone with Rodzianka. According to him, the situation in Petrograd is such that now the ministry from the Duma is powerless to do anything, since the Social Democrats are fighting it. the party represented by the working committee. My renunciation is needed. Ruzsky conveyed this conversation to Headquarters, and Alekseev - to all the commanders-in-chief. By 2.5 o'clock the answers came from everyone. The point is that in the name of saving Russia and keeping the army at the front calm, you need to decide to take this step. I agreed..."

(Diaries of Emperor Nicholas II. M., 1991. P. 625).

“There is no sacrifice that I would not make in the name of the real good and for the salvation of Russia,”

These words from the sovereign’s diary entries and his telegrams dated March 2, 1917 best explained his attitude towards the decision made.

The fact of conscious and voluntary refusal the emperor's succession from the throne was not in doubt among his contemporaries. So, for example, the Kiev branch of the monarchical “Right Center” noted on May 18, 1917 that “the act of renunciation, written in extremely godly and patriotic words, publicly establishes a complete and voluntary renunciation... To declare that this renunciation was personally extorted by violence was would be extremely insulting, first of all, to the person of the monarch, in addition, it is completely untrue, for the sovereign abdicated under the pressure of circumstances, but nevertheless completely voluntarily.”

But the most striking document, perhaps, is the farewell speech to the army, written Nicholas II March 8, 1917 and then issued in the form of order No. 371. It, in full awareness of what was accomplished, speaks of the transfer of power from the monarch to Provisional Government.

"IN last time“I appeal to you, my dearly beloved troops,” wrote Emperor Nicholas II. - After I renounced the throne for myself and for my son Russian authorities transferred to the Provisional Government, on initiative State Duma arisen. May God help him lead Russia along the path of glory and prosperity... Whoever now thinks about peace, who desires it, is a traitor to the Fatherland, its traitor... Fulfill your duty, valiantly defend our great Motherland, obey the Provisional Government, obey your superiors, remember , that any weakening of the order of service only plays into the hands of the enemy...”

(Korevo N.N. Succession to the throne according to the Basic State Laws. Information on some issues relating to succession to the throne. Paris, 1922. pp. 127-128).

Also noteworthy is the assessment of well-known telegrams from front commanders that influenced the sovereign’s decision in the memoirs of the Quartermaster General of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief’s headquarters Yu. N. Danilova, an eyewitness to the events:

“Both the Provisional Committee of the State Duma members, the Headquarters and the commanders-in-chief of the fronts ... interpreted the question of abdication ... in the name of preserving Russia and bringing the war to the end, not as a violent act or any revolutionary “action”, but from the point of view of completely loyal advice or petition , the final decision on which had to come from the emperor himself. Thus, one cannot blame these individuals, as some party leaders do, for any treason or betrayal. They only honestly and openly expressed their opinion that the act of voluntary abdication of Emperor Nicholas II from the throne could, in their opinion, ensure the achievement of military success and the further development of Russian statehood. If they made a mistake, then it’s hardly their fault...”

Of course, following the conspiracy theory against Nicholas II, it can be assumed that coercion could be applied to the sovereign if he did not accept the abdication. But the monarch’s voluntary decision to abdicate the throne excluded the possibility of anyone forcing him to such an action.

It is appropriate in this regard to quote the Empress Dowager's account Maria Feodorovna, mother of Nicholas II, from her “memory book”:

“...March 4/17, 1917 At 12 o’clock we arrived at Headquarters, in Mogilev, in a terrible cold and hurricane. Dear Nicky met me at the station, we went together to his house, where lunch was served with everyone else. There were also Fredericks, Sergei Mikhailovich, Sandro, who came with me, Grabbe, Kira, Dolgorukov, Voeikov, N. Leuchtenbergsky and Doctor Fedorov. After lunch, poor Nicky told about all the tragic events that had happened in two days. He opened his bleeding heart to me, we both cried. First came a telegram from Rodzianko, saying that he must take the situation with the Duma into his own hands in order to maintain order and stop the revolution; then - in order to save the country - he proposed to form a new government and... abdicate the throne in favor of his son (unbelievable!). But Niki, naturally, could not part with his son and handed over the throne to Misha! All the generals cabled him and advised the same, and he finally gave in and signed the manifesto. Nicky was incredibly calm and dignified in this terribly humiliating position. It’s like I’ve been hit over the head, I can’t understand anything! I returned at 4 o'clock and talked. It would be nice to go to Crimea. Real meanness is only for the sake of seizing power. We said goodbye. He is a real knight"

(GA RF. F. 642. Op. 1. D. 42. L. 32).

Supporters of the version of the illegality of abdication claim that there is no corresponding provision in the Russian system state legislation. However abdication provided for Article 37 of the Code of Basic Laws of 1906:

“In the operation of the rules ... on the procedure for inheriting the throne, the person who has the right to it is given the freedom to renounce this right in such circumstances when this does not entail any difficulty in the further inheritance of the throne.”

Article 38 confirmed:

“Such a renunciation, when it is made public and turned into law, is then recognized as irrevocable.”

The interpretation of these two articles in pre-revolutionary Russia, unlike the interpretation of the Russian diaspora and some of our contemporaries, there was no doubt. In the course of state law by the famous Russian jurist Professor N. M. Korkunova noted:

“Can someone who has already ascended the throne renounce it? Since the reigning sovereign undoubtedly has the right to the throne, and the law grants everyone who has the right to the throne the right to abdicate, then we must answer this in the affirmative...”

A similar assessment was contained in a course on state law written by an equally famous Russian legal scholar, professor at Kazan University V. V. Ivanovsky:

“According to the spirit of our legislation... a person who has once occupied the throne can renounce it, as long as this does not cause any difficulties in the further succession to the throne.”

But in emigration in 1924, a former private assistant professor at the Faculty of Law of Moscow University M. V. Zyzykin, giving special, sacred meaning articles on succession to the throne, separated the “renunciation of the right to the throne,” which, according to his interpretation, is possible only for representatives ruling house before the beginning of the reign, from the right to "abdication", which those already reigning supposedly do not possess. But such a statement is conditional. The reigning emperor was not excluded from the reigning house; he ascended the throne, having all the legal rights that he retained throughout his reign.

Now about the renunciation of the heir - Tsarevich Alexei Nikolaevich. The sequence of events is important here. Let us recall that the original text of the act corresponded to the version prescribed by the Basic Laws, i.e. the heir was supposed to ascend the throne under the regency of the emperor’s brother - Mikhail Romanov.

Russian history has not yet known the facts of the abdication of some members of the reigning house for others. However, this could be considered unlawful if it was carried out for an adult, legally capable member of the imperial family.

But, Firstly, Nicholas II abdicated for his son Alexei, who reached only 12.5 years in February 1917, and came of age at 16. The minor heir himself, of course, could not take any political and legal acts. According to the assessment of the deputy of the IV State Duma, a member of the Octobrist faction N.V. Savich,

“Tsarevich Alexei Nikolaevich was still a child, he could not make any decisions that had legal force. Therefore, there could be no attempt to force him to abdicate or refuse to take the throne."

Secondly, The sovereign made this decision after consultations with his physician, Professor S. P. Fedorov who declared the heir’s incurable disease (hemophilia). In this regard, the possible death of the only son before he reaches adulthood would become the very “difficulty in the further inheritance of the throne” that Article 37 of the Basic Laws warned about.

After the abdication of the Tsarevich took place, the act of March 2, 1917 did not create insoluble “difficulties in the further succession to the throne.” Now great Prince Mikhail Alexandrovich would have headed the House of Romanov, and his heirs would have continued the dynasty. According to a modern historian A. N. Kamensky,

“The manifesto and telegram became essentially legal documents of those years and a written decree on changing the law on succession to the throne. These documents automatically recognized the marriage of Michael II with Countess Brasova. Thus, automatically Count Georgy Brasov (son of Mikhail Alexandrovich - Georgy Mikhailovich - V. Ts.) became the Grand Duke and heir to the throne of the Russian state.”

Of course, it should be remembered that at the time of drawing up and signing the act of abdication, the sovereign could not have known about his intention younger brother(who was in Petrograd in those days) not to accept the throne until the decision of the Constituent Assembly...

And the last argument in favor of the illegality of renunciation. Could the emperor make this decision in accordance with his status as head of state, since the Russian Empire after 1905 was already a Duma monarchy, and legislative power was shared by the tsar with legislative institutions - the State Council and the State Duma?

The answer is given by Article 10 of the Basic Laws, which established the priority of the sovereign in the executive branch:

“The power of administration in its entirety belongs to the sovereign emperor within the entire Russian state. In supreme management, his power acts directly (that is, it does not require coordination with any structures. - V. Ts.); in matters of government of a subordinate, a certain degree of power is entrusted from him, according to the law, to the places and persons acting in his name and according to his commands.”

Article 11 was also of particular importance, allowing the publication regulations alone:

“The Sovereign Emperor, in the order of supreme government, issues decrees in accordance with the laws for the organization and operation of various parts public administration, as well as commands necessary for the execution of laws.”

Of course, these individually adopted acts could not change the essence of the Basic Laws.

N. M. Korkunov noted that decrees and commands issued “in the manner of supreme government” were of a legislative nature and did not violate the norms of state law. The act of abdication did not change the system of power approved by the Basic Laws, preserving the monarchical system.

An interesting psychological assessment of this act was given by the famous Russian monarchist V. I. Gurko:

“...The Russian autocratic tsar has no right to limit his power in any way... Nicholas II considered himself to have the right to abdicate the throne, but did not have the right to reduce the limits of his royal powers...”

The formal aspect of the act of renunciation was not violated either. It was sealed with the signature of the “subject minister”, since according to the status of the Minister of the Imperial Court, Adjutant General Count V. B. Fredericks sealed all acts related to the “establishment of the imperial family” and related to succession to the throne. Neither the sovereign’s pencil signature (later protected by varnish on one of the copies) nor the color of the ink or graphite changed the essence of the document.

As for the formal procedure for final legalization - approval of the act by the Governing Senate - there were no difficulties on this side. On March 5, 1917, the new Minister of Justice A.F. Kerensky handed over to the Chief Prosecutor P. B. Vrassky the act of abdication of Nicholas II and the act of “non-acceptance of the throne” by Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich. As the participants of this meeting recalled,

“Having considered the issue proposed for its discussion, the Governing Senate decided to publish both acts in the “Collection of Legislation and Government Orders” and inform about this by decrees to all officials and government places subordinate to the Senate. Both acts were passed by the Senate to be preserved in perpetuity.”

In the context of the ongoing war the most important thing was victory over the enemy. For the good of the Motherland, essentially, for the sake of this victory the sovereign abdicated the throne. For her sake, he called on his subjects, soldiers and officers, to take a new oath.

The formal legal interpretation of the legality or illegality of abdication did not in any way detract from the moral feat of the sovereign. After all, the participants in those distant events are not soulless subjects of law, not “hostages of the monarchical idea,” but living people. What was more important: keeping the vows given when crowning the kingdom, or preserving stability, order, preserving the integrity of the entrusted state, so necessary for victory at the front, as members of the State Duma and front commanders convinced him of? What is more important: the bloody suppression of the “rebellion” or the prevention, albeit for a short time, of the impending “tragedy of fratricide”?

For the passion-bearer sovereign, the impossibility of “stepping over blood” during the war became obvious. He did not want to retain the throne by violence, regardless of the number of victims...

"In the last Orthodox Russian monarch and members of his family, we see people who sought to implement the commandments of the Gospel in their lives. In the suffering endured royal family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom in Yekaterinburg on the night of July 4/17, 1918, the conquering light of Christ's faith was revealed, just as it shone in the life and death of millions of Orthodox Christians who suffered persecution for Christ in the twentieth century"

This is how the moral feat of Emperor Nicholas II was assessed in the determination of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church on the glorification of the new martyrs and confessors of the Russian twentieth century (August 13-16, 2000).

Vasily Tsvetkov,
Doctor of Historical Sciences

I wanted to write this article after another program about the last Nikolai Romanov Russian Emperor, when he was again accused of softness due to his abdication. Is it really still not clear what kind of action he committed? Only a human can do this strong-willed. Yes, now everything has turned upside down, and the actions of rulers and elected representatives of the people look much more natural - to stay in power at any cost, and no moral principles have no power. There are many examples, take today’s Gaddafi or Saddam Hussein, or our State Emergency Committee, or the governments of the USA, France, Great Britain, who at any cost want to implement their plans, without any hesitation, by bombing Yugoslavia and the Middle East. It’s a pity that they didn’t watch our film “White Sun of the Desert,” where Comrade Sukhov said the famous phrase: “The East is a delicate matter.” And they so rudely impose their interests on these countries, living according to the million-year-old principles - “an eye for an eye.” The rulers of these countries will never forgive such interference, even to the point of using nuclear weapons. Ahmadinejad promised to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth, and the same could happen to Europe. All these heroes are certainly not soft-hearted.

And Nicholas II made this decision precisely to prevent bloodshed and begin civil war. There are always people dissatisfied with the authorities and blame them for any problems. There is always an opposition that uses this dissatisfaction to its advantage. And there are always those who are ready to sacrifice their lives for the sovereign. Of course, at one time there was a provocation known as “Bloody Sunday” on January 9, 1905. was a success for the opposition and undermined the power of the sovereign. Later it became clear that priest Gapon, an absolutely immoral person, had long been planning a social action that could shake the foundations and cause unrest in the country.

The Russian people loved their tsar, and therefore the idea of ​​going to him and asking him for “truth and protection” was quite natural, and already in December 1904 it was widely discussed at meetings. At the beginning of January 1905, a strike broke out at the largest enterprise in St. Petersburg, the Putilov plant, caused by the dismissal of several workers. The strike quickly began to spread, and workers from other enterprises began to join it. This event accelerated the course of affairs, and the workers almost unanimously decided to go to the Tsar with a petition. Nose full list The workers for the most part were not familiar with the requirements themselves; it was compiled by a small “group of commissioners” chaired by Gapon. The workers only knew that they were going to the tsar to ask for “help for the working people.” Meanwhile, along with economic points, the petition contained a number of political demands, some of which touched upon the fundamentals government system and were openly provocative in nature.

Gapon lied to the authorities, posing as a law-abiding citizen, lied to people, assuring them that their interests and aspirations were closest to him in the world, lied to God, talking about peace and love, but in his soul worshiping terror and violence. He was a master at acting. The military and police authorities showed their helplessness and, instead of isolating a dozen organizers, relied on the “word of Gapon,” who assured them that the procession would not take place. The Emperor knew nothing about the impending action and was at that moment in Tsarskoye Selo, and the idea of ​​​​presenting him with a petition in the Winter Palace was obviously impossible. And he was informed about these events at the last moment. Officials finally realized that Gapon was playing a double game and on January 8 decided to send large contingents of troops into the capital and blockade the city center; in the end, thousands of people finally broke through to the Winter Palace. Shooting was opened in different places of the city, and there were numerous casualties. Two days later, signed by the Minister of Internal Affairs P. N. Durnov and the Minister of Finance V. N. Kokotsov, a government message was published stating that during the events of January 9, 96 people were killed and 333 were injured. The enemies of the throne and the Dynasty overestimated the number of victims many times over and spoke (and still write) about “thousands of those killed.”

Bloody Sunday happened. There were many to blame and many victims. The Tsar, who was in Tsarskoye Selo, learned about what had happened and was bitterly worried. He fired the chief of the St. Petersburg police and the minister of internal affairs. But this satisfied few people. Negative psychological impact The events of January 9 were huge. Those who dreamed of destruction were the winners. Radicals of all stripes in their merciless political game received such a “trump card” that they could not even dream of.

On the other hand, during the period of abdication, there were many devoted subjects, and the Guards Regiment stood ready, as soon as the command was given. At that time they tried to make him extreme. The Emperor was upset. “What a shame! During the war, when Russia strains all its strength to achieve victory over the damned Teutons, there are people who betray their duty. And what has it come to: soldiers of HIS army are taking part in outrageous anti-government protests, an army preparing for a decisive offensive against the enemy! Of course, it’s difficult for many people right now. This is understandable. But the successful end of the war is the sacred duty of every truly Russian. The blessing of the Lord is on our side, and victory is near! And suddenly these outrageous riots. They please only external and internal enemies!”

There was another option. Lieutenant General Ruzsky urged him to accept the following formula: the sovereign reigns, and the government governs. But Nikolai Alexandrovich objected that this formula was incomprehensible to him, that he had to get a different upbringing and be reborn, that he “does not hold on to power, but only cannot make a decision against his conscience and, having abdicated responsibility for the course of affairs before people, cannot abdicate responsibility before God”.

And yet, in order to avoid bloodshed, he took this step. And most importantly, the emperor was guided with your conscience, which is almost absent among the current ones. And certainly none of the real rulers and officials is guided by it. After all, if a person is guided by his conscience, then he has only one choice, but when people are guided by their carnal mind, any action and even a crime can be justified.

And after his renunciation, he showed the highest restraint, self-sacrifice and humility. "Which hard time we are worried! How inexpressibly bitter it is to realize the abnormal situation in which we all find ourselves. He always protected not just autocratic power, but Russia, and where is the confidence that a change of government will give peace and happiness to the people? But God was pleased to send this new test, and we must humbly submit to His holy will! In the name of peace and prosperity, we must agree to the Duma's demand. There are so few faithful, reliable people you can rely on, and no one to ask for advice."

But self-sacrifice is the highest love for humanity. And today, the highest love is manifested by the shameless use of the most advanced technical achievements to destroy all living things.

All situations that people find themselves in are necessary to learn important lessons. And the most important lesson is to learn to make decisions, guided by the voice of your heart, where a particle of God lives, and not by the carnal evil mind, which, alas, is used by all the politicians of our world. After all, a person in whose heart God resides will never allow himself to harm another person.

So who did Nicholas II become when he knew about the death that lay ahead for him and his children? After all, he could have saved his life and fled abroad. Is he dead? No, he did not become a dead man, he became an Ascended Master. “I consciously took upon myself this cross, this crucifixion. The hardest thing was to overcome the resistance of the part of me that tried to save the children at any cost. But I sacrificed my children. Just like Abraham was ready to sacrifice his son. Until the last moment, I hoped that the Lord would take away the hand of fate, if not from me, then from my children. But, no. Something terrible happened.

The holy innocents were martyred. And this moment served as a signal for the most evil forces of darkness to crawl out of the corners and rush to power. All the darkness came out. Everything that used to try to maintain decency and hide in the corners came out. It was an orgy of evil spirits. And this bacchanalia continues to this day. I could resist. I could save my family, and we could all stay alive. But what is the point of my life without Russia? I chose the path of giving up the fight. Non-violence. I chose the path of Christ and allowed myself and my entire family to be crucified. I became an Ascended Master, I achieved my ascension. And if my life were to repeat itself again, I would again choose the crucifixion for myself and for my family. You know that Jesus is yours martyrdom took upon himself the karma of humanity. He suffered for the sins of people. All saints at all times took upon themselves the sins of humanity, part of the planetary karma, in order to lighten the load, and so that humanity could straighten up and look at Heaven.”

Who are today's “living” people? Those in whose hands all power is concentrated in almost all countries, both financial and political, but who do not have God in their hearts. They died long ago, their Higher Self does not work, the connection with it is interrupted. And after the death of the physical body, there will be nothing more to evolve, they will become larvae. So is it worth relying on these living dead flickering on TV screens, who use the limitations of human consciousness to assert their power through the introduction of laws, rules and religious dogmas that are inconvenient for people?

“Stop looking to the West. Stop taking samples that are not only not useful, but also harmful. Very soon the peoples of all globe will listen with surprise and look closely at the changes that are taking place in Russia. Changes in this country will not come from the authorities, not from politicians and economists, changes in this country will come from the hearts of the people, and these changes will be impossible not to notice.” Mother Maria.

And if you see hope in someone, if you see that they have not yet completely dried up, if you still hope for them, then learn not to have any negative feelings against them. They are dead and do not know love. Send them, the president of the country, your love. Pray that their hearts will open so that they will be able to receive Divine wisdom into their hearts.

When writing the article, materials from the book “Nicholas II” by Alexander Bokhanov from the ZhZL series (1997) were used.

Remember that even if you suffer a visible defeat on the physical plane, you win gigantic victories on the subtle plane. You are immortal. And, sacrificing his physical body, you only affirm Life. You affirm the principles of Good and Light on this planet.

(edited by V.V. Boyko-Velikiy, RIC named after St. Basil the Great Moscow, 2015)

CHAPTER 7. Royal Gethsemane. Overthrow of the autocratic system in Russia. Abdication of the Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II from the throne in order to transfer it to his brother Mikhail.

What happened on March 2/15, 1917 in Pskov is still referred to in history as the abdication of Nicholas II from the throne. Until now, historical science and public consciousness perceive as an axiom that Emperor Nicholas II voluntarily, but under the pressure of circumstances, put his signature on the manifesto announcing that he was relinquishing supreme power.

Meanwhile, Russian history has never known such a fact as the abdication of a crowned monarch from the throne. There is a known case of renunciation of the throne by the Heir Tsarevich Grand Duke Konstantin Pavlovich, brother of Emperor Alexander I, made several years before the death of the Reigning Sovereign. However, the act of this refusal was written by Konstantin Pavlovich in his own hand, after which on August 16, 1823, a manifesto of Emperor Alexander I was drawn up on the transfer of the right to the throne to Grand Duke Nikolai Pavlovich. This manifesto was classified as secret and placed for storage in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. Three copies of the manifesto, certified by Alexander I, were sent to the Synod, Senate and State Council. After the death of Emperor Alexander I, the first thing to do was to open the package with copies. The secret of the will was known to the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna and Prince A.N. Golitsyn, Count A.A. Arakcheev and Moscow Archbishop Filaret, who compiled the text of the manifesto.

As we see, the decision to renounce the throne of the Grand Duke was certified by numerous witnesses and approved by the Emperor’s manifesto. At the same time, it was a question of the renunciation of the throne not by the reigning monarch, but by the heir to the throne.

As for the Reigning Monarch, then The Basic Laws of the Russian Empire did not at all provide for the very possibility of his abdication(Theoretically, such a basis could only have been the Tsar’s tonsure as a monk.) It is even more impossible to talk about any renunciation of the Tsar, made under moral influence, in conditions of deprivation of freedom of action.

In this regard, the words of Comrade Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Prince N.D., are noteworthy. Zhevakhov, which he said in March 1917 when refusing to swear allegiance to the Provisional Government: “The abdication of the Sovereign is invalid, because it was not an act of good will of the Sovereign, but violence. In addition to state laws, we also have Divine laws, and we know that, according to the rules of the Holy Apostles, even the forced resignation of the episcopal rank is invalid: all the more invalid is this usurpation of the sacred rights of the Monarch by a gang of criminals.”

Bishop Arseny (Zhadanovsky), who suffered martyrdom at the Butovo training ground, said that “according to church canonical rules, the forcible deprivation of a bishop of his see is invalid, even if it occurred “at the handwriting” of the expelled. And this is understandable: every paper has a formal meaning, anything written under threat has no value - violence remains violence.”

Thus, even if Emperor Nicholas II signed, under threat or pressure, a certain document that was in no way a manifesto of renunciation, either in form or in essence, then this would not mean at all that he really abdicates the throne.

On the part of the Sovereign, there would be no voluntary renunciation, but an act which, if it applied to the bishop, according to the third rule of St. Cyril of Alexandria, has the following assessment: “He gave the handwriting of the renunciation, as he says, not of his own free will, but out of need, out of fear, and out of threats from some. But besides this, it is not in accordance with church decrees that some clergy present manuscripts of renunciation.” In addition, Emperor Nicholas II, even following the official version, did not abolish the Monarchy, but transferred the throne to his brother, Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich.

The abdication of Emperor Nicholas II, thus, did not acquire the force of a Russian legislative act, since the manifesto acquires the force of law only if published, which can only be done by the Reigning Emperor (that is, the appearance of the text of the abdication in the press does not automatically legitimize it), but by Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich has never been like that - not for a single minute. Thus, the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II, even if he signed famous text, is legally void.

The abdication of Emperor Nicholas II from the throne. Falsification of abdication documents

The conspiracy plan, which provided for the abdication of the Emperor, was conceived long before the February Revolution. One of its main developers was A.I. Guchkov. Already after February events he reported: “The sovereign must leave the throne. Something in this direction was being done even before the coup, with the help of other forces. The very idea of ​​renunciation was so close and related to me that from the first moment, when this vacillation and then the collapse of power became clear, my friends and I considered this solution to be exactly what should be done.”

Guchkov said that the events of February 1917 led him “to the conviction that it is necessary, at all costs, to achieve the abdication of the Sovereign. I insisted that Duma Chairman Rodzianko take on this task."

Thus, it is clear that the initiatives of M.V. Rodzianko’s trip to Bologoi, his plans to arrest the Emperor and demands for his abdication were the initiatives and plans of A.I. Guchkova.

The fact that the renunciation was planned in advance was also said by A.I.’s companion. Guchkova on a trip to Pskov V.V. Shulgin. After the coup, he told cadet E.A. Efimovsky: “The question of renunciation was a foregone conclusion. It would have happened regardless of whether Shulgin was present or not. Shulgin feared that the Emperor might be killed. And he went to the Dno station with the goal of “creating a shield” so that the murder would not happen.”

But the abdication of the Emperor was not only part of Guchkov’s plans. It was no less part of Kerensky’s plans. This does not mean, of course, that there were no disagreements between the two coup leaders. But all this did not interfere with their most active mutual cooperation. Therefore S.P. Melgunov was absolutely right when he asserted that the preparation and organization of the February Revolution of 1917 was led by two Masonic groups. One of them (military) was headed by A.I. Guchkov, the other (civilian) was headed by A.F. Kerensky.

A.I. Guchkov was closely connected with military circles and played a leading role in organizing the army's inaction in suppressing the unrest in Petrograd. Chief of the Petrograd military guard, Quartermaster General General Staff Major General M.I. Zankevich, fulfilling the terms of the agreement with Guchkov, took steps that were aimed at weakening the defense of the Admiralty area and Winter Palace. On March 2, Zankevich presented himself everywhere as a person acting on the orders of M.V. Rodzianko.

On the other hand, A.F. Kerensky had great connections in Masonic and revolutionary circles.

At A.I. Guchkov had appropriate agreements with the commanders of some regiments on the line of conduct in the event of spontaneous soldier uprisings.

February 28 A.I. Guchkov went to campaign for military personnel in the barracks of the Life Guards Pavlovsky Regiment, and on March 1 and 2 he carried out campaigning in other units. Participated by A.I. Guchkov and in the capture of the Main Artillery Directorate.

Thus, A.I. Guchkov in every possible way contributed not to the palace coup, which he spoke about earlier, but to the revolution. The very revolution that A.F. so strived for. Kerensky.

The cooperation of Guchkov and Kerensky was clearly demonstrated in the seizure of the Imperial train on March 1, 1917. Both Guchkov and Kerensky needed the seizure of the train and the abdication of the Sovereign. There is no doubt that after the Imperial train was sent to Pskov, Kerensky and Guchkov acted in complete agreement regarding the Sovereign.

Already on the afternoon of March 2, the manifesto with the abdication of the Sovereign was spoken openly in different places of the Empire. Let us remember that at this time, even according to Ruzsky, the Emperor had not yet made any decision.

At 15 o'clock in the Catherine Hall of the Tauride Palace P.N. Miliukov spoke of abdication as a decided matter: “The old despot, who brought Russia to complete ruin, will voluntarily renounce the throne, or will be deposed. Power will pass to the regent, Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich. Alexey will be the heir."

At 5 p.m. 23 min. March 2 General V.N. Klembovsky confidently stated: “There is only one outcome - abdication in favor of the Heir under the regency of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich. His Majesty has not yet made a decision, but, apparently, it is inevitable.”

At 19:00 on March 1, the Imperial train arrived in Pskov. The situation around him was not typical for the Tsar’s usual meetings. A.A. Mordvinov wrote that the platform “was almost unlit and completely deserted. Neither the military nor the civilian authorities (with the exception, it seems, of the governor), who always gathered long ago and in large numbers to meet the Emperor, were present.”

General D.N. wrote the same thing. Dubensky: “There will probably be no official meetings, and there will be no honor guard in sight.”

Chief of Staff of the Northern Front, General Yu.N. Danilov adds a number of important details to previous memories. He writes that “by the time the Tsar’s train arrived, the station was cordoned off, and no one was allowed into its premises.”

Deputy Head of the Commissioner for the Northern Front of the All-Russian Zemstvo Union, Prince S.E. Trubetskoy arrived at the Pskov train station on the evening of March 1 to meet with the Tsar. When the officer on duty asked “Where is the Emperor’s train?”, he “showed me the way, but warned me that in order to enter the train itself, special permission was required. I went to the train. The parking of the Tsar's train on unsightly sidings covered with snow made a depressing impression. I don’t know why, this train guarded by sentries did not seem like a Tsar’s residence with a guard posted, but suggested a vague idea of ​​arrest.”

The events that took place in Pskov on the Imperial train on March 1-3 remain unsolved to this day.

According to the official version, Emperor Nicholas II, who had previously categorically refused any attempts to convince him of the need for a responsible ministry, suddenly approved and signed three manifestos in Pskov within 24 hours. One of these manifestos radically changed political system country (introduced a responsible ministry), and the other two successively transferred the Russian throne, first to the young Tsarevich, and then to Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich.

After the Imperial train was placed on a siding, the commander-in-chief of the armies of the Northern Front, General N.V., arrived in the Imperial carriage. Ruzsky, his chief of staff, General Yu.N. Danilov and two or three more officers. According to the recollections of members of his retinue, General Ruzsky began to demand radical concessions from Nicholas II as soon as he entered the carriage and was received by the Emperor. V.N. Vo-eikov, during interrogation at the VChSK, stated, in contrast to his memories, that “all the talk about the Responsible Ministry took place after arriving in Pskov.”

The generals began to actively put pressure on Emperor Nicholas II even before his arrival in Pskov. On the afternoon of March 1, when the Emperor was at Dno station, Adjutant General M.V. Alekseev sent him a telegram. Having reported about the unrest in Moscow, Alekseev wrote to the Tsar that the unrest would spread throughout Russia, a revolution would take place, which would mark the shameful end of the war. Alekseev assured that the restoration of order is impossible “if Your Imperial Majesty does not follow an act that contributes to general calm.” Otherwise, Alekseev declared, “power will pass into the hands of extreme elements tomorrow.” At the end of the telegram, Alekseev begged the Tsar “for the sake of saving Russia and the dynasty, put at the head of Russia a person whom Russia would trust, and instruct him to form a cabinet.”

The entire tone and argumentation of this telegram to M.V. Alekseev are completely consistent with the syllable and his arguments by M.V. Rodzianko. This telegram to M.V. Alekseev was supposed to send to Tsarskoe Selo, but did not do so, allegedly because there was no communication. In fact, they decided to delay sending the telegram, since they knew that the Emperor had to be delivered to Pskov.

Colonel V.L. Baranovsky, in his conversation with the assistant chief of the intelligence department of the Northern Front headquarters, Colonel V.E. Medio-Cretan via direct wire on March 1 at 15:00. 58 min. noted: “The Chief of Staff asks to convey this telegram to the Commander-in-Chief and asks him to present this telegram to the Sovereign Emperor when His Majesty passes through Pskov.”

As a result of behind-the-scenes negotiations with Rodzianko on the evening of March 1, Alekseev’s telegram underwent significant changes. In fact, it was a manifesto for the introduction of a responsible ministry headed by Rodzianko.

General M.V. Alekseev and Grand Duke Sergei Mikhailovich, who was at Headquarters, authorized the assistant chief of staff of the Northern Front, General V.N. Klembovsky “to report to His Majesty on the absolute necessity of taking those measures that are indicated in the telegram of General Alekseev.”

Full support for the request set out in Alekseev's telegram came from Tiflis and from Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich.

Pressure on the Tsar with the demand to grant a responsible ministry was continued in Pskov by General N.V. Ruzsky. When meeting with the Tsar, Ruzsky asked whether Nicholas II had received his telegram about the responsible ministry. We were talking about Ruzsky’s telegram, which he sent to the Emperor on February 27 at Headquarters. Nicholas II replied that he had received it and was awaiting Rodzianko's arrival.

Ruzsky, in a conversation with Grand Duke Andrei Vladimirovich a year after the events, explained that Emperor Nicholas II agreed to give a responsible ministry after the commander-in-chief gave him a telegram from General Alekseev with a draft manifesto.

However, in the response telegram drawn up by the Tsar there was no mention of any granting of a responsible ministry. Ruzsky said that when they finally brought him a telegram from the Emperor, it turned out “that there was not a word about a responsible ministry.” The only thing Emperor Nicholas II agreed to was to instruct Rodzianko to form a government, choosing ministers at his own discretion, except for the ministers of military, naval and internal affairs. At the same time, Rodzianko himself had to remain responsible to the Emperor, and not to the Duma. In essence, the telegram of Nicholas II with the instruction of Rodzianko to head a government in which the appointment of chief ministers would remain with the Tsar, and Rodzianko himself would be responsible to the Monarch, turned the responsible ministry into an ordinary office.

To all of Ruzsky’s objections about the need for a responsible ministry, Emperor Nicholas II replied that he “considers himself not entitled to transfer the entire matter of governing Russia into the hands of people who today, being in power, can cause the greatest harm to the Motherland, and tomorrow they will wash their hands of leaving with the cabinet.” resign." “I am responsible before God and Russia for everything that happens and has happened,” said the Emperor; “whether the ministers will be responsible before the Duma and the State Council is indifferent.”

According to General N.V. Ruzsky, the telegram from M.V. was decisive for the Sovereign. Alekseeva. Having familiarized himself with it, Nicholas II agreed to a responsible ministry, saying that “he made a decision, because both Ruzsky and Alekseev, with whom he had spoken a lot on this topic before, were of the same opinion, and he, the Sovereign, knows that they rarely agree on something completely.”

Having allegedly received consent from the Tsar, Ruzsky went to the telegraph office to talk via direct wire with M.V. Rodzianko. N.V. Ruzsky told M.V. Rodzianko that the Tsar agreed to a responsible ministry and asked the Chairman of the Duma whether it was possible to send a manifesto with this message for its “publication”. However, the text of the “manifesto” transmitted by Ruzsky was in fact a draft version, largely repeating the text of General Alekseev’s telegram. Of course, such a text could not be transmitted by the Emperor.

In response to M.V. Rodzianko told General N.V. Ruzsky that the situation has changed, “one of the most terrible revolutions has come, which will not be so easy to overcome.” In this regard, a “formidable demand for abdication in favor of his son arose during the regency of Mikhail Alexandrovich.”

Ruzsky asked: “Is it necessary to issue a manifesto?” Rodzianko gave, as always, an evasive answer: “I really don’t know how to answer you. Everything depends on events that fly by at breakneck speed.”

Despite this ambiguity, Ruzsky understood the answer clearly: there is no need to send a manifesto. From this moment, intensive preparations begin for the preparation of a new manifesto on renunciation.

At the end of the conversation N.V. Ruzsky asked M.V. Rodzianko, can he report to the Emperor? about this conversation. And I received the answer: “I have nothing against this, and I even ask about it.”

Thus, Rodzianko decided whether to report anything to the Emperor or not. At the same time, the opinion of the Tsar, his instructions and orders were not taken into account at all. For Ruzsky, there were other bosses, and first of all, he was M.V. himself. Rodzianko.

It was General M.V. Alekseev, Chief of Staff of the Northern Front, General Yu.N. Danilov sent a telegram on the morning of March 2, in which he reported on the conversation between Ruzsky and Rodzianko. At the end of the telegram, Danilov wrote: “The Chairman of the State Duma recognized the contents of the manifesto as belated. Since the commander-in-chief will be able to report to the Sovereign about the above conversation only at 10 o’clock, he believes that it would be more careful not to release the manifesto until further instructions from His Majesty.”

Already at 9 o'clock in the morning General A.S. Lukomsky on behalf of M.V. Alekseev called General Yu.N. via direct line. Danilova. Alekseev, in a harsh manner, discarding the “loyal” tone, pointed out to Danilov the need to demand abdication from the Emperor, threatening otherwise with internecine war and paralysis of the front, which would lead Russia to defeat.

Yu.N. Danilov expressed the opinion that it would not be easy to convince the Emperor to agree to a new manifesto. It was decided to wait for the results of Ruzsky’s conversation with the Tsar. In anticipation of this result, Alekseev sent out circular telegrams to the commanders-in-chief of the fronts A.E. Everta, A.A. Brusilov and V.V. Sakharov, in which he asked them to express their attitude towards the possible abdication of the Sovereign.

Before General Alekseev had time to ask the opinion of the commanders-in-chief, they immediately, without hesitation, answered that abdication was necessary, and as soon as possible. Here, for example, is the answer of General A.A. Brusilova: “You can’t hesitate. Time is running out. I completely agree with you. I will immediately telegraph my most humble request to the Sovereign Emperor through the Commander-in-Chief. I completely share all your views. There can’t be two opinions here.”

The answers of all the commanders were approximately the same in meaning. Such a reaction on their part could have happened if they knew in advance about the upcoming telegram from General Alekseev with a question about abdication. Just like they knew in advance the answers to this question.

On the evening of March 2, generals N.V. came to the Tsar’s carriage with telegrams from the commanders-in-chief. Ruzsky, Yu.N. Danilov and S.S. Savich. They continued to put pressure on the Tsar, convincing him that the situation was hopeless and the only way out was renunciation.

According to the recollections of the above-mentioned generals, during this pressure and, most importantly, telegrams from the commanders-in-chief, Emperor Nicholas II decided to abdicate the throne in favor of his son Tsesarevich.

Ruzsky, in his stories to different people, was confused about the form in which the Emperor expressed his consent to abdication. The general claimed that it was telegram, That act of renunciation That several drafts. Thus, from all the memories we see that the Emperor drew up a telegram (telegrams, drafts, act), but not a manifesto on abdication.

Meanwhile, it is known for sure that a draft of such a manifesto has been prepared. “This manifesto,” wrote General D.N. Dubensky, - was developed at Headquarters, and its author was the master of ceremonies of the Supreme Court, the director of the political office under the Supreme Commander Basili, and this act was edited by Adjutant General Alekseev.”

The same is confirmed by General Danilov: “During this period of time, a draft Manifesto was received from Mogilev from General Alekseev, in case the Sovereign decided to abdicate in favor of Tsarevich Alexei. The draft of this Manifesto, as far as I know, was drawn up by the Director of the Diplomatic Chancellery under the Supreme Commander-in-Chief N.A. They were based on the general instructions of General Alekseev."

Dubensky wrote: “When we returned a day later to Mogilev, they told me that Basili, having come to the headquarters canteen on the morning of March 2, said that he had not slept all night and worked, drawing up a manifesto of abdication on the instructions of General Alekseev Emperor Nicholas II from the throne. And when they pointed out to him that this was too serious a historical act to be drawn up hastily, Basili replied that there was no time to hesitate.”

However, from the memoirs of N.A. himself. Basili makes it clear that his work was not at all hard labor: “Alekseev asked me to sketch out an act of renunciation. “Put your whole heart into it,” he said. I went to my office and an hour later returned with the text.”

On the evening of March 2, General Alekseev sent a draft manifesto by telegraph to General Danilov, providing him with the following telegram: “I am sending a draft manifesto in case the Sovereign Emperor deigns to make a decision and approve the presented manifesto. Adjutant General Alekseev."

Immediately following this message was the text of the draft manifesto: “In the days of the great struggle with the external enemy, who has been striving to enslave our homeland for almost three years, the Lord God was pleased to send down a new ordeal to Russia. The internal popular unrest that has begun threatens to have a disastrous effect on the further conduct of the stubborn war. The fate of Russia, the honor of our heroic army, the good of the people, the entire future of our dear Fatherland require bringing the war, at all costs, to a victorious end. The cruel enemy is straining his last strength, and the hour is already approaching when our valiant army, together with our glorious allies, will be able to finally break the enemy. In these decisive days in the life of Russia, WE considered it a duty of conscience to facilitate for OUR people the close unity and rallying of all the forces of the people for the speedy achievement of victory and, in agreement with the State Duma, WE recognized it as good to renounce the Throne of the Russian State and lay down the Supreme Power . In accordance with the order established by the Basic Laws, WE pass on our heritage to our Dear Son, OUR Sovereign, Heir, Tsarevich and Grand Duke ALEXEY NIKOLAEVICH and bless HIM for his accession to the Throne of the Russian State. We entrust OUR Brother, Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich, with the duties of Ruler of the Empire until OUR Son comes of age. We command OUR Son, as well as during His minority, the Ruler of the Empire, to rule over state affairs in complete and inviolable unity with the representatives of the people in legislative institutions, on those principles that will be established by them, having taken an inviolable oath. In the name of our beloved homeland, we call on all the faithful sons of the Fatherland to fulfill their duty to it by obedience to the Tsar in difficult times of national trials and to help HIM, together with the representatives of the people, lead the Russian State onto the path of victory, prosperity and strength. May the Lord God help Russia."

This text was almost entirely taken from a telegram from General M.V. Alekseev with a draft manifesto on a responsible ministry. Only minor additions were made and the theme of renunciation was introduced. Colonel of the Operations Department of Headquarters V.M. Pronin cites diary entries for March 1 in his book. From them it becomes obvious that the authors of the manifesto on the responsible ministry and the abdication of the throne are the same persons: “22.40. Just returned from the editorial office of Mogilevskie Izvestia.” General-Qvar-Tiermeister ordered me to obtain, at all costs, a sample of the Highest Manifesto. In the indicated edition, together with its secretary, I found No. for 1914 with the text of the Highest Manifesto on the declaration of war. At this time, a draft Manifesto on the granting of a responsible ministry had already been drawn up. They compiled his gene. Alekseev, gen. Lukomsky, Chamberlain Vysoch. Dvora N.A. Basili and Grand Duke Sergei Mikhailovich. The text of this Manifesto with the corresponding note from General Alekseev was sent to the Emperor at 10 p.m. 20 min." .

However, the “manifesto” did not reach the Emperor at all. In his telegram to Alekseev on March 2 at 20 o’clock. 35 min. General Danilov reported: “The telegram about General Kornilov has been sent for delivery to the Sovereign Emperor. The draft manifesto was sent to the Glavkosev carriage. There are fears that it would be belated, since there is private information that such a manifesto was already published in Petrograd by order of the Provisional Government."

It is strange that the telegram with the proposal to appoint General L.G. Kornilov for the post of head of the Petrograd Military District is sent to the Sovereign, and for some reason the manifesto of abdication is sent to Ruzsky! Stunning is Danilov’s assumption that a top secret manifesto, which even the Emperor had not seen, could be published in Petrograd by order of the rebels! In fact, this is a direct recognition that the question of abdication in no way depended on the Sovereign Emperor.

Thus, on March 2, no new manifesto on abdication was drawn up at Headquarters; its basis was prepared in advance and the necessary changes were made to this basis.

On a copy of the draft manifesto owned by N.A. Basil, there are amendments made by the hand of General Alekseev.

Therefore, we can draw an unambiguous conclusion: Emperor Nicholas II had nothing to do with the authorship of the manifesto on abdication in favor of the Heir and never signed it.

According to Ruzsky, the signing of the manifesto by the Sovereign did not take place, since the headquarters of the Northern Front received news of A.I.’s imminent arrival in Pskov. Guchkov and V.V. Shulgina. N.V. Ruzsky and Yu.N. Danilov tried to explain the delay in signing the manifesto by the desire of Nicholas II to meet first with A.I. Guchkov. However, apparently, this decision was made by the commander in chief.

Headquarters were also confident in the inevitability of abdication. At 5 p.m. 23 min. On March 2, in a conversation over a direct wire between General Klembovsky and the chief commander of the Odessa Military District, Infantry General M.I. Ebelov Klembovsky confidently stated that there was only one outcome: “abdication in favor of the Heir under the regency of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich.”

It is quite possible that the arrival of A.I. Guchkov in Pskov and the emergence after his arrival of the third manifesto of abdication, this time in favor of the Tsar’s brother, Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich, were associated with the conspiracy of A.I. Guchkova and N.V. Ruzsky, bypassing M.V. Alekseeva. Alekseev apparently believed that by abdicating in favor of the Tsarevich the issue would be resolved. Moreover, it was assumed that the abdicated Emperor would be sent to Tsarskoe Selo and there he would announce the transfer of the throne to his son. Back at 9 pm on March 2, State Duma deputy Cadet Yu.M. Lebedev said in Luga that “in a few hours, Duma members Guchkov and Shulgin, who are entrusted with negotiating with the Emperor, will leave Petrograd for Pskov, and the result of these negotiations will be the arrival of the Emperor in Tsarskoe Selo, where a number of important state acts will be issued.”

Apparently, M.V. Alekseev hoped to play a leading role under the new government (hence his authorship of the manifesto). However, events did not go as Alekseev expected. The “Alekseevsky” manifesto was sent to Petrograd via Pskov, from where there was no information about it future fate did not arrive at Headquarters. Moreover, it became known that no announcement about the manifesto would be made without the additional permission of General N.V. Ruzsky. This could mean that for some reason Ruzsky decided to replay the situation. What's happening in Pskov, M.V. Alekseev didn’t know. By order of Alekseev, General Klembovsky contacted Pskov and “requested” to “orientate the top in what situation the issue is.” Alekseev was especially worried about the message that the letter trains were heading towards Dvinsk.

Soon, General Alekseev received a response telegram from the headquarters of the Northern Front, in which it was reported that the issue of sending trains and their further route would be resolved “at the end of the conversation with Guchkov.”

At 00 o'clock. 30 min. On March 3, Colonel Boldyrev reported to Headquarters: “The manifesto has been signed. The transfer was delayed by the removal of a duplicate, which will be handed over to Deputy Guchkov, signed by the Sovereign, after which the transfer will continue.”

The text of the so-called manifesto almost completely repeated the previous version of the manifesto in favor of the Tsarevich, developed at Headquarters under the leadership of M.V. Alekseeva. The only differences were in the name of the one to whom the throne was transferred. However, there is no certainty that M.V. Alekseev was given this text.

The famous manifesto, which for almost a hundred years now has been the main and, in essence, the only “evidence” of the abdication of the throne on March 2, 1917 of Emperor Nicholas II, was first “discovered” in the USSR in 1929 in Leningrad by a special commission on cleaning the apparatus of the Academy of Sciences. All employees of institutions of the USSR Academy of Sciences, whose Presidium was located in Leningrad until 1934, were required to undergo a background check and a procedure for discussing suitability for the position held. In this “purge”, the Academy of Sciences suffered significant personnel losses: due to their social background (nobles, clergy, etc.), the most qualified employees were fired, and new people were taken in their place, whose not only loyalty, but loyalty to Soviet power was no longer in doubt. As a result of the purge, 38 people were dismissed from the Academy of Sciences in 1929 alone.

During this check, “documents of historical importance” were discovered, which were allegedly illegally kept by employees of the apparatus. The newspaper “Trud” dated November 6, 1929 wrote: “Materials from the Police Department, the gendarme corps, and the Tsar’s secret police were discovered at the Academy of Sciences. Academician Oldenburg has been removed from his duties as Secretary of the Academy."

The commission’s conclusion stated: “Some of these documents are of such current importance that they could, in the hands of Soviet power play a big role in fighting enemies October Revolution, both domestically and abroad. Among these documents is the original about the abdication of Nicholas II and Michael from the throne."

It was the “find” of the Imperial “manifesto” that became the main “evidence” for the OGPU in accusing the academicians, primarily the historian S.F. Platonov, in a conspiracy to overthrow Soviet power and restore the Monarchy.

How about these important documents ended up in the Academy of Sciences? This becomes clear from the message in the “Bulletin of the Provisional Government” made in March 1917. “By order of the Minister of the Provisional Government Kerensky, Academician Kotlyarevsky was instructed to remove from the police department all the papers and documents that he finds necessary and deliver them to the Academy of Sciences.” .

As the biographer of academician S.F. writes. Oldenburg B.S. Kaganovich: “In fact, the government bodies knew about the storage of documents of modern times in the Academy of Sciences, which got there for the most part in the chaos of 1917-1920, when they were threatened with physical death, and did not see this as a danger to the regime ".

On October 29, 1929, the commission drew up a document that described the “manifesto.” The document stated: “The document was typed. Below, on the right side there is the signature “Nikolai”, depicted in chemical pencil. At the bottom, on the left side, there is a handwritten number “2”, then a typewritten word “Martha”, then a handwritten number “15”, after which there is a typewritten word “hour”. After this there is an erasure, but the handwritten number “3” is clearly visible, then the word “min” follows, and then the typewritten “1917”. Below this is the signature “Minister of the Imperial Household, Adjutant General Fredericks.” Fredericks' signature depicted written from a cleaned place» .

The examination of the found “denials” took place under the leadership of P.E. Shchego-lev, the same one who participated in the creation of the fake “diaries” of Vyrubova and Rasputin. Strictly speaking, there is no need to talk about any kind of examination, since the signatures of Emperor Nicholas II and Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich were only verified with the originals. The results of the reconciliation were reported to the commission: “Having verified the signatures on the mentioned two documents with the undisputed signatures “Nicholas II” and “Mikhail”, presented by N.Ya. Kostesheva, from documents stored in Leningrad in the Center Archives, came to the conclusion that both the first and second documents have original signatures, and therefore are original. Signed: P. Shchegolev."

Erasures in the document, the brand of the typewriter, the correspondence of its font to the 1917 font - nothing interested the commission.

Thus, from the depths of the “academic” case falsified by the Bolsheviks, from the conclusion of the falsifier Shchegolev, a document was born, on the basis of which the opinion that Emperor Nicholas II abdicated the throne was firmly entrenched in the minds of the people.

The order of execution of the Highest Manifestos and the Pskov “Manifesto”

A large number of samples of originals and drafts of manifestos in the archives of Russia allows us to conclude that, mainly under Emperor Nicholas II, draft manifestos were compiled on a typewriter. At the top, even on the project, was a cap with the title of the Emperor: “By the Grace of God We are Nicholas II...” and so on. This was followed by the text, and then there was always the following postscript, which was then also necessarily transferred to the original: “Given in the city of N, on such and such a day, in such and such a month, in the summer of the birth of Christ such and such, in Our reign is such and such.” Next came the following obligatory phrase, which was also then transferred to the original: “On the original, His Imperial Majesty’s Own hand is signed by NICHOLAS.” Moreover, in the project the name of the Sovereign was put by the designer of the manifesto, and in the original, naturally, by the Emperor himself. At the very end of the project, the name of its compiler was obligatory. For example, “the project was drawn up by State Secretary Stolypin.”

The Tsar did not put his signature on the draft manifestos. The name “NIKO-LAY” was written in the project by its compiler, who put his signature at the end. Therefore, if the March “manifesto” was a project, then at the end there should have been an inscription: “The project was compiled by Alekseev,” or “The project was compiled by Chamberlain Basili.”

The project was approved by Emperor Nicholas II, who put the corresponding resolution on the draft. For example, on the draft manifesto about his marriage with Grand Duchess Alexandra Feodorovna Nicholas II wrote: “I approve. For publication."

When the project was approved by the Sovereign, they began to compile the original. The text of the original manifesto was necessarily copied by hand. Only in this form did the manifesto receive legal force. In the office of the Ministry of the Imperial Court there were special scribes who had a special, especially beautiful handwriting. It was called “rondo”, and the persons who owned it were accordingly called “rondists”. Only they were used for copying especially important papers: rescripts, charters and manifestos. Of course, no blots or erasures were allowed in such documents. Examples of the Highest Manifesto are the manifestos on the beginning of the war with Japan in 1904 or on the granting of the State Duma on October 17, 1905.

After the manifesto was copied by the rondists, the Emperor put his signature. The signature was covered with a special varnish. Further, according to Art. 26 of the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire: “The decrees and commands of the GOVERNOR EMPEROR, in the order of supreme administration or issued directly by Him, are sealed by the Chairman of the Council of Ministers or the underlying Minister or the Chief Administrator of a separate part and promulgated by the Governing Senate.”

Thus, the manifesto came into legal force at the moment of its promulgation in the Senate. The personal seal of the Emperor was placed on the original manifesto. In addition, the printed version of the manifesto included the date and place where the manifesto was printed. For example, in the printed version of the manifesto of Emperor Nicholas II on his accession to the throne it is written: “Printed in St. Petersburg under the Senate on October 22, 1894.”

The “Manifesto” of renunciation was typed, not written by a rondist. Here one can anticipate the objection that it was impossible to find a rondist in Pskov. However, this is not true. Together with the Sovereign, a retinue carriage led by K.A. always followed. Naryshkin. It is impossible to imagine that during the Sovereign’s trips to Headquarters during the war, in this retinue carriage there were not those who could draw up the Highest Manifesto or the Imperial Decree according to all the rules - it is impossible! Especially during the troubled times of late 1916 - early 1917. Everything was there: the necessary forms and the necessary clerks.

But even if we assume that there was no rondist in Pskov on March 2, the Emperor himself had to write the text by hand, so that no one would doubt that he was really abdicating the throne.

But let us again assume that the Emperor decided to sign the typewritten text. Why didn’t those who printed this text put the obligatory postscript at the end: “Given in the city of Pskov, on the 2nd day of March, in the year after the Nativity of Christ One Thousand Nineteen Hundred and Seventeen, in Our Twenty-third Reign. On the genuine His Imperial Majesty’s Own hand signed NICHOLAS”? Drawing this postscript would take a few seconds, but at the same time the formality required by law for drawing up the most important state document would be observed. This formality would emphasize that the manifesto was signed by Emperor Nicholas II, and not by the unknown “Nicholas”.

Instead, in the “manifesto” there appear completely unusual designations: “G. Pskov, March 2, 15.00. 5 min. 1917." There are no such designations in any manifesto or its draft.

What prevented the drafters of the “manifesto” from observing this simple but so important formality? What prevented the Emperor, a most experienced politician, from forcing this formality to be included in the “manifesto”?

"Bid. To the Chief of Staff. In the days of the great struggle with an external enemy, who had been striving to enslave our homeland for almost three years, the Lord God was pleased to send Russia a new and difficult test. The outbreak of internal popular unrest threatens to have a disastrous effect on the further conduct of the stubborn war.

The fate of Russia, the honor of our heroic army, the good of the people, the entire future of our dear Fatherland require bringing the war to a victorious end at all costs. The cruel enemy is straining his last strength, and the hour is already approaching when our valiant army, together with our glorious allies, will be able to finally break the enemy. In these decisive days in the life of Russia, WE considered it a duty of conscience to facilitate for OUR people the close unity and rallying of all the forces of the people for the speedy achievement of victory and, in agreement with the State Duma, WE recognized it as good to renounce the Throne of the Russian State and lay down the Supreme Power . Not wanting to part with OUR beloved Son, WE pass on our legacy to OUR Brother Grand Duke MIKHAIL ALEXANDROVICH and bless HIM for his accession to the Throne of the Russian State. We command OUR Brother to rule over state affairs in complete and inviolable unity with the representatives of the people in legislative institutions, on those principles that will be established by them, having taken an inviolable oath. In the name of our beloved homeland, we call on all the faithful sons of the Fatherland to fulfill their duty to him by obedience to the Tsar in difficult times of national trials and to help HIM, together with the representatives of the people, lead the Russian State onto the path of victory, prosperity and strength. May the Lord God help Russia. G. Pskov, March 2, 15 o'clock. 5 min. 1917" .

We see that the text of this manifesto is an almost complete repetition of the draft manifesto on the responsible ministry and the draft manifesto on the abdication in favor of the Heir Alexei Nikolaevich, with the difference that the name of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich is introduced into this text.

Thus, we know the authors of the text of the manifesto: they were General Alekseev, Basili and Grand Duke Sergei Mikhailovich. The date of its original writing was March 1, 1917, the day on which the draft manifesto for a responsible ministry was drawn up. The day of his first edit was the night of March 2, when the renunciation manifesto was drawn up. But when and by whom was the third version of this manifesto drawn up, which transferred the throne to Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich?

In our opinion, on the basis of this text, a false manifesto was prepared in Petrograd, and the signature of Emperor Nicholas II and Count Fredericks was forged. Next, space was left for the date and time, which were entered later.

It was inconvenient to make such a forgery at Headquarters: it was necessary to look for samples of the signature of the Sovereign and Fredericks, and carry out long, painstaking work. It should be noted that the riots and pogroms in those February days in Petrograd were strictly controlled. They smashed only the one whom the conspirators needed to smash, and arrested only the one who was profitable to arrest. Thus, the counterintelligence department, the premises of the State Housing Administration, and police stations were destroyed, but the military command institutions, in particular the General Staff, were completely untouched.

Meanwhile, long before the coup, Guchkov’s entourage included a large number of officers and even generals of the General Staff. Naturally, during the days of the February Revolution, these connections were fully utilized by Guchkov. According to the recollections of many eyewitnesses, Guchkov was literally surrounded by General Staff officers. Apparently, these officers played an important role in maintaining Guchkov’s connection with Headquarters and the headquarters of the Northern Front. Among his closest supporters was Lieutenant General of the General Staff D.V. Filatiev. After the February Revolution, he became an assistant to Minister of War Guchkov.

Under the conditions of the General Staff, producing a false manifesto was not such a difficult task. Like any highest military body, the Russian General Staff had its own codebreakers and codebreakers, and had specialists in identifying forged handwritings, as well as in forging documents.

The special role that General Staff officers played in Operation Abdication is indicated by a conversation over a direct wire between the staff officer for assignments at the headquarters of the Commander-in-Chief of the armies of the Northern Front, V.V. Stupin and Lieutenant Colonel of the General Staff at Headquarters B.N. Sergeevsky, which occurred at 11 p.m. March 2, 1917 At this time, Guchkov and Shulgin had already arrived in Pskov. In the conversation, Stupin informs Sergeevsky that Alekseev is sending him to look for Adjutant General Ivanov in the outskirts of Petrograd. Stupin expresses his misunderstanding of this task. He goes on to say: “The expected resolution of all issues will begin any minute now. Is my trip necessary under these conditions? I’m asking about this privately and asking you to inquire with the heads of the operations department about the need for me to leave Pskov, especially since with the current work here it is undesirable to lose an officer of the General Staff.”

In this regard, it seems very interesting title, with which the text of the manifesto begins: “Bet. To the Chief of Staff." It is usually believed that General Alekseev is meant. However, when Guchkov left the Imperial carriage, at about 1 am on March 3 he sent the following telegram to Petrograd: “Petrograd. To the Chief of the General Staff. Encrypted by Colonel Mediocritsky. We ask you to convey to the Chairman of the Duma Rodzianko: “The Sovereign agreed to abdicate the throne in favor of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich with the obligation for him to take the oath to the constitution.”

On March 2, 1917, a terrible crime occurred in Russia - conspirators represented by the top military leadership, members of the State Duma and the Council of Ministers carried out a coup d'etat - overthrew the legitimate power of the Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II, while committing a second meanness in one day - they constituted a false abdication of the Throne. Thus, the Freemasons-conspirators carried out the direct instructions of the “allies” in the First World War, France and Great Britain, to destroy the monarchy in Russia. The meager conspirators prepared the text of the renunciation in a hurry and allowed a lot of inconsistencies and direct exaggerations in such an insignificant text that the compilers of the “document” can be suspected of serious mental disorder. Judge for yourself: the most important passage from the text of the so-called “renunciation”:

In these decisive days in the life of Russia, We considered it a duty of conscience to facilitate close unity and rallying of all the people’s forces for Our people to achieve victory as quickly as possible and, in agreement with the State Duma, We recognized it as good to renounce the Throne of the Russian State and relinquish Supreme power. Not wanting to part with Our beloved Son, We pass on Our heritage to Our Brother Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich and bless Him for his accession to the throne of the Russian State.

So, in order to achieve victory and unite all the people's forces, Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II decides to abdicate the Throne. What is this? There is unrest in the capital of the state, at the front, where at this time preparations are underway for the spring offensive, and there are no hard battles, that is, there is no threat to the Fatherland from German troops, suddenly the need for the unity of all popular forces is created. Unity for what, to stop a small crowd of revolutionary masses that did not pose any particular danger? And what kind of victory is the text talking about, since there is no offensive yet? And why is it so necessary not to part with his son, Tsarevich Alexei, who is at this time in Tsarskoe Selo? All these questions fully demonstrate the utter stupidity of those who concocted this fake, literally sucking meaningless formulations out of thin air. But in the following passage, the conspirators show their true nature in all their glory, obliging Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich:

in complete and inviolable unity with the representatives of the people in legislative institutions, on those principles that will be established by them, having taken an inviolable oath.

That is, Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich is initially placed in conditions dependent on the State Duma and the Constituent Assembly, and is also required to take an oath to that effect. Consequently, everything that was said in the text to the “Chief of Staff” up to the phrase “on those principles that will be established by them” can be considered meaningless verbiage of the conspirators who tried to give some kind of “manifest” form to a hastily concocted document. Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II, according to a false “renunciation,” not only violated the Act of Succession to the Throne of Paul I, as well as the Code of Basic State Laws of the Russian Empire (as amended on April 23, 1906), but also deliberately obliged Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich to swear allegiance Constituent Assembly or any other authority deemed to have legislative law group of conspirators. This is nonsense! At the same time, the conspirators themselves, already on March 3, 1917, rushed to Mikhail Alexandrovich’s apartment, persuading him to abdicate the Throne, which the Grand Duke happily accepted. Obviously, having realized the falsity and futility of the false “renunciation” of Nicholas II, the conspirators G. Lvov, A. Kerensky, M. Rodzianko, N. Nekrasov and other scoundrels, having managed to send out the text of the concocted “Manifesto of Renunciation”, rushed to correct the matter with a new renunciation, thereby finally burying the monarchy in Russia. The Grand Orient of France and both Orders of Jerusalem triumphed - the job was done! And even if the perpetrators turned out to be deceitful and short-sighted traitors, not knowledgeable about the laws Russian Empire, but the main thing for France and Great Britain was done - the Tsar was arrested and locked up in Tsarskoe Selo, and the revolutionaries began to destroy the Power.

But let's turn to the laws of the Russian Empire, which the Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II could not help but know, because he alone stood guard over the rule of law and the implementation of laws, this was his direct duty given at the coronation. First of all, let us turn our attention to the wording “To the Chief of Staff”. According to Article 14 of the Code of Basic Laws of the Russian Empire as amended on April 23, 1906:

The Sovereign Emperor is the Sovereign Leader of the Russian army and navy. He has supreme command over all land and naval armed forces of the Russian State. He determines the structure of the army and navy and issues decrees and commands regarding: the deployment of troops, bringing them to martial law, their training, service by ranks of the army and navy, and everything generally related to the structure of the armed forces and defense of the Russian State.

The Sovereign Leader of the Russian Army and Navy turns to his subordinate with “abdication” of the Throne? Couldn't you have chosen a better candidate? But such addresses are for such important state documents available, these are the State Council and the State Duma, according to Article 7:

The Sovereign Emperor exercises legislative power in unity with the State Council and the State Duma.

And article 8:

The Sovereign Emperor takes the initiative on all subjects of legislation. Only at His initiative Main State Laws may be subject to revision by the State Council and the State Duma.

That is, if Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II really made a decision to abdicate, then he would have to formalize his decision legislatively in the State Council and the State Duma, and after that the amended Law allowing abdication of the Throne would have to be approved. At the same time, it was necessary to change the Act of Succession to the Throne of Emperor Paul I, the rules of which form the basis of the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire, because the Act does not provide for the abdication of the Throne by the monarch. According to Article 37:

Under the operation of the rules described above regarding the order of inheritance of the Throne, the person who has the right to it is given the freedom to renounce this right in such circumstances when this does not entail any difficulty in the further inheritance of the Throne.

Abdication of the Throne is possible only for a candidate for the throne with the rights of succession to the throne and only if the abdication does not create instability in the state. No other renunciations are provided for, for royal power is given by God at Holy Confirmation and Crowning to the Kingdom for life. But then the fake abdication talks about transferring the Throne to his brother, which is absolutely impossible in view of the heir, Tsarevich Alexei, who must be provided with guardians (according to Article 41) before reaching the age of 16, that is, in our case, Nikolai Alexandrovich and Alexandra Fedorovna, as parents Tsarevich Alexei will be his guardians until his 16th birthday. Then what does the phrase from the false renunciation have to do with it: “Not wanting to part with Our beloved Son,” because Nicholas II does not part with his son anyway? Some unfortunate researchers saw in this phrase the departure of Nicholas II abroad and the abandonment of Alexei Nikolaevich on the Throne, but initially the criminals did not imagine anything like this, otherwise they would have carried it out, because the Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II and his entire family were under arrest. But the most important thing is contained in Article 39:

The Emperor or Empress who inherits the Throne, upon accession to it and anointing, undertakes to sacredly observe the above laws regarding the inheritance of the Throne.

What laws? First of all, the Act of Succession to the Throne of Emperor Paul I of 1797 and the Code of Laws of the Russian Empire, because according to Article 4:

The Supreme Autocratic power belongs to the All-Russian Emperor. God Himself commands to obey His authority, not only for fear, but also for conscience.

Consequently, there was no abdication of the Throne, and there could not be, because Nicholas II could not belittle his own power by submitting to a group of traitors - conspirators, trampling with his own actions the heritage of all his ancestors, destroying with his own hands the autocratic power of which he was the stronghold. That is why the fake “Chief of Staff” looks like Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II is destroying the Orthodox monarchy with his own will, handing over the state to the revolutionaries “on the principles that will be established by them,” and even with an oath. It doesn't happen like that! All human history shows that the monarchy never renounced its sacred rights to the Throne, neither did Nicholas II, and even in such a blasphemous, Jesuitical form, personally transferring power to a handful of crooks who carried out the instructions of their foreign curators.

M.A. Alexandrov, publicist, in the article “Renunciation of rights to the throne according to the Laws of the Russian Empire,” Monarchist newspaper No. 80, 2013, writes:

The fact that the possibility of renunciation was not initially provided for by law has its own public legal logic. The law establishes an obligation, but not a means of evading it. He seems to be waiting for the appropriate incident in order to react to it, but he himself does not model such a “negative” situation in advance. The abdication of Emperor Nicholas II indeed cannot be considered valid. And the reason for this is that it was not turned into law. Its registration and publication by the “reformed Senate” relates only to “ Russian Republic”, but to the laws of the Russian Empire - not the slightest. The question may arise: why does the Sovereign, as the owner supreme power, could not turn his own will into law? Yes, because here his will would conflict with his duty. To free oneself from one’s own obligation, and, moreover, through the powers that arise from this same obligation - this would be the height of legal absurdity.

We can also add that the conspirators were in a hurry, they had no time to calculate the various consequences of their betrayal, so hastily concocted documents that had no legal force were instantly sent out to the army and throughout all the villages of the vast Empire, so that there was no time to counter the actions revolutionaries, so that no one would suddenly come to their senses and arrest the criminals. Therefore, the news of the abdication of Nicholas II, designed to spread quickly, hit the entire Russian people like a butt, plunging them into a depressed state. To assume that certain forces would conduct a thorough investigation into the legal support of the fake would be the height of naivety, because the entire political elite, the high military command, bankers and church authorities joined the conspirators who overthrew the Sovereign Emperor, and they were quite happy with the document called “ To the Chief of Staff,” fully repeated in the Highest Manifesto. But in addition to legal justifications for the impossibility of Nicholas II’s abdication, there are also ecclesiastical ones.

On May 14, 1896, one day after the Trinity Day, on Tuesday, the Crowning (Coronation) ceremony of the Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II and Empress Alexandra Feodorovna took place in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. The rite of the Crowning of the Kingdom itself consisted of the following very important provisions:

1. Having entered the Assumption Cathedral, the imperial couple goes to the pulpit and, entering the solea, venerates all the icons of the local row of the iconostasis.

2. His Majesty on royal throne confesses publicly Orthodox faith reading the Creed.

3. After reading the Gospel, His Majesty dresses in royal purple.

4. The leading bishop lays his hands crosswise on the bowed head of the Emperor and reads two prayers: “O Lord our God, King of kings and Lord of lords, who through Samuel the prophet chose Your servant David, and anointed him king over Your people Israel: Himself and now Hear the prayer of us unworthy, and look down from Thy holy dwelling, and Thy faithful servant, the Great Sovereign, Whom Thou hast deigned to place as Emperor over Thy tongue, drawn by the honorable Blood of Thy Only Begotten Son, anoint Him with the oil of joy, clothe Him with power from on high, place it on the head His crown is from the honorable stone, and grant Him length of days, place in His right hand the scepter of salvation, seat Him on the throne of righteousness, protect Him with the whole armor of Your Holy Spirit, strengthen His arm, humble before Him all the barbaric tongues that want to fight, all in His heart Thy fear, and compassion for the obedient, keep Him in immaculate faith, show Him the famous guardian of Thy holy Catholic Church dogmas, may Thy people judge in righteousness, and Thy poor in judgment, may He save the sons of the poor, and may He be the heir of Thy heavenly Kingdom. For the dominion is Yours, and Yours is the kingdom and power forever and ever.” And again: “To You, the only King of men, bow your neck with us, Most Pious Sovereign, to Him the earthly Kingdom has been entrusted to You: and we pray to You, Lord of all, keep Him under Your roof, strengthen His Kingdom, always honor Him with His actions pleasing to You, shine in His days there is righteousness and abundance of peace, and in His quietness we may live a meek and silent life in all piety and honesty. For You are the King of the world, and the Savior of our souls and bodies, and to You we send glory, to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages.”

5. After the prayer of the presiding bishop, the Sovereign puts on the crown and accepts the scepter and orb.

6. Kneeling, the Sovereign Emperor reads the prayer: “Lord God of the fathers and the King of kings, who created all things by Thy word, and formed man by Thy wisdom, may the world rule in honor and righteousness! You have chosen Me as King and Judge as Your people. I confess Your unsearchable care for Me, and thanks to Your Majesty I bow down. But You, My Master and Lord, instruct Me in the work you sent Me to do, enlighten and guide Me in this great service. May the wisdom that sits before Your Throne be with Me. Send down Thy Saints from heaven, so that I may understand what is pleasing before Thy eyes and what is right in Thy commandments. Let My heart be in Thy hand and arrange everything for the benefit of the people entrusted to Me and for Thy glory, for even on the day of Thy judgment I will unashamedly give Thee the word: by the mercy and bounty of Thy Only Begotten Son, with whom art Thou Blessed, with the Most Holy and Good and Life-Giving by Your Spirit forever and ever, Amen."

7. After the Sovereign read the prayer, everyone present in the Assumption Cathedral knelt and the presiding bishop read a prayer for the invocation of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit in the administration of the Russian State on “Thy beloved servant.”

8. The Liturgy began, and during the reading of the canons the Tsar ascended to the pulpit for Confirmation.

So, the rite of the Crowning gives the Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II the right autocratic power, which is given by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, “He was pleased to set the Emperor over Your tongue,” “To Him the earthly Kingdom has been entrusted to You,” that is, royal power from God, in which the Sovereign himself confidently proclaims, “You have chosen Me as King,” “Instruct Me in the matter for which you sent Me.” Nicholas II thereby affirms that the will of the Tsar is in the hand of the Lord and swears to God “let my heart be in Thy hand” never to deviate from the commandments of God. At the same time, Nicholas II will be proclaimed the head of the Russian Orthodox Church“show Him the famous guardian of your holy catholic Church of dogmas,” since the guardian of dogmas can only be either a king or a patriarch. Thus, Nicholas II, receiving his kingdom from the hands of the Lord and swearing an oath to God to be obedient to His will, while simultaneously ascending to his great ministry (through the laying on of hands of the presiding bishop). The Emperor cannot renounce the oath given to God, just as he cannot independently relinquish the priestly rank and care of the Church as its head. For this, a meeting of the Holy Synod is necessary, but the Synod does not have the right to remove the role of head of the Church from the Emperor, since only He who bestowed it, that is, the Lord, can prohibit such service. Accordingly, the tsar cannot renounce the Russian Throne, because this responsibility is assigned to the autocrat exclusively by God, and not by people, which is clear from the text of two prayers read during the laying on of hands by the presiding bishop.

Thus, Nicholas II could not abdicate the Throne either legally or churchly, because even by changing (hypothetically) the Act of Succession to the Throne of Paul I, the Sovereign could not cancel the church rite of the Crowning of the Kingdom, and could not cancel his own oath when receiving royal symbols. Consequently, abdication could not take place under any circumstances, because this event, committed of one’s own free will, once and for all abolished the monarchy as an institution of power in Russia. This is exactly what the conspirators A. Guchkov, V. Shulgin and adjutant general N. Ruzsky sought, persuading Nicholas II to sign a manifesto of abdication. But, most likely, there was not even such a conversation, because to believe the memoirs of criminals is to declare oneself insane in advance! Nicholas II could not take part in such a conversation, but with anger (knowing his strong character) he rejected any agreement with the conspirators, who deprived him of freedom of movement and communication already on March 1, 1917. Simply put, on March 2, 1917, Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II was arrested and the conspirators were prevented from killing the monarch by the unknown reaction of the army and people to such atrocity, so the criminals who carried out the coup d’etat resorted to outright forgery, concocting a false renunciation, counting on shock upon receiving news of the abandonment of the Russian Throne by Nicholas II, which he actually could never accomplish, even while in mortal danger or under torture.

And from this moment on, any talk about abdication can be considered either deliberate misinformation or a continuation of a conspiracy against the Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II, because, as shown above, there could be no abdication. And let the fake “Chief of Staff” remind all Masons who betray Russia that retribution will certainly come to the enemies and stranglers of Russian freedom, to their descendants who continue the work of their fathers. It is important to note that the Throne of the Russian Empire is not empty, but Nicholas II continues to sit on it, because the Lord did not relieve him of responsibility for the Russian Land, and even the atrocity committed on July 17, 1918 in the Ipatiev House of Yekaterinburg, which interrupted the Emperor’s earthly path, does not remove him from his royal ministry given from God. From here we can draw a very simple and obvious conclusion - the next Russian Tsar (according to prophecies, the monarchy will be restored in Russia) will be revealed by God Himself, because only He, giving royal power, can remove it, as well as restore it again. How? Through his prophet, directly pointing to the new and last Tsar of the Russian Empire, whose election will not be earthly, but Heavenly. And this fact will become immutable for the entire Russian people, therefore all current attempts to occupy the supposedly empty Throne of Russia are ordinary fraud and nothing else. Let us wait for the Lord to reveal his will through the prophet and install a pious Orthodox Tsar in the Russian State!

Doctor of Theology, Archpriest Alexander Fedoseev

On March 2, 1917, according to the old style, Nicholas II abdicated the throne for himself and for his son Alexei. February revolution he spent not in one of his residences or even at Headquarters, but in a blocked train on which the autocrat tried to break into the anarchy-ridden capital. Until the last moment, the emperor did not believe that his abdication was imminent. And only a series of circumstances forced him to give up power.

“There is treason, cowardice and deceit all around”

On February 27, 1917, a general strike in Petrograd developed into an armed uprising. Nicholas II at that time was at the Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief in Mogilev - First world war was in full swing. It was the remoteness from the epicenter of events that became his fatal weakness. All subsequent days, the monarch had difficulty understanding the situation in the capital. Information from his sources was late and contradictory.

On the evening of February 27, Nikolai had to decide: to make concessions to the protesters or to suppress discontent in the most decisive manner. The crown bearer leaned towards the second option. A punitive detachment headed by General Nikolai Ivanov went to Petrograd. However, approaching Tsarskoe Selo and meeting with the local garrison who supported the revolution, the military man withdrew his forces from the capital.

On March 1, the commanders of all fronts spoke out in favor of the emperor’s abdication. Until that day they had been unquestioningly loyal to the monarch, but now they unanimously sacrificed the king in order (as many thought) to save the dynasty and continue the war with Germany without turning it into a civil war.

Meanwhile, the autocrat tried to return from Headquarters to Tsarskoe Selo. The royal train reached the Dno station. He was not allowed further. The blocked Nikolai went to Pskov. There a message awaited him from Rodzianko, persuading the ruler to abdicate in favor of his son, with Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich remaining as regent. The proposal was submitted to the commander of the Northern Front, Nikolai Ruzsky.

At first the emperor hesitated. Time, however, was working against him. Soon a message came to Pskov about a request from the entire military command of the country to renounce. Depressed by this news, Nikolai wrote in his diary, which became catchphrase“There is treason, cowardice and deceit all around.”

For myself and my son

On March 2, the fourth day of the second Russian revolution, in the afternoon, Nikolai was on his train at Pskov station. He invited his family doctor, Professor Fedorov.

At any other time, Doctor, I would not have asked you such a question, but this is a very serious moment, and I ask you to answer with complete frankness. Will my son live like everyone else? And will he be able to reign?

Your Imperial Majesty! I must confess to you: according to science, His Imperial Highness should not live to be 16 years old.

After this conversation, Nicholas II decided to renounce both himself and his son. The 12-year-old heir had hemophilia, which he inherited on his mother's side from Queen Victoria of England. The father did not want to leave his fragile son alone with the revolution. They never parted and eventually died together.

At 10 pm, two State Duma deputies arrived to the Tsar in Pskov: Alexander Guchkov and Vasily Shulgin. It was they who became living witnesses of how Nicholas first wrote and then signed a document about his renunciation. According to eyewitnesses, Nikolai remained calm. Shulgin only noted that the monarch's reprimand became different - that of the guards. The deputy was worried that he had come to the Tsar in a crumpled suit and unshaven.

Formally, the abdication took place in favor of Nikolai's brother Mikhail. He was in Petrograd and also renounced power. He signed his paper on March 3. A witness to the incident was one of the leaders of the Cadet Party, Vladimir Nabokov, father famous writer. This is how the power of the Provisional Government gained legitimacy.

P.S

After his abdication, Nicholas went to Tsarskoye Selo and was reunited with his family. Citizen Romanov asked Kerensky for permission to leave for Murmansk and from there emigrate by ship to England to join his cousin George V (and after the war return to Russia and settle in Livadia as a private citizen).

The head of the Provisional Government gave his consent. Negotiations began with the British Parliament, which also ended in success. Nikolai's departure was postponed due to the fact that the Romanov children fell ill with chickenpox. And soon English king I withdrew my invitation to my cousin. George was afraid of criticism from the left in parliament, who raised a cry of discontent about the arrival of the deposed king.