Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Alexander II

Alexander II of Russia (Russian: Александр II Николаевич, Aleksandr II Nikolaevich) (29 April [O.S. 17 April] 1818 in Moscow – 13 March [O.S. 1 March] 1881 in Saint Petersburg) was the Emperor of Russia from 2 March 1855 until his assassination in 1881. He was also the King of Poland and the Grand Prince of Finland. His most important achievement was the emancipation of serfs in 1861, for which he became known as Alexander the Liberator (Russian: Александр Освободитель, Aleksandr Osvoboditel').
After Alexander became emperor in 1855, he maintained a generally liberal course. Despite this, he was a target for numerous assassination attempts (1866, 1879, 1880). On 13 March [O.S. 1 March] 1881, members of the Narodnaya Volya (People's Will) party killed him with a bomb. The Emperor had earlier in the day signed the Loris-Melikov constitution which would have created two legislative commissions made up of indirectly elected representatives, had it not been repealed by his reactionary successor Alexander III.[8] Soon after the conclusion of peace, important changes were made in legislation concerning industry and commerce, and the new freedom thus afforded produced a large number of limited liability companies. Plans were formed for building a great network of railways, partly for the purpose of developing the natural resources of the country, and partly for the purpose of increasing its power for defense and attack. The existence of serfdom was tackled boldly, taking advantage of a petition presented by the Polish landed proprietors of the Lithuanian provinces and, hoping that their relations with the serfs might be regulated in a more satisfactory way (meaning in a way more satisfactory for the proprietors), he authorized the formation of committees "for ameliorating the condition of the peasants," and laid down the principles on which the amelioration was to be effected. This step was followed by one still more significant.[citation needed] Without consulting his ordinary advisers, Alexander ordered the Minister of the Interior to send a circular to the provincial governors of European Russia (serfdom was rare in other parts), containing a copy of the instructions forwarded to the governor-general of Lithuania, praising the supposed generous, patriotic intentions of the Lithuanian landed proprietors, and suggesting that perhaps the landed proprietors of other provinces might express a similar desire. The hint was taken: in all provinces where serfdom existed, emancipation committees were formed. The emancipation was not merely a humanitarian question capable of being solved instantaneously by imperial ukase. It contained very complicated problems, deeply affecting the economic, social and political future of the nation. Alexander had to choose between the different measures recommended to him and decide if the serfs would become agricultural laborers dependent economically and administratively on the landlords or if the serfs would be transformed into a class of independent communal proprietors The emperor gave his support to the latter project, and the Russian peasantry became one of the last groups of peasants in Europe to shake off serfdom. The architects of the emancipation manifesto were Alexander's brother Konstantin, Yakov Rostovtsev, and Nikolay Milyutin On 3 March 1861, 6 years after his accession, the emancipation law was signed and published. Other reforms[edit]In response to the overwhelming defeat (1856) suffered by Russia in the Crimean War, and to an awareness of military advances implemented in other European countries, the Russian government reorganized the army and navy and re-armed them. The changes included universal military conscription, introduced on 1 January 1874.[9] Now sons of all the "estates", rich and poor, had to serve in the military.[10] Other military reforms involved setting up an army reserve and the military district system (still in use a century later), the building of strategic railways, and an emphasis on the military education of the officer corps. Corporal punishment in the military and branding of soldiers as punishment were banned.[11] A new judicial administration (1864), based on the French model, introduced security of tenure.[12] A new penal code and a greatly simplified system of civil and criminal procedure also came into operation. Reorganisation of Judiciary, to include trial in open court, with judges appointed for life, a jury system and the creation of justices of the peace to deal with minor offences at local level. Alexander's bureaucracy instituted an elaborate scheme of local self-government (zemstvo) for the rural districts (1864) and the large towns (1870), with elective assemblies possessing a restricted right of taxation, and a new rural and municipal police under the direction of the Minister of the Interior. Marriages and children[edit] Wikisource has original text related to this article: An intimate glimpse into the family life of Alexander II (1871) Emperor Alexander II and his wife, Empress Maria, with their son, the future Alexander III by Sergei Lvovich Levitsky 1870During his bachelor days, Alexander made a state visit to England in 1838. Just a year older than the young Queen Victoria, Alexander's approaches to her were indeed short-lived. Victoria married her German cousin, Albert of Saxe-Coburg in February 1840. On 16 April 1841, aged 23, Tsarevitch Alexander married Princess Marie of Hesse in St Petersburg, thereafter known in Russia as Maria Alexandrovna. (Marie was the legal daughter of Ludwig II, Grand Duke of Hesse and by Rhine and Princess Wilhelmina of Baden, although some gossiping questioned whether the Grand Duke Ludwig or Wilhelmina's lover, Baron August von Senarclens de Grancy, was her biological father.[citation needed] Alexander was aware of the question of her paternity.) The marriage produced six sons and two daughters: Grand Duchess Alexandra Alexandrovna (30 August 1842 – 10 July 1849), nicknamed Lina, died of infant meningitis in St. Petersburg at the age of six Tsarevich Nicholas Alexandrovich (20 September 1843 – 24 April 1865), engaged to Dagmar of Denmark (Maria Feodorovna) Emperor Alexander III (10 March 1845 – 1 November 1894), married 1866, Dagmar of Denmark (Maria Feodorovna), had issue Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich (22 April 1847 – 17 February 1909), married 1874, Marie of Mecklenburg-Schwerin (Maria Pavlovna), had issue Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich (14 January 1850 – 14 November 1908), had (presumably illegitimate) issue Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrovna (17 October 1853 – 20 October 1920) married 1874, Alfred, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, had issue Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich (29 April 1857 – 4 February 1905), married 1884, Elisabeth of Hesse (Elizabeth Feodorovna) Grand Duke Paul Alexandrovich (3 October 1860 – 24 January 1919), married 1889, Alexandra of Greece and Denmark (Alexandra Georgievna), had issue; second marriage 1902, Olga Karnovich, had issue Morganatic Marriage[edit] Tsar Alexander II. photo by Sergei Lvovich Levitsky 1881. (The Di Rocco Wieler Private Collection, Toronto, Canada)Alexander had many mistresses during his marriage and fathered seven known illegitimate children[citation needed]. These included: Charlotte Henriette Sophie Jansen (15 November 1844 – July 1915) with mistress Sophie Charlotte Dorothea Von Behse (1828–1886)[citation needed] Joseph Raboxicz[citation needed] Michael-Bogdan Oginski (10 October 1848 – 25 March 1909) with mistress Countess Olga Kalinovskya (1818–1854)[citation needed] Antoinette Bayer (20 June 1856 – 24 January 1948) with his mistress Wilhelmine Bayer[citation needed] On 6 July 1880, less than a month after Empress Maria's death on 8 June, Alexander formed a morganatic marriage with his mistress Princess Catherine Dolgorukov, with whom he already had four children: George Alexandrovich Romanov Yurievsky (12 May 1872 – 13 September 1913). Married Countess Alexandra Zarnekau and had issue. They later divorced. Olga Alexandrovna Yurievskaya (7 November 1874 – 10 August 1925). Married Count Georg Nikolaus of Nassau, Count of Merenberg. Boris Alexandrovich Yurievsky (23 February 1876 – 11 April 1876). Catherine Alexandrovna Yurievskaya (9 September 1878 – 22 December 1959) Her first husband was the 23rd Prince Alexander Alexandrovich Bariatinski, (1870–1910) the son of the 22nd Prince Alexander Vladimirovich Bariatinski, (1848–1909). Her second husband, later divorced, was Prince Serge Obolensky, (1890–1978).

Contents [hide]

1 Early life

2 Reign

3 Emancipation of the serfs

4 Other reforms

5 Marriages and children

6 Morganatic Marriage

7 Suppression of separatist movements

8 Encouraging Finnish nationalism

9 Rule during the Russian-Caucasian War

10 Liberation of Bulgaria

11 Assassination attempts

12 Assassination

13 Aftermath

14 Alexander II's dog, Milord

15 In fiction

16 In nonfiction

17 Titles, Styles and Arms

17.1 Titles and styles

17.2 Arms

18 Ancestors

19 See also

20 Gallery

21 References

22 Further reading

23 External links

Early life[edit]

Alexander II as a boy. (George Dawe,1827)Born in Moscow, he was the eldest son of Nicholas I of Russia and Charlotte of Prussia, daughter of Frederick William III of Prussia and Louise of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. His early life gave little indication of his ultimate potential; until the time of his accession in 1855, aged 37, few imagined that he would be known to posterity as a leader able to implement the most challenging reforms undertaken in Russia since the reign of Peter the Great.

In the period of his life as heir apparent, the intellectual atmosphere of Saint Petersburg was unfavourable to any kind of change: freedom of thought and all forms of private initiative were being suppressed vigorously. Personal and official censorship was rife; criticism of the authorities was regarded as a serious offence. Some 26 years afterward, he had the opportunity of implementing changes; he would, however, be assassinated in public by the Narodnaya Volya (People's Will) terrorist organisation.[1]

His education as a future emperor was carried out under the supervision of the liberal romantic poet and gifted translator Vasily Zhukovsky,[2] grasping a smattering of a great many subjects and becoming familiar with the chief modern European languages. His alleged lack of interest in military affairs detected by later historians was his reflection on the results on his own family and on the effect on the whole country of the unsavoury Crimean War. Unusually for the time, the young Alexander was taken on a six-month tour of Russia, visiting 20 provinces in the country.[3] He also visited many prominent Western European countries.[4] As Tsarevich, Alexander became the first Romanov heir to visit Siberia.[5]

Reign[edit]Alexander II succeeded to the throne upon the death of his father in 1855. The first year of his reign was devoted to the prosecution of the Crimean War and, after the fall of Sevastopol, to negotiations for peace, led by his trusted counsellor Prince Gorchakov. The country had been exhausted and humiliated by the war.[6] Bribe-taking, theft and corruption were everywhere.[7] Encouraged by public opinion he began a period of radical reforms, including an attempt to not depend on a landed aristocracy controlling the poor, a move to developing Russia's natural resources and to reform all branches of the administration. In 1867 he sold Alaska to the United States for $7 million (equivalent to roughly $200 million in current dollars) after recognising the great difficulty of defending it against the United Kingdom or the former British colony of Canada.

After Alexander became emperor in 1855, he maintained a generally liberal course. Despite this, he was a target for numerous assassination attempts (1866, 1879, 1880). On 13 March [O.S. 1 March] 1881, members of the Narodnaya Volya (People's Will) party killed him with a bomb. The Emperor had earlier in the day signed the Loris-Melikov constitution which would have created two legislative commissions made up of indirectly elected representatives, had it not been repealed by his reactionary successor Alexander III.[8]

A new judicial administration (1864), based on the French model, introduced security of tenure.[12] A new penal code and a greatly simplified system of civil and criminal procedure also came into operation. Reorganisation of Judiciary, to include trial in open court, with judges appointed for life, a jury system and the creation of justices of the peace to deal with minor offences at local level. Alexander's bureaucracy instituted an elaborate scheme of local self-government (zemstvo) for the rural districts (1864) and the large towns (1870), with elective assemblies possessing a restricted right of taxation, and a new rural and municipal police under the direction of the Minister of the Interior. Marriages and children[edit] Wikisource has original text related to this article: An intimate glimpse into the family life of Alexander II (1871) Emperor Alexander II and his wife, Empress Maria, with their son, the future Alexander III by Sergei Lvovich Levitsky 1870During his bachelor days, Alexander made a state visit to England in 1838. Just a year older than the young Queen Victoria, Alexander's approaches to her were indeed short-lived. Victoria married her German cousin, Albert of Saxe-Coburg in February 1840. On 16 April 1841, aged 23, Tsarevitch Alexander married Princess Marie of Hesse in St Petersburg, thereafter known in Russia as Maria Alexandrovna. (Marie was the legal daughter of Ludwig II, Grand Duke of Hesse and by Rhine and Princess Wilhelmina of Baden, although some gossiping questioned whether the Grand Duke Ludwig or Wilhelmina's lover, Baron August von Senarclens de Grancy, was her biological father.[citation needed] Alexander was aware of the question of her paternity.) The marriage produced six sons and two daughters: Grand Duchess Alexandra Alexandrovna (30 August 1842 – 10 July 1849), nicknamed Lina, died of infant meningitis in St. Petersburg at the age of six Tsarevich Nicholas Alexandrovich (20 September 1843 – 24 April 1865), engaged to Dagmar of Denmark (Maria Feodorovna) Emperor Alexander III (10 March 1845 – 1 November 1894), married 1866, Dagmar of Denmark (Maria Feodorovna), had issue Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich (22 April 1847 – 17 February 1909), married 1874, Marie of Mecklenburg-Schwerin (Maria Pavlovna), had issue Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich (14 January 1850 – 14 November 1908), had (presumably illegitimate) issue Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrovna (17 October 1853 – 20 October 1920) married 1874, Alfred, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, had issue Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich (29 April 1857 – 4 February 1905), married 1884, Elisabeth of Hesse (Elizabeth Feodorovna) Grand Duke Paul Alexandrovich (3 October 1860 – 24 January 1919), married 1889, Alexandra of Greece and Denmark (Alexandra Georgievna), had issue; second marriage 1902, Olga Karnovich, had issue Morganatic Marriage[edit] Tsar Alexander II. photo by Sergei Lvovich Levitsky 1881. (The Di Rocco Wieler Private Collection, Toronto, Canada)Alexander had many mistresses during his marriage and fathered seven known illegitimate children[citation needed]. These included: Charlotte Henriette Sophie Jansen (15 November 1844 – July 1915) with mistress Sophie Charlotte Dorothea Von Behse (1828–1886)[citation needed] Joseph Raboxicz[citation needed] Michael-Bogdan Oginski (10 October 1848 – 25 March 1909) with mistress Countess Olga Kalinovskya (1818–1854)[citation needed] Antoinette Bayer (20 June 1856 – 24 January 1948) with his mistress Wilhelmine Bayer[citation needed] On 6 July 1880, less than a month after Empress Maria's death on 8 June, Alexander formed a morganatic marriage with his mistress Princess Catherine Dolgorukov, with whom he already had four children: George Alexandrovich Romanov Yurievsky (12 May 1872 – 13 September 1913). Married Countess Alexandra Zarnekau and had issue. They later divorced. Olga Alexandrovna Yurievskaya (7 November 1874 – 10 August 1925). Married Count Georg Nikolaus of Nassau, Count of Merenberg. Boris Alexandrovich Yurievsky (23 February 1876 – 11 April 1876). Catherine Alexandrovna Yurievskaya (9 September 1878 – 22 December 1959) Her first husband was the 23rd Prince Alexander Alexandrovich Bariatinski, (1870–1910) the son of the 22nd Prince Alexander Vladimirovich Bariatinski, (1848–1909). Her second husband, later divorced, was Prince Serge Obolensky, (1890–1978). THIS WAS LATER IN SEPARATE BLOG WITH MORE DETAIL Suppression of separatist movements[edit] At the beginning of his reign, Alexander expressed the famous statement "No dreams" addressed to the Poles who inhabited Congress Poland, Western Ukraine, Lithuania, Livonia and Belarus. The result was the January Uprising of 1863–1864 that was suppressed after eighteen months of fighting. Hundreds of Poles were executed, and thousands were deported to Siberia. The price for suppression was Russian support for the unification of Germany. Years later, Germany and Russia became enemies. All territories of the former Poland-Lithuania were excluded from liberal policies introduced by Alexander. The martial law in Lithuania, introduced in 1863, lasted for the next 40 years. Native languages, Lithuanian, Ukrainian and Belarusian were completely banned from printed texts, the Ems Ukase being an example. The Polish language was banned in both oral and written form from all provinces except Congress Poland, where it was allowed in private conversations only. Encouraging Finnish nationalism[edit] The monument to Alexander II "The Liberator" at the Senate Square in Helsinki was erected in 1894, 13 years after the assassination of Alexander II. At the time, Finland was still a Russian grand duchy. The date "1863" refers to the reopening of the Diet of Finland. This monument, expressing the Finns' gratitude to this Emperor, survived unharmed through many later periods of tension and war with Russia under various of its later regimes.In 1863, Alexander II re-convened the Diet of Finland and initiated several reforms increasing Finland's autonomy from Russia including establishment of its own currency, the markka. Liberation of business led to increased foreign investment and industrial development. Finland also got its first railways, separately established under Finnish administration. Finally, the elevation of Finnish from a language of the common people to a national language equal to Swedish opened opportunities for a larger proportion of the society. Alexander II is still regarded as "The Good Tsar" in Finland. These reforms could be seen as results of a genuine belief that reforms were easier to test in an underpopulated, homogeneous country, than in the whole of Russia. They may also be seen as a reward for the loyalty of its relatively western-oriented population during the Crimean War and during the Polish uprising. Encouraging Finnish nationalism and language can also be seen as an attempt to dilute ties with Sweden Rule during the Russian-Caucasian War[edit] It was during Alexander II's rule that the Russian-Caucasian War reached its climax. Just before the conclusion of the war with a victory on Russia's side, the Russian Army, under the emperor's order, sought to eliminate the mountaineers in what would be often referred to as "cleansing" in several historic dialogues.[13][14] Liberation of Bulgaria[edit]In April 1876 the Bulgarian population on the Balkans rebelled against Ottoman rule. The April Uprising was suppressed brutally and drowned in blood, causing a general outcry throughout Europe. Some of the most prominent intellectuals and politicians on the Continent, most notably Victor Hugo and William Gladstone, sought to raise awareness about the atrocities of the Turks imposed on the Bulgarian population. To solve this new crisis in the "Eastern question" a special conference was convened in Constantinople at the end of the year. The participants in the Conference failed to reach a final agreement. After the failure of the Constantinople Conference, in the beginning of 1877 Emperor Alexander II started diplomatic preparation with the other Great Powers to secure their neutrality in case there would be war between Russia and the Ottomans. Alexander II considered such agreements paramount to evade the possibility of putting his country in a second disaster, similar to the Crimean War. The Russian Emperor was successful in his diplomatic endeavor. Having secured the non-involvement from the part of the other Great Powers, on 17 April 1877 Russia declared war upon the Ottoman Empire. The Russians were successful and the Russo-Ottoman war of 1877-1878 ended with the signing of the preliminary peace treaty of San-Stefano on 19 February (3 March new style) 1878. The treaty secured the emergence of an independent Bulgarian state for the first time since 1396. For his social reforms in Russia and his role in the liberation of Bulgaria, Alexander II became known in Bulgaria as the "Tsar-Liberator of Russians and Bulgarians". A monument of Alexander II was erected in 1907 in Sofia at "National Assembly" square, opposite to the building of the Parliament. The monument underwent full maintenance reconstruction in 2012, funded by the Sofia Municipality and some Russian foundations. The inscription on the monument reads in Old-Bulgarian style: "To the Tsar-Liberator from grateful Bulgaria". Assassination attempts[edit]In 1866, there was an attempt on the emperor's life in St. Petersburg by Dmitry Karakozov. To commemorate his narrow escape from death (which he himself referred to only as "the event of 4 April 1866"), a number of churches and chapels were built in many Russian cities. Viktor Hartmann, a Russian architect, even sketched a design of a monumental gate (which was never built) to commemorate the event. Modest Mussorgsky later wrote his Pictures at an Exhibition; the last movement of which, "The Great Gate of Kiev", is based on Hartmann's sketches. On the morning of 20 April 1879, Alexander was briskly walking towards the Square of the Guards Staff and faced Alexander Soloviev, a 33-year-old former student. Having seen a menacing revolver in his hands, the Emperor fled in a zigzag pattern. Soloviev fired five times but missed. He was hanged on 28 May, after being sentenced to death. The student acted on his own, but other revolutionaries were keen to murder Alexander. In December 1879, the Narodnaya Volya (People's Will), a radical revolutionary group which hoped to ignite a social revolution, organised an explosion on the railway from Livadia[citation needed] to Moscow, but they missed the emperor's train. On the evening of 5 February 1880 Stephan Khalturin, also from Narodnaya Volya, set off a charge under the dining room of the Winter Palace, right in the resting room of the guards a storey below. Being late for dinner, the emperor was unharmed; although 11 other people were killed and 30 wounded. Main articles: Narodnaya Volya and Pervomartovtsi After the last assassination attempt in February 1880, Count Loris-Melikov was appointed the head of the Supreme Executive Commission and given extraordinary powers to fight the revolutionaries. Loris-Melikov's proposals called for some form of parliamentary body, and the Emperor seemed to agree; these plans were never realised. On 13 March (1 March Old Style Date), 1881, Alexander fell victim to an assassination plot in Saint Petersburg. As he was known to do every Sunday for many years, the emperor went to the Mikhailovsky Manège for the military roll call. He travelled both to and from the Manège in a closed carriage accompanied by five Cossacks and Frank (Franciszek) Joseph Jackowski, a Polish noble, with a sixth Cossack[15] sitting on the coachman's left. The emperor's carriage was followed by two sleighs carrying, among others, the chief of police and the chief of the emperor's guards. The route, as always, was via the Catherine Canal and over the Pevchesky Bridge. The street was flanked by narrow sidewalks for the public. A young member of the Narodnaya Volya ("People's Will") movement, Nikolai Rysakov, was carrying a small white package wrapped in a handkerchief. "After a moment's hesitation I threw the bomb. I sent it under the horses' hooves in the supposition that it would blow up under the carriage...The explosion knocked me into the fence."[16] The explosion, while killing one of the Cossacks and seriously wounding the driver and people on the sidewalk, had only damaged the bulletproof carriage, a gift from Napoleon III of France. The emperor emerged shaken but unhurt. Rysakov was captured almost immediately. Police Chief Dvorzhitsky heard Rysakov shout out to someone else in the gathering crowd. The surrounding guards and the Cossacks urged the emperor to leave the area at once rather than being shown the site of the explosion. Nevertheless, a second young member of the Narodnaya Volya, Ignaty Grinevitsky, standing by the canal fence, raised both arms and threw something at the emperor's feet. He was alleged to have shouted, "It is too early to thank God".[17] Dvorzhitsky was later to write: "I was deafened by the new explosion, burned, wounded and thrown to the ground. Suddenly, amid the smoke and snowy fog, I heard His Majesty's weak voice cry, 'Help!' Gathering what strength I had, I jumped up and rushed to the emperor. His Majesty was half-lying, half-sitting, leaning on his right arm. Thinking he was merely wounded heavily, I tried to lift him but the czar's legs were shattered, and the blood poured out of them. Twenty people, with wounds of varying degree, lay on the sidewalk and on the street. Some managed to stand, others to crawl, still others tried to get out from beneath bodies that had fallen on them. Through the snow, debris, and blood you could see fragments of clothing, epaulets, sabres, and bloody chunks of human flesh."[18] Later it was learned there was a third bomber in the crowd. Ivan Emelyanov stood ready, clutching a briefcase containing a bomb that would be used if the other two bombers failed. Alexander was carried by sleigh to the Winter Palace to his study where, twenty years before almost to the day, he had signed the Emancipation Edict freeing the serfs. Alexander was bleeding to death, with his legs torn away, his stomach ripped open, and his face mutilated.[19] Members of the Romanov family came rushing to the scene. The dying emperor was given Communion and Extreme Unction. When the attending physician, Sergey Botkin, was asked how long it would be, he replied, "Up to fifteen minutes."[20] At 3:30 that day the standard (Alexander's personal flag) of Alexander II was lowered for the last time. Aftermath[edit] Alexander II's death caused a great setback for the reform movement. One of his last ideas was to draft plans for an elected parliament, or Duma, which were completed the day before he died but not yet released to the Russian people. In a matter of 48 hours, Alexander II planned to release his plan for the duma to the Russian people. Had he lived, Russia might have followed a path to constitutional monarchy instead of the long road of oppression that defined his successor's reign. The first action Alexander III took after his coronation was to tear up those plans. A Duma would not come into fruition until 1905, when Alexander II's grandson, Nicholas II, commissioned the Duma following extreme pressure on the monarchy as a result of the Russian Revolution of 1905. The assassination triggered major suppression of civil liberties in Russia, and police brutality burst back in full force after experiencing some restraint under the reign of Alexander II, whose murder and subsequent death was witnessed first-hand by his son, Alexander III, and his grandson, Nicholas II, both future emperors who vowed not to have the same fate befall them. Both of them used the Okhrana to arrest protestors and uproot suspected rebel groups, creating further suppression of personal freedom for the Russian people. A series of anti-Jewish pogroms and legislation were yet another result. Finally, the tsar's assassination also inspired anarchists to advocate "'propaganda by deed'—the use of a spectacular act of violence to incite revolution."[21] In fiction[edit] Portrait of Alexander II Alexander II appears prominently in the opening two chapters of Jules Verne's Michael Strogoff (published in 1876 during Alexander's own lifetime). The Emperor sets the book's plot in motion and sends its eponymous protagonist on the dangerous and vital mission which would occupy the rest of the book. Verne presents Alexander II in a highly positive light, as an enlightened yet firm monarch, dealing confidently and decisively with a rebellion. Alexander's liberalism shows in a dialogue with the chief of police, who says "There was a time, sire, when NONE returned from Siberia", to be immediately rebuked by the Emperor who answers: "Well, whilst I live, Siberia is and shall be a country whence men CAN return." [23] In The Tiger in the Well, Philip Pullman refers to the assassination — though he never names Alexander — and to the pogroms that followed. The anti-Jewish attacks play an important role in the novel's plot. Oscar Wilde's first play Vera; or, The Nihilists, written in 1880 – Alexander II's last year – features Russian revolutionaries who seek to assassinate a reform-minded Emperor (and who, in the play, ultimately fail in their plot). Though Wilde's fictional Emperor differs from the actual Alexander, contemporary events[which?] in Russia – as published in the British press of the time – clearly[original research?] influenced Wilde. In nonfiction[edit]Mark Twain describes a short visit with Alexander II in Chapter 37 of The Innocents Abroad, describing him as “very tall and spare, and a determined-looking man, though a very pleasant-looking one nevertheless. It is easy to see that he is kind and affectionate. There is something very noble in his expression when his cap is off.”[24] Justin McCarthy, Death and Exile, the Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821–1922, Princeton, NJ, 1995 Y. Abramov,Caucasian Mountaineers, Materials For the History of Circassian People, 1990 Edvard Radzinsky, Alexander II: The Last Great Tsar (Free Press: New York, 2005) pp. 261, 391 & 404–421. Mark Twain We formed a circle under the trees before the door, for there was no one room in the house able to accommodate our three-score persons comfortably, and in a few minutes the imperial family came out bowing and smiling, and stood in our midst. A number of great dignitaries of the Empire, in undress unit forms, came with them. With every bow, his Majesty said a word of welcome. I copy these speeches. There is character in them—Russian character—which is politeness itself, and the genuine article. The French are polite, but it is often mere ceremonious politeness. A Russian imbues his polite things with a heartiness, both of phrase and expression, that compels belief in their sincerity. As I was saying, the Czar punctuated his speeches with bows: "Good morning—I am glad to see you—I am gratified—I am delighted—I am happy to receive you!" All took off their hats, and the Consul inflicted the address on him. He bore it with unflinching fortitude; then took the rusty-looking document and handed it to some great officer or other, to be filed away among the archives of Russia—in the stove. He thanked us for the address, and said he was very much pleased to see us, especially as such friendly relations existed between Russia and the United States. The Empress said the Americans were favorites in Russia, and she hoped the Russians were similarly regarded in America. These were all the speeches that were made, and I recommend them to parties who present policemen with gold watches, as models of brevity and point. After this the Empress went and talked sociably (for an Empress) with various ladies around the circle; several gentlemen entered into a disjointed general conversation with the Emperor; the Dukes and Princes, Admirals and Maids of Honor dropped into free-and-easy chat with first one and then another of our party, and whoever chose stepped forward and spoke with the modest little Grand Duchess Marie, the Czar's daughter. She is fourteen years old, light-haired, blue-eyed, unassuming and pretty. Every body talks English. The Emperor wore a cap, frock coat and pantaloons, all of some kind of plain white drilling—cotton or linen and sported no jewelry or any insignia whatever of rank. No costume could be less ostentatious. He is very tall and spare, and a determined-looking man, though a very pleasant-looking one nevertheless. It is easy to see that he is kind and affectionate There is something very noble in his expression when his cap is off. There is none of that cunning in his eye that all of us noticed in Louis Napoleon's. The Empress and the little Grand Duchess wore simple suits of foulard (or foulard silk, I don't know which is proper,) with a small blue spot in it; the dresses were trimmed with blue; both ladies wore broad blue sashes about their waists; linen collars and clerical ties of muslin; low-crowned straw-hats trimmed with blue velvet; parasols and flesh-colored gloves. The Grand Duchess had no heels on her shoes. I do not know this of my own knowledge, but one of our ladies told me so. I was not looking at her shoes. I was glad to observe that she wore her own hair, plaited in thick braids against the back of her head, instead of the uncomely thing they call a waterfall, which is about as much like a waterfall as a canvas-covered ham is like a cataract. Taking the kind expression that is in the Emperor's face and the gentleness that is in his young daughter's into consideration, I wondered if it would not tax the Czar's firmness to the utmost to condemn a supplicating wretch to misery in the wastes of Siberia if she pleaded for him. Every time their eyes met, I saw more and more what a tremendous power that weak, diffident school-girl could wield if she chose to do it. Many and many a time she might rule the Autocrat of Russia, whose lightest word is law to seventy millions of human beings! She was only a girl, and she looked like a thousand others I have seen, but never a girl provoked such a novel and peculiar interest in me before. A strange, new sensation is a rare thing in this hum-drum life, and I had it here. There was nothing stale or worn out about the thoughts and feelings the situation and the circumstances created. It seemed strange—stranger than I can tell—to think that the central figure in the cluster of men and women, chatting here under the trees like the most ordinary individual in the land, was a man who could open his lips and ships would fly through the waves, locomotives would speed over the plains, couriers would hurry from village to village, a hundred telegraphs would flash the word to the four corners of an Empire that stretches its vast proportions over a seventh part of the habitable globe, and a countless multitude of men would spring to do his bidding. I had a sort of vague desire to examine his hands and see if they were of flesh and blood, like other men's. Here was a man who could do this wonderful thing, and yet if I chose I could knock him down. The case was plain, but it seemed preposterous, nevertheless—as preposterous as trying to knock down a mountain or wipe out a continent. If this man sprained his ankle, a million miles of telegraph would carry the news over mountains—valleys—uninhabited deserts—under the trackless sea—and ten thousand newspapers would prate of it; if he were grievously ill, all the nations would know it before the sun rose again; if he dropped lifeless where he stood, his fall might shake the thrones of half a world! If I could have stolen his coat, I would have done it. When I meet a man like that, I want something to remember him by. As a general thing, we have been shown through palaces by some plush-legged filagreed flunkey or other, who charged a franc for it; but after talking with the company half an hour, the Emperor of Russia and his family conducted us all through their mansion themselves. They made no charge. They seemed to take a real pleasure in it. We spent half an hour idling through the palace, admiring the cosy apartments and the rich but eminently home-like appointments of the place, and then the Imperial family bade our party a kind good-bye, and proceeded to count the spoons. An invitation was extended to us to visit the palace of the eldest son, the Crown Prince of Russia, which was near at hand. The young man was absent, but the Dukes and Countesses and Princes went over the premises with us as leisurely as was the case at the Emperor's, and conversation continued as lively as ever. It was a little after one o'clock, now. We drove to the Grand Duke Michael's, a mile away, in response to his invitation, previously given. We arrived in twenty minutes from the Emperor's. It is a lovely place. The beautiful palace nestles among the grand old groves of the park, the park sits in the lap of the picturesque crags and hills, and both look out upon the breezy ocean. In the park are rustic seats, here and there, in secluded nooks that are dark with shade; there are rivulets of crystal water; there are lakelets, with inviting, grassy banks; there are glimpses of sparkling cascades through openings in the wilderness of foliage; there are streams of clear water gushing from mimic knots on the trunks of forest trees; there are miniature marble temples perched upon gray old crags; there are airy lookouts whence one may gaze upon a broad expanse of landscape and ocean. The palace is modeled after the choicest forms of Grecian architecture, and its wide colonnades surround a central court that is banked with rare flowers that fill the place with their fragrance, and in their midst springs a fountain that cools the summer air, and may possibly breed mosquitoes, but I do not think it does. The Grand Duke and his Duchess came out, and the presentation ceremonies were as simple as they had been at the Emperor's. In a few minutes, conversation was under way, as before. The Empress appeared in the verandah, and the little Grand Duchess came out into the crowd. They had beaten us there. In a few minutes, the Emperor came himself on horseback. It was very pleasant. You can appreciate it if you have ever visited royalty and felt occasionally that possibly you might be wearing out your welcome—though as a general thing, I believe, royalty is not scrupulous about discharging you when it is done with you. The Grand Duke is the third brother of the Emperor, is about thirty-seven years old, perhaps, and is the princeliest figure in Russia. He is even taller than the Czar, as straight as an Indian, and bears himself like one of those gorgeous knights we read about in romances of the Crusades. He looks like a great-hearted fellow who would pitch an enemy into the river in a moment, and then jump in and risk his life fishing him out again. The stories they tell of him show him to be of a brave and generous nature. He must have been desirous of proving that Americans were welcome guests in the imperial palaces of Russia, because he rode all the way to Yalta and escorted our procession to the Emperor's himself, and kept his aids scurrying about, clearing the road and offering assistance wherever it could be needed. We were rather familiar with him then, because we did not know who he was. We recognized him now, and appreciated the friendly spirit that prompted him to do us a favor that any other Grand Duke in the world would have doubtless declined to do. He had plenty of servitors whom he could have sent, but he chose to attend to the matter himself. The Grand Duke was dressed in the handsome and showy uniform of a Cossack officer. The Grand Duchess had on a white alpaca robe, with the seams and gores trimmed with black barb lace, and a little gray hat with a feather of the same color. She is young, rather pretty modest and unpretending, and full of winning politeness. Our party walked all through the house, and then the nobility escorted them all over the grounds, and finally brought them back to the palace about half-past two o'clock to breakfast. They called it breakfast, but we would have called it luncheon. It consisted of two kinds of wine; tea, bread, cheese, and cold meats, and was served on the centre-tables in the reception room and the verandahs—anywhere that was convenient; there was no ceremony. It was a sort of picnic. I had heard before that we were to breakfast there, but Blucher said he believed Baker's boy had suggested it to his Imperial Highness. I think not—though it would be like him. Baker's boy is the famine-breeder of the ship. He is always hungry. They say he goes about the state-rooms when the passengers are out, and eats up all the soap. And they say he eats oakum. They say he will eat any thing he can get between meals, but he prefers oakum. He does not like oakum for dinner, but he likes it for a lunch, at odd hours, or any thing that way. It makes him very disagreeable, because it makes his breath bad, and keeps his teeth all stuck up with tar. Baker's boy may have suggested the breakfast, but I hope he did not. It went off well, anyhow. The illustrious host moved about from place to place, and helped to destroy the provisions and keep the conversation lively, and the Grand Duchess talked with the verandah parties and such as had satisfied their appetites and straggled out from the reception room. The Grand Duke's tea was delicious. They give one a lemon to squeeze into it, or iced milk, if he prefers it. The former is best. This tea is brought overland from China. It injures the article to transport it by sea. When it was time to go, we bade our distinguished hosts good-bye, and they retired happy and contented to their apartments to count their spoons. We had spent the best part of half a day in the home of royalty, and had been as cheerful and comfortable all the time as we could have been in the ship. I would as soon have thought of being cheerful in Abraham's bosom as in the palace of an Emperor. I supposed that Emperors were terrible people. I thought they never did any thing but wear magnificent crowns and red velvet dressing-gowns with dabs of wool sewed on them in spots, and sit on thrones and scowl at the flunkies and the people in the parquette, and order Dukes and Duchesses off to execution. I find, however, that when one is so fortunate as to get behind the scenes and see them at home and in the privacy of their firesides, they are strangely like common mortals. They are pleasanter to look upon then than they are in their theatrical aspect. It seems to come as natural to them to dress and act like other people as it is to put a friend's cedar pencil in your pocket when you are done using it. But I can never have any confidence in the tinsel kings of the theatre after this. It will be a great loss. I used to take such a thrilling pleasure in them. But, hereafter, I will turn me sadly away and say; "This does not answer—this isn't the style of king that I am acquainted with."

January Uprising January UprisingFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search For the similarly named event, see Kiev Arsenal January Uprising. This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (January 2009) January Uprising "Polonia (Poland), 1863", by Jan Matejko, 1864, oil on canvas, 156 × 232 cm, National Museum, Kraków. Pictured is the aftermath of the failed January 1863 Uprising. Captives await transportation to Siberia. Russian officers and soldiers supervise a blacksmith placing shackles on a woman (Polonia). The blonde girl next to her represents Lithuania. Date 22 January 1863 - 11 April 1864 (150 years, 6 months, and 9 days ago, lasted for 70001000000000000001 year, 700180000000000000080 days) Location former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, then Russian empire Result Russian victory Belligerents Polish, Lithuanian, Belarusian/Litvin and Ukrainian insurgents Russian Empire Strength around 200,000 over the course of the uprising unknown Casualties and losses 10,000 to 20,000 Administrative divisions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwelath within the pre-partition borders of 1772, introduced by the National Government during the January Uprising in 1863The January Uprising (Polish: powstanie styczniowe, Lithuanian: 1863 m. sukilimas, Belarusian: Паўстанне 1863-1864 гадоў) was an uprising in the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (present-day Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, Latvia, parts of Ukraine, and western Russia) against the Russian Empire. It began on 22 January 1863 and lasted until the last insurgents were captured in 1865. The uprising began as a spontaneous protest by young Poles against conscription into the Imperial Russian Army, and was soon joined by high-ranking Polish-Lithuanian officers and various politicians. The insurrectionists, severely outnumbered and lacking serious outside support, were forced to resort to guerrilla warfare tactics. They failed to win any major military victories or capture any major cities or fortresses, but their call for national unity through the granting of land to peasants led to the elimination of szlachta privileges in the Second Polish Republic by the March Constitution in 1921. Reprisals against insurgents included the Tsar’s abolition of serfdom that granted land at low value and was designed to draw support of peasants away from the Polish nation and disrupt the national economy. Public executions and deportations to Siberia, led many Polish to abandon armed struggle and turn instead to the idea of "organic work": economic and cultural self-improvement. Contents [hide] 1 Eve of the uprising 2 Uprising in the former Polish Kingdom 3 Uprising in the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania 4 Evolution of events 5 Famous insurgents 6 January Uprising in literature 7 See also 8 References 9 External links Eve of the uprising[edit] Russian army in Warsaw during martial law 1861 "The Battle" from the cycle of paintings "Polonia" dedicated to January Uprising of 1863 - Artur Grottger.After the Russian Empire lost the Crimean war and was weakened economically and politically, an unrest started in the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In Vilnius alone 116 demonstrations were held in 1861. In August 1861, manifestations in Vilnius ended in clashes with the Imperial Russian Army. In spite of Russian police and Cossack interference, a symbolic meeting of hymn-singing Poles and Lithuanians took place on the bridge across Niemen River. Another mass gathering took place in Horodło, where Union of Horodło had been signed in 1413. The crowds sang Boże, coś Polskę (God protect Poland) in Lithuanian and Belarusian. In the autumn of 1861 Russians had introduced a state of emergency in Vilna Governorate, Kovno Governorate and Grodno Governorate.[1] After a series of patriotic riots, the Russian Namestnik of Tsar Alexander II, General Karl Lambert, introduced martial law in Poland on 14 October 1861. Public gatherings were banned and some public leaders were made outlaws. The future leaders of the uprising gathered secretly in St. Petersburg, Warsaw, Vilnius, Paris and London. After this series of meetings two major factions emerged. The Reds represented united peasants, workers and some clergy while The Whites represented liberal minded landlords and intelligentsia of the time. In 1862 two initiative groups were formed for the two components of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Uprising in the former Polish Kingdom[edit] Battles of January Uprising in Congress Poland 1863-1864The uprising broke out at a moment when general quiet prevailed in Europe, and though there was a public outcry in support of the Poles, powers such as France, Britain and Austria were unwilling to disturb the calm. The potential revolutionary leaders did not have sufficient means to arm and equip the groups of young men who were hiding in forests to escape Alexander Wielopolski's order of conscription into the Russian army. Altogether about 10,000 men rallied around the revolutionary banner; they were recruited chiefly from the ranks of the city working classes and minor clerks, although there was also a considerable admixture of the younger sons of the poor szlachta and a number of priests of lower rank. To deal with these ill-armed units the Russian government had at its disposal an army of 90,000 men under General Ramsay in Poland. It looked as if the rebellion would be crushed quickly. The die was cast, however, and the provisional government applied itself to the great task with fervor. It issued a manifesto in which it pronounced "all sons of Poland free and equal citizens without distinction of creed, condition and rank." It declared that land cultivated by the peasants, whether on the basis of rent-pay or service, henceforth should become their unconditional property, and compensation for it would be given to the landlords out of the general funds of the State. The revolutionary government did its very best to supply and provision the unarmed and scattered guerrillas who, during the month of February, met the Russians in eighty bloody encounters. Meanwhile, it issued an appeal to the nations of western Europe, which was received everywhere with a genuine and heartfelt response, from Norway to Portugal. Pope Pius IX ordered a special prayer for the success of the Catholic Polish in their defence against the Orthodox Russians, and was very active in arousing sympathy for the Polish rebels. Uprising in the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania[edit] Battles of January Uprising in eastern Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Belarus and Ukraine January Uprising`s coat of arms, respecting 3 nations forming the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth: White Eagle (Poland), Vytis (Lithuania) and Archangel Michael (Ruthenia)In Lithuania, Belarus, Latvia, northern Ukraine and western Russia the uprising started on February 1, 1863. A coalition government of the Reds and the Whites was formed. It was led by Zygmunt Sierakowski, Antanas Mackevičius and Konstanty Kalinowski. They fully supported their counterparts in Poland and adhered to the same policy. Polish, Lithuanian and Belarusian insurgents were more numerous (up to 30,000 men at the peak of uprising) and a little better armed, but there were 135,000 Russian troops and 6,000 Cossacks in Lithuania and another 45,000 Russian troops in Volhynia. In every major military engagement of the uprising insurgents were outnumbered at least 10 to 1. Insurgents of szlachta background constituted 60% percent of the uprising's participants (in Lithuania and Belarus around 50%, in Ukraine some 75%).[2] During the first 24 hours of the uprising armories across the country were looted, many Russian officials executed on sight. 2 February 1863 saw the start of the first major military engagement of the uprising between Polish peasants (mostly armed with scythes) and a squadron of Russian hussars near Čysta Būda, near Marijampolė. It ended with a massacre of the unprepared peasants. As hope of a short war was present, insurgent groups merged into bigger formations and recruited new personnel. On 7 April Zygmunt Sierakowski, who was able to recruit and arm 2500 men for the cause, was elected to be the military commander in chief of the reborn PLC. Under his command the peasant army was able to achieve several difficult victories near Raguva on 21 April, Biržai on 2 May, Medeikiai on 7 May. However, tired from a several week long marches and combat, the insurgent army suffered a defeat on 8 May near Gudiškis. Evolution of events[edit] Zouaves of Death (żuawi śmierci), an 1863 Uprising unit organized by François Rochebrune. Drawing (published 1909) by K. Sariusz-Wolski, from a photograph. From left: Count Wojciech Komorowski, Col. Rochebrune, Lt. Tenente Bella Battle of Węgrów 1863 Russian soldiers looting a Polish manor Chapel in Vilnius, erected to commemorate the crushing of the 1863 January Uprising against Russia, picture taken Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-GorskiiThe provisional government counted on a revolutionary outbreak in Russia, where the discontent with the autocratic regime seemed at the time to be widely prevalent. It also counted on the active support of Napoleon III, particularly after Prussia, foreseeing an inevitable armed conflict with France, made friendly overtures to Russia in the Alvensleben Convention and offered assistance in suppressing the Polish uprising. On the 14th day of February arrangements had already been completed, and the British Ambassador in Berlin was able to inform his government that a Prussian military envoy "has concluded a military convention with the Russian Government, according to which the two governments will reciprocally afford facilities to each other for the suppression of the insurrectionary movements which have lately taken place in Poland and Lithuania. The Prussian railways are also to be placed at the disposal of the Russian military authorities for the transportation of troops through Prussian territory from one part of the former Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth to another." This step of Bismarck led to protests on the part of several governments and roused the nations of the Commonwealth. The result was the transformation of the insignificant uprising into another national war against Russia. Encouraged by the promises made by Napoleon III, all nations, acting upon the advice of Władysław Czartoryski, the son of Prince Adam, took to arms. Indicating their solidarity, all Commonwealth citizens holding office under the Russian Government, including the Archbishop of Warsaw, resigned their positions and submitted to the newly constituted Government, which was composed of the five most prominent representatives of the Whites. Apart from the efforts of Sweden, diplomatic intervention of foreign powers on behalf of Poland did more harm than good due to drawing focus on Polish national unity versus social inequality. It alienated Austria, which hitherto had maintained a friendly neutrality with reference to Poland and had not interfered with Polish activities in Galicia. It prejudiced public opinion among the radical groups in Russia who, until that time, had been friendly because they regarded the uprising as of a social rather than a national character and it stirred the Russian Government to more energetic endeavors toward the speedy suppression of hostilities which were growing in strength and determination. In addition to the thousands who fell in battle, 128 men were hanged personally by Mikhail Muravyov ('Muravyov the Hangman'), and 9,423 men and women were exiled to Siberia (2,500 men according to low Russian data estimates, Norman Davies gives the number of 80,000 noting it was the single largest deportation in Russian history).[3] Whole villages and towns were burned down; all activities were suspended and the szlachta was ruined by confiscation and exorbitant taxes. Such was the brutality of the Russian troops that their actions were condemned throughout Europe, and even in Russia itself Muravyov became ostracized.[4] Count Fyodor Berg, the newly appointed Namestnik of Poland, followed in Muravyov's footsteps, employing inhumanly harsh measures against the country. The Reds criticized the Polish National Government for being reactionary in its policy to provide incentive to Polish peasants to fight in the uprising. The Government defended its inaction with hopes of foreign military aid promised by Napoleon III. It was only after Polish general Romuald Traugutt took matters in his own hands to unite the classes under a national cause that the situation became brighter. On 27 December 1863 he enacted the decree of the former provisional government by granting peasants the land they worked on. This land was to be provided by compensating the owners through state funds at the successful conclusion of the uprising. Traugutt called upon all Polish classes to rise against Russian oppression for the creation of the new Polish state. The response was generous but not universal since the policy was adopted too late. The Russian Government had already been working among the peasants giving liberal parcels of land for the mere asking. The peasants that were bought off did not interfere with the Polish revolutionaries to any great extent but they also did not provide support. Fighting continued intermittently for several months. Among the generals, Count Józef Hauke-Bosak distinguished himself most as a commander of the revolutionary forces and took several cities from the vastly superior Russian army. When Traugutt and the four other members of the Polish Government were apprehended by Russian troops and executed at the Warsaw citadel, the war in the course of which 650 battles and skirmishes were fought and twenty-five thousand Polish killed, came to a speedy end in the latter half of 1864, having lasted for eighteen months. It is of interest to note that it persisted in Samogitia and Podlaskie, where the Greek-Catholic population, outraged and persecuted for their religious convictions, clung longest to the revolutionary banner. The uprising was finally crushed by Russia in 1864. Graves of January Uprising veterans at Warsaw's Powązki Cemetery.After the collapse of the uprising, harsh reprisals followed. According to Russian official information, 396 persons were executed and 18,672 were exiled to Siberia. Large numbers of men and women were sent to the interior of Russia and to Caucasus, Urals and other sections. Altogether about 70,000 persons were imprisoned and subsequently taken out of Poland and stationed in remote regions of Russia. The government confiscated 1,660 estates in Poland and 1,794 in Lithuania. A 10% income tax was imposed on all estates as a war indemnity. Only in 1869 was this tax reduced to 5% on all incomes. Serfdom was abolished in Russian Poland on 19 February 1864. It was deliberately enacted in a way that would ruin the szlachta. It was the only area where peasants paid the market price in redemption for the land (the average for the empire was 34% above the market price). All land taken from Polish peasants since 1846 was to be returned without redemption payments. The ex-serfs could only sell land to other peasants, not szlachta. 90% of the ex-serfs in the empire who actually gained land after 1861 were in the 8 western provinces. Along with Romania, Polish landless or domestic serfs were the only ones to be given land after serfdom was abolished. All this was to punish the szlachta's role in the uprisings of 1830 and 1863. Besides the land granted to the peasants, the Russian Government gave them additional forest, pasture and other excessive privileges (known under the name of servitutes) which proved to be a source of incessant irritation between the landowners and peasants in the following decades, and an impediment to economic development. The government took over all the church estates and funds, and abolished monasteries and convents. With the exception of religious instruction, all other studies in the schools were ordered to be in the Russian. Russian also became the official language of the country, used exclusively in all offices of the general and local government. All traces of former Polish autonomy were removed and the kingdom was divided into ten provinces, each with an appointed Russian military governor and all under complete control of the Governor-General at Warsaw. All the former government functionaries were deprived of their positions. This measures proved to be of limited success. In 1905, 41 years after Russian crushing of the uprising, the next generation of Poles rose once again in a new one. Farewell to Europe, by Aleksander A Sochaczewski. The artist himself is among the exiled here, near the obelisk, on the rightFamous insurgents[edit]Stanisław Brzóska (1832–1865), was a Polish priest and commander at the end of the insurrection. Konstanty Kalinowski (1838–1864), was one of the leaders of Lithuanian and Belarusian national revival and the leader of the January Uprising in the lands of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Saint Raphael Kalinowski (1835–1907), born Joseph Kalinowski in Lithuania, resigned as a Captain from the Russian Army to become Minister of War for the Polish insurgents. He was arrested and sentenced to death by firing squad, but the sentence was then changed to 10 years in Siberia, including a grueling nine-month overland trek to get there. Apollo Korzeniowski (1820–1869), Polish playwright and father of Joseph Conrad. Antanas Mackevičius (1828-1863), Lithuanian priest who organized some two hundred and fifty men, armed with hunting rifles and straightened scythes. After a defeat near Vilkija, he was captured and taken to the prison in Kaunas. After Mackevičius refused to betray other leaders of the uprising, he was hanged on December 28, 1863, Władysław Niegolewski (1819–1885), was a liberal Polish politician and member of parliament, an insurgent in the Greater Poland Uprisings of 1846 and 1848 and of the January 1863 Uprising, and a co-founder (1861) of the Central Economic Society (TCL) and (1880) the People's Libraries Society (CTG). Bolesław Prus, (1847–1912), Polish writer. Aleksander Sochaczewski (1843—1923), Polish painter. Aleksander Waszkowski (1841-1865), President of Polish National Government (Leader of the January Insurrection. Arrested Dec 1864, Executed 1865. Cross commemorating 70th Anniversary of January UprisingJanuary Uprising in literature[edit]Polish poet Cyprian Norwid wrote a famous poem, "Chopin's Piano," describing the defenestration of the composer's piano during the January 1863 Uprising, when Russian soldiers maliciously threw the instrument out of a second-floor Warsaw apartment. Chopin had left Warsaw and Poland forever shortly before the outbreak of the November 1830 Uprising. In the initial draft of Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne (but not in the published version), Captain Nemo was a Polish nobleman whose family had been brutally murdered by the Russians during the January 1863 Uprising. Since France had only recently signed an alliance with Tsarist Russia, in the novel's final version Verne's editor, Pierre-Jules Hetzel, made him obscure Nemo's motives.[citation needed] In Guy de Maupassant's novel Pierre et Jean, the protagonist Pierre has a friend, an old Polish chemist that is said to come to France after the bloody events in his motherland. This story is believed to refer to the January Uprising. See also[edit]Baikal insurrection 1866 Great Emigration Insurgence Polish National Government Polish uprisings Sybirak International Workingmen's Association References[edit]This article incorporates text from The political history of Poland (1917) by Edward Henry Lewinski Corwin, a publication now in the public domain. 1.^ Piotr S. Wandycz, The lands of partitioned Poland, 1795-1918, University of Washington Press, 1974, p. 166. 2.^ Jolanta Sikorska Kulesza. Deklasacja drobnej szlachty na Litwie in Białorusi w XIX wieku. Ajaks. 1995. p. 29. 3.^ Norman Davies (1996). Europe: a history. Oxford University Press. pp. 828–. ISBN 978-0-19-820171-7. Retrieved 2 February 2011. 4.^ Adam Bruno Ulam (1977). Prophets and conspirators in prerevolutionary Russia. Transaction Publishers. pp. 8–. ISBN 978-0-7658-0443-3. Retrieved 2 February 2011. External links[edit] Polish Wikisource has original text related to this article: January Uprising Peter Kropotkin, Memoirs of a Revolutionist & Co., 1899, pp. 174–180. Augustin O'Brien Petersburg and Warsaw: scenes witnessed during a residence in Poland and Russia in 1863-1864 (1864) William Ansell Day. The Russian government in Poland : with a narrative of the Polish Insurrection of 1863 (1867) Pictures and paintings dedicated January Uprising on Youtube The list of participants, soldiers, killed, exiled to Siberia Szwadron (1992) Polish movie about the uprising

Monday, July 29, 2013

Anna RosmusFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.

This article has an unclear citation style. The references used may be made clearer with a different or consistent style of citation, footnoting, or external linking. (March 2011)

This article appears to be written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by rewriting promotional content from a neutral point of view and removing any inappropriate external links. (March 2011)

A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (March 2011)

Anna Rosmus and Mickey Dorsey.Anna Rosmus, also known as Anja Rosmus-Wenninger, is a German author and researcher born in 1960 in Passau, Bavaria.

Contents [hide]

1 Early life in Germany

2 The Nasty Girl and major TV productions

3 Emigration to the United States

4 Publications

5 Honors

6 See also

7 External links

Early life in Germany[edit]As a 16-year old she started developing an interest in contemporary history, especially that of the Third Reich. The subject was barely mentioned at school. Challenged by her father, a principal, she participated in a nation-wide essay contest that addressed the history of her city during the prewar years. Whereas some prominent residents claimed that the community remained untouched by the war, and others were praising themselves for their alleged political resistance against the dictatorship, Rosmus' efforts were not welcomed by many inhabitants. Nevertheless, at age 20, she started digging into the past. Upon further questioning of some of Passau's elders, Rosmus came across a widespread silence and refusal to provide specific information.

After three years of perseverance and litigation, she was finally granted access to the city administration’s archives. What she found was baffling. Fabled local leaders had not only been compliant, but were active members of the Nazi Party long before the war. Several concentration -, forced labor- and prisoner-of-war concentration camps had been built in and around the city.

In the meantime, Rosmus had written her first book, Resistance and Persecution - The Case of Passau 1933-1939, which was published in 1983. Undeterred by threats, she now wrote Exodus - In the Shadow of Mercy, a book focusing on the plight of Passau's Jews during the twentieth century. Her work continued to cause unprecedented uproar as well as remarkable praise.

The Nasty Girl and major TV productions[edit]In 1985, Rosmus' work attracted director Michael Verhoeven's attention. In 1988, he directed Das schreckliche Mädchen (The Nasty Girl), in which Lena Stolze plays Sonja Wegmus, a fictionalized version of Rosmus. The movie received the Golden Globe Award for Best Foreign Language Film, and it was nominated for the Academy’s Award for Best Foreign Language Film in 1991.

In 1986, the German TV station ARD broadcast Felix Kuballa's WDR 45-min documentary Von deutscher Toleranz.

In 1988, the German TV station ARD showed Henning Stegmüller's 1987 Radio Bremen 90-min documentary Gegen den Strom about Anna Rosmus.

In 1990, the German TV station ZDF showed Michael Verhoeven's 1987 documentary Das Mädchen und die Stadt about Anna Rosmus.

1994/95, Felix Kuballa (WDR) produced the documentary Das Schreckliche Mädchen in Amerika. ARD featured 60-min and a 45-min versions.

Emigration to the United States[edit]In August 1994, after constant harassment and death threats from those in her own community, Rosmus and her daughters moved to the United States. They settled in the Washington, D.C. area. Since her youngest daughter's graduation from high school, Rosmus has lived near Chesapeake Bay in Maryland.

Her research resulted in numerous presentations, including

• Filling in the Void, The Last Phase of Survivor Literature, Ben Gurion University, Beersheva, Israel, 1996

• Pocking’s Buried Secrets, Teaching the Holocaust Conference in Augsburg, Germany, 1997

• Austrian-German Conspiracies at a Centuries-old Bishopric. A look back, 60 Years after the Conquest of Austria, 28th Scholars’ Conference on the Churches and the Holocaust, Seattle, Washington, 1998

• The Passau Theater Scandal, German Studies Association Conference, Salt Lake City, UT, 1998

• European Response to Northern American Memorials, Teaching the Holocaust Conference, Ottawa, Canada, October 1998

• Franz Schrönghamer-Heimdal: The Honorable?, 29th Scholars’ Conference on the Churches and the Holocaust, New York, New York, March 8, 1999;

• The Presence of the Absence, International Holocaust Conference for Eyewitnesses & Descendants, Vienna, Austria, 1999

• The Pre-Nazi Town that Chose a Jewish Sex Symbol: Gender, Anti-Semitism, and Politics in Passau, 1919-1929, German Studies Association Conference, Atlanta, Ga., 1999

• My Jewish Mission. One German Woman’s Search for the Truth, Nuremberg & beyond, Columbia, South Carolina, 1999

• The Future of Germany’s Past, Holocaust Conference, Millersville, Pennsylvania, 2000

• 1919-1929, The Sexual Revolution of the Twentieth Century, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia, 2000

• The Truth about Passau, German Studies Association Conference, Houston, Texas, 2000

• The Nasty Girl and its Aftermath, Association of Holocaust Organizations’ Winter Seminar, USHMM, in Washington, D.C., 2001

• From Reality to Fiction, The European Studies Consortium, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 2001

• Growing up where Hitler Lived. The Courage to Speak the Truth, at: Connecting Biography and Research: Personal Revelations of Female Academics who Deal with the Subject of Extreme Violence and Death, Annual Conference of Canadian Universities Laval University, Quebec City, Canada, Congress 2001

• Where Hitler Used to Live: Post-Holocaust Pocking and Passau, Fourth International Biennial Conference. Deterring and Preventing Genocide: Missed Opportunities, Contemporary Issues and Future Possibilities, Association of Genocide Scholars, at the University of Minnesota, 2001

• Rabbi Lazar Salzberg and the Passauer Neue Presse, German Studies Association Conference, Washington, D.C., October 5, 2001

• Murder of the Innocent, Annual meeting of the European History Section of the Southern Historical Association, New Orleans, 2001

• The Oswald Ring. Educators who Demand that Higher Education Must be Avoided, 32nd Scholars’ Conference on the Churches and the Holocaust, Kean University in Newark, New Jersey, 2002

• Diplomacy and Terrorism: The German-Afghani Connection. Closing Luncheon Address, 32nd Scholars’ Conference on the Churches and the Holocaust, Kean University in Newark, N.J., 2002

• Erich Mühsam and the “Godforsaken Border Town of Passau”. An Arrest that Reflected the Past as Much as it was Foreboding the Future, Jewish Culture - Western Civilization - and Beyond, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Va., 2002

• Rudolph Freiherr von Moreau: The Making of a Hero, 33rd Scholars’ Conference on the Churches and the Holocaust, Philadelphia, Pa., 2003

• "Useless Consumers of Food", Sixth Holocaust Studies Conference, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, TN, 2003

• Supplementing the “Aryan” Race, Annual Conference of the Canadian Federation of Humanities and Social Sciences, Winnipeg, Canada, Congress 2004

• Choosing Murder to Reestablish a Glorious Past. From Atta to Arco: Hating Democracy, 34th Scholars’ Conference on the Churches and the Holocaust, Newark, N.J., 2005

• Back to the Home Front, Annual Congress of the Canadian Federation of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada, June 2, 2005

• Turning The Masses into Ethnic Warriors, Redefining The Political Nature of Borderline Identities, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada, CASCA Conference, May 12, 2006

• Family Matters: Rape and Incest in SA and SS: Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences, York University, Toronto, Canada, June 3, 2006

• Nazi-Era Deployments of Bavarian Folk Tales, CASCA-AES Conference, University of Toronto, Canada, May 10, 2007

• Manifestations of National Identity in “The Nasty Girl”, Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada, 2007

• How to Avoid the Nuremberg Trials in Grand Style, 8th Holocaust Studies Conference, Middle Tennessee State University, Tenn., 2007

• Major General Ernst Nason Harmon: “Certain Jewish Shipments to Bavaria", Third International Multidisciplinary Conference, Imperial War Museum, London, England, January 9, 2009

• The “Angelic” Major General or: Cussing at the Prospect of Combat, Norfolk, Va., September 13, 2009

In 1994, Rosmus began to plan programs for a first tour with survivors and US Veterans of WWII in Germany and Austria. Since then, she has organized several reunions of veterans, survivors and locals in Europe.

Since 2009, Rosmus has been a member of the International Council of the Austrian Service Abroad.

Publications[edit]Widerstand und Verfolgung am Beispiel Passau 1933 - 1945 (Resistance and Persecution — The Case of Passau 1933-1939), published by Andreas Haller in Passau, Germany, 1983.

Leiden an Passau pp. 98–106 in: Lieben Sie Deutschland (Suffering from Passau in: Do You Love Germany),191 pages, published by Piper in Munich, Germany, 1985.

Erwiderung (Response), pp. 143–147 in: Beunruhigung in der Provinz. 10 Jahre Scharfrichterhaus (Disturbance in the Province. 10 Years Executioner’s House); edited by Walter Landshuter and Edgar Liegl, Andreas-Haller, Passau, Germany, 1987.

Exodus - Im Schatten der Gnade. Aspekte zur Geschichte der Juden im Raum Passau. (Exodus. In the Shadow of Mercy.Aspects of Jewish History in the Passau Region), a book focusing on the plight of Passau's Jews during the twentieth century; 270 pages, published by Dorfmeister in Tittling,Germany, 1988.

Zur braunen Chronik Passaus. Anmerkungen zur Zeit von 1919 bis 1933 (Brown-Shirted Passau Chronicles. Connotations about the Period from 1919 to 1933), pp. 6–10 in: Lichtung. Ostbayerisches Magazin in Viechtach, Germany, Nov/Dec 1989.

Robert Klein. A German Jew Looks back, 112 pages, published in Passau, Germany, 1991.

"Wintergrün - Verdrängte Morde" (Wintergreen - Suppressed Murders), 200 pages, Labhard, Konstanz, Germany, 1993.

Wider das Vergessen (Against Forgetting), pp 31–34 in: Bayerischer Wald, edited by Hubert Ettl; Viechtach, Germany, 1993.

Der Massenmord am “fremdvölkischen” Nachwuchs und die Folgen (Mass Murder of the Foreign Rising Generation and its Consequences), pp. 11–14 in: lichtung. ostbayerisches magazin; Viechtach, Germany, Sept/Oct. 1993.

Was ich denke (What I Think),189 pages, published by Goldmann in Munich, Germany, 1995.

Pocking - Ende und Anfang. Jüdische Zeitzeugen über Befreier und Befreite (Pocking - End and Renewal. Jewish Witnesses on Liberators and the Liberated), 201 pages, published by Labhard in Konstanz, Germany, 1995.

Legacy of the 761st Tank Battalion, 100th Field Hospital, Baltimore, MD, February 11, 1996.

Wenn nicht ich, wer dann? (If Not Me, Then Who?), pp 82–86 in: Wenn nicht ich, wer? Wenn nicht jetzt, wann? (If Not Me, Who? If Not Now, When?), edited by Christlich-Jüdischer Koordinierungsrat Deutschland, Bad Nauheim, Germany, 1998.

A l’écran et avec une nomination aux Oscars" (On Screen, with an Oscar Nomination); in: "La Shoah: le témoignage impossible?(Shoah. The Impossible Testimony), published by Université de Bruxelles, Belgium, 1998.

"Filling in the Void", in: Gelber, M. (ed.) Belated or Timely Memoirs? The Last Phase of Survivor Literature from the Holocaust, Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, NY, 1998.

"Out of Passau. Von einer, die auszog, die Heimat zu finden" (Out of Passau.. By One Who Moved Out to Find the Homeland), 286 pages, published by Herder in Freiburg, Basel, Vienna, 1999.

"Can we afford to stand by?" In: The Memory of the Holocaust in the 21st Century; CD-rom, Yad Vashem, Jerusalem, Israel, 1999.

Murder of the Innocent, pp. 83–102 in: Hearing the Voices: Teaching the Holocaust to Future generations; edited by Michael Hayse, Didier Pollefeyt, G. Jan Colijn and Marcia Sachs Littell. Merion Westfield Press International, Merion Station, PA, 1999.

From Reality to Fiction: Anna Rosmus as The “Nasty Girl”, pp 113–143 in: Religion and the Arts. A Journal from Boston College.Koninklijke Brill NV, The Netherlands; Leiden, Boston, Cologne, 2000.

"A Troublemaker in a Skirt", pp 270–288 in: Second Generation Voices, Syracuse University Press, 2001.

Pocking’s Buried Secrets, pp. 207–226 in: “Building History: Art, Memory, and Myth”; McGill European Studies, published by Peter Lang, New York, Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, Frankfurt/M., Oxford, Vienna, 2001.

Murder of the Innocent. Foreign Slave Laborers and Forced Abortions in Bavaria, pp 139–158 in: Women in the Holocaust: Responses, Insights ans Perspectives. Published by Merion Westfield Press International, Merion Station, Pennsylvania, 2002.

The Challenge of Right-Wing Extremism for Democracy, pp. 103–107 in: How to Fight Right-Wing Extremism in Germany Today - The Role of Citizens, Civil Society, and the Government. Published by Friedrich Ebert Foundation in Washington DC, 2002.

Against the Stream: Growing Up Where Hitler Used to Live, 160 pages, published by University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC, 2002.

"Involuntary Abortions for Polish Forced Laborers", pp. 76–94 in: Experience and Expression: Women, the Nazis, and the Holocaust. Edited by Elizabeth R. Baer and Myrna Goldenberg, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 2003.

"The Struggle Continues: Hate Crime in Germany Today", pp. 221– 237 in: Confront! Resistance in Nazi Germany; ed. Jahn Michalczyk, Peter Lang, New York, 2004.

Out of Passau: Leaving a City Hitler Called Home, published by University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC, 2004.

Wintergreen: Suppressed Murders, published by University of South Carolina Press,Columbia, SC, 2004.

"In Search of the “Rosetta Stone”", Alma College, MI, April 1, 2009.

Valhalla Finale, 350 pp, a photo book about the end of WWII in Bavaria, Czechoslovakia, Upper Austria and the US Army in 1945, published by Dorfmeister in Tittling, Germany, 2009.

Ragnarök ('), a photo book about the end of WWII in Bavaria, Czechoslovakia, Upper Austria and the US Army, 464 pp, published by Dorfmeister in Tittling, Germany, 2010.

Honors[edit]“Best German Writer”, for “Daten innerer und äußerer Freiheit aus Politik und Geschichte Europas” (Internal and External Freedoms taken from History and Politics in Europe) in the “Europäischer Aufsatz Wettbewerb” (European Essay Competition) in June 1980, Berlin/Paris.

In 1984 Anna Rosmus received the "Geschwister-Scholl-Preis", a literary prize by the association of Bavaria’s Publishers and the City of Munich, for she “has mustered the highly inconvenient courage to reject the ready-framed historical picture of her hometown.”

Death mask of Kurt Tucholsky for civil courage and political commitment May 7, 1987, Hindås, Sweden.

The “Holocaust Survivors & Friends in Pursuit of Justice” honored her in October 1992 with the Holocaust Memorial Award in Albany, N.Y.

Legislative Resolution honoring “the tireless, courageous and often life-threatening efforts... against the acts and effects of racism, bigotry and hatred, remembering the warnings of a tragic and blackened educate future generations“ by the State of New York, in October 1992.

Elected Member of the International “PEN-Club,” in December 1993.

Honored by Temple Beth El in California on April 8, 1994, “in appreciation of the humanitarian efforts to educate the world about the history of the Holocaust.”

Scott Kennedy, Mayor of Santa Cruz, California, proclaimed Sunday, April 10, 1994 as “Anna Rosmus Day” in the City of Santa Cruz, CA.

She has received the Sarnat Prize from the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith for those who fight anti-Jewish bigotry, June 10, 1994, in New York City.

The American Society of Journalists and Authors awarded Rosmus its Conscience-in-Media Award, honoring “those who have demonstrated singular commitment to the highest principles of journalism at notable personal cost or sacrifice,” It was presented in a special program at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in September 1994

Tree-Dedication in front of “Temple Israel,” November 9, 1994, Albany, N.Y.

The Holocaust Memorial Center in West Bloomfield, Michigan, honored Rosmus “in recognition of having exposed the facts about the role of Passau, Germany, during World War II and forcing its residents finally to confront the truth.”

In 1996, the Heinz Galinski Prize, highest honor of the Jewish Community in Berlin, honored her “commitment characterized by understanding, tolerance and mutual respect; her espousal of peace and reconciliation; the sincere way she comes to grips with history and the past.” The jury’s justification says, among other things: “In spite of the greatest difficulties and opposition that you were forced to confront again and again, you have rendered a very significant contribution to memory and enlightenment. Only when we remember do we have a chance of doing battle against neo-Nazism.”

Listed in Marquis’ “Who’s Who of American Woman” (first time in the 1997/1998 edition).

On March 20, 1998, the D.C. Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the American Immigration Law Foundation honored her with the Immigrant Achievement Award as a “distinguished immigrant who through her extraordinary endeavors has made a substantial contribution to the United States of America and is a proud reflection of the values of this nation.”

“Myrtle Wreath Award,” by Hadassah, “in recognition of selfless and fearless pursuit of the truth about the Holocaust,” March 30, 1995, Washington D.C.

Elected honorary member of the 65th Infantry Division Association on September 8, 1995

On February 11, 1996, the 4214th USAR Hospital honored her “enlightening research centered around the involvement of African-Americans in Germany during WWII”.

Listed in Marquis “Who’s Who in America” (first time in the 1996 edition).

Listed in Marquis “Who’s Who in the World” (first time in the 1999 edition).

Elected honorary member of the 71st Infantry Division Association, 2005

Elected honorary member of the 11th Armored Division Association, 2008

Honorary PhD, University of South Carolina, 2000

Honorary PhD, Alma College, 2009

See also[edit]Austrian Holocaust Memorial Service

University of South Carolina

External links[edit]Biography (

Jodi Solomon Speakers Bureau

Anna Rosmus at E.N. Thompos Forum on World Issues

Alma College Honors Anna Rosmus

"The Nasty Girl" (Washington Post, 1990)

Nasty Girl Still At Work (CBS News, 2000)

University of South Carolina Press: Anna Rosmus

65th & 71st Division, Germany and Austria Tour with Anna Rosmus, March 2006

Wrapping the Dead in Silence? (Women & The Holocaust)

A Dedication in Pocking and Shabbat in Passau (

The_Nasty_Girl/ Anja Rosmus of Passau
Aruzenjin 1 27 2012 Why bringing that up. It didn¿t happen. Or it did and nothing can be done. It happened too long ago. That is at times the mentality of those who condemns that nasty girl. They can't accept that people like themselves did what they did, that certain special moment after a war was a crucial time when the very fabric of their culture was at stake, and they let that great opportunity pass, fearfully, distracting themselves in so many other media-invented meanders. But now they are going to be at the mercy of a girl, and a film director with courage, wit and humor that will pin them down and will see them squirming and trying to justify the attacks of oblivion that paralyzed a lot of things in them. Maybe one day, when a nasty girl appears in our own communities and starts asking questions, we may remember the girl from this film and invite her home and tell her about the nightmares and show her the souvenirs of the wars some of us witnessed and some others fought and some others lived through, or profited from, just like the sympathizers, collaborators, friends, relatives and neighbors did in Germany, unquestioning. Remember what we did during our own wars. War criminals go back home and live normal lives, just like the now very old Nazi collaborators did and still do in Germany and elsewhere. We enjoyed, smug and contented, every time some Israeli agents pinned down a Nazi war criminal... How happy would we get if some, let¿s say, Vietnamese agent does the same in one of our towns? Nobody holds the center. Beware of the nasty girl. That is the message in this film.

The style is very interesting. The topic is serious: a young woman unearthing information about Nazi collaboration, and the town’s efforts to thwart her, including violence. Yet the manner is light-hearted, almost comical at times. The contrast is striking. The story of her tenacity is impressive, and there are some brave characters. The former collaborators are also resilient, but they ultimately have no choice but to give way. This is a story larger than just Germany, but really about groups who close ranks to avoid public humiliation and embarrassment for past weaknesses. The only fault in the film is the ending. Probably meant as a surprise but it just came off leaving us to scratch our heads

Absolutely phenomenal. Makes me wonder about my own home country. Love God and love his people. But the more I know the less I trust those I used to trust. Sometimes I wish it would be not so. Two years ago I went to Dachau. There I overheard a tour guide. He said, "As long as the old leadership more the administration the concentration camp did not receive much attention from the community. But the resigning or dying out of our town's leaders with Nazi past, Dachau is starting to confront the horrors of the Holocaust." This is my paraphrasing. Watch the movie. Get over the strange art of cinematography and just listen to what it has to say. Anna Rosmus who is portrayed by the fictitious character of Sonja Rosenbaum has a ton of courage in the face of extreme opposition.

Before I review Nasty Girl I would like to recommend "Sophie Scholl: The Final Days" also in streaming and nominated for several awards. It is about a group of students at the University in Munich, Bavaria round the time of the German losses at Stalingrad. The movie is a true story, in German, and covers the underground resistance to the war through the distribution of pamphlets.The group is called the White Rose. It is an astonishing story about privileged German students allowed to attend the University, even young men are allowed. Nasty Girl is an astonishing movie, as well. Lena Stolze carries the movie. It does in fact start out as a comedy, laugh out loud funny, even. It is about a precocious girl, who wins an essay contest years after WWII and later enters a second essay, which is about what her village did during the Nazi war years.This is about when the movie becomes quite serious with older folk hiding heinous war misdeeds, non-cooperation of authorities, and even violent threats against Sonya, the young girl, later the young married woman. It is unlike any movie I have ever seen, really amazing. By the way, Lena Stolze also played Sophie Scholl in another German movie about the White Rose, which not in streaming. That movie also won a Bafta award for Stolze.

ACTOR’S REVIEW. This is an engrossing, frightening, bewildering and at times brilliant film that defies simple description. It is not, as the box shot claims, “a provocative comedy” full of surprises. (The photo doesn’t even look like the protagonist). The style is surrealistic and, I suspect, influenced by Fassbinder, though as a whole it is much more cohesive and coherent than his work. To some extent, it foreshadows “Amélie” and “Run Lola, Run”, though it lacks the romanticism of the former and the raw energy of the latter. Having characters speak directly to the audience, with microphones sometimes visible in the shot, gives the narration an immediacy that I found effective.The unrealistic use of color and background images, including living room scenes that appear to have been staged on moving, a flatbed railway car are often arresting and spellbinding. But all these unnaturalistice choices didn't seem to add much to the plot or the development of the characters. Still, the story is compelling enough that I think it would have held my interest regardless of how it was told. It only fell apart at the very end, which seemed unmotivated, perplexing and unconnected to the rest of the picture. It's worth a look, especially if you are interested in films as art.

I'll mention that the English title and movie cover suggest something sexual. If they had chosen a different picture that fits the plot of the film better this confusion would have been avoided since nasty just means bad. Glad it wasn't called naughty. Anyways, this was a unique film in many ways. Like when the family is getting threats on their answering machine and their home and life is being paraded through the town streets. These people in the background, their friends, neighbors and co-workers don't confront them this harshly face to face but anonymously are rude, cruel and threatening via message machine recordings. I loved this story of a maturing young bright girl discovering the dark secret of her town that everyone just wants to pretend didn't happen.It becomes a project of her's over about a decade of her life as she matures, finishes her education, marries and starts a family. Along the way she's stonewalled and lied to; though she's trusting of the people she's know all her life and she's determined to find the truth, She discovers that esteemed members were the collaborators and the ones currently portrayed as collaborators were in fact anti-Reich during Nazi rule. She's called nasty girl because of her persistent dredging of the past. Reminds me of Kafka, trying to fight the system with the system. Currently this is hard to find in region 1 DVD but you can find an old VHS or a region 2 DVD online though that print isn't very good.040611

Directed by Michael Verhoeven (who also made "The White Rose", about a student resistance group under the Nazi regime), "The Nasty Girl" is the story of Sonja, who ignites a storm of outrage and reprisal by entering an account of her own town during the Hitler years in a national essay contest. mores isn't just a question of stirring up unpleasant memories: plenty of people are still alive who were never held to account for their deeds under the Third Reich, and bands of young skinheads are already forming who're sorry to have missed it. In the wake of such events the burden of memory is enormous, and can't even begin to be processed when silence is imposed afterwards in the name of civility and progress. The film has a sense of humor, and at times seems comic due to the absurdity of situations Sonja finds herself in -- but as she discovers, the real issues are deadly serious. How much sense her ongoing determination makes is for the viewer to decide.

Ah the director Michael Verhoeven was up to his old tricks again. If you like this movie you may also be interested in The Unknown Soldier. German director Michael Verhoeven has been honored on both sides of the Atlantic for his unflinching portrayals of Germany's Nazi-era and wartime past. He moreys he prefers to make comedies and he somehow is able to bring some comic relief to The Nasty Girl. In this film you really get a sense for his deep understanding of the current politically opposed forces or the dichotomy that is modern Germany.

BS .. "The TRUTH will set you free" Like the folks in the flic, Most of can't handle the Truth and deny it ...our delusions, constructions, myths, legends...stuff we need to believe in and be comfortable with ourselves, our family, our history and country and religion become what they NEED TO BE moreor most. We deny scientific facts we do not like, factual history we do not like, reality we do not like. And because of only this we are becoming a stupid insipid country.


"School children at that time were not given the (true story) of (the war)" Children have never been "given" the "true" story of history in any country at any time. The USA is not an exception. Our school books are more concerned with being Politically Correct than with being true, which has been much the case in most countries with schools in the last century. The only time a bit of truth is held on to at all, for any time, is when some one like this character, or groups of brave persons like this character, get together and fight for the truth; whether it is the truth of their own people or some one's else's. Look at the civil rights movement, look at what little is told even today in public schools about what was done and what really happened. To me the message is to each of us to dig deeper, to look harder, and to not buy what we are sold at face value. A beautiful story that seems not to waste so much money on sets and props, but focuses more on the story itself

Although there is comedy in this movie, and the actress seemly does a good job, in real life this movie does not do her justice. If, you read up on Anna Rosmus you will find that in the end, her life in danger, she and her children moved to the United States. The ending of this movie stinks, and the overall picture it paints, is one of a slight comedy, sprinkled with enough truth to keep it interesting. One shot of nudity at the end was far too late to save it. Read the Book, it¿s better. I gave it a 3, and that was generous.

By turns this film is moving and emotional, very very funny, serious and avant garde. Excellent directing by Michael Verhoeven keeps the viewer a bit off balance throughout the film - literally you have no idea what to expect. Ultimately though the film is a tribute to all those around the world more at times have stood up for truth and faced whatever hits them from small minded and dangerous bullies.Can't say enough about the outstanding acting by Lena Stolze - a fantastic performance. Someone else pointed out that the english translation of the title is unfortunate; it might lead some to think of this as a film about a sexually permissive young woman - not at all. Congrats to all involved in making this gem of a film - I regret it took me so long to find out about it and watch it. This is Btranquilo.

"Das Schrecklische Maedchen" concerns contemporary Germany's reexaming the Nazi era, and the reactionary, far right wing political and social motivations that attempt to silence and prohibit this at all costs. Sonja pays a horrible price for her unrelenting quest for the truth about the elders of her hometown. How this meek, taciturn "good Catholic Girl" turns into a "nasty Girl" is a reverse mirror for how the HORRIBLE NAZI COUNTRY tries to turn into an innocent Barvarian girl. As Sonja uncovers the truth of her town's and neighbors' Nazi past, the elder generation turns on her, and all those former teachers, priests, and family friends who so honored her as a high school student, suddenly become enemies. What makes this film endurable, is the dark humor, tempering the irony and social commentary with lots of lighthearted humor. Most modern German films about their Nazi past, will tend to overdramatize the tragedy of the victums . But not here. The real victum of the nazi era, which this films maintains, is TRUTH. Another victum, is the generation that came up in the 70s and 80s, who had the racism and conservativism of their parents and grandparents, transmuted into neo-nazi skinheads. All this could end up making for a heavy, depressing film, except in the hands of the director, who is about to use elements of live, surreal and avant guard theater, with a sort of autobiographical narration, to lighten the mood. Again, making the film seem less than real, only heightens the realism of the emotional pain Sonja finds, as she relentlessly persues the question of WHO are the real heros and villians, of the nazi era. It also challenges the viewer, and society, to DEMAND a reevaluation of any country's history while its STILL being written, so lies, propaganda and deliberate distortion doesnt hide the truth for all future generations.

Maddog's Review: I don't like movies where the actor stands in front of the camera and talks about herself and the movie. It's ok for documentaries. But for a movie, it's too self conscious. While her upbringing and background are relevant, there is far too much of this and it's all self more cute. I am fascinated by accounts in which ordinary people participate in or just condone atrocities. I feel they reveal something important about our true nature that we would rather not face. I have a personal stake in this story, nearly all my family went into the camps and none came out. But had I been a young Aryan German at the time that Hitler came to power, I can't say with any confidence that I would have done much differently from all the other young men. I may even have been enthusiastic enough to join the SS. The Germans are us - ordinary, decent, law abiding people. In the 19th century they were the jewel in the crown of Western Civilization. That being said, this film is a disappointment. It shows the determination of the young woman to fight for her right to learn and publish the truth but it's very thin on substance. There is very little real detail about what happened in that small town nor do we really ever come to understand any of the people in depth. There are only three characters types in this movie, monsters, weaklings and heros. But how does an ordinary man become a monster? Is it possible for him to remake himself as a human being after having been a monster and if so, how? Questions like this are never taken up. Sadly such atrocities are commonplace. It happened all over Germany ,all over Eastern Europe under Soviet rule, in Yugoslavia quite recently and over much the world today. How about we get over the shock value and take a good look at how we become monsters?

A movie that I missed in the theaters when it came out. I've been meaning to watch it for years, but finding videos used to be more of a chore, and there were other things to do.This is a somewhat fictionalized version of the actual story of Anna Rosmus. Anna becomes Sonja Wegmus, and her real moreown of Passau in Bavaria becomes the fictional one of Pfilzing. The resentment which the real Anna Rosmus generated in her home town continued to fester after this film was made, and she came to the US with her daughters a few years later, feeling that she was no longer safe in her home.The fictionalized presentation of the story permits the introduction of some surreal elements, and creative cinematography. It's not always clear which characters are based on real people, which are composites, and which are completely fictional. The events seem to follow the general outline of the real story, but again, more research would be needed to see what actually happened. I'll add at this point that I watched this on streaming, so I don't know what might be on the DVD features.There is a lot of insight here into human nature. Even before we get to the shameful Nazi secrets part, we see many vignettes about the little hypocrisies of everyday life, the little compromises and dishonesties that are found in every land. The people of Pfilzing are not, for the most part, actually bad, although there is a thuggish element that becomes more threatening as the story progresses. Most of them just don't want to be bothered; they don't like it when they are forced to confront unpleasant facts about themselves and their past. That's a very human reaction to guilt, and not one that is restricted to Germany. Ultimately, though, people like Sonja/Anna, who are determined to dig for truth, do us all a favor, even if they are not honored in their own lands or their own generation.

A gem of a movie! It depicts very accurately the culture of " not asking questions". It is a good reminder of how even today when being open to their history is the "official" attitude - the reality is that on a specific, personal level questions about family members are still not welcome and morey continues to be reinvented, conveniently forgotten and fingers pointed elsewhere.

Although I stumbled across this story by accident, I found myself wondering exactly what liberties the writers took with the story. Seeking information, I Googled the woman¿s name, and found much information concerning her. For a better understanding of this story, I strongly suggest first reading about the woman and her struggles before watching the movie, it helps in gaining a basic understanding of the movie. It should be noted here, that the past is buried as long as no one takes a shovel and starts digging for the truth. Herein lies the story, for your sins will find you out.

The film is based on the actual experiences of Anja Rosmus of Passau. The film's apparent purpose is to portray the awful treatment that Rosmus received for trying to make her hometown face up to its behavior during the Third Reich. However, the photographic style and the screenplay's method of morelling the story incorporates totally inappropriate comedy. This lessens the film considerably and turns the story of Anja Rosmus into a burlesque.

This film was one of the most pleasant cinematic surprises in quite awhile for me. Although not new, it had a freshness about it that made it seem as though it had just been done. I'm a bit surprised that it is called a comedy. It certainly has humor and even comedic structure, but I would call it satire, as it just doesn't turn out comedically. I found the casting and direction excellent, and fell in love with lead actress Lena Stolze. I'll have to think about the final minute of the film -- I would be interested in the director's thoughts on that

There is nothing funny about murder, nor those who took a blind eye to the horror that was occurring all over Germany. Everyone points their fingers at others. However, anyone that has ever lived in a small town knows that nothing can be hidden. I am not familiar with Lena Stolze, but I think that morehe would be offended by this rendition of her attempt to learn the truth.

Every country has it's justice seekers and rightfully so in The Nasty Girl. I found myself cheering her on to expose the evidence she's gathering to reveal the truth. It was refreshing to see a German film exhibiting humor with her glances directly at the camera and her narrarating herself at moreous points and the brother with the various girlfriends....hilarious! I did think the story could have been cut in length some and the ending was weirdly funny considering how she'd basically fought her entire life and what was she going to do with the rest of her life, now?!?! No wonder she flipped out!!!!

FILM GRRRL REVIEW: Actually quite funny in its offbeat way, "Nasty" is a mostly pointed send-up of over-organized German culture (You're free to see it our way), denial (War, what war?) and officious bureaucracy (We have procedures. Follow them). Highly stylized, with a fun period feel, Film Grrrl moresp. enjoyed the pluck of our lead actress (Miss Stolze -- yummy) in overcoming the traps tossed in her way, and her quirky sense of optimism. The plot wobbles now and again, drags a bit, and the ending is rushed, but "Nasty" has a fresher vibe than most satires Film Grrrl screens, and does not take itself too seriously. That is something.

3 out of 4 members

This is an excellent film. Evil runs rampant in the annals of human history. Only God knows the absolute truth. This film is but a small microcosm of the secrets and coverups that were buried after WW II. And for that matter, there are so many lies and coverups going on in Washington today that more never be known. On planet earth, the never ending struggle between good and evil will always exist. Once again Netflix has gone over the top putting this film in their library. I really enjoyed viewing this film.

In early 2013, researchers at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum? revealed they have cataloged some 42,500 Nazi ghettos and camps throughout Europe . . . "the numbers are unbelievable.? "The Nasty Girl (Das Schreckliche M�dchen" a satirical film from 1990 that will help you understand how such knowledge was hidden for so long.

“A DELIGHTFUL COMEDY”?? I wouldn’t characterize this film as a comedy. I would call it a drama with a story told in a surprisingly light manner. The subject of how the people of Germany enabled the rise of the Third Reich is a topic that needs to be dealt with on many fronts and in many ways. moree story is interesting and the lead actress, Lena Stolze, is very engaging and she pulls you in. Often she will talk directly to us in the audience. It made me realize that every little town in Germany must have a host of secrets that they would like to keep buried.



I enjoyed the movie...until the last, what, 3 minutes? what the heck? did the writer quit? run out of film? suffer brain damage? i think i did anyway...all i ended up thinking is maybe she was kind of obsessed and in the end paranoid and appears to have lost contact with reality?...and i doubt that' mores the real life ending...but what else are you supposed to get from such a weird, rather stupid ending?