*taxes your beard*

Actually Russian language distinguishes between Tsar and Imperator. Tsar means just king.

If it was then why did Peter make such a big deal in changing his title from Tsar to Emperor, and why would the Holy Roman Emperor crack a tantrum when he did it?

Native in thread. No one call him Tsar. Emperor. But the most common is just Peter I

Why you say so? You are wrong. Я нe знaю кaк пepeвecти этo.

I'm not wrong at all. Tsar means king in Orthodox Slavlands which includes Russia. Korol' is reserved for Catholic/Western monarchs.

Wrong. "Emperor" comes from "Imperator" (the title Peter adopted) while Caesar comes from, well, Caesar.

Boy fucking is it. I've been studying in St. Petersburg and every single class I have ever taken finds a way to tell us that, be it language, history, or literature. Russians are ballistic about their national heroes

Not him but bull fucking shit. Tsar is a supreme title that existed after Ivan the Terrible to replace Knyaz, which is effectively a prince. The only reason that Korol' wasn't commonly used was because of the unique system of government that existed in Rus for a few hundred years. Once Ivan IV formed Russia, he eliminated the need for Knyaz and took on the title of Tsar. The only other Tsars were the ones in Bulgaria.

Pro-tip: tsar =emperor
Peter was an euroboo and wanted to have such title. I'm surprised he didn't switch to the Latin alphabet and kept the Bulgarian one.

all imperator means in latin is "right to command" or "military command". Only certain officials in republican rome had imperator, namely consuls. Caesar, Augustus and successors, appointed themselves as consuls for life or subsumed the office of consul into dictator. Augustus in homage to caesar, effectively created the "caesar" as a new category and to have tht title of caesar meant to have imperium. the words are basically synonymous.

into dictator or the title of caesar or whatever title the so-called emperors used* (if im not mistaken didn't the first roman emperors not even refer to themselves as such? augustus called himself "princeps", which means "first among equals" right?)

What Augustus got was a "Imperium proconsularis maius". Emperors "respected" the Consul title so they avoided to use it all years.
He adopted Caesar as his nomine.
Imperator Divi filius Caesar Augustus was his actual name.

>Only certain officials in republican rome had imperator,
had imperium*

Anyone got the greentext about Peter trying to learn how to build ships in Denmark?

Why didnt the Czars family in England and Germany not save them from being killed? I couldnt stand by and let my relatives be slaughtered.

Then the Russian language is wrong, the first one who used the title "tsar" was a bulgarian who did it so he could be the byzantine emperors equal

>the """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""great""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Literally all he did was copying western Europe and defeating a heavily outnumbered enemy.

What the fuck could they have done?

they have a word for "king", and that's "korol".

They could have let Nicky move to Britain after he abdicated, for one. You know, like he asked. And was told "no."

He kickstarted the modernization of Russia.

As i said, he copied the west

See

That's a bad thing?

It's not great

It objectively is when the west was objectively the best thing on the planet at that point. Peter single handedly dragged Russia from being a backwater swamp and transformed it into a feared superpower with significant contributions to science and arts.
Can you name a single significant Russian before Peter who wasn't a warrior or some kind of monk? There's pretty much just Andrei Rublev and that's it.

>Peter single handedly dragged Russia from being a backwater swamp and transformed it into a feared superpower with significant contributions to science and arts.
Wrong, the westernization of Russia happened throughout many many years and is technically not complete to this day.
>Can you name a single significant Russian before Peter who wasn't a warrior or some kind of monk?
Ivan the terrible? He is much more worthy of the "great" title desu if it wasn't for all of his terribleness

it's a bit hard to try and rescue someone when there is a battlefield in between the both of you

>Can you name a single significant Russian before Peter
IVAN THE TERRIBLE

>who wasn't a warrior or some kind of monk?
>IVAN THE TERRIBLE

fucking read the whole question

Their elite and intelligentsia got westernized which is all that matters. There would be no Chaikovsky, Tolstoy or Lomonosov if not for westernization. Ironically not even Dostoyevsky who was anti-western himself, but he would never exist if not for western literary and philosophical tradition.

When the Franks completely copied Roman empire it's a good thing, when Meiji Japan based their state on Prussia it's a good thing, hell even Rome itself copying Greece is considered good to the point we talk of "Greco-Roman" culture, but when it's Russia then it's suddenly bad to copy anything from the west. Why?

It's almost like Russia has an eastern coast or something.

Because Russians are the spawn of Satan and the others are not.

Germans were faggots who funded the bolsheviks, and the English are just backstabbers by their nature. Nicholas trusted the English, so did Hitler, both were dumb for doing so.

Thanks for revealing your true colors.

how is he a warrior or monk

>Their elite and intelligentsia got westernized which is all that matters.
Not overnight under Peters rule

It's true, Russia has only brought pain and misery to this world

>t. Burkhardt von Schönfinkel

t. Schlomo Schekelstein

lmao no, Jews love Russia for inventing Bolshevism

Bolshevism wasn't invented by "Russia", it was invented by Jews.

it's not only literally but figuratively, Nick made very bad choices in his lifetime, the fact that Germany was the big bad of the story made it even worse due to his queen being german herself.

and as for finding asylum in the german empire; Kaiser William was a cunt

The Jews invented the theory, the Russians put it into action

Yes the (((Russians)))

he was a deeply religious monarch who spent a decent amount of his time praying, but he also waged many wars where he led the armies by himself (see: conquest of Kazan)

Explain?

Lenin also happens to have jewish origins

The Bolshevik leaders were nothing without the popular support

The Bolsheviks never had popular support. They achieved power in what was essentially a military coup.

They recieved something like 25% after the election and after that the majority of all Russians chose to side with them in the civil war which is why they won.

Lenin is like the only "Russian" constant on that list and it was later discovered he literally didn't have a single drop of Russian blood. Father was Chuvash+Kalmyk, mother was German+Jew+Swedish.

What popular support? Bolsheviks lost the democratic elections in 1917.

>Rig the election in your favor
>Still only get 25% of the vote

JUST

Wilhelm deeply resented both him and George; he claims to have done whatever was possible to rescue him from a crumbling Russia after the abdication and proclamation of Kerensky's government. But he was also the man who released Lenin from jail and send him back to Russia via train in order to destabilize the country even further in the ensuing chaos from the war. This along with his incompetence could be the reasons he never did what within his reach to rescue Nicholas (I don't want to believe he didn't give a shit).

then you have the countries who were allied to Russia at the time of WWI, the english wouldn't take Nicholas because of the anti-german sentiment (queen Alexandra was Wilhelm's cousin) and no matter how hard George V would have loved to give asylum to Nicholas II, the UK is/was a constitutional monarchy so the king doesn't have the last word.

I think Wilhelm was honestly just stupid, as in he had low IQ. Even Hitler used to refer to him as "that old idiot".

that, along with his insecurity about his nation and a crippled arm didn't make a good monarch

It wasn't rigged, the bolsheviks were actually pro-democracy before they lost. They had just taken control of the government, they couldn't rig it even if they wanted to.

Everyone is pro-democracy before they lose. They're not pro-not-democracy.

>Everyone is pro-democracy before they lose
Not true, Hitler, for example, was never pro-democracy.

>the bolsheviks were actually pro-democracy

>before they lost
Did you miss that part? It's true, otherwise they wouldn't have let the election happen in the first place

Allowing a token election during a time when you believe you're guaranteed to win and then going nuts when you ending up losing does not suggest a strong commitment to democratic ideals.

I agree, my point was simply that they were enough "pro-democracy" to allow a free election to take place. The post i replied to said they rigged it which they didn't.