update: elle fanning and nicholas hoult are NOMINATED FOR BEST ACTORS at this year's GOLDEN GLOBE AWARDS along with the show being nominated for BEST COMEDY SERIES as well. let's hope the emmys will not sleep on them, huzzah!
The real Catherine The Great wanted to free the serfs, but she needed the continued support of the nobility (their masters) who supported her coupe to remain on the throne.
She might have when she was young and fancied herself "a progressive". She got over it and instead spread serfdom bordering on slavery to the newly acquired colonies. It's not that Peter III, Ekaterina II, Paul I and Alexander didn't see the danger of serfdom to the country, but their armies were based on serf conscripts and their idea of greatness on land grabs.
@@paradox_1729 that's not true, some guy pretending to be Peter (after the real Peter had died) claimed that he was in fact the real Peter and also claimed that the only reason he had been overthrown was because he was about to free all the serves ( which wasn't true) and launched a rebellion.
Unfortuantely, the real Catherine wasnt able to free the serfs because there was a major revolt and the support she had for freeing them disappeared after that. So, this was a start to the freedom of Russians, but unfortunately, one that didn't last.
@@nathanliteroy9835 Exactly. She wanted to do better at first, but at the end she gave the lords even more power over their serfs. Peasantry class was treated the worst under her reign.
I laughed hard when she grabbed the gun. Like you knew she finally lost her patients with them. Men like this, seem to only understand one thing. And that's power. And at first they will support someone as long as they get something out of it. But then it backfires on them, when they find out, all their plotting was in vain. I wish she would have shot one them as a warning.
DAMN I wish Catherine had actually done that , imagine the Russian nobility huddling in a corner scared she might actually kill them all , sadly her descendants didnt have the same spine …
Well she'd need enough guns to do so in a timely fashion one after the other, otherwise it would go something like this :*shoots one nobleman* "Now gentleman, please make an organized line while I have assistance in reloading this gun. Your time will come soon enough. Upon reflection it is probably best I know nothing about loading guns so that way you too can reflect upon how you should have listened to me." XD
Her biggest failure was failing to prepare for what would happen after her death. She failed to raise her son to be the ruler to complete her legacy, since he was the rightfull heir and she came to power through a coup she often saw him more as a potential rival than as an heir . She failed as a mother, devoting more time to her lovers than to her own son, whenever he expressed interest to take part and learn about affairs of state she snubbed him. When he travelled through Europe most monarchs saw him as pretty smart and capable but once he returned home Catherine rejected him a position in the cabinet, she also wouldn't allow him to serve in army or anything that would help increase his leadership skills, so her son and his descendents ended up, being quite unimpressive rulers.
@@masterplokoon8803 Catherine and Paul certainly had a rocky relationship. It could be that Paul resembled his father a lot in terms of looks and personality. Him being an awful reminded of his father, and the fact that he was equally as incompetent didn't put him in Catherine's good graces. In fact some thought Catherine had planned on passing over Paul in the line of succession and making his more capable son Alexander her successor.
@@barbiquearea Paul wasn't naturally incompetent, other people and even monarchs saw the intelligence and potential in him. Catherine constantly rejecting him made him idolize his dead father and he ended up becoming more like him. In the end he became incompetent because Catherine never bothered to teach him what he needed to rule and never gave him the atention he needed so the fault is mostly on her. She never gave him the opurtunity to learn anything so you can't really blame him. She had the opurtunity to teach her son to become a competent ruler and he even showed interest in learning, she chose not to do it.
@@masterplokoon8803 Perhaps some of it could have been Catherine's fault for not preparing him for the throne, but Paul was a pretty bad ruler. In fact one French diplomat described him as " vindictive, headstrong and absolute in his ideas". He also had his eccentricities which affected policy making, and during his reign he had reversed, ignored or subverted many of Catherine the Great’s policies most likely out of spite, and implemented a new succession law that forbade any more women from taking the throne. Also he had humiliated and angered the nobles of his court which was a grave mistake for any autocrat. Its no wonder they had him assassinated in a palace coup just five years into his reign
Okay, this is weird but I think putting this in the show is rather sweet. Early in her reign, Catherine wanted to free the serfs but eventually abandoned the idea because she feared people turning against her. Now, in this fictional version of her world, she gets to.
It’s a little sad when you consider the entire history of Russia is a single chain of reform, reform, reform - almost but not quite. An entire history of almost there’s.
I feel like Gregor is lowkey mesmerized by Catherine and doesn't really hate her. He's okay with her having power as long as she doesn't kill him. He seems much happier now that she's in power but that could also be because Georgina is gone...
Catherine loved Enlightenment ideals and wanted to free the serfs... right up until the French Revolution happened. Then she had a sudden change of heart.
Yes, there’s nothing like the news of populist uprisings to bring out the counter-revolutionary in the bourgeoisie, comrade. Catherine was likely always a Conservative in 18th century terms.
@@ManoverSuperman Mate if you are a monarch and here of revolutions were people like you are getting massacred, you'd probably not be favourable to revolutionaries would you? Are you seriously criticising here for not wanting herself and people like her to be massacred?
Well yeah if I heard that there was a massacre of aristocrats after a revolution, I'd probably become hostile to it if I was on the receiving end. That just seem like common sense
@@ManoverSuperman Also you need to be realistic, Russia wasn't anything like the rest of Europe. She couldn't fully implement enlightenment ideals there
It was partially doomed due to her son making it almost impossible for another female to rule Russia. (Which would have helped because the Tsar’s son was a hemophiliac. And that led to so many issues.
Serfdom had nothing to do with fall of monarchy in Russia. The serfdom was abolished finally in the 1861 more then 50 years before revolution. Additionally you had many monarchies in Europe to fall long, long after the serfdom was abolished.
Her husband had been an admirer of Frederich the Great, and upon his demise (and as she was preparing to attack him) she found letters he had sent her hubby suggesting that he should treat her better as befits her station and it helped talk her down
Ideals are one thing but change takes time you can’t make major changes overnight. Humans are slow to adapt and without a solid plan in place this was doomed to fail she allowed herself to be guilted by some school kids.
Yeah, because its not like nations have lost wars and society has changed fast or anything. That has never happened. Also, who are always saying you cant have changes within reasonable time. Oh, it is usually those that would lose something because of those changes. What a shock... better listen to them and your pimp. They know their stuff. Now get out on the street before I beat you up.
This fine actress does the real Catherine the great a BIG helping hand beauty wise...The real Catherine could be played by a much larger and 100x uglier actress...Catherine although "great" was more manish, more plump and not much to look at in the way of beauty, but she did make history and that fact can't be denied...
I mean studies does prove that a happy worker is a productive worker. And if they don’t need to steal 1/4 of your produce to survive the month on their salary then you sell more so you get more money. So she’s right, they’ll eventually get richer.
The real Catherine forced serfdom onto Ukraine (the Hetmanate was somewhat autonomous before that). One of the worst Romanov monarchs from the peasants' perspective.
It's thought that the French Revolution dissuaded her from this course of action in real life. Something about other autocrats getting their heads cut off gives one cold feet. It wouldn't be until Alexander II that the serfs were actually freed.
Labor costs, Did she have a child, Oh the weddings off, dubbed again. My Noble blood shall make it so, Love her truths, it does make her such a sexy wo Man.
And here I thought it was Alexander II who freed the the surfs and it was Cathrine the whole time, a 18th century woman who amazingly thought like 21st century feminist I do hope no one miss represents history to give credit to some man like Alexander.
She wanted to but overruled by the nobility, she didn't sign the papers to freed the serfs and by the end of her reign even strengthened the law supporting it after the Horror of French Revolution
She wanted to, but ultimately the Nobility protested. And then she reflected on her Enlightenment ideals in wake of the French Revolution. Serfdom would not end until the 1860s. In short, in the words of my professors, if you want to learn the actual history of something, take a history class!
Russia is a shit hole and still is. Catherine the "great" made conditions worse for the serfs and peasants in real life and gave more powers to the elite.
