Military Review

Russia on the way to the era of palace coups

156
Russia on the way to the era of palace coups

Peter I and Catherine, XNUMXth century engraving


In two small articles, we will talk a little about the reasons why Russia in the XNUMXth century suddenly turned down the very dubious path of the era of palace coups. And let's remember the young Russian Emperor Peter II, who managed to nominally reign for less than three years and died before he was fifteen. Traditionally, he remains in the shadow of his predecessors and successors, few people remember him. Meanwhile, his early death became one of the most important bifurcation points in the historical development of Russia.

We will have to start this story from afar, otherwise we will not be able to understand why this young man was rejected by his grandfather, Emperor Peter I, and, being the undisputed heir to the throne, and even the last purebred Russian representative of the Romanov dynasty in the male line, came to power in such a roundabout by way. And why after his death a series of palace coups began in Russia.

Unloved wife of Peter I


This began история back in January 1689, when the wedding of 16-year-old Peter I and 19-year-old Evdokia Feodorovna Lopukhina took place.


Evdokia Lopukhina, parsuna

The wife for Peter was chosen by his mother, Natalya Kirillovna (nee Naryshkina), and naturally, she did not ask her son's opinion. She was in a hurry with the wedding because the wife of another tsar was pregnant - Ivan V Alekseevich (from the Miloslavsky family), who two months after Peter's wedding gave birth to her first child - Princess Mary.

It is curious that in fact the bride of Peter I was called Praskovya. However, at the wedding, she was given a different name - either because it seemed more decent to a royal person, or because Praskovya was the name of the wife of Ivan Alekseevich, co-ruler of Peter I.

The girl's patronymic was also changed: her father's name was Illarion, but she became Fedorovna: this is already in honor of the Feodorovskaya Icon of the Mother of God - the shrine of the Romanovs' house.


Theodorovskaya icon of the Mother of God, XII century, Kostroma Epiphany-Anastasiin monastery

Boris Kurakin, married to the sister of the new queen Xenia, left this description of Evdokia:

“And there was a princess with a fair face, only an average mind and disposition not similar to her husband, which is why she lost all her happiness and ruined her entire family ... True, at first the love between them, Tsar Peter and his wife, was fair, but only lasted only a year ... But then it stopped. "



Peter I and E.F. Lopukhina. Miniature from "The Book of Love is a Sign of Honest Marriage". Historical Museum, Moscow

Nevertheless, Eudoxia gave birth to Peter either two or three sons (the existence of a third is in doubt). Only one of them survived, Alexei, who in 1718 was destined to die from torture - not in the Seven-Tower Castle of Constantinople and not in the casemates of Stockholm, but in the Peter and Paul Fortress of St. Petersburg. According to some sources, his father, Tsar Peter I, personally took part in these tortures, and they took place in the presence of his new wife Catherine (goddaughter of the arrested prince).

But back a bit.

The marriage of Peter and Eudokia, concluded at the insistence of the Tsar's mother, was doomed to become unhappy: the spouses turned out to be too different in character and their inclinations. And besides, the jealous Natalya Kirillovna, according to the same Kurakin, for some reason, her personally chosen daughter-in-law "hated and wished to see her more with her husband in disagreement than in love."

As a result, his wife brought up in the old Moscow traditions, Peter preferred relaxed and depraved metress, and partly transferred his contempt for Evdokia to his son and heir - Alexei.

It all ended with the fact that on September 23, 1698, Queen Evdokia was transported to the Intercession Suzdal convent and forcibly tonsured there as a nun under the name of Elena. They say that when Alexei bid farewell to his mother, the Tsar's sister, Natalya Alekseevna, had to literally snatch the crying boy out of her hands. One can imagine what a blow was then inflicted on the psyche of this unfortunate child and how this scene influenced his further relationship with his father.

Meanwhile, Peter's hatred for Evdokia was so great that, contrary to tradition, he refused to assign her content and provide a servant. The tsarina of Russia found herself in the position of a beggar and was forced to ask relatives:

“Even though I'm boring to you, but what can I do. While she is alive, please, drink and feed, and dress, beggar. "

This decision did not add to the popularity of Peter's subjects. Both the people and many aristocrats and clergy (including Patriarch Adrian, Metropolitan Ignatius of Krutitsa and Bishop Dositheus of Rostov) condemned the tsar, who at that time was already called the Antichrist and assured that “the Germans replaced him abroad”. In Russian society, they clearly sympathized with the unfortunate woman and pitied her son. Peter I, of course, was aware of these rumors and therefore was very jealous of any contacts between Alexei and Evdokia.

Let's just say that “meek Evdokia” actually turned out to be a very strong woman. She was well aware of Peter's unpopularity in society and general sympathy for herself as an innocent sufferer, enduring reproach and insults from an unworthy husband. She never submitted to Peter, and six months later she began to live in the monastery as a laywoman. In 1709-1710. she got in touch with Major Stepan Glebov who had come to recruit recruits. This relationship, like many other things, was revealed in the framework of the case of Tsarevich Alexei. Peter was simply enraged by the news of the infidelity of his abandoned wife. On his order, an extremely cruel search was carried out. The abbess of the monastery Martha, the treasurer Mariamna and some other nuns were executed in Red Square in 1718. According to the testimony of the Austrian citizen Player, "Major Stepan Glebov was tortured in Moscow with a terrible whip, red-hot iron, burning coals, for three days he was tied to a post on a board with wooden nails."

Finally he was impaled. His agony lasted 14 hours. Some sources claim that Evdokia was forced to watch his torment, not allowing him to turn away and close his eyes.

Evdokia herself was whipped and sent first to the Alexander Dormition Monastery, and then to the Ladoga Dormition Monastery. After the death of Peter, by order of Catherine I, she was transferred to Shlisselburg, where she was kept as a state criminal under the name of "Famous person". A rootless German woman of Courland, whom in the spring of 1705 Aleksashka Menshikov demanded in his letter to immediately send to him “and with her the other two girls” (the first mention of Martha Skavronskaya in a historical document!), The legitimate Russian queen Evdokia seemed very dangerous. She survived not only her son, but also her persecutors - Peter I and Catherine, after the accession of her grandson she lived in Moscow in high esteem, and after his death her candidacy, according to some sources, was considered by members of the Supreme Council for the role of the new empress. Anna Ioannovna treated Evdokia with respect and attended her funeral in 1731.

Tsarevich Alexei: the unloved son of an unloved woman


Alexei loved his mother and suffered greatly from separation from her, but did not show obvious discontent and disobedience to his father. Contrary to popular belief, he willingly studied and far surpassed his father in knowledge of history, geography, mathematics. Peter knew 2 actions of arithmetic, his son - 4. In addition, Alexei perfectly knew French and German, also surpassing Peter I in this respect. He was also well versed in fortification.

The prince began his military service as a soldier in a bombardment company at the age of 12, when he took part in the storming of the Nyenskans fortress (1703). Peter, for the first time, "sniffed gunpowder" only at the age of 23. In 1704, Alexei was part of the army that was besieging Narva. Later, he headed work to strengthen the walls of the Moscow Kremlin and Kitay-gorod. And even his children were given “loyal” names by the heir: he named his son Peter, and his eldest daughter Natalya (in honor of the beloved sister of the emperor, one of the most ardent persecutors of his mother, who treated him without any sympathy).

And an interesting question arises: what exactly did Peter dislike about such a son? And when exactly did he stop liking the eldest son?


Christoph Bernard Francke. Portrait of Alexei Petrovich

It is impossible to answer the first question from the standpoint of logic and rationality. Alexey was simply an unloved son, born of an unloved woman, and no other guilt was attributed to him. His desire to live in peace with neighbors (“I will keep the army only for defense, and I don’t want to have war with anyone”) expressed the most cherished aspirations of the entire people of Russia: by the time the tsarevich was arrested, Peter I had really “ruined the Fatherland worse than any enemy” ( V. Klyuchevsky).

The successes, of course, were great, but everything has its own margin of safety. Russian finances were upset, the people were starving, the peasants fled from the villages: some to the Don to become Cossacks, others immediately to robbers. The country was depopulated and was on the verge of a demographic catastrophe. Peter's most loyal associates, who ruled Russia on behalf of Catherine I and Peter II as part of the Supreme Soviet, silently abandoned the policy of the first emperor and actually carried out the program of the tortured Alexei. Russia was able to start the next big war after the Northern War only during the reign of Anna Ioannovna. After the death of Peter I, of all the battleships he built in the Baltic fleet only one went out to sea several times: the rest rotted at the berths. Under Catherine II, this fleet was practically created anew. The large ships of the Azov fleet, as you know, have completely rotted, never having entered into battle with the enemy. And even the capital under Peter II was again moved to Moscow - without the slightest objection from Menshikov and other members of the Supreme Soviet. So it is impossible to find any betrayal of national interests in the plans of Alexei Petrovich: the prince was only a realist and correctly assessed the situation in the country.

The second question is easier to answer: the expressed tension in the relationship between Peter and Alexei appeared in 1711, in which Peter I secretly married Martha Skavronskaya, in Orthodox baptism - Catherine (March 6).

On October 14 of the same year, Alexei married Crown Princess of Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel Charlotte Christine-Sophia, who after the adoption of Orthodoxy took the name of Natalia Petrovna. And on February 19, 1712, the official marriage of Peter I and Catherine was concluded, her illegitimate daughters were declared princesses. For this purpose, the following ceremony was carried out: 4-year-old Anna and 2-year-old Elizabeth walked around the lectern with Catherine during the wedding ceremony, after which they were declared "wedded."


A. Zubov. Wedding of Peter I and Catherine in February 1712


Peter I and Catherine. 1717 engraving

But the situation became especially acute in October 1715, when two boys were born in the royal family at once: on October 12, Alexei's son, the future Emperor Peter II, was born, on the 29th, Peter Petrovich, the son of Peter I and Catherine.


Louis Caravac. Children of Tsarevich Alexei: Natalya Alekseevna in the image of Diana at the age of 8 (right) and her brother, the future Emperor Peter II, in the image of Apollo


Louis Caravac. Pyotr Petrovich (son of Peter I and Catherine I) as Cupid

It was then that Peter, apparently, for the first time seriously thought about who exactly would take his place on the throne. Alexei was the undisputed legal heir, but Peter had already decided that his younger son, born of Catherine, should replace him on the throne.
And very soon Alexey heard threatening words from Peter:

"Do not imagine that you alone are my son."

Alexei then tried to renounce the throne, but Peter did not like it: the eldest son, regardless of his will, still remained the legal heir in the eyes of all subjects. There was only one way out: to get rid of him.

This was followed by some strange intrigue with the flight of Alexei, which some researchers consider a subtle provocation of Peter. At the same time, the tsarevich for some reason went to Austria, friendly and allied to Russia, which looks absolutely illogical: after all, he should have escaped to Sweden or Turkey. In these countries, he would be completely inaccessible to his father's agents, and they would welcome him there with great joy. Who advised him to go to Austria? Perhaps it was his father's people who directed him along this path?

So, the prince ended up in Austria, where Peter's agents felt at home, and the emperor was not at all going to quarrel with a powerful neighbor because of his family affairs. It was not difficult for P.A.Tolstoy, who led the search, to find the fugitive and convey to him the false letters of Peter I, in which he solemnly promised forgiveness to his son.

Alexey returned to Moscow on January 31, 1718, and already on February 3 he was deprived of the rights of the heir to the throne. Arrests began among his friends and acquaintances. Moreover, on February 14, 1718, a decree was signed to exclude Alexei's son Peter from the list of heirs.

It was for the investigation of the Tsarevich's case that the Secret Chancellery was created on March 20 of that year, which for many decades instilled terror in all Russians, regardless of material well-being and position in society.

On June 19, Alexei began to be tortured, and he died from these tortures a week later, on June 26. Some believe that Alexey, sentenced to death, was strangled, since his public execution could have made a very unpleasant impression among his subjects. They refer, in particular, to the memoirs of the guard officer Alexander Rumyantsev, who claimed that on the night of June 26, 1718, Peter ordered him and several other people loyal to him to kill Alexei, and at that time Catherine was with the tsar. And less than a year later, on April 25, 1719, the beloved son of Peter I, born by Catherine, died, who, as it turned out at the autopsy, was terminally ill.

Meanwhile, the grandson of Peter I was growing up - the son of Alexei, also Peter. And he was not at all as bad as traditionally portrayed and is portrayed by historians panegyrically inclined towards the first Russian emperor (not to mention the authors of works of fiction). The boy was absolutely healthy, developed beyond his years, handsome and by no means stupid.


Peter II, portrait by an unknown artist

And you can't blame him for growing like a weed without having received proper education: claims about this can only be made to Peter I.

The life and fate of the son of Tsarevich Alexei will be discussed in the next article.
Author:
156 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimir Vladimirovich S
    Vladimir Vladimirovich S 29 September 2020 05: 46
    +1
    Author, can you link to sources?
    1. Bar1
      Bar1 29 September 2020 14: 33
      -5


      this muzzle, who was it really? But it’s obvious that it’s a nerus.
      What kind of war was it then? it is quite certain that between Russia and non-Russia.
      1. Kronos
        Kronos 29 September 2020 20: 59
        +2
        Who knows? Where is the proof ?
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 29 September 2020 21: 54
          -3
          Quote: Kronos
          Who knows? Where is the proof ?

          about the epoch of Peter the Great, such academic scientists as Doctor of History Professor Pyzhikov and historian Spitsyn.
          You can find books and videos of Pyzhikov, who these "Russian" tsars were.
  2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka 29 September 2020 05: 48
    +9
    Thanks! We will consider the above work as a "tie-in" to the story of the fate of Peter II.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 29 September 2020 06: 00
      +5
      And it should be supplemented.
      For all the layouts set forth by the Author, Peter I did not delete his grandson from the candidates for the throne of the Empire, everything else is from the evil one.
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 29 September 2020 06: 09
    +9
    - Complicated story.
    - How true, Watson ... (c) smile
  4. Undecim
    Undecim 29 September 2020 08: 29
    11
    We will have to start this story from afar, otherwise we will not be able to understand why this young man was rejected by his grandfather, Emperor Peter I, and, being the undisputed heir to the throne, and even the last purebred Russian representative of the Romanov dynasty in the male line
    Peter II could not be a "purebred Russian" representative of the Romanov dynasty in any way, since his mother was Princess Sophia-Charlotte of Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel. Therefore, he was half German.
    Peter II is the last representative of the Romanov family in a straight male line.
    1. Undecim
      Undecim 29 September 2020 09: 41
      10
      Some kind of individual stuck a minus. That is, he believes that a purebred Russian can be with a mother - a purebred German. Indeed, they are "scared, they are not sown, but they themselves give birth."
      1. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master 29 September 2020 10: 32
        11
        Viktor Nikolaevich, these disadvantages were given to you ... Apparently, they are given to you solely because you pay attention to them ...
        She noticed us! Bagheera noticed us! The entire jungle admires our dexterity and our intelligence! - the monkeys shouted.
        laughing
        I bet a plus to compensate for this unfortunate minus. smile
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 29 September 2020 10: 51
          +7
          Yes, minus, as such, nonsense. The minus signs are interesting, you know, the curiosity of an amateur zoologist.
          1. Trilobite Master
            Trilobite Master 29 September 2020 11: 06
            +7
            So you provoke them on purpose? laughing
            However, I am afraid that in order to understand the nature of some creatures that have learned to manipulate a computer mouse, your knowledge in the field of zoology may still not be enough ... request
            Here we need a professional entomologist-psychiatrist who has dedicated his life to the study of rabid cockroaches ... laughing
            1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
              Kote Pan Kokhanka 29 September 2020 11: 16
              +5
              Quote: Trilobite Master
              So you provoke them on purpose? laughing
              However, I am afraid that in order to understand the nature of some creatures that have learned to manipulate a computer mouse, your knowledge in the field of zoology may still not be enough ... request
              Here we need a professional entomologist-psychiatrist who has dedicated his life to the study of rabid cockroaches ... laughing

              Well, or a banal cat-marked sneaker !!! I emphasize that such individuals in the above incident always have a seditious thought “I’m for something!” Then only "the tedious and long road of Academician Pavlov", up to the consolidation of unconditioned reflexes - "shit - get it!" Alas, there is no other way!
              1. Catfish
                Catfish 29 September 2020 16: 37
                +5
                Well, or a banal cat-marked sneaker !!!


                Well, here it is again ... What have you done wrong now, citizen chief? request
                1. Astra wild
                  Astra wild 29 September 2020 17: 07
                  +6
                  Konstantin, you have a disciplined cat: it stands in line, and my Puzik stands on his hind legs to reach the table.
                  1. Catfish
                    Catfish 29 September 2020 17: 23
                    +4
                    Vera hi , this is not my cat, mine does not stand up on its hind legs, it is too lazy, but it does not climb tables either. smile
                    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                      Kote Pan Kokhanka 29 September 2020 19: 46
                      +3
                      Quote: Sea Cat
                      Vera hi , this is not my cat, mine does not stand up on its hind legs, it is too lazy, but it does not climb tables either. smile

                      Konstantin, your cat has already trained its owner to serve sweets from the table !!!
                      Now, according to the program, he will teach him to catch mice and birds !!!
                      1. Astra wild
                        Astra wild 29 September 2020 20: 38
                        +2
                        Hee hee. Witty
                      2. Catfish
                        Catfish 29 September 2020 22: 03
                        +2
                        No, he told me right away that rodents and birds are his sacred cause. And he extremely disapproves of a rifle or a pistol in my hands, he considers this way of hunting unsportsmanlike. laughing
                        And from the table he really does not beg for anything and does not whine, everyone is surprised.
              2. Aviator_
                Aviator_ 29 September 2020 21: 31
                +1
                "Something for INTO me"!

                Judging by the minuses I get, they are pushing "me for a sho!"
              3. not main
                not main 30 September 2020 00: 32
                +2
                Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
                Well, or a banal cat-marked sneaker !!! I emphasize that such individuals in the above incident always have a seditious thought “I’m for something!” Then only "the tedious and long road of Academician Pavlov", up to the consolidation of unconditioned reflexes - "shit - get it!" Alas, there is no other way!

                But here I disagree! I have had a cat for more than 10 years and regularly brings kittens. I distribute kittens, I just wanted to note that all kittens went to the tray! What has it not I taught them (especially with a slipper), but the cat itself!
                1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                  Kote Pan Kokhanka 30 September 2020 04: 45
                  +1
                  Quote: non-primary
                  Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
                  Well, or a banal cat-marked sneaker !!! I emphasize that such individuals in the above incident always have a seditious thought “I’m for something!” Then only "the tedious and long road of Academician Pavlov", up to the consolidation of unconditioned reflexes - "shit - get it!" Alas, there is no other way!

                  But here I disagree! I have had a cat for more than 10 years and regularly brings kittens. I distribute kittens, I just wanted to note that all kittens went to the tray! What has it not I taught them (especially with a slipper), but the cat itself!

                  Good morning, I'm about people, not cats!
                  Sincerely.
                  1. not main
                    not main 30 September 2020 20: 38
                    +1
                    Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
                    Kote pane Kohanka (

                    Sorry! For some reason I thought that about those "whom we have tamed."
          2. Pane Kohanku
            Pane Kohanku 29 September 2020 11: 25
            +6
            The minus signs are interesting, you know, the curiosity of an amateur zoologist.

            As far as I remember, your addictions are about arrogant Indian monkeys and golf clubs?
            Some kind of individual stuck a minus.

            Me too. I didn't understand why.
          3. antivirus
            antivirus 29 September 2020 19: 05
            0
            astronomer - the spots on the Sun have decreased ........................................... .................................................. ............................... other activity
        2. Astra wild
          Astra wild 29 September 2020 17: 02
          +5
          "solely because you pay attention to them" or just like you, just because you exist. You, Viktor Nikolaevich, and maybe 2-3 more colleagues have personal minus players. They cannot live, so as not to stick it to one of you -.
          Few of us can boast of this. So you can be proud
          1. Pane Kohanku
            Pane Kohanku 29 September 2020 17: 10
            +7
            You, Viktor Nikolaevich, and maybe 2-3 more colleagues have personal minus players. They cannot live so as not to stick it to one of you -.

            I'll leave this. About "experts" -minusovschikov. I think Viktor Nikolaevich will appreciate it. drinks
            1. Catfish
              Catfish 29 September 2020 17: 27
              +2
              But options are also possible ... laughing
              1. Astra wild
                Astra wild 29 September 2020 18: 08
                +3
                Nikolay, Konstantin, thanks for the pictures. They are funny. Especially the top one: drunkard with a glass
                1. 3x3zsave
                  3x3zsave 29 September 2020 20: 09
                  +4
                  Especially the top one: drunkard with a glass
                  I know him. This is Seryoga Shnurov.
              2. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 29 September 2020 20: 15
                +3
                The orderly is clearly expecting a call. For the telephone of the GTS, during the call, in such a situation, "tickles" so robust!
                1. Catfish
                  Catfish 29 September 2020 22: 00
                  +1
                  "Call Allah", if I am not mistaken. soldier
          2. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 29 September 2020 20: 07
            +4
            I'm immensely proud !!! For I am also in this glorious cohort.
            1. Astra wild
              Astra wild 29 September 2020 20: 35
              +4
              I didn't know you were like that. I'll know
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 29 September 2020 15: 22
        +7
        Quote: Undecim
        Some kind of individual stuck a minus. That is, he believes that a purebred Russian can be with a mother - a purebred German. Indeed, they are "scared, they are not sown, but they themselves give birth."

        - What, you write down my Christ as Jews ?!
        - What do you think, if dad is Jewish, mom is Jewish, then the baby is Russian?
        - Dad has a dove!
        © Shirley-Myrli
  5. Cartalon
    Cartalon 29 September 2020 08: 48
    +2
    Apparently the author agrees with the point of view that Peter was the Antichrist.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 29 September 2020 11: 22
      +6
      Quote: Cartalon
      Apparently the author agrees with the point of view that Peter was the Antichrist.

      Peter was a "complex" person, especially in the understanding of modern man, but first of all he was an outstanding ruler of his era! You can express your personal attitude towards him in different ways, for me personally he is a "king-carpenter".
      So if someone perceives him as a "ghoul" or "supporter of the version that the king was replaced" flag in your hands and a drum around your neck, arguments to the studio !!!
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 29 September 2020 16: 31
        +3
        for me personally, he is the "king-carpenter"
        Just think, bale with an ax.
        And fly to heaven with Siberian Cranes or extract amphorae from the depths of the sea?
        1. Astra wild
          Astra wild 29 September 2020 18: 10
          +3
          Viktor Nikolaevich, are you familiar with such kings?
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 29 September 2020 18: 33
            +3
            I am not personally familiar, but they constantly play on TV. And you know him too.
            1. Astra wild
              Astra wild 29 September 2020 18: 37
              +2
              It's news to me that Vladimir Vladimirovich flies like a fish and swims like a bird.
              Are we talking about different people?
              1. Phil77
                Phil77 29 September 2020 18: 54
                +2
                Quote: Astra wild
                Vladimir Vladimirovich flies like a fish and swims like a bird.

                Vera, we still don't know a lot about him.
                That's just for you! In secret! He also plays the piano. laughing wink
                1. 3x3zsave
                  3x3zsave 29 September 2020 21: 08
                  0
                  He also plays the piano.
                  "Murka"?
              2. Undecim
                Undecim 29 September 2020 19: 04
                +3

                No, not about different ones.
                1. Undecim
                  Undecim 29 September 2020 19: 08
                  +3

                  Do you know this person?
                  1. Astra wild
                    Astra wild 29 September 2020 19: 31
                    +3
                    I'll try to get acquainted. An interesting man, what if he is free? Then I will try to arrange my happiness.
                    Hee hee. Sorry, I can't insert an image. As the saying goes: "for technical reasons"
                    1. Phil77
                      Phil77 29 September 2020 19: 57
                      +2
                      Quote: Astra wild
                      An interesting man,

                      Faith! Here is a request! Great!
                      And explain to me, pliz, from the point of view of a woman. Why is he interesting? Quite an ordinary, inconspicuous, expressionless physiognomy.
                      What's so * interesting * about him?
                      1. 3x3zsave
                        3x3zsave 29 September 2020 21: 16
                        +3
                        Why is it interesting?
                        Administrative resource
                      2. Undecim
                        Undecim 29 September 2020 21: 18
                        +3
                        And the financial resource is at the level.
                      3. 3x3zsave
                        3x3zsave 29 September 2020 21: 43
                        +1
                        Khodorkovsky and Chichvarkin had good finances, however ...
                      4. Undecim
                        Undecim 29 September 2020 21: 59
                        +2
                        The guys upset the balance between desires and opportunities. Here Roma Abramovich is an example of maintaining balance for all examples.
                      5. Liam
                        Liam 29 September 2020 22: 59
                        0
                        Quote: Undecim
                        Roma Abramovich

                        Unlike the first two, this one does not have its own money, but common fund. Therefore, on the wave
                      6. Undecim
                        Undecim 29 September 2020 23: 17
                        +1
                        I didn’t communicate, therefore I don’t have exact information about his money.
                      7. Liam
                        Liam 29 September 2020 23: 35
                        0
                        Not the binomial of Newton. Yukos and Sibneft passed to the state in the same period. One received 10 years in prison, the second - 13 yards unjustified by any objective market factors
            2. Liam
              Liam 29 September 2020 21: 41
              0
              Luzoblyudy, propagandists, PR people and selfless admirers (admirers) of old politicians and the rich hide behind a reliable argument-charisma
          2. Astra wild
            Astra wild 29 September 2020 21: 40
            +3
            You know, this is very difficult to explain, it happens that the real hunks seem handsome. Or, on the other hand, a complete stupid person, but a stately handsome man and is not interested in anything else.
            Remember, Master and Margarita, she is a bright personality, but she chose an ordinary one. It's very difficult to explain. + Gender bias, we look at each other more critically. Once upon a time there lived a woman on our street, of an ordinary appearance, and she had probably 12 admirers. We did not like her together. Or another example, in her youth she knew a woman, she was called "Dona": a stately beauty and clever girl. Although they were furious with envy, they respected her.
            So it is for men: look and think what women found in him?
            Р
            S
            I can be very biased towards women, but to whom ... I will not talk about it. I do not want
      2. Phil77
        Phil77 29 September 2020 19: 53
        +2
        Quote: Undecim
        Do you know this person?

        Rrrrrr !!!!! Instead of PR, he would have to deal with the country and personnel in the system / built by him!
        However .. let's not talk about sad things, the main thing is not to rock the boat! belay
      3. BAI
        BAI 29 September 2020 20: 37
        +3
        Do you know this person?

        It is especially touching that amphorae, which have lain under water for several thousand years, do not have algae growths and, in general, no dirt.
        A little in the development of the topic.

      4. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave 29 September 2020 21: 14
        +2
        Sign. Jacques-Yves Cousteau.
  • Phil77
    Phil77 29 September 2020 18: 52
    +3
    Quote: Undecim
    I am not personally familiar, but they constantly play on TV. And you know him too.

    Bravo Victor Nikolaevich! A similar thought occurred to me too! laughing
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 29 September 2020 20: 26
    +2
    "We all did. What is there ...,
    Amusing the whole country
    Flew the plane
    Plunged into the depths "(C)
  • antivirus
    antivirus 29 September 2020 19: 07
    +1
    especially in the understanding of modern man, but first of all he was an outstanding ruler of his era! You can express your personal attitude towards him in different ways, for me

    about EBN VT Tretyakov (approx 2-3 years ago) - had an "animal" primitive instinct of power.
  • Far B
    Far B 29 September 2020 08: 55
    +6
    Peter knew 2 actions of arithmetic, his son - 4
    Chot I strongly doubt that Peter did not know multiplication and division. He, of course, is still a historical character, but you can hardly deny him the curiosity and inquisitiveness of the mind. And multiplying 7 by 8 is still not a secant with a cosecant to cross, so ...
    In general, it seems that the article contains all the "scandals, intrigues, investigations" regarding Peter the Great.
    But the eighteenth century really stands out from the whole of Russian history - only in this century women reigned, and, moreover, there were one to one imperials as there were emperors, if we exclude the baby and mother. But according to the years of the reign, the ladies make cavaliers with a score of 70:30! Pavel Petrovich, apparently, cleared that this is complete discrimination and sexism, and blocked the weaker sex from access to the throne. How correct this decision was is unknown to science. But five stars are still better than three.
    1. Astra wild
      Astra wild 29 September 2020 09: 30
      +4
      Agree with you. It is unlikely that Peter did not know how to multiply. I read somewhere that Peter did not have a systematic education, knowledge was fragmentary and superficial
      1. Phil77
        Phil77 29 September 2020 12: 33
        +4
        Quote: Astra wild
        were sketchy and superficial

        Damn, who at that time in Russia had a * systematized * education?!?!
        Examples ?! bully
        1. Senior seaman
          Senior seaman 29 September 2020 15: 55
          +4
          Graduates of the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy.
      2. Phil77
        Phil77 29 September 2020 12: 36
        +4
        Quote: Astra wild
        systematic education,

        * we all learned a little,
        something and somehow. *
        Pushkin A.S. laughing
      3. Undecim
        Undecim 29 September 2020 19: 38
        +4
        Agree with you. It is unlikely that Peter did not know how to multiply.
        Meanwhile, all biographers of Peter the Great delicately bypass the question of his education, mentioning it in passing.
        Even Nikolai Pavlenko himself wrote in the classic monograph "Peter the First" that Peter did not even complete the course of sciences that the princess took in those years. He was trained to read, write and was given an initial sketchy knowledge of history and geography.
        1. Astra wild
          Astra wild 29 September 2020 20: 10
          0
          However, this did not prevent him from mastering, albeit at an amateur level, shipbuilding, artillery and fortification. And here it is not enough to be able to read and write.
          I can: read, write. I know: geography, history, physics, chemistry, but I don't understand fortification. I suspect that you are not strong in fortification either
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 29 September 2020 20: 16
            +5
            I suspect that you are not strong in fortification either
            Compared to you, my knowledge looks fundamental.
      4. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 29 September 2020 20: 03
        +6
        Quote: Astra wild
        Agree with you. It is unlikely that Peter did not know how to multiply. I read somewhere that Peter did not have a systematic education, knowledge was fragmentary and superficial

        At the same time, he possessed a skill of at least 10 crafts. He knew how to "draw" a frigate and a ship of the line, calculate a "redoubt" and "a trench for laying mines."
        So to deny in the ability to "divide" and "multiply", more than "group".
        And the most interesting thing was that his ships sailed (Lesnoye, Poltava), and a number of fortresses still stand (Kronstadt).
        At the same time, he was an extravagant and far from restrained person, although I personally like the methods of his fight against corruption.
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 29 September 2020 20: 09
          +3
          And the most interesting thing is his ships sailed
          Only close and not for long. And some did not swim at all.
        2. Astra wild
          Astra wild 29 September 2020 20: 16
          +1
          Regarding Kronstadt, I do not exclude that - "collective" creativity
        3. Korsar4
          Korsar4 30 September 2020 07: 03
          +2
          The temples, made according to the drawings of Peter, are still standing. It is clear, of course, that other architects put their hand to them.
    2. Trilobite Master
      Trilobite Master 29 September 2020 10: 27
      +6
      Quote: Dalny V
      Pavel Petrovich, apparently, cleared that this is complete discrimination and sexism, and blocked the weaker sex from access to the throne.

      Not at all. Read the "Act of Succession" carefully. In accordance with this act, it is men who have priority in inheritance, but women are by no means excluded, they simply follow men. Another thing is that Pavel was able to resolve the issue with the actual men in the family (thanks to his little wife, by the way, she also tried, maybe her husband smile ) and in dalgeysh until the fall of the dynasty there were enough male heirs.
      1. Pane Kohanku
        Pane Kohanku 29 September 2020 10: 42
        +5
        Read the "Act of Succession" carefully. In accordance with this act, it is men who have priority in inheritance, but women are by no means excluded, they simply follow men. Another thing is that Paul was able to resolve the issue with the actual men in the family

        absolutely right, I agree completely, Mikhail. hi
    3. Petrik66
      Petrik66 29 September 2020 10: 51
      +2
      Bravo, especially in light of the American national game: Black Lives Matter. Women rule ..... we have overtaken these democrats by 2 centuries, when they still have women, excuse me -They burned at the stake, they ruled the ball with us. Let them wither now.
    4. Senior seaman
      Senior seaman 29 September 2020 15: 53
      +7
      Quote: Dalny V
      I strongly doubt that Peter did not know multiplication and division

      I would venture to suggest that the respected author thus hinted that Pyotr Alekseevich only knew how to take away and divide :))))
      1. antivirus
        antivirus 29 September 2020 19: 10
        +2
        no - only integrals and differentials ........................................... .................................................. .......................................... more and it was not necessary for the carpenter
  • Astra wild
    Astra wild 29 September 2020 09: 25
    +4
    Praskovya "Evdokia" was of a mediocre mind, but Natalya Kirillovna was not brilliant either
    1. Phil77
      Phil77 29 September 2020 13: 08
      +4
      Quote: Astra wild
      Praskovya "Evdokia" was of a mediocre mind, but Natalya Kirillovna was not brilliant either

      Nightmare, is this how to live with it? wink
      1. Astra wild
        Astra wild 29 September 2020 15: 36
        +6
        The psychology of women is so multifaceted that men cannot understand it.
        However, we ourselves can not always understand
        1. Phil77
          Phil77 29 September 2020 18: 43
          +3
          Quote: Astra wild
          The psychology of women is so multifaceted that men cannot understand it.

          First, let's define! Are we about the mind of the individual, or about the psychology thereof?
          There is still a difference, no? laughing
          1. Astra wild
            Astra wild 29 September 2020 18: 50
            +2
            It depends on who and how evaluates. I try to assess in a complex
            1. Phil77
              Phil77 29 September 2020 18: 56
              +2
              Quote: Astra wild
              I try to assess in a complex

              Try in particular and separately, separately. wink
              1. Astra wild
                Astra wild 29 September 2020 19: 24
                +1
                In general, the more stupid a person is, the more primitive his character is. Don't you think so?
                1. Phil77
                  Phil77 29 September 2020 19: 28
                  +2
                  Primitive character ????
                  This is something new in classification, bravo! good
  • Astra wild
    Astra wild 29 September 2020 09: 31
    +4
    Quote: Cartalon
    Apparently the author agrees with the point of view that Peter was the Antichrist.

    Probably so
  • Trilobite Master
    Trilobite Master 29 September 2020 10: 16
    10
    And again, it is not clear from what motives Valery is showing us a "different view" of history at the expense of objectivity.
    No, in texture, it seems, everything is correct, but ... here the quote is taken out of context, then here some circumstance is modestly silent ... In general, the author again selects facts to substantiate his opinion, like Michelangelo, "cutting off all unnecessary ". smile
    For example, a quote:
    I will keep the army only for defense, but I don't want to have a war with anyone

    And here is the source from which the quote is taken:
    But he, the tsarevich, used to say: when he becomes the sovereign, and then he will live in Moscow, and Peterburkh will leave the simple city; also he will leave the ships and will not keep them; and he would keep the troops only for defense, and did not want to have war with anyone, but wanted to be content with the old possession, and intended to live the winter in Moscow, and the summer in Yaroslavl; and when he heard about any visions or read in the chimes that it was quiet and calm in Pieterburgh, he used to say that the vision and silence were not for nothing:
    "Maybe either my father will die, or there will be a rebellion: my father, I do not know why he does not love me, and wants to make my brother heir, he is still a baby, and my father hopes that his wife, and my stepmother, is smart ; and when, having done this, he dies, then there will be a woman's kingdom. And there will be no good, but there will be confusion: some will become for my brother, and others for me ... When I become king, I will transfer all the old ones, but I will collect new ones of their own free will ...

    This is the testimony of Aleksey's mistress and concubine, a certain Efrosinya, a peasant serf. Why this same Euphrosyne is better than Martha Skavronskaya is not a question for me. smile By the way, her testimony is assessed by researchers as quite reliable.
    Or here's another quote from the author:
    And very soon Alexey heard threatening words from Peter:
    "Do not imagine that you alone are my son."

    Why not quote, for example, this letter from Peter to his son dated October 11, 1715?
    ... I pondered with sorrow, and seeing that I can’t persuade you to do anything good, for good I invented this last testament for you to write and wait a little longer, if you would not be hypocritical.
    If not, then be known that I will very much deprive you of your inheritance, as if you are a gangrenous oud, and do not imagine that I am writing this only in a distraction: I will truly do it, for for my country and people I have not spared and do not regret my belly, then How can I regret you obscene? Better be someone else's kind, not your own obscene.

    A father with a pain in his heart admonishes his son, threatens him with deprivation of inheritance even BEFORE the birth of his second son from Catherine ...
    I also liked this passage from the author dedicated to Peter II:
    The boy was absolutely healthy, developed beyond his years, handsome and by no means stupid.
    And you can't blame him for growing like a weed without having received proper education: claims about this can only be made to Peter I.

    Interestingly, girls are dancing ... It always seemed to me that the responsibility for raising children lies with their parents, and not grandparents. The author about Alexey:
    Contrary to popular belief, he willingly studied and far surpassed his father in knowledge of history, geography, mathematics. Peter knew 2 actions of arithmetic, his son - 4. In addition, Alexei perfectly knew French and German, also surpassing Peter I in this respect. He was also well versed in fortification.

    That is, Peter's son received an excellent education, unlike his grandson. This is despite the fact that Peter, unlike Alexei, was engaged in state affairs all his life, but found time to organize the training of his son, Alexei was doing what? - but somehow he did not attend to his son's education.
    Well, and so on, little things.
    The author does not mention that in Austria Alexei negotiated with the emperor about an intervention in Russia, but failed to convince the latter of the prospects of such a plan, and, making sure that Charles VI did not yield to his promises, he contacted Charles XII, with whom he father at that time was at war and offered his help in exchange for the Russian throne ...
    While I was reading something else, the ear was cut, but it was not so clearly postponed ...
    And, I remembered - about Rumyantsev's letter. In fact, this is a recognized forgery, full of errors and anachronisms. To refer to such a source is like referring to "Veles's Book" in works on the ancient history of Russia.
    1. Alexander Suvorov
      Alexander Suvorov 29 September 2020 11: 27
      +4
      Michael hi Why are you attached to the "artist"? This is how he sees ... laughing
      If you remember, this author burst out with a whole series of articles about Peter III, where this sovereign was presented by the author as a beacon of genius and splendor, and his wife Catherine, who later became Great, was exhibited at all in an unnecessary form, a kind of Satan in a skirt, a repository of depravity and lawlessness ...
      So I would not hope for the objectivity of this author, not the case. Here one of two things, either he really sees it, or so ordered.
      1. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master 29 September 2020 11: 42
        10
        I am sure that when writing such articles, Valery is driven solely by the desire to express his own vision of certain events. The only thing that can be blamed on him (and I constantly point to this) is the lack of objectivity of the researcher. Good intentions - to show readers, if I may say so, the "reverse side" of certain events, to acquaint them with little-known, not replicated historical facts, play a cruel joke with the author, for the earth has the shape of a ball, one who pulls very strongly in one direction certainly in will end up on the other.
        Valery, in his desire to reveal something new to us, sometimes completely refuses to take into account the "old", and without taking into account this "old" concept, he instantly slides towards pseudo-history, that is, distortion of the real history.
        In any case, this is how I see the situation, and I try to remind the author of this with my comments, not wanting to offend him at all.
    2. Astra wild
      Astra wild 29 September 2020 11: 32
      +3
      Mikhail, you got ahead of me. She wanted to say: it seems that Valery has collected everything or almost everything in order to discredit Peter the 1st.
      Undoubtedly, Peter 1 was a despot, but I cannot imagine that Peter, together with Marta Skavronskaya, tortured Tsarevich Alexei.
      Was Catherine present at the torture of Alexei? Again, it is doubtful that I have not met any materials for her to be so bloodthirsty and it is unlikely that Peter would have allowed her to be there
    3. arturpraetor
      arturpraetor 29 September 2020 13: 46
      +5
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      It always seemed to me that the responsibility for raising children lies with their parents, not grandfathers-babaks.

      In that era, yes and no. There, sometimes everything is very difficult with upbringing, the parents often simply did not participate in the process - the same Louis XIV removed the still very small Great Dauphin from himself, appointed responsible people, and scored on him until the moment Dauphin became a teenager. The upbringing and education of Alexei was mainly occupied by Natalya, Peter's sister, she also took care of the children of the late Tsar Ivan Alekseevich - of course, she did not personally teach them, but controlled the teachers and regularly observed the upbringing process. So here, first of all, it is worth thanking her - she did not treat this issue carelessly, like many families of nobles who promoted Peter's decrees regarding compulsory general education for them.

      But with Peter II, I remember, everything is just more complicated in terms of education. The teachers were chosen unsuccessfully, there was no one to supervise the process, so it grew, what grew ... However, it is worth noting that in this regard, Peter I, too, was not brought up by geniuses and samples of diligence and pedagogy, but the king, who grew like a weed , for some reason grew into a much more respectable ruler than his grandson. That is why among AI specialists I am rather skeptical about Peter II, whom some make "unjustly offended by fate," and a very promising ruler. Even with a normal upbringing and education, it is unlikely that anything really good would come out of him.
      1. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master 29 September 2020 14: 33
        +7
        I think you are right, Artem.
        I just wanted to say that to blame for the unsatisfactory education of Peter II on his grandfather, as Valery tried to do, is somehow completely biased. smile
        1. arturpraetor
          arturpraetor 29 September 2020 15: 10
          +7
          No, well, cho, since the king, then he must think about everything. Even about the education of the grandson laughing And it seems to be so purely theoretically - I could think about it, but the sovereign, as a rule, has a little more other affairs, state affairs, and yet you are right - to blame him for the fact that Peter did not stand with a stick over the teachers while they taught the grandson, somehow somewhat biased. It all comes down to the fact that he could hypothetically do it, and it would even be in his interests, but he was not obliged. Moreover, teachers and educators were already appointed, and everything seemed to work. And the fact that, according to rumors, so that Peter the grandson did not scream in childhood, his nannies would get drunk, from which the formation of Peter II began as he became - so these rumors later went ...
      2. Astra wild
        Astra wild 29 September 2020 19: 54
        +3
        Artem, “with a normal upbringing and education, it is unlikely that something really good would come of him.
        To be fair, we ABSOLUTELY cannot know what will come of it. Count how long he lived and reigned?
        It's hard to understand something in such a time
        1. arturpraetor
          arturpraetor 29 September 2020 20: 24
          +2
          Well, there is some information about what he was. And if you do not strive to idealize this person, then he did not show anything outstanding, which is not surprising given a poor upbringing, so here you are entirely right - but at the same time he showed one very bad feature: he was extremely easily influenced by others. To etch out this with some other education is an unattainable task. They essentially turned the entire board as they wanted, and whoever wanted it, which even for his age serves as a weak excuse. Therefore, nevertheless, I will remain with my own - even if he received a good upbringing, he would have become a kind of analogue of Louis XV, who was only interested in amusements and gulks with girls, although he seemed to have received a good upbringing, and everyone in the country was ruled by favorites, favorites and temporary workers.
  • Astra wild
    Astra wild 29 September 2020 10: 16
    +6
    "actually turned out to be a strong woman", but here it is debatable. If she has sexual incontinence - not yet an indicator of will. Now, if she began to fight with Peter, then we can talk about her strength.
  • Astra wild
    Astra wild 29 September 2020 11: 05
    +6
    "At the age of 12, when he took part in the storming of the Nyenshanets fortress" Valery, do you seriously think that a 12-year-old boy, heir to the throne, climbed the walls?
    In this case, Peter 1 is not only the Antichrist, but also a complete down.
    "Later, he headed the work to strengthen the Moscow Kremlin and Kitay-Gorod" formally or was he really in charge?
    I met materials that Bruce was actually in charge of everything
  • Operator
    Operator 29 September 2020 11: 11
    +2
    Alexey Petrovich was not a politician - he stupidly did not understand that his father had already formed in Russia a new aristocratic class (nobles in fact) and turned the country around to build a civilization of the European type. And his son Peter II, in the event of a long reign, would not have gone anywhere and would have begun to pursue a pro-European policy of the aristocracy (like the subsequent Catherine, Elizabeth, Anna, Petra, Pavla, Alexandra and Nikolai Romanov) - otherwise a military coup with the change of the emperor.

    And how many arithmetic operations Alexei Petrovich knew and what share of Russian blood he had (for example, the German dynasty of Hohenzollerns still rules in Anglo-Saxon Britain) - no one is interested.
    1. Astra wild
      Astra wild 29 September 2020 16: 03
      +3
      Actually, Tsarevich Alexei was the LAST of the Romanovs, who had both Russian father and mother.
      It was always unclear to me why the emperors considered it "shameful" to marry Russians, while Russian tsars could marry compatriots
      1. Kwas
        Kwas 29 September 2020 18: 09
        +1
        ..
        Quote: Astra wild
        It was always unclear to me why the emperors considered it "shameful" to marry Russians, while Russian tsars could marry compatriots

        ... and the gap between the sovereign and the people widened, and they understood him less and less until they were naturally overthrown. By the way, marrying Nicky to Matilda, something worthwhile could come out, but already the stupid law of succession did not allow.
    2. Senior seaman
      Senior seaman 29 September 2020 16: 06
      +8
      Quote: Operator
      in Anglo-Saxon Britain, the German dynasty of Hohenzollerns still rules)

      Who is it?
      In fact, the Winds are Wettins (Saxe-Coburg-Gotta branch) if you count according to Prince Albert, Oldenburgs (Glucksburgs) if according to Philip Mountbatten and Hanoverians, if still according to Queen Victoria, but not the Hohenzollerns.
      1. Operator
        Operator 29 September 2020 16: 10
        +2
        Well, to hell with them, the Germans Saxe-Coburg-Gottas, Glucksburgs and Hanoverians to boot laughing
  • Astra wild
    Astra wild 29 September 2020 16: 21
    +2
    Quote: Phil77
    Quote: Astra wild
    were sketchy and superficial

    Damn, who at that time in Russia had a * systematized * education?!?!
    Examples ?! bully

    Probably priests: studied according to the canons and in the corresponding educational institutions
    1. Phil77
      Phil77 29 September 2020 18: 49
      +2
      Quote: Astra wild

      Probably priests: studied according to the canons and in the corresponding educational institutions

      The priests are another song! We are talking about secular people.
      The Moscow University appeared only in 1755, but in 1725 the idea of ​​creating an Academic University in St. Petersburg appeared. stop
      1. Astra wild
        Astra wild 29 September 2020 19: 05
        +2
        It was necessary to warn in advance that we were talking about Soviet people.
        In this case, I'll call J. Bruce, he was distinguished by his education among his contemporaries
        1. Phil77
          Phil77 29 September 2020 19: 24
          +2
          Quote: Astra wild
          about the Soviet people.

          Vera! Do you have a problem with the keyboard again? I'm not talking about Soviet people, but about * secular *! winked
          Well ... about the civilians!
          1. Astra wild
            Astra wild 29 September 2020 19: 45
            0
            Alas, the auto editor immediately remembered the Soviet ones. I know very well who secular people are.
            1. Phil77
              Phil77 29 September 2020 19: 48
              +2
              Quote: Astra wild
              the auto editor immediately remembered the Soviet

              Disconnect! Disconnect him damned to hell! For? ... everything is confusing-prankster! laughing
              1. Astra wild
                Astra wild 29 September 2020 19: 58
                +1
                In fact, it is beneficial. You just have to take your time and double-check it, but TIME is a pity.
        2. Phil77
          Phil77 29 September 2020 19: 34
          +2
          Quote: Astra wild
          I will call J. Bruce, he was distinguished by his education among his contemporaries

          You see, Vera. Bruce, although he was born in Moscow, but ... he lived in the Nemetskaya Sloboda, where he received a good education at home. That's all! Plus, that the man was smart! And ... he was curious. ! hi
  • Astra wild
    Astra wild 29 September 2020 17: 14
    0
    Now I looked closely at the portrait of Praskovya "Evdokia" by Lopukhina: her face is kind of puffy. Marta Skavronskaya has a prettier face, even if you make allowances for court flattery
  • Kwas
    Kwas 29 September 2020 18: 02
    0
    In any science, there are two approaches - scientific and emotional. A scientist draws conclusions from facts, an emotional one draws conjectures from gossip. For the assessment of the sovereign in history, facts are the results of reign. History does not care about the qualities of a monarch as a person, only his qualifications as a professional ruler are important. The results of the reign of the great rulers speak for themselves (the fleet is built, the enemy is defeated, the territory is expanded, reforms have been carried out), while the detractors have to resort to emotions, gossip and speculation, which we see in this opus.
    Another emotional approach is characterized by the adjustment of facts to a preconceived view. "The fleet is rotten," damn it! And who is to blame, the one who built, or the one who rotted? Maybe then we will blame Brezhnev for the destruction of the Soviet fleet? He supposedly then rotted and fell apart! Article is a minus!
    1. Astra wild
      Astra wild 29 September 2020 18: 14
      +3
      Write better.
      1. Kwas
        Kwas 29 September 2020 18: 23
        +1
        I'll try, maybe even on this topic. "Benefit or harm of palace coups." I'm afraid I won't be able to allocate time, because I work.
    2. Undecim
      Undecim 29 September 2020 19: 20
      +3
      "The fleet is rotten," damn it! And who is to blame, the one who built, or the one who rotted?
      They did not rot him, he himself rotted, the wood must be cooked for years.
      1. Kwas
        Kwas 29 September 2020 20: 00
        +3
        Everything rots if you spit and throw. And so it was done.
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 29 September 2020 20: 05
          +7
          If during construction use an unsuitable material - undried wood of suboptimal varieties, then the ship will rot under any storage conditions. It's just that historians prefer to bypass this page.
          1. Kwas
            Kwas 29 September 2020 20: 11
            +2
            I know about it. I think Peter knew too. In the Northern War, he fulfilled his task, it could have been used further, just the service time would have been less (say 20 years instead of 40), but he had to be taken care of, more repaired, and gradually changed.
            1. Undecim
              Undecim 29 September 2020 20: 27
              +4
              In the northern war, he completed his task
              In the literature, one can find both the history of the shipyards on which the fleet was built for the Northern War, and the history of the ships built. In short, the Luzhskaya, Novgorodskaya and Pskov shipyards were founded in 1701, and were closed already in 1703 - 1704 due to the fact that they were extremely unsuccessful. The Syasskaya shipyard and Selitsky row on the Volkhov, founded in 1702 - 1703, were closed for the same reason in 1706 - 1707. I hope you understand what efforts it took to build these shipyards in those years.
              Of the 1702 large ships built in 1707-46, not a single one took part in hostilities, and in 1711, under Peter, almost all of these units were dismantled for firewood due to their complete dilapidation and low running characteristics.
              1. Kwas
                Kwas 29 September 2020 20: 37
                +1
                By the end of the Northern War, he was stronger than the Swedish, ensuring Russian dominance in the Baltic, despite the presence of the British, which contributed to the success of the landings and, ultimately, the conclusion of peace.
              2. Liam
                Liam 29 September 2020 21: 17
                +1
                Hello hi
                Peter broke the backbone of the country (after which she recovered for at least 50 years) and was enlisted as a great statesman for “opening a window to Europe.” In the Baltic. In other areas, there are no particular successes. But along with questions about his education or there in the fleet, historians somehow modestly bypass the question - what exactly gave Russia this "window". The rise of the economy, trade, influence, what exactly. For which the country was devastated by continuous 20 year wars
                1. Undecim
                  Undecim 29 September 2020 21: 54
                  +2
                  Hello. Speak to cramola! The foundations are shaking! Have you swung at the sacred for every turbopatriot?
                  Articles on the history of the Russian economy on the site are unpopular, and I don’t see the author who would master this topic. Therefore, the people are in holy ignorance of the true situation in the economy of Russia in the XNUMXth century after the windows were cut.
                  1. Liam
                    Liam 29 September 2020 22: 56
                    0
                    Quote: Undecim
                    Articles on the history of the Russian economy on the site are unpopular

                    But in vain. This is the apotheosis of turbopatriotic militarism, several centuries of mobilization economy of varying degrees of rigidity. Under Peter, there was one of the "highest" moments of this phenomenon. Only Grozny and Stalin were able to approach its heights.
                    And patriots do not know that Peter was building a new alternative silk road from Persia to Europe)
                    1. Undecim
                      Undecim 29 September 2020 23: 32
                      +3
                      Peter was building a new alternative silk road from Persia to Europe
                      Are you familiar with the work of von Mises, Diamond, McNeill?
                      1. Liam
                        Liam 29 September 2020 23: 36
                        +1
                        A little. Through the work of Nefedov
                      2. Undecim
                        Undecim 29 September 2020 23: 39
                        +2
                        Who is both a physicist and a historian?
                      3. Liam
                        Liam 29 September 2020 23: 41
                        0
                        He's the most interesting point of view
                      4. Undecim
                        Undecim 29 September 2020 23: 54
                        +4
                        Nefedov is neo-Malthusianism. And I meant the technological interpretation of history based on the theory of cultural circles and the theory of military revolution.
                        Here is an interesting point - perhaps without even knowing about it, the author of today's article somewhere in line or almost in line with these theories and wrote.
                      5. Liam
                        Liam 30 September 2020 00: 03
                        0
                        He has works in cultural circles.
                        And specifically for Peter -Peter I: the brilliance and poverty of modernization

                        Quote: Undecim
                        the theory of cultural circles and the theory of military revolution.

                        The hypothesis is very rational and has a solid base.
                        Quote: Undecim
                        perhaps without even knowing it, but

                        The author is more and more about the role of personality in history ... change A to B and everything will change dramatically.
                      6. Undecim
                        Undecim 30 September 2020 00: 17
                        +2
                        Wow, Nefedov - what a versatile person. I'll have to read it. That would be someone in the authors on the site.
                        For today - disconnect. Thanks for the info.
                      7. Liam
                        Liam 30 September 2020 00: 21
                        0
                        Good night.
                        https://www.socionauki.ru/journal/articles/134123/
      2. arturpraetor
        arturpraetor 30 September 2020 01: 45
        +2
        Quote: Undecim
        Therefore, the people are in holy ignorance of the true situation in the economy of Russia in the XNUMXth century after the windows were cut.

        Not only the people, I'm afraid. Because even when you start taking certain sources, completely distinguishable information can emerge from them. The economy is, alas, in Russia, an unpopular thing, and not only in terms of the fact that only a few are trying to delve into it, or are traditionally ineffective in it, but also in terms of the fact that in the historical context it has been poorly described, or described in a very peculiar way. And often it is also biased, because often you have to look at who the author is, since it depends on him what he could embellish and what - belittle. Etc. As a result, different sources provide different information, which of them is true - sometimes it is simply impossible to determine, because in the links there are sources and documents that simply cannot be rechecked. And there is also an analysis and comparison of different states, and the connection of topics that have little to do with the original. For example, the same stagnation in the empire's economy during the time of palace coups can be attributed to the consequences of Peter's ruin - or perhaps to the instability of the central government, when corruption skyrocketed and the effectiveness of governing the country fell. Or the described position of the serfs at the end of the reign of Catherine II may suddenly turn out to be not very much better than what is attributed to the end of the reign of Peter the Great. But under Catherine, no one called the country ruined ...

        Besides, nobody really needs it. When I tried to start studying the topic of the Russian economy and publish developments, I almost became an enemy of the people, and, as always, I succeed - both from the side of the imperials and from the side of the Sovietophiles laughing Alas, this topic is unnecessary for the broad masses. People do not want research on economics, they are not interested in it, except perhaps as another proof of their opinion (delusion). They simply do not perceive anything that starts to go "out of hand", because in the topic of economics, you first need to understand what economics is, at least its basic laws in a historical context, and only then go and see who is where, and what to what. Because even among those interested in historical economics, this is rare. I also met with those who considered serfdom in all seriousness an absolute good, explaining this by the fact that the state can freely dispose of human resources, transferring them to different directions. And with those who tried to talk about the laws of economics from the point of view of psychology, from which it was concluded that the economy is a secondary thing for the development of the state, and there is no need to deal with it. Why, many people still believe that the gold of South Africa made Britain powerful. Like, there is a lot of gold, and everything is in the British colony, which means that a hundred poods the country has become greatly enriched, and the country means the treasury. Here it is just right to start carrying out an educational program about the mechanisms of the economy, and not to educate about serious topics on historical economics ...
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 30 September 2020 08: 53
          +1
          Here it is just right to start carrying out an educational program about the mechanisms of the economy, and not to educate about serious topics on historical economics ...
          I agree. In addition, an objective economic analysis is incompatible with propaganda.
          1. arturpraetor
            arturpraetor 30 September 2020 15: 26
            +1
            Quote: Undecim
            In addition, an objective economic analysis is incompatible with propaganda.

            Here's just a PPKS. But our propaganda is a more priority thing than the economy ... Traditions, sir ... To cleanse the second from the first is, as a rule, thankless work, if at all productive ...
  • Astra wild
    Astra wild 29 September 2020 20: 33
    0
    And the heirs did not even remember this. They had more important things to do: seize the throne, sleep with a large number of males, deal with the defeated, where can you remember the fleet?
  • BAI
    BAI 29 September 2020 20: 59
    +3
    "The fleet is rotten"

    Wood for building ships must dry for 20 years. Moreover, in St. Petersburg, the climate is not the most suitable for drying wood. Peter 1 simply did not have time for this. The ships were built from damp wood, the service life of the ships was, of course, minimal.
    1. arturpraetor
      arturpraetor 30 September 2020 02: 07
      +5
      Quote: BAI
      Wood for building ships must dry for 20 years.

      Everything is much more complicated. Different forest species sometimes have to be dried in different ways (in a saline solution, or fresh standing water, or immersed in running river water for a while, and a bunch of other ways depending on the piece of wood), at different times, and the local the climate in which the tree grows. And even the soil - oak from the swamp and oak from black soil, there are three big differences. And the climate also affects the life of even well-dried wood. And also it is necessary to deliver the timber to the shipyard not by rafting, as was done here, but on barges, otherwise it will start to rot before it becomes part of the ship. And there is also such a thing as timbering, which often means a complete rebuilding of the ship from almost scratch, but formally this is an old trough that continues its service. We did it less, because the forests are as hell, it's easier to build a new ship, the foreigners have more. But even among foreigners, primarily the British, ships at the beginning of the 10th century rarely sailed without timbering for more than XNUMX years. It was then that the service life of the ships was increased by the Europeans.

      Makhov dealt with this topic in sufficient detail. Even the "decayed" fleet of Peter, under the given conditions (an ambulance from damp timber of not the best grades, the absence of timberovka) served quite a period of time, even by European standards. Less than their average, of course, but not so disastrously. But for what Peter can and should be scolded in terms of shipbuilding - absolutely disorganized deforestation. which, alas, before Nicholas I was generally a Russian tradition. Only a small part of the felled forest went into business, since the rules for transporting and storing timber were grossly violated, and it began to rot even before it entered the shipyard. As a result, the ogogo was cut through the greenery, and much fewer ships were built than could have been obtained from that volume of the forest ...
      1. Korsar4
        Korsar4 30 September 2020 07: 27
        +3
        Much is true. But the oak does not grow in the swamp. Distinguished, for example, pine pine (cobblestone), growing on sandy loam soil, and mint - with loose wood.

        The Forestry Department was established during the time of Paul 1.
        And the history of changes in the requirements for forest inventory and forest management is long, interesting and separate.
        1. arturpraetor
          arturpraetor 30 September 2020 15: 36
          +1
          Quote: Korsar4
          But the oak does not grow in the swamp.

          Well, I was the one who went too far. But in general, I happened to come across information on Russian oaks, their quality in comparison with foreign ones - that was somewhat not in our favor. And in the Baltic basin, the best oak trees were considered German or Polish. The best "vaapche" is Asturian. Virginia could compete with him, if not for the fungus, which required special treatment.
          Quote: Korsar4
          The Forestry Department was established during the time of Paul 1.

          EMNIP still Peter understood that he was doing bad things with the forest, and it was necessary to somehow organize this business in a human way, but his blockage was complete. He did not manage to firmly consolidate many of his undertakings in the country, he didn’t even have time to start a lot ... The normalization of forestry is from the latter. If I remember correctly, things did not go beyond the ban on uncontrolled deforestation and the declaration of forests as a strategic resource and property of Russia. Well, the attempt to force the timber to be floated at least on rafts failed - there was not enough time to hammer in this rule with a club, it was already in the 1720s ... And then already in the XNUMXth century it got better, when the era of wooden shipbuilding itself was coming to an end.
          1. Korsar4
            Korsar4 30 September 2020 15: 56
            +1
            At the time of Peter 1, there was no systematic order - the subsequent one corrected the previous one well (at least in forestry matters).

            There was a decree on breeds that cutting was prohibited and cutting was allowed (1703). It was forbidden to cut wood at a distance of 50 versts from large rivers and 30 from small ones.

            There are still glorious Kaibitsky oak forests in Kazan.

            It is no coincidence that when the forest experts arrived, one = Ferdinand Gabriel Vokel remained in St. Petersburg. This is his creation, the famous Lindulovskaya larch grove. And three went to the Kazan Admiralty.

            And, of course, the Voronezh oak forests were well chopped down for domestic shipbuilding.
            1. Korsar4
              Korsar4 30 September 2020 16: 07
              +1
              He lied about 30 miles on the tributaries. Still, not 30, but 20.
  • Astra wild
    Astra wild 29 September 2020 18: 57
    +2
    Quote: Kwas
    I'll try, maybe even on this topic. "Benefit or harm of palace coups." I'm afraid I won't be able to allocate time, because I work.

    Here, from which side to look: if the coup was a success, then the benefit to the organizers in the first place.
    1. Kwas
      Kwas 29 September 2020 20: 06
      0
      From the point of view of benefits for the state. If the ruler is worthless, he needs to be changed, but how? In an absolute monarchy, a palace coup is the only mechanism that insures against a bad monarch. And if you look at the history of the XNUMXth century, then each palace coup improved the quality of the ruler.
      1. Astra wild
        Astra wild 29 September 2020 21: 45
        0
        But not everyone agrees with this: for example, Valery doted on the soul in Petr-Ulrich, and Catherine is brighter than he
        1. Kwas
          Kwas 30 September 2020 11: 30
          0
          Of course, everyone has their own preferences. I proceed from the premise that the ability to make a palace coup and not allow yourself to be well correlated with the basic qualities of a statesman. We can say that the sovereign who admitted him did not pass the exam for the ruler.
  • Liam
    Liam 29 September 2020 19: 13
    +2
    It is curious that in fact the bride of Peter I was called Praskovya. However, at the wedding, she was given a different name - either because it seemed more decent to a royal person, or because Praskovya was the name of the wife of Ivan Alekseevich, co-ruler of Peter I.

    The girl's patronymic was also changed: her father's name was Illarion, but she became Feodorovna: this is already in honor of the Feodorovskaya Icon of the Mother of God - the shrine of the Romanov house
    .
    Her name was changed for the same reasons as her patronymic. For the sake of euphony and the Greek meaning of the name. Evdokia - Grace.
    Changing the name and patronymic of girls to Greek when they became queens - a tradition in pre-Petrine Russia
  • Astra wild
    Astra wild 29 September 2020 20: 25
    0
    Quote: Undecim
    And the most interesting thing is his ships sailed
    Only close and not for long. And some did not swim at all.

    Have you personally checked which ones you swam?
    I'm not going to justify Peter, he has too much negative, but in fairness. About not ordinary personalities, of this level, as a rule, too much pretentious was said and said
    1. Undecim
      Undecim 29 September 2020 21: 17
      +3
      Have you personally checked which ones you swam?
      Why do I personally. There are professional historians for this. The biography of all ships of the Russian fleet is publicly available. So you can do that kind of research. You will learn a lot of new things.
      As for the personality of Peter the Great, I have been interested in it for about 50 years.
      Niklai Ivanovich Pavlenko once presented his book, sorry, "the dykes have eaten."
    2. BAI
      BAI 29 September 2020 21: 34
      +2
      what were you swimming?

      Some of those that did NOT swim:
      “The Russian Tsar promised to install the Georgian Tsar in his possessions, and in 1702, it was ordered (as it is assumed) for this purpose by the Danish master to build 120 sailing ships 12 and 16 cannon on the Volga ... the above mentioned vessels are still rotting on the Volga, not used in any package"[26] (p. 65).

      Someone John Perry
      26. Perry D. State of Russia under the present tsar. Cit. Quoted from: Readings of the Imperial Society of Russian History and Antiquities. No. 2. M., 1871.
      1. arturpraetor
        arturpraetor 30 September 2020 02: 30
        +5
        And besides Perry, there is information about this armada somewhere else? Because even Perry himself turns out some kind of nonsense in describing this passage. Starting from the fact that Georgia - one of the most prosperous countries, more populated, which is located on the shores of the Caspian Sea... Peter, unlike the Englishman, knew perfectly well that Georgia was not on the shores of the Caspian Sea, and that it was not necessary to build a fleet for the establishment of the Georgian Tsar there on the Volga. Perry also has enough factual errors - he and Alexander Imeretinsky died 4 years after captivity, and not in 1711, as it was, and according to the text (in full) it turns out that the war with Sweden began after the construction of the fleet on the Volga, which contradicts the information he himself indicated that the fleet began to be built in 1702.

        It reminds of the usual bike in the style "I was in the outlandish country of eastern barbarians, and here are the miracles I saw there." Therefore, information about 120 12- and 16-gun sailing ships should be confirmed by some other sources.
        1. arturpraetor
          arturpraetor 30 September 2020 02: 37
          +5
          I will add - this text is taken from only TWO paragraphs of the author's text of a certain John Perry. Those. the concentration of errors and inventions (like the richest Georgia on the shores of the Caspian Sea) in the text is very high. So yes, you can't do without additional proofs ...
          1. Astra wild
            Astra wild 30 September 2020 16: 56
            +1
            But how solid it sounds
  • Kushka
    Kushka 2 October 2020 16: 09
    0
    Quote: Astra wild
    The psychology of women is so multifaceted that men cannot understand it.
    However, we ourselves can not always understand

    On the table lay the brochure "Male Psychology"
    Nearby is a thick tome "Women's Psychology. Introduction"
  • Richard Lionheart
    Richard Lionheart 5 October 2020 14: 16
    0
    And for all lovers of European history of the XIV-XIX centuries, I recommend the site where you can find Portraits of the Rulers (monarchs, statesmen and military leaders) of European countries (from 1300 to 1855). Images in Color and Excellent quality: http://portraitsofkings.com/gallery/