Military Review

How Tsar Peter missed the opportunity to defeat the Ottoman army on the Prut river

39

Victor Arseni. Russian Tsar Peter I and the ruler of Moldova Dmitry Cantemir in the battle with the Turks and Crimean Tatars, 1711.


Preparation of the Danube Campaign


During the long journey from Moscow to the active army (from March 6 to June 12, 1711), Tsar Peter Alekseevich worked hard. Also, Peter "from the cold air and from the difficult path" fell seriously ill. The disease confined him to bed, and he was so weak that he had to learn to walk.

The tsar's primary task was to concentrate troops on the two flanks of the theater of operations: at Azov in the east, and at the Dniester in the west. The Baltic front also remained against the Swedes, weakened by the withdrawal of the best army forces to the south. Here it was necessary to fortify the occupied fortresses, replenish units and garrisons with recruits. It was necessary to strengthen relations with the allies - the Commonwealth and Denmark, seeking from them a significant contribution to the war with Sweden. With the Polish king Augustus II, they concluded an agreement on military operations against the Swedes of Pomerania. The Polish-Saxon army was reinforced by a 15-strong Russian corps. It was not possible to draw Poland into the war with Turkey.

Back in 1709, the Wallachian ruler Konstantin Brankovyan promised Peter to send an army to help the Russians and provide them with food in the event of a war with Turkey. Wallachian and Moldavian boyars asked for protection from Russia. But in June, the Turkish army had already occupied Wallachia, and Brynkovianu did not dare to revolt (in 1714, the Wallachian ruler and his four sons were tortured to death and executed in Constantinople).

On April 2 (13), 1711, a secret treaty was concluded in Slutsk with the Moldovan ruler Dmitry Cantemir. The Moldavian principality recognized the supreme power of the Russian kingdom, while maintaining internal autonomy. Kantemir promised to send a light cavalry corps to help the Russian army and help with food.

In Slutsk, on April 12-13, 1711, a military conference was held, which was attended in addition to Peter - Sheremetev, General Allart, Chancellor Golovkin and Ambassador to Poland Grigory Dolgoruky. Peter ordered Sheremetev to be on the Dniester by May 20, having a 3-month supply of food.

The field marshal immediately raised a number of objections: by the 20th, the army would not have time to arrive at the Dniester due to poor crossings, delayed artillery and recruiting reinforcements. Sheremetev also noted that the army, after the battles in Ukraine, in the Baltic States and a heavy and prolonged march, is exhausted, is in great need of weapons, uniforms, horses, carts and especially in provisions. Usually food and fodder were obtained in areas where the army was located, where the fighting was conducted. In this case, the rear base was Ukraine. But its resources were undermined by previous hostilities and have not yet recovered, and there was also a crop failure and a massive death of livestock in 1710.

The Tsar was in a hurry, urging Sheremetev on. He strove to reach the Danube before the Ottoman army. In this case, the troops of the Wallachian and Moldavian rulers joined the Russian army, one could count on the support of the local Orthodox population. The army received a food base (Moldavia and Wallachia). Then the Russian sovereign hoped that not only the Vlachs, but also the Bulgarians, Serbs and other Christian peoples would revolt against the Ottomans. In this case, the Turks will not be able to go beyond the Danube.

How Tsar Peter missed the opportunity to defeat the Ottoman army on the Prut river
Portrait of Dmitry Kantemir. Unknown artist. XVIII century

Russian army hike


The Russian army included 4 infantry divisions and 2 dragoon divisions. The infantry divisions were commanded by Generals Weide, Repnin, Allart and Entsberg, the dragoon divisions were commanded by Rennes and Eberstedt. There was also Mikhail Golitsyn's guards brigade (Preobrazhensky, Semenovsky, Ingermanland and Astrakhan regiments). The artillery was commanded by General Jacob Bruce - about 60 heavy guns and up to 100 regimental guns. The staff size of the army was up to 80 thousand people, in each infantry division there were more than 11 thousand people, in the dragoon division - 8 thousand each, 6 separate regiments - about 18 thousand, a separate dragoon regiment - 2 thousand Plus about 10 thousand. Cossacks.

But during the long transition from Livonia to the Dniester and the Prut, the size of the Russian army was practically halved. So, even during the 6-day march from the Dniester to the Prut with exhausting heat during the day and cold nights, with a lack of food and drinking water, many soldiers died or fell ill.

Sheremetev was late, Russian troops reached the Dniester only by May 30, 1711. The Russian cavalry crossed the Dniester and moved to the Danube to occupy the crossings at Isakchi. On June 12, the Ottoman army built bridges across the Danube and was ready to cross the river, while Russian troops were just building a crossing over the Dniester.

The Turkish army under the command of the Grand Vizier Bataldzhi Pasha (about 120 thousand people, more than 440 guns) crossed the Danube at Isakchi on June 18. The Ottomans went along the left bank of the Prut, where they united with the 70-thousandth cavalry army of the Crimean Khan Devlet-Girey.

As a result, what Peter feared happened - the Ottoman army crossed the Danube and went towards the Russians. Sheremetev turned to Yassy, ​​where Peter approached with the main forces on June 25.

Now it is difficult to judge who is to blame.

Did Peter demand the impossible from Sheremetev, or could the old field marshal add?

It is also difficult to answer another question: could the relatively small Russian army, having reached the Danube near Isakchi before the Ottomans, resist the superior forces of the Turks and Crimeans near the Danube? Perhaps the Danube's trap would be worse and more dangerous than the Prut's?

Peter's hopes to occupy the Danube line were dashed. Hopes for the effective help of the Wallachian and Moldavian rulers also dashed. The Moldavian ruler organized a solemn meeting in Iasi, went over to the side of Russia with several thousand soldiers, but his contribution to the war was modest. The Moldovan detachments were weak, the food base in Iasi was not prepared. A severe crop failure befell the country, it was hard to get food. And the Wallachian ruler Brynkovianu, as a subject of the Port, was forced to side with the Ottomans, who had come to Wallachia before the Russians.

The war of liberation of the Slavic, Christian peoples in the Balkans did not take on a large scale that could have an impact on the campaign.

The supply problem has become almost the main one. On June 12, 1711, Tsar Peter wrote to Sheremetev:

“At this moment we came with shelves to the Dniester ... Only there is no bread. Allart has already had 5 days of no bread or meat ... Let us know for sure: when we get to you, will the soldiers have anything to eat? "

On June 16, Sheremetev wrote to the tsar:

"I have had and still have labor in provisions with contrition of my heart, for this is the main thing."

All hope was in the Moldovan ruler. But he had no bread either. Kantemir handed over to the Russian army only meat, 15 thousand sheep and 4 thousand oxen.

There was another problem as well. The heat burned out the grass, and the horses had no food. What the burning southern sun did not manage to do was completed by the locusts. As a result - the death of horses, a slowdown in the march of the army. Also, the troops suffered from a lack of drinking water. There was water, but it was thin, and not only people, but also horses and dogs, ached and died from it.


Continuation of the hike


What was to be done? Come back or continue the hike?

Most of the commanders were in favor of continuing the campaign. They counted on provisions in Wallachia, they wanted to seize the enemy's reserves. There was also a rumor that the grand vizier allegedly had an order from the sultan to enter into negotiations with the Russians. Since the enemy is looking for a truce, it means that he is weak.

Peter, intending to go to the Prut, counted on success. However, this was a mistake.

On June 30, 1711, Peter set out from Yassy, ​​a 7-thousandth cavalry detachment of General Rennes was sent to Brailov to create a threat from the rear and capture enemy reserves. On July 8, the Russian cavalry occupied Fokshany, on July 12 they reached Brailov. For two days the Russians successfully attacked the Turkish garrison, on the 14th the Ottomans capitulated. About 9 thousand soldiers were left in Iasi and on the Dniester to guard communications and rear.

At the council of war, they decided to go down along the Prut and not move away. Sheremetev correctly decided that it was dangerous to move towards an enemy with numerous cavalry. Tatar detachments were already looming around, disturbing carts and foragers. In addition, under Sheremetev there was only a third of the army. The divisions of Weide, Repnin, and the Guards were in different places due to problems with provisions.

On July 7 (18), the Russians reached Stanileshti. Here the news was received that the Ottoman troops were already 6 miles from the Sheremetev camp and that the cavalry of the Crimean Khan had joined up with the vizier. All troops were ordered to link up with Sheremetev. The Russian vanguard of General von Eberstedt (6 thousand dragoons) was surrounded by enemy cavalry. The Russians, lining up in a square and firing back from their cannons, retreated on foot to the main forces. The Russian troops were saved by the lack of artillery among the Ottomans, their weak weapons (mainly edged weapons).

The council of war decided to retreat in order to fight in a convenient place. The Russian army occupied an unsuccessful position, it was convenient to attack it from the surrounding heights. Under cover of the night on July 8 (19), the Russians retreated. The troops marched in 6 parallel columns: 4 infantry divisions, guards and dragoons of Eberstedt. In the intervals between the columns - artillery and a train. The guard covered the left flank, the Renne division - the right (at the Prut).

The Ottomans and Crimeans perceived this retreat as a flight and began to make raids, which were fought back with rifle and cannon fire. The Russians stopped at a camp near Novy Stanileshti.


The battle plan on the Prut river. 1711 g. History Russian army and fleet: Volume V

Battle


On July 9 (20), 1711, the Turkish-Crimean troops surrounded the Russian camp, pressed against the river. In the morning, the Preobrazhensky regiment led rearguard battles for 5 hours. Light artillery approached the Turks, which began shelling the Russian positions.

On the eve of the battle, Generals Shpar and Poniatovsky arrived at the vizier from Bender. They asked the vizier about his plans. Mehmed Pasha said they would attack the Russians. Swedish generals began to dissuade the vizier. They believed that it was not necessary to give the Russians a battle, they had a regular army and would repel all attacks with fire, the Ottomans would suffer heavy losses. The Turkish-Crimean cavalry had to constantly harass the enemy, make sorties, interfere with the crossings. As a result, the hungry and tired Russian troops surrender. The vizier did not heed this sensible advice. He believed that there were few Russians and they could be defeated.

At 7 pm the Janissaries attacked the divisions of Allart and Eberstedt. All attacks of the Turks were repulsed by fire, as the Swedes had warned. General Ponyatovsky noted:

“The Janissaries ... continued to advance, not waiting for orders. Emitting wild screams, calling out to God by their custom with repeated shouts of "Alla", "Alla", they rushed to the enemy with sabers in their hands and, of course, would have broken through the front in this first powerful attack, if not for the slingshots that the enemy threw in front of them. At the same time, the strong fire almost point-blank not only cooled the ardor of the Janissaries, but also confused them and forced them to a hasty retreat. "

During the battle, the Russians lost over 2600 people, the Ottomans - 7-8 thousand people.

On July 10 (21), the battle was continued. The Ottomans completely surrounded the Russian camp with field fortifications and artillery batteries. Turkish artillery continuously fired at the Russian camp. The Turks stormed the camp again, but were repelled.

The position of the Russian army was becoming desperate. The troops were threatened with starvation, ammunition could soon run out. The military council decided to offer the Ottomans a truce. In case of refusal to burn the baggage train and break through with a fight: "not to the stomach, but to death, without mercy on anyone and not asking for mercy."

Mehmed Pasha did not respond to the peace proposal. The Crimean Khan took an irreconcilable position, no negotiations, only an attack. He was supported by General Poniatowski, who represented the Swedish king.

The Turks renewed their attacks, they were repelled again. The Janissaries, having suffered heavy losses, began to worry and refused to continue their attacks. They declared that they could not stand against Russian fire and demanded to conclude an armistice. Sheremetev again proposed an armistice. The Grand Vizier received him. Vice-Chancellor Pyotr Shafirov was sent to the Ottoman camp. Negotiations have begun.

It is worth noting that the position of the Russian army was not as hopeless as it seemed. In the rear, Renne took Brailov quite easily, intercepting enemy communications. There was anxiety in the Turks' camp. The Russians were standing, the losses of the Turks were serious. The Janissaries didn't want to fight anymore. With a decisive onslaught in the Suvorov style, the Russian army could disperse the enemy. This was also noted by the British ambassador to Constantinople Sutton:

"Eyewitnesses to this battle said that if the Russians knew about the horror and stupor that gripped the Turks, and could take advantage of the continued shelling and sortie, the Turks, of course, would have been defeated."

Further, it was possible to conclude peace on favorable terms, to save Azov. However, there was not enough determination. In the Russian army, foreigners predominated in the highest command posts, for them the numerical superiority of the enemy was a decisive factor. Therefore, after the Prut campaign, Peter will arrange a "purge" of the army from foreign personnel.


P. Stroli. Catherine persuades Peter the Great to conclude a peace treaty with the Turkish vizier. Around 1800-1802

Prut world


On July 11 (22), 1711, no hostilities took place. On this day, two military councils were held. At the first, it was decided that if the vizier demands surrender, the army will go for a breakthrough. On the second stage, private measures were outlined to overcome the blockade: to get rid of excess property in order to increase the mobility of troops; because of the lack of bullets, to chop iron into shot; beat thin horses for meat, take others with you; divide all provisions equally.

Peter allowed Shafirov to accept any conditions, except captivity. The vizier could bargain for more. The Russian tsar believed that the Ottomans would put forward not only their own conditions (Azov and Taganrog), but also represent the interests of the Swedes. Therefore, he was ready to give up everything that he seized from the Swedes, except for the exit to the Baltic and St. Petersburg. That is, Pyotr Alekseevich was ready to sacrifice all the fruits of previous victories - two campaigns to Azov, two Narva, Lesnoy, Poltava, to give up almost the entire Baltic.

But the Ottomans did not know about it. They saw that the Russians stood firm, it was dangerous to continue the battle and were content with little. In addition, a large sum was allocated to bribe the vizier (but he never took it, he was afraid that his own or the Swedes would hand over).

As a result, Shafirov returned with good news. Peace was made.

On July 12 (23), 1711, the Prut Treaty was signed by Shafirov, Sheremetev and Baltaji Mehmed Pasha.

Russia yielded to Azov, destroyed Taganrog. That is, the Azov fleet was doomed to destruction. Peter promised not to interfere in the affairs of Poland and the Zaporozhye Cossacks. The Russian army freely went into their possessions.

The interests of Sweden and the Swedish king were practically ignored by this agreement. Unsurprisingly, King Charles XII of Sweden went berserk. He galloped to the headquarters of the vizier and demanded troops from him in order to catch up with the Russians and capture Peter. The vizier hinted to Karl about the defeat at Poltava and refused to attack the Russians. The enraged king turned to the Crimean Khan, but he did not dare to break the truce.

On July 12, the Russian troops moved back, taking precautions in case of treachery by the Ottomans. We moved very slowly, 2-3 miles a day, partly because of the death and exhaustion of the horses, partly because of the need to remain on alert. The Russian army was followed by the Crimean cavalry, ready to attack at any moment. On July 22, the Russians crossed the Prut, on August 1, the Dniester.

Peter went to Warsaw to meet with the Polish king, then to Karlsbad and Torgau for the wedding of his son Alexei.

The Moldavian ruler Cantemir fled to Russia with his family and boyars. He received the title of prince, a pension, a number of estates and power over the Moldovans in Russia. He became a statesman of the Russian Empire.

The state of war continued until 1713, as the Sultan demanded new concessions. However, there were no active hostilities. The Adrianople Peace Treaty of 1713 confirmed the terms of the Prut Peace Treaty.

In general, the failure of the Prut campaign was associated with the mistakes of the Russian command. The campaign was poorly prepared, the army had a weakened composition, and a rear base was not created. The bet on foreign military specialists let down. Too high hopes were pinned on potential allies. They overestimated their strength, underestimated the enemy.


Russian diplomat, Vice-Chancellor Pyotr Pavlovich Shafirov
Author:
Photos used:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/
39 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 11 July 2021 03: 26
    +1
    Eyewitnesses of this battle said that if the Russians knew about the horror and stupor that gripped the Turks, and could take advantage of their advantage, continuing the shelling and making a sortie, the Turks, of course, would be defeated. "
    Of course nonsense. fool "We'll start breaking the wall ..." The state of the exhausted Russian army (illness, malnutrition) was also no better, not to mention the presence (absence) of gun charges.
    1. Bar1
      Bar1 11 July 2021 07: 35
      -9
      Usually food and fodder were obtained in areas where the army was located, where hostilities were fought.


      no, no, this is just not usual, if the army does not rely on its reserves, this is called preparation for war, but on the lands that it must liberate, from the Turks at the request of the owners of these territories, then such an army is not a liberation army, but a predatory one ...

      The infantry divisions were commanded by Generals Weide, Repnin, Allart and Entsberg, the dragoon divisions were commanded by Rennes and Eberstedt. There was also Mikhail Golitsyn's guards brigade (Preobrazhensky, Semenovsky, Ingermanland and Astrakhan regiments). The artillery was commanded by General Jacob Bruce - about 60 heavy guns and up to 100 regimental guns.


      and it's called "Russian army"? This nemchura did not even speak in Russian, how did they give orders? This means that the lower army ranks were also not Russian, the accursed Peter commanded not the Russian, but the European army.
      Yes, and Peter himself, here is his real image, not smoothed, is this Russian?



      Here is a film made on the basis of the book by Alexander Kasatkin / Kas, here it is analyzed in detail on medieval writings what the Russian army was like before Peter. The lie that official historians call us history is striking, and the records of medieval chroniclers that have come down to us are simply ignored.

      1. Konstantin Shevchenko
        Konstantin Shevchenko 11 July 2021 16: 10
        +1
        Good stuff about weapons.
      2. Sergey Zhikharev
        Sergey Zhikharev 12 July 2021 07: 11
        0
        The fact that food will be there where our army goes (Russian, English, French) is a common practice of those times.
      3. ABC-schutze
        ABC-schutze 12 July 2021 12: 11
        -2
        "Inspirational" nonsense, finish, please ...

        "Before Peter", Russia was already backward to the point of impossibility.

        For, EXACTLY and ONLY THANKS to Peter the Great, she, in the SHORTEST HISTORICAL TIME, "acquired" a REGULAR army and navy.

        Those. army, in which training (combat training) and service is carried out CONTINUOUSLY, the branches of the armed forces are equipped with a single weapon and uniforms, a unified system of allowance ("rear service") is introduced, a unified structure of units and subunits is formed, a system of training fighters is organized, the junior level of their middle command composition. All this, not "under" Peter, and EXACTLY THANKS to Peter the Great ...

        As for the claims "to the Russian army, in terms of supplies during the Prut campaign, I recommend that you start" educational activities "with" civilized "Europeans. , say, in Saxony ...
      4. ABC-schutze
        ABC-schutze 12 July 2021 12: 18
        0
        I explain it to "passengers of the anti-Russian tram."

        "The plundering army, or not, is determined only by the goals of a particular war, and not at all by the" nature of supply "of troops in a particular campaign ...
  2. Van 16
    Van 16 11 July 2021 04: 27
    +5
    Reading about the life of Peter, I was always amazed at one thing - how much a person managed to do in his, not so long, life. Omitting the topic of success or failure (his Azov campaigns cannot be called successful), the very fact of how much he managed to do is amazing. And this is the 17th-18th century with its speeds and modes of movement, "now in a wagon, now in a carriage, now in a cart, now on foot."
    1. Bar1
      Bar1 11 July 2021 07: 53
      -5
      Quote: Van 16
      Reading about the life of Peter, I was always amazed at one thing - how much a person managed to do in his, not so long, life. Omitting the topic of success or failure (his Azov campaigns cannot be called successful), the very fact of how much he managed to do is amazing. And this is the 17th-18th century with its speeds and modes of movement, "now in a wagon, now in a carriage, now in a cart, now on foot."


      Arctic fox, and what did Peter do in your opinion, created a European army, so he won only one battle near Poltava and something strange, and the war that historians call the war with Sweden, where he BOUGHT the victory for Russian money.
      -The Northern War, I bought a victory for money
      As a result, the Azov campaigns were a loser, the Azov had to be given over to Atamania.
      -Persian campaign-failure
      -Prutsky campaign is a failure.
      What was this "advanced" army that lost almost all the battles? And what did this "Russian" tsar do, invited all the European bastard on the head of the Russian people?
      What do historians rub in at us about the "great reformer"?
      1. ABC-schutze
        ABC-schutze 12 July 2021 13: 08
        -1
        1. "there he BOUGHT the victory for Russian money.
        -The Northern War, I bought a victory for money "
        ************************************************** ******************************
        Yeah ...
        Having previously kicked you out of all previously occupied Russian lands on the eastern coast of the Baltic. By the way, "Russian" is written in TWO "s" ...

        2. "-Azov campaigns turned out to be a loss as a result, the Azov had to be given to Atamania."
        ************************************************** ******************************
        Well yes...

        The visit of the Russian military squadron to Constantinople, which marked the arrival of the Sultan's harem under the windows of the Sultan's harem, with volleys of guns, is the most striking external sign of Peter's "defeat".

        "As a result," MAKING the "winners" of the Turks to accept and accredit the PERMANENT Russian Embassy.

        3. And here is the view of a foreigner, an enemy of Russia, on the "Prut prospects" of a busurman ...

        The British ambassador in Constantinople, Sutton, reported to London that three repeated attempts by the Janissaries to attack the Russians cost them 8 thousand people.

        "Eyewitnesses of this battle said," the ambassador continued, "that if the Russians knew about the horror and stupor that gripped the Turks and could take advantage of their advantages by continuing the shelling and making a sortie, the Turks would certainly be defeated." One Turkish Pasha, when asked why the Turks rushed to conclude peace, replied that they were tortured by the "firmness" of the Russian troops, that they did not expect to meet "terrible opponents" in their faces, and that, finally, they preferred to get rid of the neighborhood with the Russians, the battle with whom "it will cost them many lives."

        The Russian camp also did not know that the janissaries, having received an order from the vizier to resume hostilities on the morning of July 10, refused to carry it out, stating that "they do not want to advance and cannot stand against Moscow fire." The Janissaries DEMANDED the FASTEST CONCLUSION of the world from the vizier.

        4. "What was this" advanced "army that lost almost all the battles?"
        ************************************************** ******************************
        Is it you, on behalf of the King of Denmark, Karlushka 12th, or Augustus of Saxony? ..

        5. "And what did this" Russian "tsar do, invited all the European bastard on the head of the Russian people?"
        ************************************************** ******************************
        Did quite a lot ...

        I threw out, for example, this bastard, i.e. (your then and current owners) from the Russian territories occupied by them ...

        Forced her to trade with Russia through the Russian Baltic ports ...

        Well, and you, the farmer, sent you to the new capital, diligently to lay out gardens and parks there. And to engage in the introduction of progressive farming methods for that time in Russia ...
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 12 July 2021 21: 21
          +1
          Quote: ABC-schütze
          Having previously kicked you out of all previously occupied Russian lands on the eastern coast of the Baltic. By the way, "Russian" is written in TWO "s" ...


          what are you talking to the shmut?
          Who was thrown out, plainly speak?

          Quote: ABC-schütze
          The visit of the Russian military squadron to Constantinople, which marked the arrival of the Sultan's harem under the windows of the Sultan's harem, with volleys of guns, is the most striking external sign of Peter's "defeat".

          "As a result," MAKING the "winners" of the Turks to accept and accredit the PERMANENT Russian Embassy.


          this arctic fox, a connoisseur of "history" appeared here.
          Maybe you confused the "great embassy" of 1699. sI the Ukrainian ambassador arrived on ONE ship Fortress, which squadron?
          And according to the results of the Prut campaign in 1711. Russia lost thanks to Peter
          -Give Azov and all previously conquered cities on their lands to the Turks.
          - Give Livland and other lands to the Swedes, except Ingria (where Petersburg was built). Give back for Ingria Pskov.
          - Agree to Stanislav Leszczynski, the protege of the Swedes, as the Polish king.

          -The return of Azov to the Turks in the same state.
          -The destruction of Taganrog and other cities in the conquered Russian lands around the Sea of ​​Azov.
          - Refusal to interfere in Polish and Cossack (Zaporozhye) affairs.
          -Free admission of the Swedish king to Sweden and a number of non-essential conditions for merchants.
          - Until the terms of the agreement were fulfilled, Shafirov and the son of Field Marshal Sheremetev had to remain in Turkey as hostages

          According to the recollections of the Dane Rasmus Erebo (secretary of Yu. Yul) about the Russian troops on the approach to the Dniester:

          “The soldiers were black with thirst and hunger. Blackened and dying of hunger people lay in multitudes along the road, and no one could help their neighbor or save him, since everyone had an equal share, that is, no one had anything. "

          The main result of the unsuccessful Prut campaign was the loss by Russia of access to the Sea of ​​Azov and the recently built southern fleet. Peter wanted to transfer from the Sea of ​​Azov to the Baltic the ships "Goto Predestination", "Lastka" and "Shpaga", but the Turks did not allow them to pass through the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles, after which the ships were sold to the Ottoman Empire.


          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Прутский_поход

          so which squadron and which embassy is the shmutze?

          The most interesting thing is that the Zaporozhye Cossacks fought against Peter and his Germans, because they hated the order established by Peter.
          1. ABC-schutze
            ABC-schutze 12 July 2021 23: 43
            0
            The most interesting thing is that even in such a trash can as Wikipedia, "Russian" is written with TWO "s" ...

            The Zaporozhye Cossacks, who "hated" Peter's orders, do not care and forget. The pre-Petrine archers, these orders were even more hated. They were hung on the walls of the Kremlin ...

            And with the Zaporozhye "double-barreled guns", substituting, "according to the mood", their ass, EVERYONE, from Warsaw to Moscow, Stockholm and the Crimean Tatars, sorted out a little later, having attached them to the RUSSIAN Little Russia. By the way, with the help of the REGULAR Russian army, created precisely by Peter the Great ...

            As for the "results" of the Prut campaign, Russia retained the MAIN thing - that it THEN needed PEACE in the South (and not some "Azov-Taganrog" ...) to finish off you, the "Europeans" on North ... And finished it off ...

            Just in case, the "return to the Swedes of Livonia" ended, for some reason, when Peter gave an order to Apraksin to begin preparations for a military operation in Finland in 1713. "We do not need to keep it at all", but "This province is the essence of TIKY Sweden, not only that meat and so on, but also firewood fromtol."

            As a result, only in 1713 alone, the Swedes were beautifully thrown out of Helsingfors, Abo and Berg ... And the victory of Peter the Great's fleet at Gangut, in the year 1714, led to the evacuation from the capital of the Swedish court. And the "victorious Turks", somehow calmly swallowed all this disgrace ...

            After that, until 1720, Russian landings on Swedish territory became very regular, and in the vicinity of the Swedish capital, Cossack patrols even began to appear, disembarked from Russian galleys. Whether these were the Zaporozhian Cossacks "who hated the Petrine order" I cannot judge ...
            1. Bar1
              Bar1 13 July 2021 06: 43
              +1
              Quote: ABC-schütze
              The Zaporozhye Cossacks, who "hated" Peter's orders, do not care and forget. The pre-Petrine archers, these orders were even more hated. They were hung on the walls of the Kremlin ...


              There is no such country as Ukraine, but the population of these places is the descendants of the Cossacks, Cherkassians and Tartars.
              -Tartaria is not a Russian name, in Russian it will be DARDARIA or Big Dariya.
              So we will call the Slavs in these lands. And the Ukrainians are probably your breed, yes shmutze?
              Nobody forgot about the crimes of Peter, I will always talk about it.

              Quote: ABC-schütze
              And with the Zaporozhye "double-barreled guns", substituting, "according to the mood", their ass, EVERYONE, from Warsaw to Moscow, Stockholm and the Crimean Tatars, sorted out a little later, having attached them to the RUSSIAN Little Russia. By the way, with the help of the REGULAR Russian army, created precisely by Peter the Great ...


              it is not for you to condemn the rootless Cossacks who fought for their land. Bogdan Khmelnitsky with the Cossacks and the REAL Russian army twice brought the troops to Warsaw.


              Quote: ABC-schütze
              As for the "results" of the Prut campaign, Russia retained the MAIN thing - that it THEN needed PEACE in the South (and not some "Azov-Taganrog" ...) to finish off you, the "Europeans" on North ... And finished it off ...


              and whose will you be here? Russians, Cossacks, Cherkasy and Darians are not Europeans / Jews for you, but the main race in the world of creators, builders and creators, and not parasites, merchants and usurers.

              Quote: ABC-schütze
              As a result, only in 1713 alone, the Swedes were beautifully thrown out of Helsingfors, Abo and Berg ... And the victory of Peter the Great's fleet at Gangut, in the year 1714, led to the evacuation from the capital of the Swedish court. And the "victorious Turks", somehow calmly swallowed all this disgrace ...

              After that, until 1720, Russian landings on Swedish territory became very regular, and in the vicinity of the Swedish capital, Cossack patrols even began to appear, disembarked from Russian galleys. Whether these were the Zaporozhian Cossacks "who hated the Petrine order" I cannot judge ...



              fought, fought as a result, Peter just bought these lands, so that all the losses in 20 years of war go down the drain - this is your "great reformer"

              “Against the same ets.v. (his royal majesty) promises in four weeks after the exchange of ratifications on this peace treatise, or before, if possible, e.c.v. (to his royal majesty) and return the crown of Sveisk, and defecate the Grand Duchy of Finland. Moreover, he wants e.ts.v. must be and promises e.c.v. the sum of two million efimks ... to pay and give for such periods and in such a coin as agreed in a separate article. "

              about the "embassy" to the Turks do not you mention shmutze?
        2. Ulrich
          Ulrich 16 July 2021 10: 05
          0
          Purely for the sake of interest - what kind of "occupied Russian lands" are we talking about? And when you say "Vas", "Vas-khutoryan" to a person with an Asian name Timur - who do you mean?
  3. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 11 July 2021 04: 58
    +3
    Foreign countries will help us, foreign advisers have never helped our country without benefit for themselves ... this is how it was then and how it is now ... nothing has changed since the times of Peter the Great.
    1. Kronos
      Kronos 11 July 2021 13: 08
      +4
      Yes, the advisers were normal - Peter Edmond de Lassi, Burchard Christoph von Munnich, and many others. They built churches, trained gunners, helped build a modern navy, army, factories and factories. Many of them were associates of Peter like Bruce, Yakov Vilimovich.
    2. Sergey Zhikharev
      Sergey Zhikharev 12 July 2021 07: 15
      0
      Really bastards. Any foreigner employed by Russia should be happy to work / live in Russia.
      Probably the same principle with you at work? An employee should not think about his salary, but about the happiness that he works Here!
  4. Xlor
    Xlor 11 July 2021 05: 06
    -1
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    Foreign countries will help us

    In addition to wars and various kinds of sewage, our country did not receive anything from this very foreign country ... I mean the western borders
  5. gorenina91
    gorenina91 11 July 2021 05: 45
    +4
    - Yes, just Peter I as a politician, reformer, organizer and initiator of a new one was quite talented and consistent ... - But as a military leader and military strategist ... - he was rather weak ...
    - Here, personally, I have read many times the sources where detailed descriptions of the Battle of Poltava are given (and by different authors) ... - but one thing strikes everywhere ... - How then, near Poltava, the Swedish army, which remained practically without provisions (and in the Prut campaign - Russian the army was left without provisions); without artillery and "fire supplies" (gunpowder, buckshot, cannonballs, rifle charges, etc.) and being inferior to the Russian army in the number of infantry and cavalry; not having a reliable rear, being in some wilderness - an absolutely unfamiliar area - literally "cut off from the world" ... - this army was still able to maintain its fighting spirit and fight against the Russian army ???
    - And after all, then the Russian army, having such superiority over the Swedish army ... - somehow, literally somehow defeated the Swedes ... - Of course, then Peter I put all the captured Swedish commanders to feast and celebrate the victory with everyone ... - there was a reason ...
    - And in the Prut campaign, Peter I drove the poorly prepared Russian army literally to slaughter ...
    - How can you send your troops somewhere without food and water; hoping that they will be supplied by the Moldovans and someone else there ??? - In such a strategic matter, hope for the most unreliable temporary "allies" ??? - This is nonsense ...
    - Only here, too, much is not clear ... - And what the Turks had plenty of everything, or what - and water and food, and the heat and locusts did not affect them ???
    - That's really ... - when everything is disgustingly organized and bad command ... - then they start "looking for reasons" ...
    - That "frost prevented", then "rains and slush", then "dirt and impassability" ... - Does it "remind" of anything ???
    1. parusnik
      parusnik 11 July 2021 07: 44
      +2
      - How can you send your troops somewhere without food and water;
      This is a tradition and we keep it. Remember the Golitsyn Crimean campaigns
      1. Black lotos
        Black lotos 11 July 2021 21: 38
        +1
        Quote: parusnik
        This is a tradition and we keep it. Remember the Golitsyn Crimean campaigns

        of course we remember ... they sent it two times - there was not enough money for the third one ...
        But they drank a bit of a grief in logistics, but wrote to Moscow pompously bragging about their victories.
        It has long been known that the main enemy of the military is not the enemy. Not fortresses and not fighting.
        And logistics and illness!
        Without logistics and medical services, you will lose more than from the war.
        In ancient times and the Middle Ages, and even after until the present, there were non-combat losses from diseases and lack of food / water / quality water / quality food, etc.
        above the fighting.
        So we sent once the military to the Crimea ... there was not enough supplies / water / disease
        We sent the military, but at another time (to avoid the heat), the same bullshit is going on ..
        On the third attempt, the boyars said there was no money and everyone was in a good mood. Also the Jesuits / France did not lend money .. "The French woman shits .."
    2. globe
      globe 11 July 2021 09: 28
      0
      But he had no bread either. Kantemir handed over to the Russian army only meat, 15 thousand sheep and 4 thousand oxen.

      It was well supplied, considering that the locusts destroyed almost everything.
    3. ABC-schutze
      ABC-schutze 12 July 2021 14: 00
      0
      "Here, personally, I have read many times the sources where detailed descriptions of the Battle of Poltava are given (and by different authors) ... - but one thing is striking everywhere ... - How then, near Poltava, the Swedish army, which remained practically without provisions (and in the Prut campaign - Russian the army was left without provisions); without artillery and "fire supplies" (gunpowder, buckshot, cannonballs, rifle charges, etc.) and being inferior to the Russian army in the number of infantry and cavalry; without a reliable rear, being in some wilderness - absolutely unfamiliar terrain - literally "cut off from the world" ... - this army was still able to maintain its fighting spirit and fight against the Russian army ??? "
      **********************************************************************************
      "Reading" sources does not mean to understand what you read ...

      Firstly, the army of Karlushka on the 12th near Poltava, in the aforementioned wretched state, did not "turn out" at all, but was brought to such a state by the THOUGHTED STRATEGY of Peter the Great and literally HUNTED near Poltava ...

      Secondly, songs about a certain "preserved fighting spirit" of the army of Karlushka 12th near Poltava, who were they composed by? ..

      Just in case, to your attention, some results ...

      On June 30, 1709, the demoralized Swedish army was surrounded by troops under the command of Menshikov and surrendered. On the banks of the Dnieper near Perevolochna, 9 demoralized enemy soldiers and officers, led by General Levengaupt, surrendered to the Russian 16-strong detachment. In total, as a result of the Battle of Poltava, Sweden lost more than 947 people killed and 9000 prisoners, Russia's losses amounted to 18000 killed and 1345 wounded.

      Russian trophies were 28 guns, 127 banners and standards and the entire royal treasury.

      Well, and thirdly, to the nightingales singing about the supposedly "awesome" numerical superiority of the Russian army over the Swedes ...

      Can you tell me how many troops Russia directly participated in the Battle of Poltava? ..

      If you are at a loss, I will help. cavalry (dragoons) no more than 9 thousand people (with a total number of cavalry 21 thousand) and infantry about 20 thousand, (with a total number of 25 thousand). so, the balance of forces was practically equal ... What can not be said about the above losses of the sides ...
    4. ABC-schutze
      ABC-schutze 12 July 2021 14: 03
      -1
      "That" frost prevented ", then" rains and slush ", then" dirt and off-road "... - Nothing" does not remind "???"
      **********************************************************************************
      It even reminds me ...

      In particular, your "European" cry, after the Soviet troops kicked you near the end of your "winter campaign" near Moscow ...
    5. ABC-schutze
      ABC-schutze 12 July 2021 14: 06
      -1
      "- How can you send your troops somewhere without food and water; hoping that they will be supplied by Moldovans and someone else there ??? - In such a strategic matter, hope for the most unreliable temporary" allies "??? - This is nonsense ... "
      *
      And what, your "European" Augustus of Saxony, for Russia, during the Northern War, was a more reliable "ally" than the Moldovans in the Prut campaign? .. I would never have thought ...
    6. ABC-schutze
      ABC-schutze 12 July 2021 14: 10
      -1
      "- Only here, too, much is not clear ... - And what the Turks had plenty of everything, perhaps - and water and food, heat and locusts did not affect them ???"
      *
      And what is there "a lot of incomprehensible"? ..

      The Turks had everything, "so good" that the janissaries, who were tucked in by the Russians, on July 10 simply refused to obey the order of the vizier and attack the Russian positions. FORCEING to sign a truce.

      A detailed "commentary" on this subject from the Istanbul envoy of the islanders is given above ...
  6. SERGE ANT
    SERGE ANT 11 July 2021 06: 36
    +5
    Peter allowed Shafirov to accept any conditions, except captivity.Peter was nervous: "I found myself in the same difficult situation as my brother Karl near Poltava"
    Yust Yul wrote in his diary: “As I was told, the tsar, being surrounded by the Turkish army, became so desperate that he ran up and down the camp like a madman, hitting his chest and could not utter a word. Most thought it was a blow with him. "

    Moreau writes: “Our army had no provisions; on the fifth day, most of the officers did not eat bread; all the more, the soldiers who enjoy less comfort ... the horses licked the ground and were so exhausted that when they had to use them in business, they did not know whether to saddle, harness them, or not. "The military council convened by Peter on the evening of July 10 adopted the following decision: “At least the entire generals and ministers were put on the council. If the enemy does not want to be satisfied in those conditions, but wants us to surrender to their discretion and put our guns, then they all advised us to go to the side near the river. " lord. From the words sent, I realized that the Turks, although inclined, are slow to come to the world, for the sake of all repair according to their own reasoning, as God instructs you, and if they truly talk about the world, then bet with them on everything they want. except for the school. And let us know of course today, so that your dispersed path could, with the help of God, begin. If it is true that the Yavitsa is genuinely inclined to the world, and today they cannot end the contract, then at least today they can do it in order to mow for and for the tranchement. In the course of this, the verbal is ordered. Peter. From lagorou, 11 d [nya] July 11 "
    1. SERGE ANT
      SERGE ANT 11 July 2021 06: 42
      +5
      Pyotr Alekseevich was ready to sacrifice all the fruits of previous victories - two campaigns to Azov, two Narva, Lesnoy, Poltava, to give up almost the entire Baltic.
      A record has survived with the note "The first demands from the Turkish side near the Prut, which did not take place." Here they are: “With the help of God and the power of all-above, in a peaceful accord so that Azov with all the fortresses belonging to them, as before, would be given over to Taganrog, Kamennaya Zaton and at the mouth of Samara the new fortification would be completely ruined. And henceforth, the Cossacks and Zaporozhians and Poles should not be disturbed. And all the seats that were previously to be ceded to the Porte. Thanks to Volosky and Sava [Raguzinsky], as traitors, subjects, in order to give, so that henceforth our friendship will be inviolable. The tribute that the Volos land pays for one year, and until that Volos land will return to its former state, so that those money will also be given for three years. And besides the merchants, there would be no ambassador in Constantinople. And all the ammunition and guns would have been given to us. And before the king of Sweden came under the protection of the Holy Ports, and so that there would be no hostility from both sides for the friendship of the Ottoman Ports. And henceforth, as our subjects from [word not understood], no loss and disagreement has been repaired [word lost]. And if the uchinitsa is under the above-mentioned conditions, the vizier will ask the Majesty Saltanov, so that those enemy actions can be consigned to oblivion. And by the above measure, so that the British and Galanians were guarantees. And then there are two copies on both sides "
      The main thing in these conditions is the return of Azov and the destruction of the newly built fortresses. And nothing in favor of the Swedes.
  7. north 2
    north 2 11 July 2021 07: 10
    +5
    it was Karl XII, who was not killed at Poltava, of the Ukrainian Cossacks and Crimean Tatars, who created the forces that seduced the Turks to declare war on Russia in 1710. Of course, after the victory at Poltava, Peter did not show sufficient perseverance, not tough enough demanding from Turkey that she would expel Karl from Turkey. And Karl did not eat Turkish bread for nothing, fortunately he knew that the Crimean Tatars and Ukrainian Cossacks would go to serve him against the Russian Tsar ...
    As for Cantemir, who brought the Moldavian principality into vassal dependence on the Russian Tsar, Cantemir was much more cunning than Khmelnytsky, who several decades ago brought Ukraine into the Russian Federation. Cantemir bargained for himself personally, as regards the transfer of power by inheritance, and for the Moldavian principality, special privileges. So the Moldavian army was only engaged in providing the Russian army with food, and only the Russian army fought and shed blood with the Turks at the Prut ... The Polish-Lithuanian army was also not able to be drawn into this battle.
    Also, about the signing of a peace treaty between Turkey and Russia. Oddly enough, the Turks, when concluding the Prut Peace Treaty, put forward conditions to Russia much easier than those that Peter was ready to agree to ...
    Well, in History 25 years, it's even less than a moment. I mean that in 25 years Anna Ioannovna will return to Russia everything that Russia had to lose during the undoubtedly unsuccessful campaign of Peter and during the Battle of the Prut ...
  8. parusnik
    parusnik 11 July 2021 07: 41
    -4
    A severe crop failure befell the country, it was hard to get food.
    ..The Holodomor .. the British and Turkish agents staged laughing for sure laughing
  9. Boris55
    Boris55 11 July 2021 08: 10
    -7
    In the first picture, Peter I next to the tricolor is a blatant lie!

    "... The tricolor was a" gift "from the Dutch, who also have a tricolor, but red-white-blue.
    But Alexei Mikhailovich could not replace the Russian red flag with the white-blue-red tricolor “donated” by the Dutch, and the one who inherited Peter I spoke out categorically against the flag "donated" by the Dutch... Peter I experimented a lot to change the design of the flag, and in 1709 he even defined it as the imperial standard black-yellow-white flag.

    However, Peter I could not completely abandon the use of the Dutch "gift": Russia needed a fleet, including a merchant one. The national flag protects merchant ships from being robbed by other states. And the Dutch who dominated the Baltic Sea at that time refused to recognize the right of the Russian merchant fleet to sail the Baltic and other seas except under their white-blue-red tricolor. Russia had few forces, and therefore Peter I was forced to accept the Dutch ultimatum and decided to consider the white-blue-red flag as the flag of the Russian merchant fleet...

    ...White-blue-red tricolor, for which all liberal circles of Russia stood up, was approved as a state decision of the Provisional Government only 01 [14] September 1917... Not only was the government temporary, for a transitional period, which means that all decisions of this government in the future must be approved by the government that govern the created state, so on October 25 [November 07] 1917 the Great October Socialist Revolution took place, as a result of which The historically primordial Russian red flag has become the national flag of Russia, with the addition of ideological symbols of the revolution ... "

    For more details see here: "On the issue of the historical past of the" Russian "tricolor":
    http://fct-altai.ru/files/2021/Tricolor_09_04_2021.doc
    1. north 2
      north 2 11 July 2021 09: 16
      +3
      not when the purely red flag was not originally Russian, before the Bolsheviks. And the tricolor white-red-blue battle banner of Russia both on land and at sea was used by the army and the navy both in the Azov campaigns and in the battles of Narva, etc. And on warships under Peter, at first there was only a tricolor. But gradually in the army, and then in the navy, the flag was established in the form of the cross of St. Andrew. And since 1705, the tricolor and the Andreevsky flag remained on the warships, and only the tricolor on the merchant ships.
      As for my opinion on the occasion of the tricolor flag of Russia, it was not the Russian Tsars and Emperors, not the tsarist generals and soldiers who disgraced it, but the Soviet general Vlasov and the soldiers of the Vlasov army. At the same time, they disgraced and betrayed so that this stain of shame can never be washed off.
      So, today's Russia needs to use the red Soviet flag, which is not only fanned with the glory of victories, but which is clean from the use of traitors to Russia.
      1. Boris55
        Boris55 11 July 2021 09: 26
        -5
        Quote: North 2
        never when the pure red flag was not originally Russian

        Red, with ideological symbols:



        Quote: north 2
        the three-color white-red-blue battle banner of Russia both on land and at sea was used by both the army and the navy

        Read what's on the link. Everything is laid out on the shelves with pictures.

        Russian tsar in Paris with which flag:



        Quote: North 2
        As for my opinion on the occasion of the tricolor flag of Russia, it was not the Russian Tsars and Emperors, not the tsarist generals and soldiers who disgraced it, but the Soviet general Vlasov and the soldiers of the Vlasov army

        Before that, it was used by the White Guards in the civil war, who swore allegiance to the Entente, etc., destroying Russia. After perestroika, he is again above Russia ...
      2. Han Tengri
        Han Tengri 11 July 2021 10: 49
        +5
        Quote: north 2
        not when the purely red flag was not originally Russian, before the Bolsheviks.

        It is a pity that the ancestors did not know about this ...


        1. Boris55
          Boris55 11 July 2021 11: 24
          0
          Quote: HanTengri
          It is a pity that the ancestors did not know about this ...

          Heraldry is a science in which nothing is accidental.

          "All countries of the world, claiming to be states, have the corresponding attributes - the flag, coat of arms and anthem, which are state symbols.

          The anthem of the state lexically explains how the state sees its place and behavior in the world.

          The structure, use and legal status of flags and coats of arms correspond to special, historically established rules that precisely determine what and how can be applied to the flag or coat of arms, since the meaning of certain figures determine the legal status, position in the table of ranks of the owner of the flag and / or coat of arms.

          This is just like shoulder straps (and / or their analogs) in the army, by which it is immediately clear what place in the army hierarchy a particular soldier occupies, since the shoulder straps can determine not only the rank of a soldier, but often his position.

          Likewise, state flags and emblems immediately show what place in the global hierarchy of the states of the world this or that state occupies.

          The most ancient state symbol is the flag. Since he had an important managerial role at a time when the hierarchy in society was still in its infancy. Already during the clan-tribal system, when the tribes knew each other well and the place of each in the hierarchy of tribes, a high pole with a banner at the top began to be used to designate the leader (control center) on the battlefield. As the number of armies grew, it became necessary to mark not only the main command center, but also specific military units - all this helped to orientate on the battlefield, to distinguish friends from foes, and on the basis of this to manage the battle.

          This is how the hierarchy of flags appeared - the flag denoted the place that its owner occupied in the hierarchy of society / army.

          The supreme ruler had the right to a one-color flag with a minimum of additional symbols, but at the same time this flag could represent a kind of integral picture. But his subjects already had to form their flag from two or more colors and small details - the lower the place in the hierarchy, the more colors and small details the flag has. In this case, not only the number of colors and additional details on the flag matters, but also their size and position.

          By the XNUMXth century, mankind approached the level of globalization - the concentration of the control of productive forces on the planet - that supranational regulation began in the adoption of state symbols, especially flags. By this time, the possibility of creating original flags had been largely exhausted, and therefore the practice of creating flags based on a combination of color stripes, usually two or three, was easily and simply taken root - the fewer colors, the higher the hierarchical status of the state. The colors showed which global clan-corporate grouping this or that state belongs to, and the position of the color stripes on the flag express the position of this state in this clan-corporate grouping: vertical stripes mean the possibility of some independence in carrying out its foreign and domestic policies, and horizontal stripes - means that the state is a passive executor of some kind of supranational administration in relation to it. Additional elements on a flag mean that the one who has such additional elements on the flag is in a lower hierarchical position in relation to the one who has a flag with the same arrangement of color stripes, but without additional elements. Additional elements also describe the hierarchy: it matters what this additional element is, its size and position on the flag - the larger the element, and closer to the center of the flag, the higher the hierarchical status of the state

          It was in the XNUMXth century that the time came when, in the process of globalization, historically established states began to lose their sovereignty, which was expressed in the replacement of the historical flag with the flag of the new system (color stripes), in which the subordination of the state to a specific global center of concentration of control, carrying out the process of globalization on the planet, was expressed. ... "

          More: http://fct-altai.ru/files/2021/Tricolor_09_04_2021.doc
        2. Konstantin Shevchenko
          Konstantin Shevchenko 11 July 2021 16: 26
          -2
          Any historian of official history will tell you that the first picture you provided shows the Tatar-Mongols attacking Russia and its cities.
          1. Andrey Kaledin
            Andrey Kaledin 11 July 2021 22: 09
            +2
            This is an image of Dmitry Donskoy walking to the Kulikovo field under a black (red) banner. And here is the earliest testimony of the Word about Igor's regiment "A scarlet banner, a white banner, a scarlet bang, a silver shaft - to the brave Svyatoslavich!"

            And finally, the image of the Russians themselves against the Tatars. Lying is bad master.
            1. Konstantin Shevchenko
              Konstantin Shevchenko 12 July 2021 00: 42
              -1
              But find 10 differences, Takhtamysh raid in 1382. Well? Have a good one?
    2. BAI
      BAI 11 July 2021 16: 59
      +2
      In the first picture, Peter I next to the tricolor is a blatant lie!

      Well, what's the difference? The artist sees it that way. This is a work of fiction, not a historical document.
  10. Borka
    Borka 29 July 2021 19: 13
    0
    The author is trying to make a beautiful face in a bad game. In fact, our troops were utterly defeated by the Turks and suffered a super shameful defeat. This can be judged by the results of the Prut Peace. Fortunately, Peter the First was not born a fool and knew how to learn from his mistakes.