The protege of the Zaporozhian Cossacks on the Moscow throne

The greatest mystery of ours stories what remains is how the person who called himself Tsarevich Dimitry, left Ukraine with a detachment of Cossacks and became “the emperor of Muscovy”.


The protege of the Zaporozhian Cossacks on the Moscow throne

Kiev-Pechersk Lavra. Dimitrious spent some time here before declaring himself "the son of Ivan the Terrible" and asking for support from the Polish magnates


This man was busy with Pushkin. In The Captain's Daughter, Pugachev says Grinev: "Grishka Otrepiev reigned over Moscow, after all." “Do you know what he finished? - replies Grinev. “They threw him out of the window, stabbed him, burned him, loaded his cannon with ashes and blew it away!”

Pushkin devoted a whole drama to Grigory Otrepyev. "Boris Godunov" was written, in fact, about this mysterious historical phantom, from which Tsar Boris has "bloody boys in his eyes." Either the runaway monk Gryshka, or indeed the miraculously saved son of Ivan the Terrible, or someone else unknown, covered up with the pseudonym False Dimitrii I.

Only brilliant Pushkin's lines remained, like scraps of an old picture: “Here is our Russia: it is yours, prince. The hearts of your people are waiting for you there: your Moscow, your Kremlin, your power ”. This is said by Prince Kurbsky Dimitrien when they cross the “Lithuanian border” with the army. But the words of the applicant for the Moscow throne after the lost battle at Novgorod-Seversky: “How little of us survived the battle. Traitors! villains Cossacks, damned! You, you have killed us - do not stand even three minutes of resistance! I have them already! I will hang the tenth, robbers! ”

What does the power of talent mean! By and large, all that the current reader knows about the mysterious "Tsarevich" is Pushkin's drama. By the way, where is this “Lithuanian frontier” that Lzimitriy crossed? Near Kiev! In the 1604 year, when the small army of the “son of Ivan the Terrible” marched on Moscow, Chernigov and Novgorod-Seversky belonged to Russia. To get to the Moscow borders in the shortest way, you just had to cross the Dnieper. This was done by Lzedimitrii in the area of ​​Vyshgorod, a little higher than Kiev. His army was recruited from adventurers - small Polish gentry, who gave the princes of Vishnevetsky, but the troops of the Cossacks, ready to plunder anything - even Istanbul, though Moscow.


Dimitriy is the first "European" on the Moscow throne. Shave off his beard a hundred years before Peter the Great


The fact that “Polish” these gentlemen were called only by historians in the 20th century adds to the enterprise’s piquancy. They themselves called themselves “Russians,” or “Russians,” and were Orthodox. How orthodox were the princes of Vyshnevetsky, who discerned the mysterious fugitive from Moscow "true king". Only the famous Yarema Vishnevetsky will become the first Catholic in their family. But before his birth in the year of the campaign, Dimitriya still remained for eight years. Russia went to Russia. West to East. And, I'm afraid, a Catholic in the Army of Dimitri was only one out of ten! Even the French captain Jacques Margaret, who first fought in the army of Boris Godunov against the Tsarevich, and then went over to his side, could well have been a Protestant - after all in France, religious wars between Catholics and Huguenots scattered "extra people" with their swords in hands up to distant Muscovy.

By the way, Margaret, unlike modern historians, was convinced that Dimitri was real. No "false". He, of course, could be wrong. But, compared with historians, he still has one advantage: he knew this amazing person personally and even rose to the captain of his guard.

The book of Margaret, published in Paris shortly after the death of False Dimitry and the return of the author to France, is called spatially, as was customary in those times: “The state of the Russian Empire and the Grand Duchy of Muscovy describing what happened there the most memorable and tragic during the reign of four emperors, from 1590 to September 1606. ”

Talking about the finale of the reign of Boris Godunov, the brave captain writes: “In 1604, the one he was so afraid of showed up, namely Dimitri Ivanovich, the son of Emperor Ioann Vasilyevich, who, as was said above, was considered dead in Uglich. With about four thousand people he entered Russia across the borders of Podolia. ” Marjeret calls Right-Bank Ukraine, which was then part of the Polish-Lithuanian state, Podolia. That is why the border "Lithuanian". According to the memoirist, Dimitry “first laid siege to the castle called Chernigov, which surrendered, then another, which also surrendered, then they came to Putivl, a very large and rich city, which surrendered, and with it many other castles, like Rylsk, Kromy, Karachev and many others, and Tsargorod, Borisov Gorod, Livny and other cities surrendered to Tataria. And as his army grew, he began the siege of Novgorod-Seversky, it was a castle standing on a mountain, whose governor was named Pyotr Fedorovich Basmanov (which will be discussed below), which put up such good resistance that he could not take it. ”


Zaporozhye freemen. Most of the four thousand-strong detachment of False Dmitri, who moved to Moscow, were Cossack mercenaries.


The man who led this army to Moscow, appeared on the territory of the Commonwealth a few years earlier. He came here from Moscow and spent some time in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, and then moved to Zaporozhye. Contemporaries noted the good skill of Dimitriya to stay in the saddle and wield a saber. If he were just a fugitive monk, as the government of Boris Godunov claimed, then where did he get his military skills from? Natural talent? Maybe. But before asking for help from the princes of Vishnevetsky and Sandomirskiy voevode and at the same time to the headman of Sambir, Jerzy Mnischka, the self-appointed prince, if he was really self-appointed, did not hesitate to visit the Zaporozhye Cossacks. Only among this freemen was it possible to find a more or less significant contingent for the march on Moscow. It was something like intelligence. The one whom we know under the name of False Dimitry, had to make sure that Sich really has a sufficient number of unemployed thugs.

In Poland, more precisely, in Ukraine (then the Zaporozhye environs - the border with Wild Field) were called by this word, as the popular historian of the early 20th century, Kazimir Valishevsky, “came from the next world”, put it. After all, officially the son of Ivan the Terrible, Tsarevich Dimitri was considered dead since 1591. According to the investigation, commissioned by Boris Godunov, he throat on the knife during a fit episode — that is, epilepsy. True, rumor claimed that the boy was simply killed by the agents Boris sent to. Godunov, whose sister was married to the childless elder brother of Dimitry Fyodor Ivanovich. The death of the prince opened the way to the throne.

And the "bloody boy" has risen! Moreover, he found a patron in the person of Prince Adam Vishnevetzkogo which the same Valishevsky gives this description: "Prince Adam - a major mogul, nephew of the famous Dimitri Vishnevetzkogo, unfortunate candidate to the Moldovan throne, half-Russian-polupolyak, pet Vilna Jesuits and yet jealous Orthodoxy belonged to the famous genus kondotierov.

Possession Vishnevetsky shortly before it crossed the Dnieper. They were just beginning to colonize Poltava region - they just captured Sniatyn and Priluki. Then the Moscow troops recaptured these towns. The Vishnevetsky had a grudge against Moscow, a passion for adventures and good information about what was happening in the Moscow kingdom. After all, the same Dmitry Vishnevetsky, nicknamed Baida, managed to serve Ivan the Terrible for some time before going on the fatal Moldovan campaign. The man who claimed that he was the son of Tsar Ivan, who miraculously survived and who had a great saber, was a true find for the Vishnevetsky. If Prince Ostrozhsky, having talked with False Dimitry, refused to sponsor him, then Adam Vishnevetsky gave the future Tsar to Moscow starting capital. To have something to recruit Cossacks.


Jerzy Mnishek. Sandomirsk voivode, who believed that False Dimitry was indeed the son of Ivan the Terrible


And here we come back to the question: who was the False Dimitris? Genuine prince, who miraculously saved? Or a brilliant actor who played this role so well that for more than four centuries the debate about what the audience saw on the historical scene does not abate: a dirty juggling or a truth so incredible that they simply don’t dare to believe?

I repeat: Jacques Margeret was convinced that it was Dimitri before him. In his book, he wrote that by the end of the reign of Ivan the Terrible, various groups claimed power in Russia. One of them tried to push into the realm the son of the last wife of the Terrible, Mary Naked, the young Demetrius. At the head of the other was the brother of the wife of another son of Ivan the Terrible - Fedor - Boris Godunov. The situation was complicated by the fact that Maria Nagaya was the unwed wife of Ivan the Terrible. One by one, the seventh. In another way - even the eighth. The church did not recognize this marriage. Consequently, Dimitri was illegitimate. His rights to the throne could be challenged. However, Godunov had even fewer legal grounds to take the throne.

But he had the instinct of power, real administrative talents and tried to buy people's love, as they would say today, with the help of PR of his own achievements: “Boris Fedorovich, then loved by the people and very widely patronized by what Fedor said, intervened in state affairs and, being cunning and very sharp-minded, satisfied everyone ... It is believed that from now on, seeing what Fedor said, apart from his daughter who died three years old, he no longer has children, he began to strive for the crown and, to this end, began to do good deeds attracts people. He walled the above Smolensk. He surrounded the city of Moscow with a stone wall instead of the former wooden one. He built several castles between Kazan and Astrakhan, as well as on the Tatar borders. ”

Boris convinced the Muscovites with his affairs: I protect you, I built you a new fortress around the city, so that you live in safety from Tatar raids, what difference does it make, legally or illegally I will wear a Monomakh hat if I am useful to you? After all, most recently, under Ivan the Terrible, the Tatars burned all of Moscow, except the Kremlin! But apparently, some good deeds were not enough. After all, if the kingdom is ordered, there will always be those who want to take it away. Dimitri - albeit illegal and juvenile - still remained a contender for the throne. Therefore, it should be removed from Moscow.


Icon. Tsarevich Dimitrii assassinated in Uglich is considered holy by the Orthodox Church


Jacques Margaret was convinced that Godunov not only sent the prince with his mother to Uglich, but was also the customer of his assassination in 1591: “Having thus ensured the location of the people and even the nobility, with the exception of the most astute and noble, he sent him into exile under some then the pretext of those whom he considered his opponents. Finally, the empress, the wife of what was said by the late Ivan Vasilyevich, with his son Dimitry, was sent to Uglich, a city that was 10 miles from Moscow on 180. The mother and some other grandees are said to have clearly foreseen the goal Boris said said, and knowing about the danger that the baby might have been exposed to, because it had already become known that many of the grandees who had been sent to exile were poisoned on the way, found a means to replace him and put another in his place.

After he put to death many more innocent nobles. And since he did not doubt anyone else except in the said prince, in order to finally get rid of him, he sent to Uglich to destroy the said prince, who was replaced. Which was performed by the son of one man, sent by him as a secretary for the mother. The prince was seven or eight years old; the one who struck was killed on the spot, and the fake prince was buried very modestly. ”

Thus, the two most delicious versions of the strings of this story go back to the French adventurer, who happened to be in Russia at the beginning of the 17th century. It was he who claimed that Boris Godunov tried to kill Dimitri, but, thanks to the foresight of his relatives, he escaped and fled to Poland.

In contrast to these allegations, which at that time were shared by many, the government of Boris Godunov asserted that the False Dimitry was a runaway monk, Hryshka Otrepyev. However, the last is also hard to believe. At the time of the march on Moscow in 1604, contemporaries describe False Dimitri as a young man who barely exceeded twenty. And the real Otrepiev was about ten years older.


For Dimitri the Pretender were Poland and the Catholic Church. But even there, many did not believe in the authenticity of the “miraculously saved” son of Ivan the Terrible.


The man who called himself Tsarevich Dimitry explained to the Polish partners his salvation: “Instead of me, another boy was killed in Uglich”. This version has been preserved in several versions. To Pope Clement VIII in the year of his march on Moscow, he wrote: “Running away from the tyrant and moving away from death, from which the Lord God had saved me as a child by my wondrous business, I first lived in Moscow State itself until a certain time between monks”.

And Marina Mnishek, whom he married, colorized his adventure with romantic details. Already in the retelling of Marina herself, which was preserved in her diary, this option looks like this: “There was a certain doctor in Tsarevich when he was there, born Vlach. He, having learned of this treason, prevented it immediately in this way. I found a child resembling a prince, took him to his quarters and always told him to talk with the prince and even sleep in the same bed. When that child fell asleep, the doctor, without telling anyone, shifted the prince to another bed. And so he did all this with them for a long time.


Marina Mnishek planes to Lies and Dimitrias as a guarantee of his loyalty to the Commonwealth and the Pope


As a result, when the traitors set out to fulfill their plan and broke into the chambers, finding a prince’s bedroom there, they strangled another child in bed and took the body away. Then the news of the murder of the prince spread, and a great insurrection began. As soon as this became known, they immediately sent for the traitors in pursuit, several dozen of them were killed and the body was taken away.

In the meantime, Vlach, seeing how careless Fedor, the elder brother, was in his affairs, and that he owned all the land, was a horseman. Boris decided that at least not now, but someday this child is waiting for death at the hands of a traitor. He took him in secret and went with him to the Arctic Sea itself, and there he hid him, posing as an ordinary child, without declaring anything to him until his death. Then, before his death, he advised the child that he should not open up to anyone until he reached adulthood, and that he became a cherk. That on the advice of his prince performed and lived in monasteries. "


Impostor and Marina. Love and politics merged


Both stories - short for the pope and extensive - for Marina, are distinguished by the fact that there are no direct witnesses to the Tsarevich’s salvation. There was a doctor-Vlach (that is, Italian) yes he died. Take my word for it: I am a true prince!

With the slow spread of information in 1604, when Dimitri “miraculously saved himself” told this, speaking the professional language of intelligence officers, a legend could be believed in it. At least, in Ukraine and in Poland - thousands of miles from Uglich, where the murder of the prince.

But the archives preserved a well-known to historians investigative report on the case of the sudden death of Tsarevich Dimitry, commissioned by Boris Godunov. The investigation was led by Prince Vasily Shuisky. Based on the testimony of numerous witnesses, it is known that Dimitri was killed not in the bedroom, but on the street - in the yard, where he played with a knife, throwing him into the ground. This was unanimously asserted by the children who played with the prince, and his mother and mother, Queen Maria Nagaya. According to them, death happened during the day, not at night. And not from strangulation, but from a knife. So, an enterprising young man who pretended to be a prince in 1604 was still a false Dmitry. He heard the ringing, but did not know where he was. Therefore, he was so stingy with the details in the official letter to the Pope. It was important not to blurt out too much. And the beloved woman could have been lying with at least three boxes - alone with the girl, without witnesses, which is impossible to tell!

But if the fact that Ivan the Terrible’s son Dimitrii really died in Uglich in 1591, is beyond doubt, then the official version of the investigation that Boris Godunov was not involved in it should be considered very shaky. Firstly, the investigation was led by the great pro-Hindus Vasily Shuisky. At various times he adhered to three mutually exclusive versions. When Boris Godunov announced that the prince himself throat on a knife in a fit of epilepsy. When the False Dmitry won, Shuisky declared that this was the true king - miraculously saved. And when Shuisky himself became the king after the murder of the False Dmitry as a result of a palace plot in 1606, he pulled out the corpse of Dimitry from Uglich, transferred him to Moscow, achieved canonization and began to assert that the little one was finished off by order of Boris Godunov, who was striving to become the ruler of Russia, ordered by Boris Godunov.

THROAT ON KNIFE. In other words, Vasily Shuisky constantly changed his point of view for political gain. In any mode, he wanted to live well. But he really lived well only during his reign. We do not need to hesitate along with the river of history - we will not drown in it. So, let us analyze the causes of the death of Saint Dimitry of Uglich unbiased.

Himself ran into a knife? This happens? It is difficult to find a boy who was not amused as a child by this ancient folk fun. The author of these lines also threw a knife into the ground repeatedly. And in different companies. And in the city. And in the village. And in the pioneer camp, where the knife had to be hidden from the counselors. But I have never seen or heard that one of my peers during the game ran into a spearhead. For the first time I read about such a unique case in a school history textbook, which told about the amazing, truly unique death of Tsarevich Dimitri. To believe in his inadvertent suicide is as difficult as the fact that Interior Minister Kravchenko shot two bullets in the head. Moreover, during a seizure of epilepsy, the patient's fingers unclench. The knife would have fallen from the hands of the prince. He could have stuck in the ground. But not in the throat. So the boy was killed.

In order to establish who killed him, it is enough to use the question that the ancient Romans asked in such criminal cases: who benefits?

ROMAN ANSWER. Removing Dimitri was beneficial only to Boris Godunov. At the time of the sudden death of the Tsarevich, he is the royal stable and the brother of Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich's wife. In reality, the ruler of Russia, who did all the work on behalf of the weak-minded king, who most of all loved to beat the bells. Fedor Ivanovich had no children. The only heir was his younger brother Dimitri. If Boris Godunov wanted the boy to inherit the throne, he would not take his eyes off him! But Boris ensured that the only heir of the great power was sent to the wilderness - in Uglich. There, far from Muscovites, you could do anything with him, and then tell him that the little prince himself slashed his knife across his neck. Chick - and there is no future king. Only Boriska Godunov sits in the cap of Monomakh on the throne of Rurik and the kingdom bequeaths to his son Fedenka.

Karamzin and Pushkin were convinced that Boris Godunov was involved in the murder of Tsarevich Dimitri. In Soviet times, Boris, on the contrary, repeatedly tried to "wash" the prince from the blood. Stalin’s history textbook, which was also studied by Ukrainian children, argued that “arrest the cause of Tsarevich Dimitriia’s death for the first time — by dropping the people of the unwillingly unhappy situation of people, who were Jewish, I’m a generation, I’m still a youth

However, this textbook written by professors KV Bazilevich and S.V. Bakhrushin, was not such a primitive reading matter for morons, as our current school "cheat". He expounded almost all versions and even today he can be considered as a model of efficiency in transmitting information: “Tsar’s younger brother, Tsarevich Dimitrii, is alive in Uglich, stalled by 15 trash 1591 p. Ranked on the day of the day, dev'yatilіm Dimitriy engrave with his peers with a knife "at the tip" on the courtyard of the palace with the help of the mother and nurse. Behind his words, s Dimitrius had a seizure of falling sick and falling his throat on the bottom, a trimav of the ruci. On the cry zhіnok vibіgla mother Tsarevich Marіya Naga. Vaughn became shouting, scyo Dimitriia decided to podslany Godunov people. The people, who were killed by killing the Moscow girl of Bityagovskoye and kolka cholovik. From Moscow, a battle was sent to the Prince of Vasily Ivanovych Shuisky, who was called, but the prince himself was mortally wounded by the prince himself. Tsaritsa Mariya Naga was tonsured as a nun; The people walked a little bit, the prince was driven in by the reunion of Boris Godunov. ”

FREEDOM OF WORD IN POLAND. To call Boris Godunov a murderer, the very same textbook did not dare. After all, Boris, according to Stalin's professors, became a king, “promoted the policy of Ivan IV to the kingdom of the sovereign.” And Ivan the Terrible under Stalin was considered a very positive character. Consequently, the successor of his business could not be a complete beast and “order” small children. But the whole logic of events says that Godunov was the customer — no one else. No one else has benefited from this murder. And the children themselves, even in an epileptic fit, do not drop their throats on the knife.

The fact that a person who identified himself as a “miraculously surviving prince” is indeed Dimitri, in Poland, too, was believed only by those to whom it was beneficial. Princes Vishnevetsky, who had a long-standing border conflict with Russia in Poltava region. Jerzy Mniszek - the ruined tycoon, who at the expense of the adventure with the return of the resurrected Dimitri to the throne, hoped to improve his affairs and give him his daughter. Zaporizhzhya Cossacks are a people who are ready to believe anyone who promises an excuse for robbery.

“The Cossacks wrote their history with a saber, and not on the pages of ancient books, but on the battlefields left this pen a bloody trace,” said French author Father Pirling in the book “Dimitri the Impostor”, published in the Russian translation in 1911 year. - For the Cossacks, it was customary to deliver the thrones to all kinds of applicants. In Moldova and Wallachia periodically resorted to their help. For the formidable freemen of Dnepr and Don it was completely indifferent, genuine or imaginary rights belong to the hero of the minute. For them it was important one thing - that their share of good production. Was it possible to compare the miserable Danube principalities with the boundless plains of the Russian land, full of fabulous wealth? ”

But solid people did not believe the Dimitriya from the very first word. Polish Chancellor and Hetman Corona Jan Zamoyski ironically speaking in the Sejm: “Lord, have mercy, does this sovereign tell us the comedy Plavt or Terence? So, they slaughtered another child instead, killed the baby, not looking, just to kill? So why didn't they replace this victim with some goat or ram? ”


Jan Zamoysky. Polish Chancellor laughed at The Pretender


Speaking of the dynastic crisis in Moscow, Zamoysky quite reasonably remarked: "If they refuse to recognize Boris Godunov as tsar, who is a usurper, if they want to establish a legitimate sovereign on the throne, let him turn to the true descendants of Prince Vladimir - to Shuisky".

Opinion Zamoysky supported and the great hetman of Lithuania Sapieha. On the side of the skeptics were the best commanders of the Commonwealth Zolkiewski and Chodkiewicz. Bishop Baranovsky, who had a great influence on the king, wrote to Sigismund III 6 in March 1604: “This Moscow prince positively inspires me with suspicion. There is some evidence in his biography that obviously does not deserve faith. How did the mother not recognize the body of her own son? ”


Illustrious warrior. Getman Zolkiewski did not believe in the authenticity of the "Moscow Prince"


Skeptics in Poland argued that they should not get involved in the adventure of suspicious Dimitri and break the 1602 peace treaty with Moscow - Godunov will smash the adventurer, and Poland will receive a new war with Russia. “This hostile raid on Moscow,” hetman Zamoyski said in the Sejm, “is as destructive for the good of the Commonwealth as it is for our souls.”


Polish Sejm. There was a heated debate about the truth of the "prince"


Many in Poland were going to support this view. But suddenly King Sigismund III stood on the side of False Dimitry, believing, in spite of the facts, miraculous salvation. The king was earnest catholic. And the mysterious prince agreed to accept Catholicism and spread the union with the Vatican to Russia. This alone was enough for the Polish king to believe in the truth of the applicant. Great intrigue entered its final phase.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.buzina.org
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

40 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. volcano 2 October 2012 16: 03 New
    • 20
    • 0
    +20
    I once liked Putin ... when he was on a visit to Poland ...
    And now these famous Russophobes begin to remember him about the Soviet occupation and about Katyn .... Putin listened to them and said ..... let's remember about the Polish invasion .... False Dmitry and the plunder of the Kremlin ....
    after which the Polish magazines somehow quieted down at once.
    1. omsbon 2 October 2012 16: 51 New
      • 13
      • 0
      +13
      It is still appropriate to remind the Poles about the captured Red Army soldiers tortured to death in Polish concentration camps in the 20s and 30s! If I am not mistaken, there were approximately 60 thousand people.
  2. vorobey 2 October 2012 16: 05 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    Oles Elderberry? I will re-read later

    Have you heard any other fresh joke?

    . Saakashvili admitted defeat and announced the transition to the opposition
    http://warfiles.ru/14359-msaakashvili-priznal-porazhenie-i-zayavil-o-perehode-v-
    oppoziciyu.html
    1. Kaa
      Kaa 2 October 2012 19: 45 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: vorobey
      Saakashvili admitted defeat and announced the transition to the opposition

      It’s just interesting that something will change in Georgian politics, given that "After processing 30% of the ballots cast in the elections, the opposition bloc of billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili is gaining 53,11%, the Unified National Movement party - 41,57%. The current election in Georgia’s are crucial because next year, after the presidential election, the parliament and the prime minister will receive significantly more powers than the president. In accordance with earlier amendments to the Georgian constitution, the government will become the highest executive body. The president will only formally propose candidates to the post of prime minister, and only those that the parliament will initially offer him. "
      Or is it on the principle of “war is garbage, the main thing is maneuvers" ?, Miho lived, Miho lives, Miho will live ... The President is in opposition, well, to whom?
  3. lelikas 2 October 2012 16: 11 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    And by the title, at first I thought that about cars I would become recourse
    1. vorobey 2 October 2012 16: 26 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: lelikas
      about cars


      Well, what about the Soviet Volkswagen you are in vain. My grandmother had such a beast.
      1. Melchakov
        Melchakov 2 October 2012 16: 37 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        vorobey,
        Yes, we also had a Boom-Boom car in the courtyard, as I called it before, then it was handed over for scrap.
      2. tarks 2 October 2012 17: 07 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        fiat.
        “a design model that was rated as the“ newest ”Italian-made FIAT 600 car was taken as a model” (wiki)
        1. vorobey 2 October 2012 17: 48 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: tarks
          fiat. "the design model was taken to be rated as the" newest "Italian-made FIAT 600 car" (wiki


          damn and then false Dmitry.

          I was waiting for this amendment and prepared a joke in advance.
          1. tarks 2 October 2012 19: 46 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            wink I have it from the time of the stations of young technicians postponed.
            going to make a model.
  4. baltika-18 2 October 2012 16: 40 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    I try not to comment on articles on historical topics, since I take a slightly different view of history, which is different from the classical one. It at least gives an answer to the question of why the so-called False Dmitry was recognized by many as the king.
  5. bashkort 2 October 2012 16: 58 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Similarly, moreover, the historian himself in the first diploma
  6. tarks 2 October 2012 17: 09 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    in short, as always.
    it really doesn't matter who you really are. It’s important that a sponsor is found. I am afraid that the author of the project was the Vatican, which was always very jealous of the boundaries of its influence. recruited and raised people passionaries.
    It’s not without reason that false Dmitry possessed a good weapon. where did he learn, from which monks did he sit out?
    most likely the answer to this question is in the cellars of the Vatican!
    1. Igarr 2 October 2012 20: 03 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Yes, there is no question here ...
      Recall that princely (royal, royal, etc.) blood was considered blessed.
      The princes were allowed to cut each other.
      Everyone else, even the boyars of the closest circle - after the attempt on regicide - became "lepers."
      They sent Shuisky to kill Dmitry.
      I cut it?
      FIG. He slipped the peasant son (the childhood film "Barbarian Beauty, Long Scythe"), and hid the heir.
      Then he took the blame of oath-crime and perjury.
      But the heirs turned out to be Emperors.
      ..
      Therefore, the first false Dmitry achieved success.
      .
      Therefore, the second and third were already stuffed.
      .
      History .... X-he.
      So the first --.... false - Dmitry.
      1. tarks 2 October 2012 20: 16 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I have never seen a mention of the epilepsy of fake Dmitry.
        not at any. gone by yourself?
        1. Uhalus 2 October 2012 23: 34 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Maybe it was Tsarevich Dmitry, but not that one. Children of Ivan 4 could march with battalions ... History is silent ...
      2. Uhalus 2 October 2012 23: 31 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        There is one more nuance in the line of the article: G. Otrepiev was already under 50, he was known by all of Moscow (he worked as a beggar-collector of money for the temple), and they kicked him out of Moscow for drinking the money that was given, it was a very big sin in Russia . Tsarevich was about 25 years old. And by the way, when he sat down as king, he ruled quite reasonably. Only humanity destroyed him, it was necessary Shuysky - Basil - not to exile, but to shorten a little ...
  7. Ascetic 2 October 2012 17: 17 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote on this subject that False Dmitry I was only
    “Baked in a Polish oven, and fermented in Moscow”
    The Polish magnates needed False Dmitry I in order to launch an aggression against Russia, disguising it as the appearance of a struggle to return the throne to its rightful heir. This was a covert intervention .. And whether he was a runaway monk or a real prince does not matter. The important thing is who stood behind him and in whose hands he was just a puppet on the throne.
    False Dmitry I secretly adopted Catholicism, and promised the pope to spread Catholicism in Russia. Seversky (Chernihiv region) and Smolensk lands, Novgorod, Pskov False Dmitry promised to transfer to his bride Marina Mnishek, daughter of the Sandomierz voivode, and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
    False Dmitriy I did not even try to fulfill the promises given to the Polish magnates, since he perfectly understood that at the first attempt to introduce Catholicism or to give the primordially Russian lands to the Poles, he will lose the throne.
    He did not live up to the hopes of the Russian people to make life easier. On the contrary, he confirmed the legislative acts adopted before him, enslaving the peasants (a decree on a five-year investigation of the fugitives). He introduced new requisitions in order to raise at least some funds for the Polish magnates. The discontent of the people was caused by his marriage to Marina Mnishek.

    1. tarks 2 October 2012 20: 05 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well, a lot of controversial points!
      from disappearing nowhere to categorical non-involvement of the Poles directly to death.
  8. Horde
    Horde 2 October 2012 18: 05 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    from this article, Olesya Buziny is surprised to learn that it turns out that the Poles spoke Russian.

    The piquancy of the enterprise is also added by the fact that only historians in the XNUMXth century called these "Polish" nobles. They called themselves “Russian,” or “Russian,” and were Orthodox.


    I wonder from what source such infa? In general, this fact has something in common with Fomenko, that European languages ​​are water-makers.
    There is a mistake for the whole article.

    He, Boris Fedorovich, surrounded the city of Moscow with a stone wall instead of the formerly wooden one.


    it is known from the school textbook that the stone Kremlin was built by Dmitry Donskoy, and before the Battle of Kulikovo in 1380.
    The construction of the Kremlin’s white stone walls - the first stone fortifications in Suzdal Rus - began in the spring of 1367, as was noted in the Nikon Chronicle: "In the summer of 6875 (1367. - Ed.) ... the great prince Dmitry Ivanovich laid the foundation stone for Moscow and started to do continually. "


    Kiev-Pechersk Lavra Monastery founded in the 11th century, but everything that is now in the Lavra is built in the Ukrainian Baroque style, traditions say about the 17th-19th centuries, but they were not built in the 17th century, so it’s rather 18-19th century.
    And from antiquities in the Lavra there are only caves, dating of which is very difficult. Presumably Kiev is a Polish foreign city built in the early 17th century.
    So whoever writes that much, without links.

    pay attention to how the portrait of Maria Mnishek was signed before-MARIANNA MNISHOVNAWhere did Mnishek come from then?

    1. rexby63 2 October 2012 18: 54 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Under Boris Godunov, Moscow was surrounded by a stone wall along the current Boulevard Ring. Built the wall Fedor Horse. I mean, they built it under his leadership. The Kremlin at the end of the 16th century could protect extremely few people.
    2. tarks 2 October 2012 20: 10 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      from this article, Olesya Buziny is surprised to learn that it turns out that the Poles spoke Russian.

      Well, firstly, this does not even follow from the quote you quoted.
      secondly, do not you think that you are somewhat biased?
      and thirdly:
      perhaps a Pole then, is it like a Siberian today?
      1. Horde
        Horde 2 October 2012 21: 09 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Well, firstly, this does not even follow from the quote you quoted.


        according to your logic, if people call themselves Russian, then of course they should speak Chinese? fool

        perhaps a Pole then, is it like a Siberian today?

        Poland has always been a country, but Siberia is only a side.
    3. tarks 2 October 2012 20: 27 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      European languages ​​- remodels

      Do you know the history of the literary languages ​​of Europe?
      I was also surprised.
    4. Uhalus 2 October 2012 23: 53 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Your doubts are understandable, but much as in the article: the territories of modern Belarus and Ukraine were inhabited mainly by Orthodox Christians (only not of the Moscow, Eastern, but Kiev western type - they were slightly different, very slightly, but because of this they actively clawed); their language was Russian, or rather, one of its variations, not at all similar to something funny that sounds in modern Ukraine (very similar to Russian of that time, and not present, of course); Muscovites and Kievites understood each other without translation, although the languages ​​varied; they really called themselves Russian, and they were in trouble due to the policy of ritualization and catholicization. The formation of the Uniate Church is that bad world between the Orthodox and Catholics, which is better than a good quarrel. The burning of the Commonwealth was a feudal state, a sort of hodgepodge, built on the principles of vassality (adjusted for Polish bothership, of course).
      The white-stone walls of the times of Dmitry Donskoy at that time were very dilapidated, they were dismantled, the new wall was actually made anew.
      Marina Mnishek is our modern form of transferring surnames to the feminine gender. The Miseški were originally Mnisičy, Czech knights; in the Polish manner they called themselves the Mniszeks (they were also climbed and hit, by the way, turned over instantly in the right direction); and since a man from this family is Mnisic, then the lady is Mnishovna.
      AND! You are welcome! Do not mention Fomenko! I don’t like him ... to put it mildly ... and subjectively speaking. From the fact that in the eastern part of the Rzeczpospolita they spoke almost Russian, this does not mean that the European languages ​​are remodels. The language changes very noticeably every 100-150 years; most of the words are understandable, but the construction of phrases, tonality, the manner of speaking is very, very slow down understanding. This is precisely why languages ​​seem to be "remakeers."
      1. Horde
        Horde 3 October 2012 19: 05 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        AND! You are welcome! Do not mention Fomenko! I don’t like him ... to put it mildly ... and subjectively speaking.


        They don’t like Academician Fomenko, now it’s clear for one simple reason that they can’t refute it. The mathematical constructions of the Fomenko-Nosovsky theory convincingly prove that the history of mankind is much shorter than the traditional one. As you can believe the calculations of ancient dates made by illiterate medieval scholastic monks with their primitive mathematical apparatus ? But you had to calculate the astronomical dates of ancient eclipses — only modern computing tools can do it, so many variants of these eclipses come out. FIN possess a modern mathematical apparatus and the ability to program calculation methods on computers, in general for calculating old eclipses, as well as ancient horoscopes means and methods were applied that were not even dreamed of by medieval mathematicians. And after all this gigantic work, which no one in the world has ever done, historians pretend that nothing significant has happened in historical science. This is the highest degree of hypocrisy.
  9. artist-mamluk 2 October 2012 18: 32 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Good evening everyone!
    1. It’s strange not only that the sabaka walks on two legs, but that she needs it for what.
    My Grandfather said - do not chew the bread that you ate yesterday, there is no benefit to health at a loss.
    2. In order to spoil the relationship, we must begin to displace them.
    1. tarks 2 October 2012 21: 07 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      to know how they can deceive you, you need to know how they can deceive you at all!
  10. rexby63 2 October 2012 18: 57 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Vlachs are not Italians. It is akin to both Italians and Romanians, but not identical. And the first Catholic among the Vishnevets was not Jeremiah, but Konstantin, a contemporary of False Dmitry. The author needs to be more attentive. I could also write about the fact that perhaps the Vishnevets, being, with a high degree of probability, Rurikovich, could carry a thought about the Moscow throne
  11. AIR-ZNAK 2 October 2012 19: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Perhaps something would give a comparison of the data on the genetic analyzes of the participants in these events, but should this be done?
  12. MakSim51ru
    MakSim51ru 2 October 2012 19: 41 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, actually, in the case of the death of Tsarevich Dmitry, 11 were indicated (if the memory of the cuts didn’t fail me), of which only 1 was fatal, secondly, with an epilepsy seizure, it was accompanied by a seizure during which the limbs were reduced, And the last - if False Dmitry was beneficial to the Poles , then why it was not beneficial to the Russians, as if Godunov had no opponents. And among them the mother of the prince.
  13. Sasha 19871987 2 October 2012 20: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    there was a terrible time ... and many don’t even know why we have a monument of national unity ... learn history, this article should be given to Polish nationalists to read more ...
    1. tarks 2 October 2012 20: 23 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      many do not even know WHAT this monument is and where it is located.
  14. tarks 2 October 2012 20: 35 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    all somehow missed the malicious - the protege of the Cossacks. although because of this they started reading laughing
  15. Lexagun 2 October 2012 20: 41 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    In order to broaden our understanding of the issues related to the interpretation of the role of the “False” of Dmitry, it is necessary to clarify the question of why “false”? We are so used to it, at this console, that we do not take it critically. Meanwhile, the casket simply opens itself Dmitry and his legal wife Marina Mnishek managed to leave the heir. Nobody considered the Poles (nobility) as something alien and hostile to Moscow, they invited the prince, who would have thought? - from the same place, the Swedish prince will be another option, but they will nevertheless choose the Poles (more familiar?) By the way, the Romanovs themselves will be shouted to the kingdom again by the Cossacks, did they have the right? Are there too many South Russian motives? But back to the heir in history, nicknamed the "Tushino fox". However, he earned this nickname later, and at first he was just a prince, the son of Tsar Dmitry. This then ruined him. After all, the Romanovs shouted out by the Cossacks and supported by the majority, nevertheless, did not have any rights to the throne, and the clan was ark and the heir is still alive! and Misha would have strangled 1 novels Mnishek and Tsarevich in a quiet way, and then he would not have to rack his brains after passing off Otrepiev as the Tsar. But he didn’t just strangle him, but did it publicly, by which he designated himself as a usurper. A candidate for kings cannot personally participate in the suppression of the reigning dynasty and hope for a subsequent election. Self-capture please, but then the problems with recognition are Legitimacy. So the Tsarevich was declared a “vorenok” and Dmitri was “FALSE” by Dmitry and the question of violation of the rights of succession to the throat was dropped, they didn’t kill the Tsar and Tsarevich, but don’t understand who. But despite all the possibilities of the Romanovs to legitimize (for 300 years, however) their own coming to power, this problem remains unresolved so far. But to us, then, with what fright should we take the Romanovs' positions? Well, judging by the first steps of Dmitry on the Russian throne, he was not like Ivan the Terrible, but Simeon Bekbulatovich, as a son, in any case, it was he and none of his immediate family who were returned from exile as Grozny (except for his mother? recognizes the son, then no, then again recognizes, then again no), the Son? returned dad? in general, with the period of the Time of Troubles, everything is very vague and the Romanovs primarily benefited from this "vagueness". True, they themselves, if we understand them as a Russian project, this did not help much. Since Peter the Great, the German project has been approved on the Russian throne, and they have not extended two generations.
    1. avreli
      avreli 3 October 2012 00: 37 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      An interesting comment is not long and a lot of new information.
      And where can I introduce the details that you are talking about, Lexagun?
      .
      I drew attention to one more thing.
      Read the paragraph: However, this textbook, written by professors ...
      The quote in Ukrainian is readable.
      And what would this text look like in the current Ukrainian interpretation?
      Often I don’t understand what they write on the “new-mov”.
      1. Lexagun 3 October 2012 20: 33 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Uh ... sorry if I honestly did not understand the details of what? with pleasure, of course. If the policy of the Romanovs on the formation of the image of Dmitry as False Dmitry, then this is one and this is the simplest and most obvious. A regicide cannot become a king. (It was this reproach that Napoleon threw to Alexander 1, as a participant in the conspiracy and murder of his father Paul 1 — the tsar and father — the murderer. and this was the basis for ignoring, on the one hand, and the attempt to establish a new dynasty in Russia. Having declared Alexander not legitimate, Napoleon appeared the opportunity with the capture of Moscow to offer his candidacy loyal to the policy of France and hostile to the policy of England is precisely why the main attack was directed towards Moscow, which no one deprived of the status of the capital, and were crowned king only in Moscow, that’s how you should understand what Napoleon expected from the capture of Moscow there were plenty of conversations of the “society” on this subject, including at joint balls where the Europeans invaded the Russian ladies famously. - It didn’t grow together, but any conversations on this topic in Russia were taboo because it undermined the dynasty’s legitimacy and that was the reason for the abundance of impostors as such of which a couple of False Dmitriy all but a significant episode.).

        If the first steps are actually of Demetrius himself, then this is better for German and Polish sources, they are certainly no less biased than the Romanovs, but the truth is known in comparison,

        If about South Russian motives and rights to the throne, then this is to Pushkin wink In addition to jokes, analyze the tales of this very informed young man (childishness, this offspring of a very famous family allowed himself until he settled down and became a historian and publisher, except for jokes this position - chamber junker - court archivist was occupied by Alexander Sergeyevich. His kings are numerous, have southern origin (and where is the Lukomorye proper if the uncle is the Black Sea) and all this (along with stories about usurping power) a fifteen-year-old young man recently mastered at the Lyceum under the leadership of Zhukovsky - from 12 years old, the Russian language (French was native to Pushkin and the first verses were written on it) throws it out to the reader amusing himself with his reaction, which is known to him and not only to him but tabooed knowledge.In link to such a person, she got into a link in Fig. A connection with the Decembrists, as the basis for persecution, is generally an invention of the Soviet period.
        1. Lexagun 3 October 2012 20: 34 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          But if about South Russian motives, then this will immediately refer to the Cossacks and their right to shout out the Tsar! with what fright and why not Rurikovich Pozharsky? But you can pay attention to the fact that Stenka Razin, Boltonikov (according to some sources) and Pugachev Actually are natives of the same village, the former capital of the South Russian Cossacks - Zimoveyskaya (village), will be flooded during the Soviet era during the construction of the Tsimlyansk reservoir wink In general, the position of the historians of the Soviet period as zealously continued the work of the Romanovs, even in their absence, is surprising. Like the flooding of the "old" Yaroslavl during the construction of the Rybninsky reservoir.

          Textbooks by historians are not written independently but under the strict guidance of the rulers (in fact, they are ordered by historians and written otherwise they will cease to be historians or even be completely), and the goal is not to convey to the masses of truth, but to form a loyal position to the homeland of the students. and only in Russia, and everywhere (in reality, the history of France as a single state begins with the activities of Richelieu, but can we talk about this with the Frenchman?) Moreover, the “opening of the eyes” is so “loyal” (This has nothing to do with real patriotism) stories from textbooks will push aggression from the latter.

          Ce la vie.

          And in no case will I not try to position my opinion as the ultimate truth.
          information for consideration? and most likely with a position, but why did it all have to?!?!?!?
          1. avreli
            avreli 5 October 2012 05: 54 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            To break something - to create, it is advisable to know how it works.
            > Moreover, the "opening of the eyes" so "loyal" ... will push for aggression from the latter.
            - Wisely.
            But you have to. smile
            The foregoing is very interesting, for which thanks and advantages are to you.
            And ... with your permission, the conversation will not be considered over.
            1. Lexagun 5 October 2012 14: 35 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Yes, no problems wink
              By the way, try to translate the word Cossack
    2. rexby63 3 October 2012 18: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Thank you. Interesting thought.
  16. Spartakv
    Spartakv 2 October 2012 23: 34 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Yes, we do not have History, but continuous "Russian folk tales." We know more about ancient Greece and Egypt, and ourselves until the eighth century. as if it were not.
  17. Bobxnumx
    Bobxnumx 3 October 2012 03: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Fairy tales and Russia need to be strengthened! am
  18. Magadan 3 October 2012 05: 00 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    False Dmitry is the same as if false Gaddafi appeared in Benghazi and false Assad in Allepo. Accordingly, all those who fought on the side of False Dmitry are the same as Libyan or Syrian rats. Well, the then Poles are the current USA and Europe. Only under False Dmitriy did they want to push Catholicism out of silence into Russia, and now they want to make liberals from the Libyans and Syrians.
    So the story repeats itself. I would like the rats to be thrown out of the window, and the United States and Europe to wait for Poland’s fate - this country was once a superpower, and now it is SIMPLY Poland.
    And do not mix Zaporizhzhya Cossacks here, in Zaporozhye the Cossacks were different, and not just the type of Libyan rats.
  19. dmitrich 3 October 2012 06: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    how much scum on Russia climbed and will climb, it does not live without massacre in any way.