Pyotr Rumyantsev in the Seven Years' War

45
Pyotr Rumyantsev in the Seven Years' War
P. A. Rumyantsev-Zadunaisky in a portrait by an unknown artist, late XNUMXth century.


В previous article we talked about the origin and early life of Pyotr Rumyantsev, the beginning of his military career. This article ended with a short story about the beginning of the Seven Years' War and the Battle of Gross-Jägersdorf. Today we will continue the story about this commander.



1758 year


So, almost immediately after the victory in the battle of Gross-Jägersdorf, the Russian army began to retreat to winter quarters. Its new commander was Willim Fermor.


Willim Villimovich Fermor in the portrait of Alexei Antropov

In January 1758, lieutenant general and division commander Pyotr Rumyantsev and General Saltykov, who was acting together with him, went to East Prussia, occupying Königsberg. In August, the Russians besieged the Küstrin fortress, and the Prussian king himself hastened to the rescue of the garrison. On August 14, a new battle between the Russian and Prussian armies took place near the village of Zorndorf, in which Rumyantsev did not take part. The battle lasted all day and, despite heavy losses on both sides, did not reveal a winner. The next day, Frederick withdrew his army to Saxony, and the Russians retreated to the Vistula and further to Pomerania. Rumyantsev, who was tasked with covering the movement of the main troops, at the head of 20 dismounted dragoon and horse-grenadier squadrons, managed to hold back the 20-strong corps of the Prussian army in the battle at Pass Krug.

1759 and the Battle of Kunnensdorf



A.E. Kotzebue. "Battle of Kunnersdorf August 1, 1759"

The following year, the Russians changed their commander again - he became Chief General Pyotr Semyonovich Saltykov, who had previously fought in the army of Minich, and in the recent war with Sweden - under the command of Lassi and Keith, was awarded a gold sword with diamonds. At that time he was over 60 years old and did not look at all militant; A. Bolotov described him this way in his memoirs:

“A gray-haired old man, small, simple, in a white Landmilitsky caftan, without any further decorations and without all the pomp, he walked through the streets and did not have more than two or three people behind him... we did not understand how such a simple man and, apparently, nothing a significant old man could be the main commander of such a great army as ours, and lead it against such a king who surprised all of Europe with his courage, bravery, agility and knowledge of the art of war. He seemed to us like a real chicken, and no one not only caressed with hope, but even dared to think that he could do anything important, his appearance and all his actions promised us so little.”


Pyotr Saltykov in the portrait of Pietro Rotari

In July 1759, Russian troops numbering up to 40 thousand people moved towards the Oder, hoping to unite there with the Austrian allies. On July 12 there was a clash with the Prussian corps of General Wedel. He had only 28 thousand soldiers at his disposal, but Russian troops were attacked on the march. The battle near the village of Kai lasted about 5 hours, and in the end Wedel was forced to retreat. And on August 3, 1759, Russian and Austrian troops united at Frankfurt-on-Oder. On August 10, Frederick II approached from the south and positioned his army near the village of Kunersdorf. A feature of the position was a large ravine in front of the front of Russian and Austrian troops. Rumyantsev's division found itself in the center - on the Big Spitz hill.

1 (12) August 12, 1760 at 11 o'clock, Frederick II began the Battle of Kunersdorf with artillery strikes on Russian positions. Then 8 battalions of Prussian grenadiers managed to capture the Mühlberg hill, forcing the Russian left-flank units defending it to retreat beyond the ravine. If the Prussian king had stopped there, the Russian-Austrian troops would probably have been forced to retreat the next day. However, Frederick decided to achieve complete victory and continued the battle. But the attacks of the Prussian infantry, supported by Seydlitz’s heavy cavalry (which acted precisely against Rumyantsev’s division), were ineffective. And then the Arkhangelsk and Tobolsk regiments, whose attack was led by Rumyantsev, and the Austrian cavalry of General Kolovrat, attacked the tired Prussians who had suffered heavy losses. The Prussians fled, abandoning a significant part of their artillery; Frederick II was shell-shocked and lost his cocked hat, which can now be seen in the Hermitage.


Tricorne of Frederick the Great


Berger Daniel Gottfried "Frederick II flees after losing the Battle of Kunersdorf"

For this battle, Rumyantsev was awarded the Order of St. Alexander Nevsky. After Kunersdorf, Frederick is said to have told his generals:

“Fear the dog - Rumyantsev. All other Russian military leaders are not dangerous.”

In the autumn of 1760, Russian-Austrian troops of generals Chernyshev and Lassi (the son of a Russian field marshal) briefly entered Berlin.


Austrian General Franz Moritz Lassi, son of Russian Field Marshal Peter Lassi in a portrait by an unknown artist


Russian general Zakhar Chernyshev in the portrait of A. Roslin

This event is traditionally overrated in our country. The fact is that the goal of this campaign was not to capture the city, but to “demand a noble indemnity” - following the example of the Austrian general Gadik, who, at the head of a 14-strong detachment, carried out his “raid” on Berlin on October 16, 1757. These raids on Berlin in 1757 and 1760 had no strategic significance and had no influence on the course of the war.

1761 and Siege of Kolberg


Rumyantsev had to fight the Prussians once again in August 1761. The 18-strong corps he led approached Kolberg (Kołobrzeg) and immediately captured a fortified camp, which was defended by 12 soldiers of the Prince of Württemberg. At the same time, ships of the Baltic Sea approached the city. fleet. The siege of Kolberg lasted 4 months; on December 5 (16), the city capitulated. 3 thousand enemy soldiers and officers were captured, 20 banners and 173 artillery pieces became trophies.


A. E. Kotzebue. "The capture of Kohlberg"

It was then, during the assault on the enemy camp, that Rumyantsev for the first time in military stories struck in battalion columns. This blow would later be repeated near Turtukai by Suvorov, who, as we said in the first article, called himself a student of Rumyantsev. Alexander Vasilyevich will use this technique many times, which will be called “column - loose formation”. In front, “scattered,” was the light infantry, behind it were several infantry columns, between which there was regimental artillery, and behind was the cavalry, whose task was to strike one of the enemy flanks.

Tragic events in St. Petersburg and the resignation of Pyotr Rumyantsev


On December 25, 1761 (January 5, 1762), that is, 20 days after Rumyantsev captured Kolberg, the Russian Empress Elizabeth died. Her nephew, Peter III, who always opposed the war with Prussia, took the throne. Academician J. Shtelin recalled:

“The heir spoke freely that the empress was being deceived in relation to the Prussian king, that the Austrians were bribing us, and the French were deceiving us... we will eventually repent that we entered into an alliance with Austria and France.”

In this case, Peter III turned out to be simply a prophet. It was France that acted as an ally of the rebels of the Bar Confederation in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Ottoman Empire during its new war with Russia - the same one that would glorify Pyotr Rumyantsev and Alexei Orlov, and in which Alexander Suvorov would win his first high-profile victories. It will be the French who will then push the Turks to a new war, finance them, assist in the reorganization and retraining of the Ottoman army, and modernization of artillery. And to provide assistance to the adventuress who went down in history as “Princess Tarakanova” - in Ragusa she will live in the house of the French consul.


One of False Elizabeth's letters to Catherine II

By the way, the new king of France, Louis XVI, assessing the results of the Seven Years' War, later said:

"Having been strengthened by the Prussian possessions, Austria had the opportunity to measure its power with Russia."

But let's not get ahead.

The short reign of Peter III has long been told according to a hackneyed and completely false scheme. Briefly, the situation after Elizabeth's death is as follows. The feeble-minded and always drunk Peter III, who worshiped Frederick the Great, betrayed Russian interests, returned East Prussia and Königsberg to him without any conditions, but was about to start a war with Denmark for the unnecessary Schleswig and Dithmarschen. This caused outrage among the patriotic guards of St. Petersburg, who overthrew this pathetic emperor.

And what really happened?


В previous article we have already said that our country had no reasons and no reasons for war with Prussia, a state that did not have common borders with the Russian Empire. And there were no clear goals and objectives that could be solved in the event of victory over Prussia. In the Seven Years' War, Russia played the role of the cat from La Fontaine's fable, which burned its paws while pulling hot chestnuts from the fire for the cunning monkey. During this war for foreign interests, Russia suffered heavy demographic losses and found itself on the verge of financial collapse. Things got to the point where St. Petersburg officials had not been paid their salaries for years. Not surprisingly, the war was extremely unpopular in Russian society. And the “patriotically minded” guardsmen did not want to fight with anyone for a long time and categorically did not want to leave the capital’s cheerful taverns and cozy brothels. This was not the same Peter’s guard that heroically fought in the battles of the Northern War, but completely disintegrated “Janissaries”, ready at any moment to “turn the pot,” that is, to rebel against the legitimate government. This was known and understood by everyone; the French diplomat Favier, for example, wrote about them like this:

“A numerous and extremely useless corps of guards, these Janissaries of the Russian Empire, whose garrison is located in the capital, where they seem to keep the court prisoner.”

Russia's conquest of East Prussia would not be recognized by any European state. Official annexation would lead to a war like the Crimean one. And it was absolutely impossible to hold this province, cut off from Russian lands by the territories of the Duchy of Courland and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The land route to East Prussia could be blocked at any moment; supplies by sea depended on the position of Britain and Sweden. Look at the map again:


In this situation, the actions of Peter III were very reasonable and the only possible ones. The exit from the unnecessary war with Prussia made everyone extremely happy and was welcomed by all layers of Russian society. Let us remember that, having seized power, Catherine II did not even think about continuing this war - and this despite the fact that Russian troops were still in East Prussia and Königsberg. It was she, and not Peter III, who gave the order for their withdrawal - although she had every opportunity to fight with Frederick further.

But why, after the conclusion of peace with Prussia, did Russian troops continue to remain on the indigenous territory of Frederick the Great? The fact is that Peter III concluded an extremely profitable agreement with the Prussian king, according to which East Prussia would return only after the establishment of Russian power over Schleswig and Dithmarschen, which legally belonged to Peter III as the Duke of Holstein and Stormarn, but were occupied by Denmark. And these lands were not the St. Petersburg “window to Europe” and not the “bear corner” of agrarian East Prussia, but “elite real estate” in the then “European Union”, and even with a unique geographical position, allowing control of both the North and Baltic seas. Look at the map:


A powerful naval base in this duchy turned Russia into the mistress of Northern Europe.

To restore control over Schleswig and Dithmarschen, Frederick II pledged to provide 15 thousand infantry and 5000 cavalry to help Russia. The Russian army was to be led by the brilliant young commander Pyotr Rumyantsev, who was only 36 years old at the time. The Emperor awarded him the rank of General-in-Chief and awarded him the Orders of St. Andrew the First-Called and St. Anne. Rumyantsev's corps was still located in the area of ​​\u12b\u4bKolberg and Stettin, and its numbers increased significantly: it now included 23 cuirassiers, 11 hussars, 59 infantry and 908 Cossack regiments - a total of 1762 people. Negotiations with Denmark were scheduled for July XNUMX. If they were unsuccessful, Russia and Prussia began joint military operations, and the Danes did not have the slightest chance of success. But even after this, Peter III retained the right to stop the withdrawal of Russian troops from Prussia “in view of the ongoing unrest in Europe" That is, the “Western Group of Forces” could remain in East Prussia for a long time, guaranteeing the “obedience” of Frederick the Great. Which, by the way, also took upon itself the obligation to support candidates convenient for Russia for the thrones of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the still independent Courland.

Contrary to historical myths, Peter III was very popular in Russia. After the publication of the famous “Decree on the Liberty of the Nobility”, they were even going to erect a golden monument to him. And the peasants expected exactly the same decree, which would free them from serfdom - and they had reason for such hopes. Peter III actually issued a decree limiting the personal dependence of peasants on landowners, which was immediately canceled by Catherine II. In total, during his short reign, this emperor prepared and published 192 laws and decrees - more than 30 per month. By the way, Catherine II signed an average of 12 decrees per month, Peter I - 8. Decrees were issued on freedom of religion, prohibiting church supervision over the personal lives of parishioners, transparency of legal proceedings and free travel abroad. By order of Peter III, a state bank was founded, into whose accounts he deposited 5 million rubles of personal funds - they were used to ensure the replacement of damaged coins and the first bank notes in Russia. The price of salt was reduced, peasants were allowed to trade in cities without obtaining permission or paperwork, which immediately stopped numerous abuses and extortions. It was forbidden to punish soldiers with batogs, and sailors with “cats” (lashes with four tails and knots at the ends). Catherine canceled the decrees of Peter III on "silverlessness of service", which prohibited rewarding officials "peasant souls"and state land - only orders, about ending the persecution of Old Believers, about the optional observance of religious fasts. Instead of the terrible “Secret Chancellery” abolished by Peter III, Catherine II ordered the organization of a “Secret Expedition”.

Peter III managed to free some of the monastery serfs, giving them arable land for eternal use, for which they had to pay a monetary rent to the state treasury. "For innocent patience with the torture of street people“He ordered the landowner Zotova to be tonsured into the monastery, and her property to be confiscated to pay compensation to the victims. A Voronezh landowner, retired lieutenant V. Nesterov, was forever exiled to Nerchinsk for driving a servant to death.

A well-known but not advertised fact: Catherine and her accomplices deceived the soldiers of the St. Petersburg garrison, informing them about the death of the emperor, and even staged a funeral procession. To stop the rebellion, Peter III only needed to appear in St. Petersburg - as Minich advised him. Or, without wasting time, move to Kronstadt in a timely manner, where you can simply wait one week. Contemporaries wrote about serious unrest in St. Petersburg, which occurred shortly after the seizure of power by Catherine II. The sobered up soldiers of many regiments realized that they had been deceived, and for some time the ground literally burned under the feet of the conspirators. The French ambassador Laurent Beranger reported to Paris on August 10, 1762:

“The Preobrazhensky Regiment was supposed to rescue Peter III from prison and restore him to the throne.”

(But the Preobrazhensky people, as you know, were late).

And on the same day, August 10, the Prussian Ambassador B. Goltz writes to Berlin:

“The unrest that I reported... is far from calmed, but on the contrary, is intensifying... Since the Izmailovsky Guards Regiment and the Horse Guards... on the day of the coup completely surrendered to the Empress, both of these regiments are now treated with contempt and the rest of the guard, and the field garrison regiments stationed here, and the cuirassiers, and the naval ones. Not a day goes by without a clash between these two parties. The latter reproach the former for selling their sovereign for a few pennies and for vodka. The Artillery Corps has still not taken sides. The court, going to the extreme, distributed cartridges to the Izmailovsky regiment, which alarmed the rest of the guard and garrison.”

Finally, Peter III could freely get to Revel, board any ship and go to East Prussia - to Rumyantsev, who was unconditionally loyal to him. And soon he would receive a letter from St. Petersburg with the news that Catherine and her accomplices were impatiently waiting for him in the casemates of the Peter and Paul Fortress or Shlisselburg. He could have accelerated events by moving Rumyantsev’s army to St. Petersburg: the capital’s guards would have met real soldiers - veterans of the battles with the armies of Frederick the Great, on their knees. However, Peter III, as is known, abandoned the fight and was killed in Ropsha.


Frontispiece from the book “History of Peter III” by Jean Charles Thibault de Laveau, 1799 edition.

Having received the Manifesto on the accession to the throne of Catherine II, Rumyantsev for a long time refused to take the oath to the Empress, as he wanted to be convinced of the truth of the information about the death of Peter III, and then submitted his resignation, transferring command to Count P. I. Panin. Fortunately for our country, he soon returned to military service. Ahead was another Russian-Turkish war, victories in which would immortalize his name. We will talk about this in the next article.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    4 December 2023 05: 44
    I read something similar from Samsonov, several years ago, if I’m not mistaken or someone else..
    1. VLR
      +4
      4 December 2023 06: 27
      If here, then with me, I wrote in detail about the preparation of the conspiracy, the seizure of power by Catherine II and subsequent events in the cycle about Peter III. However, maybe somewhere else - serious historians have long ceased to consider Peter III an “always drunk idiot.” But the old pre-revolutionary schemes for presenting history in a loyal pro-Romanov version, sanctified by the authority of XNUMXth century historians who did not have access to many documents, still “work”, but, albeit slowly, are gradually being eroded. They already write about the same Paul I much more honestly.
      1. +2
        4 December 2023 06: 33
        If here, then with me,
        Calm down, you have been on the site for 9 years.. laughing Valery, I don’t know about anyone, but the “mysteries” of the Seven Years’ War are enough for me, and I’m not going to discuss what else you’ve written in this part. Because like you, you’re always right, and if you’re wrong, see point one. Otherwise, your fans will be banned. laughing Good luck in the field of historical fantasy. laughing
        1. VLR
          0
          4 December 2023 06: 37
          Good luck to you too, stay in the cozy captivity of illusions, old templates and schemes.
          1. +1
            4 December 2023 06: 40
            I am not the only one who lives in a cozy captivity of illusions, old patterns and schemes. laughing Hello, sectarians. laughing
            1. VLR
              -1
              4 December 2023 07: 05
              Lord, if you don't believe me, read someone else. For example, the book “Peter III”, which was written in 2002 by Doctor of Historical Sciences Pyotr Mylnikov, former director of the Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography. Very well written using a variety of documents and easy to read.
        2. -2
          4 December 2023 09: 56
          Excuse me, but maybe, after all, when discussing the previous article, it wasn’t worth being so rude to the author out of the blue and telling vulgar jokes to no one in town or village? I don’t know who, how, but I just shuddered with disgust. I'm glad the administrators intervened. If you expect normal communication, then behave normally.
        3. -2
          5 December 2023 12: 11
          You just want to make a fuss, without any facts or conclusions...
        4. -2
          5 December 2023 12: 12
          You just want to make a fuss, without any facts or conclusions...
  2. +2
    4 December 2023 06: 11
    The question is which Prussian possessions did Austria strengthen as a result of the Seven Years' War?
    1. VLR
      +3
      4 December 2023 06: 35
      It would strengthen in case of victory. But Frederick II managed to retain Silesia and the County of Glatz, which, according to Louis XVi, was beneficial to Russia.
    2. +4
      4 December 2023 07: 07
      Quote: Cartalon
      The question is which Prussian possessions did Austria strengthen as a result of the Seven Years' War?

      I don’t know how she wanted to strengthen herself there, but she very much dreamed of returning Silesia, lost as a result of the War of the Austrian Succession (1740-1749).
  3. +3
    4 December 2023 07: 10
    Thank you, Valery!

    When you continue to write about Rumyanetsev’s military actions, do not forget about the Russian-Turkish War of 1768-1774. And then in 1770 Larga and Cahul were impressive victories over a numerically superior enemy.
    1. VLR
      +2
      4 December 2023 08: 08
      Yes, the next article will be about the “Rumyantsev War” with Turkey.
  4. +3
    4 December 2023 08: 45
    Interesting, although not generally accepted, views on Peter 3. The author seriously shook my ideas about that time.
    1. +2
      4 December 2023 19: 56
      Quote: S.Z.
      Interesting, although not generally accepted, views on Peter 3. The author seriously shook my ideas about that time.

      There is nothing to “shake” here; the truth is somewhere in the middle!
      As an advantage, Peter III can add his decree banning the use of assigned peasants in factories. Hence, by the way, the popularity of Emelyan Pugachev on the Stone Belt.
      There were also disadvantages. Contrary to Valery’s opinion, a number of regiments went to overthrow the emperor with the slogans “down with the Holstein Kurguz.” So not everything is as white and fluffy as the Author’s.
      Sincerely, Kote!
      1. VLR
        +2
        5 December 2023 16: 04
        There is such a thing as the “herd instinct,” which manifests itself especially strongly “in an altered state of consciousness” (alcohol, drugs). Put yourself in the place of an officer of the Preobrazhensky regiment or a regiment other than Izmailovsky. He sobered up after a few days and begins to think, what was it then? Who is this Katka? A visiting German woman who is being “wooed” by the well-known idiot Grishka Orlov. Who is Peter? The legitimate emperor, who only recently signed the “Charter of Complaint” to us, the nobles, for which both we and our children-grandchildren are indebted to him for the rest of our lives. And what have we done? What if it's the other way around? Katka - to the fortress, Peter - to the throne? And the conspirators, hearing such conversations, shake with fear, give live ammunition to the Izmailovites, and decide to kill Peter with “hemorrhoidal colic”
        1. 0
          5 December 2023 21: 40
          Good evening dear Valery! I personally have a very good attitude towards you and your work. In principle, over so many years we have all gotten used to each other. So, I agree with you on some things, but disagree on others. It’s very, I’m not afraid - it’s “cool” that you take the time to accompany your work in the comments.
          I will be true to myself, agree with some things, and discuss others. The herd instinct in the army of that era is nonsense. The survival system is simple, listen to the command and follow it.
          Apparently the guards were so fed up with the German-style uniform that they were ready to replace the emperor.
          By the way, Catherine was recognized within 3 days by the Senate and Synod. Still, either Catherine found the key to the Russian nobility or Peter twisted the screws.
          Unfortunately, there is no time machine, so arguing could be long and tedious.
          1. VLR
            +2
            5 December 2023 22: 33
            The fact of the matter is that the guards of St. Petersburg at that time were not an army, but willful janissaries, one life company of Elizabeth, which for 20 years put the whole of St. Petersburg on the ears with impunity, was worth something. In general, discipline is not about the guardsmen of St. Petersburg. Moreover, the coup took place in an atmosphere of general drunkenness, in which the guards drank 100 thousand rubles that Catherine received from the British, and also plundered taverns for the same amount. And no one counted the losses of private individuals - it was like Blok’s: “Close the floors - now there will be robberies.” Even the conspirator Princess Dashkova was robbed then, although she claimed that she herself voluntarily gave everything she had with her to drunken soldiers. And try not to swear allegiance in such a situation! But then they began to sober up and think about what happened. Let me remind you that Catherine was then a young German woman without moral principles and without any merit to the state. And Peter III had already managed to bestow a “Charter of Complaint” on the nobles, for which the nobles were going to erect a golden monument to him.
  5. +4
    4 December 2023 10: 18
    Russia's conquest of East Prussia would not be recognized by any European state.
    Is it like now? Not recognition of the annexed regions? Kherson region? Zaporozhye, Crimea? smile And who didn’t recognize it? Allies Austria and France? Saxony? The fact that Prussia did not recognize is a fact smile Great Britain? And that already in the 18th century, an inter-European agreement was concluded between European powers on the inviolability of European borders and a European Security Council was created? smile After the death of Empress Elizabeth, Peter III, who ascended the throne, was the first of the warring parties to make peace with Prussia. Since it was more expensive to fight without Russia, after Russia, France and Austria, allies of Russia, made peace. Frederick, pointed out to his representative Goltz, what if Peter III insists that it be given to him in East Prussia. But Peter did not insist. smile
    1. VLR
      +2
      4 December 2023 10: 25
      And you will remember what difficulties Russia has always experienced when trying to retain at least something from the lands of defeated Islamic Turkey. Even if it was the “Wild Field” - the land of the future New Russia, empty due to the constant raids of the Crimean Tatars, to which serfs of the central Russian provinces were brought, and Bulgarians, Greeks, Serbs, and Armenians fleeing Ottoman oppression were allowed to settle. And here is a well-developed territory inhabited not by “Mohammedans”, but by Lutheran Germans. No, they wouldn’t recognize it and wouldn’t give it away. At a peace conference they would be forced to refuse. But Schleswig-Holstein is the super-legitimate possession of Peter III. It was necessary to develop it carefully, with broad autonomy, not to interfere in the internal affairs of local residents, but to build bases - in general, as later in Finland.
      1. VLR
        +2
        4 December 2023 10: 31
        By the way, after the murder of Peter III, the Holsteiners were ready to obey his son Paul. But in 1767, Catherine forced him to give up Holstein and Stormarn, which rightfully belonged to him - in exchange for the German counties of Oldenburg and Delmenhorst - this very unequal and extremely unfavorable exchange of territories took place in 1773 - after he reached adulthood. Thus, Catherine deprived her unloved son of subjects loyal to him. In Kiel, this decision was taken very painfully - prophecies began to appear about the return of Paul's father, Peter III. And then, 4 years later, Catherine (again, on behalf of Paul) in 1777 “donated” these counties as hereditary sovereign possession to the former prince-bishop of Lubeck, Friedrich August. So this “great empress” stupidly lost all the European possessions of her husband and son.
        1. +4
          4 December 2023 11: 40
          By the way, after the murder of Peter III, the Holsteiners were ready to obey his son Paul.
          Another thing that is more interesting is that Frederick was ready to cede East Prussia, which, by the way, had already sworn allegiance to Elizabeth and minted a coin with her image, and you write about Paul and the Holsteiners. smile
      2. +4
        4 December 2023 10: 36
        Of course, we can’t hold on to East Prussia, which in principle they wanted to exchange with the Poles, but Schleswig is a completely different matter, it’s not England - Hanover, not Prussia, they won’t object, they won’t create a coalition and dig a canal, everyone will just be happy that in the north of Germany, the Russian army and navy are sticking out.
        1. VLR
          +2
          4 December 2023 10: 43
          On what basis could England intervene in the “Russian affairs” of Schleswig-Holstein? This is an absolutely legal and undisputed possession of Peter III. Declaring war on Russia? For what reason? And how to explain it? But East Prussia is a different matter. Every day, all newspapers would publish articles about “illegal occupation,” “oppression of wailing local residents,” “the outrages of the Cossacks,” who several times “raped all women from 5 years to 80,” and so on - all, as always, according to the usual pattern.
          1. +3
            4 December 2023 10: 46
            Based on the contradiction to British interests and the threat to the balance in Europe.
            1. VLR
              +1
              4 December 2023 10: 53
              Of course, but it would be very difficult in these conditions to organize an anti-Russian coalition, and the British alone, outside the coalition, never liked to fight. And Russia would have allies in Europe. The same French from whom the British chopped off half of Canada.
              1. +3
                4 December 2023 11: 12
                That is, in order to hold Schleswig, another pan-European war in an incomprehensible configuration was needed.
                And not only England, but also Sweden, Denmark, Prussia and even Austria would not like the possession of Schleswig because the HRE still existed. And in order for the French to fit in, you would have to promise them so much.
                And Russia fought all the wars in Western Europe with someone else’s subsidies, who would have paid for the war for Schleswig.
                1. VLR
                  +1
                  4 December 2023 11: 26
                  Why is there suddenly a war for Holstein? Until then, no one had encroached on this duchy, which officially and actually belonged to Grand Duke Peter and Emperor Peter III, and now suddenly - war? And why do you include Prussia in the list of Peter III’s opponents, whose king, according to the treaty, allocated troops to him in order to recapture the areas occupied by Denmark? Frederick was not interested in Holstein; he finally received Russia not as an enemy, but as an ally - what he had always strived for. And he left behind him the Silesia he needed. And Britain was then an ally of Prussia. The Danes, if they had risked fighting, would have been instantly defeated. But, most likely, they would not have gone to war - they were not crazy, they settled the matter peacefully. No one else had any territorial claims to the Duchy of Holstein.
                  1. +3
                    4 December 2023 11: 34
                    Do you seriously believe that Russia is taking control of Northern Germany and no one will object?
                    I recommend trying to write a novel about a prisoner, you will succeed.
                    1. VLR
                      0
                      4 December 2023 11: 41
                      They will object, but for now silently. The combined forces of Russia and Prussia are not to be joked about. It’s hard to say what will happen next, in 50 years. But specifically in 1762 there was no reason to abandon Holstein, whose universally recognized duke was the Russian Emperor Peter III.
      3. +3
        4 December 2023 11: 36
        Answer the question: which European power would not recognize the annexation of East Prussia? And don’t talk about Lutherans. The Caucasus, Azerbaijan, Dagestan, Chechnya, where did Lutherans live? But we are not talking about them. Please answer, who would not recognize the annexation of East Prussia if the treaty had been signed by the Elizabethan government. And where does the information come from that the annexation of East Prussia was not approved by the European powers.
        1. VLR
          +1
          4 December 2023 11: 49
          You asked well about Dagestan and Chechnya. For how many decades have the British and Turks sent money and weapons to the highlanders there? And Russia was "rinsed" in British newspapers?
          And none of the European powers would recognize the annexation of East Prussia to Russia, including its allies - Austria and, especially, France. I’ll say more: even Elizabeth had no intention of annexing East Prussia. Russian diplomats were “racking their brains”: how to get rid of it as quickly as possible, and at least exchange it for something - so that they wouldn’t have to give it away for nothing.
          A similar situation occurred with Finland during the Northern War: Peter I did not intend to annex it, but he brought in troops - only to return it later in exchange for some concessions from the Swedes. Finland in the Northern War and East Prussia in the Seven Years are the territories mainly occupied. in order to improve negotiating positions.
          1. +1
            4 December 2023 12: 27
            Elizabeth was not going to join.
            If, according to your words, Elizabeth did not intend to annex, then where did you get the idea that the annexation was not recognized? smile And again, I’ll repeat where I got the information that the annexation of East Prussia was not approved by the European powers. It’s interesting to talk with you. You never clearly answer clearly posed questions. You poured the same “water” for me with the Aztecs, especially when necessary their destruction. laughing Just remembered, not relevant to the article. smile
            1. VLR
              0
              4 December 2023 12: 44
              Where did you get the information about what was approved? No one was interested in strengthening Russia - NO ONE. This is an axiom. Even the neighboring Duchy of Courland at that time did not yet dare to annex. Where is East Prussia, separated from Russia by the lands of Courland and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. And the only opportunity to “catch onto Europe” was then connected with Holstein - the officially recognized possession of Peter III by all.
              1. +2
                4 December 2023 14: 51
                Where did you get the information about what was approved?
                Logic dictates. They overcame Frederick, sat down at the table, drank, damn it, discussed France this, Austria that, Russia East Prussia, provided that Elizabeth lived to see these times. And from what do you assume that the Allies did not approve of the annexation of East Prussia ?I was like, your move.
                Even the neighboring Duchy of Courland at that time did not yet dare to annex.
                Was it necessary to kill Biron, like the Aztecs, and his entire family? And not keep him in exile? To annex Courland? In your opinion, Peter I was stupid when he married his niece to the Duke of Courland and did not resolve this issue by military means?
                Where is East Prussia, separated from Russia by the lands of Courland and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
                Well, were Schleswig and Goldstein closer, near Kiev? laughing
  6. +1
    4 December 2023 14: 38
    Peter 3 and Paul 1 did not reign for long, but they managed to be noted for very good deeds that seriously made the life of ordinary people easier. It’s a paradox, but if it weren’t for their murder, perhaps there would not have been the atrocities of the revolutions and the Civil War. 100-150 years from them, what would seem to be the connection? But it was under Catherine that the caste of fanatical landowners was finally formed, and under Alexander 1, it was strengthened. Next comes the game of serfdom, spitzrutens, courtyard harems and other delights. And then liberation without land in favor of the same landowners. Hello revolution.
    But history does not tolerate the subjunctive mood. Although it would be interesting to speculate on this topic
    1. +1
      4 December 2023 16: 32
      Quote: denplot
      under Alexander 1, the caste of fanatical landowners strengthened.

      Under Alexander and his younger brother, first of all, the state was strengthened, after which palace coups became impossible, and the Great Reforms of Alexander II were possible.
      1. +2
        4 December 2023 19: 57
        Or maybe it was Paul 1 who strengthened the state with the Act of Succession to the Throne?
        1. 0
          4 December 2023 21: 53
          Quote: denplot
          Or maybe it was Paul 1 who strengthened the state with the Act of Succession to the Throne?

          Doesn't Paul's fate convince you that this thesis is far-fetched?
          In fact, it (the act), of course, played a certain role, but Speransky’s reforms and the codification of the laws of the Russian Empire were much more important.
          Both Peter III and Paul wrote laws at the speed of a printer that had not yet been invented, not caring at all about consistency.
          1. +1
            4 December 2023 22: 21
            Paul 1 was not killed at all because of the weakness of the state as such. Dear Author, he indicated the reasons quite accurately.
            As for the speed of issuing acts and laws. We were heirs for a long time...
    2. +1
      4 December 2023 20: 25
      Quote: denplot
      Peter 3 and Paul 1 did not reign for long, but they managed to be noted for very good deeds that seriously made the life of ordinary people easier. It’s a paradox, but if it weren’t for their murder, perhaps there would not have been the atrocities of the revolutions and the Civil War. 100-150 years from them, what would seem to be the connection? But it was under Catherine that the caste of fanatical landowners was finally formed, and under Alexander 1, it was strengthened. Next comes the game of serfdom, spitzrutens, courtyard harems and other delights. And then liberation without land in favor of the same landowners. Hello revolution.
      But history does not tolerate the subjunctive mood. Although it would be interesting to speculate on this topic

      My personal opinion was that our Fatherland could avoid the February revolution in 1917 only in one case if Emperor Alexander III lived to see the hard times. However, I can’t vouch for the future fate of Russia. Nicholas II was a good man, but a useless king.
  7. +2
    4 December 2023 15: 38
    So that commentators do not suffer from missed prospects in the ownership of Holstein, I will explain how it ended. In 1767, Catherine renounced Russian claims to Schleswig-Holstein on behalf of her son, Paul I, who confirmed this upon reaching adulthood in 1773 with the Treaty of Tsarskoye Selo. Signed on June 1 1773, he transferred control of the Duchy of Schleswig-Holstein to the Danish Crown in exchange for Russian control of the County of Oldenburg and surrounding lands as part of the Holy Roman Empire. This peace treaty reduced the fragmentation of Danish territory and led to an alliance between Denmark and Russia, which lasted until the Napoleonic Wars. Thus, Peter III returned East Prussia to Frederick, and Catherine and Paul, Schleswig-Holstein, to Denmark. But Catherine was not a stupid woman.
  8. The comment was deleted.
  9. 0
    15 December 2023 00: 47
    He could have accelerated events by moving Rumyantsev’s army to St. Petersburg: the capital’s guards would have met real soldiers - veterans of the battles with the armies of Frederick the Great, on their knees.
    Something doesn't add up for you. Is it okay that that same Peter III immediately surrendered everything won by those same veterans of the battles with the armies of Frederick the Great? Of course, you explained here that Russia didn’t need it, but somehow I doubt that the soldiers were also sold on this and they fell for it. Thank God that they finished off that Peter III and Catherine the Great ascended the throne. It's the same story with Pavel. And modern Freemasons are engaged in whitewashing these “heroes”. By the way, Catherine II seriously fought with them, which is why Russia flourished under her.
    1. VLR
      +1
      15 December 2023 13: 31
      Yes, he didn’t pass anything - didn’t you read to the end? Rumyantsev's army was in Prussia and was reinforced with fresh units - for the war with Denmark for Schleswig. In which Prussia acted on the side of Russia. And only then, after that. As soon as Schleswig, occupied by Denmark, was liberated, Peter III agreed to withdraw troops from Prussia.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"