Petersburg triumph and fall of the Marquis de Chetardie

64
Petersburg triumph and fall of the Marquis de Chetardie

В previous article we talked about Chetardy's youth, his diplomatic career, his arrival in St. Petersburg and his participation in the conspiracy against the young Emperor John VI and his parents. This time we will continue the story about the fate of Chetardy and his attempts to influence history our country.

The Night Strike of Johann Lestocq


So, after a frank conversation between regent Anna Leopoldovna and Elizabeth on November 23, 1741, Lestocq realized that the conspiracy was practically exposed, and its participants were not arrested only because of the excessive kindness and gullibility of the emperor’s mother.



There was no time to coordinate actions with the allies (French Ambassador Chetardy and Swedish Envoy Nolken), he decided to act independently. On the night of November 25 (December 6), 1741, Elizabeth and Lestocq, at the head of 308 soldiers of the 1st company of the Preobrazhensky Regiment, set out to overthrow the young Emperor Anton Ioannovich.

These “brave boys” will go down in history as life-campans, and throughout the reign of Elizabeth, instead of serving, they will cause brawls with impunity in drinking establishments of the capital of the Russian Empire. Petersburg will be saved from their outrages by Peter III, who will order everyone to be sent to the villages given to them by the grateful Elizabeth.

But let's go back to November 1741.

At the age of 32, Elizabeth had already become so fat that she could not walk quickly, and therefore Lestocq ordered the soldiers to carry her on their shoulders.


Elizabeth in a portrait by an unknown artist

It was Lestocq, by the way, who later pierced the sentry’s drum, preventing him from sounding the alarm. The conspirators burst into the bedroom and captured the emperor's sleeping parents, while 4-month-old Princess Catherine was thrown to the floor in the confusion: having hit her head, she lost her hearing and could hardly speak. Elizabeth, taking the baby emperor in her arms, said with expression:

“Poor child! You are completely innocent: your parents are to blame.


The arrest of the Brunswick family. German engraving from 1759

It is to this episode that the famous aphorism of the Saxon envoy Petzold refers:

"All Russians admit that they can do anything with a certain number of grenadiers at their disposal, a cellar with vodka and a few bags of gold."

Meanwhile, the victorious conspirators carried out arrests of people who could be dangerous to the new empress. Among them was, for example, the outstanding statesman Andrei Ivanovich Osterman, who is called the ideologist of Russia’s imperial policy after the death of Peter the Great. And the famous Field Marshal Minich, about whom Peter I said that no one understood his plans better than this Saxon.

Drunken soldiers confused the houses of Osterman and Shetardy, and greatly frightened the Frenchman, who decided that the conspiracy had been discovered and that they had “come” for him on the instructions of Anna Leopoldovna. The commander-in-chief of the victorious active Russian army, Peter Lassi, who then ended up in St. Petersburg, was almost arrested.

However, the field marshal, awakened by the drunken Preobrazhenists, when asked which party he belonged to, wisely answered: “To the currently reigning one.” Not knowing what to do in this case, the rebels left his house, and Lassi went to the troops. On August 26, 1742, he again defeated the Swedes, forcing them to capitulate at Helsingfors. After the end of the war, he returned to St. Petersburg on Elizabeth’s personal yacht.


Martin Bernigeroth. Peter von Lacy, 1730

Triumph and rise of Chétardie


But what happened to Chetardie, who was almost arrested by mistake?

Although the coup was carried out by Lestocq without his participation, grateful Elizabeth awarded the marquis two orders at once - St. Andrew the First-Called and St. Anne, and brought him closer to her.

It must be said that he tried to save the defeated Sweden and achieved a truce. However, the Swedes themselves violated this truce a month later, which led to the complete defeat of their army by Lassi’s troops.

In September 1742, Chétardy was recalled to France for consultations - and upon departure he was again generously awarded by Elizabeth. The Marquis maintained connections with Lestocq, who wrote in letters that Elizabeth really wanted the French king to recognize her as the imperial title.

Return of Chétardie


Soon Elizabeth turned to Versailles with a request to return her friend to St. Petersburg. The Marquis did not object. On the way to the capital of Russia, he carried out two diplomatic assignments from the king - in Copenhagen and in Stockholm.

Chétardie's status was strange and uncertain. He seemed to be going to Russia as a private person, hoping to communicate directly with Elizabeth in a friendly manner - bypassing ministers and secretaries. But he had with him two important letters from Louis XV. In the first, the king, addressing Elizabeth, called her empress, but this title was not supported by his credentials.

The king's second letter was almost the much-coveted credentials, but was not backed by the chancellor's signature and therefore could not be considered an official document.

Chétardie himself had to decide which of these letters to give to Elizabeth. At the same time, he was supposed to hint that a “correctly executed” document from Versailles would arrive after the resignation of Chancellor A.P. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, who was hostile to France.

Ironically, it was Shetardy who in December 1741 recommended that Elizabeth introduce Bestuzhev to the Senate and appoint him to the post of vice-chancellor. Now he has become the main enemy of Shetardy and Lestocq.


Enemies and allies


Shetardy returned to St. Petersburg at the end of November 1743. Although Elizabeth was extremely kind to the Marquis, calling him a “particular friend,” she immediately stated:

“It’s good that you are not an envoy or a diplomat now. I don't have to talk to you about politics. And I will not!"

It turned out that the new empress is absolutely not involved in state affairs, but changes her dresses 4-5 times a day, and she is only interested in “amusements in the inner chambers with all sorts of vile rabble” (from Shetardie’s letter to Versailles).

Elizabeth entrusted all matters to Chancellor A.P. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, whom Shetardie came to “overthrow.” And he was, as they say, “bought outright” by the Austrians and the British, whose “pensions” significantly exceeded his official salary. Frederick II wrote about Bestuzhev:

“His corruption reached the point that he would sell his mistress at auction if he could find a rich enough buyer for her.”

In addition, Bestuzhev did not deny himself the regular consumption of alcoholic beverages. Later, the Prussian envoy Karl Wilhelm von Finckenstein (appointed to St. Petersburg in 1747) reported to Berlin:

“The Chancellor drinks most of the night, so his head is not entirely clear when he gets up to do business.”

Bestuzhev came up with the famous “Peter the Great system” and, despite the changing situation, he consistently followed it for 16 years. According to this “System”, Austria and two “maritime powers” ​​– England and Holland – were “appointed” as Russia’s allies. But the diplomatic talents of the chancellor were such that Russia managed to enter the Seven Years' War on the side of the allied Austria and the enemy France against the “natural ally” - England and friendly Prussia.

In the Russian capital, Chetardie again met with Lestocq, who warmly received him, who had great influence on Elizabeth and was already a Privy Councilor, “the first physician and chief director of the Medical Chancellery and the entire Faculty of Medicine,” as well as a Count of the Holy Roman Empire. New “confidants” were also found: the Prussian envoy Axel von Mardefeld, and then Johanna of Zerbst, the mother of the bride of the heir to the throne (the future Catherine II).


Johanna of Zerbst in the portrait of Anne Rosina de Gasc

But Chétardy developed a very tense relationship with the French ambassador D'Alyon, who was afraid that the Marquis, taking advantage of his previous connections with Elizabeth, would push him into the background. In the spring of 1744, it all ended in such a quarrel that Shetardy gave the ambassador a slap in the face (more like a blow, because they were talking about a black eye), and he pulled out a sword, which the Marquis had to pull back with his bare left hand, having been wounded.


This is how viewers of the film “Midshipmen, Forward” (1987) saw the French Ambassador D'Allon

D'Allon was recalled to Paris, while Chetardie was ordered to intensify his activities.

Meanwhile, in 1744, the search for a bride for the heir to the throne began. Chancellor Bestuzhev insisted on the candidacy of the Saxon princess Marianne, the daughter of Augustus III. Chétardy, Lestocq and Brumaire advocated for Sophia Augusta Frederica of Anhalt-Zerbst, whose father served Frederick II, and whose mother carried out some delicate assignments for the Prussian king. Friedrich's protégé won this competition due to two circumstances.

Firstly, she was “poor, like a church mouse” and therefore, as it seemed to Elizabeth, she should have been overjoyed and behaved quietly and meekly at court, given birth to her husband’s children and not got involved in politics.

On the other hand, her mother was the sister of Elizabeth’s fiancé, who really wanted this marriage. But the prince died on the eve of the wedding, and this was a terrible blow for Elizabeth. The empress's sentimental memories played a big role then.

With the 15-year-old German princess came her 33-year-old mother, Johanna, who, as we have already said, immediately became an ally of Chetardy and Lestocq.

Defeat of Chetardy and his allies


It seemed that clouds began to gather over Bestuzhev, but, not being a good politician
and a diplomat, he turned out to be simply an outstanding court intriguer. It was Bestuzhev who at one time created the famous “black office”, which was engaged in illustrating diplomatic letters. European diplomats, of course, were very prudent people and encrypted their letters.

However, Bestuzhev managed to find an excellent specialist who could “click” foreign ciphers like seeds. He became a Prussian mathematician of Jewish origin and Russian academician Christian Goldbach, a former teacher of Peter II. He, however, had his own principles, and he refused to decipher the correspondence of his “native” Prussian embassy. But the letters from Shetardy were enough.

Bestuzhev collected 69 sheets of incriminating evidence against the Marquis, Lestocq and Johanna, and in 1744, at the right moment, he slipped Elizabeth a folder with an intriguing inscription:

“To Her Majesty, not only the most secret and most important, but also very terrible content.”

If these documents had dealt with serious political intrigue, Elizabeth would probably have read a few lines, put them aside and forgotten them in a couple of days. But Bestuzhev knew his empress well: the proposed passages contained unpleasant characteristics of Elizabeth herself. Chetardie wrote that she:

“Accepts the opinions of his ministers only in order to get rid of the opportunity to think.”

What's because of her

“Vanity, weakness and rashness make it impossible to have a serious conversation with her.”

Stated:

“Elizabeth needs peace only in order to use money for her pleasures, and not for war, her main desire is to change four dresses in a day, and therefore see admiration and servility around her. The thought of the slightest activity frightens and angers her.”

He also called her lazy and promiscuous. Elizabeth's reaction was lightning fast and quite predictable. In June 1744, Shetardy received an order to go abroad within 24 hours - under the escort of six soldiers and an officer.

In Novgorod, a courier caught up with him and demanded the return of Elizabeth’s gift - a snuff box decorated with diamonds. D'Allon returned to St. Petersburg and brought with him the credentials so desired by Elizabeth, in which the King of France recognized her as the empress.

On September 28, 1745, Princess Johanna of Zerbst was expelled from Russia, who, however, received 50 thousand rubles from the empress as a farewell, as well as two chests of expensive fabrics and jewelry. Her daughter was left in Russia and nevertheless became the wife of the heir to the throne, and then, as we know, she organized a conspiracy that ended in the murder of her husband, Emperor Peter III.

Lestok lost his former influence on Elizabeth. He could not accept defeat and in 1747 tried to act against Bestuzhev in alliance with the Prussian ambassador Fink von Finckenstein. But the clever courtier Bestuzhev again intercepted his letters in 1748. On his orders, Lestocq was tortured, forcing him to confess to malicious intent on Elizabeth’s life.

These accusations were not confirmed, but the empress still sent him into exile - first to Uglich, and then to Veliky Ustyug. For 13 years, the man who actually elevated Elizabeth to the throne lived in poverty, barely making ends meet. He was returned to St. Petersburg by Peter III - after the death of this empress.

The last years of the life of the Marquis de Chétardie


Immediately upon his arrival in France, Chetardie was arrested and placed in the prison of the Montpellier fortress: we remember that Paris aime les vainqueurs (“Paris loves winners”). And he really doesn't like losers. However, no major sins were found against Shetardie. He was released and sent to fight in Italy.

In 1749 he returned to diplomatic activity - he became the French envoy to the Turin court. During the Seven Years' War he again found himself in the army, took part in the battle of Rosbach, and served as commandant of the city of Hanau. He rose to the rank of lieutenant general and died in the German (Hesse-Kassel) city of Hanau in 1759 - at the age of 51.
Our news channels

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

64 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    February 11 2024
    Not enough films have been made from that era. Where are our Dumas and the new Yungvald-Khilkevichs?
    1. +1
      February 11 2024
      Quote: MCmaximus
      Not enough films have been made from that era. Where are our Dumas and the new Yungvald-Khilkevichs?

      What did you not like about V. Pikul and N. Sorotokina?
      1. +4
        February 11 2024
        How much does Pikul have? Yes, and Pikul’s heroes have no charisma. Well maybe. except for Potemkin. Who is Sorotokina? I know Dumas. I’ll say right away that I won’t take revenge on everyone.
        1. +5
          February 11 2024
          Quote: MCmaximus
          How much does Pikul have?

          I remember that in my youth I read it with avidity, even worse than Dumas wink
        2. +8
          February 11 2024
          Well, why not... And midshipman Panafidin? And the scout with Napoleon's profile? And Artenev from Moonzund? It’s generally strange to me that right now, when cinema has limitless possibilities in terms of visualizing complex battle scenes, films have not yet been made about the defense of Port Arthur, the Battle of Tsushima, about the activities of the Vladivostok cruiser detachment, about the defense of Moonsund, etc. (we do not take into account rare one-piece film adaptations from the times of the USSR). After all, you can now film such epic sagas about these heroic moments of Russian history... But no, it’s all overkill and the words of the boys
          1. +1
            February 11 2024
            "scout with Napoleon's profile", something from Pikul?
            Panafidin? I haven't read it
            1. +6
              February 11 2024
              Quote from lisikat2
              "scout with Napoleon's profile", something from Pikul?

              Yes. The novel "I have the honor."
              Quote from lisikat2
              Panafidin?

              "The cruiser"
              1. 0
                February 11 2024
                I haven't read "Cruiser"
                1. +5
                  February 11 2024
                  So read it. Very interesting story
          2. +3
            February 11 2024
            During the heyday of socialism, the creative intelligentsia greatly blamed censorship, complaining that without it it would have flooded the country with masterpieces of poetry, painting, prose and cinematography. Now there is no censorship, but there is nothing worthy of attention from the works of the righteous of our creative elite. This means it’s not a matter of censorship or even money, a systemic crisis is covering everything, like a bombing of squares..
        3. +2
          February 11 2024
          Based on Sorotokina's book, a series about midshipmen was made.
          1. +1
            February 11 2024
            When I read “Chetardie” I remembered “Midshipmen”.
            I like the first part better. There's more romanticism there
        4. +9
          February 11 2024
          Quote: MCmaximus
          Who is Sorotokina? I know Dumas.

          It's funny, but in literary circles Nina Matveevna was sometimes jokingly called Mother Dumas)))
          In my opinion, her tetralogy “Three from the Navigation School” is in no way inferior to the famous trilogy about the musketeers.
          Just don’t judge her by Druzhinina’s film adaptation. If the first part still more or less follows the outline of the original work, then then the fierce gag began
          1. +1
            February 11 2024
            “Gag” I agree: the first part is bright, and then... Only out of respect for the first part "looks"
      2. +10
        February 11 2024
        Why did you not like V. Pikul

        Pikul did a great job - he aroused many, including me, interest in history. But here’s the paradox: when, under the influence of Pikul, I began to read something more serious, I suddenly discovered that I could no longer re-read Pikul - there were so many blunders that simply caught my eye.
        1. +6
          February 11 2024
          that I can no longer re-read Pikul - there are so many blunders that simply catch my eye.
          It was the same with Walter Scott's Ivanhoe. As a child I read with interest, but as an adult I read and spat. There was no need to re-read it.
          1. +9
            February 11 2024
            As Vladimir Semenovich sang - Don’t go to old addresses)))
    2. +7
      February 11 2024
      Quote: MCmaximus
      Where are our Dumas and the new Yungvald-Khilkevichs?

      We need our T. Mommsens, E. Gibbons and Plutarchs, not Dumas and Pikul...
      1. +7
        February 11 2024
        Quote: Luminman
        We need our T. Mommsens, E. Gibbons and Plutarchs, not Dumas and Pikul...

        We need both. You can't start with Plutarch, unless, of course, you want to instill in your children an aversion to reading.
        We are accustomed to treating, so to speak, “low-brow” literature with much greater zeal than the like in cinema, television or the theater. This is a tradition, a sign of good manners, etc. I understand everything, I do not strive to be original, but I want to pay tribute to this “low-class” one. And not only because it teaches you to respect the book and, to use Tolstoy’s language, to “love” it, but because it is pure in its origins. In her, goodness always triumphs, in her we always punish vice, in her women are beautiful and men are brave, she despises servility and cowardice and sings hymns to love and nobility. In any case, this is how it was, this literature, in the days of my childhood.
        Boris Vasilyev
        1. VLR
          +5
          February 11 2024
          You can't start with Plutarch, unless, of course, you want to instill in your children an aversion to reading.

          In my opinion, Plutarch’s “Comparative Lives” are very interestingly written. And Herodotus is a brilliant “fiction writer” smile
        2. +5
          February 11 2024
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          You can't start with Plutarch, unless, of course, you want to instill in your children an aversion to reading

          Let me disagree with you! Of course, I don’t remember my first book, but when I learned to read, one of the books I read on my own was Dunno on the Moon. And besides just a fascinating and interesting fairy-tale book, I learned a lot from it, for example, I learned what a share and a joint-stock company are and much, much more.

          As I remember now, in the third grade, I read a book about the struggle of the Dutch with Spain. Unfortunately, I forgot the author and the title of the book, I took it from the library, but I also learned from it that there was a Duke of Alba, there were Guezs, there was King Philip, there was the siege of Leiden, I heard about Protestantism for the first time and much more. This book was written specifically for the age I was at, but I learned a lot from it. And all this was before we started going through all this in school during history lessons. I will also say that there was nothing like that in this book, unlike Dumas, which would distort history - the author simply followed historical canons, but at the same time inventing a 10-year-old hero. These are our T. Mommsens, E. Gibbons and Plutarchs, but only for children and teenagers...

          P.S. And from A. Dumas, V. Scott and V. Pikul, there is no use - ordinary sofa reading, read and forgot. For example, I haven’t read a single Dumas novel to the end...
          1. +3
            February 12 2024
            Till Eulenspiegel?
            Likely.
            1. +2
              February 12 2024
              Quote: MCmaximus
              Till Eulenspiegel?

              No. About a boy who got into trouble during the war in the Netherlands. The guy is fictional, but the historical background is real...
              1. +2
                February 12 2024
                Quote: Luminman
                No. About a boy who got into trouble during the war in the Netherlands. The guy is fictional, but the historical background is real...

                "Kees - Admiral of Tulips" Sergienko?
                Of course, you may not agree with me. But in essence, we are talking about the same thing. You just need to understand that a historical novel and a scientific monograph are different genres. You shouldn’t demand complete authenticity from the first, but entertainingness from the second. But it’s better to start with something entertaining.
                As an example, I can cite our “Walter Scott”, in the sense of Lazhechnikov. After the release of his novel “The Ice House,” St. Petersburg residents became keenly interested in the history of their city. They rushed to look for Volynsky’s house, in front of which carriages suddenly began to crowd. From a historical point of view, his novel, of course, is not very good. But he was able to interest readers and encourage them to study history.
                The same can be said about Pikul. For the late USSR this was a breakthrough.
                1. +2
                  February 12 2024
                  Quote: Senior Sailor
                  "Kees - Admiral of Tulips" Sergienko?
                  Exactly! So many years have passed, I forgot...

                  Quote: Senior Sailor
                  Historical novel and scientific monograph - different genres

                  I agree with this. But a historical novel should still correspond to history, and not confuse and lead the reader to an unknown place...

                  Quote: Senior Sailor
                  The same can be said about Pikul. For the late USSR it was a breakthrough

                  Pikul writes well, I’ve read all of him. But there are too many gags. For example in the novel Requiem Caravan PQ-17 he writes about 50 destroyers that the Americans gave them. According to him, these destroyers were complete rubbish, and 8 of them never reached Europe - they capsized in the Atlantic due to old age. Well, this is complete nonsense! I read the real story of this convoy later, in a more serious book. Is it really impossible to maintain historical accuracy in the description in the book, inventing only the main characters and constructing a plot?
                  1. 0
                    February 12 2024
                    For the general public in the USSR, this is approximately how they wrote. It was extremely difficult to impossible to find anything serious.
                    1. +1
                      February 12 2024
                      Quote: MCmaximus
                      For the general masses in the USSR, this is approximately what they wrote

                      Such literature took away all these broad mass far away from the real information...
                      1. 0
                        February 12 2024
                        From the point of view of educational programs and propaganda, no more is needed. Ordinary people think in cliches. But we are an inquisitive people. And he immediately begins to accuse the authorities of distorting history. Kaa will only read at least one book. Everyone is smart. For some reason, no one wants to separate history as an educational program from scientific history.
                  2. +1
                    February 12 2024
                    Quote: Luminman
                    But there are too many gags.

                    Savich had such a sin)))
                    There is a story going around that Konetsky once reprimanded him, saying, Valya, it wasn’t the same...
                    And he - you, the readers, will not please!
                    ))))
  2. +4
    February 11 2024
    An article about the rise and fall of Chetardie at the Russian imperial court. Otherwise, it was not noted for anything else.
    1. VLR
      +3
      February 11 2024
      He introduced Russian aristocrats to champagne, and his chef Barido - to French cuisine. smile
      And he laid the foundations for the gallomania of Russian nobles. Quite a lot too, if you think about it.
      1. +4
        February 11 2024
        Quite a lot too, if you think about it.
        So that’s not what I’m talking about. As Panikovsky would say: “A pathetic, insignificant person.”
        1. +4
          February 11 2024
          Quote: parusnik
          As Panikovsky would say: “Pitiful, insignificant person”

          He would also say that this pathetic and insignificant person simply makes him laugh... wink
        2. +4
          February 11 2024
          laid the foundations for the gallomania of Russian nobles


          So that's not what I'm talking about.


          As they would say now, “soft power”. The upbringing of children was transferred to the hands of the French, and Russian nobles often had French as their first language, and Russian only as their second. How many fans of Napoleon there were later - even when they began to fight against him, right up to 1812. And then, after the victory, paradoxically, French influence increased - because many soldiers and officers who lagged behind in 1812 became tutors in those families that previously could not afford a “real Frenchman” as a teacher and educator of children.
          1. +4
            February 11 2024
            laid the foundations for the gallomania of Russian nobles
            Who is the culprit? If there had been no Shetardie and no gallomania? smile
          2. 0
            February 11 2024
            Vet, I note that our Valery also respects Bonoparte, but he is not one of the aristocrats
            1. +10
              February 11 2024
              Quote from lisikat2
              Valery also respects Bonoparte

              Napoleon is respected by many)))
              1. +2
                February 11 2024
                Quote: Senior Sailor
                Quote from lisikat2
                Valery also respects Bonoparte

                Napoleon is respected by many)))

                And isn't the famous cake named after him?
              2. 0
                February 11 2024
                I don’t know this “Napoleon”.
                I prefer ::"Massandra" dessert Fanagoria
      2. +4
        February 11 2024
        Chétardie did not do much.
        He is a talented swindler. An imbecile wouldn't be able to do so much
      3. +4
        February 11 2024
        And he laid the foundations for the gallomania of Russian nobles.
        Gallomania appeared after the Great French Revolution, when royalists migrated en masse from France to Russia.
        1. +1
          February 12 2024
          So, anyway, Elizaveta Petrovna preferred to speak French.
          1. 0
            February 12 2024
            So, anyway, Elizaveta Petrovna preferred to speak French.
            Well, the French appeared en masse at the end of the 18th century for a very good reason - the guillotine began to work in their place of residence.
  3. +4
    February 11 2024
    Thank you very much Valery for the article! It was very interesting! hi
  4. +4
    February 11 2024
    Falling from higher heights is more painful. But while you are falling, there may be those who will lay down straws. Or maybe they will catch you in your fall and raise you up again.
    And being a lower rank, you cannot provide for your children and grandchildren; everyone who is a little higher tries to kick you, and everyone who is a little lower tries to blame. Strive for power, for those who have power.

    Thank you! Interesting read. But you probably didn’t have enough time before publication.
    It was as if you had to quickly search for sources and use not what you wanted, but what you found.
  5. +7
    February 11 2024
    In addition, Bestuzhev did not deny himself the regular consumption of alcoholic beverages.

    Name me at least one “teetotaler” among the associates of Peter the Great and I will agree to consider this a vice)))
    And he was, as they say, “bought outright” by the Austrians and the British, whose “pensions” significantly exceeded his official salary.

    As sad as it is to say this, this was the norm, but...
    Despite the fact that they took everything, not everyone remembered the interests of their fatherland.
    Bestuzhev-Ryumin is just one of the latter.
    Frederick II wrote about Bestuzhev:

    Was there not enough money, or did you not take it from him? I’m indignant with you))))
    But the diplomatic talents of the chancellor were such that Russia managed to enter the Seven Years' War on the side of the allied Austria and the enemy France against the “natural ally” - England and friendly Prussia.

    Two questions:
    1) When did England and I declare war on each other?
    Imagine, this has happened many times in history, when a member of a coalition fights against one enemy, but is on friendly terms with his allies.
    This is not to mention the fact that such a strange configuration is by no means the merit of Bestuzhev. As if the European diplomatic departments were acting weird))
    2) How did Friedrich show his “friendliness” towards us?
    Well, besides the fact that he pinched our allies?
    1. +4
      February 11 2024
      “just their last ones” is accurately noted. Bestuzhev took the money, but remembered that he was Russian.
      “would have sold his mistress at auction” that Friedrich did not buy her?
      By herself, she’s “nothing for nothing” (C), but as the ruler of Russia... A completely different conversation
    2. VLR
      +3
      February 11 2024
      Two questions

      They fought against Prussia, whose ally was England. In World War II, for example, the British did not fight against the Hungarians, but they were allies of Germany.
      As for Prussia, Frederick did not want war with Russia, and Russia did not even have a border with Prussia. And subsequently, until the First World War, relations between Russia and Prussia were the most friendly. The Seven Years' War is an incomprehensible episode that remains a mystery to historians - neither the goals nor the tasks of Russia in this unpopular war are clear. Everyone breathed a sigh of relief when Peter III concluded a peace treaty with Frederick. But! He concluded it in exchange for military assistance against Denmark, which occupied part of his ancestral possessions. And no one wanted to fight at all - not with anyone or against anyone. Especially the guard. And therefore no one objected when Catherine II stopped this war without any conditions at all, simply withdrew troops from East Prussia and returned Königsberg to Frederick (yes, she, not Peter III). And the allies of Elizabeth and Bestuzhev-Ryumin, who were “pinched” by Frederick, simply “wiped out.”
      1. +7
        February 11 2024
        Quote: VlR
        They fought against Prussia, whose ally was England.

        Right. But they did not fight with England, and therefore our trade interests were not infringed.
        Quote: VlR
        And subsequently, until the 1st World War, relations between Russia and Prussia were the most friendly.

        They got it on the horns and realized that it’s better to be friends)
        Quote: VlR
        Everyone breathed a sigh of relief when Peter III concluded a peace treaty with Frederick, but he concluded it in exchange for military assistance against Denmark.

        Yeah. And Denmark is our most ancient enemy! How can you not hit her...
        Valery, I beg you, at least a little objectivity!
        Quote: VlR
        And the allies of Elizabeth and Bestuzhev, who were “pinched” by Frederick, simply “wiped out.”

        And everything there is generally interesting. On the one hand, Prussia seemed to have won, but on the other, from this very victory, it was strained and calmed down for a while, which, in general, suited everyone.
        So there was no particular point in arising.
        Quote: VlR
        returned Königsberg to Friedrich (yes, she, not Peter III)

        I kind of know) But we’re talking about Elizaveta and Bestuzhev?
        1. VLR
          +3
          February 11 2024
          Of course, I am talking about Königsberg, not to you, but to many others, who cannot be dissuaded from the historical myth and convinced that Peter III did not give up either East Prussia or Königsberg to Frederick the Great.
      2. +1
        February 11 2024
        Quote: VlR
        In World War II, for example, the British did not fight against the Hungarians

        In 1941 Britain declared war on Hungary
        1. VLR
          +1
          February 11 2024
          But she did not fight against the Hungarians specifically. How she didn’t fight specifically against the Russians in the Seven Years’ War
          1. +2
            February 11 2024
            Quote: VlR
            But she didn’t fight against the Hungarians specifically

            How did you not fight when these two countries were in a state of war? There may have been no hostilities between them, but this is a matter of simple geography
            1. VLR
              0
              February 11 2024
              So in the Seven Years' War it was a matter of geography. In order to “have the pleasure” of fighting at least with Prussia, it was necessary to negotiate with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth so that it would allow Russian troops to pass through its territory. How to get to England?
              1. +4
                February 11 2024
                Quote: VlR
                had to negotiate with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth

                Well, not exactly. The king of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was the Elector of Saxony, and he was just at war.
                Here, the example of Bulgaria in WWII, which was an ally of Germany but did not fight with the USSR, or Italy in WWII is much more appropriate. Which declared war on Austria-Hungary on May 23, 1915, and on Germany only on August 28, 1916.
  6. +2
    February 11 2024
    Good health to everyone.
    Valery, I want to note that the “Brunswick” surname was not popular in society.
    The name Peter 1 was popular in the guard
    "Guys, do you know whose daughter I am?" that's two.
    Now, third. : “to get rid of the opportunity to think,” a humiliating assessment, but Elizaveta Petrovna knew how to maneuver between the palace “parties” and managed to put herself above. Her word was decisive, which means she was smart
    1. VLR
      +3
      February 11 2024
      You are mistaken, Anna Leopoldovna was very popular. The same Chetardy, who did so much to organize the conspiracy against the Brunswickers, wrote about her:
      “There has never been an example of a race showing such genuine joy.”
      .
      H. Manstein recalls:
      “No one had reason to complain, since Russia had never been ruled with greater meekness, as during the year of the reign of the Grand Duchess. She loved to show mercy, and was, apparently, the enemy of all severity.

      Prussian envoy A. von Mardefeld:
      "The current government is the softest of all that have been in this state."

      P. I. Panin (nobleman from the time of Catherine II):
      “All the Russian people felt a beneficial change in government; the compassionate and merciful heart of the ruler rushed to alleviate the plight of the unfortunate...
      Every day she looked through the cases of the most important exiles, submitting to the Senate to ease the fate of others. The number of every rank of people languishing in captivity extended to many thousands of people. Those who were under torture in St. Petersburg were immediately released.
      1. +1
        February 11 2024
        Valery, you left me: I haven’t read them.
        I have respect for Klyuchevsky. Karamzin, a peculiar author. He is more of a “moral teacher” and then a historian.
        You, of course, know how Klyuchevsky wrote about Anna Leopoldovna. I fell for the remark that the ministers were squabbling
        The ruler didn’t have the intelligence to “maneuver” and keep the last word for herself
  7. +3
    February 11 2024
    “introduce into the Senate”, and then “soup with a cat* and I would be glad to bite myself on the elbow, and not get it.
    Comrades, I may be wrong, but Elizaveta Petrovna was the best option for Russia
    1. VLR
      +3
      February 11 2024
      Many people disagree with this. Not only did she not take care of business and spend huge amounts of money on rags and strange “transvestite balls”, to which men had to come in dresses (the spectacle, one must assume, was disgusting), and women in men’s suits, but she also allowed herself to be drawn into Russia into the unnecessary Seven Years' War, from victories in which our country received nothing but huge losses and complete financial breakdown. As a result, Russia entered a new war with Turkey under Catherine II without really replenishing the regiments that had suffered heavy losses, and without really training recruits. Fortunately, Catherine had the intelligence to suck up in advance to the faithful Peter III Rumyantsev, who, slamming the door, resigned after the assassination of the emperor. Yes, let me remind you, just in case, I don’t know when: she gave East Prussia and Königsberg to Frederick without any conditions Catherine II. Peter III, on the contrary, strengthened the group of Russian troops, headed by Rumyantsev, for a joint campaign with Frederick against Denmark. And only after the victory over Denmark, someday, when the situation in Europe was favorable, he vaguely promised to withdraw troops to Russia.
  8. +1
    February 11 2024
    Grateful Elizabeth awarded the marquis two orders at once - St. Andrew the First-Called and St. Anne...

    It is very doubtful that Elizabeth would award anyone with the Order of St. Anna. At the time in question, it was a dynastic order of the Holstein-Gottorp Duchy, to which her sister Anna (in whose memory the order was established) was related, but not Elizabeth herself. In the system of awards of the Russian Empire, the Order of St. Anna didn’t come in at all then.
    Maybe the second order was after all the Order of Alexander Nevsky?
  9. +3
    February 11 2024
    It seemed that clouds began to gather over Bestuzhev, but, not being a good politician and diplomat, he turned out to be simply an outstanding court intriguer. It was Bestuzhev who at one time created the famous “black office”, which was engaged in illustrating diplomatic letters. European diplomats, of course, were very prudent people and encrypted their letters.
    However, Bestuzhev managed to find an excellent specialist who could “click” foreign ciphers like seeds.

    Everything described represents Bestuzhev as at least a brilliant tactician. As for strategy, seemingly illogical actions, however, produced results that suited the Russian throne and irritated intriguers from Europe. All these missions entrusted to Lestocq and the hero of the article cannot be called anything other than intrigue. Bestuzhev outplayed them. Hey, he's a corrupt alcoholic)
  10. 0
    February 12 2024
    During the Seven Years' War [Chetardie] again found himself in the army, took part in the battle of Rosbach, and served as commandant of the city of Hanau. He rose to the rank of lieutenant general and died in the German (Hesse-Kassel) city of Hanau in 1759 - at the age of 51.

    In fact, Ganau and Hanau are the same city. Its correct name is Hanau am Main: “Hanau am Main”, if pronounced as the Germans pronounce it, or “Ganau am Main”, if pronounced as is customary in Russia.
    ([media=https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A5%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%83])
  11. 0
    February 12 2024
    Quote: VlR
    But she didn’t fight against the Hungarians specifically

    The British Air Force took part in raids on Hungary, bombed railways, stations, and other communications
    The Danube was mined

"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; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"