Ivan the Terrible and the Meaning of the Livonian War

6 654 62
Ivan the Terrible and the Meaning of the Livonian War
Ivan the Terrible in Livonia (The Capture of the Livonian Fortress of Kokenhausen by Ivan the Terrible). Artist: P. P. Sokolov-Skalya


Black myth


Ivan the Terrible is one of the most effective rulers of Rus' throughout its history. historyHe restored a great empire-state that united the legacy of both the Rurikid-Sokolov Rus' and the Horde Rus' (the heirs of the Scythian-Siberian world of the Rus' super-ethnos).



Therefore, Westerners and liberals, armed with European slanderous conjectures and information warfare manuals, tried to denigrate and discredit the great Russian sovereign. They accused him of everything: a despot and tyrant, the murderer of his son, a drunkard and a bloody oprichnik who drowned the country in blood."Black Myth" about the first Russian Tsar Ivan the Terrible).

They even went so far as to accuse Ivan Vasilyevich of laying the foundations for the Great Troubles of the early 17th century. Although he was succeeded by his son, Fyodor Ivanovich, and the Godunov dynasty, under whom Rus' developed quite successfully.

In particular, for over two hundred years, a historical theory has been constructed that the Muscovite Tsardom was drawn into the disastrous Livonian War due to the mistakes of Ivan IV. They say they should not have "cut a window" to Europe, but continued their advance south and east, and following the conquest of the Kazan and Astrakhan Khanates, they should have gone beyond the Urals and seized Crimea. The demographic and economic losses in the Livonian War ultimately caused the Time of Troubles.

In reality, Ivan the Terrible had no choice. He had a strategic vision and understood that Rus' must move forward and develop. This is what Russia's future history demonstrated. The national challenges that the great Russian sovereign attempted to address were addressed after him by Tsars Alexei Mikhailovich and Peter I Alexeevich. Under Catherine the Great. This included the creation of a powerful state with an economic base, a regular army, and fleet, with access to the Baltic and Black Seas. The reunification of the entire Russian land and the Russian people.

"Window to Europe"


State policy is the concentrated expression of economics, a tool for realizing fundamental economic interests. All policy is based on an economic foundation.

Let me remind you that during the reign of Ivan Vasilyevich (1533–1584), there were two leading powers in Eastern Europe: the Russian state and Poland, which included the lands of today's Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, and Ukraine. Rus', which faced the harshest natural and climatic conditions, simply could not compete with the other powers. To see this, one can simply compare the average annual temperatures in Moscow and Novgorod with those in Berlin, Paris, and Rome. This is very well described in Andrey Parshev's work "Why Russia Is Not America."

Russia was also cut off from the main maritime routes (the Mediterranean, the Atlantic, and the North Sea), through which most global trade flowed. This meant that Muscovite Rus' was on the periphery of the emerging global economic system.

To change the situation, it was necessary to become a leading grain exporter. The grain market became the first and most capacious pan-European commodity market of the time. It absorbed the funds siphoned off from the American colonies. By becoming the leading grain exporter, Moscow gained a stable source of revenue for its treasury and development. This way, Russia could return to the mainstream politics and economics of Europe.

But for this Several overarching objectives had to be addressed. First, it was necessary to complete the reunification of the Russian lands and recapture the grateful lands of the former Kievan Rus' from the Poles and Lithuanians. The lands that would later be called "Ukraine," from the Russian word for "ukraina-okraina." The chernozems there are rich and fertile, and the winters are much milder than in northeastern Rus'. The soils in the Non-Chernozem region are poor and podzolic, and the winters are long. Yields are low: at best, 3%, meaning for every seed sown, three were harvested, meaning the harvest was three times greater than the original. And during the Little Ice Age (a period of global relative cooling that occurred on Earth from the 14th to the 19th centuries), yields fell even further.

Therefore, it was necessary to reconquer the lands of the former Kyiv and Volyn regions. To begin reclaiming the so-called "Wild Field"—the forest-steppes and steppes of the former Southern Rus', devastated by the predatory raids and campaigns of the steppe dwellers and Crimeans. These lands had to be recaptured from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Poland, not forgetting the southern front—the Crimean Khanate. An incredibly complex task.

A second objective followed from this. It was necessary to critically weaken the alliance of Poland and Lithuania (from 1569, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth), the main exporter of grain to Europe and Moscow's geopolitical adversary, backed by the Roman Catholic world.

Thirdly, it was necessary to create a direct transit corridor through the Baltic to Northern Europe Denmark, Holland, Northern Germany, Northern France, and England. These were Russia's main trading partners, the economic leaders of Europe at the time. To achieve this, it was necessary to regain access to the Baltic Sea (via the Ingrian lands) and reclaim the Baltic cities and ports—Narva, Reval (Tallinn), Dorpat (Russian Yuryev), and Riga. These had to be recaptured not only from the decrepit Livonian Order, but also from Poland and Sweden, who had their eye on them.

Incidentally, these objectives remain relevant today. For Russia to regain its status as a great power empire, control over Southern Rus' (today's Ukraine) and the Baltics is essential. These are questions of economics, strategy, and national security.

War of civilizations


So Ivan the Terrible didn't have many options. Insanely complex tasks ultimately took nearly two centuries to resolve, including the governments of Alexei Mikhailovich, Peter I, and Catherine the Great. Over the course of several bloody and protracted wars, a "window to Europe" was opened on the Baltic. In several stages, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was defeated (even to the point of eliminating Polish statehood) and the lands of Southern and Western Rus' were reclaimed.

But doing nothing was impossible! After all, Poland, having "digested" Southwestern Rus' and fully integrated into Europe, would then lock itself into all trade and financial flows in Eastern Europe. To the north and south, the blockade was maintained by Sweden and the Crimean Khanate, backed by the powerful Ottoman Empire. Muscovite Rus' would become isolated, a second-rate power, and would suffer the same fate as insular China. Becoming an economic semi-colony under the guns of the European powers, it would either be torn to pieces and devoured.

That's why Moscow began the Livonian War, marching its regiments against the degraded Livonian Order. The war began victoriously. Livonia was falling apart. Russian troops recaptured Narva and Reval. The powerful Russian artillery She cracked the old knight's castles like nuts. It seemed that just a little more and victory would be complete.

However, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth came to the aid of Livonia, or rather, to swallow it up (the Union of Lublin united the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania). Then, one of the most powerful military powers in Europe at the time, Sweden, which also laid claim to the Baltic lands, opposed Moscow. The Crimean Horde, supported by the Ottoman Turks, attacked from the south. Rus' was forced to fight powerful enemies on three fronts – west, north, and south. The enemy was supported by almost all of Europe: Hungarian troops fighting under the banner of Stefan Batory, mercenaries from the German principalities, Italy, England, and Scotland. Poland was supported by the German Emperor and the Holy See.

A conventional war between two Eastern European states – Muscovy and Livonia – turned into a civilizational confrontation. A world war between West and East, with the Muslim world (Crimea and Turkey) also involved. A religious war between Catholics and Protestants (Lutherans) against the Orthodox. "Civilized" Europe against "Russian barbarians," against "Tartaria."

The goal of the Russian invasion of Livonia, according to Livonians Johann Kruse and Elert Taube, was “…the final destruction and devastation of the entire Christian world, the Kingdom of Poland, Lithuania, and our ill-fated homeland… And all these actions were against God, against honor, against the Christian Church…”.

It was then that the mythological image of Russians as bearded, cruel, and terrifying barbarians (Scythians, Huns, Mongols, Cossacks), as eternal aggressors, enemies of the "free and civilized world," the Russian Mordor, was finally formed in Europe. This image has defined the relationship between our civilizations for many centuries. The image of the "Russian threat" was used during the Livonian War, the Great Northern War of the early 18th century, under Hitler and Reagan, and under Obama and Trump.

In the eyes of the West, such a people had no right to independent existence. They had to be conquered, subjugated, and subjugated, forever deprived of the right to independence. Therefore, already during the Livonian War, plans were being made to occupy Rus', turning it into a colony of the Western powers, and its population into slaves. They were also planning to destroy Orthodoxy. All these plans were being formulated long before Hitler, Goebbels, Rosenberg, and the other Nazis with their "Ost" plan. Before Reagan and the Reaganites with their cries of an "evil empire."

Then the wealthier and more populous West (the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth alone had a population one and a half times greater than that of the Russian Tsardom) with Turkish support defeated Rus'. Ivan the Terrible was forced to retreat.

However, the problem that could not be solved under Ivan Vasilyevich has not gone away. Ultimately, Rus' reclaimed its lands, defeated the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Sweden, and occupied the Baltics and Crimea. It established trade and economic corridors to Europe, and thwarted plans to transform "wild Tartary" into a Western colony.
62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    5 February 2026 06: 21
    It's all clear there... The very postulate that Russia should have gone after the Ottomans, the very empire that, when it met them, would have driven all of Europe wild! It's clear that Europe would have been perfectly happy with that; they would have come to the ruins and enslaved everyone. The logic of jackals; well, they were nothing else.
    1. -8
      5 February 2026 06: 28
      The Ottomans did not pose any threat to Russia at all, due to the peculiarities of Turkish logistics, but it was possible to seize the black soil.
      As for Livonia, they didn't go there for some windows, but for the land. Novgorod landowners, who couldn't get their hands on that same black soil, practically seized Narva by Basmanov. The result was a three-front war, the collapse of Moscow, the devastation of the country, serfdom, and unrest. Although serfdom would have existed anyway.
      1. +8
        5 February 2026 06: 33
        Yeah, right, we had no idea! Why haven't we touched the Crimean Tatar Khanate for who knows how long? Despite their incessant raids? Because they're practically part of the Ottoman Empire—if you touch them, they'd instantly send out the Janissaries, and the forces there are simply incomparable—Russia simply couldn't physically field that many troops, let alone cannons; it would have been a one-sided war! But in the scenario that unfolded, we dodged a total war of annihilation, miraculously, but we did. A direct invasion of the Ottoman zone of interest would have certainly ruined all those Ottoman campaigns on Vienna and the Balkans—they would have gone with the main army—and Rus' would have quickly been finished.
        1. -6
          5 February 2026 07: 47
          The Sultan's army set out from Adrianople at the end of May, if they had assembled properly. By the end of the summer, the troops had reached, say, Hungary. By October, it was already too cold for the right-wing to fight, and everyone went home.
          Consequently, the Sultan could not have sent any Janissaries to Moscow; they would not have been able to reach even Belgorod, even in theory.
          1. +8
            5 February 2026 08: 06
            Shota hadn't heard that the Koran forbade war after summer... And how did the Ottomans reach Vienna three times when they couldn't reach Belgorod? And Devlet Giray burned Moscow under Ivan the Terrible, precisely with Ottoman support. Another thing is that the Sultan didn't give a damn about Moscow; at that time, he was busy making money for the Europeans in Corsica. If he'd given up and headed north, the Khan would have definitely come to Rus'.
            1. +2
              5 February 2026 08: 12
              I don’t know what you read there, but in October the Janissaries were going home, and that’s why they couldn’t take Vienna.
              The Janissaries attacked Astrakhan once, and everyone died.
            2. +3
              5 February 2026 08: 35
              Quote: Foggy Dew
              when they didn't reach Belgorod

              Just in case, let me remind you that Belgorod and Belgrade are different cities and are located very far from each other) drinks
            3. 0
              5 February 2026 18: 03
              Russia was the third priority for the Ottomans.
              Europe is second.
              The main strategic theme is the Persians. The rest are secondary.
              1. 0
                5 February 2026 20: 21
                After the catastrophic defeat at Vienna by the Polish king, the Turkish Empire began a slow decline... which ended with the collapse of the empire in the 20th century.
                Turkey before Vienna and after Vienna - there is a big difference... if before Vienna the Turks planned to create an empire with access to the Polish Baltic, and the annexation of Germany, then after Vienna, they no longer even dreamed of anything like that, the Russian Empire was still fighting with a weakened Turkey... whose zenith of power had passed
                1. 0
                  5 February 2026 23: 16
                  One defeat is not enough for decline to begin.
                  The Turks lost their army. But they still had territory, men, and money. And what losses? 15,000 killed and 10,000 captured? Recruiting new ones is no problem, plus five years of training.
                  So this is not the reason for the decline.
                  1. 0
                    5 February 2026 23: 23
                    To clarify, they never dreamed of reaching the Baltic and annexing Germany and Austria... A monument to the Polish king Jan Sobieski, commander of the Polish-German forces near Vienna, was erected even in London... and that is very far from Turkey and the Turkish threat... Under Cromwell, the monument was remade into a monument to him - Cromwell
                    1. 0
                      5 February 2026 23: 24
                      I'm not sure we would have advanced very far even after victory in Vienna. Again, the main theater of operations is Persia.
                      1. 0
                        5 February 2026 23: 34
                        What would prevent you from moving forward?
                      2. 0
                        6 February 2026 08: 55
                        Of the 200-strong Ottoman army, less than half were Turks. The rest were local Europeans: Hungarians, Wallachians, and others. So they would have had to go north. They would have fought a war!
                        But the Turks couldn't abandon their eastern borders for long. They only managed to resolve the Persian problem in the 18th century.
                    2. 0
                      6 February 2026 09: 13
                      Quote: bondov
                      To clarify, they never dreamed of reaching the Baltic and joining Germany and Austria.

                      You have a very strange, infantile understanding of history.
                      I would like to note that the Turks remained close to the borders of Germany until the 18th century.
                      Serbia was liberated after a grueling war only in 1877, a century after Vienna. And not by the Serbs themselves, but by the Russian army.
                      The Battle of Vienna certainly damaged the Ottoman Empire, but you greatly overestimate it. The empire's military machine was still there.
                      And the Battle of Vienna
                      1. 0
                        6 February 2026 18: 18
                        Yes, the small and often dwarf German states of that time were a terrible force, especially if they had been defeated near Vienna...
              2. +1
                8 February 2026 15: 30
                The Persians and Habsburgs nevertheless shared the first priority – in the West and East, respectively. And regarding Russia, it's aptly noted. Incidentally, the Turkish campaign against Astrakhan in 1569, along with the rebellious Nogai, when the Turks attempted to dig a channel through the Volga-Don to transport their artillery, was an attempt at a flanking maneuver, to unexpectedly strike Safavid Persia along the Volga-Caspian route, and Astrakhan was inconveniently located along the route. As for Russia, until the end of Vasily III's reign, the Ottomans generally tried to maintain friendly ties with Moscow in every possible way. Diplomatic ties, incidentally, were established in the 1590s at the initiative of Sultan Bayazet; he was the first to send an embassy to Moscow, which the Lithuanians turned away. Firstly, Crimea was then Moscow's main ally and a Turkish vassal, and the Crimean Khan helped build bridges between Russia and Turkey until the rift with Moscow was complete. Secondly, the Turks knew that the Habsburgs were actively recruiting Moscow to join the anti-Turkish league, and the Turks didn't need another enemy in the Habsburg fold. Thirdly, Moscow became an important hub for the Turkish caravan transit trade, primarily in Indian spices. The Venetians and Portuguese had driven them out of Western European markets with their maritime trade after the discovery of the sea route to India, so Moscow also became an important trading partner. Duty-free trade is a constant theme in ambassadorial books on relations with Turkey. And even under Ivan the Terrible, Turkey didn't yet perceive Moscow as an outright adversary.
          2. 0
            5 February 2026 17: 48
            Quote: Cartalon
            Consequently, the Sultan could not have sent any Janissaries to Moscow; they would not have been able to reach even Belgorod, even in theory.
            However, the Janissary corps took part in the Battle of Molodi.
            1. 0
              5 February 2026 18: 17
              I didn't participate, it's a fairy tale.
            2. +1
              5 February 2026 23: 40
              Pensky V. - Battle of Molodi, July 28 - August 3, 1572
              Certainly, Devlet Giray’s army included several hundred (no more than a thousand) of his own “streltsy,” whom contemporaries had in mind when they spoke of “janissaries” in the service of the Crimean “tsar,”

              A very modern and relevant work
        2. +1
          5 February 2026 08: 40
          Quote: Foggy Dew
          Why was the Crimean Tatar Khanate left alone for who knows how long? Despite their incessant raids?

          Because logistics—the nature of the Russian army was different from that of the Tatars. Foot soldiers, artillery... And here we have waterless steppes. They tried under Sophia, but it didn't work out very well.
          Because they are considered part of the Ottoman Empire, if you touch them, they immediately send out the Janissaries.

          Well, the "moment" of that time is like this. By the time they get through to the Sultan, by the time they gather everything, by the time they equip it, by the time they load it, and then it's already autumn, and in autumn, the faithful are forbidden to fight – it's haram (or so I read above).
          1. +2
            5 February 2026 08: 56
            During the reign of Ivan the Terrible, between the capture of Kazan and the beginning of the Livonian War, Crimea was easily accessible, by river, of course.
          2. +1
            6 February 2026 09: 14
            The problem was one of logistics—that's true. The Crimeans were supported by their navy and the Turks' complete control of the Black Sea.
      2. +1
        5 February 2026 07: 19
        From the first lines it is immediately clear who the author of this work is. lol He doesn't even have to sign his name to the article. This begs the question: what information will readers take away from this "masterpiece"? request
  2. +2
    5 February 2026 09: 34
    The incredibly complex problems that ultimately took almost two centuries to solve were the governments of Alexei Mikhailovich, Peter I, and Catherine the Great.

    They solved them, having the necessary forces and resources, Ivan the Terrible in Livonia took on an impossible task
    1. 0
      6 February 2026 09: 25
      Ivan the Terrible took on an impossible task in Livonia

      In fact, Ivan the Terrible didn't expect to have to fight not just the Order, but practically most of Eastern Europe. Furthermore, he was left politically isolated thanks to a smear campaign largely orchestrated in Poland.
      And the reason for all this is the Europeans' fear of the initial successes and demonstration of Russia's mobilization power. So, in my opinion, Ivan the Terrible carried out his plan; he failed to predict and failed to overcome the powerful counterattack.
  3. +4
    5 February 2026 11: 35
    If, under the Tsars and Emperors, the Russian Tsardom and the Russian Empire lasted for 500 years, growing from a small Moscow principality to the largest empire in the world during this time, while under today's liberal democrats, the borders of the Empire, which they remade into a republic, have been cut back 400 years, with Russia's enemies now appropriating the fashionable but alien status of a republic with the deceptive and false invention of "democracy," then only one thing is clear: Russia urgently needs to return to the path of the Russian Empire. Moreover, much of this will have to be repeated along the same path that Russia traversed under Ivan III the Great, Ivan the Terrible, Alexei Mikhailovich, Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, and even Alexander III. So we shouldn't wait for the US, perhaps very soon, to declare that democracy and republicanism are a false path for development for such great countries as the US, and proclaim the US an Empire and Trump the Emperor. Putin's devotion to Yeltsinism—that is, to the idea of ​​destroying Russia's imperial nature—will prevent this from happening for Russia. We'll be late waiting for the post-Garant era, but there's no other way out of the traps of democracy in government and governance except by returning Russia to its true path as the Russian Empire.
    1. 0
      6 February 2026 09: 10
      Exactly. Proclaim Putin emperor, United Russia party members boyars, and give them serfs with estates. Wow, we'll live in peace. laughing

      Russian history has proven that unlimited, inherited power leads to disaster. And in today's world, with its unlimited information resources, monarchy would collapse instantly.
    2. +1
      6 February 2026 09: 34
      Quote: north 2
      We urgently need to return to the path of the Russian Empire.

      Under Nicholas Romanov, the Russian Empire was full of traitors to the motherland.
      Most of the nobility was openly comprador. So why do you think a return to imperial policies will improve anything? The issue is different and doesn't depend on the form of government. The problem is trivial: economic failure and comparisons with neighbors make people traitors. It is precisely the state elite's failure to understand the importance of real, not inflated, economic success that leads to decline. This is exactly what happened under Khrushchev in the USSR, and exactly the same thing happened in the Russian Empire under Alexander II, then III, and Nicholas II.
  4. +2
    5 February 2026 11: 51
    Author! What kind of state did Ivan the Terrible restore? What was it called before him? He's a dreamer. But he created it...it fits his reign.
    1. +1
      6 February 2026 09: 35
      according to the Ukrainian textbook version, Tatar-Fino-Ugric.
  5. 0
    5 February 2026 12: 35
    Ivan the Terrible is one of the most effective rulers of Rus' in its entire history.

    Yeah, like Paul I or Stalin, for example:
    - Okay, okay, let's go. why!
  6. +3
    5 February 2026 13: 40
    In fact, Ivan the Terrible had no choice.
    Of course, there was no choice, right? After all, the Livonian Order is not monks singing psalms, but natural military unit ,by the way, with aggressive intentions, the in the eastern direction. Drang nach Osten - that's from there. The order itself is not so bad, but through the open gates of the Baltics, always Overseas Varangians flocked to participate in these campaigns. The Russo-Polish and Russo-Swedish wars that followed only confirmed this. Three wars with the Swedes, after the death of Ivan the Terrible and the subsequent intervention during the Time of Troubles, with the creation of a puppet independent Novgorod state in Novgorod, Prince Charles Philip became a claimant to the royal throne and the Grand Prince of Novgorod. Thus, most of the Novgorod lands became formally an independent Novgorod state, under Swedish protectorate, although in essence it was a military occupation. It's good that it didn't work out, but the cost to the Russian state is beyond words. So, Ivan the Terrible was right When starting a war, the idea wasn't to cut a window to Europe, but to seal it up so no Varangians could poke their noses in. All port cities were under control, and trade was allowed, but nothing more. But he couldn't handle it; everyone piled on, reminiscent of today. Peter the Great and Stalin later understood this; the Baltic gates must be there. under Russian control And that's it. It's a vital necessity. But Yeltsin and his followers didn't understand this, having squandered the Baltics in the 90s and now having what we have there.
    1. -1
      6 February 2026 00: 19
      Quote: Unknown
      Of course, there was no choice, rightly so. After all, the Livonian Order wasn't monks singing psalms, but a genuine military unit, incidentally with aggressive intentions, specifically in the eastern direction.


      By the time of the Livonian War, the aggressive intentions of the Livonian Order were a thing of the distant past.

      Quote: Unknown
      but the open gates of the Baltics always attracted overseas Varangians who wanted to take part in these campaigns


      Always is when exactly?

      Quote: Unknown
      The Russian-Polish and Russian-Swedish wars later only confirmed this.


      The Swedes almost always fought through Finland, and with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth through today's Belarus and Ukraine, what does Livonia have to do with it?

      Quote: Unknown
      so that no Varangians would come


      Nobody even tried to go through the Baltics.
      1. +1
        6 February 2026 06: 59
        Quote: Tulus12
        By the time of the Livonian War, the aggressive intentions of the Livonian Order were a thing of the distant past.

        Need I remind you of the history of 7th grade? Why was Ivangorod founded? And the Treaty of Pozvol concluded in 1557 between the Livonian Confederation and the Polish-Lithuanian Union. It grossly violated the Russo-Livonian treaties of 1554 and included an article on a defensive-offensive alliance directed against Moscow.
        Quote: Tulus12
        Always is when exactly?

        From the founding of the Livonian Order to the present day. By the way, where are Barclay de Tolly's ancestors from?
        Quote: Tulus12
        The Swedes almost always fought through Finland, and with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth through today's Belarus and Ukraine, what does Livonia have to do with it?

        Yes...?! A victim of the Unified State Exam? Batory's siege of Pskov, back in Ivan's time? Regarding the Swedes and the visiting Varangians. In 1611, taking advantage of the ten-month truce signed between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Sweden in April, mercenaries—French Huguenots, Scottish, and Dutch Presbyterians under the command of the young Swedish colonels Horn and de la Gardie—having not received the payment promised for their services by Tsar Shuisky, whom they had already overthrown in Moscow on July 29, 1610, began to independently seize Novgorod lands—the Russian border fortresses of Korela, Yam, Ivangorod, Koporye, and Gdov were stormed. On July 16, 1611, Novgorod was attacked by an army of mercenaries. Due to the confusion and the retreat of the Moscow governor Buturlin and his detachment, the city was quickly captured, beginning the six-year occupation of Novgorod. Who borders Ivangorod, Yam, Koporye, and Gdov? And then
        Quote: Tulus12
        No one even tried to get through the Baltics.
        Why didn't they? They did it in the Crimean War, in the Civil War, and don't even mention WWII. Do you even know where Army Group North was advancing? When did the Courland Group surrender, a victim of the Unified State Exam?
        1. 0
          6 February 2026 08: 34
          Quote: Unknown
          In 1611, taking advantage of the fact that a truce had been concluded between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Sweden in April

          What does Livonia have to do with it?
        2. -1
          6 February 2026 20: 01
          Quote: Unknown
          Why was Ivangorod founded?


          Ivangorod was founded sixty years before the Livonian War

          Quote: Unknown
          And the conclusions in 1557 between the Livonian Confederation and the Polish-Lithuanian Union


          This is when a war broke out in Livonia between the Order and the pro-Polish Bishop of Riga, and Poland, Lithuania, and Prussia ultimately declared war on the Livonian Order, leading to the signing of this treaty. Moreover, there is simply no documentary evidence that the Treaty of Pozvol was known in Moscow or that it was the cause of the war.

          Quote: Unknown
          By the way, for example - Barclay de Tolly, where are your ancestors from?


          What difference does it make where his ancestors are from?

          Quote: Unknown
          The siege of Pskov by Batory, still under Ivan?


          Batory's army carried out campaigns from the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, or, more simply, from present-day Belarus.

          Quote: Unknown
          Who do Ivangorod, Yam, Koporye and Gdov border with?


          Actually, the Swedes came from Finland.

          Quote: Unknown
          And they got involved in the Crimean War, the Civil War, and there’s no need to even talk about the Great Patriotic War.


          There is no point in talking about the Crimean and Great Patriotic Wars, because at that time the Baltics belonged to the Russian Empire/USSR.

          Quote: Unknown
          Do you even know where Army Group North was advancing?


          I know, it was advancing from East Prussia.
          1. 0
            7 February 2026 01: 53
            Quote: Tulus12
            Ivangorod was founded sixty years before the Livonian War

            Actually, do you know what we're talking about? It's not about WHEN it was laid, but WHY it was laid.
            Quote: Tulus12
            This is when a war broke out in Livonia between the Order and the pro-Polish Bishop of Riga, and Poland, Lithuania, and Prussia ultimately declared war on the Livonian Order, leading to the signing of this treaty. Moreover, there is simply no documentary evidence that the Treaty of Pozvol was known in Moscow or that it was the cause of the war.

            ???? The Tsar just wanted to fight. lol
            Quote: Tulus12
            Batory's army carried out campaigns from the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, or, more simply, from present-day Belarus.

            Who bordered the Grand Duchy of Lithuania? The result of the siege of Pskov was the abandonment of Livonia.
            Quote: Tulus12
            Actually, the Swedes came from Finland.

            Who do Ivangorod, Yam, Koporye and Gdov border with?
            Quote: Tulus12
            There is no point in talking about the Crimean and Great Patriotic Wars, because at that time the Baltics belonged to the Russian Empire/USSR.

            So what?
            Quote: Tulus12
            No one even tried to get through the Baltics.
            In the spring of 1854, dozens of propeller-driven and sailing ships under the command of Vice-Admirals Charles Napier (Britain) and Alexandre Parseval-Deschênes (France) entered the Baltic Sea with the intention of destroying the Russian fleet, capturing Kronstadt and other Russian forts and ports, and breaking through to St. Petersburg. They didn't bother.
            Quote: Tulus12
            I know, it was advancing from East Prussia.

            And WHERE did it advance and through which republics?
            1. 0
              7 February 2026 10: 12
              Quote: Unknown
              Do you actually know what this is about?


              With your flight of thoughts it’s completely unclear what you want to say and what Ivangorod has to do with it.

              Quote: Unknown
              The king simply wanted to fight.


              Well, yes, a quick takedown of a weak neighbor, under the pretext of unpaid tribute. But it turned out to be a complete failure.

              Quote: Unknown
              Who bordered the Grand Duchy of Lithuania? The result of the siege of Pskov was the abandonment of Livonia.


              Actually, you wrote about the terrible Drangh nach Osten through the open gates of Livonia and the Varangian hordes pouring in from there. And that the Russo-Polish and Russo-Swedish wars prove this.
              So, Batory did not attack through Livonia.

              Quote: Unknown
              Don't interfere.


              Well, if you don’t see any difference between the Baltic territory and the Baltic Sea, then I can’t help you.

              Quote: Unknown
              Who do Ivangorod, Yam, Koporye and Gdov border with?


              It doesn't really matter who they border. The Swedish army left Vyborg in 1611 and immediately took Novgorod, which borders no one, and only then the rest of the cities in northern Russia.

              Quote: Unknown
              And WHERE did it advance and through which republics?


              What difference does it make where they attacked? The "open gates of the Baltic" are buried and sealed according to your recipe; there are no enemy Varangians there.
              1. 0
                7 February 2026 17: 29
                Quote: Tulus12
                With your flight of thoughts it’s completely unclear what you want to say and what Ivangorod has to do with it.

                But yours is absolutely amazing. And why was Ivangorod built anyway?
                Quote: Tulus12
                Well, yes, a quick takedown of a weak neighbor, under the pretext of unpaid tribute. But it turned out to be a complete failure.

                The neighbor, a weak little runt, should have been pitied. lol
                Quote: Tulus12
                Actually, you wrote about the terrible Drangh nach Osten through the open gates of Livonia and the Varangian hordes pouring in from there. And that the Russo-Polish and Russo-Swedish wars prove this.
                So, Batory did not attack through Livonia.

                What if there was no Drang nach Osten, and no attacks from there? How many wars were there with the Livonian Order? And what difference does it make where Batory came from if Livonia was at stake.
                Quote: Tulus12
                Well, if you don’t see any difference between the Baltic territory and the Baltic Sea, then I can’t help you.

                Yes, one should be surprised at the knowledge of... geography good What shores does the Baltic Sea wash in the south? Study the map carefully. That's why it's called the Baltic Sea.Baltic.
                Quote: Tulus12
                It doesn't really matter who they border. The Swedish army left Vyborg in 1611 and immediately took Novgorod, which borders no one, and only then the rest of the cities in northern Russia.
                It's not the Swedish army, but mercenaries, bordering Livonia, where in the worst case scenario they can go and then come back.
                Quote: Tulus12
                What difference does it make where they attacked? The "open gates of the Baltic" are buried and sealed according to your recipe; there are no enemy Varangians there.

                Well, for some, it doesn't matter, but there are others, and they advanced northeast toward St. Petersburg. There were plenty of Varangians there. You know that European historians call the battles near Narva in 44 the "Battle of the European SS." Those are the kind of Varangians that are coming there. By the way, whose soldiers are there now?
      2. +1
        6 February 2026 09: 06
        Quote: Tulus12
        The Swedes almost always fought through Finland.

        Battle of Fraustadt
        Battle of Narva
        Battle of Golovchina
        Battle of Poltava

        Somehow this doesn't look like Finland.
    2. 0
      6 February 2026 09: 20
      It's problematic to enter through these gates these days; your own territory could bubble up and freeze into glass. Technological progress has changed the situation.
      1. 0
        7 February 2026 02: 04
        Quote: Essex62
        It's problematic to enter through these gates these days; your own territory could bubble up and freeze into glass. Technological progress has changed the situation.

        Yeah... what's the problem? You know, it's 120 km from Ivangorod to St. Petersburg, according to the road signs, and 30 km from the Estonian coast to the port of Ust-Luga, as the crow flies across Narva Bay. These are perfect targets for HIMARS. So, the situation has changed.
        1. 0
          7 February 2026 02: 07
          And how will these Chimeras stop the glazing if they try to do this? A loaf of bread, for example, might even fly in from Siberia.
          1. 0
            7 February 2026 02: 15
            Quote: Essex62
            And how will these Chimeras stop Finland from being glazed if they try to pull this off? A loaf of bread, for example, might even fly in from Siberia.

            A one-sided game WILL NOT WORK and Siberia will be covered, it is unlikely that we will be able to sit there. The point is who will start first And, naturally, the flight time. Chimeras are still pounding Russian territory, but there's no glazing from where they're coming from.
            1. 0
              7 February 2026 02: 22
              I'm talking about gates and a conventional invasion, not a globe-trotting Armageddon. They'll be covered by the "Dead Hand" and SSBNs anyway. And it's not happening because... Well, everyone knows why it's not happening. There's no overt intervention. They intervened in our Civil War with a limited contingent of specialists and mercenaries. War wasn't officially declared. There's no reason to strike. And how can you strike at children, mistresses, and real estate?
              1. 0
                7 February 2026 04: 33
                Quote: Essex62
                I'm talking about the gates and the invasion with the conventional

                So, I'm talking about the gates, I'll explain again: it's a stone's throw from the border to St. Petersburg, the president's birthplace, by the way, and Russians live there too. As a resident of the Bryansk region, I don't need anyone explaining how to live under fire. And the people of St. Petersburg have lived through a siege in the past, and from the Finns, too. That's how it is.
                1. 0
                  7 February 2026 09: 44
                  You're under fire because Russia is in the midst of a civil war. And if Leningrad starts being shelled from a neighboring state, there's a pretext to respond in accordance with the doctrine.
                  1. 0
                    7 February 2026 20: 22
                    Quote: Essex62
                    because there is a civil war going on in Russia.

                    The word "war" is not mentioned at all; the NWO is underway and the shelling is carried out by a neighboring state, with overseas missiles, using the same overseas space guidance.
                    1. 0
                      7 February 2026 22: 53
                      Of course it's not mentioned. Why should the bourgeois powers take responsibility? This is all the consequence of the bourgeois coup and the division of a single country into fiefdoms. And what do you call a fight within a single nation on its own territory?
                      And the Masons' involvement in this matter is a given, just as it was in the USSR's fertile soil. Is it any wonder their missiles are flying at us? What the hell neighboring state? An illegal criminal entity.
    3. +1
      6 February 2026 09: 38
      Quote: Unknown
      After all, the Livonian Order is not monks singing psalms, but a genuine military unit.

      I will add that they are part of the well-established military machine of the Landsknechts, a highly organized force that had a strong rear with reinforcements that periodically arrived from Germany and Poland.
      1. 0
        6 February 2026 20: 03
        Quote: multicaat
        Somehow this doesn't look like Finland.


        It seems the conversation was about the times of the Livonian War and, more specifically, the wars with Russia.
        1. 0
          7 February 2026 02: 06
          Quote: Tulus12
          It seems the conversation was about the times of the Livonian War and, more specifically, the wars with Russia.

          The discussion was about the Baltic Gates.
  7. +4
    5 February 2026 14: 16
    Livonia was actually a tributary of the Grand Duchy of Moscow, but then it abandoned this theme, along with the process of how the previously administratively appointed masters of the Orders suddenly privatized power and titles, wanting to become barons and dukes.
    For those who don't know, any self-respecting overlord would have been obliged to take measures to establish constitutional order; the system simply wouldn't work any other way. If you don't clamp down on an insolent vassal, he'll be sure to take something from you tomorrow.
    P.S. In fact, nothing fundamental has changed since then, despite the UN, the global community, the internet, and TikTok. Even, dare I say it, despite the opinion of Guttaperrish.
    1. 0
      6 February 2026 00: 34
      Quote: faterdom
      For those who don't know, any self-respecting overlord would have been obliged to take measures to establish constitutional order; the system simply wouldn't work any other way. If you don't clamp down on an insolent vassal, he'll be sure to take something from you tomorrow.


      The Livonian Confederation was not a vassal of the Russian Tsardom in any way.
      1. +2
        6 February 2026 02: 29
        In addition to the payments that have stopped coming.
  8. +2
    5 February 2026 18: 18
    From the very first lines, it's bullshit about the Scythians and Rus'...
    Is the author deliberately trying to discourage you from reading right away?

    P.S.
  9. 0
    5 February 2026 19: 56
    A separate, vibrant page is the feat of Russian gunners at Wenden.

    Terrible had good commanders - Shuisky defended Pskov
    The Silvers took Polotsk
    Kurbsky escaped
    Basmanov is a mid-level dad
    Adashev's brother showed promise - the raid on Crimea

    25 years of the grueling Livonian War + a century and a half later, 21 years of the Northern War + how many of our soldiers died during the liberation of the Baltics more than eighty years ago, and Estonians, Lithuanians, and Latvians live on their own
  10. 0
    5 February 2026 20: 31
    Rus', which was located in the harshest natural and climatic conditions, simply could not compete with other powers.

    Of course, it's not just about the climate - Muscovy at that time was just from the Horde... with the corresponding cultural and technological heritage, which is why Europeanization began... total Europeanization, which began even before Peter and continues to this day with the borrowing of capitalism, democracy, parliament (the Duma before 1917 was not a parliament)... and other, as they now elegantly express it in the Western manner, competencies
  11. -1
    6 February 2026 08: 59
    In reality, Ivan the Terrible had no choice. He had a strategic vision and understood that Rus' must move forward and develop. This is what Russia's future history demonstrated. The national challenges that the great Russian sovereign attempted to address were addressed later by Tsars Alexei Mikhailovich and Peter I Alexeevich. And under Catherine the Great. This included the creation of a powerful state with an economic base, a regular army and navy, and access to the Baltic and Black Seas. This included the reunification of the entire Russian land and the Russian people.

    Author, I'm sorry, but this is a collection of formulaic and meaningless slogans from textbooks.
    The Livonian War had several very specific, not abstract, goals. I believe the most important of these was the ability to trade without a ton of middlemen, which dramatically improved the quality of the economy, the share of profits, and increased independence. If you look at history, you'll see that free trade was a crucial factor in the development of many states. And the Livonian War was meant to break the foreign monopoly on controlling trade flows from Russia to Western Europe.
    The second important factor is that Ivan the Terrible was no fool and saw perfectly well that the expansion of the Livonian Order would sooner or later become a problem that needed to be solved, and the further it went, the more difficult it would become.
    So the decision to start the conflict was inexorably logical. Another issue is that Ivan the Terrible wasn't immediately able to organize everything to the required standard—well, he hadn't been trained at the General Staff of the Third Reich or the Zhukov Academy.
    1. +1
      6 February 2026 20: 07
      Quote: multicaat
      I consider the main one to be the ability to trade without a bunch of intermediaries, which has dramatically changed the quality of the economy, the share of profits, and increased independence.


      Ivan the Terrible had the Baltic coast of today's Leningrad region - build, trade, nothing to do.

      Quote: multicaat
      And the Livonian War was supposed to break the foreign monopoly on controlling the flow of trade from Russia to Western Europe.


      And how can this be done without our own military, and most importantly, merchant fleet?

      Quote: multicaat
      expansion of the Livonian Order


      What other expansion of the Livonian Order took place in the mid-16th century?
      1. 0
        9 February 2026 09: 25
        Quote: Tulus12
        What other expansion of the Livonian Order took place in the mid-16th century?

        The Livonian Order was a tributary and, according to the concepts of that time, a vassal of Ivan the Terrible.
        He refused to pay and effectively declared his independence.
        Quote: Tulus12
        And how can this be done without our own military, and most importantly, merchant fleet?

        And there was no need to sail particularly far. Furs were a major trade then, and they were flowing briskly through what is now Eastern Europe. It would have been enough to break the cordon of bloodsuckers entrenched in the Baltics and western Belarus for trade to dramatically increase in profitability. The state's treasury and its power would have grown exponentially.