Military Review

King and conspiracies. The goal - to defame Ivan the Terrible

61
King and conspiracies. The goal - to defame Ivan the TerribleNot all important dates are marked in calendars. Not all anniversaries are mentioned by mass media. Why not, for example, remember such a date - 555 years ago formed a grand international conspiracy against our country. One of the first conspiracies against her and one of the most ambitious. Even then plans were made to dismember Russia, to drive into the framework of the ancient "Muscovy". Even then there were "perestroika", ready to serve as foreign directors.


However, it makes sense to recall the situation at that time. Under Ivan the Terrible, Russia annexed the Volga region, the North Caucasus. Fought the way to the Baltic Sea, crushed the Livonian Order. However, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden, Denmark, the Crimean Khanate rose. Added treason own nobility. Nevertheless, our country successfully coped with all the difficulties. Lithuania defeated, Tatars reflected. The Swedes and Danes managed to win over to their side. And to eradicate the internal opposition, an emergency regime was introduced - the oprichnina.

It was then that the secret anti-Russian alliance began to turn. It was led by the Pope and the Jesuit Order. With 1568, they began to direct and coordinate the activities of the enemies of our country. Swedish king Eric XIV managed to conclude an alliance with Ivan the Terrible. But the Jesuits and Polish agents in 1568 organized a conspiracy of Swedish aristocrats. Eric was poisoned, he lay ill for a long time. The opposition leader was the royal brother Juhan, married to the sister of the Polish king. He rebelled before, was in prison. Now he was released, he raised a mutiny. Eric advisers convinced that you can not fight with his brother, we must look for ways of reconciliation. And when Yuhan's army approached Stockholm, the same advisers gave him a king. Erik was declared insane and imprisoned in a dungeon, where he soon died, and Johan, taking the throne, resumed the war with the Russians.

In Poland and Lithuania, Jesuits and emissaries of Rome also did a good job. These states had one monarch, but remained independent, had different governing bodies and laws. The Vatican has long wished for their merger to put the population of Lithuania, mostly Orthodox, under the control of the Catholic Poles, but Lithuanian magnates opposed this. Now the campaign was blown up, that without unification, Lithuania would perish, the Polish party was fueled with gold. In January, 1569 managed to merge two states into one, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, at a Sejm in Lublin. Formerly, Russia fought only against Lithuania, the Poles helped her very modestly. Now the only powerful country has become an opponent.

Finally, the Russians ottoman Ottoman empire. Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent has been pushing this for a long time. But he refrained from a quarrel with Moscow, preferred to fight with the Western powers. However, Suleiman died, his son Selim II ascended to the throne - who did not add to his name the epithets of the Magnificent, the Winner, etc. He earned the nickname Selim the Drunkard. It's clear that it was not the advocates of Islam and not the patriots of Turkey who got him drunk. Spoil European agents. His father’s policies he abruptly changed. Zamirilsya with the Germans, Italians, and with 1568 in Azov began to collect troops. The following year, the army of Kasim Pasha made a speech at Astrakhan. Who contributed to this is well known. The ambassador of Poland came to Kasim together with messengers from the Sultan, promised joint strikes.

Little of. The loop that engulfed Russia was supposed to be supported by internal sedition. True, by liberal and foreign researchers, this conspiracy is announced only by fraud. It is customary to write only about flashes of tsar's cruelty, as if causeless pathology. And the outline of events is described fragmentary and inconsistently. Say, at the end of the summer 1569 Novgorod nobleman Peter Volyn reported to the king - the tip of the boyars and fat cats of Novgorod headed by Archbishop Pimen entered into an agreement with the Polish king Sigismund II. The traitors were going to carry out a coup, to enthrone the cousin of the tsar, Vladimir Staritsky, on the throne, and for the assistance of the Poles they promised Novgorod and Pskov. Volynsky said that a copy of the contract is kept in a cache in the church of St. Sophia, and Ivan the Terrible sent a trustee with him to check and take a copy of the evidence.

And in September, the king suddenly summoned Staritsky. He accused of a far-fetched crime, “allegedly a royal cook was bribed”, to whom Vladimir “supposedly gave money and poison” (quotes from Karamzin). Different authors are competing in terrible details. They say how Staritsky trustingly drove to his brother with his whole family, as Grozny flew with a whole regiment of guardsmen. As a prince, his wife and children were forced to drink poison, and the princess was serviced by female servants from bows, for some reason stripping naked (I wonder why? So that it was more convenient to aim?

The mother of Prince Euphrosyne Staritskaya, 6, who lived in the monastery for years, was either drowned or suffocated with smoke. And with it - “12 old ladies”, and historians lament for these innocent maidservants, craftswomen, needlewomen ... Well, in December, Ivan the Terrible finally remembers a report about the betrayal of Novgorod (three months old), organizes a campaign. Raises the army. On the way, for some reason, he is smashing all the cities from Klin to Vyshny Volochk, exterminating the prisoners contained in them. In Novgorod, a slaughterhouse is organized, thousands of people are drowned in Volkhov, and guardsmen ride boats and finish off those who wish to swim (boats ride in January, probably on ice).

Stop-stop-stop ... There is really no logic in this flow. Rampant of some irrational rabies. But it can be shown that the logic was. Iron and justified. Frauds themselves were made by the researchers themselves, who tried to tarnish the figure of Ivan the Terrible! To begin with, Staritsky was not an innocent lamb. He has been convicted of conspiracies three times already, in 1553, 1563, 1567. However, in his message to Kurbsky, Grozny knowingly called Vladimir a “fool”. He himself was not a leader. He was only a convenient candidate for the throne, who was moved by the opposition boyars, and he was led by his mother, an ardent schemer. Even on the embroidered veils donated to the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, Euphrosyne emphasized her son's claims to the throne, calling him a “pious sovereign”.

Ivan Vasilievich was not always "formidable." He did not want to take revenge on relatives. After the rebellion, 1553 not only forgave Vladimir, but even rewrote the will. In the event of his death, he appointed him guardian of a minor son and second heir. But in 1563, it was discovered that the Staritskies had broken the oath, are plotting a coup again. The sovereign again refrained from austerity, only sent to the monastery the main troublemaker, Euphrosyne. The scandal was settled quietly, she cut herself off as if “of her own will,” she was given a generous content, the princess was accompanied by servants and 12 neighbor boyarons who received estates near the monastery. No, it did not help. In 1567, I even had to interrupt the military campaign - from intelligence officers and prisoners they learned that Sigismund II was awaiting a coup in Russia. The sovereign interrogated his brother, and he himself issued accomplices, led by the boyar Chelyadnin, having bought forgiveness with their heads.

Despite this, in 1569, when the Turks invaded, Grozny entrusted Staritsky with the post of commander-in-chief, and ordered to assemble an army in Nizhny Novgorod. Vladimir did not possess military talents, but the name of the royal brother was important. This was supposed to have an effect on the tribes of the Kazan region — in order to keep themselves from the uprising. However, there was another reason for the appointment. As it turned out later, the king’s closest advisers, the Basmanovs and the Vyazemsky, participated in the plot. Apparently, they contributed to Vladimir received at his disposal an army.

As mentioned above, the same summer, Volynsky received a report on the Novgorod elite treaty with the Poles (and the Staritskys had long been associated with Novgorod). It is not difficult to see that if the conspirators succeeded, Russia would have to be very bad. She was losing the western regions, the whole North (which belonged to Novgorod), Astrakhan and Kazan would have disappeared. But personal kramolniki turned out to win. Vladimir received the crown, the boyars - “democratic freedoms”, as in Poland, Pimen - the post of Metropolitan, to whom he rushed to 1563 (however, the king already had some suspicions about him and rejected his candidacy four times). Livonia, too, went to Poland, but the Novgorod oligarchs, passing under the authority of Sigismund, received free access to the Baltic trade.

At the head of the army Staritsky behaved very peculiar. All summer stood inactive. Astrakhan he did not help. It was not he who saved the city, but the governor Karpov, who organized the defense, and the Cossacks — they began a guerrilla war, cut off the supply of the Turks and forced them to retreat. Vladimir Staritsky at that time remained in Nizhny Novgorod, arranged celebrations and feasts, gaining popularity among the troops. A shelf kept with him, at hand. I waited. What?

The answer is obvious. September 9 died the queen, Maria Temryukovna. She did not get sick and died suddenly - as was noted at the Consecrated Cathedral, “in agony, in torment.” After the murder of Grozny’s first wife, Anastasia, a trial was required. But in this case, the signs of poisoning were so obvious that the cause of death was established immediately. We do not know for what reason the king himself was not injured. Maybe he decided to fast that day, or maybe things were delayed, he did not sit down at the table with his wife. But the poison was actually applied! Here you have a “supposedly”, “supposedly” bribed chef. So much for the “contrived” attempt.

The rigging introduced by the venerable liberal writers of the XNUMXth century is also obvious. By piling up the charges against Ivan the Terrible, they did a very simple thing. Took away the death of Maria Temryukovna from the Staritsky case! You can pay attention - it is customary to mention it in other sections and chapters historical works on other pages. Although it is enough to compare the dates: the murder took place on September 9, and at the end of September the king summons his brother. In juridical terms, the detractors of Grozny committed "hiding the corpse." As criminologists say, "no body - no action." But there was a corpse! The corpse of a young and beautiful woman, not only a loving and beloved wife, but also an active assistant to the king. A lively and intelligent Kabardian woman was an outstanding person. She was the co-author of the idea of ​​the oprichnina, organized the protection of her husband, actively participated in diplomacy, corresponded with relatives in the Caucasus and Crimea.

Moreover, it turns out to be sufficient to restore the fallen out (that is, the discarded) link, the killing, as everything further becomes clear and understandable. The investigation reveals the cook, during interrogations he calls the customer. Let's pay attention to dates again. The blow to the royal family was dealt 9 September, at the most tense moment of the campaign. The Turks on this day only approached Astrakhan. They removed the siege of 26 September. That is, Staritsky was called to the tsar not from his possessions, but from the army. So he was driving without his wife and children. Accordingly, without the maids spouses. The fact that he came to the sovereign alone is confirmed in his notes by Horsey.

And the mother of Prince Euphrosyne was neither drowned nor strangled. Her remains are preserved, and chemical analysis showed the cause of death - the arsenic content in 150 is higher than the maximum allowable level. This gives the answer to many questions. The power-hungry princess did not quit in the monastery, weaving intrigues. Apparently, Vladimir Staritsky, in the same way as he did in 1567, was laid by his mother and other accomplices hoping to earn forgiveness. But they have already been forgiven many times, and softness led to more and more serious consequences. And the plot was directed not only against the tsar, but against Russia. Therefore, Vladimir and Euphrosyne offered to eat the same thing that they intended for the royal family and handed over to the cook.

Together with Euphrosyne punished "12 old ladies." Only these were by no means innocent maidservants, but the very 12 neighbor boyars who had gone with the princess to the monastery. Her trusted assistants, through them, communication was maintained with her son, boyars, plans were coordinated. They were full participants in the crime and were punished accordingly. But the children of Staritsky, despite slander, remained alive. The king soon returned to his son Basil the possessions of his father, his daughters Euthymius and Maria the Terrible for the Danish prince Magnus. The fate of Staritsky's wife Evdokia is unknown. Russian sources report the death of Vladimir alone, and he is buried alone. And the execution of Evdokia calls into question an eloquent fact: after three years her sibling Nikita Odoyevsky Ivan the Terrible appointed to command the army. Do you think it is possible to trust the army to the executed brother? Most likely, Evdokia Staritskaya was tonsured as a nun or went to the monastery herself after the death of her husband.

From Vladimir Andreevich, cooks, “old ladies”, other threads stretched, and in October-November the investigation continued. It confirmed the information about the treason in Novgorod. In addition, in medieval Europe, political opposition was almost always associated with religious. This gave the “ideological” bundle, allowed to violate the oath (after all, the oath was a sacred act). So it was in Russia. Back in 1553, it was discovered that many kramolniki were part of the “Judaizing” sect. To her belonged were the brothers Euphrosyne Staritskoy Borisov-Borozdins, a close Staritskim priest Sylvester was friends with the heresy preacher Artemy the Hermitage. Artemia was deeply revered by Kurbsky. At 1553 processes, such connections were managed to hush up, now they have been revealed. Ivan the Terrible later wrote Kurbsky: “I wanted to subjugate you to my will, and you desecrated and desecrated the holy shrine of the Lord! Resenting God, they rebelled against God. ”

In winter, the king conducted a “special operation” in Novgorod. Of course, he did not trasher passing cities. In the coming years, foreign embassies, including those unfriendly to Russia, traveled along the same road many times. But none of them traces “pogroms” noticed, and nothing of the kind reported. Finally, the basis of the operation was secrecy. It was necessary to appear suddenly, capture the criminals red-handed. Well, judge for yourself what could be the secret, if you gather an army, ravage Klin, Gorodnya, Tver, Copper, Torzhok, Vyshny Voloc? News spread quickly, all the conspirators would have time to run up. The only thing you can believe is the destruction of prisoners held in some cities. Because in Torzhok they put up armed resistance, wounded Malyuta Skuratov, the king himself was in danger. Do not you think, to put it mildly, strange - armed prisoners? If this message is correct, it may mean that the conspirators formed detachments of prisoners to participate in the coup.

The raid was a purely policeman, with a small force involved. Oprichniki was only something 6 thousand, and many of them remained in Moscow, Alexandrov Sloboda, performed other tasks. 2 On January 1570, a detachment of Malyuta from 1000 man rode into Novgorod, blocked the gate with outposts and made arrests on previously scheduled lists. 8 January came the king with his retinue in 500 people. By the way, to collect a significant army and was not required. Novgorod was an important frontline base, it housed a large garrison. No source mentions clashes of the guardsmen with the military or their arrests. Apparently, the garrison was involved in the operation.

There is one more fact confirming that the king’s campaign was quick and well timed. Leaving Alexander Sloboda, Ivan the Terrible simultaneously ordered to convene the Consecrated Cathedral in Moscow. Arriving in Novgorod, he did not accept the blessing of the Archbishop Pimen, but allowed him to send services. However, the same day they brought the decision of the Council to overthrow Pimen and deprive him of the priesthood, and only then did the king arrest him (the sovereign himself had no right to depose the hierarch and did not exceed his authority). The main culprits were sent to Moscow, ordinary traitors were punished on the spot. A total of 1490 to 1505 people were executed. On this figure all modern researchers, respecting Grozny respectfully, and his opponents agree.

Icons and shrines were removed from the temples desecrated by heretics. The monasteries, where they built their nests, confiscated the treasury. A number of other monasteries and priests who knew about heresy, but did not fight it, who preferred to keep quiet, were punished with large fines. In addition to treason, many common abuses have accumulated in Novgorod. The structures of the Zemstvo elective power were captured by rich merchants, oppressed the poor, violated the rules of trade, etc. The Tsarist court, having considered the complaints, ordered to “rob” the guilty, i.e. confiscate property, imposed fines.

Cruel? But such punishments followed strictly according to the law - for abuses of official position, corruption, smuggling, the clandestine sale of alcohol, etc. Ordinary citizens themselves did not consider them to be excessive at all. In 1581, the city of Batory was trying to raise them to an uprising, sent out letters, painted all the insults that the king had inflicted on Novgorod. However, no one responded to the appeals of the king. The population recognized that the persons punished by the sovereign paid fairly. And the residents of neighboring Pskov were also aware that executions in Novgorod were not without reason. Otherwise, would they wait for the king? They had the Lithuanian border nearby, nobody was keeping them. But they knew perfectly well that they were punishing the Novgorod elite, and they did not feel such guilt behind them.

After the raid on Novgorod, the investigation lasted another six months. About 300 people were sentenced to death. The execution took place on July 25 1570 in Pogankin bog (now Chistye Prudy). The king personally addressed the assembled masses of Muscovites and visitors, spoke about the guilt of the convicts and asked for confirmation from the people: “Answer, is my court right?” Thousands of people unanimously supported his decision. However, 184 sentenced, nearly two-thirds, Ivan the Terrible pardoned. He executed only the main criminals, the rest was replaced by death by imprisonment or exile.

On the whole, it can be compared - with the elimination of the largest conspiracy in the history of Moscow Russia, much less blood was shed than with the suppression of any of the many European rebellions of the same era. Ordinary rebellions, which in the history of England, France, Germany were awarded only brief references. About larger-scale campaigns of repression, such as the Bartholomew’s Night, which crossed out 30 thousand lives in one fell swoop. By the way, there was a genuine investigative case of the Novgorod betrayal. It survived the Troubles, all the fires of Moscow. The archive record indicates that it was stored until the 19th century. And then ... disappeared. It disappeared at about the same time that liberal historians who undertook to edit our past “hid the corpse” of Tsarina Maria Temryukovna. How do you order to evaluate it? How an unfortunate accident? Or as another fact of hiding the truth?
Author:
Originator:
http://zavtra.ru/
61 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. kaktus
    kaktus 18 October 2013 09: 16
    +5
    Interesting! A new interpretation of famous events!
    1. Sakhalininsk
      Sakhalininsk 18 October 2013 12: 57
      21
      Quote: kaktus
      Interesting! A new interpretation of famous events!


      And what is changed there?
      In fact, Ivan the 4th brought order to the country and expanded the territory, won great victories.
      The fact that every liberalistic ga.no writes heresy about our history is time to get used to.
      Ivan the Terrible tyrant, murderer, usurper ... of course, and all sorts of Louis are fat, head-ass and other Karl obliques are directly the same distributors of democracy and philanthropy. The number of people executed by Ivan during the entire reign is much less than in the same small Britain at the same time people were executed in a year!
    2. washi
      washi 18 October 2013 17: 08
      +8
      Quote: kaktus
      One of the first conspiracies against her and one of the most ambitious. Even then, plans were being made to dismember Russia and drive it into the framework of the ancient Muscovy. Already then there were "perestroika" ready to serve foreign directors.

      Why new? Among the people, Ivan 3 was "Terrible". Ivan 4 was "Great" Peter 1 was "Antichrist" and "murderer".
      Under Ivan 4, for the first time in all of Europe they introduced local self-government, a regular army, All Europe bought Russian weapons, and sanitary cordons against the unwashed and plagued Europe were introduced. Trade with foreign countries was carried out through state orders, in spite of foreign representations in Russian cities. Serfdom was not.
      He is probably the last king, under whom they remembered their own, and not written, story
      In foreign literature, he was called "horrible". For foreigners, he was.
      When writing modern history by Western philosophers, his western nickname was translated as "Terrible", and the great women ... they made Peter 1 - the murderer.
      By the way, Ivan 4 was poisoned. Examination of his remains revealed a large amount of lead and arsenic.
      One of the first conspiracies against her and one of the most ambitious. Even then, plans were being made to dismember Russia and drive it into the framework of the ancient Muscovy. Already then there were "perestroika" ready to serve foreign directors.
  2. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 18 October 2013 09: 22
    29
    Why are all our rulers who have achieved military and political victories so disgusting. Terrible - a butcher, Peter-Alkash, Catherine the Great - a whore, Stalin a tyrant. Well done only Kurba, humpback and Yeltsin. I live in the Urals, it was joined by Ivan the Terrible (by the way, to travel by train to Yekaterinburg, you need to leave the Kazan station, i.e. to join the Urals, you had to solve the problem of hostile Kazan, which was done), Peter founded my city Kamensk-Uralsky, under Catherine, he had many government orders and developed rapidly, under the leadership of Stalin, the Motherland defeated a terrible enemy and gave me the opportunity to be born and grow up, and the city received a powerful impetus for development during the Second World War. Blasphemers of our winners, you go through the woods, I understood everything for myself, and there are more and more of them every day.
    1. baltika-18
      baltika-18 18 October 2013 15: 46
      +5
      Quote: FC Skif
      Grozny - the butcher,, Peter -alkash

      I have my own vision of the situation of that time in the history of the country, which is different from the classical one. Who is right to show when the Grozny library is found, it would be a bomb for the whole world, not leaving stone unturned from classical history. But I do not want to say about that. I just want to remind Grozny that in his time the death penalty was used for only seven types of crimes. During the time of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov for 62 types, and during the time of Peter for 150. Here is a bloodsucker and a butcher. Something is wrong in the current version of the story, guys .
  3. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 18 October 2013 09: 26
    -41 qualifying.
    Well, of course, Ivan IV was "white and fluffy" or, in modern terms, "cute and forged." And the nickname "Terrible" only stuck to him by mistake. Yes.
    1. FC SKIF
      FC SKIF 18 October 2013 10: 24
      16
      Count yourself how Russia has grown under him. That, do you think, there were few contradictions on the newly acquired lands, dissatisfied, former. Yes, complete. I had to punish, and there it was not far from the "excesses in the field". People are different. And if you compare the scale of the repressions, estimate how many were cut only on the night of St. Barbhalama, burned by the inquisitors, hung all sorts of henrichs and Mary, and compare with our Ivan. Yeah, he's still a monster.
      1. MIX58
        MIX58 18 October 2013 11: 04
        12
        Quote: FC Skif
        And if we compare the scale of the repressions, estimate how many were cut only on the Warfalamean night, the Inquisitors burned, hanged all sorts of Henry and Mary, and compare with our Ivan. Yeah, he’s still a monster.


        Duck the scale ... ahhh, not comparable (sorry, there is no time to look for a link .... take my word for it ...) During his reign, Ivan the Terrible, being an extremely religious person, asked for forgiveness from the confessor to every executed subject and kept memorial notes before God ... According to which the executed and 4 thousand are not recruited .... During the same period in the "enlightened" England, according to the reports of the court of Her Majesty, about 120 ruined peasants were exterminated for "vagrancy" ... and executions were a cruel "Anglo-Saxon show" --- people were boiled alive in boiling water ... they wheeled .... they quartered with whole families ....., so what to compare with the Terrible European monarchs --- it's still a circus ..... ...
      2. drop
        drop 18 October 2013 11: 07
        +9
        Maxim, I support your opinion. Ivan IV was a great sovereign. It is difficult for us to judge his relationship to the enemies of Russia, but without their physical destruction, Russia could not expand and gain new territories. Remember the actions of Ivan IV to strengthen the northern territories. It was he who ordered the governors during the defense of the Solovetsky Monastery - not to take captive Swedes, Germans, Finns. With this he saved thousands of Russian lives, stopped the aggression and the capture of the North by foreigners. He allowed our merchants to go by sea to Europe.
    2. Nika
      Nika 18 October 2013 10: 27
      +7
      Notice, "Terrible", not anything meaning "unrighteous". In itself, "formidable", as for me, does not carry any negative meaning only a warning.
      And if you recall a certain “Good” from French history, then it becomes very good :)
    3. albi77
      albi77 18 October 2013 10: 33
      +4
      the question with whom he was formidable. if with an external enemy - then to us then what matters is they calling him in countries hostile to us?
    4. MIX58
      MIX58 18 October 2013 10: 49
      10
      He was terrible for the enemies of the Fatherland ... (... even Lomonosov in the assembly broke his nose to the Chukhontsa schloetzer for similar pearls when writing Russian history .... and Grozny to John-4 ... it stuck)
      And read the diplomatic correspondence of John-4 .., it is in the public domain ...., maybe the desire to write nonsense will disappear ...
    5. report4
      report4 18 October 2013 11: 07
      +7
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      Well, of course, Ivan IV was "white and fluffy" or, in modern terms, "cute and forged." And the nickname "Terrible" only stuck to him by mistake. Yes.

      He was "formidable", not "bloody". During the time of the oprichnina, relatively few people died when compared with European events.
    6. calocha
      calocha 18 October 2013 11: 08
      +3
      When he was born, there was a thunderstorm. Therefore, Grozny. According to ancient Russian beliefs, the one who was born in a thunderstorm is blessed by GOD!
    7. Proud.
      Proud. 18 October 2013 11: 29
      11
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      ... And the nickname "Terrible"

      That's exactly Grozny. Not Bloody, Not Marked, not Judas, not Alkash. THERAPY.
    8. Poppy
      Poppy 18 October 2013 11: 49
      +6
      There was no nickname Grozny during his lifetime, his name was Great, and later "historians" called him Grozny
    9. atos_kin
      atos_kin 18 October 2013 12: 29
      +5
      Terrible is better than nasty.
    10. Sakhalininsk
      Sakhalininsk 18 October 2013 13: 32
      +9
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      Well, of course, Ivan IV was "white and fluffy" or, in modern terms, "cute and forged." And the nickname "Terrible" only stuck to him by mistake. Yes.


      As they say in the wonderful city of Odessa: "Don't give us brains!"
      This time was cruel. Ivan the 4th can be called anyone, but not a bloody sadist and a tyrant, but his fellow craftsmen from advanced hotbeds of culture such as England, France and other Austria and Spain by tyrants, sadists and bloody despots can be easily called compared to him.
    11. washi
      washi 18 October 2013 17: 14
      0
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      Well, of course, Ivan IV was "white and fluffy" or, in modern terms, "cute and forged." And the nickname "Terrible" only stuck to him by mistake. Yes.

      It stuck when the story was rewritten. Ivan the Terrible 3. Ivan 4 - The Great. In the Western annals - terrible. He invited the Queen of England to marry him. She was horrified. What about the eastern savage?
      And then, when inventing our history, Western historians Ivan 4 and called the terrible,
    12. Straj
      Straj 20 October 2013 21: 37
      0
      He was terrible for the enemies of Russia.
  4. avt
    avt 18 October 2013 10: 33
    +9
    Quote: Monster_Fat
    Well, of course, Ivan IV was "white and fluffy" or, in modern terms, "cute and forged." And the nickname "Terrible" only stuck to him by mistake. Yes.

    “Terrible” was actually his predecessor III, Romanov's historians stuck it to him much later. Well, as regards the “fluffiness” and shades, Vanya did NOTHING beyond the ordinary. His colleagues, both in the East and in The "enlightened" West was doing even more bloody things, I don't want to list for lazy people, read the story for yourself. forcibly tonsured a monk and who ate up in the train of the Tushinsky thief and made him patriarch for his faithful service. Well, then it's a matter of technology and, for example, the atrocities of the French crown on St. Bartholomew's Night - a fascinating love story about Queen Margot. Well, thanks to the efforts of the same Lungin, Vanino's kingdom is utter ace unwashed, wild, Muscovy.
    1. Altona
      Altona 18 October 2013 12: 56
      +6
      Yes, only Oliver Cromwell, who was born by the way a little later, roughly a little over half a century from King John, chopped something about half a million Irish into stuffing and nothing ... As the Discovery Channel says, it was justified, and no genocide ... Even by Nowadays, the figure is unimaginable — cut out half a million people to forge the foundations of British democracy ... Oh, how ... But then it’s only about three or four thousand for sedition and treacherous boyars ... Not a figure at all ...
      1. Bersaglieri
        Bersaglieri 18 October 2013 14: 46
        +5
        ... Or Philip II of Spain. "Let Spain depopulate - but all heretics must be put on a cleansing fire." Also, about 200-300 thousand sent "to the grill".
  5. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 18 October 2013 10: 38
    -7
    The lexicon of some members of the forum is curious. Key word: "little people". winked It seems that Menshikov uttered something similar to Mr. Peter, about the great losses during the capture of the fortress. It is understandable, "little people", why pity them then. And: "contra" is a very familiar word. recourse Directly the Cheka blew ... Humanities, damn it. Yes, that’s under Hitler, Germany has grown so much .... yes
    1. avt
      avt 18 October 2013 11: 04
      +4
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      Directly the Cheka blew ... Humanities, damn it. Yes, that’s under Hitler, Germany has grown so much ....

      Well, this is straight in the Gozman way, quite in the spirit of the Russian-Soviet intelligentsia. Directly according to the precepts of the historians "ala Pivovarov, throw mud and let others wash, collect historical facts, compare, analyze. thrown, here Vanya with Hitler will be compared. And most importantly, he, an intellectual, is always sincere surprise. Why is his "bearer of values" not very fond of and do not follow us? And from this, out of malice, he throws himself even more and more hysterically with mud, although in his opinion it is not mud at all, but a very weighty historical fact.
  6. Ross
    Ross 18 October 2013 10: 53
    +9
    There is a simple observation in life - the one who has done the most for the country - causes the most indignation among the enemies, and hence the slander. Who shouts the loudest: hold the thief?
    1. Poppy
      Poppy 18 October 2013 11: 54
      +6
      quite right, here you can also say something about this: Ivan, in general, spoke on the side of the people against the elite, and he also punished
      and the later representatives of the elite - the nobles wrote history, it would be strange to expect from them an understanding of his actions, but he made them work for the good of the country, instead of receiving pleasure at the expense of the people
      1. Doctorleg
        Doctorleg 18 October 2013 16: 41
        -1
        Quote: Poppy
        quite right, here you can also say something about this: Ivan, in general, spoke on the side of the people against the elite, and he also punished
        and the later representatives of the elite - the nobles wrote history, it would be strange to expect from them an understanding of his actions, but he made them work for the good of the country, instead of receiving pleasure at the expense of the people

        The fact that Grozny spoke on the side of the people would be stronger than Faust Goethe wink He wanted to eliminate the slightest freedoms of the nobility - yes. Unlike England, where the barons had certain freedoms that they had knocked out of the king in the 1200s, there was no difference for Ivan the Terrible - a peasant or a nobleman - they were equally powerless towards him. Beginning with the great-grandfather of Ivan IV, Ivan III (also Grozny), autocracy was laid precisely in this form. When Ivan IV wrote to Elizabeth I, he did not understand what parliament was and called her a vulgar girl, because she did not have such power as he. And such an inflexible system of power lasted until the age of 17. It was her inability to change with time, imprisonment for one person that caused the revolution. When the number of executed people is compared, the total number of those executed in England and executed by direct order of the Tsar is taken. Oprichnina, of course, was directed against the boyars. But they didn’t take into account the Zemstvo and could do whatever they wanted. Here on the forum, someone was offended by the comparison of Hitler and Grozny. And what's the problem, there and there are conquests. Or is Siberia also native Russian lands? But this is history, many states were created by conquests. Many historians divide the reign into 2 parts, and in total 2 was the ruin of the country as a result of a long war and the crisis that prepared the time of troubles. Just do not talk about patriotism. For many kings then (and for Ivan, patriotism is submission to him as the sovereign ruler
        1. avt
          avt 18 October 2013 17: 19
          +1
          Quote: DoctorOleg
          .Here on the forum, someone was offended by the comparison of Hitler and Grozny. And what's the problem, there and there are conquests.

          Well, this someone I, could well quote from the post. Well, if the difference between the reign of Ivan IV and the Nazi racial ideology introduced by Nazi Germany under the leadership of Hitler in the World do not see request Well, this is your misfortune, if out of ignorance, well, if you consciously in the cohort of intellectuals of Gozmans, Novodvorsk, and Pine forests, then there’s nothing to talk about.
          1. Doctorleg
            Doctorleg 18 October 2013 17: 42
            -3
            Quote: avt
            Quote: DoctorOleg
            .Here on the forum, someone was offended by the comparison of Hitler and Grozny. And what's the problem, there and there are conquests.

            Well, this someone I, could well quote from the post. Well, if the difference between the reign of Ivan IV and the Nazi racial ideology introduced by Nazi Germany under the leadership of Hitler in the World do not see request Well, this is your misfortune, if out of ignorance, well, if you consciously in the cohort of intellectuals of Gozmans, Novodvorsk, and Pine forests, then there’s nothing to talk about.

            The conversation was not about racial theories, but about ways to expand living space. In principle, they are different - peaceful, semi-peaceful (under threat) and purely military. Ermak’s campaign was a military operation. And the fact that he was Russian does not change the essence of the matter. Yes, everyone did that - it was a time of conquests. But do not say that they were white and fluffy. And intellectuals are a good group. And it’s not limited to Novodvorskaya, Borov and Gozman (by the way, I don’t know their views on this period of history (I don’t know much about Gozman). It is only doubtful that Gozman can somehow justify Hitler’s racial theory, judging by the name.
            1. avt
              avt 18 October 2013 18: 10
              +3
              Quote: DoctorOleg
              It is only doubtful that Gozman can somehow justify Hitler's racial theory, judging by the surname.

              No, he just puts an equal sign between Nazi Germany and the USSR, as well as between SMERSH and the GESTAPO, without embarrassing himself and openly to the joy of a democratic intelligentsia.
              Quote: DoctorOleg
              .And the intellectuals are a good group.

              Well, yes, they don’t know anything, they don’t know, but they didn’t forget to write themselves into the carriers of something like that, they hate other people's opinions and only from them do I constantly hear that we must repent to everyone and we must arrange the Nuremberg process for ourselves. Is Gumilev right when asked whether he is an intellectual? He answered - have mercy, no, I have a profession.
              1. Doctorleg
                Doctorleg 18 October 2013 19: 51
                -1
                Quote: avt
                Quote: DoctorOleg
                It is only doubtful that Gozman can somehow justify Hitler's racial theory, judging by the surname.

                No, he just puts an equal sign between Nazi Germany and the USSR, as well as between SMERSH and the GESTAPO, without embarrassing himself and openly to the joy of a democratic intelligentsia.
                Quote: DoctorOleg
                .And the intellectuals are a good group.

                Well, yes, they don’t know anything, they don’t know, but they didn’t forget to write themselves into the carriers of something like that, they hate other people's opinions and only from them do I constantly hear that we must repent to everyone and we must arrange the Nuremberg process for ourselves. Is Gumilev right when asked whether he is an intellectual? He answered - have mercy, no, I have a profession.

                Probably, Gozman puts equality between these organizations, based on their methods of work. Both offices did not shy away from dirty methods. By the way, I don't want to say anything about Smersh - the organization worked in wartime, and after the war it was disbanded. As far as I understand, it was military counterintelligence. But with the Gestapo you can compare the Cheka-GPU-NKVD. The same disregard for human lives, and even in peacetime. The fate of people was broken without hesitation. There are victims in my family, both from our organs and from the Germans. The grandfather of my wife, a Polish communist whom the USSR dragged out of a Polish prison (supposedly even for money) was soon shot as a Polish spy - that's where the irony of fate lies. By the way, together with another 700 thousand people who were shot in 37-38 years (I immediately write that I am not saying that millions of people were killed, as the "whistleblowers" of the repressions do. These are the figures given by the NKVD itself, they are available. But for me, these numbers are terrible). My grandmother was forced to leave her fiancé, who was exiled to the Urals together with his family as a "kulak", and they worked themselves. Grandmother married a man from the military commander, so as not to repeat the fate of the groom. which is typical - it was the policemen who did it, not the Germans themselves) They shot it simply because they were Jews, along with another 500 Jews from a large village in the Smolensk region. This is what makes the USSR and Germany of those times similar: My new relative, a German, a pupil of a German school, believes that Hitler was worse than Stalin, because he killed strangers, and Stalin only his own. It's a matter of taste. Both of them divided the people, only on different grounds - one pressed the Jewish communists, the other was a "socially alien element." And as for the intelligentsia, everyone can call himself what he wants. During the census, a number of people called themselves elves. Let's discuss this. The meaning of the word has slowly changed. Doctors, teachers, writers, etc., are called intellectuals. It’s just workers, peasants, and I also wanted to include the representatives of other professions. A creative scientific and technical, etc. intelligentsia appeared. Everyone has their own understanding of this word - someone divides by profession, someone by education, someone ascribes high moral qualities to them, and someone, on the contrary, low. You decide. And they offer to repent, first of all, before their people. It's good form to admit your mistakes. The Spaniards not so long ago apologized to Jews for their eviction and forced baptism in the 15th century, the Japanese to Koreans and Chinese, the Australian government to the Aborigines. And regarding the quote, I tried to find this statement on the net - there are different options: I am not a democrat - I am a soldier; I am not an intellectual - I am a soldier, well, your version. But these are not direct quotes. And rejection of the opinions of others is not only about the intelligentsia. You don't really stand it either.
                1. avt
                  avt 18 October 2013 20: 33
                  +2
                  Quote: DoctorOleg
                  And the rejection of the opinions of others is not only to the intelligentsia. You also do not really tolerate it.

                  When I get a nasty "opinion" like Rezun and Gozman about my ancestors, one of the six returned, the same invaders like the Nazis, that's just, "no luck" - Hitler was the first to attack and I have to repent for them, yes not that `` transfer ''! Arrange Nuremberg. And whose opinion should I listen to !? Yesterday's workers of the Kommunist magazine, the children of teachers at the University of Marxism-Leninism, who suddenly saw the light and are now sorely belching “new truths”? Well, thank you, somehow I will find more worthy interlocutors, and I'll figure it out myself, since Soviet education allows you to learn everything in comparison, and not feed on the ready-made burp of new messiahs.
                2. Proud.
                  Proud. 19 October 2013 00: 33
                  +2
                  Quote: DoctorOleg
                  But with the Gestapo, you can compare the ChK-GPU-NKVD.

                  Neither horseradish! Neither horseradish can not be compared. The comparison is absolutely incorrect, for temporary, social and political reasons.
                  Quote: DoctorOleg
                  The same neglect of human lives, and even in peacetime. They broke people's fates without hesitation.

                  This is what is called a liberal approach and view. According to this principle, everyone was "innocently repressed", there were no political enemies, terrorists, spies (I write without irony) saboteurs, murderers, robbers, rapists, bandits. All are "lambs"
                  .
                  Quote: DoctorOleg
                  By the way, together with another 700 thousand people who were shot in 37-38 (I immediately write that I am not saying that millions of people were killed, as the "whistleblowers" of repressions do. These are the figures given by the NKVD itself, they are available. But for me, these numbers are terrible).
                  Well, yes, you were pretty modest, stating that 700.000 over two years (taking into account the years, for political reasons) is a "true" figure. In 1989, a commission was formed to determine the population losses of the History Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences, headed by a corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences Yu. A. Polyakov. The commission got access to the statistical reports of the OGPU-NKVD-MVD-MGB, kept in the Central State Archive of the October Revolution (TsGAOR). From the archive there is (declassified in 1989) a certificate prepared in February 1954. addressed to Khrushchev: on the number of "convicted of counter-revolutionary crimes for the period from 1921 to February 1, 1954."
                  According to this certificate: "... for this entire period, 3.777.380 people were sentenced by the OGPU Collegium, the NKVD troikas, the Special Meeting, the Military Collegium, the courts and military tribunals, including: to capital punishment ... - 642.980; to detention in camps and prisons - 2.369.220; to exile and deportation .... - 765.180 ... ". What happens? For 33 years, 642.980. Ah .., well, they were all innocent. Several references on this topic have been prepared over the years. The maximum number of those executed is contained in the certificate compiled according to the analysis of statistics of the regional departments of the KGB of the USSR, carried out in 1988. This figure is 835.194 people. True, this calculation was made for the period from 1918 to 1953.
                  Thus, the number of people shot by political motives for the period 1918-1953. does not exceed 850.000 people. Yes, there were innocent victims (I won’t discuss the reasons, I don’t know them). But there were real enemies — real spies, real saboteurs, Nazi lackeys, traitors, saboteurs.
                3. The comment was deleted.
                4. The comment was deleted.
                5. Proud.
                  Proud. 19 October 2013 01: 06
                  +1
                  Interesting quotes from you. Extremely.
                  Quote: DoctorOleg
                  That is what makes the USSR and Germany related at that time.

                  Quote: DoctorOleg
                  It's a matter of taste. Both of them divided the people, only on different grounds - one pressed the Jewish communists, the other "socially alien element"

                  And now I’ll explain.
                  Quote: DoctorOleg
                  .My new relative, German, graduate of German school

                  Bravo! Bravissimo! (I'm ironic). This is what makes you, DoctorOleg, related to your new relative and the German school "Doctor Goebbels", a school of lies, and a lobotomy "from Gozman". On this resource (IMHO), you will not shine .There is no breeding ground for your word .... and it is not necessary to claim that this is an opinion. Again you will lie.
            2. Djozz
              Djozz 18 October 2013 18: 25
              +1
              Gozman once blurted out that the NKVD was the same as the Gestapo.
        2. washi
          washi 18 October 2013 17: 23
          +4
          Quote: DoctorOleg
          Quote: Poppy
          quite right, here you can also say something about this: Ivan, in general, spoke on the side of the people against the elite, and he also punished
          and the later representatives of the elite - the nobles wrote history, it would be strange to expect from them an understanding of his actions, but he made them work for the good of the country, instead of receiving pleasure at the expense of the people

          The fact that Grozny spoke on the side of the people would be stronger than Faust Goethe wink He wanted to eliminate the slightest freedoms of the nobility - yes. Oprichnina, of course, was directed against the boyars. But they didn’t take into account the Zemstvo and could do whatever they wanted. Here on the forum, someone was offended by the comparison of Hitler and Grozny. And what's the problem, there and there are conquests. Or is Siberia also native Russian lands? But this is history, many states were created by conquests.

          Zemstvo was introduced by Ivan 4. Siberia - originally Russian lands, according to recent archaeological research. And the Wall of China was not created by the Chinese, but against the Chinese. The history of China, as well as ours perverted. China was lengthened, but ours was reduced.
          1. Doctorleg
            Doctorleg 18 October 2013 17: 55
            -2
            Quote: Vasya
            Quote: DoctorOleg
            Quote: Poppy
            quite right, here you can also say something about this: Ivan, in general, spoke on the side of the people against the elite, and he also punished
            and the later representatives of the elite - the nobles wrote history, it would be strange to expect from them an understanding of his actions, but he made them work for the good of the country, instead of receiving pleasure at the expense of the people

            The fact that Grozny spoke on the side of the people would be stronger than Faust Goethe wink He wanted to eliminate the slightest freedoms of the nobility - yes. Oprichnina, of course, was directed against the boyars. But they didn’t take into account the Zemstvo and could do whatever they wanted. Here on the forum, someone was offended by the comparison of Hitler and Grozny. And what's the problem, there and there are conquests. Or is Siberia also native Russian lands? But this is history, many states were created by conquests.

            Zemstvo was introduced by Ivan 4. Siberia - originally Russian lands, according to recent archaeological research. And the Wall of China was not created by the Chinese, but against the Chinese. The history of China, as well as ours perverted. China was lengthened, but ours was reduced.

            As geneticists say, all peoples were formed from one small group of people from Africa. In this sense, our ancestors lived in Siberia. I don't know what happened to the wall. Now there are a huge number of "sensational" finds, but their reality is questionable. Watch the REN-TV channel and marvel at world history. But to believe all this is your business. It is only embarrassing that some unknown "experts" tell about these finds. And the interpretation of the finds is still the same - they found a hole - this is from an atomic bomb, not otherwise, etc. The same "scientists" are in other sciences. Only I do not advise them to be treated - I cannot rule out that there are geniuses among them who have discovered the truth, but it is more likely to stumble upon either a conscious charlatan or a conscientiously mistaken (the doctor himself, therefore, the topic is close). In general, history is a dark thing and talking about someone's original land is empty. That way, you can run the entire Great Migration of Peoples backwards. And you can look even further. after all, peoples often migrated not voluntarily, but because someone forced them out, etc. etc.
        3. Djozz
          Djozz 18 October 2013 18: 21
          0
          A. that America is an original Anglo-Saxon land! And that there was no revolution in England! Follow the logic of a nice man.
  7. komissar
    komissar 18 October 2013 11: 57
    +3
    When will the "wheat from the chaff" be separated in our national history? I would like the new "unified" history textbook for the school to provide an objective assessment of the results of the reign of Russian grand dukes and tsars. Otherwise, to this day, in the new feature films of outstanding Russian filmmakers, Tsar Ivan the Terrible is a mad sadist, and Tsar Nicholas II is a highly moral martyr, equated to saints.
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 18 October 2013 18: 27
      0
      Thank God, so far "passion bearer"
  8. Poppy
    Poppy 18 October 2013 12: 20
    +4
    there is still such a fact: Ivan created Russia as a single state, overcame feudalism, i.e. before him there were princes the specific owners in their patrimony full of what they wanted to do, a certain analogue of today's federalism ... and the transition from feudalism to a single state in all countries was not easy and not without blood, we just had the bloodless option
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 18 October 2013 18: 28
      +1
      In France, this problem was only solved in the 17th century, Cardinal Richelieu.
  9. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 18 October 2013 13: 01
    +2
    Let it be better that he speaks for him, and not the corrupt pro-Western mimicrid liberoids.
  10. George
    George 18 October 2013 13: 06
    +2
    Thank you for the article.
  11. luxing
    luxing 18 October 2013 14: 00
    +2
    informative article, and now would clean the conspirators ...
  12. RUSS
    RUSS 18 October 2013 15: 17
    0
    About Ivan 4, we know a lot as if it were yesterday, but for example, not a word about Ivan 3, but for Russia he did no less ....
  13. Alexandr73
    Alexandr73 18 October 2013 16: 10
    +5
    During the reign of Ivan the Terrible, nicknamed for cruelty, Vasilyevich was:
    –– a jury trial has been introduced;
    –Free primary education (church schools);
    –– medical quarantine at borders;
    –– for the first time, a regular army appeared (and the first military uniform in the world among archers);
    - local electoral self-government, instead of governor;
    - equality was established between all segments of the population (did you know that serfdom at that time did not exist in Russia at all? The peasant was obliged to sit on the land until he paid for its rent, and nothing more. And his children were considered free from birth, in any case!).
    - slave labor is forbidden (source - the lawsuit of Ivan the Terrible);
    - The state monopoly on the fur trade, introduced by Grozny, was canceled just 10 (ten!) Years ago.
    - The territory of the country (Muscovy or Moscow Tartaria) has been increased 30 times!
    - emigration of the population from Europe exceeded 30 000 families (those who settled along Zasechnaya line were paid lifting 5 rubles per family. Expenditure books were preserved).
    - The growth of the welfare of the population (and paid taxes) during the reign amounted to several thousand (!) Percent.
    - for all the reign there was not a single executed without trial, the total number of "repressed" was from three to four thousand. (And the times were dashing - remember St. Bartholomew's night).
    Now remember what you were told about Grozny at school? That he is a bloody petty tyrant and lost the Livonian war, and Russia was shaking in horror?
    more details can be found here
    http://ru-an.info/%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8/%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%BB%
    D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9-%D1%86%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%8C-%
    D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD-%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9/
  14. capskup
    capskup 18 October 2013 16: 29
    0
    That was the time. Do not forget that Russia has never had friends and allies and must be judged centuries later by deeds: here you remember the development of Siberia and the Urals and the capture of Kazan and the pacification of the "Wild Field" and, in the end, the Cossack free-robber bands that under his rule they stopped plundering on the Volga and began to serve the state (by the way, a very far-sighted policy). Who is this White and Furry West? with its inquisitions, colonization, destruction of Protestants and Huguenots. After Ivan's death, I remind you there was a time of troubles that tore the country apart, and we must not forget about the Grand Duchy of Lithuania - the closest western neighbor of the Moscow state with which there were continuous wars, and many of the nearest Moscow boyars served as they say "both ours and yours" take though to Prince Kurbsky.
    1. Doctorleg
      Doctorleg 18 October 2013 16: 54
      -4
      Quote: capskup
      That was the time. Do not forget that Russia has never had friends and allies and must be judged centuries later by deeds: here you remember the development of Siberia and the Urals and the capture of Kazan and the pacification of the "Wild Field" and, in the end, the Cossack free-robber bands that under his rule they stopped plundering on the Volga and began to serve the state (by the way, a very far-sighted policy). Who is this White and Furry West? with its inquisitions, colonization, destruction of Protestants and Huguenots. After Ivan's death, I remind you there was a time of troubles that tore the country apart, and we must not forget about the Grand Duchy of Lithuania - the closest western neighbor of the Moscow state with which there were continuous wars, and many of the nearest Moscow boyars served as they say "both ours and yours" take though to Prince Kurbsky.

      I don’t understand what. All comments on this topic (well, or almost all) are compared with the West, for some reason believing that Western historians write about this period in the history of Western Europe in laudable tones (white and fluffy). Maybe they should be read ?. There they write Bartholomew’s night and write about the Inquisition, without denying everything that happened. But in my opinion the difference is that in Europe there were certain liberties of the nobles. It was not so easy to condemn them - there were laws, courts. Sometimes formal, sometimes not. Before Grozny, everyone was equally disenfranchised - even a peasant, even a boyar. Everyone could be executed by his order and lose his property. As a matter of fact it was said - they say your servant is beating such a brow. At the same time, the English barons had a liberty charter, parliament. Yes, it was an inequality between the estates, but then an independent court and an independent parliament grew out of it.
      And to see in the works of historians a conspiracy against Russia is some kind of mania. Rather, it is a conspiracy of aliens - our historians are scamming the West, they are Russia, they all lose patriotism and become easy prey for aliens. This plot will be cooler
  15. Vittt
    Vittt 18 October 2013 17: 37
    +1
    Quote: Sakhalininets
    Quote: kaktus
    Interesting! A new interpretation of famous events!


    And what is changed there?
    In fact, Ivan the 4th brought order to the country and expanded the territory, won great victories.
    The fact that every liberalistic ga.no writes heresy about our history is time to get used to.

    Comrade Sakhalinets, once again I am convinced that history teaches us that it does not teach anything. To my great sadness, we ordinary people really do not know what happened then (we are not included in the historical and KGB archives, but those who are in they write what they will be told). Although some historical facts are true, their interpretation is designed for our irrepressible thirst to protect the Motherland from everyone, including from enemies that were not there. Of course, the interpretation of those events by the author has the right to be, but with TRUE- TRUTH, this has only a philosophical-mediated relationship. As in X-files, the truth is somewhere nearby.
  16. Irokez
    Irokez 18 October 2013 18: 58
    +3
    Doctorleg
    You write here, "That's what I don't understand. All the comments on this topic (well, or almost all). And to see a conspiracy against Russia in the works of historians is some kind of mania. Rather, it is a conspiracy of aliens."
    Dianne Reidy, who probably had a nervous breakdown during the announcement of the voting results, began to shout into the muted microphone the phrase from the Gospel of Matthew - "No one can serve two masters."
    Then she told the congressmen about the devil and that the United States was founded by the Freemasons - opponents of God. They, according to Reidy, wrote the American constitution. It was on this occasion that she remembered a quote from the Gospel. "The biggest lie is that this nation does not walk under God. It never did and never will."

    The time most likely was what it is right now, but with less science and knowledge and less development of science. In the 90s, too, troubled times.
    The conspiracy theory is and was, and in order to discredit it they come up with all sorts of excuses and ridicule and reduce it to crazy, so that people think less and disbelieve it. Typical congressional vote. This is probably crazy if they even talk about it there.
    "DoctorOleg" does not need to treat us - life has taught everything, and now immunity has been rigidly developed against Democracy, Liberalism, Tolerance and in general the word "Freedom" said in conjunction with "Democracy" more and more immunity in patients increases against the disease "Freedom" and "Democracy" ...
    1. Doctorleg
      Doctorleg 18 October 2013 20: 11
      0
      Quote: Irokez
      Doctorleg
      You write here, "That's what I don't understand. All the comments on this topic (well, or almost all). And to see a conspiracy against Russia in the works of historians is some kind of mania. Rather, it is a conspiracy of aliens."
      Dianne Reidy, who probably had a nervous breakdown during the announcement of the voting results, began to shout into the muted microphone the phrase from the Gospel of Matthew - "No one can serve two masters."
      Then she told the congressmen about the devil and that the United States was founded by the Freemasons - opponents of God. They, according to Reidy, wrote the American constitution. It was on this occasion that she remembered a quote from the Gospel. "The biggest lie is that this nation does not walk under God. It never did and never will."

      The time most likely was what it is right now, but with less science and knowledge and less development of science. In the 90s, too, troubled times.
      The conspiracy theory is and was, and in order to discredit it they come up with all sorts of excuses and ridicule and reduce it to crazy, so that people think less and disbelieve it. Typical congressional vote. This is probably crazy if they even talk about it there.
      "DoctorOleg" does not need to treat us - life has taught everything, and now immunity has been rigidly developed against Democracy, Liberalism, Tolerance and in general the word "Freedom" said in conjunction with "Democracy" more and more immunity in patients increases against the disease "Freedom" and "Democracy" ...

      What do you have against democracy and liberalism, that is, the ability to freely express your opinion and choose your power. This is what these words mean. After all, the dictatorship can be different - both to support you and to crush. And there are many such examples. You can play these games together - Hitler and Stalin, Pinochet and Castro, South and North Korea (40-70s), Chiang Kai-shek and Mao, Franco, Salazar, Duvalier, etc., etc. And which is typical, you will not be able to exchange a dictator that is not suitable for you personally, or at least leave. Here, many worry with a strong hand, but mean socialist Stalin, and if Franco had come? Would he ban our forum or turn it into a praise of caudillo. That would be a feint. Everything seems to be in place - there is no democracy, liberalism too, even tolerance would perish. But probably something was missing
  17. Irokez
    Irokez 18 October 2013 21: 11
    +5
    You rightly said that the dictatorship can be different both for the people and against it, and the same can be said about democracy and freedom. In addition, if the president is elected (according to some sources, "the president is a manager who is hired for 4 years"), then in some countries the most democratic his electors are elected, not the people, and sometimes the electors vote for another. And they vote for the same dummy dictators who are nominated by two parties in power and no more gugu. But the fact is that above their parties and presidents there are circles of influential and wealthy people who, as it were, are not in power, but lobby and actually, through presidential managers, control not only the country, but also many processes in the world. And this lobby is the most powerful power, or if you like (masons, world government, the powerful, committees there are 300, and so on). A conspiracy in the sense of subjugating as many peoples and countries as possible for their control, albeit with their puppet rulers and plus grandmothers and property that are slowly being bought up all the time wherever it is profitable. So one fine moment you will wake up, and some kind of Vasya Pupkin appears on TV and says I have 51 percent of shares or property in the entire industry of some countries, but I will not become their leadership, but I will simply manage my economy, and if you interfere I can let everyone go to the world. The main power is not political, but economic, and if this is not understood, then of course there is no illusion that there is no conspiracy.
    And Russia is valuable in its territory and resources, and this is the largest tidbit for all economic conspirators.
    And there will never be an ideal power like all people who think alike, and human vices will always crush the world around them and therefore conflicts of interest and views give rise to conflicts. Some, as it were, on the bright side, others go with the dark and defame rivals each, and the victors write history and we now have our own short history of Russia, and only very small sources trace the deep antiquity, if not of Russia, then of the Slavs, Scythians, Aryans, and so on.
    And right now we have freedom of speech, but the fact is that the revolutionary minority, driven by democrats and liberals, is trying to impose its will on the majority by changing the principles and values ​​of an established society with other selfish-personal values ​​that generate all immorality, lack of spirituality, careerism and pluralism.
    Democracy and freedom in its purest form simply cannot be, for there are certain frameworks (law, customs, values) that hold people back from their personal desires and actions. In addition, democracy was in Greece in policies on the territory of one city where the people (demos) sometimes gathered to solve some issues, but no one remembers that there were lawless slaves who worked for this demos and there were kings who only listened to opinion. And right now, something has changed. There are demos (states) and there are slaves (it seems that the whole world). And they are all monotonous in order to elect puppet presidents for 4 years.
  18. Black
    Black 18 October 2013 22: 18
    +1
    Quote: FC Skif
    Why are all our rulers who have achieved military and political victories so disgusting. Terrible - a butcher, Peter-Alkash, Catherine the Great - a whore, Stalin a tyrant. Well done only Kurba, humpback and Yeltsin.

    RIGHT!!!!!
    Nothing ..... if only, when the time comes, not to forget anything, but not to forgive ....
  19. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 19 October 2013 01: 05
    +1
    Quote: Irokez
    And right now we have freedom of speech, but the fact is that the revolutionary minority, driven by democrats and liberals, is trying to impose its will on the majority by changing the principles and values ​​of an established society with other selfish-personal values ​​that generate all immorality, lack of spirituality, careerism and pluralism.
    Democracy and freedom in its purest form simply cannot be, for there are certain frameworks (law, customs, values) that hold people back from their personal desires and actions.

    good You can’t say better, put the pluses as much as I could.
  20. mr_Doom
    mr_Doom 19 October 2013 06: 10
    -6
    Terrible bloody, like Stalin, but for the country did nothing similar in scale. And the article did not like ... Just paranoia of deception and schizophrenia of destruction ...
    1. Straj
      Straj 20 October 2013 22: 01
      +1
      Judging by your comment, your knowledge of Ivan the Terrible is based solely on watching the movie of Lungin's abomination "Tsar".
    2. The comment was deleted.
  21. mithridate
    mithridate 19 October 2013 10: 47
    +1
    due to the fact that history is perverted and rewritten a thousand times by the enemies of Russia, we still have to evaluate the true contribution of certain rulers of Russia to the process of exalting or, on the contrary, humiliating Russia
  22. sarmat-4791
    sarmat-4791 20 October 2013 12: 46
    0
    At that time, Ivan the Terrible was a descendant of the most ancient dynasty of all the reigning courts. And since in the process all the dynasties had family ties, then the Rurik dynasty had the right to all the thrones. Correspondingly, the attitude towards barbaric Europe was the same as towards upstarts - "vulgar maiden Elizabeth", "peasant Swedish king Johan", "insignificance Stefan Batory". Therefore, Ivan could trace his family from Augustus. That is why they tried to poison him and his family. Thus the dynasty was interrupted. A new tsar "youngster" ascended the throne. And Europe was becoming the center of civilization, the "elder brother". Which we managed to do.
  23. shasha
    shasha 20 October 2013 13: 21
    0
    Tsar Ivan the Terrible is very necessary now
  24. Straj
    Straj 20 October 2013 21: 50
    0
    Who was Ivan the Terrible really?

    It seems to me that this question was answered in his books "The Tsar of Terrible Russia. The Testament of the Terrible Tsar", "Holy Russia against barbarian Europe" Shambarov V.Ye.
  25. The comment was deleted.
  26. Straj
    Straj 20 October 2013 22: 15
    0
    I would be in OPRENCHIKI let him teach me ...