Military Review

Three crowns for Grigory Potemkin

44
The uncrowned emperor, the de facto co-ruler of Catherine the Great - so often in historical monographs and novels are called Grigory Potemkin. His influence on the development of the Russian Empire in the 70s and 80s of the XNUMXth century was enormous. The geopolitical projects of the Highness Prince predetermined the future of Russia for centuries to come.


Large-scale state of mind, pragmatism, diplomacy, seething energy have earned him fame even during his lifetime not only in Russia, but also abroad. With the growing influence of the Russian state on the affairs of Europe, the intensification of international relations, Grigory Potemkin was considered a promising candidate for a number of state thrones.

At least three times there was an opportunity to transform the status of an unofficial prince - consort of the Russian empire into the title of monarch of one of the European principalities.



At the beginning of 1779, a group of nobles from Courland asked Potemkin to lead this small state. By that time, the Duchy of Courland formally was in vassal dependence on Poland, but in fact was subordinate to St. Petersburg. Local elites were looking for a replacement for the extremely unpopular Duke Pierre Biron. The corresponding proposal was handed over to Grigory Alexandrovich at that time by Colonel Ivan Mikhelson, who was of Baltic origin. Svetlana liked this idea, but Catherine II answered with a categorical refusal.

By that time, the development of Novorossiya was in full swing, and distracting the attention of the state governor in this strategically important region of the empire to the affairs of the Baltic duchy was seen as undesirable. In addition, the empress did not want to bind herself to any agreements with Prussia (which also had its own interests and influence in Courland) under the conditions of the alliance of Russia and Austria that was being formed.

The question of the Courland crown for Potemkin was continued in 1780. Frederick II of Prussia, concerned about the rapprochement between Russia and Austria, through his envoy in St. Petersburg, offered support for Grigori Alexandrovich’s claims on the ducal crown or in his reconciliation with the Grand Duke Pavel Petrovich. Frederick probably thought that in this way one could counterpose the personal interests of an influential courtier to the aspirations of the Russian state. But he was wrong.

Three crowns for Grigory Potemkin


The proposal to create a semi-independent principality for Potemkin in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was expressed by the Polish king Stanislav August. It sounded during the famous journey of Catherine the Great to Crimea. 20 March 1787, at a preliminary meeting with the Russian delegation in the town of Khvostove, the head of Poland expressed the idea to turn Potemkin’s possessions in the Smela region (Right-Bank Ukraine) into a special sovereign principality. This state formation should have been formally dependent on the Polish crown, like Courland.

The fact that this step corresponded to the aspirations of the Most High Prince, may be evidenced by the fact that at the end of the 70 of the XVIII century, he himself was looking for an opportunity to create a separate possession in the territory of the Commonwealth. The so-called Russian party, which in fact was supported by Potemkin’s money, attempted to betray its extensive estates in Lithuania and Belarus to extensive estates.

Empress Catherine II was annoyed by the king’s deed. After all, it turned out that, turning to the actual co-ruler of Russia, Stanislav Augustus acted through her head. At that time, she was extremely reserved with regard to the attempts of the Russian-Polish rapprochement. Grigory Alexandrovich had no choice but to reject this initiative. A year later, His Serene Highness Prince actively promoted the plan for Russia’s absorption of the entire Polish Ukraine, as well as Belarus and Lithuania.

Grigory Alexandrovich's claims to the throne of the ruler of the Moldavian principality in currently known historical sources are not documented. On the contrary, the Austrian diplomat Charles-Joseph de Lin in his memoirs quoted the High Prince in relation to the Moldo-Wallachian throne: “This is nothing for me, if I wanted, I could become the King of Poland; I refused the Duchy of Courland. I stand much higher. ”

However, thanks to the events of the Russian-Turkish war in 1790 – 1791, Grigory Potemkin still became the de facto head of the Moldovan state. His actions in the principality went far beyond the powers of the head of the occupying administration and betrayed long-term interests in Moldova.
The commander-in-chief of the Russian armies in the south rotated the members of the Divan (the Moldavian government) and appointed the former Russian vice-consul in Iasi, Ivan Selunsky, as its head. At the main apartment in Moldova, he created a courtyard, which was a semblance of the imperial court in St. Petersburg. Here, “Asian luxury and European sophistication combined on holidays that followed one after another, with an unbroken chain ... The best contemporary artists flocked to entertain the Most Serene Prince, with important famous grandees of the neighboring countries crowding around.”

Potemkin attracted to the court the local nobility, was especially affectionate to the Moldavian boyars. Those, in turn, almost openly called on Grigory Alexandrovich to take the fate of the principality into their own hands. In the letters, they thanked him for his release from the "tyranny of the Turks" and begged not to lose sight of the interests of their country, which would always "honor him as a liberator."



Many Moldovans served in the General Staff and in the army. Moldovan volunteers (about 10 thousand) were transferred to the position of the Cossacks and subordinated directly to Potemkin. Instead of collecting taxes by the Ottomans, Moldova introduced supplies to provide Russian troops with supplies and transport. The Russian administration demanded from local authorities strict compliance with the layout of duties in accordance with the income of residents. Due to the fact that in the regions of Moldova occupied by Austrian troops, a more stringent tax regime was established, there was an influx of population into the territory subject to Potemkin.

In February 1790, at the behest of Grigory Alexandrovich, the first newspaper-type print publication in the history of Moldova was published. The newspaper was called Courier de Moldavia, published in French, each of its numbers was decorated with the coat of arms of the Principality of Moldova - an image of the head of a bull crowned with a crown.

Potyomkin patron of Moldovan cultural and art workers. It was he who managed to see the great talent of the artist in Eustaphy Altini, who later became an outstanding icon painter and portrait painter. The care of the prince of a peasant nugget from Bessarabia was sent to study at the Vienna Academy of Arts. Local art critics say that the artistic impressions of the inhabitants of the principality under the influence of the musical and theatrical undertakings of the prince turned out to be so significant that they allow us to talk about the “Potemkin era” in Moldova.

Probably the most ambitious undertaking of the Most High Prince in the Danube Principality was the establishment of the Moldavian Exarchate in 1789 year. Despite the fact that the Danube principalities were the canonical territory of the Constantinople Patriarchate, the exarchate was created as part of the Russian Orthodox Church. It can be assumed that Grigory Aleksandrovich would hardly have unleashed a conflict with the Patriarch of Constantinople if he had not linked his future with Moldova.

Potemkin’s plans for the Moldavian principality can shed light on the content of diplomatic battles during the Russian-Turkish war of 1789 – 1791.

The plan for the war, approved by the State Council of Russia in 1787, was based on the provisions of the Russian-Austrian agreement 1781 of the year. The treaty provided for the rejection of the Moldavian and Valashsky principalities from the Ottoman Empire, their unification into one independent state called Dacia. The ruler of this new state was supposed to make a prince professing Orthodoxy, attentive to the interests and security of Russia and Austria.

At the end of 1788 of the year (after the capture of Ochakov) under the influence of the folding of the Triple League (England, Prussia and Holland) and its threats against Russia, St. Petersburg was ready to make concessions to Istanbul on the issue of the Danube principalities, while maintaining their autonomous status.

The active offensive actions of the Allies in 1789 led to the creation by Russia and Austria of a draft peace treaty with Turkey, which offered Porte to begin negotiations based on the principle of uti possidetis (recognition of the right to possession of the conquered territory). The recognition of the independence of Moldova and Wallachia, according to this draft, was one of the most important conditions for concluding a peace treaty. By that time, Russia actually controlled most of Moldova, Austria occupied Wallachia.

Based in Iasi, Grigory Potemkin insisted on the need to create a separate Moldavian principality. This is evidenced by the rescript of Catherine II to Potemkin, dated March 1790 of the year: “You know that in case of success weapons of ours, we assumed an independent region, from Moldavia, Wallachia and Bessarabia compiled, under its ancient name Dacia ... We agreed with your opinion that even Moldova alone in its abundance could ... make up a profitable lot ... ” Turkish vizier, plentifully stimulating the pliability of Ottoman officials with generous offerings.

However, England and Prussia again intervened, insistently demanding the return of the Danube principalities of the Ottoman Empire. In February, 1790 of the year, Emperor Joseph II died, and already in July, the Austrians signed a truce with the Turks, giving them the territory of Wallachia and leaving Russia alone with the Ottomans and the pro-Turkish coalition in Europe. Catherine II again doubted the need to defend an independent status for Moldova. Nevertheless, in the 1790 year, under the command of Potemkin, the Russian armies and the Black Sea Fleet conducted one of the most brilliant campaigns in their history, the crown of which was the capture of Ishmael. Encouraged by Western support, the Turks delayed peace negotiations. It was not possible to end the war in 1790.



Concerned with the growing aggravation of relations with England and Prussia, the military preparations of Poland, Catherine more insistently advocated the signing of a peace treaty with Turkey. In February, 1791, the Most Serene Prince, went to Petersburg, transferring command of the armies to Prince Nikolai Repnin. In the capital, he insists on the need for a deal with Prussia (at the expense of Poland) to obtain freedom of action against the Turks and Poles. Meanwhile, Repnin becomes the main negotiator with Turkey, having received from the Empress the authority to interrupt military operations at any time on favorable terms for Russia.

While the continuation of the war saw Catherine II becoming increasingly unpromising, the anti-Russian coalition in Europe began to make deep cracks. In England, antiwar sentiment was rapidly growing (merchants, port workers and even sailors protested), March 18, English opposition leader Charles James Fox, said a fervent speech in parliament, proving that England had nothing to defend under Ochakov, British Prime Minister William Pitt was accused of patronizing the Turks - "Asian barbarians." Anglo-Prussian relations have sharpened.

31 July 1791 of the year, taking advantage of the victory in the Machinsky battle, the day before Potemkin’s return to the headquarters of Commander-in-Chief Repnin signed an armistice agreement and preliminary conditions for a peace treaty with Turkey. The document provided for the expansion of the territory of Russia at the expense of the Bug-Dniester interfluve during the return of Moldavia and Wallachia to the sultan on autonomy. The High Prince was indignant at the last demand. In a correspondence with Catherine, he spoke of the need to reduce the truce. Quite rightly, he reprimanded Repnin that he was too in a hurry to make peace at the moment when Ivan Gudovich's troops took Anapa, and Fyodor Ushakov’s fleet crushed the Turks under Kaliakria. According to Grigory Alexandrovich, these events would have made the conditions of peace incomparably more beneficial for Russia.



Potemkin joined in the struggle for the revision of the conditions of unprofitable agreement. He demanded that Turkey pledged "not to change" the rulers of Wallachia and Moldova of their own accord, giving the right to appoint them to the Boyar divan with the approval of the Russian consul. Turkish diplomats fiercely resisted, seeing in this a desire only to formally subordinate Moldavia to the Ottoman Empire. New military preparations began. It is difficult to imagine how this confrontation would end, if not the sudden death of the Most High Prince.

Grigory Alexandrovich died on October 5 1791 on the way from Yass to Nikolaev, ten versts from the Moldovan village of Puncheshty (now Old Rededeny, Ungheni Region of Moldova). On October 11, crowds of people flocked to the mourning ceremony in Iasi, Moldovan nobles lamented the loss of their benefactor, along with Potemkin’s military comrades.



Grigory Potemkin’s claims to the thrones of a number of monarchical state formations are closely interwoven into the history of Catherine the Great’s foreign policy of Russia. His actions can be justified by the stylistics of international relations of the 18th century, by the great vanity of the Most High Prince, by his objective desire to protect herself in the event of the death of the Empress-Co-Bridesmaid.



Nevertheless, the monarchical ambitions of Grigory Alexandrovich themselves were not opposed to the interests of the Russian state. On the contrary, the implementation of personal geopolitical projects of Potemkin characterizes him as a statesman, putting in the first place the achievement of foreign policy successes of the Russian Empire.
Author:
Originator:
http://историк.рф/special_posts/три-короны-для-григория-потемкина/
44 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Cartalon
    Cartalon 26 March 2016 06: 22
    +2
    Potemkin either scolded or praised, I would like to see an impartial study of his activities.
    1. V.ic
      V.ic 26 March 2016 08: 14
      +3
      Quote: Cartalon
      Potemkin either scolded or praised, I would like to see an impartial study of his activities.

      Read the novel "Favorite" by VS Pikul.
      1. avt
        avt 26 March 2016 08: 35
        +1
        Quote: V.ic
        Read the novel "Favorite" by VS Pikul.

        laughing laughing laughing Yeah ! To study the story of Pikul in order to
        Quote: Cartalon
        see an impartial study of his activities.

        fool It pushed powerfully! laughing And the historical figure is truly large-scale! good It is a pity that thanks to the efforts of writers, the same coekakers from history, who was Pikul, despite the rather lively syllable in his ARTISTIC WORKS ON HISTORICAL TOPICS, in the mass consciousness of Grigory Potemkin, perhaps two fragments remained - "Potemkin villages", thrown into the envious an Austrian, and a battleship named after him from an Eisenstein film.
        1. Cartalon
          Cartalon 26 March 2016 09: 38
          +3
          Many people read Roman Pikul so that the majority of those interested in history have a positive image of Potemkin.
          1. xan
            xan 27 March 2016 20: 37
            0
            Quote: Cartalon
            Many people read Roman Pikul so that the majority of those interested in history have a positive image of Potemkin.

            Yes, because Pikul could not hide or embellish the main thing that Potemkin did or was involved in - the defeat of Turkey and the addition of a heap of Russian lands, and this despite all the squeals of Europe. If memory serves, Dumas once said that it is better for the state to have ministers of embezzlers of the Potemkin type than honest and incorruptibles like Fouquet.
            Russia was lucky that Potemkin was in Catherine’s bed at the right time, and not some sharkun or a slammer.
        2. V.ic
          V.ic 26 March 2016 12: 09
          +1
          Quote: avt
          Yeah ! Learn the story of Pikul

          Yeah, well, E.V. Tarle was not honored about him on a book like "Napoleon" / "Talleyrand" / "North
          war and the invasion of the Swedes to Russia "(Peter 1). So put your sarcasm in your pocket. In return, would you be so kind, indicate any work of Russian / Soviet authors, comparable to" Favorite ", describing the multifaceted human activity, who received the title "TAVRICHESKY" PS You can not mention the "Stone Belt" EA Fedorov. You can answer "in a personal".
        3. andrey-ivanov
          andrey-ivanov 26 March 2016 14: 38
          +2
          Yeah ! To study the story of Pikul in order to

          That's it for Pikul !!! So that youth have pride in Russia! And not according to the libel of the traitor rezun-suvorov.
        4. Captain45
          Captain45 26 March 2016 18: 30
          +2
          Quote: avt
          Quote: V.ic
          Read the novel "Favorite" by VS Pikul.

          laughing laughing laughing Yeah! To study the story of Pikul in order to
          Quote: Cartalon
          see an impartial study of his activities.

          fool It powerfully pushed!

          Let me disagree with your sarcasm. Perhaps you don’t know that prior to publication, the novels of V.S. Pikul were seriously reviewed by scholarly historians, in particular the novel “Favorite” was reviewed by the staff of the Faculty of History of Leningrad State University and the Moscow Institute history candidates and doctors of sciences. In those Soviet times, anyway, they just didn’t let them go to print. Now they write something to anyone's head, because such bloopers are in books and in movies. At least in Soviet times, historical novels corresponded to the existing at that time, the official historical point of view, and not that the current tribe of Samsonovs, Petukhovs, Fomenko, etc. And by the way, in the reviews Pikul was not reproached for not portraying Potemkin as a serf and embezzler, although in the school history course he is represented in this way.
      2. Cartalon
        Cartalon 26 March 2016 09: 29
        0
        Charming tip
      3. iouris
        iouris 26 March 2016 17: 33
        0
        With all due respect, Pikul is a dilettante who wrote his books in very specific conditions of the so-called "stagnation". His point of view on Potemkin or Rasputin is quite subjective, I would say, journalistic.
      4. siberalt
        siberalt 11 October 2016 20: 35
        0
        Pikul is primarily an artist, not a historian, which does not detract from his importance in curiosity for the ignorant.
        Second: in Russia, the names, and even more so their names, were always speaking. Is not it? So think about what the name Potemkin says. laughing Yes, okay about the past. You never know in our state the same dark (dark). Let's start with Chubais, Yegor Gaidar ... We don't have to go on, so we'll get to the Ozero cooperative and his friends. What has changed then? So we live in darkness: either we clap together in good hands, or we eat potatoes in bulk. But we have the honor and that's okay. Two, guys!
    2. Sweles
      Sweles 26 March 2016 08: 21
      -9
      you look at these portraits of the "Russian" nobility of the 18th century and you understand why these "Russian" nobles spoke German, does this Potemkin look like Russian? something not very ...
      1. Riv
        Riv 26 March 2016 09: 26
        0
        But Potemkin is not Russian, for that matter. His father is from a Belarusian gentry.
        1. Sweles
          Sweles 26 March 2016 09: 52
          0
          Quote: Riv
          But Potemkin is not Russian, for that matter. His father is from a Belarusian gentry.


          Belarusians are Russian, the same DNA, culture, religion, you still say, Potemkin is not Russian, because not from Rus, but from Smolensk. It is contrary to read such comments ...
          1. Cartalon
            Cartalon 26 March 2016 11: 20
            -6
            Your komenty pleasure deliver even less because fanaticism and racism pulls from them
            1. Sweles
              Sweles 26 March 2016 13: 41
              +2
              Quote: Cartalon
              Your komenty pleasure deliver even less because fanaticism and racism pulls from them

              racism is when one race is higher than another, but I believe that everyone should live on their own land, Russians on their own, Jews and Negroes on their own i.e. SEPARATELY and there should be no confusion, you are on your own, and we are on our own, go to yourselves and do whatever you want ...
          2. Riv
            Riv 26 March 2016 17: 17
            -2
            What ??? What kind of DNA? Are you denying the right to Belarusians to be called the people? So they had a state when they still did not throw off the Tatars in Russia. Have you heard about the Grand Duchy of Lithuania? Here it is. And remember the word about Smolensk: he belonged to Lithuania.

            Such things, dear heart ... You are probably one of those patriots who are a national idea? That is, Nichrome’s native country is not aware of what was happening there, but patriotism is so rushing. :)
            1. Sweles
              Sweles 26 March 2016 17: 48
              0
              Quote: Riv
              What ??? What kind of DNA? Are you denying the right to Belarusians to be called the people?


              you seem to be hanging around on historical subjects for a long time, but didn’t you hear about the fact that the r1a1 Russians? so Belarusians have even more such genes.
              Quote: Riv
              So they had a state when they still did not throw off the Tatars in Russia. Have you heard about the Grand Duchy of Lithuania?


              before the great turmoil, the Principality of Lithuania is either nonsense or just a province of the Horde,
              and after the turmoil, it was part of the Polish state.
              Quote: Riv
              from it is. And remember the word about Smolensk: he belonged to Lithuania.


              and Belaya Rus is a region that included Moscow and the regions.

              Quote: Riv
              You are probably one of those patriots who are a national idea? That is, Nichrome’s native country is not aware of what was happening there, but patriotism is so rushing. :)


              I'm in the know-you don’t know ...
              1. Riv
                Riv 26 March 2016 17: 59
                -2
                Well, for sure, he is one of those same patriots. :)
                My dear, I will not comment on your nonsense. You go to Minsk and there, right on the street, reveal your genetic knowledge to any passerby. It will not be boring, I guarantee.

                Belarusians have more genes, it’s necessary! ..
      2. Cap.Morgan
        Cap.Morgan 26 March 2016 12: 45
        -3
        Quote: Sveles
        you look at these portraits of the "Russian" nobility of the 18th century and you understand why these "Russian" nobles spoke German, does this Potemkin look like Russian? something not very ...

        You have not seen Yermolov yet.
      3. tundra
        tundra 26 March 2016 13: 08
        +3
        And Catherine was completely German.
        However, it was more Russian than many current k ....
        Yeltsin, Gorbachev and Gaidar.
        Notice they didn’t distribute the land but attached it.
        1. Sweles
          Sweles 26 March 2016 13: 42
          0
          Quote: tundra
          Notice they didn’t distribute the land but attached it.

          no it was not so ...
      4. Alex
        Alex 26 March 2016 13: 26
        +3
        Quote: Sveles
        you look at these portraits of the "Russian" nobility of the 18th century

        Well, a portrait is not a photograph. Portrait painters in those days had quite certain canons and concepts of beauty (for women) or masculinity (for men), so anything is possible. And considering that at that time many were trying to derive the pedigree "from the Germans" ...
        1. Captain45
          Captain45 26 March 2016 18: 44
          +1
          Quote: Alex
          Well, a portrait is not a photograph. Portrait painters in those days had very definite canons and concepts about beauty (for women) or masculinity (for men), so anything is possible

          Quite right, the portrait is not a photograph. Potemkin was one-eyed, his right eye leaked after being treated for beating by the Orlov brothers, and he had all the portraits in all the portraits presented in the article.
          1. Alex
            Alex 26 March 2016 21: 48
            +2
            Quote: Captain45
            Potemkin was one-eyed

            By the way, yes, it's a well-known fact. So, in other respects, "artistic digressions" are also possible.

            By the way, although not quite on the topic. There is an opinion that the portraits of Lomonosov have very little in common with the original. In any case, the preserved oral descriptions of the appearance and, especially, the figures of the great Russian scientist do not correspond much to his images written by the same court artist. So I long ago stopped paying attention to some stereotypical portraiture of that time.
      5. V.ic
        V.ic 26 March 2016 19: 22
        -2
        Quote: Sveles
        why did these "Russian" noblemen speak German,

        Managers must know the language of the owners!
  2. Good cat
    Good cat 26 March 2016 07: 13
    +6
    Potemkin is the creator of the Russian state.
  3. crasever
    crasever 26 March 2016 07: 15
    +3
    The scale of Potemkin’s personality is also emphasized by the complete insignificance of Count Zubov, who after him was next to the empress.
    1. Riv
      Riv 26 March 2016 09: 25
      +1
      About Plato Zubov, too, a lot of all lied. And Potemkin kind of poisoned him (although the Most Serene Enemy always had enough), and relatives around him fed (since the same Potemkin was grabbing from the treasury - it’s ten Zubovs), and he killed the king, and Potemkin appropriated and implemented his plans ( and what's wrong with implementing a good plan?)

      However, an interesting fact: Alexander Vasilievich Suvorov married his daughter to the elder Zubov. It is foolish to suspect the prince of pleasing the court conjuncture. He, too, presumably, understood the generals better than us and would not give his daughter for a coward.
      1. Cartalon
        Cartalon 26 March 2016 09: 35
        0
        Em Suvorov was a completely earthly person, I did not study the details, but without the Empress's instructions, such a marriage was hardly possible.
        1. Riv
          Riv 26 March 2016 11: 39
          0
          Do you seriously believe that Catherine was so regulating the life of her favorites to personally decide who and when to marry their brothers?
          1. Cartalon
            Cartalon 26 March 2016 17: 44
            +1
            But the marriage of the maid of honor required the highest consent, and the Empress did not give it. Wanting to elevate the Zubovs and strengthen their position, she offered the husband of her candidate Count Nikolai Zubov, the elder brother of the favorite, to her husband. Zubov got married to Suvorova and received consent.// Wikipedia
            1. Riv
              Riv 26 March 2016 18: 18
              0
              Well, that’s it ... Now we know where to turn for historical data - to the vulgar Wikipedia. :) In fact, if we read the same wiki carefully, it was Suvorov himself who chose the husband for his daughter and there were not a few candidates at all. The fact that Catherine proposed her candidate may have played a role, but for sure personal acquaintance of Suvorov and Zubov was of much greater importance. The latter was under the command of Suvorov on Rymnik and was sent to him by Petersburg with the news of the victory.

              Awarding the Order of St. George also indicates that this is a military officer. Under Catherine, this order was not given to civilians. And even though his brother was Catherine's favorite, Nikolai never received the remaining degrees of the order.

              Actually, his marriage with Suvorova can not be called unsuccessful. Seven children, over ten years - in general, this is an indicator.
  4. parusnik
    parusnik 26 March 2016 07: 56
    +2
    In the church of St. Catherine the Great Martyr Ochakova, which went to Russia in 1791, Prince Potemkin was buried.
  5. surrozh
    surrozh 26 March 2016 09: 03
    0
    There were rumors that Potemkin poisoned Zubov, fearing a rival in business.
  6. surrozh
    surrozh 26 March 2016 09: 05
    +2
    From a simple peasant Potemkin ascended to the sovereign. They criticized tsarism, but there were already social elevators.
    1. Bersaglieri
      Bersaglieri 26 March 2016 09: 16
      +1
      Not very simple. A nobleman, nevertheless, although from a foreign gentry. My father was a major.
      1. Cap.Morgan
        Cap.Morgan 26 March 2016 13: 12
        +2
        Quote: Bersaglieri
        Not very simple. A nobleman, nevertheless, although from a foreign gentry. My father was a major.

        In addition, he studied at the university and had a rich library.
        The Most High Prince did a lot.
        1. Bersaglieri
          Bersaglieri 26 March 2016 18: 17
          0
          Daddy correctly married the widow Khodyreva (from which the offspring also came to rest);)
        2. Bersaglieri
          Bersaglieri 26 March 2016 18: 19
          +1
          And the Most Bright did more than a lot. New Russia and Crimea, a monument to him.
  7. Riv
    Riv 26 March 2016 09: 14
    +2
    There is plenty of evidence that Potemkin was by no means the usual lover of Catherine. The marriage was real, with a wedding in the church. For obvious reasons, he did not advertise, but for the Prince Consort of the Russian Empire, the crown of the European Duke would hardly have been attractive. Moreover, there were such crowns then - even if they were carrying carts, and Potemkin was the brightest prince anyway, which equated him with the royal surnames of Europe.

    The first illustration of the article, where he is depicted next to Catherine on the background of the Sevastopol Bay - an interesting historical fact is connected with her. Catherine, when visiting Sevastopol, wished to board the warship. An admiral's uniform was already ready for her, but during the journey Catherine was slightly dressed up and the uniform on her, let’s say this: it didn’t look. The solution was found: for her an admiral's skirt was urgently sewn.
    This is probably the only case in the history of the navy.
  8. Cap.Morgan
    Cap.Morgan 26 March 2016 13: 16
    +1
    The rapid development of Russia in the 18th century is due not least to favoritism.
    Favorites were often changed, they were capable people and everyone, helping the Empress, contributed to the development of the country.
    Without an era of stagnation.
    Elements of which began to appear in the 19th century when the kings single-handedly ruled for 25-30 years.
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. tundra
    tundra 26 March 2016 15: 01
    0
    Quote: Sveles
    Quote: tundra
    Notice they didn’t distribute the land but attached it.

    no it was not so ...

    But as?
    1. Riv
      Riv 26 March 2016 21: 00
      0
      Actually it was. Catherine gave Denmark Schleswig-Goldstein. Probably simply underestimated his strategic position.
      1. Vladislav 73
        Vladislav 73 28 March 2016 20: 21
        0
        Here, apparently, politics is in half with family memories. Schleswig-Holstein, the hereditary possession of Peter 3, passed automatically to Pavel Petrovich. Apparently, remembering Peter 3 ended the Seven Years War with an alliance with Friedrich and was going to fight Denmark, knowing Prussophilia of Pavel Petrovich, Catherine apparently at the same time tied the heir only to Russia and deprived him of the opportunity to follow in the footsteps of Peter 3. Well, something like that.
  11. Karabin
    Karabin 26 March 2016 15: 22
    -1
    His Grace Prince Potemkin of Tauride.
    The Darkest Prince Putin is Semi-Tauric. (He did not reach the full because of the fright from New Russia)
  12. Robert Nevsky
    Robert Nevsky 26 March 2016 17: 42
    +1
    A capacious and interesting article!
  13. Warrior2015
    Warrior2015 26 March 2016 20: 50
    0
    There is a good book "Potemkin and Suvorov", who wants to learn more deeply the subject and, in general, the interaction of two great people of Russia - read it, there it is full of factual analysis, and it is small in volume.
    1. Cartalon
      Cartalon 26 March 2016 22: 33
      0
      Well, there Potemkin generally holy life is a man and a genius of all time.