Military Review

How the False Dmitry I was killed

60
Invasion


October 13 1604, the Falsdmitry units launched an invasion of the Russian state through the Seversk Ukraine. This direction of invasion allowed to avoid strong frontier battles, since the region at that time was covered by unrest and uprisings caused by the “excesses” of the Godunov government. It also helped the impostor to replenish the army with Cossacks and runaway peasants, since the local population believed in the "good king" and expected him to get rid of excessive oppression. In addition, this direction of movement of the impostor’s army to Moscow made it possible to avoid a meeting with such a powerful fortress as Smolensk. The impostor troops had practically no artillery, and without it, it was impossible to storm strong fortresses.

“Lovely letters” and appeals to the Seversky cities did their job. The "real king" called the people to revolt against usurper Boris and to restore justice. Seversky Krai was full of refugees who fled from hunger and persecution. Therefore, the appearance of the "real king" was perceived positively. The signal for the widespread uprising was the surrender of Putivl, the only stone fortress in the region. The men of the vast and rich Komaritsky volost, which belonged to the royal family, rose. Then many southern cities refused to obey Moscow - among them Rylsk, Kursk, Sevsk, Kroma. Thus, the external invasion coincided with the internal civil confrontation caused by the feudal policy of the government.

Actually the basic calculation was based on popular discontent and conspiracy of the boyars. From a military point of view, the impostor’s army had no chance of success. The best time for fighting - summer, was missed, the rainy season began, turning the roads into a swamp, winter was near. Artillery for taking fortresses was not. Money to pay for mercenaries was not enough. The discipline and order in the army was not, the Polish gentry did not respect the impostor. The Crimean horde, which was supposed to attack from the south and tie up the Moscow army, did not march. In such conditions, the False Dmitry army could count only on the raid and the capture of several cities, and not on success in a large campaign.

Government troops under the command of Prince Dmitry Shuisky concentrated near Bryansk and waited for reinforcements. Tsar Boris announced the collection of the Zemstvo militia in Moscow. The Moscow government was waiting for the main blow of the Polish army from Smolensk, and only realizing that it would not be, moved the troops to the south.
21 January 1605 was a decisive battle near the village of Dobrynichi, Komaritskaya volost. The rout was complete: the army of the impostor only killed more than 6 thousand people lost, many prisoners were captured, 15 banners, all artillery and a wagon train. The impostor himself barely escaped. The remaining Poles left him (Mnishek left even earlier). Thus, this battle showed that it was not for nothing that the Poles were afraid of invading the Russian state. In direct combat, the royal troops were a formidable force that easily dispersed the forces of an impostor.

However, the indecisiveness of the royal governors, who stopped the chase, did not allow the liquidation of the impostor to be completed. This helped the impostor to leave and gain a foothold in Putivl, under the protection of Zaporizhzhya and Don Cossacks. Part of the Cossacks sent to protect Kromy and distract the royal troops. They coped with this task — a small Cossack detachment until the spring was shackled by troops sent against False Dmitry. The tsarist troops, instead of besieging the False Dmitry in its temporary capital, were losing time, storming Kromy and Rylsk. Unable to take Rylsk, Mstislavsky decided to disband his troops into "winter apartments", reporting to Moscow that siege artillery was needed to capture the fortress. The king abolished the dissolution of the army, causing discontent of the soldiers. The wall was sent to the army. Also, Godunov recalled from the army of Mstislavsky and Shuisky, which further offended them. And he appointed a distinguished Basmanov, to whom the king promised to marry his daughter, Xenia. In addition, the royal governor unleashed a brutal terror, destroying everyone indiscriminately as sympathizing with an impostor. This led to generalized bitterness and caused a split among the nobility, which was previously largely committed to the Godunov dynasty. Residents of the insurgent cities, being witnesses of terror, stood to the last. In Moscow, by denunciations, they seized on torture and reprisals of sympathizers with “thieves”, this embittered the Muscovites.

The royal army firmly bogged down under Kromy. Ataman Karela with the Cossacks stood to death. Nothing remained of the town, walls and houses burned down from the bombing. But the Cossacks kept, dug under the walls of the tunnels and holes, where they waited for the shelling and slept and met with fire with attacks. The tsarist troops in the battle did not particularly rush, did not want to die. Vasiliy Golitsyn, an enemy of the Godunov family, remained commanding between the departure of the former command and the arrival of the new, did not show zeal. The royal army decomposed from idleness, suffered from dysentery and read the anonymous letters of anonymous. Still, the impostor's troops were doomed, sooner or later they would have been crushed.

At this critical moment, when the invasion plan could finally collapse, on April 13, Tsar Boris suddenly died. The heir to the throne was his 16-year-old son Fedor. The death of the king was completely unexpected and occurred under strange circumstances. Boris was healthy and apparently he was helped to die. The actual rulers of the young king were his mother Maria Skuratova and Semyon Godunov, whom everyone hated. They also offended the ambitious Basmanov, making him only the second commander.

Boyars immediately conspired against the young king. Many nobles began to leave the camp near Kromy, ostensibly for a royal funeral, but many left for an impostor. And in the royal camp itself, the leaders of the Ryazan noble militia, Prokopy and Zakhar Lyapunov, conspired. He was joined by the offended Basmanov and Golitsyn. As a result, on May 7, the Tsarist army headed by voivod Peter Basmanov and the princes Golitsyn went over to the side of the impostor. Having learned about the change in the situation, the Poles again rushed to the impostor into the army. The impostor triumphantly marched on Moscow. He stopped in Tula, sending a detachment of Cossacks of Karelia to the capital.

Envoys of the False Dmitry 1 Jun read out his message. The uprising began. Tsar Fedor, his mother and sister were arrested, their relatives were killed or exiled. Patriarch Job was deposed by putting Greek Ignatius in his place of compromiser. Shortly before the impostor entered Moscow, the king and his mother were strangled. Before entering Moscow, the false Dmitriy expressed a wish: "It is necessary that Fedor and his mother should not be either." It was officially announced that the king and his mother were poisoned.

How the False Dmitry I was killed

KF Lebedev The entry of the False Dmitry I troops into Moscow

Impostor policy

June 20 "real king" surrounded by boyars-traitors, with a strong convoy of Polish mercenaries and Cossacks arrived in Moscow. Initially, the new king was marked by favors. Many "faithful" were given a reward, a double salary was paid to boyars and okolnichy. The boyars who were in disgrace under the Godunovs returned from exile. They returned the property. They even brought back Vasily Shuisky and his brothers, who were exiled because of a conspiracy directed against False Dmitry. Forgiveness was received by all relatives of Filaret Romanov (Fedor Romanov), who were also subjected to opal under the Godunovs. Filaret himself received an important post - the Metropolitan of Rostov. A touching meeting of “Dmitry” with her mother Maria Nagoy was played - she was kept in a monastic imprisonment and chose to “find out” him in order to get out of prison and return to social life. Servicemen have doubled their maintenance, landowners have increased land holdings, due to land and monetary confiscations from monasteries. In the south of the Russian state, which supported the impostor in the fight against Moscow, the collection of taxes was abolished for 10 years. However, this holiday of life (for six months it wasted 7,5 million rubles, with annual income in 1,5 million rubles) had to be paid by others. Therefore, in other areas taxes increased significantly, which caused new unrest.


The new king, who distributed many promises, was forced to somewhat ease the pressure on the people. The peasants were allowed to leave the landlords if they did not feed them during the famine. Banned hereditary entry into slaves; The slave was supposed to serve only the one to whom he had “sold himself”, which translated them into the position of hired servants. Established the exact date of the search for runaway - 5 years. Those who fled during the famine were assigned to the new landowners, that is, those who fed them in difficult times. Legislatively banned bribery. To reduce abuses in collecting taxes, the new king ordered the “lands” themselves to send the corresponding amounts with elected people to the capital. The bribe takers were ordered to be punished; noblemen could not be beaten, but heavy fines were imposed on them. The king tried to attract ordinary people to his side, took petitions, often walked the streets, talking with merchants, artisans and other ordinary people. He stopped the pursuit of buffoons (remnants of paganism), stopped prohibiting songs and dances, maps, chess.

At the same time, the False Dmitry began active Westernization. The new king removed the obstacles to leaving the Russian state and moving within it. No other European state has yet known such freedom in this matter. He ordered the Duma to be called the “senate”. He introduced the Polish ranks of a swordsman, a subchief, a subcarbarian, and he himself assumed the title of emperor (Caesar). The "secret office" of the king consisted exclusively of foreigners. When the king was created personal guard of foreigners, which ensured his safety. The fact that the king surrounded himself with foreigners and Poles, dismissed the Russian guards, insulted and outraged many. In addition, the new king challenged the church. Monk False Dmitry did not like, called "parasites" and "hypocrites." He was going to make an inventory of the monastic property and select all the "extra". Provided freedom of conscience to subjects.

In foreign policy he anticipated the actions of the princess Sophia with Prince Golitsyn and Tsar Peter — he was preparing for a war with Turkey and the seizure of Azov at the mouth of the Don. He planned to repel the Swedes from Narva. I was looking for allies in the West. He especially hoped for the support of the Pope of Rome and Poland, as well as the German Emperor and Venice. But he did not receive serious support from Rome and Poland because of the refusal to fulfill earlier given promises on the assignment of lands and the spread of the Catholic faith. The false Dmitry understood that serious concessions to Poland would undermine his position in Moscow. Polish Ambassador Korvin-Gonsevsky said that he could not make territorial concessions to the Commonwealth, as he had previously promised, and offered to pay for help with money. The Catholics were granted freedom of religion, as were other Christians (Protestants). But the Jesuits were banned from entering Russia.

However, very soon Muscovites felt deceived. The aliens behaved in Moscow as in a captured city. The Englishman D. Horsey wrote: "The Poles - an arrogant nation, arrogant in happiness - began to show their power over the Russian boyars, intervened in the Orthodox religion, broke laws, tortured, oppressed, robbed, devastated treasuries." In addition, people were unhappy that the tsar was violating Russian customs in everyday life and clothes (he was wearing a foreign dress), was disposed towards foreigners, and was going to marry a Polish girl.

In winter, the situation of the False Dmitri worsened. There was a rumor among the people that “the king is not real”, but a runaway monk. The Russian boyars, who wished to see their toy in the False Dmitry, had miscalculated. Gregory showed an independent mind and will. In addition, the boyars did not want to share power with the Poles and the "artistic". Vasily Shuisky almost directly stated that the False Dmitry was imprisoned in the kingdom for the sole purpose of dumping the Godunov family, now it is time to change it. Know made up a new conspiracy. At its head were the princes Shuisky, Mstislavsky, Golitsyn, boyars Romanov, Sheremetev, Tatishchev. They were supported by the church, offended by large exactions.

In January, 1606, a detachment of conspirators broke into the palace and tried to kill the king. However, the murderers acted ineptly, made noises, gave themselves away. The attempt failed. Seven conspirators were seized, torn by the crowd.

Insurrection

False Dmitry himself dug his grave. On the one hand, he flirted with the Boyar Duma, tried to attract service people to his side, and distributed court titles and posts. On the other hand, gave new reasons for discontent. 24 April 1606, with Yuri Mnishek and his daughter Marina, many Poles arrived in Moscow - about 2 thousand people. On the gifts of the bride and her father, a noble panam and gentry impostor allocated huge sums. Only a jewelry box donated to Marina cost about 500 thousand gold rubles and another 100 thousand sent to Poland to pay debts. Balls, dinners and festivals followed one after the other.

May 8 False Dmitry celebrated his wedding with Marina. The Catholic was crowned with the royal crown, which angered the people. Indignation caused and violation of customs during the ceremony. The capital is boiling over. The false Dmitry continued to feast, although he was told about the plot and preparation of the uprising. He thoughtlessly dismissed the warning, threatening to punish the scammers themselves. False Dmitry celebrated and walked away from public affairs. And spree Poles insulted Muscovites. Ban Stadnitsky recalled: "The Muscovites were very sick of the debauchery of the Poles, who began to treat them like their subjects, attacked them, quarreled with them, insulted, beat, drunk, and raped married women and girls." The ground for rebellion was created.

A rebellion broke out on the night of May 17 (27). Shuya named the king reduced his personal security in the palace from 100 to 30 people, ordered to open prisons and extradite weapon the crowd. Even earlier, the Cossacks loyal to the Tsar were sent to Yelets (a war was being prepared with the Ottoman Empire). At two o'clock, when the king and his associates slept off from the next feast, they sounded the alarm. Boyarsky servants, as well as citizens, armed with cold weapons, food and even cannons, from different parts of Moscow attacked the detachments of Polish lords who had taken refuge in the stone palaces of the capital. And the people were deceived again, Shuisky started a rumor that “Lithuania” wants to kill the king, and demanded that Muscovites rise to his defense. While the townspeople smashed the Poles and other foreigners, a crowd of conspirators led by Vasily Shuysky and the Golitsyns broke into the Kremlin. Quickly breaking the resistance of the mercenaries-halberdschik from the impostor’s personal guards, they broke into the palace. Voivod Peter Basmanov, who became the closest associate, False Dmitry, tried to stop the crowd, but was killed.

The impostor tried to flee through the window, but fell and was wounded. He was picked up by archers from the Kremlin guard. He asked for protection from conspirators, promised a great reward, estates and property of the rebels. Therefore, the archers first tried to defend the king. In response, the henchmen of Tatishchev and Shuisky promised the archers to execute their wives and children if they did not betray the "thief." Sagittarius hesitated, but still demanded that Queen Martha confirmed that Dmitry was her son, otherwise “God is free in him.” The conspirators did not have the advantage in forces and were forced to agree. While the messenger went to Martha for an answer, they tried to make the False Dmitry admit their guilt. However, he stood to the end and insisted that he was the son of Grozny. The returned messenger, Prince Ivan Golitsyn, shouted that Martha allegedly said that her son had been killed in Uglich. The rebels immediately killed False Dmitry.

Several hundred Poles were killed. Shuisky saved the rest. He sent troops to calm the raging people and take the Poles who were fighting back in their courtyards under protection. Captured Poles were exiled to various Russian cities. Pan Mnishek and Marina were sent to Yaroslavl.

The bodies of the murdered king and Basmanov were subjected to the so-called. "Trade penalty". They first lay in the mud, and then were thrown on the block (or table). Everyone could subject their bodies to shame. I must say that the death of the impostor caused a mixed reaction. Many ordinary people felt sorry for the king. Therefore, it was announced that the impostor was an idolater and "warlock" (sorcerer). First, False Dmitry and Basmanov were buried. But immediately after the funeral, severe frosts struck, destroying grass in the meadows and already sown grain. There were rumors that the dead witch was to blame, saying that he was "walking dead." As a result, the body of the False Dmitry was dug out and burned, and the ashes, mixed with gunpowder, were fired from a cannon in the direction of Poland.


S.A. Kirillov. Sketch for the painting “Time of Troubles. False Dmitry

Three days after the death of Lzhedmitriya, a well-known boyar prince Vasily Ivanovich Shuisky (Shuiskies - descendants of the Suzdal branch of Rurikovich), the organizer of the conspiracy against the impostor, was “elected” the king. According to the Russian laws and traditions, the tsar was to elect the Zemsky Sobor. But in the provinces, faith in the “good king” Dmitry still lived. He managed to promise a lot of things, but did not have time to harm. Therefore, the conspirators decided to "elect" the king themselves to put all before the fact.

There were four contenders. Son of Filaret - 9-year-old Michael, by a majority vote in the Boyar Duma rejected for his early years. Indecisive and helpless Mstislavsky refused himself. And Vasily Golitsyn and for nobility of the clan and for his role in the conspiracy He gave way to Vasily Shuisky. This candidate and won. For personal qualities, this was a cunning and unprincipled politician. To avoid friction with other boyars, Shuisky compromised with the boyars and undertook to solve the most important issues only with the Duma and not repress anyone without her permission. Boyars, knowing that Shuisky is not popular among the people, did not dare to convene the Zemsky Sobor for the election of the king. They brought Shuisky to the place of execution, and “shouted” him to the king in front of the assembled citizens. In Moscow, he was respected and supported. Pretending that the present townspeople, merchants and servicemen from other cities are their delegates, the Boyar Duma informed the state about the election of Shuya Cathedral.

Thus, Smoot continued. The protege of the West was killed, but a handful of noble boyars, unprincipled and greedy, seized power. The common people, who had thrown off the impostor, found themselves in even greater bondage than under Godunov. Mass search and runaway peasants, who fled from the yoke of the boyars and landlords, began, the prisons were filled with "seditious". Therefore, the broad popular movement continued.
Author:
Articles from this series:
Troubles

Folk hero Kuzma Minin and Smoot
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. todaygoodday
    todaygoodday 31 May 2016 07: 17
    +17
    We would also have told how the first Romanovs poisoned Ivan the Terrible and his son. And how did this family, in the person of Filaret and Mikhail, by the way swore eternal allegiance to the future king Vladislav, generally ascended the throne.
    1. Pitot
      Pitot 31 May 2016 07: 35
      +19
      And a very interesting role for the church at this moment. I apologize to the Believers, but after they betrayed the Rurikovich family, the priests for me are opportunists and traitors. ALWAYS supported (oddly enough) the enemies of Russia (after the Rurik and except during the Second World War). True, they always shouted that they were raising the people to fight. But I don’t remember something from History. They endured the Mongol-Tatar yoke for 300 years. Even "fat" was covered. Guardians.
      1. Monarchist
        Monarchist 31 May 2016 08: 35
        +15
        When the boyars sold themselves to the Poles and the "Latins" took everything. Only Hermogenes raised the people. The army of Minin Pozharsky began with the letters of Hermogenes. Read Tatishchev, Karamzin
        1. Nicholas C.
          Nicholas C. 31 May 2016 14: 38
          +4
          Troubles - a difficult time to understand - the state system was radically changing from the Rus of the Ruriks - "people's monarchy" (Solonevich) to the absolute monarchy of the Western type of the Romanovs. In the future, the Romanovs made a lot of efforts to justify their not quite legitimate accession. To this end, the hired historians defamed the previous dynasty. The Time of Troubles especially hit.

          There was a point of view that Skrynnikov was one of the best specials of this time. But here's the catch. I read his works still Soviet. He quoted the classics of Marxism-Leninism without measure in them. And still intrusive reminders of the fidelity of Norman theory were striking. So what does this have to do with Troubles? Now Skrynnikov uses much more vile terms - Jesuit (Muscovites, etc.). And it seems that he began to expound the history of the Troubles in this vein. Maybe their grants were needed - after all, professors also want to eat.
          In this regard, I recommend the example of another historian, in which the scientist nevertheless defeated the conjurer. N. Kostomarov is one of the leaders of the secret organization Cyril and Methodius Brotherhood, his Ukrainians even tried on the role of the father of the Ukrainian nation in order to become more ancient from M. Hrushevsky. It is curious how exactly Kostomarov expounds who is Muscovite and who is not, and much more relevant in the work "Truth to Poles about Russia" (especially useful for Svidomites)
          www.voskres.ru/idea/kostomarov.htm


          Quote: Samsonov
          The peasants of the vast and rich Komaritsky volost, which belonged to the royal family. Then Moscow refused to obey many southern cities - among them Rylsk, Kursk, Sevsk, Kromy. Thus, the external invasion coincided with the internal civil confrontation caused by feudal government policies.

          Komaritsky volost belonged to the palace order (earlier - to the oprichnina inheritance). In this territory serfdom was NEVER - neither before nor after. Militarily, she entered the county and obeyed the governor. This is already on the line of the discharge order.
          statehistory.ru/books/YA-E--Vodarskiy_Naselenie-Rossii-v-kontse-XVII---nachale-X
          VIII-veka / 1322157944_ed65.jpg

          Quote: Samsonov
          They forbade hereditary entry into slaves; the slave was supposed to serve only the one to whom he “sold out”, which translated them into the position of hired servants. They established the exact term for the search for the fugitives - 5 years.

          All this was done much earlier. Klyuchevsky at the same time clarifies the "serfdom" before the Romanovs.
          http://www.bibliotekar.ru/rusKluch/37.htm
          Quote: Samsonov
          The king’s death was completely unexpected and happened under strange circumstances. Boris was healthy and apparently, they helped him die.

          "Boris began to be seriously ill since 1602. In 1604 he suffered the first paralytic stroke, for several weeks Boris Godunov did not come out, and when he appeared, he dragged his leg behind him. On April 13, 1606, the still far from old Boris Godunov suddenly died of an apoplexy . "
          http://www.tonnel.ru/?l=gzl&uid=228
          Boris was one of the most successful and active kings. Urban planning, etc. But two years in which snow fell in the summer, and, accordingly,
          hunger (and in the third year) undermined his health. He then distributed free bread from state stocks, but the other largest owner - the church - refused to do so. Then a lot happened. Everything crossed out the stroke of 1604. Perhaps there was another. Because in recent months, up to a year, Boris was apparently incapacitated.

          There is no place.
        2. andrew42
          andrew42 31 May 2016 19: 44
          0
          Nobody deceives Hermogenes. And churchmen are patriots. But, the question is, who then blessed Vladislav "for the kingdom"? And even before that, no one particularly anathematized False Dmitry I against something. Why? Yes, because within the church there was the same struggle for power, for the right to personally influence those in power, for the right to own church property "according to the commandments of Joseph Sanin." That's why. And decent people, it happens, and in such a structure they get to the top, like Hermogenes. Because CONSCIENCE continues to have.
          1. andrew42
            andrew42 1 June 2016 13: 37
            0
            Minus for no reason. Sign ...?
            1. Trapperxnumx
              Trapperxnumx 2 June 2016 09: 28
              0
              Quote: andrew42
              Minus for no reason. Sign ...?

              A sign of obvious commentator delirium, and it is always very difficult to respond to delirium.
            2. The comment was deleted.
      2. bober1982
        bober1982 31 May 2016 08: 38
        +8
        Pitot: Comrade Gubelman Miney Izrailevich (party nickname Emelyan Yaroslavsky), a Soviet party leader, a prominent revolutionary, would envy your analytical thinking.
        In combination: Chairman of the Union of Militant Atheists of the USSR
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 31 May 2016 19: 04
          +6
          The dispute is about nothing. Everything is simpler than a steamed turnip: possession of the priesthood has not yet automatically made anyone a righteous person or a patriot of their country (not religion, but the country). Therefore, the people have always had a twofold attitude towards the church: the elders were honored and respected, and many hierarchs were treated like Balda to that priest from Pushkin's tale. Moreover, after the victory of the Josephites Sanin over the non-possessors of Nil Sorsky (the reign of Ivan III, if not memory does not change) the church took shape in the most cruel mega-serf-owner in the vastness of Russia. The worm of acquisitiveness and lust for power showed its own head out of the body of the church. All this backfired later on the internal squabbling of Nikon's supporters, who hunger for power above the king, and the Avvakumites. And in 1917, the finish came, when the people in the mass did not lift a finger against the obvious Satanism and atheism: there was trust in individual saints, but not in the church. And nowadays, when Kirill Gundyaev is devoutly pulling an owl on the globe, trying to impose the study of the "Law of God" in schools (having successfully sold cigarettes and alcohol in the early dashing 90s), it looks like the height of madness.
      3. D. Dan
        D. Dan 31 May 2016 08: 43
        +4
        Ah well said!
      4. Basil50
        Basil50 31 May 2016 09: 55
        +5
        PITO.
        During the Second World War, not all churchmen in the SOVIET UNION supported the RED Army, and the foreign * Greek Catholic * church, with rare exceptions, did NOT support the SOVIET UNION in the fight against the Nazis and their allies.
      5. Mikhail Matyugin
        Mikhail Matyugin 31 May 2016 11: 42
        +12
        Quote: Pitot
        300 years the Mongol-Tatar yoke suffered

        It is strange that you do not know anything about the activities of St. Sergius of Radonezh, who did a lot of useful things and blessed the troops of Prince Dmitry Donskoy to the battles on Vozha and Kulikovo Field.
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 31 May 2016 19: 08
          0
          You are trying to place both Elder Sergius and Filaret (Romanov) on a par with such "kicks". Raking into one heap both the highest spiritual exploits and career acquisitiveness. Will not work! That the church, that the same Communist Party, is the same disease: internal cadre heterogeneity, - unmercenaries and self-seeking in one bottle.
        2. alexej123
          alexej123 31 May 2016 20: 04
          +3
          Yes, Peresvet and Oslyabya were not boyars.
      6. Yujiko
        Yujiko 5 November 2016 00: 56
        0
        I once read the life of the Moscow metropolitan ... the time of the capture of Moscow by the Poles, so the Poles persuaded the Poles to explain the people for the Poles - it’s supposedly guys’s norms (the word shepherd was authoritative for the backgammon, and the Poles needed the support of the people), and he refused, in the end the Poles starved the metropolitan, which provided Minin and Pozharsky with the support of the people during the liberation of Moscow. And for me, an interesting fact in front of Mininin and Pozharsky was another man who gathered a fairly large army to liberate Moscow, but he was poisoned at the next corps, which delayed the uprising and liberation of Moscow for a year until the appearance of M and P.
      7. Yujiko
        Yujiko 5 November 2016 01: 17
        0
        I once read the life of the Moscow metropolitan ... the time of the capture of Moscow by the Poles, so the Poles persuaded the Poles to explain the people for the Poles - it’s supposedly guys’s norms (the word shepherd was authoritative for the backgammon, and the Poles needed the support of the people), and he refused, in the end the Poles starved the metropolitan, which provided Minin and Pozharsky with the support of the people during the liberation of Moscow. And for me, an interesting fact in front of Mininin and Pozharsky was another man who gathered a fairly large army to liberate Moscow, but he was poisoned at the next corps, which delayed the uprising and liberation of Moscow for a year until the appearance of M and P.
        Here I googled: "The people of Nizhny Novgorod wrote to the residents of Vologda:" On January 27, voivode Prokopy Lyapunov and nobles and all sorts of people of the Ryazan region wrote to us from Ryazan that they, with the blessing of His Holiness Hermogen, the Patriarch of Moscow, had gathered with all the Seversky and Ukrainian cities and Kaluga , go to the Polish and Lithuanian people to Moscow, and we also go ... And with the blessing and order of His Holiness Hermogen, having gathered with all the people from Nizhny Novgorod and with the devious people, we are going to Moscow, and with us are many different military people, both roundabout and grassroots cities. "Yaroslavl in a letter to Kazan added:" We all despaired, for in Moscow all surrendered to the side of the Poles; there was no intercessor for us. But, apparently, the Lord was not completely angry with us. Hermogenes stood up for the faith and Orthodoxy and told us all to stand up to the end. If he had not done this glorious deed, everything would have perished. "

        This urban movement alarmed the Polish party. Saltykov with a deputation again appeared before patr. Ermogen and demanded from him a circular letter to the cities to stop this campaign. “I’ll write,” said the patriarch, “to return home, but only on condition that you and all the traitors and the people of the king leave Moscow. If not, then I bless everyone to bring the work begun to the end, for I see the traitorous faith from heretics and from you traitors and the destruction of the Holy Churches of God and I can no longer hear the singing of Latin in Moscow. "

        This was a direct break with the ruling party. For this, the patriarch was taken under house arrest in his chambers and surrounded by the Polish guard. However, on Palm Sunday, March 17, 1611, the patriarch was released for worship and the usual procession on a donkey. On the sides of the procession were Polish and German troops with weapons and artillery, but the Orthodox people were absent. There was a rumor that the Poles would kill the patriarch ...

        On Holy Tuesday, the battle between the Russians and the Poles began. The Poles set Moscow on fire, while they themselves concentrated in Kitai-Gorod and the Kremlin. Patr. Ermogen was first kept at the Kirillo-Belozersky Compound, and now he was transferred to the Chudov Monastery. The 100-strong Russian militia approached Moscow, and its siege began on Easter Monday. Saltykov and Gonsevsky again pestered the patriarch under the threat of starvation to order the military Russian people to retreat away. Hermogenes invariably repeated: "Do not threaten, I am only afraid of God. If you leave Moscow, I will bless the militia to retreat. If you stay, I bless everyone to stand against you and die for the Orthodox faith."
      8. Yujiko
        Yujiko 5 November 2016 01: 18
        0
        This should be the answer to the guy called "Pito".
        I once read the life of the Moscow metropolitan ... the time of the capture of Moscow by the Poles, so the Poles persuaded the Poles to explain the people for the Poles - it’s supposedly guys’s norms (the word shepherd was authoritative for the backgammon, and the Poles needed the support of the people), and he refused, in the end the Poles starved the metropolitan, which provided Minin and Pozharsky with the support of the people during the liberation of Moscow. And, another interesting fact for me - there was another man in front of Mininin and Pozharsky who gathered a fairly large army to liberate Moscow, but he was poisoned at the next corps, which delayed the uprising and liberation of Moscow for a year until the appearance of M and P.
        Here I googled: "The people of Nizhny Novgorod wrote to the residents of Vologda:" On January 27, voivode Prokopy Lyapunov and the nobles and all sorts of people of the Ryazan region wrote to us from Ryazan that they, with the blessing of His Holiness Hermogen, the Patriarch of Moscow, gathered with all the Seversky and Ukrainian cities and Kaluga , go to the Polish and Lithuanian people to Moscow, and we also go ... And with the blessing and order of His Holiness Hermogen, having gathered with all the people from Nizhny Novgorod and with the devious people, we are going to Moscow, and with us are many different military people, both roundabout and grassroots cities. "Yaroslavl in a letter to Kazan added:" We all despaired, for in Moscow all surrendered to the side of the Poles; there was no intercessor for us. But, apparently, the Lord was not completely angry with us. Ermogen stood up for the faith and Orthodoxy and told us all to stand up to the end (work guys). If he had not done this glorious deed, everything would have perished. "
        This urban movement alarmed the Polish party. Saltykov with a deputation again appeared before patr. Ermogen and demanded from him a circular letter to the cities to stop this campaign. “I’ll write,” said the patriarch, “to return home, but only on condition that you and all the traitors and the people of the king leave Moscow. If not, then I bless everyone to bring the work begun to the end, for I see the traitorous faith from heretics and from you traitors and the destruction of the Holy Churches of God and I can no longer hear the singing of Latin in Moscow. "
        This was a direct break with the ruling party. For this, the patriarch was taken under house arrest in his chambers and surrounded by the Polish guard. However, on Palm Sunday, March 17, 1611, the patriarch was released for worship and the usual procession on a donkey. On the sides of the procession were Polish and German troops with weapons and artillery, but the Orthodox people were absent. There was a rumor that the Poles would kill the patriarch ...
        On Holy Tuesday, the battle between the Russians and the Poles began. The Poles set Moscow on fire, while they themselves concentrated in Kitai-Gorod and the Kremlin. Patr. Ermogen was first kept at the Kirillo-Belozersky Compound, and now he was transferred to the Chudov Monastery. The 100-strong Russian militia approached Moscow, and its siege began on Easter Monday. Saltykov and Gonsevsky again pestered the patriarch under the threat of starvation to order the military Russian people to retreat away. Hermogenes invariably repeated: "Do not threaten, I am only afraid of God. If you leave Moscow, I will bless the militia to retreat. If you stay, I bless everyone to stand against you and die for the Orthodox faith."
    2. Aleksander
      Aleksander 31 May 2016 08: 24
      +5
      Quote: todaygoodday
      We would also have told how the first Romanovs poisoned Ivan the Terrible and his son.

      So tell your alternative version of the story.
      Quote: todaygoodday
      And how did this family, in the person of Filaret and Mikhail, by the way swore eternal allegiance to the future king Vladislav, generally ascended the throne.

      From Moscow it was ordered to send from all cities "elected, best, strong and reasonable people for the Zemstvo Council and for the Tsar’s election." So the Great Zemsky Sobor gathered in Moscow at the very beginning of the 1613 of the year. At this cathedral there were elected representatives from all classes of the Russian people, including the peasant and the Cossack. Then all the inhabitants of Moscow and all the people elected from other cities, different ranks, after a long discussion, on February 7, unanimously decided to be Tsar to the Russian cousin of the last sovereign from the house of Rurik Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov.
      1. todaygoodday
        todaygoodday 31 May 2016 09: 39
        +8
        22 October 1612 year, the militia led by Prince Dmitry Pozharsky and the Cossack units of Prince Dmitry Trubetskoy stormed Kitai-Gorod. The fate of the Polish garrison and its minions was a foregone conclusion. First, Russian boyars came out of the Kremlin, who had previously sworn allegiance to the Polish prince Vladislav, whom Pozharsky had promised immunity. Among them was young Mikhail Romanov and his mother, who immediately left for their estates near Kostroma. Then the Kremlin left the Polish garrison, which laid down arms.

        The main task in this period was the election of a new Russian Tsar. In November, a meeting of all Moscow estates, held by the triumvirate, decided to convene by 6 December in Moscow at the Zemsky Sobor deputies from all classes of the Russian land, except for the boyar and monastery peasants. Over the distance, deputies continued to arrive until the end of January, when the Cathedral was already actively working. A total of about 800 people gathered.

        Most of the boyars who had previously sworn to Vladislav took part in the work of the Council. Under their pressure, the candidacies of Pozharsky and Trubetskoy were blocked. Two main groups formed at the Council, one supported the election of the tsar from among the Russian candidates, the other supported a foreigner, nominating the Swedish Prince Carl Philip as the main candidate. Pozharsky supported the last candidate.

        In the end, the Council rejected the candidacy of a foreigner and concentrated on discussing Russian candidates, among which were princes, boyars and even Tatar princes. For a long time it was not possible to come to an agreement. Then the candidacy of Mikhail Romanov was actively nominated, actively supported by the Cossacks, many of whom were formerly supporters of the Tushinsky thief. Apparently, the Cossacks played the role of the Romanovs as their proteges, since the father of the candidate was elevated to the patriarchs in the camp of False Dmitry II.

        In an effort to defuse the situation, Pozharsky's supporters suggested taking a break of two weeks in the Cathedral’s work from February 7 in order to discuss possible candidates with residents of Moscow and surrounding regions. This was a strategic mistake, since the Cossacks and the boyar group had much more opportunities for organizing agitation. The main agitation unfolded for Mikhail Romanov, who was supported by many boyars, who believed that he would be easy to keep under his influence, since he was young, inexperienced, and most importantly, like them, he was “tainted” with an oath to Vladislav.

        They managed to create a definite opinion in favor of Mikhail. On the morning of February 21, when elections were called, in the Kremlin, in modern terms, Cossacks and commoners rallied, demanding the election of Mikhail. Apparently, the "rally" was skillfully staged, but later it was he who became one of the facts of the justification of the nationwide promotion of Romanov to the throne.
        1. Aleksander
          Aleksander 31 May 2016 10: 06
          +1
          Quote: todaygoodday
          Apparently,

          Quote: todaygoodday
          Apparently

          Quote: todaygoodday
          considered
          Did they tell you this?

          "Convincing" "facts".

          the fact is that Mikhail Romanov was elected and had more reasons than others, as the closest relative of the last Tsar Fedor.
          1. todaygoodday
            todaygoodday 31 May 2016 11: 38
            +6
            Did they tell you this?

            No, the question is counter, but did you personally attend the Zemsky Sobor?

            Prince Pozharsky came from the Starodub princes of Suzdal, i.e. descendant of Yuri Dolgoruky. And he had no less rights to the throne than Michael. Moreover, he did not swear allegiance to Vladislav that Mikhail completely deprived of the right to the throne. At the same time, it was Pozharsky who led the second popular militia.
            As for Trubetskoy, he is a descendant of Gediminas.
            And for his activity he received the title of “Savior of the Fatherland”. It’s not like very much such a mean-hearted Romanov.

            No wonder that they were first pushed back.
            By the way, when Michael ascended the presto, he immediately forgave all the traitor boyars. Those. traitors sat in Moscow, who immediately began to settle scores with the heroes of unrest.
            1. Mikhail Matyugin
              Mikhail Matyugin 31 May 2016 11: 48
              +7
              Quote: todaygoodday
              Prince Pozharsky came from the Starodub princes of Suzdal, i.e. descendant of Yuri Dolgoruky. And he had no less rights to the throne than Michael. Moreover, he did not swear allegiance to Vladislav that Mikhail completely deprived of the right to the throne. At the same time, it was Pozharsky who led the second popular militia.
              As for Trubetskoy, he is a descendant of Gediminas.
              And for his activity he received the title of “Savior of the Fatherland”. It’s not like very much such a mean-hearted Romanov.
              You absolutely correctly noted that Pozharsky and Trubetskoy were the most obvious candidates for the throne - but ... they were primarily military leaders, charismatic war leaders who were opposed to political intrigues. Where are they to the crafty Romanovs.
              1. andrew42
                andrew42 31 May 2016 19: 19
                +1
                I agree. In politics, the Romanovs were hard to beat. Filaret was a talented intriguer of his time, judging by his "track record" personality is very, very unprincipled. Only Shuisky was a worthy competitor to him, who outplayed him at a short distance, but got burned out quickly enough. It is clear that Mikhail was only a pawn, which his father moved to power. But in the end, the reign of the Romanovs was short-lived. On Peter II, the dynasty was cut short, and Russia was ruled (sometimes badly, sometimes not very well, sometimes quite well) by "true Holsteins." :) However, the name of the Romanovs is actually a synonym for the Troubles, in fact they were its "engine", although not the only one.
                1. Maegrom
                  Maegrom 31 May 2016 20: 27
                  0
                  The turmoil had many engines, but the main one was still Rurik. The weakness and death of the central government provoked the power of those possessing to hunt more. This was the case with all the early fratricidal Rurikovichs. In the shooting range on live targets the Romanovs won, but there were much more willing to “shoot”, they simply knew better. Glory to the patriotic heroes, and in the mud everyone is equal.
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. Aleksander
              Aleksander 31 May 2016 12: 10
              +3
              Quote: todaygoodday
              Prince Pozharsky came from the Starodub princes of Suzdal, i.e. descendant of Yuri Dolgoruky. And he had no less right to the throne than Michael

              Yeah, so at the Council he proposed as king swedish prince karl philip!
              Mikhail Fedorovich was the closest a relative of the last king and was the son of Metropolitan Filaret, a cousin of the last king, languishing in Polish captivity.
              In addition, Patriarch Germogen, mastermind of the Russian militia, in 1610 in the year he proposed to elect Mikhail Romanov.
              1. todaygoodday
                todaygoodday 31 May 2016 14: 37
                +1
                Yes, this is a strange moment, it’s true. The fact is that only when his candidacy was dismissed, he cast his vote for Carl. Perhaps he somehow wanted to play with it, but it did not work out and now it is very difficult to say about his plans.
        2. Mikhail Matyugin
          Mikhail Matyugin 31 May 2016 11: 44
          +5
          Quote: todaygoodday
          First, Russian boyars came out of the Kremlin, who had previously sworn allegiance to the Polish prince Vladislav, whom Pozharsky had promised immunity. Among them was young Mikhail Romanov and his mother, who immediately left for their estates near Kostroma. Then the Kremlin left the Polish garrison, which laid down arms.

          Oh, in different ways there was - for example, most of the Poles, in violation of the terms of surrender. She was nevertheless killed by Russian troops who "did not restrain" (those units that were at the other gates, those who went to Pozharsky personally escaped).
          1. todaygoodday
            todaygoodday 31 May 2016 14: 33
            +3
            Yes, indeed, half of the surrendered Poles were killed. But there is an interesting point. Pozharsky promised to give life, and when the Poles surrendered, they were divided approximately equally between the Cossacks and the militia. The half that the prosperous prince took back home, he kept his word, but the Cossacks chopped their own.
      2. kamikaze
        kamikaze 31 May 2016 21: 26
        0
        it reminds today UKRAINE
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 31 May 2016 11: 15
      +5
      Yes, there were dark times .... the worst thing is that the whole Russian people suffered, palace intrigues for power strongly affected the entire state structure (though it is the same now) - history repeats itself. The 90s can also be called a "time of troubles"
    5. unclevad
      unclevad 31 May 2016 12: 29
      +6
      Yes there are all smeared with one myrrh. Shuisky, Romanov, and Rurik in the person of Ivan-4 the Terrible? I was pleased with the story of how Vasily Shuisky was innated. We recently observed a direct analogy after the victory on the Maidan in Kiev. "Love!" the crowd shouted.
  2. Max repp
    Max repp 31 May 2016 07: 30
    -1
    Yes indeed there was a TROUBLE time, you read - it takes a horror, God forbid us from such a disaster. It’s interesting, but what would happen if Godunov stayed on the throne or Ivan Vasilievich would not have killed his son.
    1. timyr
      timyr 31 May 2016 08: 17
      +15
      Quote: Maks Repp
      Yes indeed there was a TROUBLE time, you read - it takes a horror, God forbid us from such a disaster. It’s interesting, but what would happen if Godunov stayed on the throne or Ivan Vasilievich would not have killed his son.

      There is no evidence that Ivan the Terrible killed his son, except for vague evidence. But at the autopsy of the remains in the bones of Ivan and his son, a large amount of arsenic and mercury was found. Also, large traces of arsenic and mercury were found in the remains of Anastasia and Martha of the first and second wives of Tsar Ivan the Terrible.
    2. todaygoodday
      todaygoodday 31 May 2016 09: 25
      +9
      And Ivan the Terrible did not kill his son when the remains were recovered, the concentration of arsenic was 1000 times higher than usual. What a clear sign of his persecution, and not one-time, but prolonged. Arsenic accumulates in the tissues.
    3. russkiy redut
      russkiy redut 31 May 2016 09: 46
      +8
      Ivan the Terrible did not kill his son. This is a falsification, even a famous painting was ordered to be believed more readily. The nickname "Grozny" was also invented by our partners from abroad
      1. Maegrom
        Maegrom 31 May 2016 21: 11
        -2
        I know that Pushkin also worked on order. Surely he took the money for denigrating Boris Godunov and, for some reason, Salieri. Then he promised to hand over, and they removed him.))
  3. Moore
    Moore 31 May 2016 08: 26
    +2
    Quote: Maks Repp
    It’s interesting, but what would happen if Godunov stayed on the throne or Ivan Vasilievich would not have killed his son.

    There is such a writer about the populists - RV Zlotnikov, he has a series about this - "Tsar Fyodor. The eagle spreads its wings" - the first book.
    Part interesting, part nonsense. But worth reading.
    1. D. Dan
      D. Dan 31 May 2016 08: 44
      +1
      Zlotnikov read almost everything. This is where he got into the son of Shuisky?
      1. Moore
        Moore 31 May 2016 12: 00
        0
        In the son of Godunov Fedor. Skopin-Shuisky was his right hand, like ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. vetrov
        vetrov 31 May 2016 14: 08
        0
        Not the son of Shuisky, but the son of Boris Godunov.
  4. Sirocco
    Sirocco 31 May 2016 08: 42
    +1
    On October 13, 1604, the units of False Dmitry began an invasion of the Russian state through Seversky Ukraine.

    Everything is as it is today. Again from the same direction, and again Outskirts.
    June 20, the "real king" surrounded traitor boyars with a strong convoy Polish mercenaries and the Cossacks arrived in Moscow. Initially, the new king noted favors. Many "faithful" were given remuneration, the boyars and the deceased were paid a double salary.

    Again the same thing, the same traitors, and the same business representatives who were at the feeding trough.
    False Dmitry himself dug a grave. On the one hand, he flirted with the Boyar Duma, tried to attract service people to his side, and distributed court ranks and posts. On the other hand, it gave new reasons for discontent.

    Doesn’t resemble anything? Ukraine today, and our liberal party.
    Thus, the Time of Troubles continued. A Western protege was killed, but a handful of noble boyars, unprincipled and greedy seized power. The common people, having thrown off the impostor, found themselves in even greater bondage than under Godunov. A mass search began and runaway peasants who fled from the yoke of the boyars and landowners, prisons were filled with "seditious."

    A plaque is a fly, so many centuries have passed, and the theater is the same with the same actors and puppeteers. As if Poroshenko did not repeat the fate of False Dmitry.
    1. russkiy redut
      russkiy redut 31 May 2016 09: 49
      +4
      History is constantly repeated, only with other names, so it must be taught so as not to make mistakes.
      1. andrew42
        andrew42 31 May 2016 19: 23
        +1
        This is not a story repeated. It’s the geopolitical opponents of Russia who are too lazy to change manuals :) They think more about gesheft, and thank God, therefore Russia is playing back its own.
  5. Mengad
    Mengad 31 May 2016 09: 28
    +3
    Quote: Fenix-15
    Ivan Vasilievich did not kill his son, the picture and myth are the result of the activities of the Jesuits, whom he deceived. His son died of illness on his way to the monastery.

    And they could have poisoned him. ,, In 1963, the tombs of Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich and Tsarevich Ivan Ivanovich were opened in the Archangel Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. Subsequent reliable studies, medico-chemical and forensic examinations of the honest remains of the Tsarevich showed that the permissible mercury content, several times the arsenic and lead, were 32 times higher. The chief archaeologist of the Kremlin, Doctor of Historical Sciences T. D. Panova writes: “... what is the reason for such an elevated content (to put it mildly) of mercury, arsenic, and lead - one can only guess” (Wikipedia) An interesting conclusion is not it? Think excess poisoning in the body in 32 times and he doesn’t know why? Not to mention the fact that Repin’s painting “Ivan the Terrible kills his son” was banned for public display, but gentlemen the so-called artists are close to the court, or rather Mr. A. P. Bogolyubov. And ask people what painted Repin? first so uh
    that Ivan the Terrible’s murder of his son, well, maybe even the hacks will be remembered on the Volga and that’s all.
    1. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 31 May 2016 10: 55
      +1
      A painting! Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan. "That is how it is called. None of the serious historians talked about Ivan the Terrible's murder of his son. But the fact that he hit him in a fit of anger. Perhaps this influenced the state of the tsar's son.
    2. Army soldier2
      Army soldier2 31 May 2016 11: 33
      +5
      In fact, mercury, antimony, and arsenic were the main components of most drugs at that time. And lead was widely used for making dishes.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  6. Basil50
    Basil50 31 May 2016 09: 51
    +2
    * The Time of Troubles * began precisely with the poisoning of Ivan the Terrible. The church aspired to the ideal in the person of the pope. Therefore, there were so many imported theologians, traditions to poison everyone, and poison recipes brought with them. And so Ivan the Terrible was poisoned with his whole name, and then Boris Boris Godunov. Later, it was precisely at the suggestion of the Pope that * Nikon * reform * and a church schism were carried out.
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 31 May 2016 19: 31
      +2
      Nikon from the Pope? - Well, you had enough. Nikon wanted of course to become an analogue of the Pope, pardoning kings / kings, waving his own "Canossa" in his fevered imagination. But it didn't work out. Although he destroyed the Russian spirit in the same church pretty much. Take, for example, how he “subscribed” all sorts of religious leaders from abroad for the approval of the “Greek rank” in divine services, and for debates at cathedrals for his personal benefit. But .. Romanov's lust for power turned out to be stronger. And Nikon essentially worked to "de-Russify" the church. He actually cut the double faith to the root, and there he used the Old Believers (former fellow travelers in the field of struggle against "paganism").
      1. Mikhail Matyugin
        Mikhail Matyugin 31 May 2016 22: 39
        +1
        Absolutely agree! You very correctly noticed everything - Nikon strove to become such a Russian version of the Pope. But the love of power of the early Romanovs (as well as their capabilities and experience in political intrigues) turned out to be higher.

        And it was precisely Nikon’s activity that led essentially to an inter-religious war in the Russian kingdom, which wasn’t born off, and as a logical result — the transformation of the Church from a guardian of the people into a state enforcement agency.
      2. Basil50
        Basil50 31 May 2016 23: 32
        +1
        Nikon's close advisers had many immigrants from Greece and Western countries who were sent purposefully, and books were brought from the blessing of the pope.
      3. The comment was deleted.
  7. Million
    Million 31 May 2016 10: 11
    0
    There were False Dmitry I and False Dmitry II, there is False Dmitry III. Most likely a similar end awaits him
  8. gramatey
    gramatey 31 May 2016 11: 06
    +1
    Hood. Karl Wenig "The last minutes of Dmitry the impostor"
  9. King, just king
    King, just king 31 May 2016 11: 13
    -2
    Poisoned, poisoned. That everyone shouted? No one in the conclusion on the opening of graves and the study of the remains - even a hint does not speak about poisoning.
    The autopsy materials with the report are in the public domain, to whom I can give a link.
    Ivan Ivanovich had syphilis, treatment with mercury ointments. Ivan Vasilievich has exceeded the norms - this is how you need to know the life of that time, the surrounding objects of the king and the treatment carried out at that time.

    About False Dmitry ... OH, and the dark story, oh dark ...
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 31 May 2016 11: 42
      0
      ..... Ivan Ivanovich ...
      as they say, smiled, lifted the mood.
      1. King, just king
        King, just king 31 May 2016 14: 20
        +2
        If Pope Ivan Vasilievich IV the Terrible, and his son's name was Ivan, then what follows from this .... "bober1982"?

        And yes, it was Ivan Ivanovich who was sick with lués, as indicated in the research protocol.

        For which, only five put a minus on my head bruised, it’s interesting simply. Offended, probably for poisoning.
        1. bober1982
          bober1982 31 May 2016 14: 31
          +1
          I didn’t give you a minus, I only said that it amused me, maybe my neighbor, Ivan Ivanovich, is angry with me. I was offended for syphilis.
          1. King, just king
            King, just king 31 May 2016 17: 02
            +1
            Yes, somehow clumsily said, ambiguously. The people went nervous. Jagged, che-thread, and then reads the answers and looks for the ins and outs, perhaps where it doesn’t exist.
  10. sibiryouk
    sibiryouk 31 May 2016 11: 30
    0
    The author in the article calls Maria Naguya the Queen, but since she was tonsured a nun, she was not a queen and had no right to the Succession and could no longer have.
    1. King, just king
      King, just king 31 May 2016 14: 24
      0
      Um, "a hood to the head, they didn't nail it with a nail" ...
  11. Lex.
    Lex. 31 May 2016 18: 06
    +3
    Thus, the Time of Troubles continued. A Western protege was killed, but a handful of noble boyars, unprincipled and greedy seized power.
    that is, the oligarchs
  12. Torins
    Torins 31 May 2016 18: 07
    +2
    It is a pity that the Rurik dynasty was interrupted ... The rulers were strong and strengthened and expanded their homeland. And the most annoying thing is that it was not their enemies who defeated them, but they themselves were worn out ... the dashing 90s are just sweetie compared to those times, although there is a lot in common.
    1. sibiryak10
      sibiryak10 1 June 2016 13: 56
      +1
      The Romanovs are also Rurikovich, like almost all the boyars and princes of that time.
      And today the Rurik family is the largest in the world - the descendants are the most :)
  13. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 31 May 2016 18: 12
    -1
    The actions of False Dmitry are very reminiscent of the actions of the young Peter the 1st.

    And the attraction of foreigners, and radical reforms, and marriage to a foreigner.
    Only Peter, who was absolutely ruthless to the rebels, succeeded, while
    more humane Dmitry - no.
    1. Lex.
      Lex. 31 May 2016 18: 54
      +6
      Peter did not ruin the treasury and Poland didn’t send anything and was not an impostor
    2. Lex.
      Lex. 31 May 2016 18: 54
      +3
      Peter did not ruin the treasury and Poland didn’t send anything and was not an impostor
    3. andrew42
      andrew42 31 May 2016 19: 38
      +2
      I disagree. There are fundamental differences: although Peter is considered the "Antichrist" and "the destroyer of the economy", he was a patriot whatever one may say. He had foreigners SERVED, but NOT FUELED. And Peter, not on a foreign army, entered Moscow, but on his own grown from nobles, townspeople, and even from the lower classes. And the internal policy of False Dmitry is pure populism. This, of course, has already become a cliche, they say, "I wanted to please everyone, did not please anyone," but, oddly enough, it is true, and there is no need to doubt it.
    4. Mikhail Matyugin
      Mikhail Matyugin 31 May 2016 22: 36
      +2
      Quote: voyaka uh
      The actions of False Dmitry are very reminiscent of the actions of young Peter 1. And the attraction of foreigners, and radical reforms, and marriage to a foreigner. Only Peter, who was absolutely ruthless to the rebels, succeeded, while
      more humane Dmitry - no.
      Here you are very, very true to notice!

      And oddly enough, it seems to many, but according to real facts, just the same, Dmitry I (unlike False Dmitry, the 2.0 version and the 3.0 version) was most likely the legitimate heir to the Russian throne from the Rurikovich. Explain for a long time. But this is the most likely option, everything else is too much propaganda of various groups.

      And not just because the people followed him. And Poland then did not declare war on Russia. And having reigned, he acted in the national interests of Russia.

      And instead of it came just the oligarchs, who, fearing their own people, organized the military occupation of the country by foreigners.
  14. PKK
    PKK 1 June 2016 06: 16
    -3
    Quote: Aleksander
    From Moscow it was ordered to send from all cities "

    What else is Moscow? They began to rebuild Moscow in 1834. And Stalin made full-flowing rivers in the 30s. They depicted a storm in a glass, you know!