Stories about autocrats in jokes and curious situations. Nikolay I

100
Stories about autocrats in jokes and curious situations. Nikolay I


Great, formidable, bloody and even cursed - no matter how they call the person who single-handedly ruled Russia. We suggest discarding stereotypes and taking a fresh look at the rulers of the empire: historical jokes and funny situations.

Nicholas I was firmly entrenched with the fame of the despot and the martinet, who turned the whole of Russia into a large barracks. However, the memoirs of contemporaries show that at times Nikolai Pavlovich’s sense of humor was not at all barracks.

Nikolai I Pavlovich (25 June [6 July] 1796, Tsarskoye Selo - 18 February [2 March] 1855, Petersburg) - All-Russian Emperor from December 14 [26 December] 1825 through 18 February [2 March] 1855 of the Year, King of Poland and Greece and XNUMX of February [XNUMX March] Prince of Finland. The third son of Emperor Paul I and Maria Feodorovna, the brother of Emperor Alexander I, the father of Emperor Alexander II.

1. Once the pages were played out in the huge Great Throne Room of the Winter Palace. Most jumped and fooled, and one of the pages ran into the velvet pulpit under a canopy and sat down on the imperial throne. There he began to wriggle and give orders, when he suddenly felt that someone was taking him by the ear and leading him off the steps. Page measure He was silently and menacingly emperor Nikolai Pavlovich himself. When everything came to proper order, the emperor suddenly smiled and said:

“Believe me, it's not at all fun to sit here like you think.”

On another occasion, Nikolai Pavlovich reduced to a joke even the decision on the case of the most important anti-state crime, which was considered an insult to the sovereign emperor. His circumstances were as follows.

Once, in a tavern, podgulyav almost to the position of a riz, one of the lesser brethren, Ivan Petrov, foul language so much that even the usual kisser could not stand it. Wanting to appease the dispersed bojan, he pointed to the royal bust:

- Stop foul language, if only for the sake of the sovereign.

But dumb Petrov replied:

- And what is your face to me, I spit on him! - after which he fell and snored. And I woke up in the jail of the Christmas part. Ober-police master Kokoshkin, in the morning report, the sovereign filed a note about this, explaining immediately the punishment determined by law for such a fault. Nikolai Pavlovich imposed such a resolution: "Declare Ivan Petrov that I spit on him and let him go." When the attacker was announced a verdict and released from arrest, he grieved, almost mad, washed down, and so disappeared.


2. Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich called the nobility his main support, and sternly, but fatherly, he was affectionate towards the noble nedoroslyam.

Strolling once along Nevsky Prospect, he once met a student who was not dressed in uniform: his overcoat was thrown over his shoulders, his hat was skittled on the back of his head; negligence were noticeable in him.

The sovereign stopped him and sternly asked:

- Who do you look like?

The student was embarrassed, sobbed and said timidly:

- On Mama ...

And he was released laughing sovereign.

On another occasion, Nikolai Pavlovich came to the Noble regiment, where they prepared for the officer service of young nobles. On the flank was a cadet head and shoulders above the sovereign with a tall stature. Nikolai Pavlovich paid attention to him.

- What is your last name?

“Romanov, your majesty,” he answered.

- Are you related to me? - the sovereign joked.

“Exactly, your majesty,” the cadet suddenly replied.

- And to what extent? - asked the sovereign, angry with a bold answer.

“Your Majesty is the father of Russia, and I am her son,” the cadet answered without batting an eye.

And the sovereign deigned to kindly kiss the resourceful "grandson."


3. In addition to wearing a wig that covered his bald head, Nikolai Pavlovich adored the theater and went to performances at every opportunity. In 1836, during the performance of the opera “Life for the Tsar”, the emperor particularly liked the play of the famous singer Petrov, and, coming on the stage, he confessed:

- You are so good, so ardently expressed love for the fatherland, that I had a lining on my head!

The retinue has often used the theatrical predilection of the sovereign, especially when replacing horses and carriages. Because when Nikolai Pavlovich was given, for example, a new horse, he usually exclaimed: “Rubbish, weak!”

And then he made such ends in the city, that the horse really came home tired and covered in soap.

“I said that I was weak,” remarked the emperor, leaving his sleigh.

The new crew, just as well, always seemed to the sovereign with flaws:

- Short! Nowhere legs stretch!

Или:

- Shaking and narrow, it's just impossible to go!

Therefore, a new horse or carriage was attempted to be submitted to the Sovereign for the first time when he went to the theater. And when the next day he asked:

- What is this horse? What kind of crew?

They answered him:

- Yesterday, they deigned to go to the theater, your majesty!

After such an explanation, the sovereign did not make any comments.


4. One day, while visiting the prison, Nikolai Pavlovich went to the convicts' department. Here he asked everyone for what he was exiled to penal servitude.

“On suspicion of robbery, your majesty!” - said some.

“On suspicion of murder!” - answered others.

- On suspicion of arson, - the third reported.

In a word, no one admitted guilt: everyone was talking about suspicions.

The sovereign approached the last prisoner. He was an old man with a thick beard, a tanned face and callused hands.

- And what are you for? - asked the sovereign.

- For the cause, king-father! For the cause! In the hop was yes in a fight of a friend killed, in the temple I had enough of him ...

- And now what? Are you sorry, as you can see?

- How not to regret, sovereign-father! How not to regret! Glorious man was, God rest his soul! His family is orphaned by me! Do not beg me sin of this forever!

- Has anyone stayed in your homeland? - asked the sovereign.

“Of course,” answered the old man, “the wife is an old woman, the son of a patient, but small grandchildren, orphans.” And I ruined them from damned wine. Forever not hide my sin!

After which the emperor loudly commanded:

- Since here all the honest people and the guilty are only one old man, then so that he does not spoil these “suspected” people, remove him from prison and send him home to his relatives.


5. Nikolai Pavlovich loved pleasant surprises, including financial ones. In those days, the imperials and semi-imperials were minted from strip gold in the mint. At the same time, there remained the so-called cuts, which were not entered into any reporting books. As a result, the cuts have accumulated so much that was enough for fifteen thousand semi-imperials. Finance Minister Count Kankrin invented to bring them to the sovereign at Easter. For this purpose, according to his instructions, at the Institute of Technology a large egg was made of alder, which was opened in two with the help of a special mechanism.

On the first day of Easter, officials of the Ministry of Finance brought the egg to the palace, and several chamber-attendants brought it to the sovereign's rooms for Count Kankrin.

- What's this? - asked the sovereign.

“Allow me, Your Majesty,” said the Minister, “first to stand alone!” - Sovereign kissed him.

“Now, your majesty,” continued Kankrin, “I dare to imagine a red egg from your wealth, and ask you to touch this spring.” The emperor touched, the egg opened, and the semi-imperials became visible.

- What is it, what is it, how much is there? - the emperor was surprised.

Count Kankrin explained that there were fifteen thousand semi-imperials, and clarified that they were made from urezki, which were not reported anywhere. The sovereign could not hide his pleasure and suddenly suggested:

- Trimming - savings? Well, so in half.

To which the minister modestly but firmly answered:

- No, your majesty, it is yours, from yours and only belongs to you alone.


6. In 1837, Nikolai the First wished to visit the Caucasus for the first time.

From Kerch he went by steamboat to Redut-Kale - a fortress north of Poti, although in the fall cruel storms happen on the Black Sea. However, the sovereign did not cancel the trip, fearing false interpretations in Europe, where they closely monitored his health and affairs.

When the elements were played out in earnest, the alarmed Nikolai Pavlovich began to sing prayers, making the composer Lvov, the author of the music for the hymn "God Save the Tsar!" Sing along. The emperor favored Lviv and often took with him on trips.

“I have no voice,” Lvov, terrified by the storm, was saying to death.

“It cannot be,” replied the sovereign, who was amused by the sight of a shaking musician, “you say, and therefore, the voice has not disappeared anywhere.”


7. In the 1840-s, the first urban public stage-shows appeared in St. Petersburg. The appearance of these omnibuses was an event, they liked the public and everyone considered it their duty to ride in them, so that they could have the opportunity to talk with friends about the impressions they experienced while traveling.

The success of this enterprise, cheapness and ease of movement became known to the emperor. And he wanted to personally verify this. Walking once around Nevsky and meeting a stagecoach, he made a sign to stop and climbed into it. Although it was crowded, but the place was found, and the sovereign drove to the Admiralteiskaya Square.

Here he wanted to go out, but the conductor stopped him:

- Let me get a dime for the ride?

Nikolai Pavlovich found himself in a difficult position: he never carried money with him, and no one of his companions made up his mind or thought to offer him money. Conductor had no choice but to take the word of honor of the emperor.

And on the next day, the chamber-attendant delivered ten kopecks to the office of the diligence, with the application of twenty-five rubles for tea to the conductor.


8. Nicholas I loved to drive fast and always on an excellent trotter. One day, while driving by the sovereign on Nevsky Prospect, a man, despite the hails of the coachman, almost fell under the crew of the emperor, who even got into the cab and grabbed the driver by the shoulders.

At the same time, the emperor shook the offender with a finger and gestured him to him. But he waved a negative hand and ran on. When the disobedient was found, taken to the palace and brought to the emperor, he asked him:

- Are you so carelessly thrust under my horse? You know me?

- I know your imperial majesty!

“How dare you disobey your king?”

- Sorry, your imperial majesty ... there was no time ... my wife suffered in difficult labor ... and I ran to the midwife.

- BUT! This is a valid reason! - said the sovereign. - Follow me!

And he led him into the inner chambers to the empress.

“I recommend you an exemplary husband,” he told her, “who, in order to provide more medical assistance to his wife, disobeyed the call of his sovereign. An exemplary husband!

The dog was a poor official. This event was the beginning of the happiness of his entire family.


9. Nikolai Pavlovich was capable of unexpected mercies. Once, on Isakievskaya Square, from the side of Gorokhovaya Street, two funeral nags dragged mourning heels with a poor coffin. On the coffin lay a bureaucratic sword and a civilian cocked hat, followed by one poorly dressed old woman. The roads were approaching the monument to Peter I. At this point, the sovereign's crew appeared from the Senate.

The emperor, seeing the procession, was outraged that none of his colleagues had come to return the last debt to the deceased official. He stopped the carriage, went out and, on foot, followed the official’s coffin, towards the bridge. Immediately the people began to follow the sovereign. Everyone wanted to share the honor along with the emperor to accompany him to the grave of the deceased. When the coffin went to the bridge, the mourners had gathered a lot of every title, mainly from the upper class. Nikolai Pavlovich looked around and said to the mourners:

- Gentlemen, I have no time, I have to leave. Hope you spend it to the grave.

And so departed.


10. In the 1848 year, during the Hungarian uprising, Nikolai Pavlovich had to decide whether to save the Habsburg monarchy, who had so often ruined Russia, or to allow the insurgent Hungarians to defeat the Austrian army. Since the insurgents were commanded by Polish generals who had fought more than once against the Russians, the sovereign considered the lesser evil to send Russian troops to the aid of the Austrians.

And in the course of the campaign two officers-allies entered the same Hungarian shop: Russian and Austrian. Russian paid for the purchase of gold, and the Austrian in payment offered bills. The trader refused to accept the piece of paper and, pointing to the Russian officer, said:

- That's how gentlemen pay!

“It’s good to pay them in gold,” said the Austrian officer, “when they were hired to fight for us.”

A Russian officer was offended by such a statement, summoned an Austrian to a duel and killed him. A scandal erupted, and Nikolai Pavlovich was told about the officer’s deed.

However, the emperor decided this: to give him a stern reprimand for endangering his life in wartime; he had to kill the Austrian right there on the spot.

Sources:
encyclopaedia-russia.ru
kommersant.ru
portal1.rf
Our news channels

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

100 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    August 6 2016
    can historical anecdotes make the brutal serf servant Nikolai1 pretty or humane? No, of course. A slave owner can never become human, no matter how funny jokes are told about him.
    1. +15
      August 6 2016
      Quote: Paul1
      can historical anecdotes make the brutal serf servant Nikolai1 pretty or humane? No, of course. A slave owner can never become human, no matter how funny jokes are told about him.

      I don’t know how to react to your comment, but the said phrase addressed to Nevelskoy saved the captain from the shame of demotion and kept the mouth of the Amur for Russia. He said something like this: "Where the Russian was raised once, he should not descend."
      1. -3
        August 6 2016
        Quote: Amurets
        kept the mouth of the Amur River in Russia.


        and who do you think should belong to this mouth?
        1. +11
          August 6 2016
          Quote: Paul1
          and who do you think should belong to this mouth?

          This is not my opinion, but according to Nikolai1. When Nevelskaya brought documents on the opening of the Amur mouth, the St. Petersburg mosquito, led by Nesselrode, demanded that Nvelsky be demoted and his sailor exiled to the crew.
          The saddest thing is not that I did not receive the Nevelskaya award, but that the country was not ready for the gift of providence.
          Upon arriving in St. Petersburg on January 28, 1850, Nevelskaya presented to the Main Naval Headquarters a report by N. N. Muravyov that, in view of the discovery made by Nevelsky, it was necessary to take 1850 Amur’s lower men in the navigation of 70.
          Emperor Nicholas I ordered to consider the report of Nevelsky at a meeting of the Special Committee. It was chaired by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Count Nesselrode.
          On February 2, 1850, Nesselrode, Director of the Asian Department of Senyavin, Minister of War Count Chernyshov, who was called “eye to eye,” informed Nevelsky that they were sure of his mistake in investigating the estuary and the mouth of the river. At the same time, they referred to the report of our diplomatic mission in Beijing that Amur was guarded by large Chinese forces. Even earlier (December 1849), Nesselrode presented the emperor with a report that Nevelsky’s report was erroneous, and that the Chinese on Amur had enormous forces sufficient to repel an invasion of the river from the sea.
          With this position of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, even the direct statement of Nevelsky that not only the Chinese forces, but also the slightest Chinese government influence does not exist there, was inconclusive.
          1. -10
            August 6 2016
            Quote: Amurets
            Even earlier (December 1849), Nesselrode presented the emperor with a report that Nevelsky’s report was erroneous, and that the Chinese on Amur had enormous forces sufficient to repel an invasion of the river from the sea.


            generally tired of reading this nonsense already. If you think the Chinese were so strong, then why were they inferior to the same England in the opium wars of 1840-42, when the Angles had 3 thousand. soldiers defeated the entire Chinese army, says only one thing, that China, as a sovereign state, did not exist.
            The forces of the Great / Chinese Tartary guarded the Far East, who suffered the last defeat from Romanov Russia, England and then France, but these facts are hidden from history.
            1. +11
              August 6 2016
              The forces of the Great / Chinese Tartary guarded the Far East, who suffered the last defeat from Romanov Russia, England and then France, but these facts are hidden from history.


              a, fomenkovets. Now it’s clear, the character has revealed, an adequate person will not write this laughing
              1. +5
                August 6 2016
                Quote: Pissarro
                The forces of the Great / Chinese Tartary guarded the Far East, who suffered the last defeat from Romanov Russia, England and then France, but these facts are hidden from history.


                a, fomenkovets. Now it’s clear, the character has revealed, an adequate person will not write this laughing

                - IMHO this is the reincarnation of a character under the nickname "Sveles"
                - in any case, once I hinted at it, and I immediately got into his emergency belay
                - there is a test "for Sveles": he needs to hint that the angelic language is not the worst language in the world (at least so)
                - if it starts to hiss and spit, 99. (99)%, that it is Sweles

                I wanted to do this at my leisure, but I didn’t have time sad
                1. Riv
                  +1
                  August 7 2016
                  I think this is just a fat troll. By the way: you feed him now.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
              2. +1
                August 6 2016
                Quote: Pissarro
                The forces of the Great / Chinese Tartary guarded the Far East, who suffered the last defeat from Romanov Russia, England and then France, but these facts are hidden from history.


                a, fomenkovets. Now it’s clear, the character has revealed, an adequate person will not write this laughing

                Quickly pasted a sticker. smile
              3. +1
                August 6 2016
                Quote: Pissarro
                The forces of the Great / Chinese Tartary guarded the Far East, who suffered the last defeat from Romanov Russia, England and then France, but these facts are hidden from history.


                a, fomenkovets. Now it’s clear, the character has revealed, an adequate person will not write this laughing


                I am not a Fomenkovets, but one of those who consider ALL historical facts without sorting them into "true and archaic". It was Fomenko and Nosovsky who taught by their works not to discard uncomfortable questions, but to answer them. If it weren't for Fin and None, no one would have known what indications or scores in Olympiads are, or that Sergius of Radonezh in the world, Bartholomew Chernets is Berthold Schwartz, or that it was the Russians who invented the first muskets. They have a lot of things discovered from the history of the Russian people, therefore Russophobes like you hate them.
                1. +7
                  August 6 2016
                  hate them a lot of honor.

                  Sergius of Radonezh in the world Bartholomew Czernets - Berthold Schwartz, or the fact that the Russians first invented the muskets.


                  In the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, a powder laboratory or a musket workshop have already been dug up? wassat
                  1. 0
                    August 6 2016
                    Quote: Pissarro
                    hate them a lot of honor.

                    Sergius of Radonezh in the world Bartholomew Czernets - Berthold Schwartz, or the fact that the Russians first invented the muskets.


                    In the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, a powder laboratory or a musket workshop have already been dug up? wassat


                    no, there is other evidence ...
                    1. +4
                      August 6 2016
                      in history, evidence is a material fact, an artifact, an expert document
                      1. -1
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        in history, evidence is a material fact, an artifact, an expert document


                        What are you saying? Why are you so, so confused in the conversation? You attribute what neither I nor Rastas said.
                        Here is a page from the Lutheran chronograph that says
                        And this is what it says: "This century, under Wenceslas Bartold Swart, a monk of Coloniens, cannons of the military, like Bombards are called, invented, they were first used by Venets against Genoens, the years of Christ 1380" [940], sheet 336.

                        I hope you know whom the Germans called Wends?
                        http://chronologia.org/shahname/shahname03_01.html

                        rather vile things are happening on the top, I’m forbidden to insert images, here’s a tendentious approach in its pure form along with a stream of minuses, such a party policy ...

                      2. +4
                        August 6 2016
                        Venets vs. Genuens


                        There is a lot of material about the wars of Venice and Genoa, study. Venues from Roman times were called by the inhabitants of Rome. But you need to pull an owl on the globe and prove that the Wends are Russian only because this word is consonant with the name of one of the Slavic tribes. But this word in tune with the name of a Celtic tribe of France. Linguists have long exposed the game of words to words
                      3. -2
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        There is plenty of material about the wars of Venice and Genoa, study. Venets



                        no, no dude, no need to juggle the Venetians, no one except you called Wends. You still say that the townspeople of the city of VIENNA are also Wened, the traditions of pipipax will tear you apart ...
                      4. +1
                        August 6 2016
                        do not ascribe to me your Fomenkovsky illness in the search for similar words.

                        For reference, German for Venice will be Venedig. Can you learn Google translator? laughing
                      5. -1
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        For reference, German for Venice will be Venedig. Can you learn Google translator?


                        why in german? When the official language is Latin. In short, quite official science considers the Wends to be Slavs, except everyone knows this, so there is nothing to prove here. Then the Genoese war against the Wends was in 1380, just a year of the battle on the Kulikovo field. In addition, besides the Lutheran chronograph Fina, there is more evidence.
                      6. +3
                        August 6 2016
                        why in german?


                        Because Bertold Schwartz was German from Dortmund and because even if your Lutheran chronology of 1680 existed, it could only be written in German

                        When the official language is Latin.


                        Comrade, do you know who Luther is? He hated Latin and translated the Bible and worship into German. And not a single Lutheran will write in the language of the hated Rome. So, by no means can the Lutheran chronicle have an original Latin language laughing
                      7. -2
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        Because Bertold Schwartz was German from Dortmund and


                        scribe, you not only lied, but you got completely confused, despite the fact that he was Lutheran written in Latin, he already made translations into Russian ...
                      8. 0
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        But this word is consonant with the name of one Celtic tribe of France


                        what tribe then?
                      9. +4
                        August 6 2016
                        you google it and read about all three tribes with similar names, from French Brittany, from the Italian coast and from the Slavic Baltic. All your Fomenkovsky problem of ignorance, the scarcity of knowledge makes you unite different events, people, peoples, countries according to some common signs .Because educated people make fun of your unification of the Etruscan and Russian, for example
                      10. -3
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        you google it and read about all three tribes with similar names, from French Brittany, from Italian


                        Yes, I got your Google, you give me links to documents, how I do it, I still have to think up your nonsense for you ...
                      11. +2
                        August 6 2016
                        You gave a link to the non-existent Lutheran chronograph, about which even on your Fomenkov site it is written that it is not in the original and no one has seen the original laughing
                      12. -2
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        You gave a link to the non-existent Lutheran chronograph, about which even on your Fomenkov site it is written that it is not in the original and no one has seen the original laughing


                        it’s disgusting to talk with such an unicultural opponent, the link to the document that I posted contains links to the Lutheran chronograph page.
                      13. +4
                        August 6 2016
                        The translation was carried out by the Bishop of Ryazan, Gabriel of Buzhinsky, from the original now lost. In 1749, the book was banned by the decree of Elizabeth Petrovna and withdrawn


                        This is from your Fomenkovsky site. http://chronologia.org/rare/luter_hronograf/index.html
                        Translated into Russian called you can’t find the ends, believe in the word laughing
                      14. -1
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        The translation was carried out by the Bishop of Ryazan, Gabriel of Buzhinsky, from the original now lost. In 1749, the book was banned by the decree of Elizabeth Petrovna and withdrawn


                        This is from your Fomenkovsky site. http://chronologia.org/rare/luter_hronograf/index.html
                        Translated into Russian called you can’t find the ends, believe in the word laughing



                        fuu, you already can't read three lines, it is written - "Now in the Russian language from Latin translated".
                      15. +3
                        August 6 2016
                        Yes, it was, a crazy Lutheran wrote something in a language that all Lutherans hate (Find at least one Lutheran document in Latin!), Then translated it into Russian, immediately lost the original, then the translation was banned by the decree of the Empress, but was not destroyed, but hidden. Fomenko found it, read it, but didn’t show it to anyone, asked to take his word for it. You believed it. Did I set it right? laughing
                      16. -2
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        I set out correctly


                        everything is clear with you.
                      17. -1
                        August 6 2016
                        Pissarro, to put your opinion to the forum, you need to know the issue under discussion. And the question is that:
                        a) Fomenko and Co. always argue that their findings are a hypothesis that can be discussed constructively and without labels;
                        b) Fomenko developed a number of methods for the study of history. The frequency attenuation method, for example, is now used by certain services in Internet monitoring;
                        c) There are a lot of facts, documents, written monuments that official historians do not consider or give unintelligible comments. For example, a steel knife on the mummy of Tutankhamun or astronomical dates of Egyptian horoscopes.
                        What do you disagree with Fomenko specifically? Can you get into an argument with him, or are all the arguments just "a la Fomenkovism"?
                      18. -3
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Igor V
                        What do you disagree with Fomenko specifically? Can you get into an argument with him, or are all the arguments just "a la Fomenkovism"?


                        this conragenesis will not be able to answer why, he has one specialty stinking against the wind, apparently paid. In general, it’s very strange for the last three weeks that there are already several topics in defense of Nicholas1, then Samsonov attempted to resuscitate this skeleton in the closet, this is today from red flag. The site is very strange. And as for Fomenko, for them it’s just an unauthorized discharge of waste against the wind ...
                      19. +3
                        August 6 2016
                        you, the clown on this site a couple of months, and I’ve been here for several years. Strange with the crazy ideas of the Fomenkovites, here you are laughing
                      20. 0
                        August 6 2016
                        here we were discussing, as it were, not Tutankhamun’s steel knives, but some kind of missing document of the 17th century. I am well enough on the topic of the Lutheran German question to understand that Latin, Lutherans, monks, a new time in that mishmash in which all this is presented is fierce nonsense . I do not presume to discuss Tutankhamun's knives
                      21. 0
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        here we were discussing, as it were, not Tutankhamun’s steel knives, but some kind of missing document of the 17th century. I am well enough on the topic of the Lutheran German question to understand that Latin, Lutherans, monks, a new time in that mishmash in which all this is presented is fierce nonsense . I do not presume to discuss Tutankhamun's knives

                        Tutankhamun’s knives are not required to be discussed, by the way, there were two of them: the second was gold. You have been asked a specific question. Do you disagree with the methods of studying history? Bring to the interested members of the forum your arguments.
                      22. +4
                        August 6 2016
                        Do you disagree with the methods of studying history?


                        above arguments. A reference to a mysterious, unseen translation of a lost source that contradicts all logical, scientific and historical laws as a fact is ridiculous. I recall this fact trying to prove that Sergius of Radonezh in gunpowder and muskets riveted and was German Bertold Schwartz. So far, they have not found a laboratory in the laurel, books too. But Fomenko himself said this to Pavlik and Pavlik enough. Do you also?

                        By the way, Pavlik, study the process of making a long musket barrel. You will not only have to find a chemical laboratory for the production of gunpowder in the laurel, but also a big production laughing
                      23. +6
                        August 6 2016
                        .I recall that this fact is trying to prove that Sergius of Radonezh in the laurel gunpowder and muskets riveted and was a German Bertold Schwartz

                        laughing Why are you trying to argue with the sick for the whole head people? This thing is generally useless. It only remains to pity them and ignore them.
                      24. -4
                        August 6 2016
                        Pissarro, admit honestly that you do not know Fomenko's methods, hence such a dense ignorance of the "Fomenko" questions. Sometime at your leisure, read at least about the methods and write a devastating article where there is a lie. Everyone will appreciate it. Having taken some detail out of context, you can flap it in any way without affecting the essence.
                      25. +6
                        August 6 2016
                        Fomenko found several chronological inconsistencies in the medieval chronicles
                        and on the basis of this he dismantled the whole history of the Ancient World.
                        Meanwhile, archeology is developing, applying methods taken from forensics,
                        artifact dating has become much more accurate - radio-carbon analysis compared with
                        dating on tree rings and dating on annual layers of Antarctic ice. AND
                        the error of the method is approximately 100 years for 3000 years in the range up to 12000 years.
                        On the contrary, the ancient history of Egypt moved back another 100-200 years.
                        The chronology of Fomenko is completely refuted by artifacts.
                      26. -5
                        August 6 2016
                        In radiocarbon analysis it is impossible to determine the measurement error, since only those dates are known that suit interested parties, and this is not enough for statistical physics. Fomenko, at one time, advocated that laboratories publish ALL measurements taken officially on the pages of international scientific journals, but interested parties raised a scandal. That's where the roots grow from.
                        The ancient history of Egypt is so far removed that historians do not see the connector line on the head of Nefertiti. If you see it, you must admit that casting technology has not changed at all from ancient times to the present, although the last 200-300 years say the opposite.
                      27. +1
                        August 6 2016
                        Yes, it seems that not only historians do not see the connector line! smile
                      28. +4
                        August 7 2016
                        Radio-carbon analysis had many critics, not just Fomenko.
                        For this reason, scientists began to compare their method with
                        measurements on tree rings and annual stratifications
                        ice. Thus, the comparison tables reached "depth"
                        5-6 thousand years. And the error is set at 100 years approximately
                        to this "depth".
                        In the territory of modern Israel, different tribes and peoples have lived since the early Bronze Age. The peoples were changing, but the place was never empty.
                        At one archaeological section, artifacts of all
                        epochs: from the sites of an ancient man, through the Egyptian kingdoms (Egypt has long owned this
                        territory), Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Crusaders, Ottomans ...
                        Each slice is filled: jugs with grain, jewelry, tools, weapons, coins. And full of bones.
                        The climate is dry - organic matter is "canned" and is well preserved.

                        And no "holes in history". All eras are fully and consistently presented.
                        According to the classic story. There are many senations, but they do not belong to the chronology.
                      29. +2
                        August 8 2016
                        I wanted to say here that when exact sciences interfere in history, then insoluble contradictions appear. Geologists, for example, cannot find millions of tons of rock from a quarry near the pyramids, and there is no removal cone either. Pitchers drilled in stone, according to historians, cannot be drilled with a modern tool. There are many such examples. So how can I, a mechanical engineering engineer, believe that bronze metallurgy appeared before steel metallurgy? If every day I see the line of contact on products from molds and lithforms, how can I not see it on the ancient Egyptian artifacts? It turns out that history has become a religion - I believe, I do not believe. I don’t like being deceived.
                      30. +1
                        August 8 2016
                        There are truly technologically unexplained cases.
                        But at the same time there are hundreds of thousands of artifacts that are strictly
                        fit into the classical chronology of history, and
                        by the totality of all the criteria. If earlier archaeologists are more
                        Engaged in stone, they are now intensively digging up organic matter: garbage dumps, foci, even latrines. By grains, fruit bones, bones from garbage can quite accurately date the era. Artifacts are now scanned using electron microscopes, using x-rays and ultrasound.
                        On "blind" (erased) papyri and parchments, one reads - from scratches of the pen - texts in several layers. In general, modern archeology has neatly closed all the "holes" in history that he tried to push apart
                        Fomenko (expanding the real "holes" of some chronicles that he found).
                        Two thousand years of the Ancient World and the Middle Ages remained firmly in place.
                        In Israel, in the region of the Dead Sea, where the humidity is almost zero, almost mummified remains of people in clothes, Roman armor, the remains of knights, seals of ancient kings with inscriptions are found.
                        There are many finds, they are one above the other, continuously, in the layers of excavations for thousands of years.
                      31. The comment was deleted.
                      32. 0
                        August 9 2016
                        Quote: Pissarro
                        Venetians from Roman times were called the inhabitants of those places. But you need to pull an owl on the globe and prove that the Wends are Russian only because this word is consonant with the name of one of the Slavic tribes. But this word is consonant with the name of one of the Celtic tribe of France. linguists have long been exposed to words

                        Linguists may have unmasked it, but archaeologists and geneticists say - "not everything is so simple and there is something really underneath it." So that's it.
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. +7
              August 6 2016
              Quote: Paul1
              generally tired of reading this nonsense already.

              This is not my nonsense, but Nesselrod's nonsense. Here are the documents of the Sakhalin Regional Museum of Local Lore. Look at the link.
              http://sakhalinmuseum.ru/konkurs_work_28.php
              1. 0
                August 6 2016
                Quote: Amurets
                Quote: Paul1
                generally tired of reading this nonsense already.

                This is not my nonsense, but Nesselrod's nonsense. Here are the documents of the Sakhalin Regional Museum of Local Lore. Look at the link.
                http://sakhalinmuseum.ru/konkurs_work_28.php


                where are the documents? This is an article by a certain Ponomarev ...
        2. 0
          January 25 2017
          Dear Pavel1. I must disappoint you, the CPSU (b) was not there then, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels “The Communist Party Manifesto”, was written in 1848 and I think Nikolai! did not read it.
      2. -1
        August 6 2016
        Here is a scene from nature, sketched by the famous historian Soloviev: “The emperor visits one military school; the director introduces him to a foster child who exerts extraordinary abilities, follows the modern war, and, for his reasons, correctly predicts the outcome of events. What does the emperor answer? Rejoices, showers caresses the gifted young man, the future servant of the fatherland? Not at all. Frowning, Nikolai replies: “I don’t need such people, without him there is someone to think about and do this; I need these! ” With these words, he takes by the hand and pushes out from the crowd a hefty small, huge piece of meat, without any life and thought on his face and the last in success ”
        1. +3
          August 6 2016
          another bike.
          two comments on her.
          1. Is a purely civilian historian Soloviev present at the tsar’s visit to a military school to paint scenes from nature?
          2. Prior to Nicholas the First, the Military Academy did not exist in Russia; it was founded in 1832 and it was called Nikolaev before the Revolution. This, as it were, shows how much attention this emperor paid to military science, his predecessors did not think about it.
          1. -1
            August 6 2016
            Quote: Pissarro
            Before Nicholas I, the Military Academy did not exist in Russia. It


            you are not only a liar, but also an ignoramus, it was about military schools
            Military educational activities stood out as a separate branch of government, a committee was formed of directors of St. Petersburg military schools, which developed a draft General Regulation and Charter for military schools. Under the new provision, all military schools were divided into three classes:
            the first includes provincial military schools and cadet corps;
            to the second - the Page Corps and the capital's cadet corps;
            to the third - Engineering and Artillery School.
            The general goal of the establishment of these institutions was "to provide the young Russian nobility with an upbringing decent to this title, so that the rules of piety and morality can be rooted in the pupils, and by teaching them everything that is necessary in their predetermined military rank, they must be made capable of serving with benefit and honor. sovereign "

            http://www.ruscadet.ru/education/edsystem/history/12.htm
            1. +8
              August 6 2016
              The ignoramus is you. You accused the tsar, who founded the first military academy in Russia, of neglecting military science. So enlighten why he founded it.
              And if you do not understand the difference between a military school in which a junior officer is trained and a military academy where a commander is trained, then go in for self-education laughing
              1. -5
                August 6 2016
                Quote: Pissarro
                You have accused the tsar, who founded the first military academy in Russia, of neglecting military science.


                when did I say that nicholas neglected military science? I see you have already completely lied there.
                Quote: Pissarro
                And if you do not understand the difference between a military school in which a junior officer is trained and a military academy,


                Mouthbug Rastas told you that Nikolai visited the MILITARY SCHOOL, you already started talking about the academy, but military schools existed, I gave you a link, even if you look, what?
                1. +6
                  August 6 2016
                  Fomenkovets, Rastas’s bike shows a tsarist degenerate who doesn’t need thinking military men, but needs stupid ones. This image has nothing to do with Nikolai the First, who was fond of military science, especially engineering, from his youth. Even to the throne, he commanded the model sapper battalion he had created, who played huge role during the Decembrist rebellion. Having built not only a military academy, but also a bunch of perfect fortresses on the western border such as Brest, relevant even during the Second World War. Having commanders such as Paskevich, Dibich, Nakhimov and others, glorified by glories of solid victories.
                  1. +1
                    August 6 2016
                    Forgive me, this is not a tale, but the words of the historian Solovyov, the author of the huge work "History of Russia". All questions to him. I was not living at the time. And about Nicholas 1, and in 100 years they will write an article about how wonderful Yeltsin was, and his ungrateful contemporaries called him a bloodsucker.
                    1. +3
                      August 6 2016
                      so it’s necessary to judge by the fruits, and not by donkeys kicking a dead lion. The historians who have done the most for Russia, Ivan the Terrible, Stalin are the most disregarded by historians.
                      1. -1
                        August 6 2016
                        Well, Ivan the Terrible, you can agree, if not for the Livonian War, but yes. Stalin - yes. But Nicholas 1, excuse me, his son did much more for Russia. And for almost 30 years of rule, Nikolai did not bring to completion any reforms, left the country with an empty treasury (by the way, one of the reasons why Alaska later had to be sold was that there was no money for its development), he got involved in the Crimean War. He left everything to his son and said famous words before his death, which leaves him with a different state than he would like.
                    2. -5
                      August 6 2016
                      Quote: Rastas
                      Sorry, this is not a bike, but the words of the historian Solovyov


                      But can you give a link to this, what would this frantic plug up?
                      1. +2
                        August 6 2016
                        The historian Soloviev, who has not served in the army for a day and draws pictures from life about what is happening inside the military school, where he never had the same authority on Nikolai’s military preferences as you did in historical science with torments and great tartaria. Do not bother trying to shut me up, will not work laughing
                      2. 0
                        August 7 2016
                        Well, the historian Soloviev is not an authority for you, of course, not Starikov or Medinsky. And is General Marshal D. A. Milyutin such for you? Or was he also a liberal layman who thought nothing in army affairs? His low opinion of Nicholas 1, how do you rate it?
                      3. +1
                        August 6 2016
                        This is from the memoirs of S. M. Soloviev: Soloviev S. M. Notes. [PG.], B. g., p. 150.
                      4. -1
                        August 6 2016
                        Quote: Rastas
                        This is from the memoirs of S. M. Soloviev: Soloviev S. M. Notes. [PG.], B. g., p. 150.

                        hi drinks
          2. 0
            August 6 2016
            They started talking about the academy, well, then here's one more for you. The speech of the President of the Military Academy, Ivan Onufrievich Sukhozanet, made by him on November 14, 1846 at a meeting of all students at the Academy of Officers and all professors and administrative staff: “I, gentlemen, have gathered you to speak with you about the most unpleasant incident. I notice you have no military discipline at all. Science in military affairs is nothing more than a button to a uniform; a uniform without a button cannot be worn, but a button does not constitute the entire uniform. ” By all means, Sukhozanet tried to avert the officers of the academy from the erroneous thought that science was necessary for a military man, and in his order at the Military Academy of February 14, 1847 we read: “I think it is not superfluous to repeat here what I have already said several times during the collection of officers at the Academy, it is possible to win without science, but never without discipline. ”
            1. 0
              August 6 2016
              it is possible to win without science, but never discipline


              Very often the head of the Nikolaev Military Academy, General Ivan Onufrievich Sukhozanet, is criticized by civilians for these words, if I am not mistaken, another bookworm Tarle wrote his own in the "Crimean War". I tried to make a combat artillery general, a participant in the war with Napoleon a fool, but what this general said is known to any sergeant of any army, there will be no discipline even a chance of victory, there is no military science in a sergeant, there is a chance of victory, maybe the enemy is dull-headed. But the bookworms are laughing, and in order to understand this, it is necessary not to be clever in the office, but to put on boots and turn the crowd of yesterday's collective farmers into a smoothed unit.
              1. 0
                August 7 2016
                Yeah. Sukhozanet was such a wonderful and professional leader of the academy that the number of graduates fell every year, in 1851 12 people and 10 students were graduated from it. In the end, a special commission was appointed, which recognized the explanations provided by Sukhozanet about the shortage of students as insufficient; in 1854 he was dismissed from the post of its director.
            2. +1
              August 6 2016
              And what do you dislike about army discipline? So the army is holding onto it. Remember the 227 order - after all, in fact, from this order Stalingrad began. And it was executed due to the presence of army discipline.
              1. +2
                August 7 2016
                You do not confuse discipline with a brainworm ... m.
        2. 0
          August 9 2016
          Quote: Rastas
          Not at all. Frowning, Nikolai replies: “I don’t need such people, without him there is someone to think about and do this; I need these! ”With these words, he takes by the hand and pushes a hefty small, huge piece of meat out of the crowd, without any life and thought on his face and the last in success”

          Unfortunately, there is a lot of truth in this story - it's not just that the officers of the "Nikolaev upbringing" (ie those who grew up during his reign) turned out to be mostly uninitiated "shagists" and bureaucrats.

          The defeats of the Crimean War are not just. The exception is Russian victories in the Caucasian theater of operations then (but there the Separate Caucasian Army fought with other traditions).
    2. +2
      August 6 2016
      can the imposed stereotypes make a brutal serf and slave owner of a normal, handsome and human king? For some, they may laughing
      1. -7
        August 6 2016
        Quote: Pissarro
        can the imposed stereotypes make a brutal serf and slave owner of a normal, handsome and human king? For some, they may laughing


        you are just a liar ...
        1. +7
          August 6 2016
          challenge him to a duel
      2. +1
        August 6 2016
        Why stereotypes? You read more. For example, Minister of War D. Milyutin wrote in his notes: “Speaking quite frankly, and I, like most of the modern young generation, did not sympathize with the then regime, which was based on administrative arbitrariness, police oppression, and strict formalism. Even in the military business, which the emperor was engaged in with such passionate enthusiasm, the same predominant concern for order and discipline prevailed, not for substantial improvement of the troops, not for his adaptation to combat assignment, but only outward appearance, with a brilliant view of the parades, "pedantic observance of countless petty formalities that dull the human mind and kill the true military spirit"
      3. 0
        August 6 2016
        And here is the testimony of the historian Solovyov, whom you can’t call a revolutionary, but rather he was a supporter of the monarchy: ““ A terrible cloud was approaching over Nicholas and his deeds, the cloud of the Eastern war. We had to pay for thirty years of lies, thirty years of pressure of all living things, spiritual, suppression of the people strength, the transformation of Russian people into sticks ... Some consoled themselves like this: it's hard! everyone is sacrificed for material, military strength; but at least we are strong, Russia occupies an important place, we are respected and feared. And this consolation was taken away ... "
        “At the same time that the thunder began to rumble over the head of the new Nebuchadnezzar, when Russia began to suffer the unusual disgrace of military failure, when the enemies appeared near Sevastopol, we were in a difficult situation: on the one hand, our patriotic feeling was terribly offended by the humiliation of Russia, with another, we were convinced that only a disaster, and it was an unfortunate war, could produce a saving coup, stop further decay; we were convinced that the success of the war would tighten our bonds even more, would finally establish the barracks system; we were tormented by news of failures, knowing that the opposite news would lead us into awe. ”
        1. +5
          August 6 2016
          we were tormented by news of failures, knowing that the opposite news would lead us into awe


          wishing defeat for one's own country is in the tradition of the "Russian" intelligentsia.

          historian Solovyov, who by no means can be called a revolutionary


          Of course you can’t call him a revolutionary, revolutionists, through the mouth of Lenin, gave these characters a deadly true characterization
        2. +6
          August 6 2016
          How do the words of Solovyov differ from the howls of our modern intelligentsia? Svanidze is also a historian, and why? This should make him believe about the ominous Putin regime? If you read what our intellectuals write for this five-year period, it turns out that we live directly at almost 37 years old. Nicholas 1 was a competent manager, builder and standardizer. Plus, he tried to instill in our society a penchant for order and pragmatism, for which everyone hated him without exception.
          In general, I agree with Pizarro - the more the ruler did for Russia - the more our beloved intelligentsia smears his feces. Throughout the history of our country, there was no ruler who has done more for our country and people than Ivan 4. But few people so richly smeared with shit like him. Even on the monument “Millennium of Russia” they didn’t place it, so it was smeared by our intellectuals even then. Although it was he who created Russia, namely, a powerful single centralized state, laid its foundations, defeated the feudal opposition, tearing the country apart, carried out a bunch of reforms, created a new army, enlarged its territory by 2 times, crushed most of the enemies and much more. But most importantly, he gave the country such acceleration that even the troubled times could not stop it. But even now, when so many centuries have passed, he is perceived as a psycho and a madman - he was so smeared.
          PM there is a good rule. The more our intelligentsia water the ruler with feces, the more this person has done for the country and future generations. hi
          1. 0
            August 6 2016
            S. M. Soloviev was not an adversary of the monarchy, as such, but vice versa. In addition, I also cited the opinion of D. Milyutin, the Minister of War, the last Field Marshal of the Russian Empire (there was an article about him recently), which by no means can be called liberal intelligentsia.
          2. 0
            August 6 2016
            What does Svanidze have to do with it? He, ksati, a member of the presidential commissions, has his own programs on television. This is a simple doll, which Putin is holding in his hands, which is put to denigrate, above all, the Soviet past. And he never fought the "Putin regime". Just people like you do not understand, whose opinion interests you? The Bolsheviks and Soviet historians are liars for you, historians and ministers of tsarist Russia are the same. “I do not need learned minds, I need loyal subjects,” Nikolai said when they interceded for the guilty pupils of the Gatchina Orphanage Institute on the grounds that they were the best students of the institute. In the last years of his life, he only repeated that he was surrounded by only embezzlers, traitors and scoundrels. And this king is put forward as a model.
            1. +3
              August 6 2016
              An intelligent person does not always represent a model of morality. Nicholas 1 fought for order. Order is the law. If a person screwed up, then he is the best student or the worst - on the drum. Nakosyachil - answer.
              Well, there is no doubt that the top of the late Russian Empire was full of embezzlers, traitors and bastards. It is enough to remember its end. Was there little money that was stolen for building fortifications in the Far East before the war with Japan, and where did the money go to ships? Why was the mistress of the Grand Duke booed? As for the traitors - what are the names of the gentlemen who send congratulations to the Japanese emperor on the victory over Russia, for example? Well, as for the bastards, it’s even strange to doubt that Guchkov alone is worth it.
              So where was Nikolai wrong?
              1. 0
                August 7 2016
                That's right. The retinue makes the king, and the fact that the majority of the bastards gathered around Nikolai, he alone is to blame.
    3. +2
      August 6 2016
      Brave claim. And how many slaves did he have?

      And how are we going to consider situevina - from today's calm times weighed down by humanism, or will we look from those dark times?
    4. +3
      August 6 2016
      Fairly common misconception.
      Under Nicholas 1 - serfdom has already begun to abolish.
      Step by step. In several provinces of a vast empire.
      With his son, Alexander 2, the process just ended.
      And then ... even under Nicholas 2 - redemption payments were paid ...
      1. 0
        August 6 2016
        Quote: Mytholog
        Fairly common misconception.
        Under Nicholas 1 - serfdom has already begun to abolish.


        already started? Where does this come from?
        1. +3
          August 6 2016
          The process of abolishing serfdom began from the western provinces since 1815. Braked-restored, but nonetheless ...
          Where it was at all. Beyond the Urals, for example, serfdom was generally a curiosity.
          1. +3
            August 6 2016
            I will add, it was not only in the West, in Poland and the Baltic states under Nicholas, it was not only never in Siberia, but it was not in the North at the Pomors, and in the South, at the Cossacks
          2. -1
            August 6 2016
            Quote: Mytholog
            The process of abolishing serfdom began from the western provinces since 1815. Braked-restored, but nonetheless ...
            Where it was at all. Beyond the Urals, for example, serfdom was generally a curiosity.

            you don’t write out your words here, but let’s say that the serfs were canceled ...
          3. 0
            August 9 2016
            Quote: Mytholog
            Beyond the Urals, for example, serfdom was generally a curiosity.

            In the Urals, in the first place there were few people, and in the second there were huge territories - since it had gone into the forest, and who would look?
    5. 0
      August 6 2016
      Under Nicholas 1, the share of serfs in the country's population fell sharply. A decree was passed on "obliged peasants". Not a single state peasant was presented to nobles for merit.
      1. -1
        August 6 2016
        Quote: Sergej1972
        decree on "obliged peasants".

        Firstly, it should be noted right away that the decree on obligated peasants provided for not mandatory implementation, but recommendatory. That is, he gave an opportunity, but how the landowners act is at their discretion. As a result, from ten million serfs were transferred to obligated, but free from twenty-five to twenty-seven thousand people. This is called in everyday life "a drop in the ocean". - Read more on FB.ru: http://fb.ru/article/148766/ukaz-ob-obyazannyih-krestyanah---popyitka-nikolaya-p
        ervogo-reshit-krestyanskiy-vopros
        1. 0
          August 6 2016
          I read that the actions to liberate serfs began when the Russian nobles returned from their last campaign to France --- the defeat of Napoleon. These actions were independently the initiative of the nobles. Subsequently, these nobles formed secret societies.
          Book ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE USSR
          Series page of the history of our country
          Academician M.V. Nechkina. Decembrists. Edition 2-if
          Publishing house "Science" Moscow. 1983.
          I am now reading the "History of the ХlХ century" 8 volumes, 2-if the edition is supplemented and corrected under the editorship of Professor E.V. Tarle. Until I read these events, I will soon.
          1. +1
            August 6 2016
            Well, and which of the Decembrists, breathing in Europe freed at least one peasant? Well this is the property of the master, how can he be so enlightened to voluntarily lose it. There were no such
    6. 0
      August 6 2016
      Quote: Paul1
      can historical anecdotes make the brutal serf servant Nikolai1 pretty or humane?

      Can any arguments convince "some civilians" that the personality of a statesman cannot be considered in isolation from his time?
      And who was these years a great democrat?
      And much later, the "people's" leaders deprived many peasants of their "belly", they say, the elimination of the kulaks (and not only) as a class.
      And the remaining passports were issued only under Khrushchev ... So that they would not run from the land, labor and hard existence. Here you have the remnants of serfdom in the 20th century. wink
    7. +2
      August 7 2016
      And the slave owner was, for example, George Washington ... Moreover, natural, with personal blacks.
      1. +1
        August 7 2016
        Quote: Reptiloid

        Book ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE USSR
        Series page of the history of our country
        Academician M.V. Nechkina. Decembrists. Edition 2-if
        Publishing house "Science" Moscow. 1983.
        I am now reading the "History of the ХlХ century" 8 volumes, 2-if the edition is supplemented and corrected under the editorship of Professor E.V. Tarle. Until I read these events, I will soon.


        Quote: Pissarro
        Well, and which of the Decembrists, breathing in Europe freed at least one peasant? Well this is the property of the master, how can he be so enlightened to voluntarily lose it. There were no such


        Sadly, it turns out that you are right. I was upset and surprised by the publishing house "Science" --- no names. In the "History of the ХlХ" century --- there are also no names, no intentions.
        The network lists the Decembrists, their intentions .... It turns out --- "the thought dominated", but did not come true.
  2. +6
    August 6 2016
    Thank. Good selection. Saturday morning to raise mood.
  3. +1
    August 6 2016
    Nicholas I was firmly entrenched with the fame of the despot and the martinet, who turned the whole of Russia into a large barracks. However, the memoirs of contemporaries show that at times Nikolai Pavlovich’s sense of humor was not at all barracks...Yes a sweetheart man .. amorist .. His best joke .. For 25 years he delayed the development of capitalism in Russia ... Only then, after his death, capitalism began to develop rapidly, but it was too late ..
    1. +2
      August 6 2016
      His best joke .. For 25 years he delayed the development of capitalism in Russia ... Only then, after his death, capitalism began to develop rapidly, but it was too late ..


      And, maybe, thank God, otherwise if the capitalists in the 17th (or 05-07) were stronger, then "October" would not have followed "October". And, accordingly, GOELRO, educational program and industrialization. And Russia would have merged with Hitler as shamefully as bourgeois France.
      1. +2
        August 6 2016
        Neither you nor your opponent are right. Under Nicholas 1, industry increased by an order of magnitude. Such a pace of industrial development, as with him, was not with his son or grandson.
      2. 0
        August 9 2016
        Quote: alicante11
        . And, accordingly, and GOELRO, educational program and industrialization. And Russia would also shamefully merge with Hitler, like bourgeois France.

        But it would definitely not be the millionth victims of East Slavic peoples.

        And most importantly, Hitler himself most likely would not have been there. he rose precisely on the wave of confrontation with the communists and relying on the "Bolshevik threat" from the USSR.

        In general, historically, Russia and Germany did not fight before the 20 century, but were always allies (excluding adventures when our rulers pushed into completely unnecessary wars such as Seven Years). And in the 20 century - it started, both world wars - and in both we are the main opponents and suffer the greatest losses ...
  4. +6
    August 6 2016
    There is another joke. Nikolai examined the winter palace from the embankment, met some cadet and asked - where are you coming from? - sovereign from the depot! - Is the depot inclined? “Everything bowed before your imperial majesty,” the junker answered, and was graciously released. But something else is interesting here. An emperor without a crowd of guards calmly meets random people and this is normal. And now ? can you imagine this?
  5. +7
    August 6 2016
    If you look at modern Nicholas Europe, then it’s quite a normal ruler. And the more insidious and bloody and venal rulers there were enough. Britain alone is worth it.
  6. +4
    August 6 2016
    Good historical excursion. Thanks to the author. I am not a monarchist, but knowledge of my history is not superfluous. Even so funny.
    1. +2
      August 6 2016
      On channel 365, the second case in the first paragraph had the following phrase of Nikolai l in addition at the end: "And so that my busts are not put in taverns !!!"
      The correct indication, in my opinion.
  7. +4
    August 6 2016
    I consider the monument to Nicholas on St. Isaac's Square the most beautiful in Russia. Stalin's strange attitude to the tsar. On the one hand, the official support of the Decembrists, on the other, the understanding that "these Trotskyists" could smash Russia to shreds. Therefore, Nikolai, with the exception of the Crimean defeat, was the greatest sovereign. Well, yes now, thank God, Russia is going with difficulty, but it is going ...
    But what will happen next?
    1. +10
      August 6 2016
      Quote: pafegosoff
      Because Nicholas, with the exception of the Crimean defeat, was the greatest sovereign


      The emperor died six months before the capture of the Malakhov barrow in Sevastopol and was not going to sign the world.
    2. +5
      August 6 2016
      Quote: pafegosoff
      Because Nicholas, with the exception of the Crimean defeat, was the greatest sovereign


      The emperor died six months before the capture of the Malakhov barrow in Sevastopol and was not going to sign the world.
      1. 0
        August 9 2016
        Quote: Aleksander
        The emperor died six months before the capture of the Malakhov barrow in Sevastopol and was not going to sign the world.

        After losing the BOTH GENERAL BATTLES - Inkerman and the Black River - what do you think he was going to do and why sent delegations to Europe?
    3. -1
      August 6 2016
      Because there is a "public" line of the party that must be voiced by a government official no matter what other opinions he or she holds, but there is a "reasonable / programmatic" line that is not voiced, but done.
      One of the things that JV Stalin is good for is that he never drove any ruler into a tank, although his policies, both external and internal, were completely contrary to Lenin's.
    4. 0
      August 12 2016
      It is also a unique monument, the fact is that it has two fulcrum. How it was necessary to calculate everything, so that after so many years he stood there. Usually such monuments (riders) stand on three pillars.
  8. -5
    August 6 2016
    Quote from the article:
    "- Gentlemen, I have no time, I have to leave. I hope that you will accompany him to the grave."

    Not in Russian, not humanly.
    If you have no time for this, then do not go to the funeral.
    And if you really have no time, but once you have come, then do not say that you have no time, or I am in a hurry, there is a lot to do, or I ran in to say goodbye, there is no time.
    At the funeral, it’s advisable not to look at the clock, so as not to demonstrate your busyness with important matters.
    If once, then quietly went in, said goodbye and quietly left.
  9. +2
    August 6 2016
    However, the emperor decided this way: to severely reprimand him for endangering his life in wartime; he should have killed the Austrian right there. \\\\\\
    Syria, the scandal with the Wada, is the best suited to the current situation.
    For nefig talk with them talk.
  10. +7
    August 6 2016
    Quote: Paul1
    can historical anecdotes make the brutal serf servant Nikolai1 pretty or humane? No, of course. A slave owner can never become human, no matter how funny jokes are told about him.


    You dear, do not bring down serfdom and slavery in one heap, but don’t put it on Nikolai -1.
    What would you do in his place?
    Judging by how you verbally got rid of Nikolai-1, whether you were in his place in 1824, from the rioters and those involved, only feathers flew ...
    So about slavery ...
    Slavery in America was accompanied by unprecedented casualties. During the slave trade, out of 10 million African blacks, only a million slaves were delivered alive to the slave markets of America! Nine million could not bear the hardships of sailing in crowded holds. Survivors more than covered losses from monstrous mortality. In total, the revenue of slave traders amounted to $ 000.
    This is the foundation on which today's Walt Street and the US Fed stand!
    The slave was completely powerless and in the full power of the slave owner, i.e. likened to an inanimate instrument of extraction of profit, at best an animal, cattle. So on the American continent the infection of the religion of money settled and developed - Satanism, which today devours Western society, finally surrendering itself in the clutches of the father of lies and manslaughter from the ages. Who doesn’t know. In 1969, the Church of Satan was officially legalized and registered by the state in the United States. Its adherents are representatives of all walks of life, including the highest command staff of the US Army and Navy ...
    Those who know the true state of affairs are right when they say: "A disaster is looming on Russia now, much more terrible than Hitler's invasion."

    Serfdom ...
    Serfdom entrenched the peasants on the land of the nobility with the aim of serving those sovereign, i.e. To the Russian state. The sovereign’s service in the vast expanses of Russia was not sweet and demanded a large expenditure and effort from the serving nobility to ensure that the villages with peasants and the land were given.
    The nobleman was responsible before God and the King, for the souls of serfs entrusted to him. Although there were abuses, none of the nobles encroached on the Soul, Faith, and serfdom! In the dashing year of the invasions, the serf was the same defender of Vera, Tsar and Fatherland, as was the nobleman. And this is the fundamental difference between serfdom and slavery.
    Tsarism from Satanism.
    1. 0
      August 6 2016
      Quote: cedar
      ... none of the nobles encroached on the Soul, Faith and Homeland of the serf!


      A nobleman could sell a serf and sold, and in bulk, i.e. villages, families, and retail, and exchanged, and paid for debts anywhere, like cattle, even to the Caucasus, even to Karakum. Is this not an encroachment on his albeit small Homeland, but this is his Homeland.

      Catherine II even tried to save Russia from slavery-serfdom, to somehow alleviate the situation of serfdom. For example, she came up with a proposal to the nobility that if a nobleman was going to sell serfs, they would at least sell them in families, so as not to break up families. So what kind of nobles there, especially the nobility of the nobility accepted with hostility the proposal. How so it is my serfs that I want to do this.
      Of course, the monarch is not omnipotent, but Nicholas I didn’t even make such an attemptbut the time was already different and society was more educated, more enlightened than under Catherine II.
      1. +3
        August 6 2016
        Nicholas I didn’t even make such an attempt


        well, it’s as if it weren’t so, you can’t say that he didn’t do anything

        there was a sharp decrease in the number of serfs - their share in the population of Russia, according to various estimates, decreased from 57-58% in 1811-1817 to 35-45% in 1857-1858 and they ceased to make up the majority of the population
        Klyuchevsky V. Course in Russian History
        1. -1
          August 6 2016
          Quote from Pissarro's comment:
          happened sharp reduction the number of serfs - their share in the population of Russia, according to various estimates, decreased from 57-58% in 1811-1817 to 35-45% in 1857-1858 and they ceased to make up the majority of the population.


          According to the statistics you cited, this is a really sharp reduction in the number of serfs, i.e. they decreased by 39%, almost half of the serfs became free. What more could you wish, in a natural way, and all serfs will be free, without reform and upheaval.
          However, the statistics here are very crafty.
          From 1811 to 1858, the whole Caucasus, all of Kazakhstan, large parts of Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan became part of Russia. The population of the country increased sharply, but serfs from the included territories were not added. This is where the percentages come from.
          1. +1
            August 6 2016
            From 1811 to 1858, the whole Caucasus, all of Kazakhstan, large parts of Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan became part of Russia.


            Turkestan campaigns, and everything you listed in Asia, became part of the country under Alexander the Second and its successors. But not under Nikolai the First.
            1. 0
              August 6 2016
              Quote from Pissarro:
              "Turkestan campaigns and everything you listed in Asia became part of the country under Alexander II and his successors. And not under Nicholas I."


              Yes, Nicholas I died in 1855, but you yourself indicated in your commentary the period until 1858.
              But even under Nicholas I, quite a few were annexed, for example, General Perovsky entered the Ak Mosque in 1852, thereby completing the annexation of Kazakhstan and part of the Kokand Khanate (Uzbekistan). And after 1852, until the death of Nicholas I, campaigns and expeditions continued, the annexation of territories in the southern directions even under Nicholas I.
    2. 0
      August 6 2016
      Quote: cedar
      So about slavery ...
      Slavery in America was accompanied by unprecedented casualties. XNUMX

      and tries to enslave us in America? however, if you yourself want

      http://www.kramola.info/vesti/letopisi-proshlogo/belye-raby-ameriki-stoili-v-10-
      raz-cheap-negrov
      1. +1
        August 6 2016
        Under the Istanbul and Horde slave trade the same
    3. -4
      August 6 2016
      Quote: cedar
      Serfdom entrenched the peasants on the land of the nobility with the aim of serving those sovereign, i.e. To the Russian state. State


      you would have a dude across your back with a stick for the glory of serving the fatherland to the corvee, and your wife and daughter for the glory of the wedding night to the German gentleman’s yard, then you would shut up with the service ...
      1. 0
        August 9 2016
        Quote: Paul1
        you would have a dude across your back with a stick for the glory of serving the fatherland to corvee, and your wife and daughter for the glory of your wedding night to the courtyard of the German gentleman,

        Very correct words! Serfdom deserved nothing but the word "shame"!
  11. +10
    August 6 2016
    And I respect Nikolai Pavlovich at least for the fact that at a difficult moment for the country he showed will and took power into his own hands! From the world of art: Vasily Livanov is not only the best Sherlock Holmes, but the best and Nicholas the First! Before the era of Nicholas the First, capitalism developed for more than 300 years. So maybe it was the Mongols who delayed the development of Russia along the path of "democratic capitalism" !!!
  12. -1
    August 6 2016
    I already read all this somewhere, or rather, not somewhere, but in grunts.
  13. +2
    August 6 2016
    Each person has its pros and cons.
  14. Cat
    +2
    August 6 2016
    So, myths and cliches lose their meaning.
  15. 0
    August 6 2016
    They say that Nikolai Pavlovich was a very honest man.
  16. 0
    August 9 2016
    Quote: Puhtelenmuh
    Nikolai Pavlovich was a very honest man

    An honest man and a great sovereign are often incompatible things.

    It’s just a question - why appoint an explicit agent of Nesselrode’s influence on the posts that guide and direct the foreign policy of the entire empire?

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"