"Portrait of Peter the Great."
Engraving from a painting by Benner.

However, Peter didn’t really like dudes either. “It has reached us,” he wrote in one of the decrees, “that the sons of eminent people in gispan trousers and camisoles flaunt along Nevsky Prospekt insolently. I order the Governor of St. Petersburg: from now on, catch these dandies and beat them with a whip in the ass... until the very obscene look remains of the Spanish pants."

Vasily Belov. "Lad." Moscow, "Young Guard". 1982

Ivan Nikitich Nikitin.
"Peter I against the backdrop of a naval battle."
1715.

Hasty and active, feverish activity, which began naturally in early youth, now continued out of necessity and did not stop almost until the end of his life, until the age of 50. The Northern War, with its anxieties, with defeats at first and with victories later, finally determined Peter’s way of life and informed the direction, set the pace of his transformative activities. He had to live from day to day, keep up with the events quickly rushing past him, rush towards new state needs and dangers that arose daily, without having time to take a breath, come to his senses, or figure out a plan of action in advance. And in the Northern War, Peter chose a role for himself that corresponded to the usual activities and tastes acquired from childhood, impressions and knowledge brought from abroad. This was not the role of either a sovereign ruler or a military general-commander-in-chief. Peter did not sit in the palace, like previous kings, sending decrees everywhere, directing the activities of his subordinates; but he rarely stood at the head of his regiments to lead them into the fire, like his enemy Charles XII. However, Poltava and Gangud will forever remain in the military history of Russia as bright monuments of Peter’s personal participation in military affairs on land and at sea. Leaving his generals and admirals to act at the front, Peter took upon himself the less prominent technical part of the war: he usually remained behind his army, arranged its rear, recruited recruits, drew up plans for military movements, built ships and military factories, prepared ammunition, provisions and military shells, stored everything, encouraged everyone, urged, scolded, fought, hanged, galloped from one end of the state to the other, was something like a general feldzeichmeister, a general provisions master and a ship chief master. Such tireless activity, which lasted almost three decades, shaped and strengthened Peter’s concepts, feelings, tastes and habits. Peter was cast one-sidedly, but in relief, came out heavy and at the same time eternally mobile, cold, but every minute ready for noisy explosions - exactly like the cast iron cannon of his Petrozavodsk casting.

Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky. "Course of Russian history".

Louis Caravaque.
"Peter I, commander of the four united fleets in 1716."
1716.

Andrey Grigorievich Ovsov.
"Portrait of Peter I".
Miniature on enamel.
1725. Hermitage,
Saint Petersburg.

Dutch paintings appeared on the banks of the Neva in 1716, long before the museum was founded. This year, more than one hundred and twenty paintings were purchased for Peter I in Holland, and after that almost the same number of canvases were purchased in Brussels and Antwerp. Somewhat later, English merchants sent the king another one hundred and nineteen works. Peter I’s favorite subjects were scenes from the life of “Dutch men and women,” and Rembrandt was among his favorite artists.

L.P. Tikhonov. "Museums of Leningrad". Leningrad, "Lenizdat". 1989

Ivan Nikitich Nikitin.
"Portrait of Peter I".
1717.

Jacob Houbraken.
"Portrait of Emperor Peter the Great."
Engraving based on the original by Karl Moor.
1718.

Another portrait was painted by the Dutchman Karl Moor in 1717, when Peter traveled to Paris to hasten the end of the Northern War and prepare the marriage of his 8-year-old daughter Elizabeth with the 7-year-old French King Louis XV.

Parisian observers that year portrayed Peter as a ruler who had learned his commanding role well, with the same penetrating, sometimes wild look, and at the same time a politician who knew how to treat pleasantly when meeting with the right person. Peter was then already so aware of his importance that he neglected decency: when leaving his Parisian apartment, he calmly got into someone else’s carriage, felt like a master everywhere, on the Seine, as on the Neva. This is not the case with K. Moore. The mustache, as if glued on, is more noticeable here than on Kneller’s. In the set of the lips and, especially in the expression of the eyes, as if painful, almost sad, one senses fatigue: you think that the person is about to ask permission to rest a little. His own greatness crushed him; there is no trace of either youthful self-confidence or mature contentment with one’s work. At the same time, we must remember that this portrait depicts Peter, who came from Paris to Holland, to Spa, to be treated for an illness that buried him 8 years later.

Miniature on enamel.
Portrait of Peter I (bust-length).
1712.
Hermitage, St. Petersburg.

"Family portrait of Peter I."
1712.

"The Family of Peter I in 1717."

“Katerinushka, my dear friend, hello!”

This is how dozens of letters from Peter to Catherine began. There was indeed a warm cordiality in their relationship. Years later, in correspondence, there is a love game between a pseudo-unequal couple - an old man, constantly complaining about illness and old age, and his young wife. Having received a parcel from Catherine with the glasses he needed, he sends jewelry in response: “On both sides, worthy gifts: you sent me to help my old age, and I send them to decorate your youth.” In another letter, blazing with a youthful thirst for meeting and intimacy, the tsar again jokes: “Although I want to see you, but you, tea, much more, because I'm in[yours] I was 27 years old, and you[my] I haven’t been there for 42 years.” Catherine supports this game, she jokes in tone with the “cordial old man”, is indignant and indignant: “It’s a waste of time, that old man!” She is deliberately jealous of the Tsar, either of the Swedish queen or of the Parisian coquettes, to which he responds with feigned insult: “Why are you writing that I will soon find a lady [in Paris], and that is indecent for my old age.”

Catherine's influence on Peter is enormous, and it grows over the years. She gives him something that the whole world of his external life - hostile and complex - cannot give. He - a stern, suspicious, difficult man - is transformed in her presence. She and the children are his only outlet in the endless, difficult circle of state affairs, from which there is no way out. Contemporaries recall amazing scenes. It is known that Peter was subject to attacks of deep blues, which often turned into fits of frenzied anger, when he destroyed and swept away everything in his path. All this was accompanied by terrible facial spasms, convulsions of the arms and legs. Holstein minister G. F. Bassevich recalls that as soon as the courtiers noticed the first signs of a seizure, they ran after Catherine. And then a miracle happened: “She began to talk to him, and the sound of her voice immediately calmed him down, then she sat him down and took him, caressing him, by the head, which she scratched lightly. This had a magical effect on him, and he fell asleep in a few minutes. In order not to disturb his sleep, she held his head on her chest and sat motionless for two or three hours. After that, he woke up completely fresh and alert.”
She not only cast out the demon from the king. She knew his preferences, weaknesses, quirks, and she knew how to please, please, simply and affectionately do something pleasant. Knowing how upset Peter was because his “son”, the ship “Gangut,” had somehow received damage, she wrote to the Tsar in the army that the “Gangut” had arrived after successful repairs “to her brother “Lesnoy,” with whom she had now copulated and standing in one place, which I saw with my own eyes, and it is truly joyful to look at them!” No, neither Dunya nor Ankhen could ever write so sincerely and simply! The former port-washer knew what was dear to the great skipper of Russia more than anything in the world.

"Portrait of Peter I".
1818.

Peter Belov.
"Peter I and Venus".

Probably, not all readers will be satisfied with me, because I did not talk about the Tauride Venus, which has long served as an adornment of our Hermitage. But I have no desire to repeat the story about her almost criminal appearance on the banks of the Neva, since this has already been written about more than once.

Yes, we wrote a lot. Or rather, they didn’t even write, but rewrote what was known earlier, and all historians, as if by agreement, unanimously repeated the same version, misleading readers. For a long time it was believed that Peter I simply exchanged the statue of Venus for the relics of St. Brigitte, which he allegedly received as a trophy during the capture of Revel. Meanwhile, as it recently became clear, Peter I could not have made such a profitable exchange for the reason that the relics of St. Brigitte rested in Uppsala, Sweden, and the Tauride Venus went to Russia because the Vatican wanted to please the Russian emperor, whose greatness Europe no longer doubted.

An ignorant reader will involuntarily think: if the Venus de Milo was found on the island of Milos, then the Tauride Venus, presumably, was found in Taurida, in other words, in the Crimea?
Alas, it was discovered in the vicinity of Rome, where it lay in the ground for thousands of years. “Venus the Most Pure” was transported in a special carriage with springs, which saved her fragile body from risky jolts on potholes, and only in the spring of 1721 she appeared in St. Petersburg, where the emperor was eagerly awaiting her.

She was the first ancient statue that the Russians could see, and I would be lying if I said that she was greeted with unprecedented delight...

Against! There was such a good artist Vasily Kuchumov, who in the painting “Venus the Most Pure” captured the moment of the appearance of the statue in front of the king and his courtiers. Peter I himself looks at her point-blank, very decisively, but Catherine hid a grin, many turned away, and the ladies covered themselves with fans, ashamed to look at the pagan revelation. They weren’t ashamed to swim in the Moscow River in front of all the honest people wearing what their mother gave birth to, but to see the nakedness of a woman embodied in marble, you see, it became shameful for them!

Realizing that not everyone would approve of the appearance of Venus on the paths of the capital's Summer Garden, the emperor ordered her to be placed in a special pavilion, and posted sentries with guns for protection.
- Why did you gape? - they shouted to passers-by. - Go away, it’s none of your business..., the king’s!
The sentries were needed for good reason. People of the old school mercilessly scolded the Tsar-Antichrist, who, they say, spends money on “naked girls, filthy idols”; passing by the pavilion, the Old Believers spat, crossing themselves, and others even threw apple cores and all sorts of evil spirits at Venus, seeing in the pagan statue something satanic, almost a devilish obsession - to temptations...

Valentin Pikul. "What Venus held in her hand."

Johann Koprtzki.
"Peter the Great".

Among the great people of the past there was one amazing person who, although not a professional scientist, was nevertheless personally acquainted with many outstanding naturalists on turn of XVII-XVIII centuries.

In Holland, he attended lectures by the famous chemist, botanist and physician G. Boerhaave (1668-1738), the same one who was the first to use a thermometer in medical practice. With him he examined the exotic plants of the Leiden Botanical Garden. The scientists there showed him the newly discovered “microscopic objects” in Delft. In Germany, this man met with the president of the Berlin Scientific Society, the famous mathematician and philosopher G. Leibniz (1646-1716). He was in friendly correspondence with him, as well as with another famous mathematician and natural scientist, H. Wolf (1679-1754). In England, he was shown the famous Greenwich Observatory by its founder and first director J. Flamsteed (1646-1720). In this country, he was warmly received by Oxford scientists, and some historians believe that during the inspection of the Mint, the director of this institution, Isaac Newton, talked to him...

In France, this man met with professors from the University of Paris: astronomer J. Cassini (1677-1756), famous mathematician P. Varignon (1654-1722) and cartographer G. Delisle (1675-1726). Especially for him, a demonstration meeting, an exhibition of inventions and a demonstration of chemical experiments were organized at the Paris Academy of Sciences. At this meeting, the guest discovered such amazing abilities and versatile knowledge that the Paris Academy elected him as a member on December 22, 1717.

In a letter expressing gratitude regarding his election, the unusual guest wrote: “We want nothing more than to bring science to its best color through the diligence that we will apply.” And as shown further events, these words were not a tribute to official politeness: after all, this amazing person was Peter the Great, who “to bring science to its best color” decided to create the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences...

G. Smirnov. "The great one who knew all the great ones." “Technology for Youth” No. 6 1980.

Francesco Vendramini.
"Portrait of Peter I".

"Peter the Great".
XIX century.

A. Herzen once called Peter I “a crowned revolutionary.” And the fact that this really was the case, that Peter was a mental giant, towering above the majority of his even enlightened compatriots, is evidenced by the curious history of the publication in Russian of “Cosmoteoros” - a treatise in which Newton’s famous contemporary, the Dutchman H. Huygens, outlined and developed in detail Copernican system.

Peter I, quickly realizing the falsity of geocentric ideas, was a convinced Copernican and in 1717, while in Paris, bought himself a moving model of the Copernican system. At the same time, he ordered the translation and publication of Huygens’s treatise, published in The Hague in 1688, in 1200 copies. But the king’s order was not carried out...

The director of the St. Petersburg printing house M. Avramov, having read the translation, was horrified: the book, according to him, was saturated with “satanic cunning” and “devilish intrigues” of Copernican teaching. “Trembling in heart and horrified in spirit,” the director decided to violate the tsar’s direct order. But since Peter was not to be trifled with, Avramov, at his own peril and risk, only dared to reduce the circulation of the “atheistic book of an extravagant author.” Instead of 1200 copies, only 30 were printed - only for Peter himself and his closest associates. But this trick, apparently, did not escape the tsar: in 1724, “The Book of the World, or Opinion on the Heavenly-Earthly Globes and Their Decorations” was published again.

“An atheistic book by an extravagant author.” “Technology for Youth” No. 7 1975.

Sergey Kirillov.
Sketch for the painting "Peter the Great".
1982.

Nikolai Nikolaevich Ge.
"Peter I interrogates Tsarevich Alexei."

Related to the case of Tsarevich Alexei and kept in State Archives empire documents are numerous...

Pushkin saw documents about the torture that the prince was subjected to during the investigation, but in his “History of Peter” he writes that “the prince died poisoned.” Meanwhile, Ustryalov makes it clear that the prince died, unable to withstand the new torture to which he was subjected by order of Peter after the death sentence was announced. Peter was apparently afraid that the prince sentenced to death would take with him the names of his accomplices, who had not yet been named by him. We know that the Secret Chancellery and Peter himself were looking for them for a long time after the death of the prince.

The official version said that upon hearing the death sentence, the prince “felt a terrible cramp throughout his whole body, from which he died the next day.”* Voltaire in his “History of Russia during the reign of Peter the Great” says that Peter came to the call of the dying Alexei, “both he and the other shed tears, the unfortunate son asked for forgiveness” and “his father forgave him publicly”**. But the reconciliation was late, and Alexei died from an apoplexy that befell him the day before. Voltaire himself did not believe this version and on November 9, 1761, while working on his book about Peter, he wrote to Shuvalov: “People shrug their shoulders when they hear that the twenty-three-year-old prince died of a stroke while reading the verdict, the abolition of which he should have hoped.” ***.
__________________________________
* I. I. Golikov. Acts of Peter the Great, vol. VI. M., 1788, p. 146.
** Voltaire. History of the Russian Empire during the reign of Peter the Great. Translated by S. Smirnov, part II, book. 2, 1809, p. 42.
*** This letter was published in the 34th volume of the 42-volume collection. Op. Voltaire, published in Paris in 1817-1820...

Ilya Feinberg. Reading Pushkin's notebooks. Moscow, " Soviet writer" 1985.

Christoph Bernard Franke.
"Portrait of Tsarevich Alexei, son of Peter I, father of Peter II."

Faded Candle

Tsarevich Alexei was strangled in the Trubetskoy Bastion Peter and Paul Fortress. Peter and Catherine breathed a sigh of relief: the problem of succession to the throne was resolved. The youngest son grew up, touching his parents: “Our dear Shishechka often mentions his dear father and, with the help of God, gets into his condition and constantly has fun with drilling soldiers and cannon fire.” And even if the soldiers and guns are still wooden, the sovereign is happy: an heir, a soldier of Russia, is growing up. But neither the care of the nannies nor the desperate love of his parents saved the boy. In April 1719, after being ill for several days, he died, not having lived even three and a half years. Apparently, the disease that claimed the baby’s life was an ordinary flu, which always took its terrible toll in our city. For Peter and Catherine, this was a severe blow - the foundation of their well-being suffered a deep crack. After the death of the empress herself in 1727, that is, eight years after the death of Pyotr Petrovich, his toys and belongings were found in her belongings - not Natalia, who died later (in 1725), not other children, namely Petrusha. The stationery register is touching: “A gold cross, silver buckles, a whistle with bells and a gold chain, a glass fish, a jasper cooker, a fuselette, a skewer - a golden hilt, a tortoiseshell whip, a cane...” You can just see the inconsolable mother sorting through these little things.

At the funeral liturgy in the Trinity Cathedral on April 26, 1719, an ominous event occurred: one of those present - as it later turned out, the Pskov landrat and relative of Evdokia Lopukhina Stepan Lopukhin - said something to the neighbors and laughed blasphemously. In the dungeon of the Secret Chancellery, one of the witnesses later testified that Lopukhin said: “Even his, Stepan’s, candle has not gone out, there will be time for him, Lopukhin, from now on.” From the rack, where he was immediately pulled up, Lopukhin explained the meaning of his words and laughter: “He said that his candle did not go out because he remained Grand Duke Pyotr Alekseevich, thinking that Stepan Lopukhin will do well in the future.” Peter was filled with despair and powerlessness as he read the lines of this interrogation. Lopukhin was right: his, Peter’s, candle was blown out, and the candle of the son of the hated Tsarevich Alexei was flaring up. The same age as the late Shishechka, the orphan Pyotr Alekseevich, not warmed by the love of loved ones or the attention of nannies, was growing up, and everyone who was waiting for the end of the tsar rejoiced - the Lopukhins and many other enemies of the reformer.

Peter thought intensely about the future: he still had Catherine and three “robbers” - Annushka, Lizanka and Natalya. And in order to untie his hands, on February 5, 1722, he adopted a unique legal act - the “Charter on the Succession to the Throne.” The meaning of the “Charter” was clear to everyone: the tsar, breaking the tradition of passing the throne from father to son and further to the grandson, reserved the right to appoint any of his subjects as heirs. He called the previous order “an old bad custom.” It was difficult to imagine a more vivid expression of autocracy - now the tsar controlled not only today, but also the future of the country. And on November 15, 1723, a manifesto about the upcoming coronation of Ekaterina Alekseevna was published.

Evgeny Anisimov. "Women on the Russian throne."

Yuri Chistyakov.
"Emperor Peter I".
1986.

“Portrait of Peter I against the backdrop of the Peter and Paul Fortress and Trinity Square.”
1723.

In 1720, Peter laid the foundation for Russian archeology. In all dioceses, he ordered the collection of ancient charters, historical manuscripts and early printed books from monasteries and churches. Governors, vice-governors and provincial authorities were ordered to inspect it all, dismantle it and write it off. This measure did not turn out to be successful, and subsequently Peter, as we will see, changed it.

N. I. Kostomarov. "Russian history in the biographies of its main figures." St. Petersburg, "All". 2005 year.

Sergey Kirillov.
Study of the head of Peter for the painting “Thoughts about Russia” (Peter the Great).
1984.

Sergey Kirillov.
Duma about Russia (Peter the Great).
1984.

P. Soubeyran.
"PeterI».
Engraving from the original by L. Caravacca.
1743.

P. Soubeyran.
"Peter I".
Engraving based on the original by L. Caravacca.
1743.

Dmitry Kardovsky.
"The Senate of Peter's time."
1908.

Peter denied himself and the Senate the right to give verbal decrees. According to the General Regulations of February 28, 1720, only written decrees of the Tsar and the Senate are legally binding for colleges.

Sergey Kirillov.
"Portrait of Peter the Great."
1995.

Adolf Iosifovich Charlemagne.
“Peter I announces the Peace of Nystad.”

The conclusion of the Peace of Nystadt was celebrated with a seven-day masquerade. Peter was overjoyed that he had ended the endless war, and, forgetting his years and illnesses, sang songs and danced on the tables. The celebration took place in the Senate building. In the midst of the feast, Peter got up from the table and went to the yacht standing off the bank of the Neva to sleep, ordering the guests to wait for his return. The abundance of wine and noise at this long celebration did not prevent the guests from feeling bored and burdened by the obligatory fun along the way, even with a fine for evasion (50 rubles, about 400 rubles in our money). A thousand masks walked, pushed, drank, danced for a whole week, and everyone was very happy when the official fun lasted until the specified date.

V. O. Klyuchevsky. "Russian History". Moscow, Eksmo. 2005 year.

"Celebration at Peter's"

By the end of the Northern War, a significant calendar of annual court holidays had been compiled, which included Victorian celebrations, and from 1721 they were joined by the annual celebration of the Peace of Nystadt. But Peter especially loved to have fun on the occasion of the launching of a new ship: he was happy with the new ship, like a newborn brainchild. In that century they drank a lot everywhere in Europe, no less than now, and in the highest circles, especially the courtiers, perhaps even more. The St. Petersburg court did not lag behind its foreign models.

Thrifty in everything, Peter did not spare expenses on drinking bouts, which were used to inject the newly-constructed swimmer. The entire high society of the capital of both sexes was invited to the ship. These were real sea drinking parties, the ones that lead to or from which comes the saying that the sea is knee-deep drunk. They used to drink until old Admiral General Apraksin began to cry and burst into burning tears that here he was, in his old age, left an orphan, without a father, without a mother. And the Minister of War, His Serene Highness Prince Menshikov, will fall under the table, and his frightened Princess Dasha will come running from the ladies’ room to take a leak and scrub off her lifeless husband. But the feast did not always end so simply. At the table, Peter will flare up at someone and, irritated, will run to the ladies' quarters, forbidding his interlocutors to leave until he returns, and will assign a soldier to the exit. Until Catherine calmed down the dispersed tsar, put him to bed and let him sleep, everyone sat in their places, drank and was bored.

V. O. Klyuchevsky. "Russian History". Moscow, Eksmo. 2005 year.

Jacopo Amigoni (Amiconi).
"Peter I with Minerva (with the allegorical figure of Glory)."
Between 1732-1734.
Hermitage, St. Petersburg.

Nikolai Dmitrievich Dmitriev-Orenburgsky.
“The Persian campaign of Peter the Great. Emperor Peter I is the first to land on shore.”

Louis Caravaque.
"Portrait of Peter I".
1722.

Louis Caravaque.
"Portrait of Peter I".

"Portrait of Peter I".
Russia. XVIII century.
Hermitage, St. Petersburg.

Jean Marc Nattier.
"Portrait of Peter I in knightly armor."

“The Journal of Peter the Great,” published by Prince Shcherbatov half a century after Peter’s death, is, according to historians, a work that we have the right to look at as the work of Peter himself. This “journal” is nothing more than the History of the Sveian (that is, Swedish) war, which Peter waged throughout most of his reign.

Feofan Prokopovich, Baron Huyssen, cabinet secretary Makarov, Shafirov and some other close associates of Peter worked on the preparation of this “History”. The archives of the Cabinet of Peter the Great contained eight preliminary editions of this work, five of which were edited by the hand of Peter himself.
Having familiarized himself upon his return from the Persian campaign with the edition of the “History of the Suean War”, prepared as a result of four years of work by Makarov, Peter “with his characteristic ardor and attention read the entire work with pen in hand and did not leave a single page of it uncorrected... Few places of Makarov’s work survived: everything important, the main thing belongs to Peter himself, especially since the articles left unchanged by him were copied by the editor from his own draft papers or from journals edited by his own hand.” Peter gave this work great importance and, while doing it, appointed a special day for his historical studies - Saturday morning.

"Portrait of Peter I".
1717.
Hermitage, St. Petersburg.

"Portrait of Peter I".
Copy from the original by J. Nattier.
1717.

"Emperor Peter"IAlexeyevich".

"Portrait of PeterI».

Peter almost did not know the world: all his life he fought with someone, now with his sister, now with Turkey, Sweden, even with Persia. Since the autumn of 1689, when the reign of Princess Sophia ended, of the 35 years of his reign, only one year, 1724, passed completely peacefully, and from other years one can accumulate no more than 13 peaceful months.

V. O. Klyuchevsky. "Russian History". Moscow, Eksmo. 2005.

"Peter the Great in his workshop."
1870.
Hermitage, St. Petersburg.

A. Schonebeck. The head of Peter was made by A. Zubov.
"Peter I".
1721.

Sergey Prisekin.
"Peter I".
1992.

Saint-Simon was, in particular, a master of dynamic portraiture, able to convey contrasting features and thus create the person he writes about. Here is what he wrote about Peter in Paris: “Peter I, Tsar of Muscovy, both at home and throughout Europe and Asia, acquired such a loud and deserved name that I will not take upon myself to portray this great and glorious sovereign, equal to the greatest men of antiquity, a wonder of this age, a wonder for centuries to come, an object of greedy curiosity throughout Europe. The uniqueness of this sovereign’s trip to France in its extraordinary nature, it seems to me, is worth not forgetting even the slightest of its details and telling about it without interruption...

Peter was a very tall man, very slender, rather thin; he had a round face, a large forehead, beautiful eyebrows, a rather short nose, but not too round at the end, thick lips; the complexion was reddish and dark, beautiful black eyes, large, lively, penetrating and well-defined, the gaze majestic and pleasant when he controlled himself; otherwise, stern and stern, accompanied by a convulsive movement that distorted his eyes and entire physiognomy and gave it a menacing appearance. This was repeated, however, not often; Moreover, the king’s wandering and terrible gaze lasted only one moment; he immediately recovered.

His whole appearance revealed intelligence, thoughtfulness, greatness, and was not without grace. He wore a round dark brown wig without powder that did not reach his shoulders; a dark, tight-fitting camisole, smooth, with gold buttons, stockings of the same color, but did not wear gloves or cuffs - there was an order star on the chest over the dress, and a ribbon under the dress. The dress was often completely unbuttoned; The hat was always on the table; he did not wear it even on the street. With all this simplicity, sometimes in a bad carriage and almost without an escort, it was impossible not to recognize him by the majestic appearance that was characteristic of him.

How much he drank and ate at lunch and dinner is incomprehensible... His retinue at the table drank and ate even more, and at 11 am exactly the same as at 8 pm.

The king understood French well and, I think, could speak this language if he wanted; but, for greater greatness, he had an interpreter; He spoke Latin and other languages ​​very well...”
I think it would not be an exaggeration to say that there is no other equally magnificent verbal portrait of Peter as we have just given.

Ilya Feinberg. "Reading Pushkin's notebooks." Moscow, “Soviet Writer”. 1985

August Tolyander.
"Portrait of Peter I".

Every schoolchild knows that Peter I, reforming the state administrative management of Russia, created 12 boards instead of the previous orders. But few people know exactly which colleges Peter established. It turns out that of all 12 colleges, three were considered the main ones: military, naval and foreign affairs. Three boards were in charge of the financial affairs of the state: income - the chamber board, - expenses - the state board, and control - the audit board. The affairs of trade and industry were carried out by the Commerce, Manufacture and Berg Collegiums. The series was completed by the justice college, the spiritual college - the synod - and the chief magistrate, who was in charge of city affairs. It is not difficult to see what a colossal development technology and industry have received over the past 250 years: affairs that in Peter’s time were managed by only two boards - the manufacturing and berg boards - are now managed by about fifty ministries!

"Technology for youth." 1986

The personality of Peter 1 rightfully occupies one of the dominant places in the history of the Russian state. And the point is not even that it was this man who founded the Empire as such, but that during the reign of Peter, Russia received a completely new vector of development. Thousands of historical and biographical books have been written creating a portrait of Peter 1, but historians to this day cannot unambiguously characterize the activities of this man. Some of them deify the first Russian emperor, describing his innovations in the state system and foreign policy. Others, on the contrary, try to show him as a tyrant and despot, citing excessive harshness and cruelty towards his subjects. But the portrait of Peter 1, the photo of which is presented below, depicts a purposeful and educated man.

The first emperor is also criticized for ill-conceived innovations aimed, according to historians, at eradicating everything Russian, replacing it with Western values. However, both of them clearly agree on one thing: he was truly a controversial, significant and great figure in the history of the Russian state.

Judge not lest ye be judged

If you carefully study the historical portrait of Peter 1, created by the authors of countless works, you can come to a simple conclusion: such large-scale personalities cannot be judged one-sidedly. Strict distinctions like “white and black” are unacceptable here. In addition, in order to criticize or, conversely, praise, it is necessary to clearly understand the laws and foundations that existed at that time. And what sometimes seems wild and scary to our contemporaries was simple everyday life for different segments of the population of Russia at the beginning of the 18th century.

A portrait of Peter the Great cannot be drawn up using modern moral values. This approach will be “flat” and emotional. It will prevent a sober assessment of the historical reality of the Moscow state, and then the Russian Empire XVIII century.

Therefore, you just need to try to objectively focus on a neutral biography of the first Russian emperor and everything that was connected with him. After all, such individuals, as a rule, leave a mark not only in politics and government.

Education is the basis of a future personality

Pyotr Alekseevich Romanov was born on May 30, 1672. Like all the royal offspring, the future sovereign received exclusively home education. And we must admit that, even by modern times, it was not bad. The teachers revealed in the boy a great tendency to foreign languages and exact sciences. In other words, the future emperor already from childhood combined humanitarian and technical aspirations. Although he still gave preference to practical sciences.

The youngest son of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and Natalya Naryshkina, little Peter, grew up as an amazingly active and strong child. In addition to his penchant for science, he enjoyed climbing fences, fighting with noble peers from his inner circle and committing other pranks characteristic of this age.

Handicraft is an occupation worthy of kings

All biographers without exception have always been especially surprised by the tsar’s son’s passion for simple working crafts, in which he showed interest at a very young age. Not a single historical portrait of Peter 1 is complete without a description of how he could spend hours watching the work of a lathe or happily breathe in the hot fumes of the palace forge.

The interest of the royal son did not go unnoticed. Special craftsmen were assigned who began to teach Peter the basics of the simplest crafts: turning and forging. It must be taken into account that this did not come at the expense of the young heir’s main academic schedule. The exact sciences, the study of languages, and the basics of military affairs have not been canceled. Already with early childhood the future sovereign received multilateral and quality education(contrary to the opinion of some Western historians that home education in Russia in those years was characterized by one-sidedness and unprofessionalism).

However, you would never call the emperor a “simpleton”, looking at how the artist Antropov painted the portrait of Peter 1: the royal regalia, posture and look speak of a great and powerful man. And even though at the time of the creation of the picture the emperor had been dead for almost 50 years, the author portrayed him very reliably.

Coronation and exile

The political portrait of Peter 1 should begin to be painted in 1682. After the death of the childless Tsar, young Romanov was elevated to the throne. However, this happened bypassing his older brother Ivan, which the Miloslavsky party (relatives of Peter’s older sister Sophia) did not fail to take advantage of to organize a palace coup. The Miloslavskys successfully used the Streltsy unrest, and as a result, the Naryshkin clan, to which Peter’s mother belonged, was almost destroyed. Ivan was appointed “senior” king, and Sophia became the ruler-regent.

The Streltsy revolt and the outright cruelty of the murders had a very serious impact on the personality of Peter the Great. Many historians associate the further, not always balanced, actions of the tsar with these events.

Sophia, having become the sole mistress of the country, practically exiled the little tsar to Preobrazhenskoye, a small fiefdom near Moscow. It was here that Peter, having gathered the noble ignoramuses of his inner circle, created the famous “amusing regiments”. Military formations had real uniforms, officers and soldiers and were subject to real army discipline. Peter, of course, was the commander-in-chief. To entertain the young king, a “amusing fortress” was built, which, honing their “combat skills,” was stormed by the amusing army. However, few people then guessed that it was this childish fun of boys running around with wooden guns and sabers that would lay the foundation for the famous and formidable Peter's Guard.

Not a single portrait of Peter 1 is complete without mentioning Alexander Menshikov. They met there, in Preobrazhenskoye. The groom's son in subsequent years became the emperor's right-hand man and one of the most powerful men in the Empire.

Miloslavsky's coup

The weakness and illness of the “elder” Tsar Ivan constantly forced the ruler Sophia to think about complete autocracy in the country. Surrounded by nobles from the powerful Miloslavsky clan, the ruler was fully confident that she would be able to usurp power. However, Peter stood in the way of the throne. He was God's anointed and rightful king.

In August 1689, Sophia decided to stage a coup d'état, the purpose of which was to eliminate Peter and seize the throne. However, faithful people warned the young tsar, and he managed to leave Preobrazhenskoye, taking refuge in the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. The monastery was not chosen by chance. Powerful walls, ditches and underground passages presented an insurmountable barrier for Sophia’s foot archers. According to all the rules of military science, Sophia had neither the time nor the means to carry out an assault. In addition, the elite command of the Streltsy units openly hesitated, not knowing which side to choose.

Who made the decision to retreat specifically to Trinity-Sergievo? Not a single historical portrait of Peter 1 mentions this. In short, this place turned out to be fatal for Sophia and very successful for the king. The nobles supported Peter. Combat detachments of the noble cavalry and infantry of the “amusing” and faithful archers surrounded Moscow. Sophia was convicted and imprisoned in a monastery, and all associates from the Miloslavsky clan were executed or exiled.

After the death of Tsar Ivan, Peter became the sole owner of the Moscow throne. Perhaps it was the events described that prompted him to seriously reorganize the entire Russian way of life. After all, representatives of the “good old time” in the person of the Streltsy and Miloslavskys constantly tried to physically eliminate the young sovereign, instilling in him a subconscious fear, which, as contemporaries who painted Peter 1 claimed, was reflected on his face and haunted him in his soul almost until his death. Even painters noticed and recreated the unusually strong, but at the same time extremely tired face of the king. The artist Nikitin, whose portrait of Peter 1 is surprising in its simplicity and absence of imperial paraphernalia, conveyed precisely such a strong-willed and powerful, but deeply sincere person. True, art critics are inclined to “take away” part of Nikitin’s fame, citing a drawing style that was uncharacteristic for the beginning of the century.

Window to Europe - German settlement

Against the background of these events, the young tsar’s aspirations for everything European look quite natural. One cannot fail to note the role of Kukui, a German settlement that the emperor loved to visit. The friendly Germans and their neat way of life differed sharply from what Peter saw in the rest of Moscow. But the point, of course, is not about neat houses. The Emperor became imbued with the very way of life of this small piece of Europe.

Many historians believe that it was Kukui’s visit that partly shaped the historical portrait of Peter 1. In short, future pro-Western views. We must not forget about the acquaintances the tsar made on the German reservation. There he met a retired Swiss officer who became the main military adviser, and the charming future favorite of the first emperor. Both of these people played an important role in the history of Russia.

Access to the sea is a strategic task

Peter is becoming more and more interested in the fleet. Specially hired Dutch and English craftsmen teach him the tricks and intricacies of ship building. In the future, when multi-gun battleships and frigates will sail under the Russian flag, Peter will need his knowledge of the nuances of shipbuilding more than once or twice. He identified all defects and defects in construction himself. It was not for nothing that he was called the Tsar Carpenter. Peter 1 could really build a ship from stem to stern with his own hands.

However, during his youth, the Moscow state had only one access to the sea - in the city of Arkhangelsk. European ships, of course, called at this port, but geographically the place was too unfavorable for serious trade relations (due to the long and expensive delivery of goods deep into Russia). This thought, of course, visited not only Pyotr Alekseevich. His predecessors also fought for access to the sea, mostly unsuccessfully.

Peter the Great decided to continue the Azov campaigns. Moreover, the war with Turkey, which began in 1686, continued. The army, which he trained in the European way, was already an impressive force. Several military campaigns were made against the sea city of Azov. But only the latter was successful. True, the victory came at a high price. Small, but built for that period according to last word engineering thought, the fortress claimed many Russian lives.

And although the fact of the capture of Azov in Europe was perceived quite skeptically (precisely because of the ratio of losses), this was the first real strategic victory of the young tsar. And most importantly, Russia finally gained access to the sea.

North War

Despite the outright skepticism of European politicians, Peter 1 begins to think about the Baltic. The ruling elite at that time was seriously concerned about the growing ambitions of another young strategist - This is partly why the Europeans supported the Moscow Tsar in his desire to obtain part of the coastal Baltic lands to open shipyards and ports there. It seemed that it was quite possible for Russia to have two or three ports, and the inevitable war for the Baltic would seriously weaken Sweden, which, although it would defeat the weak Russians, would be seriously bogged down in the mainland of wild Muscovy.

Thus began the long Northern War. It lasted from 1700 to 1721 and ended with the unexpected defeat of the Swedish army near Poltava, as well as the establishment of the Russian presence in the Baltic.

Reformer

Of course, without serious economic and political changes in Russia, Peter 1 would not have cut through the famous “window to Europe.” The reforms affected literally the entire way of life of the Moscow state. If we talk about the army, then it received its formation precisely in the Northern War. Peter found resources for its modernization and organization according to the European model. And if at the beginning of hostilities the Swedes were dealing with unorganized, often poorly armed and untrained units, then at the end of the war it was already a powerful European army that knew how to win.

But it was not only the personality of Peter the Great, who possessed remarkable talent as a commander, that allowed him to win great victory. The professionalism of his closest generals and devotees is a topic for long and meaningful conversations. Entire legends are written about the heroism of a simple Russian soldier. Of course, no army could win without a serious rear. It was military ambitions that spurred the economy of old Russia and brought it to a completely different level. After all, the old traditions could no longer fully meet the needs of the growing army and navy. Almost every portrait of Peter 1 during his lifetime depicts him in military armor or with military paraphernalia. The artists paid tribute to the emperor's merits.

Not by an army alone

The portrait of Peter 1 will not be complete if we limit ourselves only to economic and military victories. The Emperor must be given credit for developing and implementing reforms in the field of government. First of all, this is the establishment of the Senate and collegiums instead of the outdated Boyar Duma and orders working on the class principle.

The “Table of Ranks” developed by Peter gave rise to the emergence of so-called social elevators. In other words, the Table of Contents made it possible to receive benefits and nobility solely on merit. Changes also affected diplomacy. Instead of the ancient fur coats and hats of the noble boyars who represented Russia, embassies with diplomats of the European level appeared.

The description of the portrait of Peter 1 will be incomplete if we talk about it only in superlatives. It is worth noting that with the general geopolitical growth of Russia, life ordinary people within the country has not changed much, and in some cases (for example, conscription) has become worse. The life of a simple serf was worth less than the life of a horse. This was especially noticeable during Peter’s “global” construction projects. Thousands of people died building the most beautiful city in Europe - St. Petersburg. No one counted the dead during the construction of the Ladoga Canal... And many young guys never became soldiers, dying under the sticks of officers introducing discipline in military units.

Precisely for complete neglect human life the first emperor is criticized, accusing him of senseless cruelty and a huge number of unjustified victims. In addition, we are everywhere faced with facts of the activities of Peter 1 that are striking in their inhumanity.

There is only one thing that can be said in defense of this man. The first emperor of Russia never moved away from his people to the distances that subsequent rulers allowed themselves. A thousand times the enemy's cannonball could have torn him to pieces. Dozens of times Pyotr Alekseevich Romanov could simply drown on imperfect sea vessels. And during global construction projects, he slept in the same barracks with sick construction workers, risking contracting illnesses for which there were no cures at that time.

Of course, the emperor was protected from enemy bullets better than an ordinary soldier, he was treated by good doctors, and he had a much greater chance of not dying from the flu than an ordinary peasant. However, let's finish the description of the portrait of Peter 1 with a memory of the cause of his death. The emperor died from pneumonia, which he received while rescuing a simple guard soldier from the cold water that overflowed the banks of the Neva. A fact that may not be so remarkable in comparison with the actions of his entire life, but it speaks volumes. It is unlikely that any of the modern “powers of this world” are capable of such an act...

Professional historians have long come to the conclusion that almost all the documents and memories that have reached us about the childhood and youth of Peter I are forgeries, inventions or blatant lies. The Great Transformer's contemporaries apparently suffered from amnesia and therefore did not leave to their descendants any reliable information about the beginning of his biography.

The “oversight” of Peter I’s contemporaries was corrected a little later by the German historian Gerhard Miller (1705–1783), fulfilling the order of Catherine II. However, oddly enough, another German historian, Alexander Gustavovich Brickner (1834–1896), and not only him, for some reason did not believe Miller’s tales.

It is increasingly becoming obvious that many events did not occur as they were interpreted by official historians: they either did not happen, or they occurred in a different place and at a different time. For the most part, no matter how sad it is to realize, we live in a world of a story made up by someone.

Physicists joke: clarity in science is a form of complete fog. For historical science, whatever one may say, this statement is more than fair. No one will deny that the histories of all countries of the world are replete with dark spots.

What historians say

Let's see what the Pharisees put into the heads of their descendants from historical science about the first decades of the stormy activity of Peter the Great - the builder of the new Russia:

Peter was born on May 30 according to the Julian calendar or June 9 according to the Gregorian calendar in 1672, or in 7180 from the Creation of the World according to the Byzantine calendar, or in 12680 from the “Great Cold” in the village of Kolomenskoye, and perhaps in the village of Izmailovo near Moscow. It is also possible that the prince would be born in Moscow itself, in the Teremny Palace of the Kremlin;

his father was Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov (1629–1676), and his mother was Tsarina Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina (1651–1694);

Tsarevich Peter was baptized by Archpriest Andrei Savinov in the Kremlin's Miracle Monastery, and perhaps in the Church of St. Gregory of Neocaesarea in Derbitsy;

children's and teenage years the royal youth spent time in the villages of Vorobyovo and Preobrazhenskoye, where he supposedly served as a drummer in an amusing regiment;

Peter did not want to reign together with his brother Ivan, although he was listed as the tsar’s understudy, and spent all his time in the German Settlement, where he had fun in the “All-Joking, All-Drunken and Extravagant Council” and threw mud at the Russian Orthodox Church;

in the German Settlement, Peter met Patrick Gordon, Franz Lefort, Anna Mons and other outstanding historical figures;

On January 27 (February 6), 1689, Natalya Kirillovna married her 17-year-old son to Evdokia Lopukhina;

in 1689, after the suppression of the conspiracy of Princess Sophia, all power completely passed to Peter, and Tsar Ivan was removed from the throne and

died in 1696;

in 1695 and 1696, Peter made military campaigns with the aim of capturing the Turkish fortress of Azov;

in 1697–1698, as part of the Great Embassy, ​​the brilliant Transformer under the name of Pyotr Mikhailov, a sergeant of the Preobrazhensky regiment, for some reason secretly went to Western Europe for acquiring the knowledge of a carpenter and joiner and for concluding military alliances, as well as painting his portrait in England;

after Europe, Peter zealously began the Great Transformations in all areas of the life of the Russian people, supposedly for their benefit.

It is impossible to consider all the vigorous activity of the brilliant Reformer of Russia in this short article - it’s not the right format, but on some interesting facts his biography is worth a stop.

Where and when was Tsarevich Peter born and baptized?

It would seem a strange question: German historians and interpreters, as it seemed to them, explained everything smoothly, presented documents, evidence and witnesses, memories of contemporaries. However, in this entire evidence base there are many strange facts that raise doubts about their reliability. Specialists who conscientiously studied the Petrine era were often deeply perplexed by the inconsistencies that were revealed. What is strange in the story of the birth of Peter I, presented by German historians?

Historians such as N. M. Karamzin (1766–1826), N. G. Ustryalov (1805–1870), S. M. Solovyov (1820–1879), V. O. Klyuchevsky (1841–1911) and many others They were surprised to note that the exact place and time of birth of the Great Transformer of the Earth is unknown to Russian historical science. The fact of the birth of the Genius is there, but there is no date! The same cannot happen. Somewhere this dark fact was lost. Why did Peter's chroniclers miss such a fateful event in the history of Russia? Where did they hide the prince? This is not some kind of serf, this is blue blood! There are only clumsy and unproven assumptions.

Historian Gerhard Miller reassured those too curious: Petrusha may have been born in the village of Kolomenskoye, and the village of Izmailovo sounds good to be written in golden letters in the annals of history. For some reason, the court historian himself was convinced that Peter was born in Moscow, but no one knew about this event except him, oddly enough.

However, Peter I could not have been born in Moscow, otherwise there would have been a record of this great event in the metric books of the Patriarch and the Moscow Metropolitan, but there is none. Muscovites also did not notice this joyful event: historians have not found any evidence of ceremonial events marking the birth of the prince. In the rank books (“sovereign ranks”) there were contradictory records about the birth of the prince, which indicates their probable falsification. And these books, as they say, were burned in 1682.

If we agree that Peter was born in the village of Kolomenskoye, then how can we explain the fact that on that day Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina was in Moscow? And this was recorded in the palace books. Perhaps she secretly went to give birth to the village of Kolomenskoye (or Izmailovo, according to another version of Miller), and then quickly and quietly returned. Why does she need such incomprehensible movements? Maybe so that no one will guess?! Historians have no clear explanation for such somersaults with Peter’s birthplace.

Those who are too curious get the impression that for some very serious reason, German historians, the Romanovs themselves and others like them tried to hide the place of Peter’s birth and tried, albeit crookedly, to pass off wishful thinking. The Germans (Anglo-Saxons) had a difficult task.

And there are also inconsistencies with the sacrament of Peter’s baptism. As you know, God’s anointed should have been baptized by the patriarch or, at worst, the Metropolitan of Moscow, but not by some archpriest of the Annunciation Cathedral, Andrei Savinov.

Official history reports that Tsarevich Peter was baptized on June 29, 1672 on the feast of the apostles Peter and Paul in the Miracle Monastery by Patriarch Joachim. Among others, Peter’s brother, Tsarevich Fyodor Alekseevich (1661 – 1682), also took part in the baptism. But there are also historical inconsistencies here.

For example, in 1672 Pitirim was patriarch, and Joachim became one only in 1674. Tsarevich Fyodor Alekseevich was a minor at that time and could not, according to the Orthodox canon, participate in baptism. Traditional historians cannot clearly interpret this historical incident.

Was Natalya Naryshkina the mother of Peter I

Why do historians have such doubts? Yes, because Peter’s attitude towards his mother was, to put it mildly, inappropriate. This can be confirmed by the lack of reliable evidence of their joint presence at any significant events in Moscow. The mother must be next to her son, Tsarevich Peter, and this would be recorded in some documents. And why did contemporaries, except German historians, never see Natalya Naryshkina and her son Peter together, even at his birth? Historians have not yet discovered reliable evidence.

But Natalya Kirillovna was seen more than once with the prince and later Tsar Ivan Alekseevich (1666–1696). Although Ivan’s year of birth is somewhat confusing. However, German historians could correct the date of birth. There were other oddities in Peter's relationship with his mother. For example, he never visited his sick mother, and when she died in 1694, he did not attend her funeral or wake. But Tsar Ivan Alekseevich Romanov was at the funeral, and at the funeral service, and at the wake of Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina.

Pyotr Alekseevich or simply Min Herts, as he sometimes affectionately called himself, was at that time busy with more important matters: he drank and had fun in the German Settlement with his German, or rather Anglo-Saxon, bosom friends. One can, of course, assume that the son and his mother, as well as with his beloved and unloved legal wife Evdokia Lopukhina, had a very bad relationship, but one cannot bury his own mother...

If we assume that Natalya Kirillovna was not Peter’s mother, then his shocking behavior becomes understandable and logical. Naryshkina’s son, apparently, was the one with whom she was constantly. And he was Tsarevich Ivan. And Petrusha was made the son of Naryshkina by such “Russian scientists” and historian-illusionists of the Russian Academy of Sciences as Miller, Bayer, Schlozer, Fischer, Schumacher, Wintzheim, Stehlin, Epinuss, Taubert...

Personality characteristics of Peter I

Who was this strange prince Petrusha? Everyone knows that Peter was more than two meters tall, and for some reason his feet were small! It happens, but it's still strange.

The fact that he was a crazy person with bulging eyes, a neurasthenic and a sadist is also known to everyone except the blind. But much else is unknown to the general public.

For some reason his contemporaries called him a great artist. Apparently because, pretending to be Orthodox, he brilliantly and incomparably played the role of the Russian Tsar. Although at the beginning of his career he played, admittedly, poorly. Apparently, it was difficult to get used to it, and I was drawn to my native land. Therefore, when he came to a run-down town called Zaandam (Saardam), he indulged in pleasures well, remembering his reckless childhood and youth.

Peter did not want to be the Russian Tsar, but wanted to be the ruler of the sea, that is, the captain of an English warship.

In any case, he spoke about such thoughts to the English king William III of Orange, that is, Prince Nosovsky, or Willem van Oranje-Nassau (1650–1702).

Duty, objective historical necessity and the demands of the procurators to accomplish great things did not allow Peter to give free rein to his personal passions, preferences, aspirations and ambitions. Reluctantly with his heart and teeth, the reformer of Russia had to submit to force majeure circumstances.

Peter differed sharply from his Russian prince brothers in many ways and, above all, in his contempt for the Russian people, for Russian history and culture. He hated Orthodoxy pathologically. It was not for nothing that the common Russian people considered him a fake tsar, a substitute and, in general, the Antichrist.

Peter only began to respond to Peter Alekseevich in the late 90s of the 17th century. And before that it was called simply - Piter, Petrus or even more original - Mein Herz. This German-Dutch transcription of his name was apparently closer and dearer to him. By the way, for Russian Orthodox tradition It was uncharacteristic to give princes the name Peter. This was closer to the Latins, since Saints Peter and Paul are in greater favor with Catholics and Protestants than with Orthodox Christians.

Peter possessed qualities unique to kings and kings. Judging by the “documents” that have reached us, he could be in several places at the same time or not be anywhere, both in time and in space. Peter loved to travel incognito, under a false name, for some reason to drag ships on land as if on water, break expensive dishes, break ancient masterpiece furniture, personally cut off the heads of mistresses and Orthodox clergy. He also liked to pull teeth without anesthesia.

But if he could now find out what feats, deeds and noble sayings were later attributed to him by German (Anglo-Saxon) court historians, then even his eyes would pop out of their sockets in surprise. Everyone knows that Peter was a carpenter and knew how to work on a lathe. And he did this work professionally.

This raises the question, how could he do the work of a simple joiner and carpenter so well? It is known that it takes several years or at least months to acquire skills in carpentry. When did Peter manage to learn all this while ruling the state?

The linguistic features of Peter I are interesting. Allegedly, for some reason he spoke his native Russian language poorly, like a foreigner, and wrote completely disgustingly and badly. But he spoke German fluently, and in the Low Saxon dialect. Piter also spoke Dutch and English well. For example, in the English Parliament and with representatives of Masonic lodges, he did without an interpreter. But with knowledge of Russian, his supposedly native language, Peter let us down, although from the cradle he should, in theory, have been in a Russian spoken environment.

If you take a short excursion into the field of linguistics, you will notice that in Europe at that time modern literary languages ​​had not yet been formed. For example, in the Netherlands at that time there were five major equal dialects: Dutch, Brabantian, Limbourgian, Flemish and Low Saxon. In the 17th century, the Low Saxon dialect was widespread in some areas of northern Germany and northeastern Holland. He was similar to English language, which clearly indicates their common origin.

Why was the Low Saxon dialect so universal and in demand? It turns out that in the Hanseatic trade union of the 17th century, the Low Saxon dialect, along with Latin, was the main one. Trade and legal documents were drawn up and theological books were written on it. Low Saxon was the lingua franca in the Baltic region, in cities such as Hamburg, Bremen, Lübeck and others.

How it really was

An interesting reconstruction of the Peter the Great era was proposed by the modern historian Alexander Kas. It logically explains the existing contradictions and inconsistencies in the biography of Peter I and his entourage, as well as why the exact place of Peter’s birth was not known, why this information was and is being hidden.

According to Alexander Kas, for a long time this fact was hidden because Peter was born not in Moscow or even in Russia, but in distant Brandenburg, in Prussia. He is half German by blood and half Anglo-Saxon by upbringing, beliefs, faith and culture. From here it becomes clear why German was family to him, and as a child he was surrounded by German toys: “a German screw carbine, a German map” and the like.

Peter himself recalled fondly his childhood toys when he was fairly drunk. According to the tsar, his children's room was upholstered in “Hamburg worm cloth.” Where did such good things come from in the Kremlin?! At that time, the Germans were not very welcome at the royal court. It also becomes clear why Peter was surrounded entirely by foreigners.

Historians say that he did not want to reign with Ivan, was offended and retired to the German settlement. However, there is the fact that the German Settlement, as historians described it, did not exist in Moscow at that time. And they would not have allowed the Germans to engage in bacchanalia and mock the Orthodox faith. In polite society, one cannot even talk out loud about what Peter did with his Anglo-Saxon friends in the German Settlement. But in Prussia and the Netherlands these performances could well have taken place.

Why did Peter behave so unnaturally for a Russian prince? But because Peter’s mother was not Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina, but his allegedly sister Sofya Alekseevna Romanova (1657–1704).

The historian S. M. Soloviev, who had the opportunity to delve into the archives, called her a “hero princess” who was able to free herself from the mansion, that is, get married. In 1671, Sofya Alekseevna married Friedrich Wilhelm Hohenzollern (1657–1713), the son of the Elector of Brandenburg. In 1672, their baby Petrus was born. Taking the Russian throne with the existing arrangement of princes was problematic for Petrus. But the Anglo-Saxon Sanhedrin thought differently and began clearing out contenders for the Russian throne and preparing its own candidate. The historian conventionally identified three attempts to seize the Russian throne.

All of them were accompanied by strange events. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov died very suddenly at the age of 47. This happened during the stay of the Great Embassy from the Netherlands, led by Conrad von Klenk, in Moscow in 1675-1676.

Apparently, Konrad von Klenk was sent to the Russian Tsar by the English King William III of Orange after Alexei Mikhailovich threatened him with sanctions. It seems that Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov was poisoned by the Anglo-Saxons. They were in a hurry to free the Russian throne for their candidate. The Hohenzollerns sought to capture Orthodox Russia and instill the Protestant faith in its people.

With this approach to the biography of Peter I, inconsistencies with his baptism are also removed. It is more correct to say that Peter was not baptized, but was baptized from the Latin faith to the Orthodox faith after the death of Alexei Mikhailovich. At this time, indeed, Joachim was already the patriarch, and brother Fyodor had reached adulthood. And then Peter began to be taught Russian literacy. According to the historian P. N. Krekshin (1684–1769), training began on March 12, 1677.

At this time in Russia there was a real pestilence against royalty. Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich quickly went to the next world, and for some reason Ivan Alekseevich was considered sick in body and spirit. The rest of the princes generally died in infancy.

The first attempt to place Peter on the throne in 1682 with the help of amusing regiments was not crowned with success - Petrusha’s years were not enough, and supposedly his brother Tsarevich Ivan Alekseevich was alive and well and was a legitimate contender for the Russian throne. Peter and Sophia had to return to their native Penates (Brandenburg) and wait for the next suitable opportunity. This can be confirmed by the fact that not a single official document has yet been found stating that Tsarevich Peter and his alleged sister, that is, mother, Sophia were in Moscow from 1682 to 1688.

The pedantic “Millers” and “Schletzers” found an explanation for the absence of Peter and Sophia in Moscow during these years. It turns out that since 1682 two tsars have ruled in Russia: Ivan and Peter under the regency of Sofia Alekseevna. It's like two presidents, two popes, two Queen Elizabeth IIs. However, in the Orthodox state there could not be such dual power!

From the explanation of the “Millers” and “Schletzers” it is known that Ivan Alekseevich ruled in public, and Pyotr Alekseevich was hiding in the village of Preobrazhenskoye, which at that time did not exist in the Moscow region. There was the village of Obrazhenskoye. Apparently, the name of the village, according to the plan of the Anglo-Saxon directors, was supposed to look like a symbol of the transformation of Russia. And in this non-existent village it was necessary to hide the modest drummer Petrus, who would eventually turn into the Greatest Transformer of Russia.

But this was not the case! Peter was hiding in Prussia and preparing for a mission, or rather, he was being prepared. This is what really happened. This is reasonable and logical. But the officialdom convinces us of something else. The fact is that in the village of Preobrazhenskoye Peter was engaged in playing war, creating amusing regiments. For this purpose, the amusing fortress town of Preshburg was built on the Yauza River, which was stormed by brave guys.

Why Miller moved Presburg or Presburg (the modern city of Bratislava) from the bank of the Danube to the bank of the Yauza River is anyone's guess.

No less interesting is another story in the biography of Peter I - the story of how he discovered an English boat (vessel) in some barn in the village of Izmailovo. According to Miller, Peter loved to wander around the village of Izmailovo out of nothing to do and look into other people’s barns. What if there is something there! And exactly! In one barn he discovered an English boot!

How did he get there so far from the North Sea and his native England? And when did this epoch-making event happen? Historians mumble that it was somewhere in 1686 or 1688, but they are not sure of their assumptions.

Why does the information about this remarkable symbolic find look so unconvincing? Yes, because there could not be any English boots in Moscow sheds!

The second attempt to seize power in Russia by the Anglo-Saxons in 1685 also failed spectacularly. Soldiers of the Semenovsky (Simeonovsky) and Preobrazhensky regiments, dressed in German uniforms and waving flags with the date “1683” on them, tried for the second time to place Petrus Friedrichovich Hohenzollern on the throne.

This time, the German aggression was stopped by the archers under the leadership of Prince Ivan Mikhailovich Miloslavsky (1635-1685). And Peter, as the previous time, had to flee the same way: to Prussia in transit through the Trinity-Sergius Lavra.

The third German attempt to seize power in Russia began several years later and ended with Peter becoming the sole ruler of Russia on July 8, 1689, finally deposing his brother Ivan.

It is believed that Peter brought from Europe after the Great Embassy of 1697-1698, in which he allegedly participated, only foreign astrolabes and globes. However, according to surviving documents, weapons were also purchased, foreign troops were hired, and mercenaries were paid in advance for six months.

What happened in the end

Peter I was the son of Princess Sophia Alekseevna Romanova (Charlotte) and Friedrich Wilhelm of Hohenzollern (1657-1713), son of the Elector of Brandenburg and the first king of Prussia.

And it would seem, why should historians fence a garden here? Peter was born and raised in Prussia and in relation to Russia he acted as a colonialist. What's there to hide?

No one hid and is not hiding the fact that Sophia Augusta Frederica of Anhalt-Zerb, who disguised herself under the pseudonym of Catherine II, came from the same places. She was sent to Russia on the same mission as Peter. Frederica was to continue and consolidate his great deeds.

After the reforms of Peter I, the split in Russian society intensified. The royal court positioned itself as German (Anglo-Saxon) and existed on its own and for its own pleasure, while the Russian people were in a parallel reality. In the 19th century, this elite part of Russian society even spoke French in the salons of Madame Scherer and was monstrously far from the common people.

Alekseevich Romanov (1672-1725) is a major figure in Russian and world history.

The time of his reign (1682-1725) was a time of a sharp turn in the destinies of the fatherland. Like any large-scale personality, Peter I was full of contradictions, which had a great influence on the nature of his reforms, way of life, and relationships with people.

Inquisitive, inquisitive by nature young Peter did not receive a systematic education. Sincerity and hard work were combined in him with cruelty and intolerance.

Peter's path to autocracy was long. At the age of four he lost his father, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. He was on the throne for six years step-brother- Fedor Alekseevich.

From the age of ten he became co-ruler of his brother Ivan, under the regency of his sister Sophia. Over the years, the future emperor became more and more interested in his “amusing” army and the German settlement, and Sofya Alekseevna began to worry about the activity of the young king.

The Streltsy uprising organized by the princess in 1689 failed, Sophia was imprisoned in a monastery, and her half-brother Ivan actually abandoned the reign (died in 1696).

The main activities of Peter I

Domestic policy:

• centralization of power;
• decree on unified inheritance (1714);
• table of ranks (1722);
• creation of the metallurgical industry;
• protectionist policy;
• military reform, creation of a regular army;
• population census;
• creation of the Senate and collegiums;
• administrative reform, creation of provinces;
• abolition of the patriarchate, creation of the Synod;
• construction of cities, a new capital - St. Petersburg;
• decree on succession to the throne (1722);
• formation of professional education;
• reforms in the cultural sphere.

Foreign policy:

• capture of Azov;
• "Great Embassy" (1697-1698);
• Russian-Turkish war (1710-1713);
• Northern War (1700-1721);
• Russian-Persian War (1722-1723).

In 1721, Peter I proclaimed himself Emperor of All Russia, thereby declaring the power Russian state, its significant international position. The great reformer died in January 1725, without having time to name his successor.

Results of the reign of Peter I

• modernization and Europeanization of Russia;
• development of industry and trade;
• strengthening the army and navy;
• growth of the bureaucracy;
• access to the Baltic Sea;
• strengthening Russia's international authority;
• deterioration of the situation of the peasantry;
• development of culture;
• Russia became an empire.

Valentin Aleksandrovich Serov - master of creating paintings on historical topic. In his works, he emphasized the greatness of the Russian people and their difficult fate, and glorified great statesmen. The painting “Peter 1” is a vivid example of this.

History of creation

Famous book publisher I.N. Knebel was preparing to release a series of books on Russian history. Being familiar with Serov, he suggested that the artist paint a picture on a historical theme, which could illustrate one of the chapters. Serov responded with joy because the artist had long admired the personality.

This was followed by a series of sketches and sketches. V. Serov sought to convey the greatness of Peter and the city he created. So in 1907 the painting “Peter 1” was created.

Description of the picture

The background of the picture illustrates the panorama of St. Petersburg. The river and the buildings and structures lined up along it look like scenery against which the figure of the king is exalted. There are no buildings yet - only the foundations of the buildings are visible, there is no embankment - only earth has been poured in its place.

In fact, the one depicted on the canvas will be built a decade after the death of Peter. By depicting him, Serov emphasized how the tsar’s projects even after his departure. Likewise, the ships that are visible in the distance raise their sails only in the king’s thoughts. This is just the beginning, a prototype of the Admiralty.

The Emperor steps heavily and confidently. His whole figure is directed forward, into the future. The wind blows in his face, but he continues to walk. The royal Peter 1 leads a group of people. Serov’s painting emphasizes his greatness in contrast with the bent figures of chilled nobles, wrapped in warm clothes. They hide their faces from the rain. The features are indistinguishable; they follow the king as a whole.

Details and symbolism

The artist’s work very accurately conveys the atmosphere of reforms and transformations, the scale of which is still impressive. The painting “Peter 1” was made without the use of bright colors and shades. This emphasizes the harsh reality of those times. There are few small details - the main focus is on the main character. The details of the clothing and decoration of Peter, the great reformer, are drawn. The tightly stuffed pockets especially stand out. This is a symbol of the sovereign’s involvement not only in the design of the city, but also in its direct creation.

Interesting from the point of view artistic expression a cow that drinks water from the river. Metaphorically, it conveys the everyday life that settled people establish. You can guess that the Baltic is very close by the seagulls soaring in the sky. Access to the sea means an expansion of trade space and a prospect for the economic development of the state. All the details that the painting “Peter 1” conveys indicate the beginning of a new stage in the development of Russia, the irreversibility of change. However, there is no pathos in the depiction of Peter; there is the strength and power of a ruler leading the entire country into the future.

We examined Serov's work "Peter 1". Paintings by artists who worked in the same genre noticeably fade against its background. The greatness of the ruler is skillfully conveyed in the famous masterpiece.