In Moscow they gossiped: "The sovereign is not of Russian breed, and not Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich's son." The unequivocal proof was that the tsar favors the Germans, which means that he himself is one of them. They argued only about when and who replaced the monarch.

For "obscene speeches" they flogged, tortured, sent to hard labor and exile, but they could not eradicate the rumors.
According to one version, the Germans replaced the boy in infancy. The “mothers” of the tsarevich gape, and it was then that they had in their hands instead of Pyotr Alekseevich a “German”.

According to another, Tsarina Natalya Kirillovna herself replaced the child, fearing that her husband would fall out of love with her if she gave birth to a girl. Allegedly, the queen put a child from a German settlement in a cradle, and gave her daughter to someone. Peter allegedly learned about the substitution from his mother when she was dying.

Evil tongues even found the “real” father of Peter I, who allegedly was an associate of the reformer tsar Franz Lefort. It was this that explained the closeness of the general to the tsar, his appointment as an admiral, and then - the head of the Great Embassy.

According to another version, the king was replaced during a trip to Europe. It happened in Riga, where the real Peter was either immured in the wall, or “the tsar in the Germans was laid in a barrel and put into the sea”, and instead of him an impostor came to Russia.
There was a version that the king was tortured in prison by the Swedish queen Christina, who replaced Peter with her man.

It is alleged that Peter I, according to the memoirs of his contemporaries, changed dramatically after returning from the Great Embassy. As evidence of the substitution, portraits of the king are given before and after his return from Europe. It is alleged that in the portrait of Peter, before traveling to Europe, he had an elongated face, curly hair and a large wart under his left eye. In the portraits of the king after returning from Europe, he had a round face, straight hair and no wart under his left eye. When Peter I returned from the Great Embassy, he was 26 years old, and on his portraits after his return he looked to be about 40 years old. It is believed that the king before the trip was of a dense build and above average height, but still not a two-meter giant. The returned king was thin, had very narrow shoulders, and his height, which was established quite accurately, was 2 meters 4 centimeters. Such tall people were a rarity at that time.

In addition, there is a version shared by a number of Russian historians that Peter I died in 1691 during military exercises due to an accident. Allegedly, his entourage was very afraid of losing their position, so they went to substitute. The head of the conspiracy was Prince Fyodor Romodanovsky. On his orders, they found a "replacement" for the Dutch shipbuilder Jaan Mus, who arrived in Russia, who allegedly looked very much like the tsar. Russia is actually Prince Romodanovsky, hiding behind a foreign impostor. After his death, in 1717, the new environment decided to put an end to the only heir of the real Peter - Tsarevich Alexei, who fled to the Holy Roman Empire. He was lured from there to Russia, and soon died in prison. So, according to this version, the Romanov dynasty was interrupted.

During the Great Embassy of the Russian Tsar Peter in Western countries- the real Tsar Peter was imprisoned in the Bastille as an "Iron Mask", and the freemason Anatoly, under the name of the false emperor "Peter the Great", began to commit excesses in Russia, which he declared an empire in the Western manner.

Rice. 1. False Peter the First and my reading of the inscriptions on his portrait

The portrait I borrowed from the video where the Announcer says: " But already on his other engraving, as well as on all subsequent portraits of other artists, we see a completely different person, unlike his relatives. It would seem absurd!

But the oddities don't end there either. On the engravings and portraits of 1698, this man looks more like a 20-year-old boy. However, in the Dutch and German portraits of 1697, the same person looks more like 30 years old.

How could this happen?»

I am starting an epigraphic analysis of this portrait. A clue to where to look for certain inscriptions are the two previous portraits. First, I read the inscription on the brooch attached to the headdress, which says: MIM YAR RURIK. In other words, this is another priest of Yar Rurik, although there is no signature of CHARAOH. It may very well be that the absence of this highest spiritual rank means that this priest did not recognize the spiritual priority of Rurik, although formally he was his priest. In this case, he was very suitable for the role of Peter's double.

Then I read the inscriptions on the fur collar on the left, above the white frame: TEMPLE OF MARY YARA. I consider this inscription as a continuation of the previous one. And inside the fragment circled in white, I read the words in inverted color: MOSCOW MARY 865 YARA (YEAR). Under Mary's Moscow, Veliky Novgorod was understood; however, already the first Romanov introduces real Christianity, and Patriarch Nikon, under Alexei Mikhailovich, eliminates all remnants of Russian Vedism from Muscovy. Consequently, Russian Vedists partly go to the Russian hinterland, partly go to the Russian diaspora in neighboring states. And the year 865 Yar is 1721 A.D. , this is more than 70 years after Nikon's reforms. By this time, the places of the priests were no longer occupied by children, but by the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the priests removed by Nikon, and the grandchildren and great-grandchildren often no longer speak the speech of their grandfathers and great-grandfathers. But, perhaps, the year of the final design of this engraving, which was begun in 1698, is shown. But even in this case, the depicted young man is 6-8 years younger than Peter.

And on the very bottom fragment, under the frame on the fur collar on the left, I read the word MASK. Then I read the inscription on the fur collar on the right: the top of the collar, diagonally, contains the inscription ANATOLY FROM RUSSIA MARY, and the line below - 35 ARKONA YARA. But the 35th Arkona Yar, this is the same as Mary's Moscow, this is Veliky Novgorod. In other words, one of the ancestors of this Anatoly in mid-seventeenth centuries, he could really be a priest in this city, while after Nikon's reforms he ended up somewhere in the Russian diaspora. It is possible that in Catholic Poland, which very diligently carried out all the decrees of the Pope.

Rice. 2. Portrait of Peter by an unknown artist at the end of the 18th century

So, we now know that the young man with the bulging eyes was not Peter at all, but Anatoly; in other words, the substitution of the king is documented.

We see that this portrait was painted in Veliky Novgorod. But apart from the name of False Peter, this portrait did not bring any details, and, moreover, the artist was not even named, so this portrait was not entirely acceptable as an evidence document, which made me look for other canvases. And soon the desired portrait was found: “ Peter the Great, Emperor of All Russia, portrait by an unknown late artistXVIII century» . Below I will show why the artist was unknown.

Epigraphic analysis of the second portrait of the False Peter.

I chose this particular image of Peter, because on his silk baldric I read the word YARA below, deciding that the portrait belonged to the painter of their Yara temple. And I was not mistaken. The letters were inscribed both in separate parts of the face and in the folds of clothing.

Rice. 3. My reading of the inscriptions on the portrait of Peter in fig. 2

It is clear that if I suspected the presence of Russian inscriptions on a blue silk ribbon, then I began reading from it. True, since in the direct color these letters are not very contrasting, I go to the inverted color. And here you can see the inscription, made in very large letters: TEMPLE YAR, and on the collar - the inscription MASK. This confirmed my preliminary reading. In modern terms, this means: IMAGE FROM THE TEMPLE OF YAR .

And then I moved on to reading the inscriptions on the parts of the face. First - on the right side of the face, on the left at the viewer's point of view. On the lower strands of hair (I rotated this fragment 90 degrees to the right, clockwise). Here I read the words: MASK OF THE TEMPLE OF RURIK. In other words, IMAGE FROM THE TEMPLE OF RURIK .

On the hair above the forehead you can read the words: MIM OF THE TEMPLE OF RURIK. Finally, on the right from the viewer's point of view, on the left side of the face, one can read ANATOLY MASK FROM RURIK YAR JUTLAND. Firstly, it confirms that False Peter was called Anatoly, and, secondly, it turned out that he does not come from Holland, as many researchers have suggested, but from neighboring Denmark. However, the transition from one country to another at the end of the 17th century, apparently, did not pose a big problem.

Next, I move on to reading the inscription on the mustache. Here you can read the words: RIMA MIM. In other words, Dane by birth and Dutch by language, was an agent of Rome's influence. For the umpteenth time, the final center of action against Russia-Russia is Rome!

But can this claim be verified? - I'm looking at the armor on right hand, as well as the background behind the hand. True, for readability, I rotate this fragment to the right by 90 degrees (clockwise). And here on the background in the form of fur you can read the words: MASK OF THE TEMPLE OF ROME And ROMA MIM RUSSIA RIMA. In other words, about the fact that before us is really the image of not the emperor of Russia, but the priest of Rome! And on armor, hands can be read on every two plates: ROMA MIM. RIMA MIM.

Finally, on the fur collar next to the left arm, one can read the words: RURIK ROME MIM.

Thus, it becomes clear that the temples of Rurik existed as early as the 18th century, and their priests, creating portraits of dead people (usually the priests of the temple of Mary did this), usually wrote their titles, as well as names. This is exactly what we saw in this portrait. However, in a Christian country (where Christianity had been the official religion for more than a century), it was not safe to advertise the existence of Vedic temples, which is why the artist of this portrait remained unknown.

Rice. 4. The death mask of Rurik and my reading of the inscriptions

Death mask of Peter.

Then I decided to look on the Internet for foreign sites. In the article, I read the section “The Great Embassy” with interest. In particular, it said: " His Grand Embassy, numbering 250 participants, left Moscow in March 1697. Peter became the first king to leave his kingdom. The official purpose of the embassy was to give a new breath to the coalition against the Ottoman Empire. However, Piotr did not make a secret of the fact that he went to "observe and learn", as well as to select foreign specialists for his new Russia. In the then Swedish city of Riga, the tsar was allowed to inspect the fortress, but to his great surprise, he was not allowed to take measurements. In Courland (the current region of the coast of Lithuania and Latvia), Peter met with the Dutch ruler, Frederick Casimir. The prince tried to persuade Peter to join his coalition against Sweden. In Königsberg, Peter visited the fortress of Friedrichsburg. He took part in visiting artillery courses, and graduated with a diploma certifying that "Peter Mikhailov received skills as a bombardier and skills in the use of firearms».

The following describes a visit by Peter Leeuwenhoek with his microscope and Witsen, who compiled a book describing northern and eastern Tartaria. But most of all I was interested in the description of his secret meeting: September 11, 1697 Peter had a secret meeting with King William of EnglandIII. Nothing is known about their negotiations, except that they lasted two hours and ended in a friendly parting. At that time, the English navy was regarded as the fastest in the world. King William assured that Peter should visit the English naval shipyards, where he would learn to understand the design of ships, make measurements and calculations, and learn how to use instruments and instruments. As soon as he arrived in England he tried to sail the Thames» .

One gets the impression that it was in England that the best conditions were formed for the replacement of Peter by Anatoly.

The same article published the death mask of Peter the Great. The caption underneath reads: "DeathmaskofPeter. After 1725, St Petersburg, from the original by Bartolomeo Rastrelli, after 1725, Bronze-tinted plaster. Case 34.5 x 29 x 33 cm. State Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg." This death mask has forehead I read the inscription in the form of a strand of hair: MIMA RUSI ROME MASK. She confirms that this image does not belong to the Emperor of Russia Peter the Great, but to the Roman priest Anatoly.

Rice. 5. Miniature by an unknown artist and my reading of the inscriptions

Miniature by an unknown artist.

I found it at the address with the signature: “PetertheGreat (1672 - 1725) of Russia. Enamel miniature portrait by an unknown artist, late 1790s. #Russian #history #Romanov”, Fig.5.

Upon inspection, it can be argued that the largest number of inscriptions is on the background. The miniature itself I strengthened in contrast. To the left and above the head of the portrait, I read the captions: ROMA RURIK YARA MARY TEMPLE AND ROME MIM AND ARKONA 30. In other words, now it is specified in which particular temple of Mary of Rome the miniature was made: in the capital of the state of Rome, in the city a little to the west CAIRA .

To the left of the head at the level of the hair, I read in the background the words: MARY RUSSIA TEMPLE OF VAGRIA. Perhaps this is the address of the customer of the thumbnail. Finally, I read the inscriptions on the character's face, on his left cheek (where the wart on the left side of his nose is missing), and here you can read the words below the shadow of the cheek: RIMA MIM ANATOLY RIMA JAR STOLITSY. So, once again, the name of Anatoly is confirmed, now written in rather large letters.

Rice. 6. A fragment of a picture from the British Encyclopedia and my reading of the inscriptions

Painting of Peter from the Encyclopædia Britannica.

Here I read the inscriptions on the fragment, where there is a bust portrait, fig. 6, although the full picture is much larger, Fig. 7. However, I singled out exactly the fragment and the size that suited me perfectly for epigraphic analysis.

The first inscription that I began to read is the image of a mustache. On them you can read the words: TEMPLE OF ROME MIMA, and then - continuation on the upper lip: RURIK, and then on the red part of the lip: MARY'S TEMPLE MASK, and further - on the lower lip: ANATOLY ROMA ARKONA 30. In other words, here we see a confirmation of the previous inscriptions: again the name of Anatoly, and again his link to the temple of Mary Rurik in the city near Cairo.

Then I read the inscription on the collar: 30 ARKONA YARA. And then I turn to the consideration of the fragment to the left of Peter's face, which I circled with a black frame. Here I read the words: 30 ARKONA YARA that has already been read. But then there are new and amazing words: ANATOLY MARY TEMPLE IN ANKARA ROME. Surprise is not so much existence special temple dedicated to Anatolia, how much is the location of such a temple in the Turkish capital Ankara. I have not yet read such words anywhere. Moreover, the word ANATOLY can be understood not only as a proper name of a person, but also as the name of a locality in Turkey.

For the time being, I consider it sufficient to consider the inscriptions on the portraits. And then I am interested in the details of the substitution of the Russian Tsar, which can be found in printed works on the Internet.

Rice. 7. Painting from Encyclopædia Britannica online

Wikipedia's opinion on the substitution of Peter the Great.

In the article “The Double of Peter I”, Wikipedia, in particular, states: “ According to one version, the substitution of Peter I was organized by some influential forces in Europe during the tsar's trip to the Grand Embassy. It is alleged that of the Russian people who accompanied the tsar on a diplomatic trip to Europe, only Alexander Menshikov returned - the rest are believed to have been killed. The purpose of this crime was to put his protege at the head of Russia, who pursued a policy that was beneficial to the organizers of the substitution and those who stood behind them. One of the possible goals of this substitution is the weakening of Russia».

Note that the history of the conspiracy to change the tsar of Russia in this presentation is conveyed only from the side of facts, and, moreover, very vaguely. As if the Great Embassy itself had only the goal of creating a coalition against the Ottoman Empire, and not the goal of replacing the real Romanov with his double.

« It is alleged that Peter I, according to the memoirs of his contemporaries, changed dramatically after returning from the Great Embassy. As evidence of the substitution, portraits of the king are given before and after his return from Europe. It is alleged that in the portrait of Peter, before traveling to Europe, he had an elongated face, curly hair and a large wart under his left eye. In the portraits of the king after returning from Europe, he had a round face, straight hair and no wart under his left eye. When Peter I returned from the Great Embassy, he was 28 years old, and on his portraits after his return he looked to be about 40 years old. It is believed that the king before the trip was of a dense build and above average height, but still not a two-meter giant. The returned king was thin, had very narrow shoulders, and his height, which was established quite accurately, was 2 meters 4 centimeters. Such tall people were a rarity at that time.».

We see that the authors of these Wikipedia lines do not at all share the provisions that they present to the reader, although these provisions are facts. How can you not notice such a striking change in appearance? Thus, Wikipedia tries to present obvious provisions with some speculation, something like this: “ it is said that two times two equals four". The fact that the person who arrived from the embassy was different can be seen by comparing any of the portraits in fig. 1-7 with a portrait of the departed king, fig. 8.

Rice. 8. Portrait of the departed Tsar Peter the Great and my reading of the inscriptions

To the dissimilarity of facial features, one can add the dissimilarity of implicit inscriptions on these two types of portraits. The real Peter is signed as "Peter Alekseevich", False Peter on all five portraits - as Anatoly. Although both were mimes (priests) of the temple of Rurik in Rome.

I will continue to quote Wikipedia: According to supporters of the conspiracy theory, soon after the arrival of the double in Russia, rumors began to spread among the archers that the tsar was not real. Peter's sister Sophia, realizing that an impostor had arrived instead of her brother, led a streltsy revolt, which was brutally suppressed, and Sophia was imprisoned in a monastery».

Note that in this case, the motive for the uprising of the archers and Sophia turns out to be extremely serious, while the motive for Sophia’s struggle with her brother for the throne in a country where only men still reigned (a common motive of academic historiography) seems to be very far-fetched.

« It is alleged that Peter loved his wife Evdokia Lopukhina very much, often corresponded with her when he was away. After the return of the king from Europe, on his orders, Lopukhina was forcibly sent to the Suzdal monastery, even against the will of the clergy (it is alleged that Peter did not even see her and did not explain the reasons for Lopukhina's imprisonment in the monastery).

It is believed that after his return, Peter did not recognize his relatives and subsequently did not meet either with them or with his inner circle. In 1698, shortly after Peter's return from Europe, his associates Lefort and Gordon died suddenly. According to conspiracy theorists, it was on their initiative that Peter went to Europe».

It is not clear why Wikipedia calls this concept conspiracy theories. According to the conspiracy of the nobility, Paul the First was killed, the conspirators threw a bomb at the feet of Alexander II, the USA, England and Germany contributed to the elimination of Nicholas II. In other words, the West has repeatedly interfered in the fate of Russian sovereigns.

« Supporters of the conspiracy theory argue that the returned king was ill with a chronic dengue fever, while it can only be contracted in southern waters, and even then only after visiting the jungle. The route of the Great Embassy passed by the northern sea route. The surviving documents of the Great Embassy do not mention that the constable Pyotr Mikhailov (under this name the tsar went with the embassy) fell ill with a fever, while for the people accompanying him it was no secret who Mikhailov really was. After returning from the Great Embassy, Peter I during naval battles demonstrated extensive experience in boarding combat, which has specific features that can only be mastered by experience. Boarding combat skills require direct participation in many boarding battles. Before traveling to Europe, Peter I did not take part in naval battles, since during his childhood and youth, Russia did not have access to the seas, with the exception of the White Sea, which Peter I did not visit often - mainly as an honored passenger».

It follows from this that Anatoly was a naval officer who took part in naval battles. southern seas who had been ill with tropical fever.

« It is alleged that the returned tsar spoke Russian poorly, that he did not learn how to write Russian correctly until the end of his life, and that he "hated everything Russian." Conspiracy theorists believe that before traveling to Europe, the tsar was distinguished by piety, and when he returned, he stopped observing fasts, attending church, mocked the clergy, began persecuting the Old Believers and began to close monasteries. It is believed that in two years Peter forgot all the sciences and subjects that the educated Moscow nobility owned, and at the same time acquired skills of a simple craftsman. There is a striking, according to conspiracy theorists, change in the character and psyche of Peter after returning».

Again, there are clear changes not only in Peter's appearance, but also in Peter's language and habits. In other words, Anatoly did not belong not only to the royal, but even to the nobility, being a typical representative of the third estate. In addition, there is no mention that Anatoly spoke Dutch fluently, which many researchers note. In other words, he came from somewhere in the Dutch-Danish region.

« It is alleged that the tsar, having returned from Europe, did not know about the location of the richest library of Ivan the Terrible, although the secret of finding this library was passed from tsar to tsar. So, Princess Sophia allegedly knew where the library was and visited it, and Peter, who came from Europe, repeatedly made attempts to find the library and even organized excavations.».

Again, a specific fact is given out by Wikipedia for some "statements".

« As evidence of the substitution of Peter, his behavior and actions are given (in particular, the fact that the tsar, who used to prefer traditional Russian clothes, no longer wore it after returning from Europe, including royal clothes with a crown - conspiracy theorists explain the latter fact by the fact that the impostor was taller than Peter and had narrower shoulders, and the things of the king did not fit him), as well as his reforms. It is argued that these reforms have done far more harm to Russia than good. As evidence, the tightening of serfdom by Peter, and the persecution of the Old Believers, and the fact that under Peter I in Russia there were many foreigners in the service and in various positions are used as evidence. Before his trip to Europe, Peter I set as his goal to expand the territory of Russia, including moving south towards the Black and mediterranean seas. One of the main goals of the Grand Embassy was to achieve an alliance of European powers against Turkey. While the returned king began the struggle for mastery of the Baltic coast. The war with Sweden conducted by the tsar, according to supporters of the conspiracy theory, was needed by Western states that wanted to crush the growing power of Sweden with the hands of Russia. It is alleged that Peter I spent foreign policy in the interests of Poland, Saxony and Denmark, which could not resist the Swedish king Charles XII».

It is clear that the raids of the Crimean khans on Moscow were a constant threat to Russia, and the rulers of the Ottoman Empire stood behind the Crimean khans. Therefore, the fight against Turkey was a more important strategic task for Russia than the fight on the Baltic coast. And the Wikipedia mention of Denmark is consistent with the inscription on one of the portraits that Anatoly was from Jutland.

« As evidence, the case of Tsarevich Alexei Petrovich is also cited, who fled abroad in 1716, where he planned to wait for the death of Peter (who was seriously ill during this period) on the territory of the Holy Roman Empire and then, relying on the help of the Austrians, become the Russian Tsar. According to supporters of the version of the substitution of the king, Alexei Petrovich fled to Europe because he sought to free his real father, imprisoned in the Bastille. According to Gleb Nosovsky, the agents of the impostor announced to Alexei that after his return he would be able to take the throne himself, since loyal troops were waiting for him in Russia, ready to support his coming to power. Aleksey Petrovich, who returned, is believed by conspiracy theorists to have been killed on the orders of an impostor.».

And this version turns out to be more serious than the academic one, where the son opposes his father for ideological reasons, and the father, without putting his son under House arrest, applies capital punishment immediately. All this in the academic version looks unconvincing.

Version of Gleb Nosovsky.

Wikipedia also sets out a version of the new chronologists. " According to Gleb Nosovsky, initially he heard many times about the version of the substitution of Peter, but he never believed in it. At one time, Fomenko and Nosovsky studied an exact copy of the throne of Ivan the Terrible. In those days, the zodiac signs of the current rulers were placed on the thrones. Examining the signs placed on the throne of Ivan the Terrible, Nosovsky and Fomenko found out that the actual date of his birth differs from the official version by four years.

The authors of the New Chronology compiled a table of the names of Russian tsars and their birthdays, and thanks to this table, they found out that the official birthday of Peter I (May 30) does not coincide with the day of his angel, which is a noticeable contradiction compared to all the names of Russian tsars. After all, names in Russia at baptism were given exclusively according to the holy calendar, and the name given to Peter violated the established centuries-old tradition, which in itself does not fit into the framework and laws of that time. Nosovsky and Fomenko, on the basis of the table, found out that the real name, which falls on the official date of birth of Peter I, was "Isakiy". This explains the name of the main cathedral. tsarist Russia Isaacevsky.

Nosovsky believes that the Russian historian Pavel Milyukov also shared the opinion about the forgery of the tsar in an article in the encyclopedia of Brockhausazai and Evfron, Milyukov, according to Nosovsky, without stating directly, repeatedly hinted that Peter I was an impostor. The substitution of the tsar by an impostor was carried out, according to Nosovsky, by a certain group of Germans, and together with a double, a group of foreigners came to Russia. According to Nosovsky, rumors about the substitution of the tsar were very common among Peter's contemporaries, and almost all archers claimed that the tsar was fake. Nosovsky believes that May 30 was in fact the birthday not of Peter, but of the impostor who replaced him, on whose orders St. Isaac's Cathedral was built, named after him».

The name "Anatoliy" revealed by us does not contradict this version, because the name "Anatoly" was a monastic one, and not given at birth. - As you can see, the "new chronologists" have added another touch to the portrait of the impostor.

Historiography of Peter.

It would seem that what is easier is to consider the biographies of Peter the Great, preferably lifetime ones, and explain the contradictions that interest us.

However, this is where disappointment awaits us. Here's what you can read in the work: " There were persistent rumors among the people about the non-Russian origin of Peter. He was called the Antichrist, the German foundling. The difference between Tsar Alexei and his son was so striking that many historians suspected Peter's non-Russian origin. Moreover, the official version of the origin of Peter was too unconvincing. She left and leaves more questions than answers. Many researchers have tried to lift the veil of strange reticence about the Petrine phenomenon. However, all these attempts instantly fell under the strictest taboo of the ruling house of the Romanovs. The phenomenon of Peter remained unsolved».

So, the people unequivocally asserted that Peter had been replaced. Doubts arose not only among the people, but even among historians. And then we read with surprise: In an incomprehensible way, until the middle of the 19th century, not a single work was published with a complete historiography of Peter the Great. The first who decided to publish a complete scientific and historical biography of Peter was the remarkable Russian historian Nikolai Gerasimovich Ustryalov, already mentioned by us. In the introduction to his work "History of the reign of Peter the Great" he details why so far (mid 19th century) scientific work on the history of Peter the Great is missing". This is how this detective story began.

According to Ustryalov, back in 1711, Peter was eager to get the history of his reign and entrusted this honorary mission to the translator of the Posolsky Prikaz Venedikt Schiling. The latter was provided with all the necessary materials and archives, but ... the work was never published, not a single sheet of the manuscript was preserved. Even more mysterious: “The Russian Tsar had every right to be proud of his exploits and wish to pass on to posterity the memory of his deeds in a true, unadorned form. Thought he undertook to fulfillFeofan Prokopovich , Bishop of Pskov, and teacher of Tsarevich Alexei Petrovich,Baron Huysen . Both of them were informed of official materials, as can be seen from the writings of Theophanes, and as is even more evidenced by the Sovereign's handwritten note of 1714, preserved in his office affairs: “Give all the journals to Gizen”(one). It would seem that now the History of Peter I will finally be published. But it was not there: “A skillful preacher, a learned theologian, Theophan was not a historian at all ... From that, describing the battles, he fell into inevitable mistakes; moreover, he worked with obvious haste, in a hurry, made omissions that he wanted to supplement later.. As we can see, Peter's choice was unsuccessful: Feofan was not a historian and did not understand anything at all. Huysen's work also turned out to be unsatisfactory and was not published: “Baron Huysen, having in his hands authentic journals of campaigns and travels, limited himself to extracts from them until 1715, without any connection, entangling in historical events many trifles and affairs of strangers ".

In a word, neither this biography nor subsequent ones took place. And the author comes to this conclusion: The strictest censorship of all historical research continued into the 19th century. So the work of N.G. Ustryalov, which is the first scientific historiography of Peter I, was subjected to severe censorship. From the 10-volume edition, only separate excerpts from 4 volumes have been preserved! Last time this fundamental research about Peter I (1, 2, 3 tons, part of the 4th volume, 6 tons) in a truncated version was published only in 1863! Today it is actually lost and is preserved only in antique collections. The same fate befell the work of I.I. Golikov "Acts of Peter the Great", which has not been reprinted since the century before last! Notes of an associate and personal turner of Peter I A.K. Nartov "Reliable Narratives and Speeches of Peter the Great" were first opened and published only in 1819. At the same time, a scanty circulation in the little-known magazine "Son of the Fatherland". But even that edition underwent an unprecedented revision, when only 74 out of 162 stories were published. This work was not republished anymore, the original was irretrievably lost.» .

The entire book by Alexander Kas is called "The collapse of the empire of Russian tsars" (1675-1700), which implies the establishment of an empire of non-Russian tsars. And in the IX chapter, under the title "As under Peter royal dynasty cut out ”he describes the standing of Stepan Razin’s troops 12 miles near Moscow. And he describes many other interesting, but practically unknown events. However, he does not give more information about the False Peter.

Other opinions.

Again, I will continue to quote the already named Wikipedia article: “It is alleged that Peter's double was an experienced sailor who participated in many naval battles and sailed a lot in the southern seas. It is sometimes stated that he was a sea pirate. Sergei Sall believes that the impostor was a high-ranking Dutch Freemason and a relative of the King of Holland and Great Britain, William of Orange. It is most often mentioned that the real name of the double was Isaac (according to one version, his name was Isaac Andre). According to Bayda, the double was either from Sweden or Denmark, and by religion he was most likely a Lutheran.

Baida claims that the real Peter was imprisoned in the Bastille, and that it was he who was the famous prisoner who went down in history under the name of the Iron Mask. According to Baida, this prisoner was recorded under the name Marchiel, which can be interpreted as "Mikhailov" (under this surname Peter went to the Great Embassy). It is stated that the Iron Mask was tall, carried himself with dignity, and was treated fairly well. In 1703, Peter, according to Bayda, was killed in the Bastille. Nosovsky claims that the real Peter was kidnapped and most likely killed.

It is sometimes argued that the real Peter was actually tricked into going to Europe so that some foreign powers could force him to subsequently pursue the policies they wanted. Not agreeing to this, Peter was kidnapped or killed, and a double was put in his place.

In one version of the version, the real Peter was captured by the Jesuits and imprisoned in

EXTRA see:

"How Tsar Peter I was replaced" -
"Investigation of the kidnapping and substitution of Tsar Peter I and the nomination of an impostor to the royal throne" -

Three hundred and sixteen years ago, Peter the Great introduced the European chronology in Russia, throwing the Slavic calendar into the "trash of history" on which was 7208. Why did Peter the Great need to change the calendar and impoverish Russian history? Historians put forward a shocking hypothesis.

It was not Peter Alekseevich Romanov who canceled it at all, but an impostor who arrived from Europe in his place. At the time of departure, Peter was 26 years old. He had a mole on his left cheek, wavy hair, and was slightly taller than average. This is clearly seen in the portraits of that time. The sovereign was well educated, loved everything Russian, knew the Bible and Old Slavonic texts by heart.

Evidence that Tsar Peter I was an impostor

After his arrival from abroad (which happened two years later, instead of the planned two weeks, and as part of a delegation of twenty people, only Menshikov returned with Peter), the tsar looked completely different outwardly. According to eyewitnesses, he was about two meters tall (which was a rarity at that time), there was no that very mole on his left cheek, there were hard straight hair.

He was also physically very strong and, in particular, demonstrated various skills that could hardly be acquired without participation, for example, in naval battles. It was probably a different person, and he was very different from the real Pyotr Alekseevich Romanov.

The man who returned from, although he had an outward resemblance to Peter, immediately puzzled his subjects with strange habits. He ordered that beards be shaved and dressed in Western fashion. And he himself never wore his old clothes again, including royal vestments, probably because the size did not suit him.

The new Peter was over two meters tall, which at that time was a rarity. Until the end of his days, he suffered from a tropical fever, which there was absolutely nowhere to pick up in Europe. It's a disease of the South Seas. During the battles, he demonstrated great experience in boarding combat, which can only be obtained by experience, and Peter had not participated in any naval battles before.

Returning to, Peter ordered to exile his legal wife Evdokia Lopukhina to a remote monastery, without even seeing her. But at the beginning of the journey, he often wrote to her tender letters, preserved to this day: consulted, swore love and fidelity. And suddenly such a sharp change. Probably, the impostor was afraid that his royal wife would immediately notice the substitution and therefore, first of all, took care of its elimination.

Another, albeit indirect, evidence in favor of the impostor. The sovereign was gone for two years, and if Princess Sophia had plans to take the throne, she did not have a more convenient moment, but she did not make any attempts to do so. Only after seeing Peter returning from Europe, Sophia raises a streltsy rebellion, the reason for which was simple - the king is not real.

He was suppressed, and in fact, by force, the possibility of even discussing the topic that the king was a different person was eliminated.

Among the reforms of Peter returned from Europe, historians see a number of measures that destroyed a number of culturally rich Russian traditions. Cancellation of measures of length and weight: sazhens, cubits, vershoks. A ban on the cultivation of a number of agricultural crops, such as amaranth, which was the basis of Russian bread. The abolition of Russian writing, which consisted of 151 characters, and the introduction of the forty-three character writing of Cyril and Methodius. Peter ordered everything to be taken to Petersburg and then burned. He called on German professors who wrote a completely different Russian history.

What happened to the real Peter the first? According to historians, he was captured by the Jesuits and placed in the Swedish fortress. He managed to convey the letter to Charles 12 - the king of Sweden, and he rescued him from captivity. Together they organized a campaign against the impostor. But the entire Jesuit Masonic brethren of Europe, called to fight, together with the Russian troops, won a victory near Poltava. The real Russian Tsar Peter 1 was captured and placed away from the Bastille, where he later died. An iron mask was put on his face.

But why was such a complex and dangerous substitution of the sovereign needed? Why was it necessary to try to erase Russian history at any cost? What was so dangerous about Western Europe? Perhaps this is also explained very simply. For many centuries, the Germans illegally occupied our lands and were very afraid that we would demand them back at any moment.

Tsar Peter - "the first revolutionary on the throne" - was the great destroyer of the national order of the country, a symbol of the stupid, hasty and excessively cruel in his impatience desire to imitate the West in everything. Pushkin, starting in 1831 to write the "History of Peter I", was full of stormy delight and wanted to praise the autocrat, as he did in the poems "Poltava" and "The Bronze Horseman", but a more thorough acquaintance with the deeds of the reformer tsar did not leave him this delight and a trace: Pushkin hated Peter and called him nothing more than a Protestant, a tyrant and a destroyer of Russia.

Let us ask ourselves an unexpected question: was Peter I a Russian?

This question is not as absurd as it seems at first glance. And for the first time they began to ask it not now, but more than three hundred years ago, but for the most part in a whisper. With fear and confusion in their hearts, looking at the strange whims and terrible amusements of the tsar, the Russian people felt a vague suspicion: the Germans had replaced the tsar! ..

The question of the personality of Peter I and the significance of his reforms for the historical formation of Russia has long become a cornerstone and even a kind of boundary line in the worldview, irreconcilably separating Westerners and supporters of the country's primordially Russian path of development. The former see Peter as a statesman of enormous proportions, who gave Russia science, developed industry, a regular army, navy, and the culture of Europe, and thereby saved the country from inevitable death in that historical impasse into which it involuntarily entered, adhering to political and cultural self-isolation.

For others, Peter is the great destroyer of the national way of the country, a symbol of the stupid, hasty and barbarously carried out Europeanization of Russia.
In this regard, Peter's decrees on the introduction of European dress in Russia - shoes, stockings, short caftans, wigs - are very remarkable.

For those who did not comply with these decrees, a whip, and hard labor, and enrollment in soldiers, and even the death penalty were provided! Is it possible to see in these decrees, extremely unreasonable and extremely humiliating for the whole nation, a movement “from non-existence to existence” (this is how his enthusiastic supporters characterized all of Peter’s activity), to feel in them the genius spirit of a “great man” (the words of the historian S.M. Solovyov)?

More than seen in them is the absurd and petty absurdity of mediocrity, which has lost its head from its own omnipotent power.
But this absurdity turned into a real tragedy for Russia, since the reprisals for non-compliance with these decrees were truly draconian.

It was because of them that a popular revolt broke out in Astrakhan in 1705. Somewhat later, Peter softened these requirements and allowed a Russian person, having paid a certain tax, to walk in his usual clothes and even remain with a beard. But this indulgence was caused by more selfish interests than respect for one's own people.

Special mention must be made of the impression that Peter I makes with his deeds. Any person superficially familiar with the era of the reformer tsar involuntarily experiences an enthusiastic interest and sympathy for his activities: the thunder of victories, access to the seas, Russian proud pennants on stormy waves, the development of science, industry and art, windows and doors wide open to Europe ...

But it is worth taking a closer and deeper look at the event of “those glorious days”, as sympathy for the king is replaced by feelings that are almost opposite. So Pushkin, starting in 1831 to write the "History of Peter I", was full of stormy delight and wanted to praise the autocrat, as he did in the poems "Poltava" and "The Bronze Horseman".

But a more thorough acquaintance with the deeds of the reformer tsar did not leave a trace of this delight: Pushkin hated Peter and called him nothing more than a Protestant, tyrant and destroyer. And he no longer had the desire to compose laudatory songs in honor of the time when "young Russia matured with the genius of Peter." The book conceived by the poet was never written.

The Polish historian Kazimir Waliszewski almost literally repeated the path of Pushkin in a creative and emotional aspect - from delight to deep disappointment. Having begun to write his work about Peter with a firm conviction of his genius and the special exclusivity of his deeds, he, as he studied historical materials, noticeably cooled off towards his hero, his associates and his transformations.

And although the book about Peter was completed, many unattractive facts from the life of the Russian Tsar, which the author could not omit without questioning his objectivity, seriously distorted the original plan. After reading this book, the reader is presented not with a hero, as Valishevsky wanted, but with a rather mediocre sovereign, an incompetent commander, a dubious reformer and in the highest degree immoral person.

The first Russian historians, M.M. Tatishchev and N.M. Karamzin, did not favor Peter either, the last Russian Emperor Nicholas II treated him badly, preferring Peter's father, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, as a reasonable ruler, cautious in his innovations.

But, on the other hand, one can name a long series of names of those who treated and continue to treat Peter I with a special feeling of sincere admiration and respect: Derzhavin, S.M. Soloviev, V.I. Buganov, N.I. Pavlenko. For them, his services to Russia and history are undeniable.

Viktor Alexandrovich Saulkin, who placed his extensive article “Sovereign Emperor Peter the Great” on the RNL, belongs to the same supporters of Peter I. For him, the most valuable thing about Peter's reforms is that they helped create a strong army, a combat-ready navy and opened the door for Russia to the political affairs of Europe. Realizing at the same time that these reforms were both burdensome and very harsh on the Russian people, Viktor Alexandrovich briefly remarks:

“Of course, the reforms of the Russian public life in contrast to the reform of the army were ambiguous. Some transformations of Peter I caused great harm to people's life. The consequences of some of the mistakes of Tsar Peter were too severe. Sovereigns did not have enough time to correct them Alexander III and Tsar-Martyr Nicholas II. Two last emperor sought to return to Russian life much of the good that existed in Muscovite Russia, but it turned out to be damaged and destroyed by Peter's reforms. The Muscovite kingdom, becoming the Russian Empire, suffered serious losses and losses.

And I would like to say a few words about these losses. If you look closely at the results of Peter's deeds, you involuntarily come to the conclusion that all the victories and achievements of the Tsar the Transformer are crossed out by the losses at the cost of which they were achieved. In essence, all his victories are Pyrrhic victories, which almost led the country to disaster. And if she withstood the blows of these destructive reforms, it was only at the expense of the country's inexhaustible resources and the holy patience of the Russian people.

Associated with the life and death of the great Russians. This includes the death of the son of Ivan the Terrible, Tsarevich Dimitri, and the execution of the last Russian Emperor Nicholas II, and the poisoning of I.V. Stalin. At the same time, the substitution of Peter I - is it a fiction or a historical fact, has been repeatedly discussed by historians and has three different options.

The main versions of the substitution of Peter I

The least conspiratorial hypothesis that Tsar Peter I was replaced by a double was put forward by V. Kukovenko, co-founder historical society the city of Mozhaisk, and I. Danilov, head of the Philosophical Assault project. According to them, during the second amusing "Semenovsky" campaign in 1691, the young tsar was mortally wounded during a horse attack or a skirmish. A similar accident has happened before. A year earlier, during an exercise, a grenade exploded in the hands of a soldier, burning the face of Peter I himself and his ally, General Patrick Gordon. Peter's associates, led by the boyar Fyodor Romodanovsky, had previously noted an undoubted resemblance to the tsar by the Dutch shipbuilder Yaan Mush, a Saardam carpenter who arrived in Russia to build an amusing fleet. F. Romodanovsky and the commander of the opposing amusing army "Generalissimo" I. Buturlin, saving themselves from death penalty, and their relatives from repression, they replaced Peter I with a Dutch master, who was 4 ... 5 years younger than the tsar.

The most convincing and substantiated is the hypothesis proposed by the "overthrowers" of the modern view of historical science and the developers of the "New Chronology" Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences A.T. Fomenko and associate professor of the Moscow State University G.V. Nosovsky. They were the first to note that the official date of Peter's birth did not correspond to the day of his angel. If the king, indeed, was born on May 30, 1672, then he should have been named Isakiy. It was in honor of this name, the real name of the person who replaced the king, that the main church cathedral was named Russian Empire. At the same time, the fact that Russia, starting from 1698 - the year of the return of Peter I from the Great Embassy - was ruled by an impostor, was hinted in a veiled form by the historian P. Milyukov, who wrote an article about the first Russian Emperor for the encyclopedia of Brockhaus and Efron.

The following facts support this hypothesis:

the tsar sent his wife, tsarina Evdokia, who gave birth to his son Alexei, to a monastery during his travels in Europe before returning to Russia;
before the entry of Peter I into Moscow, the remnants of the streltsy army were destroyed, and the streltsy died near Moscow during the battle with an unknown army, under the command of the boyar Shein, about whom no more historical records have been preserved;
before entering Moscow, the Russian autocrat secretly meets with the Polish king and pays him a “contribution” (according to other sources, a “subsidy”) of 1.5 million gold efimki, which was equal to the annual income of the Muscovite state;
returning to Moscow, Peter unsuccessfully tried to find Sophia Paleolog's library, the location of which was known only to persons of royal blood and which Princess Sophia repeatedly visited;
shaving of beards, Western European dancing and entertainment, and the introduction of Western customs began only after the return of the sovereign from the Grand Embassy.

There are two versions of the substitution of Peter I with a double during a trip to Western Europe:

St. Petersburg mathematician Sergei Albertovich Sall believes that the double of the Tsar of Muscovy was a prominent freemason and relative of William of Orange, the first king of England and Scotland and the only representative on the British throne from the Nassau-Oran dynasty;
according to the historian Yevgeny Trofimovich Bayda, the double was either a Swede or a Dane named Isaac (hence St. Isaac's Cathedral) and professed the Lutheran religion.

However, to check the versions about whether the substitution of Peter was a fiction or a historical fact, this event can be resolved quite simply. To do this, it is necessary to take, during the next, planned restoration of the tomb of Peter in the Peter and Paul Cathedral, a particle of genetic material, and it will immediately become clear, the substitutions, as well as the theories about who was the father of the first Russian Emperor- Tsar Alexei Fedorovich or Patriarch Nikon, whose contemporaries slandered about his connection with Peter's mother, Naryshkina Natalya Kirillovna.