Chapter 1. Old maps of St. Petersburg
Chapter 2. Ancient tale in the north of Europe
Chapter 3. Unity and monotony of monumental structures scattered around the world
Chapter 4. Capitol without a column … well, no way, why?
Chapter 5. One project, one architect or cargo cult?
The well-known Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin in the poem "The Bronze Horseman" became the author of several delusions.
Why copper? It's bronze, but as the saying goes, "believe what is written, because you can't cut it out with an ax."
In the author's note to his line "to cut a window to Europe", he directly refers to the original source - the French words of Francesco Algarotti: "Petersburg is a window through which Russia looks to Europe", but sources of mass knowledge such as school textbooks and the notorious Wikipedia, supported by official historians of all stripes and ranks persistently broadcast: "To cut a window to Europe" is a catch phrase from Alexander Pushkin's poem "The Bronze Horseman", characterizing the founding by Peter I of the city of St. Petersburg - the first seaport of the Moscow state ", although the seaport it never appeared in the city during the time of Peter I. The only real seaport as it was, and to this day remains in Kronstadt on the island of Kotlin. Due to a stretch of shallow water 27 nautical miles (47 km.) Petersburg was denied the right to be named "Door" (port - gate,door), at that time it remained just a "window to Europe".
Promotional video:
Another misconception:
In the fifth footnote to the poem "The Bronze Horseman" Pushkin refers to Mitskevich's poem. And the lines from the poem "Monument to Peter the Great" in literal translation read as follows:
“To the first of the kings who created these miracles, Another queen erected a monument.
Already the king, cast in the form of a giant, Sat on the bronze ridge of Bucephala
And I was looking for a place to enter on horseback.
But Peter cannot stand on his own land …"
Mickiewicz for some reason mentions the name of Alexander the Great's favorite horse, although it was known that Peter's favorite horse was Liseta, from which they later made a stuffed animal.
The censor of the poem "The Bronze Horseman" was Tsar Nicholas I himself. For some reason he forbade the use of the word "idol" in relation to Peter I.
Maybe the tsar knew that the rider on horseback (but not Peter) was really once a people's idol?
Here's another coincidence.
Peter I holds his hand so that it is easy to put a spear into it, it would look quite harmonious there.
The horse stepped on the snake with its hind right foot, everything is like a book writes. And the position of the hand and head is not that difficult to edit. Not all monuments have a cloak (cape) from the times of A. Macedon. And this is a completely different hero.
George the Victorious.
… and here is the "Petrovsky" altyn (three kopecks).
But this is a penny of Ivan V Vasilyevich the Terrible.
And here is the seal of Ivan III, known to everyone on Wikipedia.
1497 year.
Another fact is interesting: the authorship of the model of the equestrian statue of Peter was attributed by historians to the sculptor Etienne Falconet in 1768-1770, but the very head of Peter was sculpted by the student of this sculptor, Marie-Anne Collot … Why would it be?
The legend about lightning striking a stone, invented by the guides, is also embarrassing. The very name Thunder-stone appeared, allegedly due to a lightning strike. More precisely, the lightning is used to explain the front granite attachment to the pedestal, which seems to form a very intricate crack.
Surprisingly, the crack runs exactly along the border of various color (chemical and crystalline) granite structures, and the strip of enlarged inclusions also abruptly and unnaturally breaks off at this border.
And the most important thing … The monument has not one such granite insert, but two of them, in front and behind.
We look here.
The historical version says: There was a stone lying on it, lightning struck it, and then, as in a fairy tale, a crack that ran through changed the color, structure, orientation of crystals, even grain size … Believe it? If yes, then the whole fictional history of the city's construction is also true. The added fragment looks more like the result of the restoration after the destruction of the front and rear parts of the monument's pedestal. The whole view of the pedestal, its processing and the wavy slabs laid around it indicate that it once depicted the crest of a wave, and not just a wild rock, but was destroyed.
Perhaps it initially looked something like this:
A sharp stone chip in the front looks very unnatural next to the smooth features of the base, they look more like a sea wave without a crest.
In addition, the snake under the hoof looks more comical than symbolic.
Large scales are closer to dragons.
And a head without scales looks generally unnatural.
They were able to draw the details of the horse and rider delicately, but with the snake the trash came out, maybe the snake is all that Falcone had the strength to do? Although, history says that he did not even cast the snake, it was made by Fyodor Gordeev. From official sources: The model of the equestrian statue of Peter was made by the sculptor Etienne Falcone in 1768-1770. Peter's head was sculpted by his student, Marie-Anne Collot. The snake was fashioned by Fyodor Gordeev according to Falcone's plan. The casting of the statue was carried out under the guidance of the master Emelyan Khailov and was completed in 1778. Architectural planning solutions and general management were carried out by Yu. M. Felten.
Until 1844, in general, no one knew that Catherine gave this monument to Peter I, in the painting by N. M. Vorobyov. there is no sign at all.
Even V. I. Surikov painting my paintings in 1870, I did not see any inscription.
One more nuance is surprising. Peter on this monument, however, as well as on the other, which we will consider below, sits without pants, in a Roman toga, and neither the Russian nobility nor the shipbuilders have ever worn such clothes. The Bronze Horseman's hand position also seems familiar.
Only this is Marcus Aurelius in Rome.
Why would the sovereign-emperor have such an outfit? It is not good for the Russian Autocrat to flaunt without trousers! Moreover, Peter sits on a horse without a stirrup, but what history says: the stirrup was invented in the 4th century. From this we can make an unequivocal conclusion that this rider lived no later than the 4th century, and the statue should also be cast much earlier than in the 18th century.
And when did the sovereign indulge in such weapons?
At the time of Peter 1, there were no swords in the armament of the army, there were sabers.
Hence the question: who armed the Bronze Horseman with a sword?
Does Bucephalus' stance remind you of anything?
This is how A. Macedonian on horseback was always depicted.
And here is a monument to Alexander the Great in Skopje.
A sword, a horse, a cloak, a harness on a horse, and the rider's clothes itself remind you of nothing?
And here is the real Peter 1,
it was in this form that he had to sit on his beloved mare Lisette.
Verse from the author
The Bronze Horseman from a different angle.
(not Pushkin, exactly)
Shining bronze over the Neva, And pulling the loins of the clouds, He is fed up with rainwater, The land is alien to him.
Granite shackles itch
Far from enemy columns …
And Macedonian Sasha again
Goes to ancient Babylon.
From the notes of Buckmeister Ivan Grigorievich, bibliographer of Catherine the Great, "she already had the image of PETER the Great sculpted", which is still preserved, however, this did not satisfy the desired intention. An ordinary pedestal, on which most of these statues are approved, does not mean anything and is not capable of arousing a new reverent thought in the viewer's soul. The monument, erected by Catherine, should correspond to dignity in the noblest and most majestic way. The chosen foot to the sculpted image of the Russian Iroi should be a wild and impenetrable stone, on which he is represented galloping on a horse with an outstretched right hand. A new, bold and expressive thought! The stone itself as an adornment should remind of the then state of the state and of the difficulties,koi the creator thereof, when making his intentions, had to overcome. How beautifully the chosen allegory resembles its subject is proved by the fact that PYOTR the Great had a seal on which he was depicted as a stonecutter carving a statue of a woman, that is, Russia, from a stone. The calm position of the rider depicts the fearless courage and spirit of the Iroi, who senses his majesty and is not afraid of any danger. The gallop of a furious horse that reaches the top of a stone mountain will show the speed of his affairs and successful success in the changes made by his tireless work in his power. The right outstretched hand is a sign of the commanding one, blessing his faithful subjects and of the welfare of his possessions of the baking Father of the Fatherland. "- this is a quote from the "Historical news of the sculptured equestrian image of Peter the Great, composed by the collegiate assessor and librarian Imp. Of the Academy of Sciences by Ivan Bakmeister / Translated by Nikolai Karandashev. - SPb.: Type. Shnor, 1786 ". The original text was in German.
What this text says, it says that the monument apparently bent over (or fell altogether), as they say, was in disrepair, which is why it was sent for restoration, as a result of which it was subject to a small alteration, namely: the head and right hand were sawed off, and completely new parts, of a different shape, were soldered to it.
Here is a version invented for posterity, which fits so well into academic work.
An excerpt from a letter from Falcone to Catherine II:
Author Kaganovich A. The Bronze Horseman. The history of the creation of the monument. - 2nd ed., Add. - L.: Art, 1982. p. 150. It is quite a "suitable document" for posterity, who may have all sorts of questions about the presence of a seam in the head and shoulder area on the solid casting of the monument …
The text below this picture also speaks for itself.
The pedestal also needed restoration, it was necessary to update the fallen off parts, a large piece in the front and a smaller piece in the back.
I was greatly puzzled by another incident, see for yourself.
The Russian emperor would be more suited to his famous cocked hat, he not only did not wear laurel wreaths, but also did not allow paintings with his image in this form during his lifetime.
So Peter is on horseback or not Peter?
Whom do they still like to portray all over the world like that?
(frame from the well-known film)
I can't get past another drawing
The so-called St. Geogios.
George the Victorious. Sculptor. N. S. Pimenov. 1856 Hermitage.
Does nothing remind you of the pedestal to the monument?
Illustrated catalog of the Art Department of the All-Russian Exhibition in Moscow, 1882. Part 1.
As a schoolboy, I came across a history book, or rather a historical novel, where the author tried, taking as a basis the legend of the missing golden monument to Alexander the Great, to find his trace (it was not all gold, only armor, helmet and spear, the rest of the parts were made of bronze). It ended there with the fact that the monument, during transportation from Babylon, drowned somewhere in the area of about. Malta. Or maybe you swam? Why was he taken there? Who drove him? The book said that the carriers were the knights of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem (Maltese Cross). It happened exactly at the end of the 17th century.
Let's remember the story: In 1798, when Napoleon I captured Malta during an expedition to Egypt, the knights of the order appealed to the Russian Emperor Paul I with a request to assume the rank of Grand Master of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem, to which the latter agreed. At the very end of 1798, the Russian Emperor Paul I was proclaimed Grand Master of the Order of Malta. So, what I am leading to: at the end of the 17th century, the monument to A. Macedon disappears, and in the middle of the 18th century, an updated monument to Peter 1 appears. Or, before the renovation, it looked exactly as in the picture above? Another nuance, this warrior in Roman armor does not kill a snake, as we are used to, but a griffin - a symbol of Great Tartary.
What is it for?
Drawing from an album of 1833.
Remains of building materials that were used for repairs have not yet been removed.
History does not hide this: the head of Peter was sculpted by the student of the sculptor E. Falcone, Marie Anne Collot. The snake was fashioned by Fyodor Gordeev according to Falcone's plan. The casting of the fragments of the statue was carried out under the guidance of master Emelyan Khailov and was completed in 1778. Architectural and planning decisions and general management were carried out by Yu. M. Felten … and below the signature: The author of the monument is Etienne Falnone. Interesting, huh?
Falconet, who had never had to do such work himself, refused to finish the monument himself and waited for the arrival of the French master B. Ersman. The foundry worker, accompanied by three apprentices, arrived on May 11, 1772, having with him everything necessary to guarantee success: "earth, sand, clay …". However, the long-awaited master could not fulfill the requirements of the sculptor and was soon fired at Felten's insistence. Ersman simply refused to deal with the task assigned to him. From that moment on, all the preparatory work for the casting was carried out by Falcone himself. To assess the tension of the situation and the relations of the characters, it is necessary to quote a letter from the sculptor dated November 3, 1774 to Catherine II, calling for her patronage: “Most Merciful Empress, at the beginning of last month, Mr. Betskoy ordered me through Felten to write my demands regarding the completion of the casting (here it is necessary to read "alterations") of the statue, although this formality seemed to me unnecessary, nevertheless I immediately sent a letter from which I am attaching a copy, since then I have not received an answer … Without your august patronage, I am at the mercy of a man who hates me more every day, and if Your Majesty does not want to see me more, then I would have to live here worse than any newcomer who finally finds a patron … "Without your august patronage, I am at the mercy of a man who hates me more every day, and if Your Majesty does not want to see me more, then I would have to live here worse than any newcomer who finally finds a patron … "Without your august patronage, I am at the mercy of a man who hates me more every day, and if Your Majesty does not want to see me more, then I would have to live here worse than any newcomer who finally finds a patron …"
Here is what Falcone himself wrote about the monument: “My monument will be simple … I will confine myself only to the statue of this hero, whom I do not interpret either as a great commander or as a winner, although he, of course, was both. The personality of the creator-legislator is much higher …”. Here at the expense of the "great commander, and the winner" Falcone clearly let slip. To make the idea more accurate, the sculptor engraved the inscription “Sculpted and cast by Etienne Falconet, Parisian of 1778” on one of the folds of the Bronze Horseman's cloak.
These were the passions that raged then, but the attempt to falsify the origin of the monument, thanks to the poem of the same name by Pushkin, was a success for all hundred percent.
Read the continuation here.
Author: ZigZag
