Witsen, Custine, Horsey - these people had a reputation that many others do not have to envy. Therefore, it is sad to see when, after seeing any criticism or mention of unpleasant events in our history, the author is heaped with reproaches, called an enemy of Russia, a spy, etc.
Of course, nothing can be taken for granted. Sources are often lost, translations are inaccurate. But we need to read, search, compare, and the more information we receive, the richer and clearer our understanding of things and events, understanding of the topic. Many of Horsey's messages are confirmed by other sources, but the format of the article does not allow to go deeper into the analysis of each specific case.
To get interested in the topic - this is precisely the main task of the first part, which I set for myself. Not to discredit Ivan the Terrible, not to drive him into despondency with a list of endless meannesses and scenes of cruel bloodshed. Make your own opinion. There are both books and audio books. If we really want to consider ourselves people who understand, at least a little versed, it is necessary to get acquainted with various sources.
About Jerome Horsey - Eremey Ulyanov
Almost two decades - from 1573 to 1591, Gorsey was in Russia on business and diplomatic service.
Five years before the accession to the throne of Elizabeth Tudor, a "Trading Company for the Discovery of Countries, Islands, States and Possessions, Still Unknown and Not Connected by Sea" was founded in London. London merchants, led by the mayor of London, George Barn, raised £ 6,000 and equipped them with three ships: Good Hope, Good Hope, Edward Good Enterprise. The expedition had to find a way from Western Europe to the eastern countries - China and India - the way to the fabulous eastern riches, free from the Portuguese and Spanish "lords of the seas".
Seal of the Muscovy Company.
Promotional video:
Richard Chancellor managed to reach the mouth of the Dvina on the ship "Eduard Good Enterprise", from where, as an envoy of the English king, he was sent to Moscow and solemnly received by Ivan the Terrible. This is how the sea road from England to Muscovy was "opened", albeit previously known, but not used for direct trade flights. The information brought by Chancellor, a sailor, ambassador and merchant, turned out to be so convincing, and the charter given by Ivan IV on the right to free trade of the British in the Muscovite state was so tempting that the "Trading Company …" hurried to get from Queen Mary a charter for the exclusive right to trade with Muscovy. In 1555, a special "Moscow company" of British merchants was created, which monopolized the Moscow market.
Almost the entire set of British notes about Muscovy are the works of figures connected in one way or another with the Moscow company. The most significant are the notes of the first sea-going merchants Hugh Willoughby, Richard Chancellor, diplomats Thomas Randolph, Anthony Jenkinson, Giles Fletcher, and Jerome Horsey. Among them there are also dry official documents - reports, letters, but most of the evidence left behind is tracts and notes of travelers who, having visited an unfamiliar country, rush to share their impressions, observations and advice with those who are still facing such enterprises.
Chamber of the old English court in Moscow.
Horsey came from an old Dorsetshire family. His father, William Horsey (hence, by the way, the name Yeremey Ulyanov, given to Horsey in official Russian embassy documents), was the brother of Sir Edward Horsey, who was very famous at the court of Elizabeth.
Knowing Russian, Gorsey attracted the attention of the Moscow government. In 1580, he, who was then the manager of the Moscow office of the Company, was sent to Queen Elizabeth on a secret and important mission.
The siege of Pskov by the troops of Stefan Batory.
The protracted Livonian War required large expenses. Russia was in dire need of military supplies: gunpowder, saltpeter, copper, lead, etc. Horsey had to negotiate with his government on the delivery of them from England. And it is important to know this before claiming that what Gorsey wrote is a lie and invention for the sake of a "small and provincial" northern kingdom. Horsey, risking his life, makes his way to England and, having received what was required, returns to the war-torn Muscovy with 13 ships loaded with goods demanded by the tsar.
From that time on, his position at the royal court became almost exclusive: he was an important official of the British office of the Company in Moscow; he is known by prominent Russian figures, boyars Ivan Fedorovich Mstislavsky, Moscow neighbors of the English courtyard Nikita Romanovich Yuriev and Prince Ivan Ivanovich Golitsyn. At this time, the king himself patronizes Gorsey.
In September 1585 Gorsey was again sent by the Russian government to England with the news of the accession of Fyodor Ivanovich. Neither the complaints of the hapless ambassador Jerome Baus, who was expelled from Russia after the death of Ivan the Terrible, nor the Baus-inspired denunciation of Finch could undermine Horsey's credit in England. In the summer of 1586 he returned to Russia, fulfilling the delicate orders of his new patron Boris Godunov.
He who does nothing makes no mistakes. There is no doubt that Horsey was not sinless either. Then, the successful resolution of any issue or case for one is often a loss and miscalculation for another, and the number of envious people is only growing.
When, in August of the following 1587, Gorsey again came to England as an envoy of the Russians, in his homeland a stream of accusations and complaints from the "servants" and merchants of the Moscow Company fell upon him. He was accused of using his position in Russia for personal gain, that he launched trading operations to the detriment of the Company and its employees, thereby undermining the national interests of England.
If you know and take into account these events, then it becomes clear: once in England they considered him almost a Russian spy, and not vice versa. But I promised, and readers are waiting, in this, second part, to hear good things about Tsar Ivan IV.
Tsar Ivan Vasilievich the Pious
I would not like to repeat what everyone already knows, but if you please:
Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich ruled for 51 years. Horsey mentions that Ivan IV conquered Polotsk and many other cities and fortresses that previously belonged to the Polish crown, he also conquered many lands, cities and fortresses in the eastern lands of Livonia and in other possessions of the kings of Sweden and Poland; he conquered the kingdoms of Kazan and Astrakhan, all the regions and numerous peoples of the Nogai and Circassian Tatars and other peoples close to them, on both sides of the famous Volga River and even south to the Caspian Sea. He conquered the Siberian kingdom and all the regions adjacent to it from the North.
Thus, he significantly expanded his power in all directions and thereby strengthened a populated and numerous country, conducting extensive trade and exchange with all peoples representing different types of goods of their countries, as a result, not only did his income and crown income increase, but he greatly enriched him cities and provinces.
But what turned out to be good for Russia, you will not believe it, is still a fertile ground for the cultivation of terry Russophobia. The military campaigns of Ivan the Terrible, and Ivan the Terrible is not Grozny, but disgusting, disgusting, terrible, serve for some as confirmation of the alleged innate Russian bloodlust.
Horsey writes that the Russian possessions became so vast and great that they could hardly be ruled by one general government and had to disintegrate again into separate principalities and possessions, but under the monarch's sovereign hand they remained united, which led him to a power that surpassed all neighboring rulers.
The king reduced the ambiguities and inaccuracies in their legislation and judicial procedures, introducing the most convenient and simple form of written laws, understandable and binding for everyone, so that now anyone could conduct their business without any assistant, and also challenge illegal extortions in the royal court without deferral.
Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich established and promulgated a single confession, teaching and worship in the church for all, according to the doctrine of the three symbols, or Orthodoxy, which is closest to the apostolic charter used in churches.
Horsey writes that the Greek church, due to apostasy and strife, was subject to decline and error in the most important: in the essence of doctrines and in the administration of worship. Because of this, the tsar separated the Moscow spiritual administration from the Greek church and, accordingly, from the need to send donations to this church and receive letters from there.
The tsar sharply rejected and rejected the doctrine of the pope, considering it as the most erroneous of the existing in the Christian world: it pleases the pope's lust for power, invented with the aim of preserving his supreme hierarchical power, which no one allowed him to; the tsar is amazed that individual Christian princes recognize his supremacy, the priority of church power over secular power.
During his reign, he built over 40 stone churches, richly decorated and decorated inside, with heads covered with gilding from pure gold. He built over 60 monasteries and monasteries, donating bells and decorations and donating contributions.
He built a high bell tower of cut stone inside the Kremlin, called the Annunciation bell tower, with thirty great and euphonic bells on it, which serves all those cathedrals and magnificent churches located around; the bells ring together every holiday (and there are many such days), and also very sadly at every midnight service.
Finishing the story of his piety, Horsey cites one memorable act, calling it "a merciful act." To me such a "act" seems in no way merciful, but still; in 1575, following a pestilence, a great famine began, destroying the best people. Cities, streets, and roads were packed with crooks, idle beggars and feigned cripples; in such a difficult time it was impossible to put an end to it. All of them were told that they could receive alms from the king on the appointed day in Sloboda. Of the several thousand who came, 700 people - the most savage deceivers and scoundrels - were killed with a blow to the head and thrown into a large lake to catch fish; the rest, the weakest, were assigned to monasteries and hospitals, where they received help.
During the reign of Ivan the Terrible in Russia, the first border charter in history was created - "The verdict on the stanitsa and guard service" (1571). By order of the tsar, the first border outposts were created on the border of the Russian lands, which were supposed to warn the tsar about the raids of nomads. Introduced a system of epidemiological cordons at the borders and quarantine.
The king, among many other similar acts of his, built during the reign of 155 fortresses in different parts of the country, installing guns there and placing military detachments. He built 300 cities, called "pits," one to two miles long on vacant land, giving each settler a piece of land where he could keep as many fast horses as needed for public service. Read about the pits in the article About "bast shoes" and medieval logistics.
Tsar Ivan IV also built a strong, vast, beautiful Kitaygorodskaya wall of stone around Moscow, reinforcing it with cannons and guards.
He created the first Printing House, contributed to the organization of book printing in Moscow.
It is believed that the years of the reign of Ivan the Terrible were marked by a boom in the growth of the country's population. During the years of his reign, the number of subjects of the Russian tsar increased from 8-9 million to 12-13 million. And this is due to the fact that John created a very good standard of living for the people. This was achieved through the development of bourgeois and peasant communities, into which almost the entire society of the lower classes was divided.
Under John, the Facial Chronicle Code was erected. It is known that the tsar had a particular weakness for chess. Ivan the Terrible was known in Europe as a man of outstanding intelligence and erudition.
Ivan Vasilievich looked different
In the first part, apparently, no one noticed that the paintings and engravings depicting Tsar Ivan IV do not fit the text in any way. They depict the king in a completely different way from what we are used to. I did it on purpose. It is impossible to see in these noble faces a tyrant and tormentor, a polygamist and a traitor. There are questions about the appearance of the king. For example, Horsey writes that the tsar was of a pleasant appearance, had good facial features, a high forehead, and a sharp voice.
The famous scientist Mikhail Mikhailovich Gerasimov, an anthropologist and sculpture, the author of the method of restoring the external appearance of a person on the basis of skeletal remains, as we know, recreated the appearance of Tsar Ivan IV. Gerasimov's method is recognized all over the world and has long been used in forensic science.
Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible (1530-1584). Reconstruction by M. M. Gerasimov.
But in the work of Gerasimov, we do not see the beauty that Gorsey wrote about, and absolutely nothing similar to those portraits of the tsar that are given by me in the first part.
Here is another, rare work depicting Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich:
Tsar Ivan Vasilievich (1530-1584).
Of course, it can be assumed that the artists, they say, painted portraits of the tsar without seeing him personally, according to some stories that Gorsey flattered Ivan Vasilyevich's appearance or he had peculiar ideas about beauty. Weak and tense statements!
Let me remind you of a case with another work of Gerasimov - Tamerlane.
Mikhail Mikhailovich, restoring his sculptural portrait, initially received an appearance that was not Asian, not Mongoloid. Convex, not flat face. Gerasimov in his book "Fundamentals of face reconstruction from the skull" reports the following: "The discovered skeleton belongs to a strong man, relatively tall for a Mongol (about 170 cm)."
And the cut of Tamerlane's eyes turns out to be not at all Mongoloid: "However, the significant protrusion of the root of the nose and the relief of the upper part of the brow indicate that the Mongolian fold of the eyelid itself is relatively weak." Further: "Contrary to the accepted custom of shaving his head, by the time of his death, Timur had relatively long hair."
You have already seen various paintings and prints depicting Tamerlane on the tart-aria.info website and in other sources. I will not repeat them here. Here is, perhaps, another engraving, not so famous:
Tamerlane. (JW Cook, engraving, IXX century).
If Timur is a Mongol, then the hair should be black, but in reality it turned out that Timur's hair is thick, straight, gray-red in color, with a predominance of dark brown or red. Gerasimov wrote that the hair of the eyebrows was worse preserved, but nevertheless, from these remnants it is not difficult to imagine and reproduce the general shape of the eyebrow. Individual hairs are well preserved … Their color is dark brown … Timur wore a long mustache, and not trimmed over the lip, as was customary by the faithful followers of Sharia … Timur's small thick beard had a wedge-shaped shape. Her hair is coarse, almost straight, thick, of a bright brown (red) color, with significant gray … Even a preliminary study of beard hair under a binocular convinces that this reddish-reddish color is her natural, and not dyed with henna, as historians described. But,Gerasimov makes changes to the work, and as a result we see Tamerlane - a Mongoloid. The reasons for this are not difficult to guess.
I apologize in advance for such a thought, but who can swear that this did not happen with the work to recreate the appearance of Tsar Ivan IV?
No, there are no claims to Gerasimov as a scientist, but I think that when it comes to questions of history, laws other than scientific ones come into play.
All portraits were painted after the death of Ivan the Terrible. The only lifetime portrait of Ivan the Terrible is known to have been restored at the IKI RAS.
Photo: IKI RAN.
And here it looks like a Mongoloid, with a "potato" nose, which generally goes against all the known images of the king.
After all, where did we get an idea of the appearance of Tsar Ivan IV except from films and TV series? First of all, it is the reconstruction of Gerasimov, well, and the painting by Ilya Repin.
The curse of Ivan Repinsky
In his autobiographical story "Far - Close" I. Ye. Repin recalls that the idea of the painting originated in him in connection with the March events of 1881 (meaning the explosion of a bomb by the People's Will I. I. Grinevetsky, the fragments of which killed Tsar Alexander II). Another time, the idea to paint a picture "Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan" came to the artist's mind when he was returning from a concert of N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov. "His musical trilogy - love, power and revenge, - the artist later said, - so captivated me that I irresistibly wanted to depict in painting something similar to the power of his music."
The artist struggled with the painting as if it were a serious illness. Subsequently I. E. Repin recalled: “I felt scared for minutes. I turned away from this picture, hid it. She made the same impression on my friends. But something drove me to this picture, and I worked on it again."
It is known that in fact, Tsarevich John died of a serious illness. But Ivan the Terrible was finally rehabilitated only in 1963, when the tombs of him and Tsarevich John were opened in the Archangel Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. During exhumation, the version of poisoning was confirmed, but not with arsenic, but with mercury - its amount in the remains exceeded the norm compatible with life by 32 times.
Alexander III forbade the exhibition of Repin's painting to the public. Tretyakov was ordered to hide it away and not show it to anyone. There is a known case of an attack by a maniac who cut a picture with a knife. Repin's own hand atrophied, the sitter, who posed for him in the form of Grozny, died. Damn it, in a word.
It is known that many of Repin's contemporaries who saw the painting "Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan on November 16, 1581" were outraged. Even then, the tale of the murder was not taken seriously by anyone. But the work was finished, the painting was bought by Tretyakov and placed in his museum. Further, the picture has been replicated for decades on the pages of magazines and textbooks, firmly rooting in the minds of many generations the image of Ivan as a maniac killer.
All this is, to say the least, strange. Firstly, the very fact of the tsar's murder of his son even at the time of Repin's painting was very controversial, the artist does not want to paint the picture, the tsar orders the picture to be removed, and at the suggestion of the Chief Prosecutor of the Synod in 1885 the picture was removed from the exhibition, but the canvas is all it remains to this day in the main museum of the country, no matter what.
So, the image of the crazy king-killer, the old man with bulging eyes, lives and grows stronger.
Horsey wrote in Russian
There is an interesting version that deserves attention: Horsey was an Englishman and wrote his essay in English. And with what letters did he write it? The question may seem strange at first glance. The answer seems to be obvious. Of course, in Latin - those that are still used in English today. However, this is not at all so obvious. Moreover, a vivid trace has survived, showing that the original text of his Notes - later edited by historians of the 17th century - was most likely written in Cyrillic.
Horsey, by the way, writes the following: “Let us now turn to the usurper, who in their language is called the“tyrant-murderer”; translator's comment: "The words" tyrant-murderer "Horsey transmits in English, but in Cyrillic"
The question is, why is the English expression written in Cyrillic by Horsey? We are talking about English, not Russian expression. If there was a Russian expression here, then there would be nothing surprising in writing it in Cyrillic. But English?
The answer suggests itself. Horsey's original text was probably written in Cyrillic, and then a later editor rewrote it in Latin letters. But in this insidious place, the editor missed. It was difficult not to miss. Indeed, Horsey writes: "called in their language …". That is - according to the meaning of the text - in Russian. After such words, it is quite natural to expect some kind of Russian word or expression. So, obviously, the editor understood this passage. But it was not clear what Russian word Gorsey used. There is no such word in dictionaries. What to do? I had to leave it written down in Cyrillic. That is, simply copy the original text of Horsey letter by letter. Probably, the editor thought, Gorsey used here some very rare Russian expression. But, this expression was English! It was very difficult to suspect this. Therefore, two English words in Gorsey's Notes remained written in Russian letters. Raising the suspicion that the rest of the text of his Notes was originally written in the same way.
Ivan's main enemies are Tartars and Moguls
Horsey writes about the Crimean Tatars as almost the main and main enemy of Muscovy, with whom they fought unsuccessfully for many years, paid a shameful tribute, endured raids and pogroms.
To the credit of Tsar Ivan IV, Horsey claims that he freed himself from the slave extortions that he and his predecessors paid annually to the great king of Scythia, the Khan of the Crimean Tatars (the Chan of Crim Tartor), sending him, however, a small bribe to defend himself from their annual raids. Thus, withdrawing the Crimean Tatars from the Scythians. Moreover, he mentions in one place that the Crimean Tatars, who did not know guns and pistols before, were scared to death by the shooting cavalry, which they had not seen before, and shouted: "Get away from these new devils who came with their throwing puffs" … And this, they say, greatly amused the king.
Well, what kind of Crimean Tatars? Ivan IV has guns and cannons, he holds half of Europe in fear, captures cities and fortresses one after another and at the same time suffers raids by some archers, some mythical hordes of Crimean Tatars?
The answer is simple, take a look at the section about Tartaria on our website, although I am sure what is hidden under the "Crim Tartor" you already understand.
I will also share this thought: everyone has heard about the library of Ivan the Terrible. But what if no one hid it, and the books, like under Peter the Great, were brought to Moscow and destroyed to hide any mention of Tartary and real history? Otherwise, why hide this library at all? There is a rumor that the king has some kind of library where he collects books from all over the world, that's all. If so, then it is useless to search for the library of Ivan the Terrible.
The main thing
Tsar Ivan Vasilievich is not an unambiguous figure. Fomenko and Nosovsky believe that several real people, and not one, were put into the image of the tsar. And this, so vigorously criticized version, again explains such a leapfrog in the existing images of Tsar Ivan. They seem to have different people everywhere. Why don't we observe this with portraits of the same English Queen Elizabeth and other monarchs?
In general, it is interesting with what persistence we prove that our land lay for hundreds of years under some kind of slave yoke, the kings are completely freaks, perverts, psychopaths. In contrast, others reject all historical sources and facts, hover in some rosy fantasies akin to blind faith. Some demolish monuments, others erect them, but the truth is somewhere in the middle, as it usually happens.
And the main question - "Where did people get their craving for history"? How many books and articles have been written about the same Ivan IV!? How many more will there be! events, like Tsar Ivan, are dead, their children and grandchildren, and the children of their grandchildren are dead. Whatever was there, everything passed, disappeared, and we shouldn't even care. What do we care about these distant dead people? them to write, shoot films, erect monuments, think, argue? For what? Let me be right, and Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich did not look as it is believed, Gorsey wrote in Russian, Crimean Tatars are parts of the Tartar kingdom. subconsciously we feel some kind of anxiety, some kind of untruth, a secret, having solved which we could understand first of all something in ourselves, who we are and where we are going, and why? Maybe this is the case?
Author: Sil2