A small remark - the following text will be especially difficult to perceive without watching this video.
Maybe the information in the video is fundamentally wrong, but the presentation of the material makes you think and try to delve into different archives. Thanks to the author for the job! It's good when someone has time to make such films. Everything written below is some of my short thoughts that were born thanks to watching this video.
I will not touch upon whether Napoleon was real. Did they iron the Kremlin with nuclear bombs? These versions are remarkable in their own way. Moreover, I do not understand those who perceive a piece of information as a vector of movement. When it seems that now several people are digging in different directions at the same time, and it seems that individually each has its own story, but if you look closely, there are points of contact, and the overall picture is generally third, sort of like.
The general meaning of the video (the author of the video does not say directly, but hints) - Napoleon, in alliance with Alexander1, crushed a certain third force, the center of which was Moscow. But, judging by the watercolor by Fedor Alekseev (taken from here), the center is very poor and abandoned, overgrown - in 1800.
Promotional video:
Who was wrong. Artist or Napoleon. An artist who saw, in principle, a half-abandoned center (and what can we say about the outskirts then) or Napoleon, who was so eager to visit Moscow, which was the most important and significant city for him. But significant cities don't look so overgrown.
There was a little time and I went over the main points, which the author of the video focused on. Of course, 90% of the information from the video is conclusions drawn from some pictures and engravings. Only Napoleon's letter to Alexander is perhaps one of the cornerstones. All the rest - at a gallop across Europe. Well, I also love the gallop))).
There are a number of engravings depicting scenes from the capture of Moscow by Napoleon. And they are all unusual. As if not the Kremlin in the pictures. And in general it is clear that the inhabitants are almost greeting the winner.
So, the enemy came from the side of the Borovitsky gate and enters the Kremlin.
Such people poured out to look at the invader. In general, it is clear that the residents did not hide much, but accepted the winner as expected. Although panic reigned in the OI and all the aristocracy disappeared to hell. Of course, a dome with an unusual cross is visible. The walls of the Kremlin are like in medieval European castles.
And one detail about the combat arms. 3 horsemen - Cossack in the middle.
That he had forgotten there.
Then all this is set on fire.
Yeah, the dome with the unusual cross is burning brightly. However, there is a second, almost similar engraving, where everything is mirrored and the dome flies into drabadan.
All these pictures, by the way, date from the post-war years.
They show that the French are always dragging a cannon and a coffin to the Kremlin. What's in the box? Or are they already taking out what? For me, this is how a color picture reflects the real state of affairs in terms of the orientation of objects and buildings in space.
This is the box.
But, in addition to the above Cossack, some citizens with beards, and in their hands are axes. They look like boyars from the chambers.
But they, too, are marching in formation with the French invaders. And they also enter the fortress or simply parade near the Kremlin.
If the author of the video indicates that yes, there are such men in the engravings, with beards, who, according to the OI (official history), were not accepted into the regular tsarist troops. And in the video a whole detachment with pikes is fighting the French, then bearded men are marching with axes. Well, it turns out that the defenders of Moscow resigned themselves and decided to parade with the French. Rave? And who are they then?
The next picture is a continuous Middle Ages and if not for the Verkhospassky Cathedral, then the area will not be recognized. The theme is the same - the French are entering Moscow.
And a small detail in the lower right corner. A Frenchman is chasing bearded men with a saber. Well, great. However, the next rider in a simple hat and with a saber also chops some men.
Beat your own so that strangers are afraid. Whom did they finish off?
Well, the picture - Napoleon reels.
In the background bada boom. Everyone is unhappy. The prisoner doesn't care.
As for the dome with an unusual cross. I would not dwell on it - it's just a symbol, not a guide to everything and everyone. Many crosses in the lithograph of 1729.
In details.
It's just that since the entry of Peter 1 these symbols have been systematically destroyed. Centuries later, the Bolsheviks also smashed churches and demolished domes with bells. And give them another 100 years - now we would not understand why there are any crosses on the domes of modern churches and temples. Everything would be destroyed.
In his video, the author of the video complains that all the maps and other archival data arose after the writing of Tolstoy's novel. At best, a decade after the war. The author asks - why? That maps of the battles were published much later than 1812. And in general, the apogee of the greatness of the war was only in 1912, when the lion's share of the archives, memoirs and correspondence was published. But it seems to me that there is nothing surprising in this. Data from the Finnish War of 1939 are still inaccessible. It was not customary to talk about the Second World War almost until the 60s, 70s. Were you generally interested in what exactly happened in our country from the victory of 1945 to the death of Stalin? Incidentally, this is a kind of information vacuum in our recent history. Although all information is available.
My grandfather tried to bypass the subject of the Second World War almost always. Grandma mentioned only rare details. And even now all sorts of archives are not completely open for public access. So I do not see here a conspiracy of the Freemasons, that data about 1812 began to appear after some time.
To understand the vector of movement, you need to keep in mind the fact of Paul's murder. Let me remind you that according to some studies, Paul was going to restore the empire of the tsars, which was interrupted by Alexei Mikhailovich. But just as Mikhalych was killed with Western hands - for he was tired of oppression, so Paul ended his days, being killed. I am sure that with the same Western hands. We add here Stepanenko's theory that the last bright flood took place during the time of Catherine II (he seems to point to 1775, I may not remember exactly), which significantly weakened the kings and khans east of the Kazan kingdom. They were simply destroyed by the elements.
Apparently that is why, by the way, Catherine II loved to travel so much. Yeah - essentially re-exploring lands that were devastated after the disaster.
But back to Alexander1. Apparently, Pavel succeeded greatly in a short 5 years, and therefore, some parts of the country were on the verge of secession from St. Petersburg, because there were confidants, apparently little controlled by the Center, i.e. Peter. It's about Moscow, yeah.
Comrade Rostopchin has a good biography. Dig and dig. And to dig along with the state of affairs in France, with which, apparently, everything was not bad. On the surface of the wiki - “Rostopchin contributed to the rapprochement of Russia with Republican France and the cooling of relations with Great Britain. His memorandum, confirmed by Paul on October 2, 1800, determined Russia's foreign policy in Europe until the death of the emperor. The union with France, according to Rostopchin, should have led to the partition of the Ottoman Empire "and" In the interval between the favor at the court of Paul I and the appointment in 1812 to the post of Moscow governor-general, while living in his estate Voronovo and in Moscow, he wrote a large number satirical comedies. After reading it in a circle of close friends, the author personally destroyed what he had written."
I read comedies and immediately destroyed it - does it look like anything?))
In other words, if Paul and Ludovig were going to reunite the empire of the tsars, then at the beginning of the 19th century everything changed and only Rostopchin remained from the old guard, abandoned to the mercy of fate in 1812. But we remember very well such inconsistencies when the Russians stormed the Oreshek fortress (the story of the conquest of Peter 1), in which, as it turned out, there were Swedes with Russian names and surnames. Those. in fact, the Russians conquered the Russian fortress. So, Rostopchin was appointed governor of Moscow exactly for military operations. But, apparently, he was already the head of the Muscovy (if I may say so). After all, how else can you comment on such a strange appointment to such a high post in wartime. And therefore Kutuzov did not interfere in the war near the Kremlin - he fulfilled the will of the Westernizers, who destroyed any mention of the empire of the Russian tsars. No wonder Kutuzov's dad worked during the construction of the Petrovsky dock. Those. it was impossible to take Moscow with the hands of Alexander1 - Napoleon, another matter.
By the way, here is his generally accepted image (Rostopchin).
And of course, the French library sees everything a little differently. The face too, but the attire from a completely different era.
One of the interesting engravings with Rostopchin, which I came across like this.
The signature to it reads:
The French enter Moscow, the capital of the Russian Empire.
Dada, the author of the video, that at the beginning of this story, noticed this strange fact (about the capital), though in a different picture. There's something about it. It's like our Omsk governor recently said that the son of Ivan the Terrible died on the way from Moscow to St. Petersburg. But we know for sure that in 1812 St. Petersburg was always the capital.
But then it is described (under an engraving with Rostopchin) that Moscow is the richest and most beautiful city, larger than Paris. And they tried to keep the Kremlin intact for the entry of Napoleon. Rostopchin himself goes to meet the invader. But a certain dissonance arises - if Alekseev's watercolors show us an overgrown Kremlin, a god-forsaken city. On the engravings and descriptions of 1812, the Kremlin looks like the richest and most beautiful city with which nothing can be compared. Someone is lying.
Logically, Moscow and the Kremlin should be as Alekseev depicted in watercolors. After all, the empire of the kings was defeated long ago (back in the 17th century). The flood swept in the second half of the 18th century. Moscow has essentially been devastated several times since the time of Peter. But why did the French get the impression that the Kremlin is still the richest and most beautiful land? So there was something to compare with. This means that the safety of Moscow was higher than that of European cities. I cannot explain otherwise. And this island, Moscow, which has been preserved since the times of the Quietest, it was decided to iron it out to zero. So that nothing is reminded of the Old Believer rule. And the task was completed - the Kremlin, which we see, is for the most part a remake. Structures inside the walls - only a few have survived from the time of Grozny.
Rostopchin himself rides in an old Russian outfit, with the head of some animal on the rump of a horse
Well, apparently Napoleon really was an instrument of suppression of the rebellious republic in the outback of Russia. The cold prevented his actions, but the whole picture was folded. Russia remained under the control of the West until Nikolai2. But like Mikhalych, like Pavel, Nikolai2 was killed and everything seemed to be returning to the circles of the western rails again, but something went wrong and we got the Second World War. But that's another story.
Well, and why nobody can be trusted. Here are pictures from the same angle of the early 19th century (1820-1840).