1571, 1610, 1812: how many times in fact the enemy “took” Moscow

"Before Moscow, pending the deputation of the boyars." Vereshchagin V.V. (1891–1892)

Recently, our "friends" around the world, and especially among the most zealous "brothers", have experienced a sharp exacerbation of manic-Russophobic psychosis on historical grounds. Either the self-titled “leader of the Crimean Tatar people” who didn’t even manage to get into the current structure of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, Chubarov suggests “celebrating the 450th anniversary of Moscow’s burning”, or the deputy of the Lithuanian Seimas with an unpronounceable surname comes up with the idea of ​​organizing celebrations of “joining” our capital of "republican Polish-Lithuanian troops" during the Time of Troubles ...

To people who are not very knowledgeable in the history of Russia (and, alas, there are many of them not only abroad, but also in our Fatherland), it may indeed seem that the Golden-headed one who didn’t “take”, didn’t capture, did not betray fire and a sword. Without waiting for new delights in this regard, generated by the obviously unhealthy imagination of the haters of our country, it’s worthwhile to sort out in detail the dates that they are trying to pass off today as “historical milestones”, “shameful” for our ancestors and glorious for their own. And at the same time - and with something else, about which these figures prefer to persistently keep silent.

"I burn and waste everything ..."

According to the chronicles, these are the words that the message of the Crimean Khan Devlet-Gerey addressed to sovereign John Vasilyevich, who went down in Russian history under the name Grozny, in which he substantiates his attack on the Russian Kingdom. It is about the very “burning of Moscow” with which Chubarov is wandering today, trying to present him as the “great military victory of the Crimean Tatars”. The great thing about this is that there was no victory! From the word "absolutely." What happened? Cowardice, meanness, betrayal and brutal cruelty of the next adversaries who came to our land. By the way, they subsequently had to pay for it by the fullest measure, by the way, but we will not get ahead of ourselves. Let's start in order. First of all, the year 1571 was not just unsuccessful for our Motherland, but, one might say, catastrophic. Several years before this, droughts, crop failures, and epidemics tormented her. All this, of course, led to a significant reduction in the population, including the part of it that could hold weapons in its hands. Moreover - the bulk of the Russian army at that time was involved in the Livonian war, which had been going on for more than a decade. It all began with glorious victories, but turned into a grave and bloody conflict, in which our country was bogged down tightly. The reason was trivial - against the Russians who tried to regain access to the Baltic Sea, in the very near future half of "civilized Europe" united. A poisonous abscess of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth appeared on our western borders, the Swedes climbed in with the Danes, and everything ended up pretty badly.

We must pay tribute to Ivan the Terrible - he acted much more successfully in the eastern direction. The robber gangs remaining after the collapse of the Golden Horde, who imagined themselves to be the "great descendants of Genghis and Batu" of the steppe racketeers, he smashed one after another. The Astrakhan and Kazan Khanates fell, the Siberian Khanate and the Nogai Horde recognized themselves as vassals and tributaries of Moscow. The ghost of “glorious Golden Horde grandeur” melted like snow in the spring sun. The real problem was the Crimean Khanate, which at that time was already the obedient puppet of the Ottoman Empire and ruled from Istanbul. Moreover, for his ruler Devlet-Gerey Ivan the Terrible was like a “blood man” - the khan dreamed of paying for the death of his sons, who died at the hands of Russian warriors during the reflection of another Horde raid. In 1571, an evil force of 40 thousand people moved to Russia. There were Crimeans, Nogais, Circassians. They followed the “Yasir” - a living commodity for the slave markets of Istanbul, went to burn, kill and rob. Initially, Devlet-Gerey, most likely, had no thoughts in his mind to “take” Moscow. The matter has intervened for centuries that has borne grief on Russian soil: treason and betrayal. It must be remembered that the events that we recall were preceded, speaking in modern terminology, by the most severe political crisis in the Russian Kingdom, known to us today under the name "oprichnina." The fact that today some liberal “historians” are trying to imagine “bloody atrocities of an insane tyrant” was in fact a fight against the snickering freemasons of large feudal lords who believed that they would rule the state of their own mind, and some kind of king is something "On the side-hot". The states in which the supreme rulers failed to successfully carry out this process, the fate was extremely unenviable - to take the same Poland, where each "nobleman in his garden" was "always equal to the governor."

About traitors and heroes

Since there is a political struggle, there will always be dissatisfied and “innocently injured”. That is - potential material for the "fifth column", ready to cooperate with any external enemy, in order to just topple the "tyrant". Ever since Karamzin, serious historians have been of the opinion that Devlet-Gerey owed his unexpected success to him exclusively to traitors. Chronicles give us their names. For example, a certain Bashuy Smarokov, who not only gave the khan a "full account" of the turmoil tormenting the country and convinced him that Moscow could become easy prey, but also showed the Tatar army roundabouts that allowed them to bypass the "secret line" protecting Russia . Well, this one (judging by the name) could be a rooted agent who worked for his fellow tribesmen. But here such geeks as “the son of the boyar Kudeyar Tishenkov”, who led the Tatars through secret fords on the Oka already to Moscow itself, and probably similar to it was either elementary self-interest or “political motives”. By the way, the actions of Prince Ivan Belsky, sort of as the commander of the "defense of Moscow", in a detailed analysis, look rather strange. In fact, he did not even try to give the enemy a serious battle under the walls of the capital. If we recall that 9 years before the events described, the prince was convicted of trying to escape to Poland and some "defamatory ties" with the King Sigismund there, the conclusions are very ambiguous. What can I say, if some time later another prominent governor, Ivan Mstislavsky, admitted that in 1571 he “changed the whole Russian land, brought the godless Crimean Devlet Giray to his comrades”. And what, the "tyrant" of Grozny immediately "cruelly tormented" him? Nothing of the kind - "bailed" Metropolitan Cyril and the three eminent boyars. It somehow does not look like the “bloody paranoia” that they have been trying to tell us about for so many years. Rather - excessive mercy, which later came back with "Time of Troubles."

Divlet-Gerey did not take any Moscow! His thugs simply set fire to the ambassadors - sections of the city located behind the fortress wall. The strongest winds contributed to the fact that completely wooden Moscow completely burned out in just three hours. A lot of people died in the fire. Even more, being stunned and disoriented by the disaster, they fell into Tatar captivity. Their number amounts to tens of thousands - in the capital at that time, in addition to the inhabitants, there were also many refugees. Only completely inadequate personalities can call something like this “victory” or “military success”. The war happened then. Literally a year later, the Crimean Khan completely “lost the coast” ran into Russia with an army of 100-150 (according to various estimates) thousand sabers. Moreover - reinforced by regiments of selected sultanic Janissaries, at that time representing a formidable force. This time they were no longer robbing, but occupying. As far as it is known, Divlet-Gerey, ahead of the campaign, began to distribute "uluses" to his generals and close associates. Still - he was sure that neither Moscow nor Russia would rise from the ruins in such a short time. In addition, he had certain reasons for hoping for success: to confront the ominous horde, the purpose of which was the destruction of our state as such, only 40 thousand Russian warriors had to. Oh, and they butchered the Tatars and their henchmen in the great battle of Molodi, which struck in the summer of 1572! To smithereens, to smithereens, under a nut ... I don’t know how else to describe that absolutely crushing rout that fell to the lot of the “victorious” Devlet-Gerey and his gang! Every tenth returned from the Tatars to the Crimea, God forbid, and the Turks, according to the chroniclers, were completely killed. Oka was jammed with hostile corpses and among them were a son, a son-in-law, a grandson of a khan. He himself flew off the battlefield, even throwing his own saber. That was a war! And in a completely unequal battle with at least two-fold (if not three-fold) superiority of the enemy, Russian knights defeated! This, therefore, will be celebrated.

Sneaked like thieves

Only an alternatively gifted person can propose celebrating the “Polish uprising” of the Poles in Moscow, which happened in 1610. Without a doubt, the author of this “brilliant idea” Arvydas Anushauskas belongs to this category precisely - for nothing, that he is a deputy. For me personally, it’s completely incomprehensible: how much and in what currency did this primeval ignoramus cost a diploma of a historian? Indeed, literally every word in his provocative statement directly shouts that he comprehended this science, at best, according to tabloid newspapers. “On October 1610, 11, the Moscow gates were open for Polish and Lithuanian troops. And on October XNUMX, republican troops entered the Kremlin, occupied all strategic facilities, military depots and banned Muscovites from carrying weapons. Russia ... was finally freed from the yoke of an illiterate nobility ... ”This is just some stupid nonsense! Was the Commonwealth in the seventeenth century a republic? But nothing that the king ruled her and she was the union of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania? Where the hell is the republic ?! The fact that the country was twisted, as they wanted, by the magnates and its political system, could best be described by the indecent word "mess", it does not change. "Lithuanian troops." Yes, there were no Lithuanians at the time and in the factory! There were Litvinians - for the most part, Russians who were Catholicized, Belarusians, and the ancestors of those who today call themselves, God forgive me, Ukrainians. The ancestors of the modern inhabitants of Lithuania at the same time bore for the most part the unlikely nickname "squeeze." However, the most incomparable pearl is the "liberation from power of the ignorant nobility"!

Nothing that nobles appeared in Russia during the time of Peter the Great ?! At the time of the Time of Troubles, the highest class were the boyars. It was their "best" representatives in the person of the so-called "seven-boyars" who opened the gates of Belokamennaya to the Polish invaders, recognizing (in violation of all then existing principles and rules) as their sovereign of the Polish prince Wladyslaw. Here’s the “liberation” ... The passage about the “illiteracy” of Russians in the mouth of a bombast boasting of belonging to the “enlightened West”, where in the Middle Ages (and in the seventeenth century often too) crosses were not only signed by the most generous feudal lords, but also many crowned persons, sounds especially touching. This is not even a deuce in history. This is a count with a minus. Get out of class, dumbass! However, what is the "state", such are the "historians" and "politicians" in it. There is absolutely nothing to be surprised at. After all of the above, it remains only to add that, as already mentioned above, the Poles did not take Moscow, but sneaked in thieves, using the full anarchy that prevailed in Russia, and, as usual in such cases, the vile betrayal. The events preceding all this - climatic catastrophes, unprecedented neither before nor after the Great Famine that was happening on the royal throne of leapfrog and the war of all against all caused by it, entered into the memory of our people, as the Time of Troubles. As a result, even a damn bald man could really get into the Kremlin. Or the Poles ... It should be noted that it was their appearance in the capital that made the Russians come to their senses, unite and, perked up, to sweep out the filthy filth that had nestled there from their home.

Some more historical truth

At the same time, one cannot fail to mention the fact that the stay in Moscow of the Polish garrison covered the invaders who entered it with completely unbelievable shame. Well, it would only be about robberies, atrocities, violence, reprisals against civilians. That's why they are invaders. Having turned out to be tightly locked up in the Kremlin, the “proud gentry”, who also brought with them a crowd of all kinds of riffraffs - from servants and market-goers to the most natural walking girls, went down to the most utter obscenity. Starting in the spring of 1611, in a dense siege of Muscovites and warriors of the First People’s Militia, eager for reckoning, assembled to expel foreigners, these “highly cultured Europeans” first burned all the books that the Kremlin abounded (“illiterate” boyars gained). The incunabula of that time were written on parchment - calf skin and interwoven into the skin. Here are their Poles and that ... cracked. Then it got worse. It came to natural cannibalism. I will not savor the extremely unappetizing and shocking details, fortunately, those who wish will find them without difficulty. I only mention that a lot of evidence of this horror was our ancestors after leaving the Polish gang of the Kremlin was discovered and, speaking in modern terms, the most thoroughly “documented”. It is clear that this evidence could be attributed to the “Moscow propaganda”, but only subsequently a considerable number of memoirs of just the Polish participants in the “Kremlin sitting” saw the light of day. Our ancestors, in accordance with the barbaric Muscovite customs, did not hang on the aspen along the roads, but let them go home. Not even much kicked goodbye. So: these same “Moscow campaign veterans” in their memoirs without any hesitation described the process of eating their own compatriots. Often - very colorful, with all the details. I can name one of the authors: Colonel Jozef Budzilo. I don’t advise reading at night ...

In conclusion, in order to maintain historical authenticity completely, it is worth mentioning the last case, when the foot of foreign invaders stepped on the streets of Moscow. The abandonment of her at the insistence of the commander-in-chief of the Russian Imperial Army Mikhail Kutuzov in 1812 cannot be considered a military triumph of the great Napoleon Bonaparte, who foolishly decided to fight the Russians. Quite the contrary - the "capture" of Moscow was the beginning of its end. Our troops withdrew from Zlatoglava, leaving the enemy neither food nor fuel, turning the city they left with unbearable pain into a city with a tremendous trap for the enemy. The Napoleonic horde got out of Moscow, with great difficulty having stayed there a little more than a month, after having devoured all the crows and carelessly left by the owners of the pets. By the way, the most infamous fame at that time again won ... Poles! By their numbers in the army of Bonaparte, they were inferior only to the French, and in terms of looting skills and sadistic inclinations, they exceeded them many times. Desecrated temples, bonfires of icons, atrocities against monks who did not want to leave their cells ... It is not surprising that after this the Russian soldiers, who became famous in that war (and not only in it) by their mercy, simply stopped capturing the Poles. Here you can summarize. The “seizures” of our capital, mentioned today by Russophobic, half-educated, are not really such at all. In military victories of our enemies it is impossible to rank them in any case. Moscow fell into the hands of the invaders only when the forces of the Russian land were exhausted beyond all limits. And even that, even bloodless and exhausted, she could never be defeated without betrayal. It is it and only it that can destroy our land - this must always be remembered.

Well, and at the very end I just can not resist a small comparison. After 1812, no matter how hard the war shook our Motherland, the boots of an enemy soldier did not touch its pavements even once. Unless - those who shamefully hobbled over them during the "parades" of prisoners. Hundreds of thousands of our grandfathers and great-grandfathers gave their lives in 1941, but defended the capital during the most terrible invasion. At the same time, I want to remind you of the following: Russian and Soviet troops took / liberated Warsaw three times. Berlin - twice. Also, twice our glorious warriors in the status of winners marched along the streets of Bucharest, Belgrade, Sofia. Paris, Rome, Stockholm, Amsterdam - all these cities knew the magnificent tread of the Russian regiments triumphantly entering them. So it’s probably not worth it to boast of nonexistent “victories” to those to whom we can present this more than meaningful list ...
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 123 Offline 123
    123 (123) 18 January 2020 09: 17
    We know our story very poorly and do not draw conclusions from it.
    Video topic:

    Statement of events by the person directly conducting the excavation (the presentation is more professional, with details)

    1. boriz Online boriz
      boriz (boriz) 18 January 2020 13: 20
      About Klim Zhukov. With all the respect for him, he is surprised by his naive bewilderment about ignorance of the Battle of Molodi since the middle of the 19th century. It was then that the myth of the evil sadist and tyrant Ivan the Terrible was unleashed. And so much so that this completely honored monarch and man was excluded from the number of figures on the monument to the "millennium of Russia". Excluded personally by Alexander II. Apparently, a great connoisseur of culture and history. Well, purely Khrushchev ...
      The whole history (and not only of Russia) is full of such myths. Horror stories about Grozny are still circulating on the network, although it is enough to read adequate researchers. The picture will change radically. For example, Medinsky (when he was not minister of culture, he did and wrote adequate things) wrote 3 volumes of "Myths about Russia". In my opinion, even then these books had to be urgently included in the school curriculum. But even now it is relevant. I strongly advise everyone who has not read it.
      Many myths are being created right before our eyes. The same Boeing 747, shot down on 01.09.1983/XNUMX/XNUMX, used by the United States to promote the myth of the USSR as an evil empire. Now this topic is not pedaled, tk. The approach in our country to distortions of history has changed a lot, and something that "civilized" mankind will not like very much may emerge.
      1. Vsevolod Offline Vsevolod
        Vsevolod (Vsevolod) 20 January 2020 21: 11
        Respect a dumb animal?
  2. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 18 January 2020 11: 05
    The text immediately shows who wrote it.

    Like, the Poles, Swedes and Denmark didn’t want to run away voluntarily from the shores of the North Sea, and the Tatars didn’t want to take it - it itself burned down, and they say the Poles were fools, they didn’t want to voluntarily take the stake after the tsar’s murder by the boyars, and Napoleon somehow didn’t take Moscow triumphantly.
    He just found there an abandoned arsenal, the wounded, relics, abandoned state institutions and all that.

    And so everything is correctly listed. It’s only served in such a way that you feel - somewhere, everything is not right, not right ...
    1. GRF Offline GRF
      GRF 20 January 2020 05: 48
      Quote: Sergey Latyshev
      And so everything is correctly listed. It’s only served in such a way that you feel - somewhere, everything is not right, not right ...

      Of course, one could say about the difference in honestly / dishonestly ...
      It is one thing to overtake another at speed, another is standing in a traffic jam on the side of the road.
      It is one thing to take the city in battle, another is abandoned or simply not protected, faithful.
      But what honesty in war? The main thing is the result. So about the result:
      after the capture of Paris - the abdication of Napoleon,
      after the capture of Berlin - the surrender of the Nazis

      And what after the capture of Moscow? The inevitable quick defeat of the named "guests" ...

      Well served, since something is not feeling right ...
      1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 20 January 2020 09: 12
        And then what is Moscow?

        Not the capital. The Tsar was in St. Petersburg. And I learned about the "defeat of the French" in the Battle of Borodino by mail. Victory! Kutuzov - to field marshals!
        As well as about the abandonment of Moscow.
        And figs worry? Give up?

        So everything seems to be true in the article. I did not even know that Divlet-Gerey did not take Moscow. Itself burned down.
        Glad you liked it.
  3. Stiff Offline Stiff
    Stiff (Valery) 18 January 2020 13: 18
    100-150 thousand, and not immediately a million, the number of Russian troops is known from the discharge books about 23 thousand.
  4. boriz Online boriz
    boriz (boriz) 18 January 2020 13: 45
    In general, the post is good and necessary, despite some shortcomings. It is impossible to exclude some punctures and inaccuracies, only an elephant can know everything in the world. He has a big head ...
    And it is impossible to make everyone like the post. Everyone has their own view of things.
    Here, for example, is a fairly common mistake about Berlin. He was taken three times: 1760, 1813, 1945.
    Taking in 1813. trying to belittle him, they say, no one took him, the French themselves left. Well, they wouldn't leave, who wouldn't? Napoleon also freely entered Moscow, although it ended very badly for him. But for some reason everyone counts this "capture".
    Well, about Chubarov. He needs to hang a portrait of Catherine II in the red corner as an icon and pray on him every day. Because she did not solve the Crimean Tatar issue radically even then. I would send them under my own power to Yakutsk. And who would tell her what, after they took away from the neighboring Slavic peoples (including Poles and current Ukrainians) in gang raids and sold into slavery of the civilian population much more than there were Tatars themselves. There is nothing to be proud of and nothing to work out.
    But this is my personal point of view.
  5. Vsevolod Offline Vsevolod
    Vsevolod (Vsevolod) 18 January 2020 15: 39
    About 1237th (Batu) and 1382th (Tokhtamysh) forgot to mention.
    1. boriz Online boriz
      boriz (boriz) 18 January 2020 16: 51
      Well, it was not that Moscow at all. Not the capital of a great kingdom.
    2. Bitter Online Bitter
      Bitter (Gleb) 18 January 2020 21: 34
      1991 (Yeltsin), too, forgotten, but also

      ... I waste everything ...
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. savage1976 Offline savage1976
    savage1976 19 January 2020 06: 27
    Thanks to the author.
  8. Alexander Bushkovsky (Alexander) 20 January 2020 09: 37
    Only thanks to the heroism and steadfastness of the soldiers of the Red Army, the Germans in 1941 could not enter Moscow. But there was practically no betrayal (I do not take Ukraine into account, because for Ukrainians treason is at the genetic level). But also, which is also quite important, in the second half of the 30s of the last century, Iosif Vissarionovich spent all the treacherous scum like doggies, gozmans, and stankevichs - one half to the wall and the other to the forest.
  9. ss29 Offline ss29
    ss29 21 January 2020 12: 32
    Napoleon took Moscow, it’s foolish to deny it. She was left after a general battle on the Borodino field. Another thing is that it did not work to cut the country and the tactics of scorched earth brought victory.
  10. nnz226 Offline nnz226
    nnz226 (Nikolai) 24 January 2020 12: 26
    You can simply say: "Wild West!" Certainly not a historian from Zhmudi to crow something about Russia. This territory was and is - nothing to call it!
  11. The comment was deleted.