(1682-1718) swedish king from 1697
The image of Charles XII is usually formed under the influence of Alexander Pushkin's poem "Poltava", where he is depicted as sick and inactive, already, as it were, doomed to defeat in the famous Battle of Poltava. Meanwhile, dozens of historical novels have been written about the reign of Charles XII, where he appears as a majestic and powerful monarch.
Charles was born in Stockholm and was the fourth son of the Swedish King Charles XI. Three of his older brothers died in infancy, and Charles became the most beloved child in the royal family.
Unlike his younger brother and sister, he received an excellent education. He was prepared in advance for the throne, so his father repeatedly took his son on trips around the country and decided state affairs with him. However, when Charles XI died suddenly in April 1697, power was transferred to the Council of State. Only a year later, when Charles was sixteen years old, parliament recognized him as king.
It is noteworthy that, unlike his many predecessors, no magnificent ceremonies were held for the coronation of Charles XII. Perhaps the reason was that at the end of the 17th century, Sweden was one of the richest and most steadily developing European countries. Even then, it was famous for its deficit-free budget and the highest literacy rate in Europe. Therefore, it was decided that the authority of the country is already high enough and there is no need to strengthen it with the help of a magnificent ceremony.
The main external threat was associated with the aggressive policy of Denmark, which sought to dominate the Baltic Sea. In the late nineties, an alliance was formed around Denmark - the so-called Northern League, which included Norway, Russia and Saxony.
When Russian troops laid siege to Narva in 1700, Charles XII did not even suspect that this was the beginning of a premeditated policy that led to the collapse of the great power that his father had left him.
The defeat of the Russian troops near Narva, which brought the laurels of the commander to the young king, later played its fatal role. Charles XII believed in his invincibility and talent as a military leader, so he refused to negotiate in order to end the war by diplomatic means. From that time on, his life was forever connected with the army, and he never returned to his homeland.
Having defeated the Russian troops near Narva, Karl sent his army to Poland, where he also won a number of victories, as a result of which Stanislav Leshchinsky, his creature, came to power. In the summer of 1706, together with the Polish troops, Charles XII invaded Saxony, where he defeated the much inferior army of King Augustus and imposed peace on him, according to which he pledged to break the alliance with Russia.
Now Charles XII had only one enemy left - the Russian Emperor Peter I. Busy with the war in Poland and Saxony, Charles did not even imagine that gigantic military transformations were underway in Russia. And already a few years after the defeat near Narva, Russian troops began to represent an impressive force. During this time, Peter conquered the territory around the Gulf of Finland and built a new capital of Russia there - the city of St. Petersburg.
Inspired by the Ukrainian hetman Mazepa, in 1708 Charles XII launched a campaign against Russia, believing that he would crush the Russian army to smithereens. However, his expectations were not met. The Russian campaign was his biggest military miscalculation. In the very first major battle near Poltava, he was defeated and, with a small group of adherents, was forced to flee to the Turks. The army, in which there were more than 15 thousand soldiers, was captured by the Russians.
Seeing that there was no trace left of the power of Charles XII, Denmark and Saxony, defeated by him, renewed their alliance with Russia. Soon, Poland again came under the rule of King Augustus.
What was the fate of Charles XII? At first, the Turks welcomed him as an honored guest, a possible ally in the fight against Russia. He was given a residence in Bendery. However, the Turks needed Charles as a bait. At the price of his extradition to the Russians, they wanted to force Peter to revise the terms of the peace treaty concluded with Russia.
For his part, Charles XII tried to force Turkey to go to war with Russia. He himself wanted to move to Poland in order to become the head of the new army that had come from Sweden. At first it seemed that Carl's plan had succeeded. In 1711, Turkey and Russia were at war. However, after the unsuccessful Prut campaign, Peter entered into negotiations, which led to the conclusion of peace on favorable terms for Turkey.
After that, the fate of Charles XII was decided: the Turkish Sultan ordered him to leave Turkish possessions as soon as possible and threatened with arrest if he refused. Charles tried to disobey, but the Turks suddenly attacked his house and, despite resistance, captured Charles XII. During the skirmish, he was badly wounded. Captured Charles was taken to the Turkish fortress of Edirne. When the king recovered, he was taken under escort to the Turkish border, from where he was to go back to Sweden, accompanied only by an adjutant and a servant.
The journey through Europe took Charles XII more than a year, because he had to hide and sneak through Bulgaria, Romania and Germany before he managed to get to Stralsund, which continued to be controlled by Swedish troops. There Karl stopped for a short rest, after which he again took command of the army. All the experience did not cool his extravagant nature.
Having failed in Europe, Charles XII headed north, hoping to conquer Norway. True, his first campaign ended in failure, and he began to prepare for the second. Naturally, the long absence of the king at home gave rise to all sorts of rumors and gossip. The situation was aggravated by the fact that he had no heirs, he was not even married.
The only pretenders to the throne were Karl's two sisters, Hedwig Sophia and Ulrika Eleonora. Gradually, two groups of adherents formed around the sisters, neither of which needed Charles's aggressive policy.
In the autumn of 1718 the king invaded Norway for the second time. At first, he was successful. The Swedes laid siege to the Norwegian fortress of Friedrichsten, the defeat of which meant victory. However, a few days after the start of the siege, Charles XII was killed under circumstances that have not been clarified to this day.
Queen Ulrika Eleonora ascended the Swedish throne. In 1719, she adopted a new constitution, according to which Sweden became one of the first constitutional monarchies in Europe. All power in the country passed to the Riksdag and the State Council.
Having lost the position of a great power, Sweden forever abandoned the military policy, which is reflected in its current status of a neutral country.
100 Great Series: One Hundred Great Mysteries
Nikolai Nikolaevich Nepomniachtchi
Andrey Yurievich Nizovsky
SECRETS OF HISTORY
WHO KILLED CARL XII?
In 1874, King Oscar II of Sweden came to Russia. He visited St. Petersburg, examined the Hermitage, visited the Kremlin in Moscow, the Armory, where he examined with undisguised interest the trophies taken by Russian soldiers at Poltava, the stretcher of Charles XII, his cocked hat and glove. The conversation, of course, could not help touching on this remarkable personality, and King Oscar said that he had long been interested in the mysterious and unexpected death of Charles XII, which followed on the evening of November 30, 1718 under the walls of the Norwegian city of Frederiksgall.
While still heir, in 1859, Oskar, together with his father, King Charles XV of Sweden, attended the opening of the sarcophagus of King Charles XII. The sarcophagus with the coffin of Charles XII stood on a pedestal in a recess, near the altar. They carefully lifted the many-pood stone lid and opened the coffin. King Charles lay in a heavily faded, half-decayed camisole and over the knee boots with fallen off soles. A funerary crown made of gold leaf sparkled on the head. Due to the constant temperature and humidity, the body was well preserved. Even the hair on the temples, once fiery red, and the skin on the face darkened to an olive color, were preserved. But all those present involuntarily shuddered when they saw a terrible through wound in the skull, covered with a cotton swab. deep cracks (the bullet was fired from a short distance and had great destructive power). Instead of the left eye, there was a huge wound, where three fingers freely entered ...
After carefully examining the wound, Professor Friksel, who performed the autopsy, gave his opinion, and his words were immediately recorded in the protocol: “His Majesty was shot in the head with a flintlock gun.” This conclusion was sensational. The fact is that in all history textbooks it was stated that King Charles fell, struck down by a cannonball. "But who fired that tragic shot?" asked Charles XV.
“I'm afraid this is a great mystery, which will not soon be revealed. It is quite possible that the death of his majesty is the result of a carefully prepared murder ... " 1 How did this happen? In October 1718 Charles set out to conquer Norway. His troops approached the walls of the well-fortified fortress of Friedrich Gall, located at the mouth of the Tistendal River, near the Danish Strait. The army was ordered to begin the siege, but the soldiers, numb from the cold, could hardly dig the frozen earth in the trenches with picks. Here is how Voltaire described further events: “On the 3rd of November (December 1, NS) on St. Andrew's Day at 9 pm, Karl went to inspect the trenches and, not finding the expected success in the work, seemed very dissatisfied. Mefe, the French engineer in charge of the work, began to assure him that the fortress would be taken within eight days. "We'll see," said the king, and continued to walk around the works. Then he stopped in a corner, at a break in the trench, and, resting his knees on the inner slope of the trench, leaned on the parapet, continuing to look at the working soldiers who were working in the light of the stars. The king leaned out from behind the parapet almost to the waist, thus representing the target ... At that moment there were only two Frenchmen near him: one was his personal secretary Sigur, an intelligent and efficient person who entered his service in Turkey and who was especially devoted; the other is Maigret, an engineer...
I found it a few steps away from them; Xia Count Schwerin, the head of the trench, who gave orders to Count Posse and Adjutant General Kaulbars. Suddenly, Sigur and Megre saw the king fall on the parapet, letting out a deep sigh. They approached him, but he was already dead: a half-pound buckshot hit him in the right temple and punched a hole into which three fingers could be put; his head threw back, his right eye went in, and his left completely jumped out of his orbit ... Falling, he found the strength in himself to naturally put his right hand on the hilt of the sword and died in this position. At the sight of the dead King Megre, an original and cold person, did not find anything else but to say: "The comedy is over, let's go to dinner." Sigur ran up to Count Schwerin to inform him of what had happened. They decided to hide the news of the death of the king from the army until the prince of Hesse was notified. The body was wrapped in a gray cloak. Sigur put his wig and hat on the head of Charles XII so that the soldiers would not recognize the murdered king. The Prince of Hesse immediately ordered that no one dare to leave the camp, and ordered that all roads leading to Sweden be guarded. He needed time to arrange for the crown to pass to his wife, and to prevent claims to the crown of the Duke of Holstein. Thus died at the age of 36 Charles XII, King of Sweden, who experienced the greatest successes and the most cruel vicissitudes of fate ... "
Voltaire's story was recorded from the words of eyewitnesses who were still alive in his time. However, Voltaire says that Charles was killed by "buckshot in half a pound." But the forensic investigation proved indisputably that the king was killed by a bullet. Professor Friksel, who conducted the autopsy, naturally could not answer the question: was it the work of a sent killer or was it a sniper shot from the walls of the fortress? The Russian public did not remain indifferent to the results of the investigation in Stockholm. The most unexpected thing was that the weapon from which the Swedish king Karl was killed was suddenly found in Estonia, in the Kaulbars family estate. The 50-year-old Baron Nikolai Kaulbars told about this in his notes in 1891. The fitting itself, like a family heirloom, has been passed down from generation to generation for 170 years. Regarding the death of the king, Nikolai Kaulbars reported several interesting details. In particular, he wrote: “Consideration of the circumstances under which this happened excludes any possibility of being hit by an enemy bullet, and at present there is no doubt that the king was killed by his personal secretary, the Frenchman Siquier (Sigur). Despite this, even before the last much has been written about the mysterious death of the king...
During my time as a military agent in Austria, once in a conversation with the Swedish envoy Mr. Ackermann, we raised the question of the mysterious death of the Swedish king Charles XII; moreover, I was not without surprise to learn that in Sweden, until very recently, the most contradictory opinions were circulating and even expressed in the press - and that this question is still considered not completely clarified. I immediately told him that in the chronicle of our family there are data from which it is clear that Charles XII was killed in the trenches near Friedrichsgall by his personal secretary, the Frenchman Sigyur, and that the fitting that served as the instrument of death of the king is still kept in the GENERAL our estate Medders, Estland province, Wesenberg district. Further, Kaulbars wrote that after the king was found killed in the trench, Sigur disappeared without a trace. In his apartment, the mentioned fitting was found, blackened with just one shot. And many years later, lying on his deathbed, Sigur declared that he was the murderer of King Charles XII.
Kaulbars' version was not new, and Voltaire denied Sigur's involvement in the murder of Charles, moreover, when Sigur was alive and was on his estate in southern France. Voltaire managed to talk to the old man twice before he went to another world. “I cannot pass over in silence one slander,” wrote Voltaire. - At that time, a rumor spread in Germany that Sigur had killed the king of Sweden. This brave officer was in despair at such slander. Once, telling me about this, he said: “I could kill the Swedish king, but I was filled with such respect for this hero that even if I wanted something like that, I would not dare!” I know that Sigur himself gave rise to such an accusation, which part of Sweden believes to this day. He told me that while in Stockholm, in a fit of delirium tremens, he muttered that he had killed the king, and, in delirium, opening the window, asked the people for forgiveness for this regicide. When, after recovering, he found out about this, he almost died of grief. I saw him shortly before his death, and I can assure you that not only did he not kill Karl, but he himself would have let himself be killed a thousand times for him. If he were guilty of this crime, it would, of course, be for the purpose of rendering a service to some state, which would reward him well. But he died in poverty in France and needed the help of friends."
Kaulbars sent to Stockholm two photographs of the fitting and a wax cast from one bullet, which was preserved with him. This bullet was compared with the holes in the skull, and it turned out that they "neither in external outline, nor in size did not correspond to it at all." In addition, it turned out that the inlet in the skull was located slightly higher than the outlet, that is, the king was hit by a projectile flying along a downward trajectory, and therefore, by a bullet fired by the enemy from the fortress. But the king was out of range of rifle fire! The Kaulbars carbine, from which Karl was allegedly killed, belongs to the type of flint rifled fittings of the 17th century. A short, faceted and very thick barrel on the outside, of small caliber, inside contains straight and fairly frequent rifling. The following inscriptions are engraved on the outer faces of the barrel: Adreas de Hudowycz. Herrmann Wrangel v Ellestfer - 1669. It has been suggested that the lower inscription is the name of the gunsmith who made the fitting, and the upper inscription is one of the owners, before the fitting passed into the hands of Baron Johann Friedrich Kaulbars, Nikolai's ancestor. MYSTERIES OF HISTORY 401 The following are the engraved names of the persons who made up the closest retinue of King Charles XII near Friedrichshall: Reinhold loh v. Vietinghoff.Bogislaus V.D. Pahlen. Hans Heinrich Fersen. Gustaw Magnus Rehbinden. lonannFndrichv. Kaulbars. 1718.
The information provided by Kaulbars forced the Swedish forensic specialists to conduct a new investigation. In 1917, the sarcophagus was re-opened, and an authoritative commission made up of historians and forensic scientists took the hit. Experimental shots were fired at the dummy, angles were measured, ballistics were calculated, and the results were carefully processed and published. But the commission could not come to a final conclusion. The examination showed that, being in a trench, Charles XII, due to the long distance, was practically invulnerable to rifle fire from the walls of Friedrichsgall. But for an ambush, the conditions were ideal. When Charles appeared at the break in the trench and, leaning out from behind the parapet, looked at the walls of the fortress, he was perfectly visible against the background of white snow.
It was not difficult to make an aimed shot at such a target. An excellent sniper shot: the bullet hit right in the temple. The shooter was behind at an angle of 12-15 degrees, slightly towering, which is determined by the entrance and exit holes in Karl's skull. The latter circumstance suggests that the position was not chosen by chance: having heard the sound of a shot, the people accompanying Karl involuntarily turned their eyes towards the enemy, towards the walls of Friedrichsgall, and in the meantime the shooter disappeared. Who shot the Swedish king? A romantic hypothesis was recently put forward that the name of the killer was allegedly engraved on the barrel of the fitting, among other surnames - Adreas de Hudowycz (Andreas Gudovich), who allegedly was a Serb named Adriy Gudovich, and the Serbs allegedly had special reasons for killing the Swedish king.
“He was of Serbian origin and was in the service of the Polish King Augustus. In 1719, he received a diploma from his hands, confirming, in addition to Serbian, and his Polish count dignity for special merits ... In the same year, he left for Russia, enlisting in the Russian army as an officer, where his son Vasily Gudovich was born (1719-1764). But even further this surname was not lost among the Russian noble families”, etc., etc. Judging by this passage, under an unknown Serb named Andrija (and not Adriy - there is no such name in Serbia) Gudovich, obviously, this refers to Andrei Pavlovich Gudovich, who at the beginning of the 18th century, together with his brother Stepan, moved to Little Russia and served in the Ukrainian military regiments. , field marshal of the Russian army, in 1797 he was granted the dignity of a count of the Russian Empire
There was still no information in the annals of history that allegedly one of the Gudovichs in 1719 received from the Polish king August "a diploma confirming, in addition to the Serbian, his Polish count dignity", there was still no information in the annals of history. As for the "Serbian" origin of the Gudovichs , then nothing was known about him until now Gudovichi - an ancient Polish noble family The ancestor - Stanislav, a gentry of the Odrovonzh coat of arms, in 1567 received a charter from the king on the Gudaytse estate, from which the surname Gudovich came from His direct descendant (great-grandson), descended from the younger the son of Stanislav, Ivan, was Andrei Pavlovich Gudovich However, there was another Andrei Gudovich - the grandson of A. P. Gudovich, a friend and closest associate of Emperor Peter III
In 1762, he was sent to Courland to prepare for the election of the Emperor's uncle, Prince George (Georges) of Holstein, as the Duke of Courland. Wasn't it then that his name appeared on the notorious Kaulbars fitting? And in general - what is the origin of the "Kaulbars fitting", what is its history? How authentic is it? Was it really King Charles who was killed from it, because the examination did not seem to confirm this? King Charles had many enemies and without any mythical Serbs
Versions have been discussed for a long time that the king could have been killed by British agents or Swedes - oppositionists, supporters of the Prince of Hesse Most likely, the second - after all, after the death of Charles, the "Hessian party" won the internal political struggle and the protege of the "Hessians" Ulrika Eleonora ascended the throne of the Official Investigation Carl's death was not
The people of Sweden were told that their king had been killed by a cannonball, and the absence of a left eye and a huge wound on his head did not raise much doubt about this.
In the autumn of 1718, the Swedish king Charles XII led his army against the Danes. The offensive was carried out in the direction of the city of Fredrikshald, an important strategic point of defense for all of southern Norway. Norway and Denmark at that time were a personal union (that is, a union of two independent and independent states with one head).
But the approaches to Fredrikshald were covered by the mountain castle Fredriksten, a powerful fortress with several external fortifications. Under the walls of Fredriksten, the Swedes came on November 1, locking up a garrison of 1,400 soldiers and officers in a siege. Overwhelmed by fighting enthusiasm, the king personally supervised all siege work. During the assault on the outer castle fortification of Güllenlöve, begun on December 7, His Majesty himself led two hundred grenadiers into battle and fought in desperate hand-to-hand combat until all the defenders of the redoubt fell dead. Less than 700 steps remained from the advanced trenches of the Swedes to the walls of Fredriksten. Three Swedish siege batteries of large caliber, six guns each, methodically bombarded the castle from different positions. Staff officers assured Charles that a week remained before the fall of the fortress. Nevertheless, sapper work on the front line continued, despite the continuous shelling of the Danes. As always neglecting the danger, the monarch did not leave the battlefield day or night. On the night of December 18, Karl wished to personally inspect the progress of earthworks. He was accompanied by: personal adjutant - Italian captain Marchetti, general Knut Posse, major general from the cavalry von Schwerin, sapper captain Schultz, lieutenant engineer Karlberg, as well as a team of foreign military engineers - two Germans and four Frenchmen. In the trenches, a French officer, adjutant and personal secretary of Generalissimo Friedrich of Hesse-Kassel, husband of His Majesty's sister, Princess Ulrika Eleanor, joined the king's retinue. His name was André Sicre, and there was no obvious reason for him to be present at that hour and in that place.
At about nine o'clock in the evening, Karl once again climbed the parapet and, with the flashes of lighting rockets launched from the castle, looked at the progress of work through a telescope. In the trench next to him stood the French colonel engineer Maigret, to whom the king gave orders. After another remark, the king fell silent for a long time. The pause was too long even for His Majesty, who was not known for verbosity. When the officers called out to him from the trench, Karl did not answer. Then the adjutants climbed onto the parapet and, by the light of another Danish rocket launched into the night sky, they saw that the king was lying face down, with his nose on the ground. When he was turned over and examined, it turned out that Charles XII was dead - he was shot in the head.
The body of the deceased monarch was taken out on a stretcher from the front lines and taken to the headquarters tent, handing it over to the life physician and personal friend of the deceased, Dr. Melchior Neumann, who began to prepare everything necessary for embalming.
The very next day, the military council that had gathered in the Swedish camp, in connection with the death of the king, decided to lift the siege and generally stop this campaign. Due to the hasty retreat, as well as the hustle and bustle surrounding the change of government, no investigation into the death of Charles XII was carried out in hot pursuit. There was not even an official protocol drawn up on the circumstances of his death. All those involved in this story were completely satisfied with the version according to which a buckshot the size of a pigeon's egg, fired through the trenches of the Swedes from a fortress cannon, hit the king's head. Thus, the main culprit for the death of Charles XII was declared a military accident, sparing neither kings nor commoners.
However, in addition to the official version, almost immediately after the death of Charles, another one arose - the German archivist Friedrich Ernst von Fabritz writes about this in his work The True History of the Life of Charles XII, published in 1759 in Hamburg. Many of the king's associates assumed that under Fredriksten he was killed by conspirators. This suspicion was not born out of nowhere: there were enough people in the royal army who wanted to send Charles to the forefathers.
The last conquistador
In 1700, the king went to fight with Russia, spent nearly 14 years in a foreign land. After military luck failed him near Poltava, he took refuge in the possessions of the Turkish Sultan. He ruled his kingdom from a camp near the village of Varnitsa near the Moldavian city of Bender, driving couriers across the continent to Stockholm. The king dreamed of a military revenge and intrigued in every possible way at the Sultan's court, trying to unleash a war with the Russians. Over time, he was pretty tired of the government of the Ottoman Empire, and several times he received delicate proposals to go home.
In the end he was placed with great honor in a castle near Adrianople, where he was given complete freedom. This was a cunning tactic - Karl was not forced to leave, but simply deprived of his ability to act (the couriers were not allowed through). The calculation turned out to be accurate - after lying on the sofas for three months, the fidget king, prone to impulsive actions, announced his desire to no longer burden the Brilliant Port with his presence and ordered the courtiers to get ready for the road. By the autumn of 1714, everything was ready, and the Swedish caravan, accompanied by an honorary Turkish escort, set off on a long journey.
On the border with Transylvania, the king released the Turkish convoy and announced to his subjects that he would go on, accompanied by only one officer. Having ordered the convoy to go to Stralsund - a fortress in Swedish Pomerania - and be there no later than a month later, Karl, with false documents in the name of Captain Frisk, crossed Transylvania, Hungary, Austria, Bavaria, passed Württemberg, Hesse, Frankfurt and Hanover, reaching to Stralsund in two weeks.
The king had good reason to hasten his return. While he enjoyed military adventures and political intrigues in distant lands, things were going very badly in his own kingdom. On the lands conquered from the Swedes at the mouth of the Neva, the Russians managed to establish a new capital, in the Baltic states they took Revel and Riga, in Finland the Russian flag fluttered over Kexholm, Vyborg, Helsingfors and Turku. The allies of Emperor Peter smashed the Swedes in Pomerania, Bremen, Stetten, Hanover and Brandenburg fell under their onslaught. Shortly after his return, Stralsund also fell, which the king left under fire from enemy artillery on a small rowboat, fleeing capture.
The economy of Sweden was completely ruined, but all the talk that the continuation of the war would turn into a complete economic disaster did not at all frighten the king-knight, who believed that if he himself was content with one uniform and one change of underwear, eating from a soldier’s boiler, then his subjects could be patient until he defeats all the enemies of the kingdom and the Lutheran faith. Von Fabrice writes that in Stralsund, the former Holstein minister, Baron Georg von Görtz, who was looking for service, introduced himself to the king, promising the king a solution to all financial and political problems. Having received carte blanche from the king, Mr. Görtz quickly pulled off a reform-scam, equating the Swedish silver daler with a copper coin called “notdaler” by decree. On the reverse of the notdalers, the head of Hermes was minted, and the Swedes called him “the god of Görtz”, and the coppers themselves were “money of need”. These unsecured coins were minted in 20 million pieces, which aggravated the economic crisis of the kingdom, but still made it possible to prepare for a new military campaign.
By order of Karl, the regiments were replenished with recruits, cannons were cast again, fodder and food were prepared, headquarters developed plans for new campaigns. Everyone knew that the king would still not agree to stop the war, even if only out of simple stubbornness, which he was famous for from childhood. However, the opponents of the war were not going to sit idly by either. The king placed his headquarters in Lund, announcing that he would return to the capital of the kingdom only as a winner, and news came from Stockholm, one more disturbing than the other. In 1714, when the king was still "visiting" the Sultan, the Swedish nobility assembled the Riksdag, which decided to persuade the monarch to seek peace. Karl ignored this decision and did not conclude peace, but he and his supporters had an opposition - an aristocratic party, the head of which was the Duke of Hesse Frederick, who in 1715 was legally married to Princess Ulrika-Eleanor, Charles's only sister and heir to the Swedish throne. Members of this organization became the first suspects in the preparation of the murder of their crowned relative.
Confessions of Baron Cronstedt
The death of Charles brought Ulrika-Eleanor, the wife of Frederick of Hesse-Kassel, the royal crown, and as Roman lawyers taught, Is fecit cui prodest - "The one who benefits" did it. In the spring of 1718, before setting off on a Norwegian campaign, Duke Friedrich instructed the court adviser Hein to draw up a special memorandum for Ulrika-Eleonora, which detailed her actions in the event that King Charles died and her husband was absent at that time in the capital. And the mysterious appearance at the scene of the assassination of the king's adjutant Prince Frederick, Andre Sikra, whom close officers initially believed to be the direct executor of the order of the conspirators, looks completely ominous.
However, if you wish, you can interpret these facts in a completely different way. The drafting of the memorandum for Ulrika-Eleonora is fully explained by the fact that her husband and brother did not go to the ball, but to the war, where anything could happen. Realizing that his wife, not distinguished by special abilities, is likely to be confused in a crisis situation, Friedrich could well attend to the issue of insurance. Adjutant Sicre had a solid alibi: on the night of the death of Charles XII, there were several more people in the trench next to Sicre, who testified that none of those present had fired. In addition, Sikra was standing so close to the king that, if he had fired, traces of gunpowder would certainly have remained in the wound and around it - but there were none.
Foreigners from the retinue of the king also fell under suspicion. As the German historian Knut Lundblad writes in the book The History of Charles XII, published in 1835 in Kristianstad, they were ready to record the engineer Megre as the murderers of the Swedish king, who allegedly could take sin on his soul in the name of the interests of the French crown. As a matter of fact, everyone who was in the trench that night was suspected in turn, but they did not find reliable evidence against anyone. However, rumors that King Charles was killed by conspirators did not subside for many years, thus casting doubt on the legitimacy of Charles's successors on the Swedish throne. Unable to otherwise refute this rumor, the authorities, 28 years after the death of Charles XII, announced the opening of an official investigation into the murder.
In 1746, by the highest order, the crypt in the Riddarholm Church of Stockholm, where the remains of the king rested, was opened, the corpse was subjected to a detailed study. At one time, the conscientious Dr. Neumann embalmed Karl's body so thoroughly that decay almost did not touch him. The wound on the head of the late king was carefully examined, and experts - doctors and military - came to the conclusion that it was not left by a round cannon buckshot, as previously thought, but by a conical rifle bullet fired from the side of the fortress.
Calculations, writes Lundblad, showed that the bullet would have reached the place of Karl’s death from where the enemy could have shot at him, but its lethal force was no longer enough to pierce through the head, knocking out the temple, as it turned out during the examination. Fired from the nearest Danish position, the bullet would have to remain in the skull, or even lodge in the wound itself. This means that someone shot at the king from a much closer distance. But who?
Four years later, says Lundblad, in December 1750, the pastor of the Stockholm church of St. Jacob, the famous preacher Tolstadius, was urgently called to the bedside of the dying Major General Baron Karl Kronstedt, who asked to receive his last confession. Clutching the pastor's hand, the baron begged him to immediately go to Colonel Stierneroos and demand from him, in the name of the Lord, a confession of the same thing that he himself, tormented by pangs of conscience, was going to repent of: they were both guilty of the death of the king of the Swedes.
General Cronstedt in the Swedish army was in charge of fire training and was known as the inventor of high-speed shooting methods. A brilliant marksman himself, the baron trained quite a few officers who today would be called snipers. One of his students was Magnus Stierneroos, who was promoted to lieutenant in 1705. Two years later, the young officer was enrolled in a detachment of drabants - the personal bodyguards of King Charles. Together with them, he went through all the alterations that so abounded in the biography of the militant monarch. What the general said on his deathbed did not at all fit in with the reputation of a loyal and valiant campaigner, which was enjoyed by Stierneroos. However, fulfilling the will of the dying man, the pastor went to the colonel's house and gave him the words of Cronstedt. As expected, the colonel only expressed regret that his good friend and teacher before his death fell into madness, began to talk and talk nonsense in delirium. After listening to this answer of Stierneroos, reported to him by the pastor, Mr. Baron again sent Tolstadius to him, ordering him to say: “So that the colonel does not think that I am talking, tell him that he made“ this ”from a carbine hanging third on the weapon wall of his office " . The Baron's second message sent Stierneroos into an indescribable rage, and he kicked the respected pastor out. Bound by a secret confession, the Monk Tolstadius remained silent, exemplarily fulfilling his priestly duty.
Only after his death, which followed in 1759, among the papers of Tolstadius was found a summary of the story of General Cronstedt, from which it followed that, on behalf of the conspirators, he picked up the shooter, offering this role to Magnus Stierneroos. Secretly, unnoticed by anyone, the general made his way into the trenches after the retinue of the king. Drabant Stierneroos followed at that time as part of a team of bodyguards who accompanied Karl everywhere. In the nightly confusion of intertwining trenches, Stierneroos imperceptibly broke away from the general group, and the baron himself loaded the carbine and handed it to his student with the words: “Now it’s time to get down to business!”
The lieutenant got out of the trench, took up a position between the castle and the advanced fortifications of the Swedes. After waiting for the moment when the king rose above the parapet to the waist and was well lit by another rocket fired from the fortress, the lieutenant shot Karl in the head, and then managed to return to the Swedish trenches unnoticed. He later received 500 gold awards for this murder.
After the death of the king, the Swedes lifted the siege from the castle, and the generals divided the military treasury, which consisted of 100,000 dalers. Von Fabrice writes that the Duke of Holstein-Gottorp received six thousand, Field Marshals Renskold and Mörner took twelve each, someone received four, someone three. All major generals were given 800 dalers each, senior officers - 600 each. Kronstedt, 4000 dalers "for special merits" were transferred. The general assured that he himself gave Magnus Stierneroos 500 coins from the amount that was due to him.
The evidence recorded by Tolstadius is accepted by many as a true indication of the perpetrators of the assassination, but it did not in the least affect the career of Stierneroos, who rose to the rank of general of cavalry. The late pastor's record of the contents of Baron Cronstedt's dying confession was insufficient for a formal accusation.
Click to enlarge
Siege of Fredrikshald, during which Charles XII died
1. Fort Gyllenlöve, taken by the Swedes on December 8, 1718
2, 3, 4. Swedish siege artillery and sectors of its shelling
5. Swedish trenches erected during the siege of Gyllenlöve
6. The house where Charles XII lived after the capture of the fort
7. New assault trench of the Swedes
8. Front assault trench and the place where Charles XII was killed on December 17
9 Fortress Fredriksten
10, 11, 12. Sectors of shelling of the Danish fortress artillery and artillery of auxiliary forts
13, 14, 15 Swedish troops blocking the Danish retreat
16 Swedish camp
fortress gun
Already at the end of the eighteenth century, in 1789, the Swedish king Gustav III, in a conversation with a French envoy, confidently named Cronstedt and Stierneroos as the direct executors of the assassination of Charles XII. In his opinion, the English king George I acted as an interested party in this incident. Closer to the end of the Northern War (1700–1721), a complex multi-way intrigue ensued, in which Charles XII and his army played an important role. There was an agreement, writes Lundblad, between the Swedish king and supporters of the son of King James II, who claimed the English throne, according to which, after the capture of Fredriksten, the Swedish expeditionary force of 20,000 bayonets was to go from the coast of Norway to the British Isles to support the Jacobites (Catholics, supporters of James . - Approx. ed.), who fought with the army of the ruling George I. Baron Görtz, whom Karl completely trusted, agreed with the plan. Mr. Baron was looking for money for the king, and the English Jacobites promised to pay well for Swedish support.
But even here there is reason to doubt. The secret correspondence of the Swedes and the Jacobites was intercepted, the fleet, intended for the transfer of the Swedish army to the English theater of operations, was defeated by the Danes. After that, if there was still a threat of the Swedes entering the English civil strife, it was only speculative, not requiring an immediate attempt on the life of Charles XII. Lundblad says that the inconsistency and lack of evidence for the death of Charles XII at the hands of the conspirators has led some scholars to suggest that the death of the king was the result of an accident. A stray bullet hit him. Researchers cite practical experience and accurate calculations as arguments. In particular, they claim that a bullet fired from a so-called fortress gun hit the king's head. It was a kind of handgun, of greater power and caliber than conventional handguns. They were fired from a stationary base, and they hit further than ordinary infantry rifles, enabling the besieged to fire on the besiegers on the distant approaches to the fortifications.
A Swedish doctor, Dr. Nyström, one of the researchers interested in the history of Karl's death, in 1907 decided to check the version with a shot from a fortress gun. He himself was a staunch supporter of the version of the atrocity of the conspirators and believed that an aimed shot at the right distance from the fortress to the trench was impossible in those days. Having a scientific mind, the doctor was going to experimentally prove the fallacy of the statements of his opponents. By his order, an exact copy of a fortress gun from the beginning of the 18th century was made. These weapons were loaded with gunpowder, similar to that used at the siege of Fredrikshald, and exactly the same bullets as were used in the early 18th century.
Everything was reproduced down to the smallest detail. At the place where Charles XII was found dead, a target was installed, on which Nyström himself fired 24 bullets from the castle wall from a reconstructed fortress gun. The result of the experiment was amazing: 23 bullets hit the target, entering it horizontally, piercing through the target! So, proving the impossibility of this scenario, the doctor confirmed its full possibility.
The colorful life of King Charles is a treasure trove of plots for novelists and film screenwriters. But nothing has been established for sure so far.
The King of Sweden (1697-1718) Charles XII was born on June 17, 1682. Son of King Charles XI of Sweden and Queen Ulrika Eleonora, Princess of Denmark. He received a good classical education, spoke several foreign languages. After the death of Charles XI in April 1697, young Charles, who was less than 15 years old, against his father's dying will, insisted on recognizing him as an adult and took power into his own hands.
Sweden during this period was opposed by the triple alliance of Denmark, Poland and Russia.
Then Karl transferred his troops to the Baltic provinces, where the Russian troops besieged Narva. On November 19, 1700, near Narva, Charles defeated the superior forces of the Russians. The battle and victory near this city brought Charles XII the European glory of the great commander.
The years from 1702 to 1707 Charles spent in Poland, where he got pretty stuck, losing time and initiative, while he tirelessly increased the power of the Russian state. Charles succeeded in placing Stanislav Leshchinsky on the Polish throne, forcing Augustus II to renounce all claims in accordance with the terms of the peace treaty concluded in September 1706 in Altranstadt.
After a series of victories in Poland and Saxony, the rested army of Charles XII invaded Russia in the spring of 1708. He intended to defeat the Russian army in one battle, capture Moscow and force Peter I to conclude a profitable peace. Avoiding a general battle, the Russian army retreated to the east, with the goal of "tormenting the enemy" with attacks by small detachments, the destruction of provisions and fodder.
Encountering fierce resistance, Karl turned to Ukraine, counting on the support of Hetman Mazepa. Here, military luck betrayed Charles XII, who underestimated his opponent. After the defeat in September 1708 near the village of Lesnaya of the Levengaupt corps, which was marching from the Baltic states, the main army of Charles XII found itself in a difficult situation, since together with Mazepa an insignificant part of the Ukrainian Cossacks went over to the side of the Swedes, and Turkey and Crimea did not act against Russia.
At that time, Peter was ready to conclude a peace treaty with Sweden, but Karl decided to continue the war until complete victory in order to completely cut off Russia from the sea trade routes. During the Northern War, on July 8, 1709, the famous Battle of Poltava took place, where the main forces of the Russian and Swedish troops met. The battle ended with a convincing victory for the Russian army. The king was wounded and fled to Turkey with a small detachment. The military power of the Swedes was undermined, the fame of the invincibility of Charles XII was dispelled. The Poltava victory determined the outcome of the Northern War.
After six years in Turkey, the king returned to his homeland in 1715. Charles spent the last years of his life preparing to repulse the attacks expected in 1716 from Denmark and Russia, as well as twice invading Norway. During this period, he introduced a number of internal reforms aimed at mobilizing forces for war. During the last campaign on December 11, 1718, Karl was killed by a falconet shot during the siege of Fort Frederikshall (now Halden). The circumstances of the death of the king are still not clear and are the cause of controversy among historians.
When the news of the death of Charles XII reached the capital of Russia, Peter I declared mourning in St. Petersburg for one of his most dangerous and courageous opponents.
Candidate of Historical Sciences I. ANDREEV.
In Russian history, the Swedish king Charles XII was not lucky. In the mass consciousness, he is represented as an almost caricatured, extravagant, conceited young king, who first defeated Peter, and then was beaten. "He died like a Swede near Poltava" - this, in fact, is also about Karl, although, as you know, the king did not die near Poltava, but, having escaped capture, continued to fight for almost ten more years. Having landed in the mighty shadow of Peter, Karl not only faded, but got lost, cringed. He, like an extra in a bad play, had to occasionally appear on the historical stage and give remarks designed to profitably highlight the main character - Peter the Great. The writer A. N. Tolstoy did not escape the temptation to present the Swedish king in this way. It's not that Karl appears on the pages of the novel "Peter the Great" episodically. Significantly different - the motivation of actions. Carl is frivolous and capricious - a sort of crowned egocentrist who roams Eastern Europe in search of glory. He is absolutely opposite to Tsar Peter, albeit quick-tempered and unbalanced, but day and night thinking about the Fatherland. The interpretation of A. N. Tolstoy entered the blood and flesh of the mass historical consciousness. A talented literary work in its influence on the reader almost always outweighs volumes of serious historical works. The simplification of Charles is at the same time a simplification of Peter himself and the scale of everything that happened to Russia in the first quarter of the 18th century. This alone is enough to try to comprehend what happened through a comparison of these two personalities.
Peter I. Engraving by E. Chemesov, made from the original by J.-M. Nattier 1717.
Charles XII. Portrait by an unknown artist, early 18th century.
Young Peter I. Unknown artist. Early 18th century.
Officer of the Life Guards Semenovsky Regiment. First quarter of the 18th century.
Science and life // Illustrations
Science and life // Illustrations
Science and life // Illustrations
Personal belongings of Peter I: a caftan, an officer's badge and an officer's scarf.
Bust of Peter I by Bartolomeo Carlo Rastrelli. (Painted wax and plaster; Peter's hair wig; eyes - glass, enamel.) 1819.
View of Arkhangelsk from the bay. Early 18th century engraving.
Carl Allard's book "The New Golan Ship Structure" was translated into Russian by Peter's decree. There were several copies of this edition in Peter's library.
Cup carved by Peter I (gold, wood, diamonds, ruby) and presented by him to MP Gagarin for organizing a holiday in Moscow in honor of the victory over the Swedes near Poltava. 1709
A lathe created by craftsman Franz Singer, who worked for the Florentine Duke Cosimo III Medici for many years, and then came to St. Petersburg at the invitation of the Russian Tsar. In Russia, Singer headed the tsar's turning workshop.
Medallion with a relief image of the Battle of Grenham in the Baltic on July 27, 1720 (the work of a turning workshop).
Peter I in the battle of Poltava. Drawing and engraving by M. Marten (son). First quarter of the 18th century.
Peter and Carl never met. But for many years they argued in absentia with each other, which means that they tried on, looked at each other. When the king found out about the death of Charles, he was quite sincerely upset: "Ah, brother Charles! How sorry I am for you!" One can only guess what exactly the feelings were behind these words of regret. But it seems - something more than just royal solidarity ... Their dispute was so long, the king was so imbued with the logic of the illogical actions of his crowned opponent that it seems that with the death of Charles, Peter lost, as it were, a part of himself.
People of different cultures, temperaments, mentality, Karl and Peter were surprisingly similar at the same time. But this similarity is of a special nature - in dissimilarity to other sovereigns. Let us note that to acquire such a reputation in an age when extravagant self-expression was in vogue is not an easy task. But Peter and Karl overshadowed many. Their secret is simple - both did not strive for extravagance at all. They lived without fuss, building their behavior in accordance with the ideas of what should be. Therefore, much that seemed so important and necessary to others played almost no role for them. And vice versa. Their actions were perceived by the majority of contemporaries at best as eccentricity, at worst as ignorance, barbarism.
The English diplomat Thomas Wentworth and the Frenchman Aubrey de la Motre left descriptions of the "Gothic hero". Karl in them is stately and tall, "but extremely untidy and slovenly." Facial features are thin. The hair is blond and greasy and doesn't seem to meet a comb every day. The hat is crumpled - the king often sent it not on his head, but under his arm. Reiter's uniform, only cloth of the best quality. Boots are high, with spurs. As a result, everyone who did not know the king by sight took him for a Reiter officer, and not of the highest rank.
Peter was just as undemanding in dress. He wore a dress and shoes for a long time, sometimes up to holes. The habit of the French courtiers every day to appear in a new dress caused him only ridicule: "It seems that a young man cannot find a tailor who would dress him to his liking?" - he teased the Marquis of Libois, assigned to the high guest by the regent of France himself. At the reception of the king, Peter appeared in a modest frock coat made of a thick gray barakan (a kind of matter), without a tie, cuffs and lace, in - oh horror! - an unpowdered wig. The "extravagance" of the Moscow guest shocked Versailles so much that it became fashionable for a while. Court dandies for a month embarrassed court ladies with a wild (from the point of view of the French) costume, which received the official name "savage outfit".
Of course, if necessary, Peter appeared before his subjects in all the splendor of royal grandeur. In the first decades on the throne, it was the so-called Grand Sovereign attire, later - a richly decorated European dress. So, at the wedding ceremony of Catherine I with the title of Empress, the tsar appeared in a caftan embroidered with silver. The ceremony itself, and the fact that the hero of the occasion diligently worked on embroidery, obligated to this. True, at the same time, the sovereign, who did not like unnecessary expenses, did not bother to change his worn-out shoes. In this form, he laid on the kneeling Catherine the crown, which cost the treasury several tens of thousands of rubles.
To match the clothes were the manners of the two sovereigns - simple and even rude. Karl, according to his contemporaries, "eats like a horse," delving into his thoughts. In thoughtfulness, he can smear butter on bread with his finger. Food is the simplest and seems to be valued mainly in terms of satiety. On the day of his death, Karl, having dined, praises his cook: "You feed so well that you will have to be appointed head cook!" Peter is just as undemanding in food. His main requirement is that everything should be served piping hot: in the Summer Palace, for example, it was arranged in such a way that dishes fell on the royal table directly from the stove.
Unpretentious in food, the sovereigns differed greatly in their attitude to strong drinks. The maximum that Karl allowed himself was a weak dark beer: that was the vow that the young king gave after one plentiful libation. The vow is unusually strong, without retreats. Peter's unbridled drunkenness evokes nothing but a bitter sigh of regret from his apologists.
It is difficult to say who is to blame for this addiction. Most of the people close to Peter suffered from this vice. Clever Prince Boris Golitsyn, to whom the tsar owed so much in the fight against Tsarevna Sophia, according to one of his contemporaries, "drank incessantly." Not far behind him and the famous "deboshan" Franz Lefort. But he is perhaps the only person whom the young king tried to imitate.
But if the entourage dragged Peter into drunkenness, then the tsar himself, having matured, no longer tried to put an end to this protracted "service to the tavern." Suffice it to recall the "sessions" of the famous All-Joking and All-Drunken Council, after which the sovereign's head was shaking convulsively. The "patriarch" of the noisy company, Nikita Zotov, even had to warn "herr protodeacon" Peter against excessive prowess on the battlefield with "Ivashka Khmelnitsky".
Surprisingly, the king turned even a noisy feast to the benefit of his cause. His Most Joking Council is not just a way of wild relaxation and stress relief, but a form of establishing a new everyday life - the overthrow of the old with the help of laughter, demonism and abuse. Peter's phrase about "ancient customs" that are "always better than new ones" most successfully illustrates the essence of this plan - after all, the tsar praised "Holy Russian antiquity" at the clownish antics of the "crazy cathedral."
It is somewhat naive to oppose Karl's sober way of life to Peter's predilection "to be drunk all the days and never go to bed sober" (the main requirement of the charter of the Most Joking Council). Outwardly, this did not particularly affect the course of affairs. But only outwardly. A dark spot on the history of Peter falls not only the facts of unbridled drunken anger, anger to the point of murder, loss of human appearance. Formed "drunk" style of life of the court, the new aristocracy, deplorable in all respects.
Neither Peter nor Karl were distinguished by subtlety of feelings and sophistication of manners. Dozens of cases are known when the king, by his actions, caused a slight stupor in those around him. The German princess Sophia, smart and insightful, described her impressions after the first meeting with Peter in this way: the tsar is tall, handsome, his quick and correct answers speak of quickness of mind, but "with all the virtues that nature has endowed him with, it would be desirable that there was less rudeness in him."
Grub and Carl. But this is rather the underlined rudeness of a soldier. This is how he behaves in defeated Saxony, making it clear to Augustus and his subjects who lost the war and who should pay the bills. However, when it came to close people, both could be attentive and even gentle in their own way. Such is Peter in his letters to Catherine: "Katerinushka!", "My friend", "My friend, my heart's cue!" and even "Lapushka!". Karl is also caring and helpful in his letters to his relatives.
Karl avoided women. He was evenly cold with noble ladies and with those who, as women "for all," accompanied his army in the carts. According to contemporaries, the king, in dealing with the weaker sex, looked like "a guy from a provincial village." Such restraint over time even began to disturb his family. They repeatedly tried to persuade Karl to marry, but he avoided marriage with enviable persistence. The dowager queen-grandmother of Hedwig-Eleanor was especially baked about the family happiness of her grandson and the continuity of the dynasty. It was to her that Karl promised to "settle down" by the age of 30. When, upon reaching the deadline, the queen reminded her grandson of this, Karl in a short letter from Bender announced that he was "completely unable to remember his promises of this kind." Moreover, until the end of the war, he will be "overloaded beyond measure" - quite a weighty reason for postponing the matrimonial plans of "dear Mrs. Grandmother."
The "Northern Hero" passed away without marriage and without leaving an heir. This turned into new difficulties for Sweden and gave Peter the opportunity to put pressure on the stubborn Scandinavians. The fact is that Karl's nephew, Karl Friedrich Holstein-Gottor, son of the king's deceased sister, Hedwig-Sophia, claimed not only the Swedish throne, but also the hand of Peter's daughter, Anna. And if in the first case his chances were problematic, then in the last - things quickly went to the wedding table. The king was not averse to taking advantage of the situation and bargaining. The tractability of the intractable Swedes was made by Peter dependent on their attitude towards peace with Russia: if you persist, we will support the claims of the future son-in-law; go to the signing of peace - we will take our hand away from Duke Charles.
Peter's treatment of the ladies was distinguished by impudence and even rudeness. The habit of commanding and stormy temperament did not help curb his seething passions. The king was not particularly picky in communications. In London, girls of easy virtue were offended by the completely non-royal payment for their services. Peter reacted immediately: what is the work, such is the pay.
It should be noted that what was condemned by the Orthodox Church and called "fornication" was considered almost the norm in Europeanized secular culture. Peter somehow quickly forgot about the first and easily accepted the second. True, he never had enough time and money for truly French "polites". He acted more simply, separating feelings from connections. Catherine had to accept this point of view. The endless campaigns of the king to the "metresses" became the subject of jokes in their correspondence.
Peter's wildness did not prevent him from dreaming of a home and a family. From there grew his affections. First, to Anna Mons, the daughter of a German wine merchant who settled in the German Quarter, then to Martha-Catherine, whom the tsar first saw in 1703 at Menshikov's. It all started as usual: a fleeting hobby, of which there were many in the sovereign who could not stand the refusal. But years passed, and Catherine did not disappear from the life of the king. Even temper, gaiety and warmth of soul - all this, apparently, attracted the king to her. Peter was at home everywhere, which meant he had no home. Now he has got a house and a mistress who gave him a family and a sense of family comfort.
Catherine is just as narrow-minded as the first wife of Peter, Tsarina Evdokia Lopukhina, imprisoned in a monastery. But Peter did not need an adviser. But, unlike the disgraced queen, Catherine could easily sit in a male company or, leaving things in a wagon, rush after Peter to the ends of the world. She did not ask the trifling question whether such an act was proper or obscene. The question just didn't cross her mind. Sovereign betrothed called - so it is necessary.
Even with a very large condescension, Catherine can hardly be called an intelligent person. When, after the death of Peter, she was elevated to the throne, the empress's complete inability to do business was revealed. Strictly speaking, it was with these qualities that she apparently pleased her supporters. But the limitations of Catherine the Empress became at the same time the strength of Catherine the friend, and then the wife of the Tsar. She was worldly smart, which does not require a high mind at all, but only the ability to adapt, not to annoy, to know her place. Peter appreciated the unpretentiousness of Catherine and the ability, if circumstances so required, to endure. Her physical strength also came to the heart of the sovereign. And right. It was necessary to have considerable strength and remarkable health in order to keep up with Peter.
Peter's personal life turned out to be richer and more dramatic than Karl's personal life. Unlike his opponent, the king knew family happiness. But he also had to fully drink the cup of family adversity. He went through a conflict with his son, Tsarevich Alexei, the tragic outcome of which placed on Peter the stigma of a son-killer. There was a dark story in the life of the king with one of the brothers of Anna Mons, chamberlain Willim Mons, caught in 1724 in connection with Catherine.
Peter, who had little regard for human dignity, once publicly mocked a certain cook of Catherine, who was deceived by his wife. The king even ordered deer antlers to be hung over the door of his house. And then he landed in an ambiguous position! Peter was beside himself. "He was pale as death, his wandering eyes sparkled ... Everyone, seeing him, was seized with fear." The banal story of betrayed trust in the performance of Peter received a dramatic coloring with echoes that shook the whole country. Mons was arrested, tried and executed. The vengeful king, before forgiving his wife, forced her to contemplate the severed head of the unfortunate chamberlain.
At one time, L. N. Tolstoy intended to write a novel about the time of Peter. But as soon as he delved into the era, many similar cases turned the writer away from his plan. The cruelty of Peter struck Tolstoy. "Rabid beast" - these are the words that the great writer found for the reformer king.
No such accusations were made against Karl. Swedish historians even noted his decision to ban the use of torture during the investigation: the king refused to believe in the reliability of the accusations received in this way. This is a remarkable fact, testifying to the different state of Swedish and Russian society. However, the feeling of humanism, combined with Protestant maximalism, was selective in Karl. It did not prevent him from reprisals against Russian prisoners taken in battles in Poland: they were killed and maimed.
Contemporaries, evaluating the behavior and manners of the two sovereigns, were more condescending to Peter than to Charles. They did not expect anything else from the Russian monarch. The rudeness and impudence of Peter for them is exotic, which must have accompanied the behavior of the ruler of the "Muscovite barbarians". Karl is more difficult. Charles is the sovereign of a European power. And neglect of manners is unforgivable even for a king. Meanwhile, the motivations for the behavior of Peter and Karl were largely similar. Karl rejected, Peter did not adopt what prevented them from being sovereigns.
The Swedish and Russian monarchs were distinguished by hard work. Moreover, this industriousness greatly differed from the industriousness of Louis XIV, who at one time proudly declared that "the power of kings is acquired by labor." It is unlikely that both of our heroes would dispute the French monarch in this. However, Louis' industriousness was very specific, limited by subject, time and royal whim. Louis did not allow not only clouds on the Sun, but also calluses on the palms. (At one time, the Dutch issued a medal on which the clouds obscured the Sun. The "Sun King" quickly figured out the symbolism and blazed with anger towards the fearless neighbors.)
Charles XII got his industriousness from his father, King Charles XI, who became a model of behavior for the young man. The example was reinforced by the efforts of the enlightened educators of the heir. From early childhood, the Viking King's day was filled with work. Most often, these were military concerns, a hard and troublesome bivouac life. But even after the end of hostilities, the king did not allow himself any indulgences. Karl got up very early, sorted out papers, and then went to inspect regiments or institutions. Actually, the very simplicity in manners and in clothes, which has already been mentioned, comes largely from the habit of working. Exquisite attire is just an obstacle here. Karl's manner of not unfastening his spurs was born not from bad manners, but from his readiness to jump on a horse at the first call and rush about business. The King has demonstrated this time and time again. The most impressive demonstration is Karl's seventeen-hour ride from Bender to the Prut River, where the Turks and Tatars surrounded Peter's army. It is not the fault of the king that he had to see only columns of dust over the columns of Peter's troops leaving for Russia. Karl had no luck with the "capricious girl Fortune". It is no coincidence that she was depicted in the 18th century with a shaved head: gape, did not grab her hair in time in front - remember her name!
“I heal my body with water, and my subjects with examples,” announced Peter in Olonets (Karelia, almost 150 kilometers from Petrozavodsk) at martial springs. In the phrase, the emphasis was on the word "water" - Peter was incredibly proud of the opening of his own resort. History rightly shifted the emphasis to the second part. The tsar really gave his subjects an example of tireless and disinterested labor for the good of the Fatherland.
Moreover, with the light hand of the Moscow sovereign, the image of a monarch was formed, whose virtues were determined not by prayerful zeal and indestructible piety, but by labors. Actually, after Peter, work was made the duty of a true ruler. A fashion began to work - not without the participation of enlighteners. Moreover, not just state labor was revered, as it was in debt. The sovereign was also charged with private labor, a work-example, during which the monarch descended to his subjects. So, Peter was a carpenter, built ships, worked in a lathe (historians lost count when counting the crafts that the Russian sovereign mastered). The Austrian Empress Maria Theresa regaled the courtiers with excellent milk, milking the cows on the imperial farm with her own hands. Louis XV, breaking away from love pleasures, was engaged in wallpaper craft, and his son Louis XVI, with the dexterity of a regimental surgeon, opened the mechanical womb of the clock and brought them back to life. In fairness, we must still note the difference between the original and copies. For Peter, work is a necessity and a vital need. His epigones have rather joy and fun, although, of course, if Louis XVI had become a watchmaker, life would have ended in bed, and not on the guillotine.
In the perception of contemporaries, the industriousness of both sovereigns, of course, had its own shades. Charles appeared to them primarily as a soldier king, whose thoughts and works revolved around the war. Peter's activities are more diverse, and his "image" is more polyphonic. The prefix "warrior" rarely accompanies his name. He is the sovereign who is forced to do everything. The versatile, ebullient activity of Peter was reflected in the correspondence. For more than a hundred years, historians and archivists have been publishing letters and papers of Peter I, but meanwhile it is still far from completion.
The remarkable historian M. M. Bogoslovsky, in order to illustrate the scale of the royal correspondence, took as an example one day from the life of Peter - July 6, 1707. A simple list of topics covered in the letters inspires respect. But the tsar-reformer touched them from memory, demonstrating great awareness. Here is the range of these topics: payment to the Moscow City Hall of amounts from the Admiralty, Siberian and local orders; coinage; recruitment of the dragoon regiment and its armament; issuance of grain provisions; construction of a defensive line in the Derpt chief commandant's office; translation of the Mitchel Regiment; bringing traitors and criminals to justice; new appointments; digging device; putting the Astrakhan rebels on trial; sending a clerk to the Preobrazhensky Regiment; replenishment of Sheremetev's regiments by officers; contributions; search for an interpreter for Sheremetev; the expulsion of the fugitives from the Don; sending convoys to Poland to the Russian regiments; investigation of conflicts on the Izyum line.
On that day, Peter's thought covered the space from Derpt to Moscow, from Polish Ukraine to the Don, the tsar instructed, admonished many close and not very close employees - princes Yu. V. Dolgoruky, M. P. Gagarin, F. Yu. Romodanovsky, field marshal B. P. Sheremetev, K. A. Naryshkin, A. A. Kurbatov, G. A. Plemyannikov and others.
The industriousness of Peter and Karl is the flip side of their curiosity. In the history of transformations, it was the tsar's curiosity that acted as a kind of "primal impetus" and at the same time perpetuum mobile - the perpetual motion machine of reforms. The inexhaustible inquisitiveness of the king is surprising, his ability to be surprised until his death is not lost.
Carl's curiosity is more restrained. She is devoid of Petrine ardor. The King is prone to cold, systematic analysis. This was partly due to the difference in education. It is simply incomparable - a different type and focus. The father of Charles XII was guided by European concepts, personally developing a plan for education and upbringing for his son. The prince's tutor is one of the most intelligent officials, royal adviser Eric Lindsheld, the teachers are the future bishop, professor of theology from Uppsala University Eric Benzelius and professor of Latin Andreas Norkopensis. Contemporaries spoke of Karl's penchant for mathematics. There was someone to develop his talent - the heir to the throne communicated with the best mathematicians.
Against this background, the modest figure of the deacon Zotov, Peter's main teacher, loses a lot. He, of course, was distinguished by piety and for the time being was not a "hawker". But this is clearly not enough in terms of future reforms. The paradox, however, was that neither Peter himself nor his teachers could even guess what kind of knowledge the future reformer needed. Peter is doomed on the lack of European education: firstly, it simply did not exist; secondly, it was revered as evil. It's good that Zotov and others like him did not discourage Peter's curiosity. Peter will be engaged in self-education all his life - and his results will be impressive. However, the king clearly lacked a systematic education, which would have to be replenished through common sense and great work.
Karl and Peter were deeply religious people. The religious upbringing of Charles was distinguished by purposefulness. As a child, he even wrote essays on court sermons. Karl's faith bore a touch of earnestness and even fanaticism. "In any circumstances, - noted contemporaries - he remains true to his unshakable faith in God and His almighty help." Isn't this partly the explanation for the extraordinary courage of the king? If, according to divine providence, not a single hair flies off the head ahead of time, then why beware, bow to bullets? As a devout Protestant, Karl never for a moment leaves the exercise of piety. In 1708, he re-read the Bible four times, became proud (even wrote down the days when he opened the Holy Scriptures) and immediately condemned himself. Recordings flew into the fire under the comment: "I boast of it."
An exercise in piety is also a feeling of being a conductor of the divine will. The king is not just at war with Augustus the Strong or Peter I. He acts as the punishing hand of the Lord, punishing these named sovereigns for perjury and treachery - a motive extremely important for Charles. The extraordinary stubbornness, more precisely, the stubbornness of the "Gothic hero", who did not want to go to peace under any circumstances, goes back to his conviction that he was chosen. Therefore, all failures for the king are only a test sent by God, a test of strength. Here is one small touch: Karl in Bendery drew plans for two frigates (not only Peter did this!) And unexpectedly gave them Turkish names: the first - "Yilderin", the second - "Yaramas", which together translates as "here I will come!" The drawings have been sent to Sweden with strict orders to begin construction immediately, so that everyone knows: nothing is lost, it will come!
The religiosity of Peter is devoid of the earnestness of Charles. It is more base, more pragmatic. The king believes because he believes, but also because faith always turns to the visible benefit of the state. There is a story associated with Vasily Tatishchev. The future historian, upon his return from abroad, allowed himself caustic attacks against the Holy Scriptures. The king set out to teach the freethinker a lesson. "Teaching", in addition to measures of a physical nature, was reinforced by instruction, very characteristic of the "teacher" himself. “How dare you weaken such a string, which makes up the harmony of the whole tone? - Peter was furious. - I will teach you how to read it (Holy Scripture. - I. A.) and do not break the circuits that everything in the device contains".
Remaining a deep believer, Peter did not feel any reverence for the church and the church hierarchy. That is why, without any reflection, he began to remake the church dispensation in the right way. With the light hand of the tsar, the synodal period began in the history of the Russian church, when the highest administration of the church was, in fact, reduced to a simple department for spiritual and moral affairs under the emperor.
Both loved the military. The king plunged headlong into "Mars and Neptune's fun." But very soon he stepped over the boundaries of the game and set about radical military transformations. Carl didn't have to arrange anything like that. Instead of "amusing" regiments, he immediately received "ownership" of one of the best European armies. It is not surprising that he, unlike Peter, had almost no pause in his discipleship. He immediately became a famous commander, demonstrating outstanding tactical and operational skills on the battlefield. But the war, which completely captured Karl, played a cruel joke with him. The king very soon confused ends and means. And if the war becomes the goal, then the result is almost always sad, sometimes self-destruction. The French, after the endless Napoleonic wars that knocked out the healthy part of the nation, "decreased" in height by two inches. I don’t know exactly what the Northern War cost the tall Swedes, but it can definitely be argued that Charles himself burned down in the fire of war, and Sweden overstrained itself, unable to withstand the burden of great power.
Unlike "brother Charles," Peter never confused ends and means. The war and the transformations connected with it remained for him a means of exalting the country. When embarking on "peaceful" reforms at the end of the Northern War, the tsar declares his intentions in this way: zemstvo affairs must be "brought into the same order as military affairs."
Karl liked to take risks, usually without thinking about the consequences. Adrenaline boiled in his blood and gave him a feeling of fullness of life. Whatever page of Karl's biography we take, no matter how big or small the episode is subjected to close scrutiny, everywhere one can see the insane courage of the hero-king, the unceasing desire to test himself for strength. In his youth, he hunted a bear with one horn, and to the question: "Isn't it scary?" - He answered without any frills: "Not at all, if you are not afraid." Later, without bowing, he walked under the bullets. There were cases when they "stung" him, but until a certain time he was lucky: either the bullets were at the end, or the wound was non-fatal.
Carl's love of risk is his weakness and strength. More precisely, if we follow the chronology of events, we must say this: first - strength, then - weakness. Indeed, this trait of Karl's character gave him a visible advantage over his opponents, since they almost always followed "normal", risk-free logic. Karl appeared there and then, when and where he was not expected, acted as no one had ever acted. A similar thing happened near Narva in November 1700. Peter left the position near Narva the day before the Swedes appeared (he went to rush the reserves) not because he was frightened, but because he proceeded from the position: after the march, the Swedes should rest, set up a camp, reconnoiter, and only then attack. But the king did the opposite. He gave no rest to the regiments, the camp did not arrange it, and at dawn, barely visible, he rushed headlong into the attack. If you think about it, all these qualities characterize a true commander. With the proviso that there is a certain condition, the fulfillment of which distinguishes a great commander from an ordinary military leader. This condition: the risk must be justified.
The king did not want to reckon with this rule. He defied fate. And if fate turned away from him, then, in his opinion, let it be worse ... fate. Should we be surprised at his reaction to Poltava? “I’m doing well. And only recently, due to one special event, misfortune happened, and the army suffered damage, which, I hope, will soon be corrected,” he wrote in early August 1709 to his sister Ulrike-Eleonora. This is "everything is good" and a small "misfortune" - about the defeat and capture of the entire Swedish army near Poltava and Perevolnaya!
Carl's role in history is a hero. Peter did not look so brave. He is more circumspect and careful. Risk is not his forte. Even moments of weakness of the king are known, when he lost his head and strength. But the closer we are to Peter, who is able to overcome himself. It is in this that one of the most important differences between Charles and Peter finds its manifestation. They are both men of duty. But each of them understands duty in their own way. Peter feels himself a servant of the Fatherland. This view for him is both a moral justification for everything he has done, and the main motive that encourages him to overcome fatigue, fear, and indecision. Peter thinks of himself for the Fatherland, and not the Fatherland for himself: "And know about Peter that his life is inexpensive for him, if only Russia would live in bliss and glory for your well-being." These words, spoken by the tsar on the eve of the Battle of Poltava, perfectly reflected his inner attitude. Karl is different. With all his love for Sweden, he turned the country into a means of realizing his ambitious plans.
The fate of Peter and Charles is the story of the eternal dispute about which ruler is better: an idealist who put principles and ideals above all else, or a pragmatist who stood firmly on the ground and preferred real rather than illusory goals. Karl in this dispute acted as an idealist and lost, because his idea of punishing, in spite of everything, treacherous opponents from the absolute turned into absurdity.
Charles, in a purely Protestant way, was sure that a person is saved by faith alone. And he believed in it unshakably. It is symbolic that the earliest surviving written by Charles is a quote from the Gospel of Matthew (VI, 33): "Seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all this will be added to you." Charles not only followed this commandment, he "implanted" it. In the perception of his destiny, the Swedish king is a more medieval sovereign than the king of the "barbarian Muscovites" Peter. He is seized with sincere religious piety. Protestant theology for him is completely self-sufficient in substantiating his absolute power and the nature of his relationship with his subjects. For Peter, however, the former "ideological equipment" of the autocracy, which rested on theocratic foundations, was completely insufficient. He justifies his power more broadly, resorting to the theory of natural law and the "common good".
Paradoxically, Karl, in his incredible stubbornness and in his talent, contributed a lot to the reforms in Russia and the formation of Peter as a statesman. Under the leadership of Charles, Sweden not only did not want to part with the great power. She strained all her strength, mobilized all the potential, including the energy and intelligence of the nation, in order to maintain her position. In response, this required the incredible efforts of Peter and Russia. If Sweden yielded earlier, and who knows how strong the "roll" of reforms and the imperial ambitions of the Russian tsar would have been? Of course, there is no reason to doubt the energy of Peter, who would hardly have refused to goad and spur the country. But it is one thing to carry out reforms in a country that is waging a "three-dimensional war," another thing that is ending the war after Poltava. In a word, Karl, with all his skills to win battles and lose the war, was a worthy rival to Peter. And although there was no king among those captured on the Poltava field, the congratulations cup for teachers raised by the king undoubtedly had a direct bearing on him.
I wonder if Karl would have agreed - if he had been present at the same time - with his field marshal Renschild, who muttered in response to Peter's toast: "Well, you thanked your teachers!"?