Version: Borodino-1867

According to authoritative print media of pre-revolutionary Russia, at least 25 participants in the Battle of Borodino and witnesses of the Patriotic War were alive in 1912, a hundred years later. Photographs of 7 such centenarians, aged from 107 to 122 years, have been preserved. The pictures refer to the celebrations marking the centenary of the Battle of Borodino in 1912. Two veterans even got caught on a movie camera.

History has brought to us the names of heroic centenarians who gathered at the call of the tsar for the Borodino celebrations or who did not live up to these celebrations just a little:

1. Feldwebel Akim Vintanyuk (other options Voitvenyuk or Voytinyuk), participant of the Battle of Borodino, 122 years old. According to the magazine "Ogonyok" No. 34 for 1912, in the same 1912 he was 133 (one hundred thirty three) years old. How long he lived - only God knows. In the newsreel footage, where Voitvenyuk is standing talking with the emperor and where he poses in a group with other participants and witnesses of the Patriotic War, he looks perhaps better than others.

"Just think, talking to a man who remembers everything and tells the great details of the battle, shows the place where he was wounded then!" - this is how Nicholas II describes his impressions of the conversation with Voitvenyuk in a letter to his mother.

Chronicle footage from the film "Tsarevich Alexei" - Channel One, TV company "Adam's Apple". The Emperor is informed that Feldwebel Voitvenyuk has just celebrated his 122nd birthday.

(Voitvenyuk is the one that is shorter)

2. Petr Laptev, 118 years old, eyewitness of the Patriotic War (source of information is unknown).

3. Maxim Pyatochenkov - 120 years old, participant of the Battle of Borodino ("Ogonyok", ref. Number). According to other sources, he was a "witness of the Patriotic War," although he could have taken part in his age. But apparently, there was too much in the number of 120-year-old centenarians even without him.

4. Stepan Zhuk - 122 years old participant of the Borodino battle ("Ogonyok", ref. Number). According to other sources, "witness of the Patriotic War", age 110 years.

They are:

Voitvenyuk, 122 years old, on the far left (the one with light brown hair).

Once again:

Princes John Konstantinovich (right) and Gabriel Konstantinovich talk with eyewitnesses (and participants) of the Patriotic War of 1812 near the House of Invalids. Among them (from left to right): Akim Voitinyuk, Petr Laptev, Stepan Zhuk, Gordey Gromov, Maxim Pyatochenkov. Borodino, August 26, 1912

5. Pavel Yakovlevich Tolstoguzov, 117 years old, participant of the Battle of Borodino, with his 80-year-old wife

It can be stated that the Battle of Borodino and the Patriotic War of the 12th year became, as it were, the elixir of immortality that imbued with longevity all those who were directly related to them. Below is information from the site of the 1st channel (sources not specified):

“It is surprising that the living witnesses of Napoleon's invasion of Russia and even the participants in the Battle of Borodino managed to survive not only to the invention of photography and cinema, but also to the centenary of the battle. By order of the tsar, they were searched all over the country and 25 people were found."

Twenty five people 110-120-year-olds! And how many were not found?

Continuation:

“A resident of the then Tobolsk province, Pavel Tolstoguzov (photo above), a former recruit of the army of Alexander the First, also received an invitation to come in August 1912 to the celebrations in Moscow.

"He was 118 years old. He walked himself, without glasses he saw well, he heard well! But, apparently, the memories of what he had to endure during this war flooded and on July 31, 1912, he died, "says Albina Bolotova, an employee of the Yalutorovsk museum." (From the same place).

One could consider the given information a newspaper duck, the participants themselves - hired actors or impostors, the entry in the letter of Nicholas II to be explained by his naivety, etc., however, information about long-lived veterans is not limited to this. Two decades earlier, an article was published about another participant in the Battle of Borodino, the fireworks Kochetkov Vasily Nikolayevich, who lived for 107 years and died suddenly while traveling by rail in Russia, despite his disability (he lost his leg during the battles on Shipka). The main thing is not even age, but the fact that out of his 107 years, allegedly at least 66 he spent in battles and campaigns: starting his military path near Borodino, he ended up in a war with the Turks in 1877, where he took part as a soldier, being 92 years old. (According to the "Government Gazette" No. 192 - September 2, 1892 - p.3).

To confirm that the age of the Borodino soldiers is greatly overestimated, one can also cite a photograph of a participant in the Patriotic War F. N. Glinka, filmed at the age of 92, in 1878. It looks like you won't give it more than 60 years.

Fyodor Nikolaevich Glinka (1786-1880); according to the signature, photographed in 1878. (To the centenary of the Patriotic War of 1812-1912. Issue 2. - M., 1912).

Reference:

Out of respect for the exploits of Russian soldiers, there is no reason to doubt the veracity of the biographies of World War II veterans. I would rather rather doubt the correctness of the dating of the Battle of Borodino.

In my opinion, it would be wiser than complaining about modern ecology and genetics.

The trick is that in addition to the three participants in the battle near Borodino and a couple of other witnesses to the events associated with it, information about super-long-livers within the historical borders of the Russian state does not appear anywhere else. Except perhaps for those 20 participants and witnesses of the Patriotic War, who, for various reasons, could not accept the tsar's invitation to visit Borodino a hundred years later.

Even if you believe that the age of Voitvenyuk and his younger comrades is determined correctly, it looks more than strange that so many long-lived veterans among one relatively small local group. Even 110 years of age is definitely a phenomenon of world significance, but here there are 25 such people and all of them are veterans or witnesses of the Patriotic War …

One can believe in the veracity of information about isolated cases of long life of 110-115-year-old people scattered around the world, living in different decades, but it is difficult to believe in the concentration of two dozen even more ancient old people, almost the same age, exactly on the path of Napoleon.

A photo of Napoleon himself, it turns out, also exists. He was photographed during the Crimean War by the English war correspondent Fenton.

Photo caption: "Prince Napoleon".

The photo depicts someone unlike Napoleon III, who allegedly ruled at that time (a mustachioed, humped-nosed and lean subject). But the closeness of the features with the same beardless "little corporal" inclined to corpulence is obvious.

For comparison:

Napoleon in 1812 (engraving).

Of course, the evidence cited provides a basis only for a speculative conclusion about the fact of forgeries in the history of the 19th century. Well, probably you shouldn't look in the archives for something similar to a signed confession.

And now a few thoughts about when the battle of Borodino really could have taken place?

Or so: what date of the Borodino battle is the most probable? (At least approximately).

If not in 1812, then when?

Without a doubt, such a significant event as the Battle of Borodino cannot be so simply falsified, even at the level of dates. The Patriotic War was known not only to science, it was spoken of among the people for some reason as "the war of the 12th year." Under such a diplomatic formulation, it entered historical books and literary works (suffice it to recall at least Pushkin's similar expression: "thunderstorm in 12 years").

The formulation itself is rather vague, and may be associated with the wars of other centuries, say, the Time of Troubles in 1612. Nevertheless, it was used. Why?

The explanation for such a vague wording is that it is not at all about the 12th year of the 19th century.

It is known that all the royal documents had two dates: the year of such and such from the Nativity of Christ and the year of the reign of the now living emperor.

It may very well be that the war of the 12th year means the war of the 12th year of the reign of Emperor Alexander Pavlovich, the victor of Napoleon.

The second clue will be the comparison of the “war of 12th year” with some equally large-scale conflict in which at least France would participate.

The only such event is the Franco-Prussian War, which ended in 1871.

If the Communard uprising is compared with the 100 days of Napoleon, if 1871 is considered a reflection of the year 1815, or rather the opposite: the Napoleonic Wars had a consequence of the Franco-Prussian War, then if we subtract from 1871 the three years that the Allies took to put an end to Napoleonic France, we get an approximate date World War II.

Clues to the Franco-Prussian War

There are many ambiguities regarding the Franco-Prussian War, for which historical science does not provide exhaustive explanations.

First of all, the reason for Russia's non-interference in the process of creating a unified German state, based both on Slavic lands and on the territory of the former Russian province called Prussia, is unclear.

Finally, the complete non-intervention of Russia in the protection of the Slavic population in Germany is unclear, and the patronage of the Slavs around the world was in the traditions of the Russian politics of that time.

The German Empire, whose geographical map is literally replete with Slavic names of cities and areas, where the under-German Slavs still live, whose population is very close to Russian in their genotype, will invariably threaten the existence of the Russian statehood itself, which will manifest itself later in the sending of Comrade. Lenin in a sealed carriage, and in Hitler's eastern politics. The creation of a unified German state, striving for world domination or at least for the colonization of Ukraine, will cost Russia two bloody wars, the fall of one regime, revolution and related dramatic events and about 30 million lives as a result of World War II alone.

Germany at one time was not only allowed to unite, it was then allowed to become immeasurably stronger at the expense of defeated France. This will be the second inexplicable mistake of the Russian emperors.

Only a decade later, the Russian autocracy, as if recollecting itself, would begin to seek an alliance against monarchist Germany with a weakened republican France, where the autocracy was destroyed by Russian weapons … The union, to be sure, unexpected, running counter to the previous traditional pro-German policy, an alliance more than unnatural, and most importantly, the tsarist regime, belated and for this delay, will pay with its existence in 1917.

What is the explanation for the reasons for the contradictory policy of tsarism in relation to the German Empire? What explains the incomprehensible blindness of the French supreme power in the person of Napoleon, who also did not react in any way to the creation of the German Empire, and this despite its obvious hostility, primarily to France?

If we assume that the German Empire did not pose any threat before 1870, because such an empire did not exist in nature, that the unification of "iron and blood" is no more than an ideological myth that Prussia was just liberated by Russian arms from the power of the French - in In this case, everything falls into place.

The German Empire was not overslept, it was not taken into account. And Napoleon's illness, which they are trying to explain his indulgence in the appetites of Prussia, has absolutely nothing to do with it. Dominating Europe, Napoleon, despite all his ailments, felt politically more than confident and could only fear Russia.

After the liberation of Germany, the German by blood Russian monarchs, the Germans will be the highest allowed to have their own statehood. This is the alleged creation of the German Empire.

It so happened that the Russian soldiers, who thought at one time to pacify Europe, paved the way for the militant European nationalisms, warming themselves under the wing of the French eagle.

Is it not for this unnecessary trip abroad for the good of the German states that Russia, in the words of the dying Kutuzov, will never be able to forgive Alexander I?

For France, rapprochement with Russia will also be a completely natural decision: an unpretentious Russia is better than a predatory Germany.

As for the Russian ruling circles, who surprised the whole world with their undemandingness either to territorial claims or to political influence in France and Germany, their disinterested policy only succeeded in sowing the seeds of envy of others' glory among the liberated.

Successful punitive expeditions against poorly trained communard militias in 1871 are the real first fruits of the military victories of the newly-made German Empire, and the total war of annihilation in the East in 70 years will become its swan song.

When a strengthened Germany, taking advantage of the uprising in Paris, introduces troops there, occupies France and seizes Alsace and Lorraine from her, this will be the first signal of a future German-Russian confrontation. The next step on the way of aggravating Russian-German relations will be the blackmail by Germany of Russia during the Turkish war in 1878, which did not allow an easy seizure of Constantinople.

The next ambiguity during the Franco-Prussian War is in fact numerous awards to German soldiers and officers with Russian military awards - the insignia of the military order and the orders of St. George for "The war with the French in 1870"as if Russia and Prussia were allies against a common enemy, as it was during the foreign campaigns of the Russian army in 1813-1814. If someone thinks that "numerous awards" are just an artistic exaggeration and that we are in fact talking about isolated cases, I refer to the book of P. A. Zayonchkovsky. The government apparatus of autocratic Russia in the 19th century. - M., 1978.-- p. 182-183, where it is said even more categorically: (during the Franco-Prussian war of 1870) "the crosses of St. George were generously distributed to the German officers, and the insignia of the order to the soldiers, as if they were fighting for the interests of Russia."

German officers were awarded orders up to the Order of St. George, 2nd degree (only 4 awards out of 125, or about 3% of awards in history). Decorations of German soldiers have surfaced at auction sales of awards ever since, complete with purely German orders.

Shoe of a German - a veteran of the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-1871 from Württemberg, awarded the Badge of Distinction of the Military Order of St. George 4th degree No. 22848.

According to collectors, these awards belonged to a veteran who served in the 5th Württemberg Grenadier Regiment (123rd Regiment according to general German numbering) named after King Charles and who participated in the Franco-Prussian War in the battles of Sedan, Wörth, Willers, Paris. A source:

The Austrians, who did not seem to take part in the Franco-Prussian war, also suffered from Russian bounty. The fact of awarding the Austrian (and not the German) commander for the same Franco-Prussian war with the Order of St. George as much as the 1st degree. Of the 25 soldiers awarded this order in the entire history of its existence, the Austrian Albrecht Friedrich Rudolf, Duke von Teschen became the 23rd. His leadership skills were appreciated along with the talent of Suvorov himself. The same Austrian soon received the title of Russian field marshal.

Except for the Order of St. George as a commemorative medal, which was handed out without any significant reason, the following explanation suggests itself: Russia and Austria were allies, which is confirmed by the rank of the recipient - at that time it was customary to give the highest command personnel of the allied powers high ranks.

Returning to dating

Let's check the date of the Borodino battle obtained above (1867 or 1868), adding 12 to the date of accession to the throne of the emperor reigning at that time, and this is 1855, the year of death (as a result of a cold) of the previous king. We get all the same 1867.

There is a possibility that the Battle of Borodino could have taken place not in 1867, but a year later, since in 1868 the day of the week on which this battle took place (Monday, September 7 new style / August 26 old style) exactly coincides with the same in 1812

You can check it here:

In autumn 1867, the writer Tolstoy visited the Borodino field, before writing the last parts of his epic War and Peace, a long and verbose work that was popular, apparently because of its topical nature and became a template for other authors to write similar boring epics. And they do not realize that Tolstoy worked in the genre of documentary filmmaking, lived, as it is assumed, in the era of the Napoleonic wars and almost never invented anything himself.

Analogies between the Decembrist uprising in 1825 and the regicide in 1881

The uprising of the Decembrists took place 13 years after the war of the 12th year. If we add 13 to 1867 (the probable time of the Patriotic War), we get 1880 - the approximate date of the coming to power of the new emperor (1881), who never introduced the constitution, already fully prepared for adoption. The Constitution is exactly what the insurgent Decembrists demanded … The insurgent soldiers were then explained that they should shout "Constitution!"

The sympathy of the troops exclusively for this son of Paul I can be explained not only by the fact that he was in the Italian campaign of Suvorov, but also by the striking external resemblance of Constantine, brother of Alexander I, to Alexander I. Judging by the preserved images on the "Constantine ruble", practically a copy - a massive chin, a button nose, the bald patch praised by Pushkin, and only a fuller face does not agree with the appearance of Alexander I, as he looked 10-15 years before the December uprising.

The two-month difference between the December uprising of 25 and the March assassination of Emperor Alexander III does not allow us to consider the first event as just a part of the second that has been pushed back into the past. But even this can be explained.

It can be suggested that the perpetuation of the date of regicide in Russia was taboo. Such is the whim of the emperors, like Catherine's renaming of the Yaik River into the Urals, for the mere participation of the Yaik Cossacks in the Pugachev uprising.

The shameful uprising of the Decembrists was ordered to be moved to the past, and the last month of the year, when it took place, was ordered to be replaced from the biography of the late king with another, so that this month would not have the reputation of a month in which kings are killed.

If we consider that the March murder and the December uprising are links of the same chain, the question arises: what event is considered chronologically reliable?

Most likely, the uprising of the Decembrists did indeed take place in December. Such mass events are too much of a rumor to hide or obscure the name of the month. The falsifiers contented themselves with pushing this uprising more than half a century into the past.

So, the murder of Alexander, which happened immediately before the uprising, was moved from December 1880 to March 1881, in order to throw off the trail of all future "free thinkers" from among those interested in the history of popular uprisings, so as not to give them a reason. Everything was done so that the masses would never in the future draw an analogy between the murder of the tsar himself by a handful of terrorists and the organized uprising of entire regiments against his heir.

If the first is nothing more than an excess, the second, after all, is a popular revolt, the first provoked the second. Such an analogy destroyed the mass idea of the sacred inviolability of the royal persons, of the unity between the king and the army, of Orthodoxy and autocracy and nationality.

It was difficult for the Russian tsar to remain merciful to the population of the country where his German dad was killed.

Therefore, everyone was ordered to forget about the revolution and regicide as synchronous events, and the corresponding order was immediately sent to historians.

Moving the dates undoubtedly damaged the chronology of the year 1881 - the first two months and part of December were "thrown out" of it.

Motives and opportunities

The order for falsification was undoubtedly lowered from the very top, actions to falsify history were synchronous in all the leading countries of the world. Nothing is impossible here. The fact is that after the destruction of the French Empire (1870), the world briefly became monopolar and was ruled by kindred clans, between whose representatives there was initially complete cordial agreement. Problems of international politics (and history is politics turned into the past) were the subject of discussion in a narrow family circle.

The task of rewriting history was, although difficult, but solvable, given the scanty circulation of the press of that time and the illiteracy of the peasant population, which in Russia at that time was 90%.

What is left of the true history in the country where the state of emergency existed until 1917? Only oral memory, only living witnesses of events, but over the years they became less and less.

As mentioned above, in 1912 all over Russia only 25 people were found participants and witnesses of the Patriotic War of the 12th year (1867 or 1868), but the real age of the veterans actually did not exceed 77 years, which is clearly seen in the photo. That is:

Voitvenyuk - allegedly 122 years old, probably born in 1845 (or 1846). In 1912 he was 77.

Petr Laptev, "118 years old", b. in 1849.73.

Maxim Pyatochenkov - 75.

Stepan Zhuk - 73.

Tolstoguzov - 72, etc.

It is more difficult to establish the biography of Kochetkov, because it is not exactly clear from what time he entered the service - whether in the Crimean War of 1855 or in the Patriotic War, later (yes, exactly that!).

… When a new generation of educated people grew up, they completed the rest of the work: everything that does not fit into the chronological matrix will be declared a fake.

How it happens, you can see the example of comments on a real photo of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin (look in Google: a photo of Pushkin, you will not regret it).

Benefits of falsifying history:

Above, an attempt was made to substantiate the assumption that the history of the 19th century was lengthened by at least 50 years. Now about what interest in this could be for Germany, Austria and Russia - the powers that literally created the history of the 19th century.

• appropriation of the property of the French nobility after the overthrow of the Napoleonic regime, under the pretext that the owners have long been dead.
• "Nationalization" of copyright for technical inventions and works of art, under the same pretext. It is worth remembering that Pushkin's widow was graciously allowed to extend the rights to publish her husband's works for another 50 years. Might not be allowed.
• Elongation of the pedigree of noble families and ruling dynasties;
• fabrication of a pedigree, so that the ruling clan of some impostor on paper to deduce from the legally ruling king.
• Attribution of all unpopular decisions to the past in order to create a good reputation for the Russian Tsar and his descendants.
• Substantiation of territorial and political claims of new national states and the very fact of their emergence.