Why is Pavel the First such underestimated person?
I'm not talking about him as the emperor of Russia anymore (just because I'm tired of arguing about him as the emperor).Let's look at him as a person.
He was born and was immediately taken away from his parents.His mom cooled down to him, because it's important for both of them to have intimacy from birth, and not after 40 fucking days, as his aunt did. After 8 years, his father is killed. Yes, I admit that Peter III is not a very good ruler, but as a father, I think he could have been a good father (if he had not been killed and his associates persuaded to communicate with Paul). Moreover, my mother was involved in the murder of my father (indirectly, of course, because after his death she blackened him in her memoirs, and destroyed other evidence about him).He is also told throughout his life that his mother killed his father, and he believes that he is alive (a reference to the Pugachev rebellion). I will not give everything else as an example, I am ready to talk about it for a long time, but I want to say only one thing:
Pavel is a good man. Despite his outbursts of anger, despite his excessive pedantry, he is a good man and a good father (His youngest son, Nicholas the First, recalled how Pavel played with them, communicated and called the younger ones "Sheep" or "Lambs" (MY GOD, THAT'S VERY SWEET))
7 notes
·
View notes
I can't do this anymore! (about the historian student's sore point)
I study at the Herzen State Pedagogical University, to become a historian (not a teacher!) and I have accumulated a lot of unpleasant situations from my life as a student of the above-mentioned university.
The fact is that I am madly in love with Paul I, Arakcheev and Peter III.I'm ready to tell you everything I know about them: myths, tales, facts unknown to ordinary people, etc.I've read a lot of books about them, listened to lectures on the Internet (yes, and Mr. Medinsky's lectures too, purely out of interest).I love their history and sincerely want to better reveal them to ordinary people, which is why I enrolled in the historian.
But I have people in my course who came out of school with school knowledge, passed the Unified State Exam (so that it burns in hell) and enrolled in a historian.
Fuck, it would be better not to do it, please excuse me, but this is a nightmare!90% of my classmates are ardent politicians and I sincerely do not understand why the hell they went to the historian!? It would be fine if they talked about politics, but they did not look beyond the history textbook and Klim Zhukov's lectures (although I may be mistaken). But that's not the point.
In my first year, I told them about my love for the aforementioned historical figures. And then it startedI argued with them about the foreign policy of Peter the Third, about the personality and tragic death of Paul the First, about the character of Arakcheev and military settlements, and even about the domestic policy of Nicholas the First.
And now I am a laughing stock, loving men in the uniform of the 18th and 19th centuries, aggressively reacting to any ridicule of Paul I and Peter III (for some reason they only remembered them).
I don't want to prove anything, I just want people to open their eyes to these people.:Arakcheev is not a callous soldier. (Have you seen his Georgian estate!? It says a lot about its owner!)He was helping people,he commuted the sentences of the military, took care of the education of military people.Paul I did not deserve to be laughed at for his death (my classmates openly laughed at his murder).
I just can't keep quiet about it anymore. I'm tired of making fun of them.
2 notes
·
View notes