Interesting and Humour - page 3059

New comment
 
Yuriy Zaytsev:
:)

Dimitri don't scare already ... People here are on average well educated.

Are you even right... Adequately understand the phrase "Kutuzov burned Moscow"?


Where is it "written in textbooks" that "Kutuzov burned Moscow"?

OK, I'll allow it - where in the textbooks is it written that Kutuzov gave the order to burn Moscow?

Textbook - year, edition, page?

 
Yuriy Zaytsev:
;) apparently so

Another recommendation is to
read War and Peace...
Apparently you haven't read it.

90% of people haven't read it, because few people can keep up with the volume.
 
Дмитрий:

I read it carefully:

"Most likely, Moscow was burned by order of M. I. Kutuzov" - and not most likely by who? The slowest by whom?

And there - when the French entered Moscow - Zamoskvorechye was burning, not Moscow.

Well, is it difficult to read a little further than the headline?

I have read it. And I have not asserted anything. But what do I see!? You seem to be a clear eyewitness to those events. So tell everyone here what it was like. )))
 
Anatoli Kazharski:
But what do I see!?
What exactly do you see?
 

Mikhail Davydov, Doctor of History, Professor at the Institute of History and Archives of the Russian State University of Humanities, described the evolution of the official version of the fire as follows:

"In our homeland, historical concepts of the Moscow fire have consistently changed depending on the political conjuncture...

 
Alexandr Saprykin:
It's a book that 90% of people haven't read, because few people can cope with such a volume.
War and Peace has as much to do with history (reality) as The Hussar Ballad.
 
Yuriy Asaulenko:
War and Peace has as much to do with history (reality) as The Hussar Ballad.
Many history textbooks have the same relevance to reality.
 
Alexandr Saprykin:
many history textbooks have the same attitude to reality.
This is true.
 
Yuriy Zaytsev:

that's right...

Well, because nobody knows that Moscow started burning before Napoleon set foot in the city.

It wasn't really the French who set the fire - Napoleon wanted to overwinter.

And of course everyone understands that the order to set it on fire was clearly not given

- because it was impossible to give such an order!

But everyone knew perfectly well that it had to be set on fire!

---

For those who haven't read the novel!


Moscow was burned down by its inhabitants, it's true; but not by those who stayed in it, but by those who left it. Moscow, occupied by the enemy, did not remain intact as Berlin, Vienna and other cities, only because its inhabitants did not offer bread-salt and keys to the French, but left it.

they told us at school that the villagers were setting their houses on fire as they were leaving.
 
Alexandr Saprykin:
They told us in school that the inhabitants were setting fire to their houses when they left.
The French, who occupied Moscow, were genuinely mistaken in believing that Moscow caught fire en masse in about three days.
1...305230533054305530563057305830593060306130623063306430653066...4977
New comment
Reason: