Decorative part of the king cannon. Tsar Cannon and Tsar Bell

As you know, the Tsar Cannon is a medieval artillery piece and a monument to Russian artillery, cast in bronze in 1586 by Russian master Andrei Chokhov at the Cannon Yard. Today we will try to find out whether it is possible to shoot from it or is it still a prop.

The author writes: There are many misconceptions about her among the people. For example: “Russia had the most powerful and advanced production and technological base for the production of cast iron in the world, the monuments of which are these unique artifacts (this is about the Tsar Bell and the Tsar Cannon - author)... has long been proven, and there is documentary evidence that the Tsar Cannon actually fired.”

It’s clear from the bell. They are made exclusively from bronze, and not just any bronze, but special staff. Well, guns, of course, are different. For this purpose in hard times our wonderful people even used birch burl. They took a thick, stocky one birch log, they made a hole in it, bound it with iron strips, burned a small hole in the breech for a fuse, and now the cannon is ready. In the 17th…19th centuries, they were mainly cast from cast iron. But the Tsar Cannon is still bronze.
An important note about documentary evidence that the cannon fired. Indeed, people are circulating information that certain experts have precisely established... discovered... etc. This rumor was started by journalists. Who and what actually established will be discussed in detail below. Let us also consider the question of another misconception that haunts the minds of scientists. Many of them believe that the Tsar Cannon is a huge shotgun. A very convenient opinion that allows historians to explain many of the mysteries associated with it. In fact, this is not the case, as will be convincingly shown.
There is another persistent misconception that makes one doubt the rationality of human nature. They say that the Tsar Cannon was made to frighten foreigners, especially ambassadors Crimean Tatars. The absurdity of this statement will also become obvious as you read the article.
What arguments can be given:
Firstly, the cast iron cannonballs are striking, which in the 19th century became the source of those same conversations about the decorative purpose of the cannon. In the 16th century they used stone cores, and they were 2.5 times lighter than the cast iron ones. It can be said with absolute certainty that the walls of the cannon would not have withstood the pressure of the powder gases when fired with such a cannonball. Of course, this was understood when they were cast at the Byrd plant.
Secondly, a fake carriage, cast there. You can't shoot from it. When fired with a standard 800 kg stone cannonball from a 40 ton Tsar Cannon, even with a small initial speed 100 meters per second, the following will happen:
expanding powder gases, creating high blood pressure, will, as it were, expand the space between the cannonball and the bottom of the cannon; the cannonball will begin to move in one direction, and the cannon in the opposite direction, while the speed of their movement will be inversely proportional to the mass (how many times lighter is the body, the faster will it fly).

The mass of the cannon is only 50 times the mass of the cannonball (in a Kalashnikov assault rifle, for example, this ratio is about 400), so when the cannonball flies forward at a speed of 100 meters per second, the cannon will roll back at a speed of about 2 meters per second. This colossus will not stop right away, after all, it’s 40 tons. The rollback energy will be approximately equal to a hard impact of the KAMAZ into an obstacle at a speed of 30 km/h. The Tsar Cannon will be torn off its carriage. Moreover, she simply lies on top of him like a log. All this can be held only by a special sliding carriage with hydraulic dampers (recoil dampers) and reliable mounting of the gun. I assure you, this is still quite an impressive device today, but then this simply did not exist. And all this is not just my opinion: “Currently, the Tsar Cannon is on a decorative cast-iron carriage, and next to it lie decorative cast-iron cannonballs, which were cast in 1834 in St. Petersburg at the Berda iron foundry. It is clear that it is physically impossible to either shoot from this cast-iron carriage or use cast-iron cannonballs - the Tsar Cannon will be smashed to smithereens!” (Alexander Shirokorad “Miracle Weapon” Russian Empire"). Therefore, that artillery complex, which they show us in the Kremlin under the name Tsar Cannon, is a giant prop.

Today, hypotheses about the use of the Tsar Cannon as a shotgun are persistently discussed. The opinion is very convenient for historians. If it's a shotgun, then you don't need to carry it anywhere. I put it at the loophole and that’s it, wait for the enemy.
What Andrei Chokhov cast in 1586, that is, the bronze barrel itself, could really fire. It would just look completely different from what many people think. The fact is that by its design the Tsar Cannon is not a cannon, but a classic bombard. A cannon is a weapon with a barrel length of 40 calibers and above. The Tsar Cannon has a barrel length of only 4 calibers. But for a bombard this is just normal. They often had an impressive size, and were used for siege, like battering weapons. To destroy a fortress wall, you need a very heavy shell. This is what giant calibers are for.

There was no talk of any gun carriage then. The trunk was simply buried in the ground. The flat end rested on deeply driven piles (Fig. 2). Nearby they dug 2 more trenches for the artillery crew, since such guns were often torn apart. Charging sometimes took a day. Hence the rate of fire of such guns is from 1 to 6 shots per day. But all this was worth it, because it made it possible to crush impregnable walls, avoid months-long sieges and reduce combat losses during the assault.

Only this can be the meaning of casting a 40-ton barrel with a caliber of 900 mm. The Tsar Cannon is a bombard - a battering ram gun designed to besiege enemy fortresses, and not a shotgun at all, as some are inclined to believe.

Here is the opinion of a specialist this issue: “...As a shotgun, the Tsar Cannon was extremely ineffective. At the cost of the cost, instead of it, it was possible to produce 20 small shotguns, the loading of which would take not a day, but only 1-2 minutes. I note that in the official inventory “At the Moscow Arsenal of Artillery” in 1730 there were 40 copper and 15 cast iron shotguns. Let's pay attention to their calibers: 1500 pounds - 1 (this is the Tsar Cannon), followed by calibers: 25 pounds - 2, 22 pounds - 1, 21 pounds - 3, etc. Largest number shotguns, 11, are in the 2-pound gauge. Rhetorical question: what place did our military think when they recorded the Tsar Cannon as shotguns?..” (Alexander Shirokorad “Miracle Weapons of the Russian Empire”).

The Tsar Cannon was never used for its intended purpose

As was said at the beginning of the article, there are rumors about some “documentary evidence” that the Tsar Cannon fired. Actually, it has great value not only the fact of the shot, but also what she shot with, and under what circumstances. The cannonballs that were used to load the cannon could have been different weights, and the weight of gunpowder could be different. The pressure in the barrel bore and the power of the shot depend on this. All this cannot be determined now. In addition, if trial test shots were fired from a gun, then this is one thing, but if it was used in battle, it is completely different. Let me give you a quote about this:
“Documents about the testing of the Tsar Cannon or its use in combat conditions have not been preserved, which gave later historians the basis for lengthy debates about its purpose... A minority of experts generally exclude the possibility combat use gun, and it was made to frighten foreigners, especially the ambassadors of the Crimean Tatars... An interesting detail: in 1980, specialists from the Academy named after Dzerzhinsky concluded that the Tsar Cannon was fired at least once...” (Alexander Shirokorad “Miracle Weapon of the Russian Empire”).

By the way, the report of these same specialists was not published for unknown reasons. And since the report is not shown to anyone, it cannot be considered evidence. The phrase “they shot at least once” was apparently dropped by one of them in a conversation or interview, otherwise we would not have known anything about it at all. If the gun had been used for its intended purpose, then inevitably there would have been not only particles of gunpowder in the barrel, which according to rumors were found, but also mechanical damage in the form of longitudinal scratches. In battle, the Tsar Cannon would fire not cotton wool, but stone cannonballs weighing approximately 800 kg.

There should also be some wear on the surface of the bore. It cannot be otherwise, because bronze is a fairly soft material. The expression “at least” just indicates that, apart from particles of gunpowder, nothing significant could be found there. If this is so, then the gun was not used for its intended purpose. And particles of gunpowder could remain from test shots. The point in this issue is put by the fact that the Tsar Cannon never left Moscow:
“After the Tsar Cannon was cast and finished at the Cannon Yard, it was dragged to the Spassky Bridge and laid on the ground next to the Peacock cannon. To move the gun, ropes were tied to eight brackets on its barrel; 200 horses were harnessed to these ropes at the same time, and they rolled the cannon, which lay on huge roller logs. Initially, the “Tsar” and “Peacock” guns lay on the ground near the bridge leading to the Spasskaya Tower, and the Kashpirov cannon was located near the Zemsky Prikaz, located where the Historical Museum is now. In 1626, they were lifted from the ground and installed on log buildings densely packed with earth. These platforms were called roskats...” (Alexander Shirokorad “Miracle Weapons of the Russian Empire”).
At home, using a battering gun for its intended purpose is somehow suicidal. Who were they going to shoot at with an 800-kilogram cannonball from the Kremlin walls? It is pointless to shoot at enemy manpower once a day. There were no tanks then. They were probably expecting Godzilla to appear. Of course, these huge battering guns were put on public display not for combat purposes, but as an element of the prestige of the state. And, of course, this was not their main purpose. Under Peter I, the Tsar Cannon was installed on the territory of the Kremlin itself. There she remains to this day. Why has it never been used in combat, although it is quite combat-ready as a battering weapon? Perhaps the reason for this is its excessive weight? Was it realistic to move such a weapon over long distances?

Transportation

Modern historians extremely rarely ask themselves the question: “why?” And the question is extremely useful. So let's ask, why was it necessary to cast a siege weapon weighing 40 tons if it could not be delivered to the enemy city? To scare the ambassadors? Hardly. They could make a cheap mockup for this and show it from afar. Why spend so much work and bronze on a bluff? No, the Tsar Cannon was cast to be used practically. This means they could have moved it. How could they do this?
40 tons is really very heavy. A KAMAZ truck cannot handle such a weight. It is designed for only 10 tons of cargo. When you try to load a cannon onto it, first the suspension will collapse, then the frame will bend. To do this, you need a tractor 4 times more durable and powerful. And everything that could be made of wood, for the purpose of conveniently transporting a cannon on wheels, would have truly cyclopean dimensions. The axle of such a wheeled device would be at least 80 cm thick. There is no point in imagining it further; anyway, there is no evidence of anything like that. Everywhere it is written that the Tsar Cannon was dragged, not transported.

Look at the picture of a heavy weapon being loaded. Unfortunately, here we only see the bombard being pushed off the flooring, and not the process of moving itself. But in the background you can see a transport platform. It has a bow curved upward (protection from sticking into uneven surfaces). The platform was clearly used for sliding. That is, the load was dragged, not rolled. And that's right. Rollers can only be used on a flat and hard surface. Where can you find one like this? It is also understandable that the curved bow is bound with metal, because the cargo is very heavy. The weight of most battering guns did not exceed 20 tons.

Let's assume that they covered the main part of the journey by water. Moving these bombards over short distances of several kilometers with the help of many horses is also a feasible task, although very difficult. But is it possible to do the same with a 40-ton gun? Usually such studies end with expressions like “historical incident.” It’s as if the klutzes decided to surprise everyone by casting something record-breakingly gigantic, but didn’t think about how to carry it. Here, they say, is how it is in Russian - the Tsar Bell, which does not ring, and the Tsar Cannon, which does not shoot.
But we will not continue in this spirit. Let's say goodbye to the idea that our rulers were stupider than today's historians. It’s enough to blame everything on the inexperience of the craftsmen and the tyranny of the kings. The king, who managed to occupy this high post, ordered a 40-ton gun, paid for its manufacture, was clearly no fool, and should have thought very carefully about his action. Such costly issues cannot be resolved at the end of the day. He understood exactly how he was going to deliver this “gift” to the walls of enemy cities.

Huge gun Malik-e-Maidan

By the way, the excuse “first we did it, and then we thought about how to drag it” is quite common in historical research. It became a habit. Not long ago, the Culture channel told viewers about Chinese traditional architecture. They showed a slab weighing 86,000 tons carved into the rock. Explanation in general outline like this: “ Chinese Emperor, allegedly, had mental deviations due to gigantic pride and ordered a tomb of unimaginable dimensions for himself. He himself, the architects, thousands of stonemasons, allegedly were mentally deficient in terms of logic. For decades, they all carried out a megaproject. They finally cut down the slab and only then realized that they couldn’t even move it. Well, they abandoned the matter...” Sounds like our case.

The fact that the Tsar Cannon is not just a surge of enthusiasm among Moscow foundry workers is proven by the existence of the even more enormous Malik-e-Maidan weapon. It was cast in Ahman-dagar in India in 1548, and weighs as much as 57 tons. There, historians also sing songs about the 10 elephants and 400 buffaloes that dragged this cannon. This is a siege weapon with the same purpose as the Tsar Cannon, only 17 tons heavier. What is this, the second historical incident in the same historical time? And how many more such weapons need to be discovered in order to understand that at that time they were cast, delivered to besieged cities and practically used? If today we do not understand how this happened, then this is our knowledge.
Here we are again faced with the residually low level of our current technical culture. This is due to the distorted scientific worldview. WITH modern positions we don't see a solution that was obvious at the time. It remains to conclude that back in the 16th century in Rus' and India they knew something that made it possible to move such cargo.

Decline of artillery technology in the Middle Ages

Using the example of bombards, one can see the obvious degradation of artillery art over the centuries of the Middle Ages. The first samples were made of two-layer iron. The inner layer was welded from longitudinal strips, and thick transverse rings strengthened it on the outside. After some time, they began to make cast bronze tools. This definitely reduced their reliability and, accordingly, increased their weight. Any engineer will tell you that wrought iron is an order of magnitude stronger than cast bronze. Moreover, if it is assembled as described above - in a two-layer package with the direction of the fibers corresponding to the current loads. Probably the reason is the desire to reduce the cost of the manufacturing process.
The design of the first bombards was also surprisingly progressive. For example, today you will not find modern examples small arms, which would be charged from the side of the muzzle opening. It's very primitive. For a century and a half, loading from the breech has been in use. This method has a lot of advantages - the rate of fire is higher, and maintenance of the gun is more convenient. There is only one drawback - a more complex design with the breech of the barrel locked at the time of the shot.
How interesting it is that the first guns in history (bombards) immediately had a progressive method of loading from the breech. The breech was often attached to the barrel using a thread, that is, it was screwed in. This design was retained for some time in cast guns. Look at Fig. 6. Here the Turkish bombard is compared with the Tsar Cannon. In terms of geometric parameters, they are very similar, but the Tsar Cannon, cast a hundred years later, was already made one-piece. This means that in the 15th...16th centuries they switched to a more primitive muzzle loading.
There can be only one conclusion here - the first bombards were carried out with residual knowledge progressive design solutions artillery weapons, or perhaps they were copied from some older and more advanced samples. However, the technological base was already quite backward for these design solutions, and could only reproduce what we see in medieval tools. At this level of manufacturing, the advantages of breech loading are practically no longer evident, but they stubbornly continued to be made breech-loading, because they did not yet know how to do it differently. Over time, technical culture continued to degrade, and accordingly, the guns began to be made one-piece, according to a more simplified and primitive loading scheme from the muzzle.

Conclusion

So a logical picture has lined up. In the 16th century, the Moscow principality led numerous fighting, both in the east (capture of Kazan), in the south (Astrakhan), and in the west (wars with Poland, Lithuania and Sweden). The cannon was cast in 1586. Kazan had already been taken by this time. WITH Western countries a shaky truce was established, more like a respite. Could the Tsar Cannon be in demand under these conditions? Yes, definitely. The success of the military campaign depended on the presence of battering ram artillery. The fortified cities of our western neighbors had to be taken somehow. Ivan the Terrible died in 1584, 2 years before the cannon was cast. But it was he who identified the state’s need for such weapons, and the process of their manufacture was launched. Here's how events unfolded:
“From 1550 to 1565, work at the Moscow Cannon Yard was supervised by Kishpir Ganusov (Ganus), apparently a German by nationality. In the chronicles there are references to eleven guns cast by him, but not a single one has reached us. The largest copper cannon, cast by Ganusov in 1555, was called the Kashpirova cannon. Its weight was 19.65 tons. In the same 1555, Moscow master Stepan Petrov cast the Peacock cannon weighing 16.7 tons... It is curious that both huge guns Ivan the Terrible ordered to be delivered to Polotsk, besieged by the Russians. On February 13, 1563, the tsar ordered the governor, Prince Mikhail Petrovich Repnin, “large guns for Kashpirov and Stepanov, a Peacock, an Eagle, and a Bear and the whole outfit of the wall and put it on top close to the city gates” and shoot “without resting, day and night.” The ground trembled from this shooting - “the large cannons have twenty pounds of cannonballs, and some cannons have a little lighter.” The next day the gate was destroyed and several breaks were made in the wall. On February 15, Polotsk surrendered to the mercy of the victors. In 1568, Kashpir’s young student Andrei Chokhov (until 1917 he was written as Chekhov) cast his first gun... Andrei Chokhov’s most famous weapon was the Tsar Cannon (1586)” (Alexander Shirokorad “Miracle Weapons of the Russian Empire”).
Under Ivan the Terrible, the production of such weapons was established and their use, including transportation, was mastered. However, his strong-willed state acumen disappeared after his death and the accession of a successor to the throne. Fyodor 1 Ioannovich was a man of a completely different type. People called him sinless and blessed. Probably, through the efforts of the followers of Ivan the Terrible, the order for the production of the Tsar Cannon was nevertheless formed. However, the greatness of Andrei Chokhov’s creation still exceeded the demands of the new king. Therefore, the Tsar Cannon remained unclaimed, although military operations using siege artillery were carried out 4 years later (Russian-Swedish war of 1590-1595).

The Tsar Cannon is real. The surroundings around her are a sham. Formed public opinion about her - false. The Tsar Cannon should surprise us, much more than the ancient megaliths. After all, they are amazing in that huge stones weighing several tons are delivered... lifted... placed... etc. In the 16th century, nothing fundamentally new, different from the Neolithic, was used in transportation and loading (according to the official point of view), but a 40-ton weapon was transported. In addition, the stones were placed once and for centuries, and an equally heavy cannon was supposed to be moved repeatedly over vast distances.
It is all the more amazing because it was made relatively recently, back in the 16th century. After all, scientists are free to fantasize about the time of the megaliths as they please - hundreds of thousands of slaves, centuries of construction, etc., but a lot is known about the 16th century. You can't run wild with your fantasies here.
In the Kremlin, a real miracle is on display, disguised as an absurdity, but we do not notice it, because we are zombified by propaganda, false hypotheses and the opinions of authorities.
On the one hand, this is an example of a giant props of the 19th century, on the other, one of the largest working medieval weapons. At the same time, she is a remarkable witness to the decline of artillery technology in the Middle Ages.

Tsar Cannon in the Moscow Kremlin

No matter what they call the Tsar Cannon: the first among guns in caliber, a masterpiece foundry art, the pride of the artillery collection, a symbol of Russian power. Even one of these epithets is enough to attract the attention of tourists to it. The caliber of the miracle gun is 890 millimeters, and this figure is truly the largest of all known world analogues.

The Tsar Cannon - both as a weapon and as a museum exhibit under open air, and how business card Belokamennaya among others historical monuments– very original. On the one hand, it represents an example of the largest medieval weapon, and on the other - the clearest example"gigantism" of the 19th century. The origin of the name of the original landmark, which has not yet been solved by scientists, is also intriguing. Some suggest that it is connected with the fact that one of the Russian autocrats is depicted on the cannon. Others believe that the name is due solely to the impressive size of this weapon.

Be that as it may, there are few foreign tourists who, having arrived in Moscow, would not want to look at this miracle of props. Besides the fact that the Tsar Cannon is the most large-caliber gun in the world, it is 5.34 meters long and weighs about 40 tons. These indicators were enough to include the majestic Moscow beauty in the Guinness Book of Records. And how can you then pass by such a unique landmark without touching it with your own hands and taking a photo in front of it?

History of the Tsar Cannon

In 1586, alarming news spread throughout Moscow that the Crimean Khan Islyam II Giray was moving into the city with his horde, so it was necessary to create a weapon for the defense of the Kremlin, and this task was entrusted to the Russian master Andrei Chokhov. That same year, a huge cannon was cast in the cannon yard. It was installed right on Red Square, near the so-called Execution Ground. A log sheet (flooring) was used as the base. Before this, it was necessary to use 200 horses, which dragged the gun along the logs; 4 brackets were provided on each side for attaching ropes. After some time, the log flooring was replaced with stone.

The Polish hussar Samuil Matskevich recalled on this occasion that “in the Russian capital there is a huge gun so large” that the soldiers of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth can hide “inside it” during the rain.

Meanwhile, the Crimean Khan did not reach Moscow, so no one had a chance to see how the unique weapon fired. In the 18th century, the cannon was moved to the capital's Kremlin, and since then it has been there, in the very heart of the Mother See. First, the gun was placed in the courtyard of the Arsenal, built by Peter I as a Zeichhaus - a repository for ancient and captured weapons. Subsequently, the Tsar Cannon “guarded” the main gates of the Arsenal.

In 1835, it, as well as other century-old guns, was placed along the Armory. It was erected on a new cast-iron carriage, made according to the sketches of Academician A.P. Bryullov. In the 60s of the last century, the Tsar Cannon celebrated another “housewarming”: it was placed in the place where it remains to this day.

Despite the surviving evidence that Tsar Fyodor I Ioannovich gave the order to produce such a large weapon for the meeting of the Crimean Khan’s troops, many researchers believe that in fact the Tsar Cannon was only supposed to make a “frightening” impression on foreigners with its impressive appearance. Writer Albert Valentinov, for example, argued that the master himself, Andrei Chokhov, initially knew that his huge, clumsy brainchild would not shoot. Even if we assume, the writer further reasoned, that the huge amount of gunpowder that is necessary to push out a two-ton cannonball does not blow the barrel to smithereens, it is simply impossible to imagine the Tsar Cannon in battle. After all, because of this heavy weight dragging from one position to another would be an almost insoluble problem. Valentinov also argued that the foundryman set himself, first of all, the goal of showing the capabilities of the Russian arms industry, and the gun itself was supposed to become a symbol of Russia’s power in the face of possible enemies. Chokhov’s logic, in his opinion, was simple and should have convinced all foreigners: if Russian masters were able to create such a large cannon, they were even more capable of smaller guns.

The assessments of many highly specialized gunsmiths echo the writer’s opinion. Thus, one of them, Alexander Shirokorad, in his work “Miracle Weapons of the Russian Empire” claims that at the cost of costs, instead of this gun, it would be possible to make about two dozen small shotguns, the loading of which would take only 1-2 minutes. While it would take a whole day to load our mighty beauty. In this regard, Shirokorad asks a rhetorical question, quote: “What place did our military think when they wrote down the Tsar Cannon as shotguns?..”

It would seem that the assessments of experts, supported by simple logic and ironclad arguments, should have put an end to the discussion about whether the mission of this weapon was military or, conversely, only propaganda? However, subsequent studies did not confirm the version that the Tsar Cannon was cast only so that it would frighten foreigners with its terrifying appearance. As it turned out, it really belongs to the type of bombard - siege weapon large caliber with a slight barrel extension designed to fire 800-kilogram stone cannonballs.

When the Germans advanced near Moscow in 1941, they seriously planned to use the Tsar Cannon to protect the capital from the enemy.

In 1980, the gun was sent for repairs to Serpukhov. At the same time, she was examined by specialists from the Dzerzhinsky Artillery Academy. They confirmed that the structure of the barrel clearly indicates that this is a classic bombard, designed to fire stone cannonballs, that is, “shot.” They classified it as a mounted fire weapon, the transportation of which from place to place was not necessary - such weapons were simply dug into the ground.

Other researchers have no doubt that the Tsar Cannon was fired at least once. Others object: there were tides of bronze left in the barrel chamber, which should not have been there after the shooting. The latter reinforce their position by the fact that the gun does not have a pilot hole, and this circumstance makes firing from it a priori impossible.

What does the Tsar Cannon look like?

Regardless of whether the Tsar Cannon could have been used for the defense of the Kremlin or whether it had a completely “decorative” purpose, it had and still has a ceremonial and majestic appearance. Cast from bronze, the beautiful cannon solemnly, even somewhat proudly, rises on a cast-iron carriage that is almost two centuries old. Next to it are cannonballs cast in 1834 from the same material, each of which weighs 1.97 tons. Of course, the weapon cannot fire such cannonballs.

Once on the right side of the Tsar Cannon, you will see an image of the sovereign-autocrat Fyodor I Ioannovich, also known by the name Theodore the Blessed, sitting on a horse. He has a crown on his head and a scepter in his hands. Those who are not very familiar with history will be able to read next to who exactly is depicted here.

Tsar Cannon in the photo

It is believed, and we said this at the very beginning, that the weapon received its name - the Tsar Cannon - thanks to this image. After all, Fyodor Ivanovich was not only the Grand Duke of Moscow, but also the Tsar of All Rus'. However, on this score, as well as regarding other points related to the history of the landmark, there is an alternative opinion: the gun received its name due to its dimensions, which really make it the “king” among all ordinary guns.

Now he has moved to the opposite side of the trunk, which faces another famous landmark - the Tsar Bell. On it we can see the inscription that the cannon was cast in the “preeminent royal city of Moscow in the summer of 7094 in the third year of its state,” and that the cannon was cast by “cannon maker Ondrei Chokhov.” But why is such a year indicated, evoking associations with the Byzantine chronology, which, in turn, goes back to the Old Testament? The fact is that in the 16th century, chronology in Russia, as in Byzantium, was carried out from the “creation of the world.” Counting years from the Nativity of Christ, as we are accustomed to today, began in Rus' at the end of the 17th century, on the orders of Peter the Great.

And, of course, we will not ignore the gun barrel, decorated with beautiful ornaments. Let’s talk separately about the gun carriage, which was cast according to the drawings of Pieter Jan de Wie. Foundry workers covered this 15-ton structure with a very original interweaving of plants, among which there is an image of a lion fighting a snake, which has symbolic meaning. According to the general opinion, the king of beasts was placed here not by chance, but in order to emphasize the special status of the Tsar Cannon. The “plant” theme is continued on the spokes of the large wheels, which are designed in the form of intertwined leaves.

A legend has survived to this day, according to which the Tsar Cannon finally fired. And this happened only once, under False Dmitry I. When this self-proclaimed ruler was exposed, he tried to hastily leave the capital. On the way, he was overtaken by an armed detachment. The soldiers brutally killed the impostor, but after the body was buried, the next day... he was discovered near the almshouse. The surprise of Muscovites knew no bounds, but they couldn’t leave the corpse unburied. It was buried a second time in another place, to an even greater depth. But when the body of False Dmitry appeared again, people became seriously worried. Rumor spread that even the earth would not accept the impostor. And it was decided to burn the body, after which gunpowder was mixed into the ashes and fired from the Tsar Cannon in the direction of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, where, in fact, False Dmitry came from. Of course, this is just a legend, but who knows - what if something like this actually happened? It’s not for nothing that people say that there is no smoke without fire.

And one more thing interesting fact. It turns out that in the place where the Tsar Cannon majestically “poses” in front of visitors, there was previously an ordinary tavern where a wide variety of people liked to have a glass or two.

Tsar Cannon and its copies

One of the most famous copies of the legendary weapon is located in Donetsk. For the capital of Donbass, it was cast specifically by order of the Moscow government at the Izhstal OJSC enterprise (Udmurtia). The “clone” even exceeds the original in terms of weight; it weighs 42 tons, of which a total of 3 tons are on both wheels. The weight of the kernel is 1.2 tons, and the diameter of the trunk is 89 cm.

The Donetsk Tsar Cannon, cast from cast iron, unlike the Moscow one, was installed in front of the city hall in May 2001. In order to bring closer appearance to the original, the barrel was covered with a special paint that imitates medieval bronze. The production of the duplicate took almost three months, being divided into two stages. First, a mold was made for the casting, and then it was filled with cast iron. All artistic elements, and there are 24 of them (the head of a lion, patterns on the trunk, the image of Tsar Feodor and many others) were made by Donetsk cabinetmakers Vitaly Antonenko and Mikhail Berezovsky.

Another famous copy of the Tsar Cannon is located in the capital of the Republic of Mari El, Yoshkar-Ola. It is installed at the entrance to the National Art Gallery on Obolensky-Nogotkov Square. The Mari copy was specially cast at the shipbuilding and ship repair plant named after S. N. Butyakov.

The Perm model of the Tsar Cannon is no less famous. She is the youngest of all, she was made at the Motovilikha Iron Cannon Factory back in 1868, and in life-size. Unlike " older sister"in Moscow, the Perm 20-inch model successfully passed what is called the test by combat. During testing, 314 shots were fired from it, and not only with conventional nuclei, but also with bombs of various systems.

During the 1873 World Exhibition in Vienna, the Permian cannon was installed in front of the Russian pavilion. After the exhibition, it was to be transported to Kronstadt; a special carriage was even made for it. It was planned that the gun would serve to defend St. Petersburg from the sea. However, this giant was returned back to Perm. The fact is that by that time it was technically outdated. It was replaced by lighter guns made of high-strength cannon steel, the technology for which was developed by the Zlatoust engineer-inventor Pavel Matveyevich Obukhov, who opened a plant in the city on the Neva. The Perm Tsar Cannon, like the Moscow one, was preserved as a monument.

How to get there

The Tsar Cannon is one of the most famous sights of Moscow, located in the heart of the city, so it is very easy to find.

Using the metro, you get to the Aleksandrovsky Sad station and go directly to this park, located on the northwest side of the Kremlin walls. Here, at the subway station, there are ticket offices for the Kremlin. Having purchased a ticket, go up to the Kutafya Tower and, after crossing the bridge and passing the Trinity Tower, you will find yourself directly on the territory of the Kremlin.

Next you go in the direction Senate Square and turn right, after which you reach the bell tower of Ivan the Great, next to which there is a unique ancient weapon, silent in its grandeur - Her Majesty the Tsar Cannon.

7.1. The Tsar Cannon and other old cannons in the Moscow Kremlin

Let us now turn to the famous Tsar Cannon, standing in the Moscow Kremlin, fig. 7.1–7.3. The 40-ton cannon was made by Russian craftsman Andrei Mokhov during the reign of Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich. This is indicated by the inscription on the top of its vent, Fig. 7.4. Caliber of the Tsar Cannon - 890, fig. 7.5.

Rice. 7.1. Tsar cannon, cast by Andrei Chokhov in the 16th century. Today it stands in the Moscow Kremlin. Taken from, p. 33.

Rice. 7.2. Tsar cannon. Photo from 2003.

Rice. 7.3. Tsar cannon. Photo from 2003.

Rice. 7.4. The 40-ton Tsar cannon was cast by master Andrei Chokhov during the reign of Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich. This is indicated by the inscription on the top of its vent. Photo from 2003.

Rice. 7.5. Caliber Tsar Cannon - 890. Photo from 2003.

N.V. Gordeev, author interesting book“Tsar Cannon” reports: “The first guns appeared in Russia in the 14th century,” p. 7. The compiler and author of the book “The Moscow Kremlin in Antiquity and Now,” S. Bartenev, wrote: “The walls and archers of the Kremlin in the 16th century... were furnished with fortress artillery of the most diverse composition, among which were cast iron, iron and copper guns, ranging from the most small, firing small bullets... and ending with guns of 6 - 8-pound caliber (2400 g and 3200 g), placed one on each floor of the tower. In addition, on the ground below lay HUGE MONSTERS, GIANT BOMBARDS,” vol. 1, p. 40. Quote. by , p. 8.

Some preserved ancient Russian cannons of the 16th–18th centuries can be seen today near the building of the Kremlin Arsenal, fig. 7.6. It turns out that the Russian army of the 16th–17th centuries was armed with large TROJAN GUN. That is, the cannons on which the kings of “ancient” TROY were depicted. One of these is very interesting big guns, made by the famous 16th century master Andrei Chokhov. N.V. Gordeev reports: “In 1590, a cannon called “TROILUS” was made, i.e. “TROJAN KING”. The cannon barrel is cast from bronze... On the breech of the barrel there is an inscription: “By the grace of God, by the command of the Tsar and Grand Duke Fyodor Ivanovich of All Russia, this arquebus “TROIL” was made in the summer of 7098 (1590). Made by Andrey Chokhov." In the center of the tower is a figure of the TROJAN KING with a banner in his left hand and a sword in his right... The barrel caliber is 195 mm, the weight of the gun is 7 thousand kg. The total length of the barrel is 4350 mm", p. 22. In Fig. 7.7 shows a detail of this cannon “with the image of the TROJAN KING”, p. 21. Let us recall that Troilus is the name of one of the most famous Trojan kings, p. 230. He was the son of the no less famous Trojan king Priam, who ruled the “most ancient” Troy during the era of the Trojan War.

Rice. 7.6. The Arsenal building in Moscow Krem, near the Trinity Tower. Ancient cannons - Russian and foreign - are displayed along its wall. Moreover, for some reason Russian guns are placed in places where access to outsiders is prohibited. You can freely consider only foreign guns located closer to the Trinity Tower. An ignorant visitor may even get the impression that, they say, the “best” guns worthy of being exhibited in the Kremlin are foreign production. Perhaps this was done on purpose. Photo from 2003.

Rice. 7.7. Large Moscow cannon "Troilus", cast in the 16th century. “Detail with the image of the TROJAN KING. Gun "Troilus". Master Andrei Chokhov", p. 21. Taken from, p. 21.

There are several such TROJAN cannons preserved in Moscow. Here is another similar large cannon from the 17th century, also called “TROILUS”. N.V. Gordeev writes: “The “Troilus” cannon was cast from copper in 1685. The barrel bore is smooth... On the breech of the barrel there is a cast inscription: “By the grace of God, by the command of the great sovereigns of the tsars and grand dukes Ivan Alekseevich, Peter Alekseevich, all great and small and white Russia of the autocrats was cast this squeal is called TROILUS, ON WHICH THE squeal at the treasury is depicted the TROJAN KING...” The torel is flat, with a cast relief image of a figure sitting on a throne. On the sides of the figure there is an inscription: “TROILUS arquebus.” Caliber 187 mm, weight 6438 kg, total length 3500 mm. The cannon stands on a decorative cast-iron carriage at the southern façade of the Arsenal, on the left side of the entrance arch,” p. 29. A detail of this large Troilus cannon, cast by master Yakov Dubina, is shown in Fig. 7.8.

Rice. 7.8. Another large Moscow cannon "Troilus", cast in the 17th century. “Detail with the image of the TROJAN KING. Gun "Troilus". Master Yakov Dubina. 1685" , With. 28. Taken from, p. 28.

Within the framework of Scaligerian-Romanov history, all this looks extremely strange. On the one hand, Russian foundry masters of the 16th–17th centuries, casting large Russian cannons, naturally The great Moscow kings are depicted on the cannons. For example, on the famous Tsar Cannon, cast by Andrei Chokhov in 1586, “on the right side of the barrel there is a cast image of a galloping horseman. This is a portrait of Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich, in whose presence the cannon was cast. Above the image is the inscription: By the grace of God the king and Grand Duke Fyodor Ivanovich Sovereign and Autocrat of All Great Russia,” p. 14.

On the other hand, other large Russian cannons depict, and DIRECTLY name, the supposedly “ancient” Trojan kings who reigned in distant Troy supposedly about THREE THOUSAND YEARS AGO. As historians assure us today.

In the 16th century, a large cannon called “ACHILLES” was cast in Rus', p. 20. Today she is in St. Petersburg. Once again we see a Russian cannon with an “antique” name. Let us note that according to our research, the presence of the name ACHILLES on old Russian cannons is quite understandable and natural.

We have given only three examples of Russian-“antique” cannons, which we took from a very small book. We do not know how many similar guns were cast and what percentage of them have survived.

Our reconstruction explains this picture well. Most likely, Russian cannon masters, even in the 17th century, not to mention the 16th century, knew well or remembered that Istanbul was ruled by an Ottoman-Ataman sultan, an ally of Rus'-Horde. Therefore, on some of the huge Russian-Horde guns we see images of the Russian Horde king-khans of the 16th century. And on others - their Ottoman allies - the Ataman Sultans. As we showed in the book “Empire,” the Russian-Horde and Ottoman-Ataman troops fought together in that era, side by side. Being troops of two components a single Great = “Mongol” Empire. Although in the 17th century, after the collapse of the Empire, Rus'-Horde and Ottomania = Atamania were no longer as closely connected as before, but the memory of the recent unity was, as we see, quite strong. In the 17th century, already under the first Romanovs, TROJAN cannons were still being cast in Rus'.

Let's give another example. In Fig. 7.9 and fig. 7.10 shows a large Russian cannon called "New PERS", p. 36. A “Persian” is depicted wearing a turban. On the smooth breech of the cannon there is an inscription cast: “By the permission of God, by the grace of the great sovereigns and kings and the great princes John Alekseevich Peter Alekseevich... this arquebus, called “NOVI PERS”, was cast in the reigning city of Moscow in the summer of 7194 (1686) ...”, p. 33. The caliber of the gun is 180 mm, weight 5800 kg, total length 4 meters 90 cm. Along the edge of the turret there is an inscription: “The arquech named PERS of the summer of 7194...”, p. 33. In 1969, the Persian gun stood at the southern façade of the Arsenal, to the left of the entrance arch, p. 33.

Rice. 7.9. A large Moscow cannon called the “New Persian”, cast in the 17th century. Master Martyan Osipov. 1685 Taken from, p. 36.

Rice. 7.10. General view New Persian guns. Taken from, p. 34.

As we have repeatedly written in our books on chronology, in the old chronicles PERSIA (P-RUSSIA), apparently, was often called White Rus'. It is known that Russian Cossacks used to wear turbans. Therefore, “Persian in a turban” in that era could mean “White-Russian Cossack in a turban.” The image of which on a Russian cannon is more than natural. Let us note that previously White Russia was called not only Belarus in the modern sense, but much larger areas of Russia. In particular, the city of Moscow is located on the lands of old White Rus',,.

By the way, it is possible that before the “New Persian” there was another Russian cannon called simply “PERS”. The “new Persian” gun could have been named after the famous old gun with the same name. By adding the word "new".

Experts in the history of cannons note that the giant Russian cannons of the 16th century era clearly show the leading role of the Russian army at that time. The Tsar Cannon (16th century, caliber 890) that has survived to this day was perhaps one of the largest of its time, but it turns out there were other huge Russian cannons quite comparable in size. And there were a lot of them. Professor M.I. Falkovsky in his book “Moscow and the History of Technology” writes that “by its type, the Tsar Cannon is a mortar... In the 16th century, of course, there was no caliber 890 in ANY COUNTRY. BUT THE RELATIVE SIZES OF THE TSAR CANNON DO NOT DIFFER SIGNIFICANTLY FROM OTHER MORTARS EVEN OF THE 17th-18th CENTURIES.” Quote by , p. 14.

“A lot of large cannons were made by other masters of cannon casting... BEFORE CHOKHOV’S TSAR-CANNON, HUGE GUNS WERE KNOWN IN MOSCOW, WHICH ALSO BEARED THIS NAME... So, in 1488, master Pavel Debosis cast a cannon that was called the Tsar-Cannon. In 1554, a cast iron cannon with a caliber of 650 mm was cast in Moscow (recall that the caliber of the Tsar Cannon was 890 mm - Auto.) and weighing 1200 pounds, and in 1555 - a cast iron cannon with a caliber of 600 mm, weighing 1020 pounds. The fact that there were other huge guns in Moscow is evidenced not only by written sources, but also by plans and drawings of Moscow and the Moscow Kremlin, drawn up in the 16th–17th centuries, and sketches by travelers and members of foreign embassies. The plans of the Moscow Kremlin of the 16th century show that the cannons were located at the main passage gates of the Kremlin - Spassky and Nikolsky, as well as on Red Square. These guns have not survived,” p. 18.

So, it turns out, there were enough guns or mortars comparable in caliber to the Tsar Cannon in the Russian army of that era.

By the way, the Tsar Cannon was designed to FIRE WITH BAPPOINTS, NOT CALLS. This is a mortar. So the four huge cores lying in front of her in the Kremlin today, stacked in a pyramid, have nothing to do with her. According to N.V. Gordeev, “these are DECORATIVE cast iron garnets, hollow inside. The thickness of their walls is 9 cm.” , With. 17–18.

“In ancient times, the Tsar Cannon was also called the “Russian Shotgun”, since it was designed to fire “shot,” i.e., BAPshot. The Tsar Cannon did not have to participate in hostilities (as historians believe today - Auto.), however, there is no doubt that it was cast exactly as military weapon, and not for purely decorative purposes... M.I. Falkovsky believes that, expecting the invasion of the Tatars and building NEW fortifications, Muscovites would hardly have started manufacturing a “fake” cannon weighing 2,400 pounds. A number of other authors adhere to the same conclusion,” p. 16. Isn’t the opinion instilled in us today by historians - that the Tsar Cannon was a “sham” and was cast only as a royal whim, to satisfy “Moscow vanity” - part of the propaganda campaign of the Romanov historical school? The purpose of which was and is to consign history to oblivion Great Empire. After all, evidence of a completely different kind has been preserved about Russian cannons. For example, the following.

“Andrei Chokhov cast many guns. Thus, guns with his name took part in all the campaigns of Ivan the Terrible, and in particular to Livonia. Under Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich, the famous master cast the Tsar Cannon and a WHOLE RANGE OF OTHER HUGE GUNS, including an interesting mortar with the name False Dmitry (!? - Auth.). ALL CHOKHOV’S GUNS ARE CHARACTERIZED BY COLOSSAL SIZES, EXCELLENT FINISH AND EXCELLENT WORK QUALITY,” p. 13.

“At this time (in the 16th century - Auto.) a number of guns were cast. So, for example, in 1588, Chokhov cast a 100-GUN ARM from copper, i.e., a weapon consisting of a HUNDRED TRUNKS. The caliber of each barrel is 50 mm. The casting of this arquebus was, of course, the second miracle of foundry art after the Tsar Cannon,” p. 18.

“In the 40s and 50s of our century, many round stone cores with a diameter of 15 to 30, and in some cases up to 60–70 cm were collected on the walls and towers of the Kremlin and on the site of old fortress moats. The colossal size of the cores...” , With. 5–6.

In Fig. 7.11 we present an ancient miniature from a Russian chronicle of the supposedly 16th century, which depicts the defense of Moscow supposedly in 1451. On the city wall you can clearly see a large mortar cannon, comparable in size to the giant Tsar Cannon of the 16th century known to us today. In Fig. 7.12 shows an ancient miniature depicting a huge cannon cast in Moscow by Pavlin Fryazin in 1488, p. 64. So, as we see, even according to the Scaligerian-Miller history, Russian artillery of the 15th century was very impressive. In Fig. 7.13 shows “a medium-sized artillery gun of the 16th century”, book. 2, p. 158. In Fig. Figure 7.14 shows an image of medium-sized Russian guns of the 17th century.

Rice. 7.11. Huge Russian-Horde cannons of the 15th century. A miniature of a chronicle, supposedly from the 16th century, depicting the defense of Moscow supposedly in 1451. Taken from, p. 73.

Rice. 7.12. “A gun cast in Moscow by Pavlin Fryazin. 1488. Miniature of the chronicle of the 16th century.” , With. 64.

Rice. 7.13. Ancient engraving. 16th century cannon. It is considered medium in size. Taken from, book. 2, p. 158.

Rice. 7.14. Engraving "Russian artillery before the parade in the 17th century." These guns are relatively small. Taken from, book. 2. p. 585.

In Fig. 7.15 shows images of ancient field guns and mortars that were in service Zaporozhye Cossacks. The large mortar is shown at the top right. So such large weapons for firing grapeshot were installed not only on the walls of cities, but also used on the battlefields.

In Fig. 7.16 shows a plan of the Kremlin Cannon Yard. The plan was drawn up at the end of the 17th century, p. 144.

Rice. 7.15. “Zaporozhye guns and mortars”, insert between the villages. 240–241. On the right is a large field mortar for firing buckshot.

Rice. 7.16. Plan of the Cannon Yard in the Kremlin. End of the 17th century. Taken from, p. 144.

It turns out that the huge Tsar Cannon mortar standing in the Kremlin today is noticeably inferior in size to other combat mortars that were in service with the Russian army of the 16th century. Historians report: “The report of Juan of Persia to King Philip III about his stay in Russia in 1599–1600 says that “ large area“(Red Square) “is lined with cannons so huge that two people could enter each of them to clean it.” Two years later, the secretary of the Austrian embassy, ​​Georg Tectander von der Jabel, wrote about these same guns in his report: “In the square, at the gates of the castle (Kremlin - O.I.), there are two huge cannons IN WHICH CAN EASILY FIT A MAN.” A Pole, Samuil Maskevich, who was in Moscow in 1610, says that in Kitai-Gorod he “saw a gun that was loaded with a hundred bullets and fired the same number of shots. It’s so high,” continues Maskevich, “that it would be up to my shoulder, and its bullets are the size of a goose egg.” This gun stands opposite the gate leading to the Living Bridge (this bridge led from Zamoskvorechye to the Frolovsky Gate of the Kremlin. - O.I.)“... Maskevich says that “in the middle of the market” (Red Square) he saw a mortar so large that THREE PEOPLE CAME INTO IT and played cards there... It is known that on Red Square since 1555 there were two huge guns: Kashpirova cannon, cast in 1554 by master Kashpir Ganusov, Chokhov’s teacher (weight 19,300 kg, length - 4.48 m, core weight - 320 kg), and “Peacock”, cast in 1555 by Stepan Petrov (weight - 16,320 kg). These guns were also aimed at the area of ​​​​the Living Bridge leading to Zamoskvorechye... In 1627, three giant guns were placed on special wooden “stubs” or “rolls”, covered with earth,” p. 114–116. It is clear why these giant mortar guns were installed opposite the bridges leading to the Kremlin. In the event of an attack, guns that had been sighted in advance could sweep away with grapeshot enemies trying to break through the bridges. Large volume Buckshot, ejected when fired from guns of this size, made it possible to hit not only bridges, but also cover huge areas around the Kremlin.

Today it is still difficult to restore true story cannon business in Rus' before the 17th century. It must be assumed that after the Romanovs came to power and, as a result, the very fact of the existence of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire was forgotten, most of the Russian-Horde cannons were recast and melted down. They did the same with the huge Horde bells, see below. Something similar - a deliberate descent into oblivion - happened with the history of the Russian-Horde fleet. After all, they convince us today that before Peter I, Russia “virtually did not have a fleet.” But, apparently, THERE WERE SO MANY GUNS IN THE Rus' HORDE that, despite all the Romanov meltdowns, some remained. And today we can still at least partially imagine what the Russian-Horde and Ottoman = Ataman army of the 15th–16th centuries was. The remains of its monstrous combat cannon park standing today in the Moscow Kremlin clearly show that this army was strong.

In Fig. 7.17 shows a miniature from the ancient French book “Les Quinze Joies de mariage” supposedly from 1485, ill. 207.

The miniature is not described in any way in words in the book itself. A modern historian reports that “the military scene... is not accompanied here by any specific textual commentary, it conveys only the atmosphere...”, p. 170. The picture shows large army on the march, with heavy guns. All warriors are clad in iron from head to toe. The coats of arms are clearly visible on the military equipment and on the banner - black double-headed imperial eagles on a red field. As we are now beginning to understand, these are most likely the troops of Rus'-Horde and Ottomania = Atamania, who entered Europe during the conquest of the “Promised Land”.

In Fig. 7.18 and fig. 7.19 we present photographs of a medieval cannon exhibited today at the German National Museum in Nuremberg (Germanisches Nationalmuseum). This is the largest of several old guns presented in this museum. Its internal thin metal trunk is enclosed inside a thick log, which, in turn, is covered on the outside with iron hoops for strength. Perhaps Ottoman and Horde craftsmen specifically used this technology to LIGHTEN field guns, to make them more convenient for quick transportation on the march and for maneuvering. Similar light guns were previously used in the Russian army. They were called squeaks.

Rice. 7.18. Medieval cannon exhibited at the German National Museum of Nuremberg. Photo taken by A.T. Fomenko in June 2000.

Rice. 7.19. Front view of a cannon from the German National Museum (Nuremberg). The wooden trunk surrounding the inner metal one is bound on the outside with hoops for strength. Probably, field guns were made lighter in this way. Photo from 2000.

From the book Who's Who in Russian History author Sitnikov Vitaly Pavlovich

From the book Russians. History, culture, traditions author Manyshev Sergey Borisovich

From the book Reconstruction general history[text only] author

1. OLD IMAGES OF TSAR-GRAD It is believed that no old images of the city of Tsar-Grad have survived before the 15th century. In Fig. 6.1 we present a plan of Tsar Grad, allegedly drawn up in 1450, map LVIII. In Fig. 6.2 shows a plan of Tsar Grad, allegedly drawn up in 1422. Counts,

From the book Prince Nikolai Borisovich Yusupov. Nobleman, diplomat, collector author Butorov Alexey Vyacheslavovich

Chapter 2 Prince N. B. Yusupov in Moscow society and the Moscow English Club Moscow! How much in this sound merged for the Russian heart, How much echoed in it! A. S. Pushkin Well, what about your father? all the English club Ancient, faithful member up to

From the book 100 Great Sights of Moscow author Myasnikov senior Alexander Leonidovich

The Tsar Cannon and the Tsar Bell Both the Tsar Cannon and the Tsar Bell have long become one of the symbols of Russia. With their appearance and size, they seem to remind us of the times when amazing craftsmen lived and worked in Rus', whose talent and golden hands still inspire respect and respect.

author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

4.3.14. Babylonian Gardens Semiramis in the Moscow Kremlin It is believed that Babylon was made the royal capital by the Assyrian queen Semiramis, p. 88. She built a STONE FORTRESS in Babylon, sheet 66, verso. And also - according to some news - THE FAMOUS HANGING GARDENS, one of

From the book Moscow in the light of the New Chronology author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

4.3.18. “The House of the Brave” and the Rybaritsa inside the Jerusalem Wall are the Khobro Courtyard, the Armory Courtyard and the Timofeevskaya (Fish) Tower in the Moscow Kremlin Following the description of the Bible, we continue to move along the wall, inside the Jerusalem Fortress. AFTER THE Tombs of David the book of Nehemiah

From the book Moscow in the light of the New Chronology author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

Chapter 7 Tsar Cannon and Tsar Bell

author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

19.1. In honor of the Battle of Marathon = Kulikovo, a large painting was created in “ancient” Athens. Probably it was one of the famous frescoes Arkhangelsk Cathedral in the Moscow Kremlin In the “ancient” history of the Battle of Kulikovo, the “Greek city of Athens,” that is, the “Christian

From the book The Conquest of America by Ermak-Cortez and the Rebellion of the Reformation through the eyes of the “ancient” Greeks author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

12. Guns on the field of the Sicilian battle and guns on the Kulikovo field 12.1. Logs, wooden cars and huge flames We have talked many times about the use of firearms in the Battle of Kulikovo, thanks to which Donskoy won. The question is whether the guns were reflected in

From the book The Split of the Empire: from Ivan the Terrible-Nero to Mikhail Romanov-Domitian. [The famous “ancient” works of Suetonius, Tacitus and Flavius, it turns out, describe Great author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

5.3. The Bell Tower of Ivan the Great and the Assumption Cathedral in the Moscow Kremlin on the pages of Josephus Flavius. Further, Flavius ​​describes three tall towers that stood inside the walls of Jerusalem. Since, as we already understand, we are talking about the Moscow Kremlin, it is possible that we're talking about O

From the book Conspiracy of Dictators or Peaceful Respite? author Martirosyan Arsen Benikovich

When signing a non-aggression pact with Germany in the Kremlin, Stalin created such an atmosphere that Ribbentrop “felt in the Kremlin as if among old party comrades” and even spoke of “friendship sealed

From the book Myths and Truths about Women author Pervushina Elena Vladimirovna

Old, old tales Remnants of the primitive system are still preserved among some tribes of Oceania. As mentioned above, in some cultures, the functions of the father are essentially performed by the mother’s brother, while the biological father does not show himself in any way until the children reach adulthood.

From the book Book 2. Conquest of America by Russia-Horde [Biblical Rus'. The Beginning of American Civilizations. Biblical Noah and medieval Columbus. Revolt of the Reformation. Dilapidated author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

4.18. “The House of the Brave” and the Rybaritsa inside the Jerusalem Wall are the Khobro Courtyard, the Armory Courtyard and Timofeevskaya, that is, the Fish Tower in the Moscow Kremlin. Following the description of the Bible, we continue to move along the wall, inside the Jerusalem Fortress. After the Tombs of David book

From the book American Intelligence During World War author Johnson Thomas M

"Long Bertha" - a gun inside a gun It was really a "gun inside a gun", although without the "projectile inside a projectile". The Bertha's barrel consisted of a 38-cm naval cannon, inside of which was a 21-cm cannon, extended as a smooth-walled barrel; both parts were connected

From the book Tsar Cannon and Tsar Bell author Portnov Mikhail Eliazarovich

“Litec” Andrei Chokhov and his Tsar Cannon The famous Tsar Cannon, one of the rare monuments of Russian foundry art, is installed on Ivanovo Square of the Kremlin, next to the architectural monument of the 17th century - the Church of the Twelve Apostles. Images of the Tsar Cannon are familiar

Tsar Cannon- a monument to ancient artillery and foundry art of the 16th century. Cast from bronze in 1586 at the Moscow Cannon Yard by the outstanding cannon and bell maker Andrei Chokhov.

The Tsar Cannon is located near the Ivan the Great bell tower not far from.

Description of the gun

The Tsar Cannon is the largest caliber gun in the world. The cannon barrel was cast in bronze in 1586. The weight of the gun is 2400 poods (39.5 tons). Barrel length - 5.34 m. Barrel diameter - 120 cm, caliber - 890 mm. The carriage is cast from cast iron and painted bronze (the original carriage was wooden). The weight of the carriage is 34.5 tons. In front of the cannon, four huge hollow cast-iron cannonballs (decorative), cast in the 19th century, are laid out in a pyramid. Each core weighs about 1 ton.

The Tsar Cannon has a unique design; in terms of the bore design, it is close to mortars. Based on the design of the barrel, it can be assumed that the cannon was intended to fire buckshot, for which small stones were used at that time. The bore is divided into two parts - a cylindrical barrel (“cauldron”) for the projectile and a breech for the charge (powder chamber). Research by scientists indicates that the Tsar Cannon was intended for shooting, and not just for intimidating the enemy. But there is no information that the Tsar Cannon was ever fired.

The cannon contains images and inscriptions that are difficult to see from the ground. On the right side of the muzzle, closer to the muzzle, there is an image of the king wearing a royal crown, riding a horse, wearing military attire and holding a scepter in his hand. The image is accompanied by the inscription: “By the grace of God, Tsar and Grand Duke Fyodor Ioannovich, sovereign and autocrat.” Nearby there is another inscription relating to the customer of the weapon: “By the command of the pious and Christ-loving Tsar and Grand Duke Fyodor Ioannovich, the sovereign autocrat of all great things under his pious and Christ-loving queen Grand Duchess Irina." The inscription closer to the central part of the barrel reads: “This cannon was poured out in the most famous city in the summer of 7094, in the third year of its state. The cannon was made by a cannon littsian, Ondrei Chokhov.” This inscription indicates that the cannon was cast in 7094 from the Creation of the World (in 1586 from the Nativity of Christ) in the third year of the reign of Fyodor Ivanovich by cannon master Andrei Chokhov.

History of the Tsar Cannon

There are two versions of the origin of the name Tsar Cannon. According to one of them, the name is associated with the image of the king on its trunk. Another version connects the name of the gun with its enormous size; at one time it was the most big gun in the world.

The Tsar Cannon was cast in 1586 by the foundry workers of the Cannon Yard, located on the banks of the Neglinnaya River, under the leadership of Andrei Chokhov. The author of the idea was the brother-in-law of Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich. According to Boris Godunov's plan, the cannon was installed on Red Square in front of, next to Lobnoye Mesto. It was placed on a wooden carriage. The cannon, enormous in size, installed here played an important role. It strengthened the significance of the tribune from which the kings addressed the people and from where the royal decrees were read. At the same time, it served as a demonstration military power Russian state and symbolically guarded the Intercession Cathedral and.

There is no reliable information about where the Tsar Cannon was located throughout the 17th century. Presumably, she was somewhere on the outskirts of the Kremlin, where, after the accession of the Romanov dynasty, they tried to remove everything that reminded of Boris Godunov. In the early 1700s. the cannon was installed in the courtyard of the Arsenal among other historical weapons.

In 1812, half of the Arsenal building was blown up by the French. The wooden carriage of the Tsar Cannon burned down in a fire.

In 1835, under the Emperor, at the Berda shipyard in St. Petersburg, a cast iron carriage, decorated with a lion's head and ornaments, was specially cast for the Tsar Cannon. Sketches of the carriage were made by Alexander Bryullov, brother of the famous painter Karl Bryullov, and the drawings were finally finalized by Major General de Witte. The Tsar Cannon was installed on a new carriage and moved to a new location - near the Kremlin barracks. The Tsar Cannon and the longest Kremlin cannon, the Unicorn, occupied a prominent place on the corner of Senate Square, in the northeastern part of the Kremlin.

I think each of us has heard about the Tsar Cannon, because it is the most famous and amazing artillery weapon in the world!

The Tsar Cannon was cast during the reign of Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich - in 1586. This happened at the Cannon Yard, and it was cast by the best Russian foundry master, Andrei Chokhov. From under his hands a real miracle of artillery was born, 5.34 meters long and 890 millimeters in caliber. Just imagine, the outer diameter of the Tsar Cannon’s barrel is 1.2 meters, the diameter of the patterned belt at the barrel is 1.34 meters, and this gigantic weapon weighs 39.31 tons! The cannon is literally dotted with reliefs, and on the right side of the muzzle Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich himself is depicted on horseback

On each side of the barrel there are 4 brackets for attaching ropes, and above the front right bracket, directly above the image of the Tsar, there is the inscription “By the grace of God, the Tsar and Grand Duke Fyodor Ivanovich, Sovereign and Autocrat of all great Russia"

There are two more inscriptions on the top of the barrel: on the right - “By the command of the pious and Christ-loving Tsar and Grand Duke Fyodor Ivanovich, the sovereign autocrat of all great Russia under his pious and Christ-loving queen, Grand Duchess Irina,” and on the left - “This cannon was drained in the most famous city of Moscow in the summer 7094, in the third summer of his reign, the cannon maker Ondrei Chokhov made the cannon."

There are many versions of the appearance of such a majestic name, some, for example, believe that it was named in honor of the king depicted on it, while others are sure that the cannon received this name for its size (like the Tsar Bell), and at the very beginning the cannon was generally called "Russian Shotgun", as it was intended for shooting buckshot

In 1834, to demonstrate the true caliber of the gun, special decorative cannonballs decorated with ornaments were made in St. Petersburg. Such cannonballs weigh almost two tons each, but the cannon cannot fire them

The Tsar Cannon was intended to become the main defensive weapon of the Kremlin, and therefore it was installed on a special log deck not far from the Execution Ground, but it was never destined to take part in a real battle...

The cannon was moved to the Kremlin in the 18th century. Initially it stood in the courtyard of the Arsenal, and then was transferred to its gates. In the 1960s, when the Kremlin Palace of Congresses was built, the gun was placed on Ivanovskaya Square, at the foot of the Cathedral of the Twelve Apostles

The Tsar Cannon is the largest howitzer in the world by caliber, as evidenced by the corresponding entry in the Guinness Book of Records. The largest artillery piece ever created is the German "Dora" with a caliber of 800 mm and a weight in firing position of 1350 tons.

The Tsar Cannon was thoroughly examined in 1980 for the purpose of repair. During this examination, it turned out that the weapon was designed to fire stone cannonballs weighing about 800 kilograms and that it was fired at least once

In the spring of 2001, by order of the Moscow government, a copy of the Tsar Cannon weighing 42 tons was made

In May 2001, the Moscow government donated this copy to Donetsk - since then, the “ghost” of the legendary weapon has been displayed in front of the local city hall building