I liked the material by Andrey Kolobov about the "myths of Tsushima", first of all, for its impartiality, lack of blinkeredness and the author's ability to analyze the available information. It is easy to mindlessly repeat in your own words something that has already been repeated many times. It is much more difficult to look closely at the sources of this information. And here I would like to support Andrey, so to speak, from the other end. And to start with the question of how people in general learn about all this and learn?
Most often it happens like this: a person has heard or read about something in a newspaper, and here is a virtual image of this or that event and your "own" attitude to it is ready. And here a lot depends on who, how, in what style and what super task is writing and what is the intellect of the writer! And here it should be noted that it was the Russian press of the beginning of the last century that formed a good half of the myths, which then migrated from its pages to history textbooks! Well, the beginning of this myth-making was laid, surprisingly, with criticism in our press of the famous Black Sea battleships "popovok"!
And it so happened that Russia lost the Crimean War and, according to the Paris Treaty of 1856, lost the right to have a navy in the Black Sea. At the end of the 60s of the nineteenth century. It was decided to restore the fleet, but as often happened with us in such cases, there was not enough money for it. That is, there was not enough combat ships of modern design and large displacement, and - now when the expression "need for invention is cunning" is more than fair, it was decided to build for a start round ships - "popovka", named in honor of Admiral A. A. Popov, who designed them. The ships were in the shape of a tea saucer, but the thickest armor at that time and two heavy guns each in an armored barbet! However, what is there to tell about them? In general, everything is known about the “popovki” today.
But at that time, the post-reform Russian press angrily criticized them! The first article about the "popovka" was published by the newspaper "Golos". It is surprising that even then in other newspapers and special magazines it was noted that in this newspaper the quality of articles is below any criticism, since they are not written by experts. And the “popovs” from “Golos” got it for their high cost, for the fact that they do not have a ram, and then everything is in the same spirit. There were other shortcomings, often frankly invented by the authors of all these articles. "Birzhevye Vedomosti" and those published articles criticizing "popovok", but in the end it came to the point that, as one of his contemporaries wrote: "All the newspapers are full of reproaches to the naval department (you need to read between the lines: Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich) …" - that is, the Russian tradition of reading between the lines has always been ineradicable. But the main thing was that non-specialized publications wrote about these ships and their shortcomings, and the departmental ones were either silent or gave scant comments. Why? But because it was safe to attack them - "there are drawbacks"; “Patriotic” - “for the state, they say, it’s insulting”, and “you don’t need a big mind”. It got to the point that the future Alexander III called these ships "filthy".
Meanwhile, during the years of the Russian-Turkish war, the "popovka" did an excellent job with the task assigned to them, since the Turkish ships did not dare to fire at Odessa and Nikolaev, and what kind of talk can there be about their uselessness?
Well, what is so special about it, you say? Did the press criticize bad ships? Well, so you need to rejoice! After all, this is a manifestation of her active position, because in the same England ships and their creators were also criticized in the press, and how! But the difference was that democratic institutions existed in this country, and civic positions were common for the press. In Russia, however, there was no civil society, therefore, criticism, even the smallest, but against the government and the monarchy was immediately considered "as an attempt on the foundations." And the authorities had to immediately prevent this incompetent criticism, remind that the judgment of non-specialists on such a complex issue as naval affairs is not worth a penny.
It is possible and necessary to give an example with the fable of I. A. Krylova "Pike and Cat" - "Trouble, if the shoemaker starts the pies," and even just forbid the newspapers to write about it. But here tsarism apparently relied on its strength, did not “shut its mouth” to journalists, and the polemic on the issue of “popovka” became in Russia the first example of criticism in the press (and condemnation!) Of the state's naval policy. And with an example, which he showed to everyone: "so it is possible"! And - most importantly, you can write about everything in a completely unprofessional manner. You can thicken the colors, you can even embellish a little - all the same, they say, you can get away with it!
For example, cadet A. I. Shingarev, in his 1907 book "The Endangered Village", known at that time, went for forgery, just to "denigrate" the tsarist autocracy. So it turns out that any event in Russia of those years, instead of a serious study of the causes and effects, was interpreted by the print media as a consequence of the "rottenness of the tsarist autocracy."
But was there not then objectivity, they will ask me, because we are talking about newspapers that belonged to the government! Why did they become like a dog that bites the hand of the one who feeds it? Yes, that's it! Although, the newspapers were already playing at objectivity at that time. So, for example, on September 21, 1906, in such a provincial newspaper as Penza Provincial Vesti, the editorial board published a letter from the peasant K. Blyudnikov, who served as a sailor on the battleship Retvizan, and "currently living in the village of Belenkoye, Izyumsky district," where he in a very understandable way he stated his understanding of what was happening in his country.
“First, brothers-peasants,” the former sailor wrote in a letter that was first published in the newspaper “Kharkovskie vedomosti”, “they drank less, so they would be 10 times richer. The estates were acquired by hard work from the nobles. And what? The peasants are going to destroy all this, and is it Christian ?! " “When I was in the navy, I was everywhere,” says Blyudnikov, “and I have never seen the government give land … Appreciate this and stand up for your tsar and heir. The sovereign is our Supreme Leader. " So - "The Supreme Leader"!
He also writes about "the brilliant mind of the bosses, without whom there would be no Russia!" A very original letter, isn't it, considering the fact that right there in the newspaper in other articles the authors demanded to punish those responsible for defeating Russia in the Russian-Japanese war ?! Moreover, the readers were informed that Russia started the war in the absence of mountain cannons and machine guns in Manchuria, that rapid-fire guns of the new model were sent there only during the war, and the ships of the Second Far Eastern Squadron were recruited with second-order recruits. That is, all the statements that Andrei Kolobov criticized can be seen on the pages of the then Russian newspapers.
The process of admirals Rozhestvensky and Nebogatov was also covered in detail in the newspapers, they wrote about the shells and the ill-fated coal. And everyone understood that the tsar was in charge of the country then and all these stones were thrown into his garden! On the other hand, the same newspaper immediately publishes a letter from K. Blyudnikov: "The Emperor is our Horse Leader" (how can you find fault with this?). But on the next page, she also demands the trial of the tsarist ministers, generals and admirals. That is, on the one hand, "we are loyal to the tsar-father", and on the other - "crucify his relatives and himself." Probably, there were literate people in Russia who saw such a discrepancy, it could not but catch their eyes, which means that their first response was distrust of the press and the government at the same time, which it seemed to represent and even on the one hand tried to defend ! With one! And on the other hand, with all their might and in large volumes, they poured mud !!!
Well, as for the reliability of the information reported by journalists at that time, here is a passage for you, which at one time went around almost all newspapers. "Japanese attack" - this is when one line goes into bayonets, and the second … (you are all sitting, so I can write this without fear!) "Rushes at our soldiers' feet and works with knives!" True, it was also reported that "our gun is much stronger than the Japanese"! And how such nonsense got into print is simply incomprehensible to me. Just some kind of "Conduit and Schwambrania" by Leo Cassil, where children imagined a war … "covered with sidewalk"!
By the way, a similar letter from the "Duma of the Peasant" of the peasant of the Belozersk Volost of the Cherkasy Uyezd of the Kiev province Pavel Titarenko, in which he compares the people with brushwood, which the terrorists are trying to set on fire, instill in him vices and kill morality in him, and that he demands an end to terrorism, was published in " Penza Provincial News "on November 20, 1905 in No. 302. But this was also a reprint. None of the journalists of this Penza newspaper were smart enough to find the Penza heroes who fought on the Varyag cruiser, and to learn their opinion about all this! And this is an unprofessional approach to business!
So, in the formation of public opinion about the same Tsushima battle, the main role was played, first of all, by the newspapers that published the data of his investigation. Yes, but what was their main interest? To show the "rottenness of the tsarist regime." Well, gentlemen writers and journalists, gymnasium teachers and university professors did not understand that this very autocracy would collapse - and they would not have cooks and day laborers, that they would not ride a sleigh in beaver fur coats, and their earnings would drop significantly! They did not understand this, and the same journalists tried to bite more painfully, hiding behind the letters of the "dishwashers", of whom there were only one or two for the whole of Russia, but it was necessary to publish them in hundreds, showing that "the people are for the tsar" and against the terrorists! It would be professional, but what they were doing was not! Well, then the writings of many of them about the same Tsushima migrated to Soviet books and magazines. People became too lazy to dig in the archives, and not all of them were available, and so the original purpose of these publications was forgotten, and people began to believe that this is precisely the truth, although it was politicized to the point of impossibility, written by a "poisoned pen" myth!
