Did Catherin the Great kill Peter the Great?

[Nilufer Hatun]

Hey Guys I'm doing a project on Catherin the great in assessing the different historiographical perspectives on whether she killed her husband, so I need to look at three differing perspectives on this issue so I need to find three different historians. Does anyone know three different historians with different views to this?

 

[At Each Kilometer]

Peter III was not so great indeed. I am watching a Russian series about Catherine numero dos, where he was depicted as a spoiled brat, his admiration for the Prussian king exaggerated etc. Sophie of Anhalt-Zerbst on the other hand, this maneater, is depicted as a saint. Her husband was a grandchild of Peter I.

 

[DiocletianIsBetterThanYou]

As this seems to be homework or an assignment, we can't really name historians, but the key thing to do is to find some books or articles on Catherine, see what they all say about the death of her husband and compare their different interpretations.

By the way, you're mixing up 'Peters' when you say 'Peter the Great'.

 

[wenamun]

There are basically three different categories but (as far as I know) there are no publications that have evidence for the involvement of Prussian Catherine.
1) Doubt of official cause: Voltaire, Jean le Rond d'Alembert
2) Crime: Robert Nisbet Bain (1902), Carol S. Leonard (1993), Alexander S. Mylnikov (2001 or 2002)
3) Link with Catherine: Robert K. Massie, 2011 - notes European blame on Catherine for the death of Peter III.

 

[Merlin]

(as far as I know) there are no publications that have evidence for the involvement of Prussian Catherine.

Had a look in my library and in the archive, and you seem to be correct :

1) Not guilty, no evidence to claim Catherine II ordered Peter III to be killed : numerous historians ... take a pick
2) Guilty, evidence found to claim Catherine II ordered Peter III to be killed : no historians found
3) Doubtful/perhaps : one historian

Anyway , good luck with your research @Nilufer Hatun

 

[Naomasa298]

There can be only one.

 

[Merlin]

There can be only one.

Oooops ... corrected to 1, 2 and 3 .. thank you, Nao ..

 

[Offspring]

By the way, you're mixing up 'Peters' when you say 'Peter the Great'.

Btw, "fun fact":

The words "Grandson of Peter the Great" (Russian: внук Петра Великого, romanized: vnuk Petra Velikogo) were made an obligatory part of his official title, underscoring his dynastic claim to the Russian throne, and it was made a criminal offence to omit them.[5]

 

[wenamun]

Had a look in my library and in the archive, and you seem to be correct :

What's this archive about?

 

[Nilufer Hatun]

OMG Thank you guys so much! It's actually kinda funny that only a few historians think she was involved I would have really thought more were on board

 

[Rhymehouse]

Wasn't Catherine born after Peter the Great died? Or are there 2 russian Tsars named Peter the Great?

 

[At Each Kilometer]

Wasn't Catherine born after Peter the Great died? Or are there 2 russian Tsars named Peter the Great?

Catherine numero uno was the (second) wife of Peter the Great. She didnt killed her husband. Catherine numero dos was the wife of the not-so-great grandson of Peter the Great. She killed and ate her husband, later said to Nikita Panin, the tutor of the heir, 'the future generations will never forgive me.' She was a maneater.

 

[Philliposeur]

Catherine numero uno was the (second) wife of Peter the Great. She didnt killed her husband. Catherine numero dos was the wife of the not-so-great grandson of Peter the Great. She killed and ate her husband, later said to Nikita Panin, the tutor of the heir, 'the future generations will never forgive me.' She was a maneater.

While I am aware that as a result of Peter III's death while in custody, she reportedly said ‘My glory is spoilt, posterity will never forgive me’ as translated by Simon Sebag Montefiore in his Catherine the Great and Potemkin, your post is the first time I have seen any mention of cannibalism. She didn't actually kill him herself either as she wasn't at Rapsha and was informed of the event in a letter from Alexei Orlov, who was in charge of him there. The fact that Orlov asked for her forgiveness would indicate she didn't plan his murder at that point, although she might have intended that he wouldn't be around in the long term.

When exactly was she supposed to have eaten him? Did she stand with a knife and fork beside the open coffin while he was lying in state at the Alexander Nevskii Monastery, helping herself to a slice every now and then? Or after he had been interred there, did she have him dug up in the dead of night and have him barbequed? Or was it fricasseed?

 

[At Each Kilometer]

@Philliposeur She is almost a human equivalent of mantis. Almost. Free from the chains of the marriage she had dozens of lovers throughout her reign, some of whom had a great influence on domestic & foreign policy. Her debauchery was manifested in an openly provocative form and contributed to the decline of the moral of the nobility. During her reign the institution of serfdom 'reached new heights'. She converted thousands of state peasants into serfs indeed this witch possessed many souls (душ), ceded entire villages to her favorites meaning favoritism was a key characteristic of her reign. The state expenditures on favorites amounted to tens of millions of rubles and corruption and abuses by officials were widespread. The expenses for maintaining the bureaucracy also increased sharply. By the end of her reign the empire was in a severe economic crisis with a complete collapse of the financial system, the total amount of the debt was more than 200 million rubles. Her foreign loans and the interest accrued on them were fully repaid only in 1891 during the last years of Alexandr III. Terrible ruler indeed. Maneater she was.

EDIT: Montefiore' translation is correct.