what can the “Monomakh hat” testify about at the international tribunal?
(Rubric “Point of view”)
STATE TEST
Iryna Kostenko, Iryna Khalupa
“The Moscow state was neither the heir nor the successor of the Kyiv state, it grew on its own roots”
Mykhailo Hrushevskyi
“We are fighting on our land, where the soldiers of Prince Volodymyr Monomakh struck the enemy”, – this is how the Moscow dictator recently justified the barbaric war in Ukraine. Vladimir Putin. It is significant that not only Putin, but also the entire local population, starting with schoolchildren, who for more than twenty years have been hammering home the main myths that Grand Duke of Kyiv Volodymyr Monomah (1053–1125) – “an outstanding personality of the Russian Federation.”
When did the ownership of what never belonged to Moscow begin?
Muscovites’ appropriation of the history of Russia began in the 15th century, under the Moscow ruler. Ivan III (1462–1505) – “a petty trader, a despot… who turned all subordinates into frightened and voiceless slaves” and was famous for “barbaric executions and boundless greed” (historian Mykola Kostomarov).
Despot Ivan III received unlimited power and became the “founder of the Moscow unity principle”
For such a ruler, the local monastery scribes decided to “sharpen the genealogy” (historian Norman Davies) and create a reputation of divine origin. And he wrote a genealogy (family history) for him in the fantasy genre (since then, this genre has become a favorite of imperial historians).
In their writings, they declared the Moscow despot Ivan III “a descendant of the Roman Caesar Augustus, the Moscow kingdom – the heir of the Byzantine Empire, and Moscow – the Third Rome.”
In the Moscow kingdom, they invented their own world order, which was transformed into the main imperial myth.
Hence, together with with the status of “married by God” the ruler of the despot Ivan III, he received unlimited, unlimited power and became “the founder of the Moscow unified principle” (historian Mykola Kostomarov).
Thus, half a thousand years ago, in the Muscovy kingdom, they invented their own world order, which was later transformed into the main imperial myth, or so-called. “Moscow scheme of history” (historian Ogloblin). This myth over the centuries formed the national mentality of Muscovites, which is based on loyalty in their continuation of “excellence” after any other people of the world (doctor of history Evgeny Kalyuzhny).
Transfer in Kyiv
She aptly explained the essence of that ideological special operation Lina Kostenko in his famous lectures “The humanitarian aura of the nation or the defect of the main mirror”. Moscow scribes “instead of writing that Moscow sits in the swamp and Muscovites are not marked by great dignity,” came up with a genealogical one “about the origin of the Moscow dynasty from Caesar Augustus, of course with a transplant in Kyiv, to Prince Volodymyr. And I would like real history to be prevented, and Russian historians to take out what was never there. And there will be a “Moscow scheme of world history.”
What did “transfer in Kyiv” mean?
The Muscovites gave birth to their despot Ivan III with the Roman Caesar through the Kyiv prince Volodymyr Monomakh.
Announcing Volodymyr Monomakh as his “ancestor”, Ivan III began to claim the annexation of Ukrainian lands to Muscovy
Monomachus was the son Grand Duke of Kyiv Vsevolod Yaroslavich and the Byzantine princess, as well as his father Yuriy Dolgoruky, the founder of the Suzdal-Moscow dynasty. It was through Dolgoruky that the Muscovites established a simple line of descent for their princes to the Byzantine Monomakhs.
“This genealogy was absolutely necessary for Moscow, because without it it was impossible to build a theory of the study of the rights and greatness of II and I Rome: for this, it was necessary to use Ukraine-Russia as a transitional stage,” the historian explains. Natalia Polonska-Vasylenko.
Having announced Volodymyr Monomakh as his “ancestor”, Ivan III began to call himself “the sovereign of all Russia”, and in accordance with this title to claim the annexation of Ukrainian lands to Muscovy.
Did he have the right to do so?
No. British historian Norman Davis in his bestseller “History of Europe” he claims that “the title of Ivan III “sovereign of all Russia” could not be substantiated either by history or political reality.”
Why so?
The fact is that it is not known under which laws all the regalia of Volodymyr Monomakh, together with the rights of inheritance from the Byzantine emperors, passed to Yuri Dolgoruky.
Why did Muscovites declare Yury Dolgoruky the main heir of Volodymyr Monomakh?
According to the law, the inheritance passed to the eldest son. The eldest in the marriage of Volodymyr Monomakh and English Princess Gita (daughters Haroldthe last Anglo-Saxon king of England) was Mstislav.
It was to him that Volodymyr Monomakh handed over the main throne of Ukraine-Rus – Kyiv. Mstislav ruled the state so gloriously that he earned the title of Great. His sons and grandsons were also Kiev princes, and the line of descendants of Mstislav the Great continued the glorious one. Roman Halytskyi and his son Danylo Halytskyi, who was crowned in 1253. In general, the sons and grandsons of Mstislav the Great ruled Ukraine until 1324.
And Yurii Dolgoruky was the seventh in order of seniority, he was born in the second marriage of Volodymyr Monomakh, and his mother was a concubine (concubine). Before his death, Prince Volodymyr bestowed Yuriy with one of the most remote principalities of Ukraine-Russia – Rostov-Suzdal. So why did Muscovites declare him the main heir of Volodymyr Monomakh?
Falsification of the history of Muscovy
“It is clear: we are dealing here with a deliberate falsification of the history of Muscovy, and this falsification continues to this day,” explains history professor Nataliya Polonska-Vasylenko.
Muscovites themselves understand how much their efforts to assimilate with the Kiev and Byzantine rulers are sewn with white threads
It is indicative that the Muscovites understand perfectly well themselves, thanks to their efforts to get along with the Kiev and Byzantine rulers, sewn with white threads, and soon they made another fake – “The Tale of the Monomakhs” (barms are symbols of power). The authors of “Fables” appropriately described how Volodymyr Monomakh received the royal regalia from the Byzantine emperor Konstantin Monomakh and how they later passed to Moscow by inheritance. The text “Fables” was carved on the door of the royal throne of the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin (it is there to this day). And they indicated the date of the event – 988.
Volodymyr Monomakh was born half a century later – in 1053. But Moscow writers never bothered to take advantage of such “trivial” matters – the topics of the royal barms were given an official character and the Moscow rulers finally believed that they were not Abykhs, but Monomakhovichi.
Muscovites are silent about the fact that the relic is fake. “Monomach’s cap” has nothing to do with the Byzantine Monomachus
The most famous of those bars became the so-called “Monomakh’s hat”. Moscow leaders crowned themselves king with it (the tyrant was one of the first to do so Ivan the Terrible (1530–1584)). The cap is still kept in the Armory in Moscow as a precious relic of the Moscow and later Russian autocracy.
Muscovites are silent about the fact that the relic is fake. Although this has been known since the 19th century. Numerous researchers (one of the first Russian academicians Nikodym Kondakov) argued and indisputably proved that the cap has nothing to do with the Byzantine Monomakhs: “it consists of two parts: a wonderful oriental work of gold plates (perhaps it really is the cap of some eastern ruler) and a rather unusual peak with a cross attached to it (doctor of history Natalia Polonska-Vasylenko).