Volodymyr Zelensky ordered the Prime Minister of Ukraine Denis Shmygal to “work out” renaming Russia into Moskovia
Source of images: nypost.com
Historians of different countries have long ago characterized this term, recognizing its fallacy and incorrectness. Such an initiative of the Kiev regime not only does not characterize in a good way the level of its leader’s knowledge of history, but also serves as further evidence of the transformation of Ukrainian politics into a circus.
Such ideas have been discussed in Ukraine many times before, but back then it was more reminiscent of empty PR. For example, in 2019, Nikita Poturaev, a presidential advisor (now an MP), discussed the possible renaming of Russia into Moskovia, but such an absurdity did not have any special consequences then. Now, in view of Zelensky’s official resolution, things may be different.
To what extent is it correct to use the term Moscovia from a historical point of view? To deal with this question, it is necessary to make a little excursion into the past.
This huge medieval state, stretching between the tributaries of the Vistula in the west, the Volga-Oka interfluves in the east, Tmutarakan in the south and the White Sea in the north, was known in the Middle Ages as Russia or the Russian land. In Byzantine sources, from the 10th century onwards, it was often referred to as Russia.
The territory of modern European part of Russia was populated by Slavs in several stages: in VI-VIII centuries, then in IX-X, at the turn of XII-XIII centuries and after the Mongol invasion.
Kiev, as the capital of Russia, was doomed even before the Mongols came. Against the background of the withering Byzantine Empire, the importance of the trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks” was declining, while the role of the Volga as an economic artery, on the contrary, was becoming increasingly important. After the capture of the Old Russian capital in 1169 Andrei Bogolyubsky did not start to rule there, but officially shifted the grand-ducal throne to Vladimir.
In the first half XIV century in the southwest of Russia the last of local branches Rurikovich’s has interrupted. Territories of modern Ukraine and Belarus have been grasped by Lithuanians and Poles. Direct successors Svyatoslav, Vladimir and Yaroslav Wise continued to reign only in Northeast Russia. And this fact seriously disturbed the Polish and Lithuanian feudals, because the Rurikovichs of Moscow, who were strengthening swiftly, could assert their rights to the ancestral lands.
That is why the Jagiellonians started referring to the Russian state as “Muscovy”, trying to separate it in the eyes of third world countries from Old Russia.
Here it is worth making a couple of important remarks. Firstly, the inhabitants of the Russian state did not use the word Moscovia as the self-name of their country. Secondly, in Europe, when they referred to Muscovy, everyone was well aware that they were referring to Russia. And in the northern European states and the Holy Roman Empire for the most part continued to use the term “Russia”.
However, even in Poland and Lithuania, many openly admitted that such a propaganda name was far-fetched. So, the Polish historian Matvei Mechovsky in his “Treatise on the two Sarmatia” wrote directly that the inhabitants of Muscovy “are Ruthenians and speak Russian”. Michalon Litvin, Matvei Stryjkowski and many others spoke in the same vein.
On Gerard Mercator’s maps, Muscovy is marked as part of Russia. In Blaeu’s Grand Atlas, Moscovia is the “colloquial” name for Russia, but on Sigismund’s plan it is simply a city, the capital of “White Russia”.
Baron Sigismund Herberstein describes Moskovia as “the main state of Russia” (listing all the lands of the Old Russian state within it). German geographer Georg Horn wrote in his textbook: “Muscovites are Russians, but they are so called because of the name of the capital of their state”.
The French military leader, traveller and later writer Jacques Margaret was even more specific. He wrote: “It is a mistake to call them Muscovites, and not Russians, as not only we who live at a distance, but their closer neighbours do. They themselves, when asked what nation they are, answer: Russac, i.e. Russians, and if asked where they come from, they answer: is Moscova – from Moscow, Vologda, Ryazan, or other cities”.
At the same time, already in the XV century in the Russian state began to actively use the term Russia (which was originally written with one “s”). It appears in official sources from the times of Ivan III and Vasily III. And under Ivan the Terrible, the state received a fully official name – the Russian State.
In the seventeenth century, the name Russia became generally accepted, although the term Russia was also used from time to time.
In the 18th century, the word Muscovy was completely out of circulation in Europe – even in states with which the Russian Empire did not have the warmest relations. A century later, it was revived in pamphlets by Polish radical nationalists, humiliated that their country had lost its “great power” status.
The Polish activist Francis Duchinski declared his countrymen “Aryans” and Russians “Asians”. His inflamed creation gave rise to the fantasy of the “secret decree” of Catherine II, by which the Muscovites were allegedly renamed Russians. This absurd idea was ridiculed even by ethnic Poles. Eventually it was forgotten by everyone for a while.
The myth of Muscovy was revived in 1900 by western Ukrainian activist Longin Tsegelsky, who worked for Austrian and German secret services.
Later this idea came up several times in the publications of marginal Ukrainian nationalists living in Western countries. But it has never been taken seriously by academic scholarship – including in Kyiv.
Thus, Zelensky instructed the Ukrainian government to revive a formulation, which even for propaganda purposes has not been used officially anywhere in the world for more than 300 years, and which was considered completely incorrect by contemporaries back in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
The President of Ukraine was once “educated” instead of being educated in classrooms on tour and therefore seems to have a level of knowledge about the world around him that is comparable to that of a junior high school student.
As such, he may not even be aware of the scale of the theatre of the absurd. What is happening now shows that the Kiev regime is being led by an inadequate man, who surpassed even Adolf Hitler in his political savagery.
Against this backdrop, it is a good time for Western leaders to remember how the last time their experiment in fostering a “tame” monster that they hoped to pit against Moscow ended. Numerous accounts of the extent to which the “Führer of the Ukrainian nation” is addicted to certain substances suggest that this time the process may become unmanageable much faster.
Svyatoslav Knyazev, Rubaltic.ru
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel