Articles
Nicholas Zharkikh
Shortened text of the section. Full text in ukrainian version.
In addition to the two books discussed above, Martin Dimnik published a number of articles about Chernihiv princes of the 13th century. Some of them preceded the 1981 book as preparatory work for the monograph.
(1) Dimnik M. in 1235 and 1236. – Canadian slavonic papers (Toronto), 1979, v. 21, No. 1, p. 28-44.
I commented on some other provisions of this article in the excursuses.
(2) Dimnik M. . – Mediaeval studies (Toronto), 1979, v. 41, p. 387-403.
The article on this site is paid access, so I could not use it.
(3) Dimnik M. Kamenec. – Russia mediaevalis (Munich), 1979, vol. 4, p. 25-34.
I have to regret it again – this article on a very interesting topic for me is not available on the Internet.
(4) Dimnik M. The Place of Ryurik Rostislavich’s Death: Kyiv or Chernihiv? – Medieval Studies, 1982, vol. 44, No. 1, p. 371 – 393.
I know about the existence of such an article, and it is interesting to me. But it is not on the Internet, so I cannot read it and say something.
"Academic historians" will say: why didn’t Nicholas Zharkikh take advantage of standard academic opportunities, didn’t get a grant for his work, didn’t go to Munich, where the mentioned magazine is probably located, etc.
I answer (on March 11, 2022 at 7:50 a.m., while the echoes of explosions are not heard in my Kyiv apartment): 1, I do not belong to the academic community of historians; 2, I don’t care about any grants; 3, I remember about Covid-19 – no one canceled it, they just stopped talking about it; 4, I remember the Muscovites who approached Kyiv and dream of capturing it; 5, I remember the curfew and the impossibility of getting not just to Munich, but even to the National Library on Demiivska Square. The list can be continued.
The next series of articles was published after the publication of the monograph in 2003, so it is possible to see whether there have been changes in the views of the author.
(5) Dimnik M. (1206 – 1211). – Severshchyna in the history of Ukraine, 2010, vol. 3, p. 102 – 111.
I am reading this article in the background (as of April 2, 2022) on the complete liberation of the Kyiv region from the Russian invaders. The descendants of Andrij Bogolyubsky did not succeed in repeating his feat.
But the Russian aggressors captured Izyum, . The road to our final victory is still long and difficult.
Therefore, I am obliged to continue my offensive on the selected section of the front of the struggle of ideas (April 3, 2022 at 8:55).
In this article, M. D. refused of his statement in 2003, that the older branch of Olgovychs had dynastic rights to Halych. Now M. D. asserted even more – that even the younger branch did not have such rights, and only the participation in the campaign of 1206 of the Kyiv prince Rurik gave legitimacy to the coalition’s claims to Halych – because Ryurik as grand prince of Kyiv had the right to appropriate the lands of an extinct dynasty [p. 103].
Photos and videos from the massacre in Bucha horrified the whole world. Only Russia does not recognize the fact of these war crimes, and its loyal ally Germany : "And we don’t care!"
But this massacre was planned – this is the implementation of the plan of "denazification" of Ukraine, which was announced by Russia from the very beginning of the war.
Without real denazification of what will remain in place of Russia after the war, there will be no peace. So, I continue (April 4, 2022 at 8:00 a.m.)
The considerations – why Volodymyr Igorovych fled to Putivl in 1207, and not to Novgorod-Siversky [p. 105] – remained unchanged compared to 2003. In the same form, based on Tatishchev, the description of the reign of Rostislav Rurikovich in Galicia and the death of Rurik in 1208 remained [p. 106].
So, the article in question is essentially an abbreviated summary of the relevant sections of the 2003 book, with very minor differences.
(6) Dimnik M. of prince Michael Vsevolodovich of Chernihiv (1179 – 1246). – Severshchyna in the history of Ukraine, 2012, vol. 5, p. 107 – 111.
The summary of the article does not promise anything good:
According to the sparse information that is available concerning the offspring of Prince Michael Vsevolodovich of Chernihiv (1179 – 1246), he had two daughters and five sons. The daughters moved to Suzdalia where the elder one became a nun in Suzdal and the younger one lived as the princess of Rostov. Of the five sons, the eldest, Rostislav, deserted his father after the Tatar invasion and entered the service of the Hungarian king. The four younger sons Roman, Mstislav, Simeon, and Yury ruled domains in the Chernihiv lands as vassals of the Tatars [p. 107].
The whole article completely wrong and uncritically repeats late fictions of the 15th – 19th centuries. This is the worst thing I have ever read by M. Dimnik. There would be no harm if this article did not exist at all.
(7) Dimnik M. between Daniil Romanovych and Michael Vsevolodovich (1235-1245). – Rossica antiqua, 2013, No. 1, p. 55-103.
The article has a note: This is an updated version of a chapter from the 1981 book. [p. 95 – 129]. What is new here besides the language?
Thus, the "updating" consisted in superficially suppressing the previous text with references to one Russian author, whose opinions, however, did not influence M. Dimnik in any way.
(8) Dimnik M. , Michael of Chernihiv and the Tatars: the struggle for the Galician land in 1239-1245. – Rusyn, 2014, No. 1, p. 17 – 35.
This is another publication of the same article (translated from English by the same V. G. Ananiev, who translated the previous article). The scientific apparatus is enriched with references to articles by the same A. Maiorov in the same magazine with the paradoxical name "Rusyn", which the Moscow agency publishes in Chisinau. Thank God, nothing new!
So, M. Dimnik’s late articles, published after his 2003 monograph, do not add anything new to the interpretation of the topic, except for errors.