The completely lunatic view of Armenian politicians on the current situation in the world is largely a projection of their equally lunatic historical tales, which have nothing to do with real historical facts and historical truth. Instead of accepting their rather modest place in the world today (which may well be worthy - there are many peoples comparable in number to Armenians, but living peacefully with their neighbours), they continue to suffer from delusions of grandeur.

The speech of Armenian politician and political scientist Amayak Hovhannisyan on Noyan Tapan TV channel is from the same series. The main topic of entry is the complicated and tense relations between Russia and Ukraine. And even in this topic, which is very far from Armenia (except for the fact that Kalontarov, Simonyan, Keosayan and Baghdasarov on one side and Arsen Avakov on the other side have been inciting enmity between the brotherly Russian and Ukrainian people), Amayak Hovhannisyan managed to insert Armenian myths about their "ancient greatness" (from minute 19):

Among the main Armenian myths voiced are the following:

- The myth of the Armenian origin of the outstanding scholar of the Middle Ages, Leo the Mathematician, under whom Cyril and Methodius studied.

- The myth about the huge number of Roman or Roman Emperors (called "Byzantine" by him) of supposedly "Armenian origin, particularly Vasily II and his sister Anna, wife of Prince Vladimir during whose time Russia was baptized.

- The myth about the participation of some Armenian detachment in the capture of Kazan in 1552 and the related myth that allegedly in memory and "gratitude" for this participation of Armenians one of the domes of St. Basil's Cathedral in Moscow is dedicated almost to an "Armenian church".

Let us consider all these Armenian tales in more detail.

First, the statement of Hovhannesyan about allegedly 33 Byzantine emperors-Armenians (who were actually called the Roman or "Roman" emperors - the term "Byzantine" was coined by modern historians) is nonsense. The fact is that in the Roman or Romean Empire the Armenians were considered heretics and could not be emperors in an Orthodox country by definition.

Sometimes the "Armenian descent" of a family was purely geographical, and it meant that the representatives of the family served or had estates in the border provinces of the empire, which had the word "Armenia" in their name (but not populated by the Hays), nothing more. But they were not and could not be Armenians, because the very identity of "Armenian" meant belonging to a religious sect hostile to Orthodoxy.

In the historical chronicles the word "Armenian" is applied only to one of the emperors - Leo V the Armenian, who was nicknamed "Armenian" by his predecessor Michael I who declared him patrician of the Armenian Fema (province) of the Empire during his reign. This is roughly the same as in his time in the Russian Empire, Field Marshal General Paskevich was called "Erevan", but it does not at all mean that he was a native of the Azerbaijanian city of Irevan, which he captured.

As for the outstanding scientist Leo the Mathematician, indeed his works have not reached us in the original (there are only references to them), but we know that he was born in Constantinople, grew up in Constantinople, lived in Constantinople and died in Constantinople. Constantinople was a completely Orthodox Christian city, the capital of the Orthodox Empire, and the Armenian heretics weren't allowed to live there for a long time (only the Ottomans allowed to settle in the city and build their churches).

There is no information that Lev Mathematician was in the region where there was Fema "Armenia" or had any kind of relationship with the representatives or the Hays ethnic group or the Armenian-Gregorian faith. The ethnic origin of Leo the Mathematician is not known. Taking into account multinational character of Roman Empire of that time he could be Greek, Thracian, Macedonian, Albanian, Bulgarian, Turk, Arab - any. History does not specify this. The only thing is that one source speaks about his kinship with the Iconoclast patriarch John Grammaticus. And from the imperial frontier femes, which had the word "Armenia" in their names, came a part of the Iconoclasts (only a part - but not all). That is all! There is no other information, even hypothetical, about Leo the Mathematician's links with the Armenians.

But it is well known who were the pupils of Leo the Mathematician, Constantine the Philosopher (Cyril) and Methodius. The hagiography of St. Cyril calls him and his brother Methodius Bulgarians by origin. It is also known that Kirill and Methodius belonged not to the common people, but to the elite of society. All Bulgarian elite was Turkic by origin. In days of Cyril and Methodius it gradually began to become Slavic and to pass to language of the Bulgarian common people, mixed up with Slavs and adopted Slavic language.

Also hagiography of the saints says that Constantine Philosopher (Cyril) and Methodius were with mission in Khazar Khaganate, before to a court of Khaganate Constantine Philosopher studied the Hebrew language to argue with Jews (then the top of Khazar began to accept Judaism). He did not learn the Khazar language because he knew it perfectly well - Turkic Old Bulgarian and Khazar languages were related and understandable (of the currently alive languages of the Bulgarian subgroup of the Turkic languages, the Chuvash language survived to this day).

Amayak Hovhannesyan says that Cyril is the name of Constantine in "Slavonic" as "Barsegh" is in Armenian Vasily. The respected "ancient Christian" doesn`t know elementary things - Cyril is the name which Constantine the Philosopher took after being tonsured before his death into the Great Schema - the highest degree of monasticism, symbolizing complete rejection of the world. Schema monks change their name when they take monastic vows.

 As to the name Constantine, it is not known to the end whether this was originally a secular name, which he did not change after taking monastic tonsure, or his secular name was another. Anyway, but Constantine Philosopher went down in history under his last dying name, christened to him in schema - Cyril.

As for the statement that the Emperor Basil II and his sister Anna, wife of Prince Vladimir, under whom Russia was baptized, were "Armenians" - is nothing but a modern fiction of Armenian and pro-Armenian historical falsifiers, as well as the fact that the Emperor was called in Armenian "Barsegh" (let them show at least one document or chronicle with this name!)

Basil II, who went down in history for his victories over the Bulgarians under the nickname "Bulgarians", belonged to the Macedonian dynasty. As can be seen from the name, it comes from Macedonia and has no relation to Armenia and the Armenians.

The story about the ancestors of the founder of the dynasty Basil I of Macedonia, on the basis of which historical forgeries have concluded that he was "Armenian", is contained in only one document, namely in the so-called chronicle of "Continuers Theophanes". It states that the ancestors of Basil I of Macedonia, descended from the Armenian kings of the Arshakid dynasty, Constantine I the Great and Alexander the Great.

In this case, information about the origin of Basil's ancestors modern historians believe the opinion of the Photios I of Constantinople, which he expressed only to "ennoble" and glorify the new dynasty. But, incidentally, he placed more emphasis not on its "Armenianness", but on the "Macedonianness" of Basil I, as he considered Alexander of Macedonia to be the "main ancestor" of Emperor Basil, and not the Armenian kings.

 And even if Photios is right in some respects, his assumption can only mean a relationship with the Arshakids, who, as we know, were Parthian (according to some scholars of Turkic origin) and to the Hays ethnic group had nothing to do. Of course, "to the bone" Orthodox Emperor Basil II and his sister Anna to the Armenians and the Armenian heresy had not the slightest relation, let alone carry this evil and hostile to them heresy in Russia. Therefore, the statement that "Armenians baptized Rus" sounds like another nonsense.

The same goes for other allegedly "Armenian" emperors.

And, of course, the most important and inscrutable nonsense that Amayak Hovhannisyan carries is the alleged "participation of Armenians in the Russian campaigns", in particular against Kazan. The words "Armenians" and "warriors" were not compatible at all in those times. The Armenians were considered a "purely commercial" sect; there is not a single Russian chronicle, not to mention other peoples' chronicles, that mentions an "Armenian detachment" or just a single Armenian in military service. There is plenty of information about Armenian merchants. But there were no Armenian warriors at the time and there could never have been.

As for the capture of Kazan in 1552, in general there were more Tatars than Russians among the troops storming the city. The main initiator of the Kazan campaign was Shah Ali Khan of Kasimov, who had not long before been Khan of Kazan, but was forced to cede power to the Astrakhan "Tsarevich" Yadigar Muhammad. He was in turn baptized after the capture of Kazan as "Tsar of Kazan Semyon Kasayevich" and was given the Russian town of Zvenigorod as his inheritance. Later on, Shah-Ali was the commander-in-chief of the Russian troops in the Livonian War. That's why it is wrong to view the Kazan campaign as a "confrontation between the Russians and the Tatars".

By and large, the capture of Kazan was a "showdown" within the disintegrated Ulus Dzhuchi, during which the Moscow Grand Duke who controlled the upper reaches of the Volga and the Kasimov Khan (Chingizid, formally "sovereign" over Moscow and received from it, at that time, a quite official tribute) managed to take control of the middle course of the Volga (Kazan).  After a while, the lower reaches (Astrakhan) were taken, politically uniting the most important water transit route. The fact that Armenian merchants traded along this route and further along the Caspian Sea from the Safavid Empire and back does not mean at all that any military men of the Armenian Gregorian faith, let alone a military unit of persons of Khaya origin, took any part in the political events along the trade route. After all, they were always and everywhere considered to be trading people.

And of course, the Armenian merchants themselves did not even know then that they turned out to be "ancient great Armenians" and that they had a "great Armenia" and 33 "Byzantine" emperors.  This kind of nonsense unhappy Armenians "concocted" from various ethnic groups united only by the Armenian-Gregorian faith, began to be instilled only in the 19th century.

If we go back to the history of Kazan, it seems that Armenian historians have confused the merchant caravan with a military unit. Armenian merchants could really accompany the Russo-Tatar army marching towards Kazan, just like they could buy and resell loot, which was a favorite hai "business".  However, taking part in an armed campaign was out of the question.

And finally, regarding the 7 domes in St. Basil's Cathedral. The 7 domes in the Orthodox Church mean either 7 Ecumenical Councils (of which Armenians admit only 3!) or 7 Orthodox sacraments, or 7 Christian virtues. But to dedicate one of the domes of an Orthodox church specifically to the heretical Armenian sect "church", which does not recognize all 7 Ecumenical Councils, and, this could not be in principle. It is not clear on what basis Amayak Hovvanisyan made this up or who among Armenian "storytellers" is the author of this wild and illogical fiction.

 Yes, the Orthodox Church honours St Gregory the Baptist of Armenia (of the Parthian royal family of the Arshakids), but it also notes that the Armenians have departed from the heritage of St Gregory and become heretics, "in spirit" hostile to him.

Kavkazplus