Russian propaganda claims that Ukraine is not a separate nation, but merely a “preliminary form” of Russia. Today’s Kremlin ideology seeks to annex Ukrainian history in order to justify its territorial aggression. But this myth has a birth certificate. It emerged in the 19th century, when the Russian Empire started inventing its “ancient” medieval roots. Before that, Russian travellers in Ukrainian lands showed little interest in such historical questions.
In this episode, we trace the genealogy of the myth that Kyiv is a “Russian city” and that its history somehow belongs to Muscovy.
***
Explaining Ukraine is a podcast by UkraineWorld, an English-language media platform about Ukraine, run by Internews Ukraine.
Host: Volodymyr Yermolenko, a Ukrainian philosopher, editor-in-chief of UkraineWorld, and president of PEN Ukraine.
Listen on various platforms: https://li.sten.to/explaining-ukraine
UkraineWorld: https://ukraineworld.org/en
***
Guest: Kateryna Dysa, a Ukrainian historian and Associate Professor at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. She has been a visiting fellow at Harvard, Stanford, Paris, and Oxford, and a visiting professor at the University of Basel. Currently, she is researching how the image of Kyiv was constructed in travel literature from the late eighteenth to early twentieth centuries.
***
SUPPORT:
You can support our work on https://www.patreon.com/c/ukraineworld
Your help is crucial, as we rely heavily on crowdfunding.
You can also contribute to our volunteer missions to frontline areas in Ukraine, where we deliver aid to both soldiers and civilians.
Donations are welcome via PayPal at: ukraine.resisting@gmail.com.
***
CONTENTS:
00:00 Kateryna Dysa, a Ukrainian historian and associate professor at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy.
00:15 Where and when did the myth of Kyiv belonging to Moscow actually begin?
02:05 How did 18th-century Russian travelers initially view Kyiv, and why was their interest superficial?
04:05 How did the rise of history as a discipline change Russia's perception of Kyiv?
12:17 Why did the French philosopher Madame de Staël describe Kyiv as a "semi-Tatar" or nomadic place?
15:17 What were the two extreme ways Westerners described Kyiv?
21:04 When did the annexation of the past become an "aggressive policy" and a part of Russian imperial ideology?
35:03 Why were Russian travelers unwilling to communicate with locals, stressing that Ukrainians were "the other"?
38:07 Why did Russian travelers consistently feel "not at home" in a place the Empire claimed as its "cradle"?
39:16 What aspects of Kyiv's social and cultural history in the 19th century still remain "understudied"?
***
This episode is made in partnership with Kyiv-Mohyla Academy and under the framework of the project “HER-UKR: Challenges and opportunities for EU heritage diplomacy in Ukraine”, co-funded by the EU within the ERASMUS+ Jean Monnet Policy Debate action.
All content for Explaining Ukraine is the property of UkraineWorld and is served directly from their servers
with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.
Russian propaganda claims that Ukraine is not a separate nation, but merely a “preliminary form” of Russia. Today’s Kremlin ideology seeks to annex Ukrainian history in order to justify its territorial aggression. But this myth has a birth certificate. It emerged in the 19th century, when the Russian Empire started inventing its “ancient” medieval roots. Before that, Russian travellers in Ukrainian lands showed little interest in such historical questions.
In this episode, we trace the genealogy of the myth that Kyiv is a “Russian city” and that its history somehow belongs to Muscovy.
***
Explaining Ukraine is a podcast by UkraineWorld, an English-language media platform about Ukraine, run by Internews Ukraine.
Host: Volodymyr Yermolenko, a Ukrainian philosopher, editor-in-chief of UkraineWorld, and president of PEN Ukraine.
Listen on various platforms: https://li.sten.to/explaining-ukraine
UkraineWorld: https://ukraineworld.org/en
***
Guest: Kateryna Dysa, a Ukrainian historian and Associate Professor at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. She has been a visiting fellow at Harvard, Stanford, Paris, and Oxford, and a visiting professor at the University of Basel. Currently, she is researching how the image of Kyiv was constructed in travel literature from the late eighteenth to early twentieth centuries.
***
SUPPORT:
You can support our work on https://www.patreon.com/c/ukraineworld
Your help is crucial, as we rely heavily on crowdfunding.
You can also contribute to our volunteer missions to frontline areas in Ukraine, where we deliver aid to both soldiers and civilians.
Donations are welcome via PayPal at: ukraine.resisting@gmail.com.
***
CONTENTS:
00:00 Kateryna Dysa, a Ukrainian historian and associate professor at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy.
00:15 Where and when did the myth of Kyiv belonging to Moscow actually begin?
02:05 How did 18th-century Russian travelers initially view Kyiv, and why was their interest superficial?
04:05 How did the rise of history as a discipline change Russia's perception of Kyiv?
12:17 Why did the French philosopher Madame de Staël describe Kyiv as a "semi-Tatar" or nomadic place?
15:17 What were the two extreme ways Westerners described Kyiv?
21:04 When did the annexation of the past become an "aggressive policy" and a part of Russian imperial ideology?
35:03 Why were Russian travelers unwilling to communicate with locals, stressing that Ukrainians were "the other"?
38:07 Why did Russian travelers consistently feel "not at home" in a place the Empire claimed as its "cradle"?
39:16 What aspects of Kyiv's social and cultural history in the 19th century still remain "understudied"?
***
This episode is made in partnership with Kyiv-Mohyla Academy and under the framework of the project “HER-UKR: Challenges and opportunities for EU heritage diplomacy in Ukraine”, co-funded by the EU within the ERASMUS+ Jean Monnet Policy Debate action.
Are all empires equally bad? If some were better than others, what criteria can we use to make such judgments? Why must we study networks, not only hierarchies, to understand our past, present, and future? What happens to societies in times of catastrophe, and who has the best chances of survival? And finally — why is Ukraine so important for the world today?
***
Host: Volodymyr Yermolenko, a Ukrainian philosopher, editor-in-chief of UkraineWorld, and president of PEN Ukraine.
Guest: Niall Ferguson — a renowned British-American historian and author of numerous books, including “Empire”, “The Square and the Tower”, “The War of the World”, “Doom”, and others.
Ferguson is the Milbank Family Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
We had this conversation during the Yalta European Strategy Forum in Kyiv in September 2025.
***
Thinking in Dark Times is a podcast of reflection from Ukraine. We try to see the light through — and despite — the current darkness.
This episode was made possible thanks to the support of Politeia, a Ukrainian NGO dedicated to preparing a new generation of change-makers in Ukraine.
***
UkraineWorld is an English-language media about Ukraine run by Internews Ukraine
You can support UkraineWorld on https://www.patreon.com/c/ukraineworld
We rely on crowdfunding to continue our work.
You can also support our regular trips to the frontlines, where we provide support to both soldiers (cars) and civilians (books): PayPal, ukraine.resisting@gmail.com
***
CONTENTS:
00:00 - Intro: Niall Ferguson, a renowned British American historian and author of numerous books.
01:58 - Why does historian Niall Ferguson keep coming back to Kyiv, and what value does he find here?
04:06 - Does the war in Ukraine truly hold a global meaning?
10:01 - Was the British Empire good or bad for the world?
12:17 - What's the difference between a 'liberal' empire and an 'illiberal' one?
19:30 - Does the European Union find a balance between the Empire and the Nation-State?
26:59 - Can Ukraine become an 'antifragile' state?
28:48 - Is being threatened by a 'big bad neighbor' the key to becoming an innovative society?
31:07 - How did the last decade of Russian aggression ultimately lead to the birth of the Ukrainian nation?
Explaining Ukraine
Russian propaganda claims that Ukraine is not a separate nation, but merely a “preliminary form” of Russia. Today’s Kremlin ideology seeks to annex Ukrainian history in order to justify its territorial aggression. But this myth has a birth certificate. It emerged in the 19th century, when the Russian Empire started inventing its “ancient” medieval roots. Before that, Russian travellers in Ukrainian lands showed little interest in such historical questions.
In this episode, we trace the genealogy of the myth that Kyiv is a “Russian city” and that its history somehow belongs to Muscovy.
***
Explaining Ukraine is a podcast by UkraineWorld, an English-language media platform about Ukraine, run by Internews Ukraine.
Host: Volodymyr Yermolenko, a Ukrainian philosopher, editor-in-chief of UkraineWorld, and president of PEN Ukraine.
Listen on various platforms: https://li.sten.to/explaining-ukraine
UkraineWorld: https://ukraineworld.org/en
***
Guest: Kateryna Dysa, a Ukrainian historian and Associate Professor at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. She has been a visiting fellow at Harvard, Stanford, Paris, and Oxford, and a visiting professor at the University of Basel. Currently, she is researching how the image of Kyiv was constructed in travel literature from the late eighteenth to early twentieth centuries.
***
SUPPORT:
You can support our work on https://www.patreon.com/c/ukraineworld
Your help is crucial, as we rely heavily on crowdfunding.
You can also contribute to our volunteer missions to frontline areas in Ukraine, where we deliver aid to both soldiers and civilians.
Donations are welcome via PayPal at: ukraine.resisting@gmail.com.
***
CONTENTS:
00:00 Kateryna Dysa, a Ukrainian historian and associate professor at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy.
00:15 Where and when did the myth of Kyiv belonging to Moscow actually begin?
02:05 How did 18th-century Russian travelers initially view Kyiv, and why was their interest superficial?
04:05 How did the rise of history as a discipline change Russia's perception of Kyiv?
12:17 Why did the French philosopher Madame de Staël describe Kyiv as a "semi-Tatar" or nomadic place?
15:17 What were the two extreme ways Westerners described Kyiv?
21:04 When did the annexation of the past become an "aggressive policy" and a part of Russian imperial ideology?
35:03 Why were Russian travelers unwilling to communicate with locals, stressing that Ukrainians were "the other"?
38:07 Why did Russian travelers consistently feel "not at home" in a place the Empire claimed as its "cradle"?
39:16 What aspects of Kyiv's social and cultural history in the 19th century still remain "understudied"?
***
This episode is made in partnership with Kyiv-Mohyla Academy and under the framework of the project “HER-UKR: Challenges and opportunities for EU heritage diplomacy in Ukraine”, co-funded by the EU within the ERASMUS+ Jean Monnet Policy Debate action.
