Igina, Yu. F. On dynastic helmets, chichaks and caps: in response to S. N. Bogatyrev’s article «The helmet of Ivan the Terrible in the context of the court culture»

Modified Date
Published Date:
Title of the article On dynastic helmets, chichaks and caps: in response to S. N. Bogatyrev’s article «The helmet of Ivan the Terrible in the context of the court culture»
Authors Igina, Yulia Fedorovna - Ph. D. in History, postdoctoral student, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; ScopusID 56470820400
In the section Disputatio / Discussion
Year 2015 Issue 1 Pages 67-81
Type of article RAR Index UDK   Index BBK  

This article continues the discussion about the helmet of Ivan the Terrible, opened up by the author in the article «The Casus of the helmet of Ivan the Terrible: introducing the problem». The author sheds light on the new facts about the object in question, clarifies some previously stated arguments and suppositions as well as responses to the comments made by the author’s main opponent S. N. Bogatiyrev, whose article «The helmet of Ivan the Great in the context of the court culture», published in  the last issue, reflects his viewpoint. The author takes issue with the main argument of S. Bogatiyrev’s hypothesis that the helmet of Ivan the Terrible is related to «the dynastic helmets of the heirs», which date back to the time of  Ivan II Ivanovich the Fair as well as to the Mongol and Turkiс traditions of the representation of the supreme power. According to the author, this supposition is based on the misinterpreted similarity between the words «chichak» and «shishak» in the Russian medieval studies, which should be reconsidered in the light of the arguments of  turkologists that  the word «chichak»  does not denote a helmet, but a piece of jewellery in the shape of a flower. The author also doubts the rightfulness of perceiving the helmet of Ivan the Terrible in the same way as the helmet of tsarevich Ivan from the Kremlin Armoury as the helmet from Stockholm was not a child’s helmet and did not have any dynastic symbolic significance. The author claims that the decoration of the helmet is not authentic and presumes that it may not have belonged to Ivan the Terrible and such attribution may be no more than a «legend». The main notion of the article is that the helmet of Ivan the Terrible is a unique phenomenon for the Moscovite political tradition which is yet to be interpreted convincingly.

Keywords Ivan the Terrible, helmet, chichak, shishak, Royal Armory, Stockholm, representation of power, grand prince, regalia, heir, Vasilii III, dinasty
Full text version of the article. Article language Russian
  • Blair, Claude; Campbell, Marian. Louis Marcy. Oggetti d’arte della Galleria Parmeggiani di Reggio Emilia [Louis Marcy. Art Gallery Parmeggiani of Reggio Emilia]. Torino:Allemandi, 2008. 177 p. (in Italian).

    Bogatyrev, Sergey Nikolaevich. Shapka Monomakha i shlem naslednika: Reprezentatsiya vlasti i dinasticheskaya politika pri Vasilii III i Ivane Groznom [The Cap of Monomakh and the Helmet of an Heir. The Representation of Power and Dynastic Policy under Vasilii III and Ivan the Terrible], in Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana. 2011. № 1 (9). P. 171–200 (in Russian).

    Bogatyrev, Sergey Nikolaevich. Shlem Ivana Groznogo v kontekste pridvornoy kul’tury [The Helmet of Ivan the Terrible in the Context of Court Culture], in Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana. 2014. № 2. P. 112–140(in Russian).

    Clare, Tami Lesseter; Lins, P. Andrew. Finishing techniques in metalwork. An introduction to the History and Methods of Decorating Metal. Philadelphia Museum of Art, 2008. 46 p.

    Haider, Syed Zafar. Islamic Arms and Armour of Muslim India. Lahore: Bahadur Publishers, 1991. 309 p.

    Igina, Yulia Fedorovna. Kazus shlema Ivana Groznogo [The casus of Ivan the Terrible helmet: To the problem statement], in Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana. 2014. № 2. P. 67–91(in Russian).

    JonesM. (ed.). Why fakes matter: Essays on problems of authenticity. London: Published for the Trustees of the British Museum by British Museum Press, 1992. 198 p.

    Kramatorskiy, Mark Grigor’evich. Zoloto Chingizidov: kul’turnoe nasledie Zolotoi Ordy [Gold of Chingizedes: A Culture heritage of the Golden Horde]. St. Petersburg: Slaviya, 2001. 363 p. (in Russian).

    Lavrent’ev, Aleksandr Vladimirovich. Prinadlezhal li Ivanu Groznomu «shlem Ivana Groznogo»? [If «Helmet of Ivan the Terible» was belonged to Ivan the Terrible?], in Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana. 2014. № 2. P. 92–111 (in Russian).

    Lur’e, Yakov (ed.).Khozhdenie za tri morya Afanasiya Nikitina 1466–1472 gg. [The Journey beyond Three Seas of Afanasiy Nikitin, 1466–1472]. Leningrad: Nauka Publ., 1986. 214 p. (in Russian).

    Minasyan, Rafael Sergeevich. Metalloobrabotka v drevnosti i Srednevekov’e [Metal working in Ancient Times and Medieval Age]. St. Petersburg: State Hermitage Publ., 2014. 472 p. (in Russian).

    Pyhrr, Stuart W. Armor for America: The Duc de Dino Collection, in Metropolitan Museum Journal. 2012. Vol. 47. P. 215–223.

    Sandeep Singh — The Master of Koftgari Art (URL: www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIBpSBVDca4 (last visit ― 10.10.2014)).

    Sokrovishcha Zolotoy Ordy=AлтынУрдаХәзинәләре=The Treasures of the Golden Horde. Exhibition catalog (in Russian, Tatar and English). St. Petersburg: Slaviya Publ., 2000. 345 p.


Tags: Ivan the Terrible, DISPUTATIO / DISCUSSION, helmet, dinasty, heir, regalia, grand prince, representation of power, Stockholm, Royal Armory