Talk:Principality of Pereyaslavl

Pereyaslavl after 1239
Are there any WP:RS attesting to what happened to the Principality of Pereyaslavl after the Mongol conquest and sack in 1239? As far as I know, there is very little information about what happened in 1239 itself, and after. The last prince mentioned in lists is usually Sviatoslav III of Vladimir. The most important primary source appears to be the Galician–Volhynian Chronicle (GVC), which is not always reliable, especially in the Perfecky 1973 English translation (but it's the best I've got for now). Perfecky's English GVC edition mentions Perejaslavl' twice: This first reference is evidently part of the Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus', and to my knowledge the only account of the Mongol conquest of Pereyaslavl'. This second reference is one I had never heard about before, but it is evidently part of the journey of Daniel of Galicia (Danylo of Halych) to Batu Khan in Sarai on the Volga in order to formally submit to him and pay homage in order to receive the jarlig (patent) for confirmation of his princely reign in Halych and Volyn. This journey is dated by Hrushevsky to December 1245 – January 1246 (indeed, Perfecky mentions '(1245/46)' in his translation). It suggests there was still a Perejaslavl' to reach. What is not clear, however, is whether only the second sentence in this passage refers to what Danylo saw in Perejaslavl' (namely, "the Tatars"), or whether the whole passage up until greatly distressed describes a scene in Perejaslavl'. The next word, Thence, indicates Danylo was not yet in Sarai on the Volga at Batu's court, but somewhere before that. The only place mentioned between Kyiv and Sarai is Perejaslavl'. My main doubt stems from the passage From there he went to meet Kuremsa. there is probably Perejaslavl' mentioned in the previous sentence, but does that mean Danylo departed to an unmentioned place between Perejaslavl' and Sarai, accompanied by the Tatars he met in Perejaslavl'? Or was Kuremsa, a Mongol/Tatar general he would later fight, stationed or residing somewhere in some palace or court in a more specific location inside Perejaslavl'? In this last scenario, the whole scene describing the "Tatar" rituals, customs and culture with distate took place in Perejaslavl' itself.
 * Batyj occupied Kozel'sk and marched into the Polovcian land. From there he began sending [his (1239) troops] against the cities of Rus': The city of Perejaslavl' was taken by storm. [Batyj] slaughtered all of its inhabitants and destroyed the Church of the Archangel Michael. Countless golden church vessels and precious stones were captured and the saintly bishop Semeon was killed [by the Tatars]. At that time [Batyj] sent [his soldiers] against Černigov.
 * ...[Danilo] fell on his knees before the ikon of [God's] champion [the Archangel] Michael and [then] left the monastery (the Vydubychi Monastery in Kyiv) in a boat. [On the way] he saw great misery. He reached Perejaslavl' and there the Tatars met him. From there he went to meet Kuremsa and saw that [the Tatars] did not live well. At that point he began to grieve even more for he saw that they were ruled by the Devil; [he witnessed] their foul pagan acts of fornication and Chinggis Khan's flights of fancy [such as] his disgusting bloodsucking and endless sorcery. Emperors, princes, and nobles, who came - all were led around a bush to worship the sun, the moon, the earth, and the Devil, [as well as] their deceased fathers, grandfathers, and mothers who were [all] in hell. Oh, how repugnant was their false faith! Danilo noticed this and became greatly distressed. (1245/46) Thence he went to Batyj, [who was] on the Volga, wishing to pay him homage....

It suggests that a "pagan" (Tengriist?) sanctuary had been established in the city, revolving around a sacred "bush" that was worshipped by some sort of circambulation (walking around an object, like the Kaaba in Mecca. Sidenote: the Mongols and Tatars had not yet adopted Islam at this point. The chronicler's assertion sub anno 1237 that The godless descendants of Ishmael appeared, an anti-Muslim insult, is most likely an error. Similarly in the Primary Chronicle, the Polovtsi are both framed as "godless pagans" as well as "descendants of Ishmael" around the year 1098). Whatever it is, these descriptions of Tatar/Mongol religion differ starkly from the account in the vita of Michael of Chernigov, who supposedly had purify himself by walking between two fires and to kowtow before and idol of Chingis Khan (Martin 2007, p. 164-165). The only similarity is ancestor worship. If Pereyaslavl' had its own sanctuary separate from Sarai, that would be quite unique.

At any rate, several unsourced statements on ruwiki (and 1 on ukwiki) claim that around 1300, Pereyaslavl' came into the possession of the Putivl branch of the Olgovichi. I cannot find a single reliable source confirming this. Similarly, it is claimed that the bishop of Pereyaslavl' moved to Sarai, which thus became the new seat of a diocese, the uk:Сарайська єпархія Sarajs'ka yeparkhiya or ru:Крутицкая епархия Krutitskaya eparkhija, and that this fact made this bishop the "lord" of Pereyaslavl'. It could be true, but again, it seems rather speculative. I don't know enough of Eastern European ecclesiastical history, but as far as I know, prince-bishoprics weren't a thing? That is a Catholic European phenomenon. This bishop of Sarai would have had only spiritual (religious) authority, not temporal (secular) power.

One unsourced statement on ukwiki says In contrast to Kyiv and Chernihiv, a Tatar залога zaloha was located here, which prevented the full revival of the city. Zaloha means garrison, outpost, contingent. This does correspond with the GVC account of Danylo meeting "the Tatars" at Perejaslavl', and possibly general Kuremsa being stationed there. So it was a military stronghold, not an autonomous principality anymore, nor a prince-bishopric controlled from Sarai, although evidently politically subordinate to Batu in Sarai.

A word about the year 1323, mentioned in some infoboxes, to close out: this seems to refer to the dubious, legendary Battle on the Irpin River of the early 1320s that may or may not have happened. Most scholars and the Encyclopedia of Ukraine, however, connect the Lithuanian takeover of central Ukraine with the death of Berdi Beg in 1359, 'around 1360', or the Battle of Blue Waters in 1362/3. Whether the Lithuanian takeover meant the end of the principality is highly dubious, however, and seems to be WP:OR. NLeeuw (talk) 18:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC)