Rusian genealogy


Maintained by: Christian Raffensperger (craffensperger@wittenberg.edu) and David J. Birnbaum (djbpitt@gmail.com) [Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 Unported License] Last modified: 2017-06-05T15:02:50-0400 About this site: http://genealogy.obdurodon.org/about.php


Introduction | About | Browse | Query | Sources | Family Trees | Maps


N. N. granddaughter of Tugorkhan of Polovtsy [1]

b. unknown – d. unknown

Marriages

The youngest son of Volodimer Monomax was given, like his brother Jurij, in marriage to a steppe princess by his father. However, while the marriage of Jurij is presented with context in the chronicles, the marriage of Andrej contains almost none. The Hypatian chronicle records that in 1117 “poja Volodimer za Andreja vnuku Tug′rt′kanovu.” [6] Before and after are completely unrelated events each with their own “in that year” preface. The brief entry itself provides little information about who Andrej was marrying. Later chronicles such as the Tver′ chronicle provide a fuller sentence, but still no context, saying that, “togo že leta knjaz′ velikij ženi syna svoego Andrea, poa za nego vnuku Tugurkanja, knjazja Polovetskago.” [7] There is slightly more clarification here, in particular the position of the grandfather of Andrej’s bride. With such little information only hesitant guesses can be made as to the purpose of the marriage. The traditional purpose of the steppe marriage, as was seen with Andrej’s brother Jurij, was to make peace between the two parties. Though entries indicate warring with the Polovtsy around this time there is no indication that Tugorkhan’s son or grandson was in charge or that he was the person to make peace with. The last time Tugorkhan was seen in the Rusian chronicles was as the father–in–law of Svjatopolk Izjaslavič, receiving honorable burial after attacking Rus′. [8] Thus, because of the lack of information on the descendants of Tugorkhan and the lack of context in the notation concerning the marriage, there can be few conclusions drawn.

One additional chronicle muddies, rather than clears, the picture. The Voskresenskij Chronicle carries the same statement read above, but with a slight difference. It identifies the woman not as a granddaughter of Tugorkhan, but as “vnuku Tmutorokaniu Polovech′skago knjazia.” [9] This raises the specter of Tmutorokan and adds to the list of possibilities. Instead of making a rash judgment, it is better to believe that the chronicler or a later copyist merely attempted to make sense of an unfamiliar Turkic personal name by amending a “g” to an “m.” Thus it seems as with so many other marriages with the steppe, a hesitant guess as to the purpose of the marriage is the best that can be accomplished.

Footnotes

  1. Name: Hypatian Chronicle s.a. 1117.[↑]
  2. Birth/Death: [↑]
  3. Father: [↑]
  4. Mother: [↑]
  5. Marriage to Andrei Vladimirich: Hypatian Chronicle s.a. 1117.; Voskresenskaia Chronicle s.a. 1117.; Tver Chronicle s.a. 1117.; Nikon Chronicle s.a. 1118.[↑]
  6. The quote is from the Hypatian Chronicle, but other chronicles also list the same or similar information. Hypatian Chronicle, s.a. 1117 (location of the quote); Voskresenskij Chronicle, s.a. 1117; Tver Chronicle, s.a. 1117; Nikon Chronicle, s.a. 1118.[↑]
  7. Tver Chronicle, s.a. 1117.[↑]
  8. PVL, s.a. 1096, and above under Svjatopolk Izjaslavič’s dynastic marriage.[↑]
  9. Voskresenskij Chronicle, s.a. 1117.[↑]