The UC Santa Barbara Undergraduate Journal of History

The Pereiaslav Agreement of 1654, concluded between the Cossack Hetmanate and the Grand Duchy of Muscovy at the Pereiaslav Rada, marked a decisive moment in the trajectory of Ukrainian-Russian relations. Celebrated in Russian historiography as a fraternal “reunification” of kindred Slavic peoples, and condemned in Ukrainian scholarship as the beginning of imperial domination, the agreement remains one of the most contested episodes in Eastern European history. This essay critically examines competing Russian and Ukrainian historiographical interpretations of the Pereiaslav Agreement by analyzing how each tradition reconstructs the events, motives, and aftermath of the Rada. Drawing on a broad range of primary sources—such as Khmelnytsky’s “Articles of Petition,” Tsar Alexei’s “March Articles,” and Vasilii Buturlin’s diplomatic report—alongside major secondary works, the essay evaluates the narratives advanced by key figures in both traditions. It argues that Ukrainian historiography offers a more accurate and historically grounded reconstruction of the agreement by emphasizing the divisions between the two parties in matters of ethnic identity, religious politics, and political sovereignty. Rather than symbolizing a historic reunification, the agreement functioned as a provisional and ultimately ill-fated alliance, concluded under conditions of strategic necessity. By challenging the dominant Russian paradigm, this essay contributes to ongoing debates about national identity, historical memory, and the long legacy of empire in Eastern Europe.