Vryonis Decline of Medieval Hellinism in Asia Minor

--.

The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century

Speros Vryonis, Jr. e n

(,I1 ' 1

(1'

Berkclcy Los Rngeles London

197I

UNIVEIISI'I'Y O F C A L I F O R N I A P R E S S

To my mother and to the memoy of my father

University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England Copyright 0 1971by The Regents of the University of California ISBN: 0-520-01597-5 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 75-94.984 Printed in the United States of America

Preface

The writing of this book arose from the convergence of two interests that have long intrigued me: the Hellenization of the Levant in antiquity and the centuries-long confrontation of Byzantine and Islamic societies, the joint heirs of this semi-Hellenized Levant. The decline of Byzantine Hellenism and the phenomenon of Islamization in Anatolia from the eleventh through the fifteenth century focus on that area and time within which these two interests converge for the last time. Perhaps this undertaking is inordinately ambitious, encompassing as it does a vast geographical and chronological span and cutting across three disciplines (those of the Byzantinist, Islamist, and Turkologist). Now that this work is finished thc words that Helmut Ritter spoke to me in a n Istanbul restaurant in 1959, and which then seemed to be a challenge, take on a different meaning. This renowned orientalist told me, simply and calmly, that it would be impossible to write a history of this great cultural transformation. My own efforts have, of necessity, been rcstricted to certain aspects of this huge problem. Scholarship badly nceds new, detailed histories of the Seljuk, Nicaean, Trebizondine states, and of many of the Turkish emirates. There has been no comprehensive history of the Rum Seljuks since that of Gordlevski (1941) of Nicaea since those of Meliarakes and Gardner in 1898 and 1912, of Trebizond since that of Miller in 1926. The archaeology of Byzantine and Seljuk Anatolia is still in its infancy, and the mere establishment of the principal events and their dates in these four centuries remains unachieved. Unwritten ’also is the history of Arabo-Byzantine relations and confrontations in Anatolia, though the monumental work of Marius Canard on the Hamdanids represents a substantial beginning. The story ofthe decline that Islamization occasioned in the Armenian, Georgian, and Syrian communities of eastern Anatolia, though absolutely essential, is yet to be written. Finally a comparative study of the folklore and folk cultures of the Anatolian Muslims and Christians would do much to fill the wide gaps in historical sources. The number and extent of these scholarly desiderata surely indicate how imperfect and insuficient the present work must be. I have concentrated The book of Claude Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey (London, 1968) appeared after the completion of my own work.

vii

PREFACE

I? ’ .:

on the fate and Islamization of the Greek population in Anatolia to the exclusion of the other Christian groups. There has been no attempt to present a conventional chronological history of events, but rather the approach has been topical. It is with pleasure that 1acknowledge the support of several institutions which greatly facilitated my research. The Middle East Center of Harvard University enabled me to begin the investigation as a Research Fellow of t h e Center in 1959-60. A grant from the Harvard Center and Dumbarton O a k s subsequently allowed me to spend a summer at Dumbarton Oaks in this early stage. The interest and sympathy of former Chancellor Franklin Murphy and the director of the UCLA library, Dr. Robert Vosper, resulted in the constitution of a respectable Byzantine collection of books and periodicals absolutely essential for research in Byzantine history, and which had previously been lacking on the UCLA campus. The UCLA Research Committee and the Center for Near Eastern Studies, by their unstinting generosity, made it possible for m e to work at those institutions in t h e United States and abroad which would provide me with the necessary materials. Thanks to a grant of the Social Science Research Council in 1962-63,I spent one semester at Dumbarton Oaks and one semester in Greece and Turkey where I enjoyed t h e facilities of the Gennadius Library, the Center for Asia Minor Studies, and the kindness of the members of the history faculty of the University of Ankara. As the work neared a n end, William Polk, Director of the Middle East Center, and William McNeill, chairman of the history department, invited me to spend I 966-67 a t the University of Chicago where they provided me with the badly needed leisure to finish the basic writing. I a m particularly indebted to my colIeagues a t UCLA who in meetings of t h e Near Eastern Center, the Medieval and Renaissance Center, the faculty seminar of the history department, and in individual encounters contributed to the sharpening of the work’s focus as well as to the improvem e n t of its contents. Milton Anastos, Amin Banani, Andreas Tietze, Gustave von Grunebaum, and Lynn White came to my assistance in certain specialized areas, and more important listened to what must have seemed an endless outpouring of Anatolica with a patience that would easily rank them among the Byzantine saints and Muslim dervishes of Anatolia. I a m also grateful to Andreas Tietze who took time from his busy schedule as chairman of the Department of Near Eastern Languages to read through the manuscript. His great knowledge and kindness saved the book from many errors. I wish to express my gratitude to Peter Charanis with whom I frequently discussed many of the problems entailed in the writing of this book, and to whose research on Byzantine ethnography I am much indebted. Thanks are also due to Osman Turan and Halil Inalcik who, with their unsurpassed expertise in things Seljuk and Ottoman, have been so kind as to discuss with me many particulars viii

PREFACE

related to Byzantino-Turcica, who supplied me with copies of their writings, and who gave me encouragcment. The studies of Paul Wittek and Claude Cahen have been of particular value and aid, and those ofRichard Ettinghausen have been helpful in the area of art history. 1 wish to thank my editor, Shirley Warren, who performed admirably with a difficult manuscript and also the editors of the new EncycloJedia of Islam for permission to reproduce the statistical chart from the article “Anadolu,” by Franz Taeschner. I have dedicated the book to my father and mother, who first imbued me with a love for the historical past, who educated me with great patience and expense, and who gave me every encouragement. T h e problems of transliteration and of geographical names have been such that there is no conceivable system that would satisfy everyone. Basically I have followed the new edition of the Eiicyclopedia of Islam in the transliteration of Islamic names. The Turkish equivalents for the names of Byzantine towns and villages will frequently be found in the key to the map. Though to some my treatment of transliteration and of geographic names will seem cavalier, I shall be satisfied if I have conveyed the meaning rather than a particular philological form.

1 I

1 ix

Contents

List of Illustrations

xiii

Abbreviations

I. Byzantine Asia Minor on t.: Administrative Institutions Towns and Commerce Great Landed Families Demography Road System The Church Ethnography Religion

Eve of the Turkish Conquest

11. Political and Military Collapse of Byzantium in Asia Minor Events Leading to Maiazikert Manzikert (1071) Initial Turkish Conquest and Occupation of Anatolia (1071-81) Byzantine Counterattack ( X O ~ I - X I ~ J ) . Byzantine Retreaf (1143-1204) Political Stability and Polarization : Nicaea and Konya Withdrawal of the Byzantines to Constaiatino,ble and the Decline of Konya: Establishment of the Emirates and Emergence of the Ottomans Conclusions

111. The Beginnings of Transformation I43 Nature of the Turkish Conquest in the Eleventh and Twelfih Centuries Recolonization and Reconstruction Integration of the Christians into Muslim Sociey (107’-1276) Equilibrium of Konya and Nicaea Destroyed The Nomads Conclusions

CONTENTS

IV. Decline of the Church in the Fourteenth Century The Acta The Notitiae Efiiscopatum Acta : Ujheaval Acta: Im&overization Acta :Ecclesiastical Discipline Matthew of Efhesus-a Case Study Conclusions

288

V. Conversion to Islam Muslim Institutions: Tasawwuf Muslim Institutions :Fu tuw w a Conclusions

351

VI. The Loss of Byzantine Asia Minor and the Byzantine World Causes and Egkcts of the Loss Byzantine ReJectiolzs on and Reactions to the Loss of Anntolia Religious Polemic Folklore Governmental Measures

403

VII. T h e Byzantine Residue in Turkish Anatolia The Physical Residue Formal lnstitutions Economic Lge Folk Culture Conclusions

4444

Recapitulation

498

Index

503

iI I

List of Ill ustra ti0 ns

following p . 4 6 2 : T h e rupestrian churches of Cappadocia

xi i

Interior view of Sultan Khan caravansaray Exterior view of Sa’d al-Din Khan caravansaray View of Seyid Ghazi Tekke Tahtadji women from Chibuk Khan A Bektashi sheikh with disciple Mawlawi dervishes participating in a sciiia’ Danishmendid coinage T h e former church of St. Amphilochius at Konya as a inosquc Equestrian statue of Justinian 1 l’he threshing sledge

...

xl11

Abbreviations

Greek historians in the Corpus Scriptorum Efistoriae Byzantinae are simply listed by name and with no further identification,

AS Aksaray-Genqosman

A.B. A.I.Z.

Anna Comnena

A.I.P.H.O.S.

Acta Sanctorum. M. N. Genqosman and F. N. Uzluk, Aksamyli Kerimeddin Mahmrid’un miisatneret-el-ahyer adlz’ Farsga tarihinin terciimesi (Ankara, 1943). Analecta Bollandiana. ’AV&AEKTU‘ I E ~ O C J O ~ V ~ I T I U I-rqvohoyiaS, ~~~ vols. I-V (Petersburg, 1891-1898). Anne Cotnndne. Alexiade, texts dtabli et traduit, B. Leib, vols. 1-111, (Paris, 1937-1945). Annuaire de l’institiit ~hilologique et historique orientales et slaves.

A.l-l.

’ApXEiov

B.K. B.G.A.

Bedi Karthlisa. Bibliotlieca geographorum arabicorum, ed. J-M. de Goeje, vols. I-VIII, (Leiden, 1885-1927). Bulletin of the John Rylands Library. Bulletin of the Scltool of Oriental and African Studies. Byzantinische Forschungen. Byzantiniscli-neugriec~iische Jahrbiiclter. Byzantinisclie Zeitsclirift. Byzantinoslavica. Cambridge Economic History, ed. J. H. Clapham and E. Power (Cambridge, 1941ff.).

B.J.R.L. B.S.O. A.S. B.F. B.N.J. B. Z.

B.S. C.E.H.

A.I.E.E.E. D . T.C. D.H.G.E.

AEA-rlov ~

~ ~ V T O W .

i j io-ropmfjs 5

K a l hohOylKij$ hrctlpias Tqs ‘EAA&bS.

Dictionnaire de tlihologie catholique (Paris, I go3 ff.). Dictionnaire d’liistoire et de giographie kcclesiastigues (Paris, 1912ff.).

Dolger, Regesten

D.O.P. E.O. Eflaki-Huar t

F. Dolger, Regesten der Kaiserurkunden des ostromischen Reiches (Munich-Berlin, 1924ff.). Dumbarton Oaks Papers. l?c/ios d’0rient. C. Huart, Les saints des derviches tourneurs, vols. 1-11 (Paris, 1918-1912). Encyclopedia of Islam, first edition. Encyclopedia of Islam, second edition.

‘I

ABBREVIATIONS

E.H.R. G.R.B.S. Grumel, Regestes I b n Bibi-Duda LA.

I.M.

J.O.B.G. J .A. J.H.S. J.A.O.S. J . E.S.H. 0. J .R.A.S. K.C.A.

M.B. Miklosich et Miiller M.X.

M.A.M. A. M.G.H. N.E. O.C.P.

n.n.

English Historical Review. GFeek Roman and Byzantine Studies. V. Grumel, Les regestes des actes du patriarcat de Constantinoble (Chalcedon, 1932 ff.). €3. Duda, Die Seltschukengeschichte des Ibn Bibi (Copenhagen, ‘959). Islam Ansiklopedisi. Istanbuler Mitteilungen. Jahrbuch der osterreichischen byzantinischen Gesellschaft. Journal Asiatique. Journal of Hellenic Studies. Journal of the American Oriental Society. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. Korosi Csoma-archivium. K. N. Sathas, MEoaiaviKfi BiPhioefiKq (Venice, I 872-1877). F. Miklosich and J. Muller, Acta et diplomata graeca medii aevi sacra et profana (Vienna, 1860-1890). MiKpUOlaTIK& XpOVIKh. Monurnenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua (London, 1918ff.). Monuinenta Germaniae Historica. Nlos ‘EAAqvo~vfi~wv. Orientalia Christiana Periodica. S . Lampros, llahaiohhysia K a l l l ~ h o ~ o v v r p ~ c vols. t x h ~ 1-11 (Athens, xg 12-1924) Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society (London, 1885-1897). Palestinskii Sbornik. J. P. Migne, Patrologiae cursus comjletus, series graeca (Paris, 1857KJ. Patrologia Orientalis (Paris, 1904IT.). Real-Enzyklopadie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1893ff.). llov-ricnch Oiihha. ~ O V T I C ~‘Emla. C ~ ~ Pravoslavni Palestinskii Sbornik. W. Ramsay, The Historical Geograi)lg of Asiu Minor (London, 1890). Recueil des historiens des Croisades (Paris, 1841ff.). W. Regel, Fontes rerum byeantinarum, sumptibus academiae scientiarum rossicae (Petrograd, 1892-1917). Rkjertoire chronologique d’bpigraphie arabe, ed. E. Combe, J. Sauvaget, G. Wiet, (Cairo, 1931ff.). Revue de I’Orient chrbtien. Revue des btudes islamiques. Revue historique. K. Rhalles and M. Potles, Zllrv-raypa T ~ Belov V Ka1 ~ E ~ Q v K W ~ V W V , vols. I-VI (Athens, 1852-1859). Rivista degli studi orientali. Studia Islamica. Sudost-Forschungen. Tiirkiyut Mecmuasi.

ABBREVIATIONS

V.D.

v.v. W.Z.K.M. Z.R.V.I. Z.D . M . G. Z.B. Zepos, J.G.B. Z.M.N.P.

Vaktjlar Dergisi. Vieantiiskii Vremennik. Wiener Zeitsch@ft fur die Kunde des Morgenlandes. Zbornik Radoua Vizantoloshkog Inst ituta. Zeitschrijit der deutschen morgenlandische Gesellschaft, Zeitschrijitfur Balkanologie. I. Zepos and P. Zepos, Jus Graecoromanum, vols. I-VIII (Athens, 1931). Zhurnal Ministerstua Narodnago Prosviescheniia.

P.P. T.S. P.S. P.G. P.O.

P.w. TI.@.

l7.E. P.P.S. Ramsay, Geography R.H.C. Regel R.C.E.A. R,O.C. R.E.I. R.H. Rhalles and Potles R.S.O. s.I. S.F. T.M.

xvi

xvii

1. Byzantine Asia Minor on the Eve of the Turkish Conquest

Since the fall of North Africa, Egypt, and the Levant to the Arabs and the occupation of Italy by the Germanic peoples a n d of much of the Balkans by the Slavs, Byzantium had been restricted to the southern confines of the Balkan peninsula, Anatolia, the isles, and southern Italy.1 Of these areas, Anatolia was by far the largest, most populous, and economically the most important. Unfortunately, almost nothing in the way of population statistics for Anatolia has survived, but aside from the factor of its great size, there are other indications that Asia Minor was the most populous region of the empiree2So long as Anatolia continued to be an integral part of the empire, Byzantium remained a strong and comparatively prosperous state. Once Anatolia slipped from Byzantine control, the empire became little more than a weak Balkan principality, competing with Serbs and Bulgars on an almost equal footing. With the decline of medieval Hellenism i n Anatolia, there arose a Turkish-Muslim society that is at the base of the Seljuk state and Ottoman Empire. This new society differed from those of the Asiatic steppe and from that of the Islamic Middle East because it arose in a Byzantine milieu. Consequently, the related Anatolian phenomena of Byzantine decline and Islamization are essential to a basic understanding of both Turkish and Byzantine societies. For the student of cultural change, the Islamization of Asia Minor has a twofold interest. Specifically it represents the last in a long series of religio-linguistic changes to which Anatolia had been subjccted over the centuries. Broadly considered, the Islamization and Turkification of the Anatolians in the later Middle Ages, along with the Christianization and Hispanization of Iberia, constitute one of the last chapters in the history of cultural change in the Mediterrancan basin. Since antiquity the inhabitants of the Mediterranean world had been subject to a remarkable variety of transforming cultural forces : Hellenization, Romanization, Arabization, Christianization, and Islamization. T o these were now added Turkification. 1 For a picture of the Byzantinc world at this time, G . Ostrogorsky, “The Byzantine Empire in the World of the Seventh Century,” D.O.P.,XI11 (IS$), I -2 I . 1 The evidence is discussed below.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

As the subject of this book is the cultural transformation of Greek Anatolia between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries, one must begin with a descriptive analysis of Byzantine society in the peninsula on the eve of the Turkish invasions. This will entail a discussion and partial description of administrative, military, and ecclesiastical institutions, towns, rural society, demography, roads, ethnography, and religion.3

Administrative Institutions Certain political, economic, and religious institutions characterized Anatolian society prior to the drastic upheavals of the eleventh century which caused serious dislocation of this society. These institutions produced an element o f homogeneity in the life of the inhabitants of this immense area and at the same time integrated them effectively into a Constantinopolitan-centered organism, The system of the themes, by which the civil administration became subordinate to the thematic strategus, dominated the administrative and military activity of the Anatolians. At the time of the death of Basil I1 (1025)~there existed in Anatolia approximately twenty-five provinces, mostly themes but including also duchies and catepanates, largely under the direct control and administration of the ~tra t e goi.Though ~ the administrative apparatus placed the provincial bureaucracy under the tutelage of the military, it also acted as a partial check on the absorption of the free peasantry by the landed magnates and thereby assured the empire of military, social, and fiscal strength. The thematic system served as a vital impetus to and support of the existence of the free peasant society, which in turn not only served as a balance to the landed aristocracy, but fought the Arabs and was a major contributor to the imperial tax collectors.6 T h e strategus, as supreme authority in the theme, was a veritable viceroy. Nothing could be done in his province, save for the assessment and collection of taxes, which were eiTected by agents directly under Constantinople, without his consent. His most important function was to command the army of the theme. Much has been said about the efficacy a n d importance of these local armies drawn from the inhabitants of the provinces, but there is little information as to their numbers. The Arab a The art of eleventh-century Byzantine Anatolia is still insufficiently investigated, and education and intellectual life cannot be satisfactorily reconstructed because of the nature of the sources. Hence, there will be no attempt to include these two categories in this chapter, regrettable though this fact may be. A useful and brief sketch of Anatolian geography and its significance for the history of the area is to be found in P. Birot and J. Drcsch, La Mediterrnnie et le Moyen-Orient,tome 2 : Les Balknns, 1’Asie Mineure, le MayenOrient (Park, 1956), pp. 125-191. N. Skabalanovi& Vizantiiskoe gosudarstuo i tserkou u XI. u. (St. Petersburg, 1884),pp. 193-209. Ostregersky, Geschichte des byrantinischen Staates, 3d ed. (Munich, 1963), pp. 80-83, and passim for the literature. I-I. Glycatzi-Ahnveiler, Recherches sur l’administratzon de l’empire byznntin QW IXE-A’IBsitcles (Paris, 1960). For a cautious reevaluation and refinement of the role of the themes, W. E. Kaegi, “Some Reconsiderations on the Themes (Seventh-Ninth Centuries),” J.O.B.G.,XVI (19679, 39-53.

EVE O F THE TURKISH CONQUEST

author Abu’l-Faradj Kudama ibn Djafar noted that the levy of the Anatolian themes in the first half of the ninth century was approximately 70,000.~ By the tenth century, however, there is every indication that the size of Byzantine military forces must have increased markedly. The conquest of new lands in the east witnessed the creation of new provinces and army corps, whereas the intensification of the Byzantine offensive efforts similarly demanded an increase i n the size o f the armies. Perhaps the remarks of Leo VI, that the armies ought not be too large, is a reflection of this expansion.7 Beside the men the government recruited from the local soldiery, there were other sources ofmilitary personnel in the provinces. These included a H. Gelzer, Die Genesis der bymntinischen Themcnverfssung, Abh. d. Kgl. sacits. Ges. d. Wiss., Phil-hist. Kl., vol. XVIII, Nr. 5 (18gg), pp. 97-98 (hereafter cited as Gelzer Die Genesis). For the breakdown of these forces which follows, A. Pertusi, Constantino Perphirogenito De Thematibus (Vatican, 1952)~pp. I I 5-148. hnatolicon Armeniacon Cappadocia Charsianon Thracesion Opsicion Optimaton Bucellarion Paphlagonia Chaldia Seleuceia

15,000 9,000 4,000

4Jooo 6,000 6,000 4.3000 8,000

5,000 4,000

5,000 70,000

The thematic army was organized in units of decreasing size, the turm, drungus, and and bandon. But because of the differences in size of the various themes, the number of turms, drungoi, and banda in a particular theme varied. A thematic army usually had, for any given theme, between two and four turms, but it would seem that the size of the turm was not regularly established and observed. 7 Leonis in$eratoris tactica, P.G., CVII, 709. The bandum should not have more than 400 men, the drungus not more than 3,000, the turm not more than 6,000. Michael Psellus, Chrono&hie, ed. E. Renauld (Paris, 1926-1928), I, 36 (hereafter cited as PsellusRenauld). L. BrChier, Les instituliotis de l’emjire byzantin (Paris, 1948), p. 369. Ibn IChuradadhbih, B.C.A., VI, I I I , gives the following figures: 5,000 in a turm, I ,000in a drungus, and 200 in a bandum. Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Cuerinmiis, I, G51-655, 696497. In the order of honorary precedence and size of payment the generals of the more important and powerful themes generally preceded the generals of these thrcc themes (see below). The catalog of the expedition to Crete in the reign of Leo VI tends to confirm the growth in the size of the thematic forces. The levies of the Cibyrrheote force amounted to 6,760, those of Samos 5,690, of Aegean 3,100. One century earlier Kudama noted that the forces of the theme of Seleuceia, amounted to only 5,000. The themes of Cibyrrheote, Seleuceia, Samos, and Aegean, were among the less important and numerous of the hnatolian provinces in the eyes of the central administration. I n addition the thematic soldiery of the Cibyrrheote under Leo VI was larger than 6,760, as this does not include the two ships that the strategus of the theme sent to watch the shores of Syria, and probably other ships and personnel that had to remain to guard the shores of the theme and to cut timber for shipbuilding. This comparatively largc number for such a theme as the Cibyrrheote, in contrast to the smaller figures for theninth century, indicates that the size of the thematic armies had increased by the early tenth century. When one compares the size of the Cibyrrheotc force under Leo VI with the size of the forces of the thcmes as reported by the Arabs in the ninth century, this conclusion seems inescapable, for the Cibyrrheote levy of Leo VI is greater than that of any of the ninth-century Anatolian themes save those of the great Anatolicon, Armeniacon, and Ruccelarion.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

variety of ethnic groups that the emperors settled as distinct military bodies throughout Anatolia. Theophilus, by way of example, settled 2,000 Persians in each theme (though these seem to have been incorporated into the thematic levies) ; Mardaites were settled around Attaleia, possibly b y Justinian 11; there were also bodies of Slavs and Armeniansa8 I n addition the government stationed tagmata of imperial troops i n certain of the Anatolian districts. This superimposition of foreign bodies of soldiers in the provinces increased the military manpower of a given province considerably. With the addition of the Mardaites to the forces of the Cibyrrheote theme, the military strength of the district may have been as large as I O , O O O . ~ ~ Other large themes very probably had as large a military force, if not larger, with the consequence that the military manpower stationed in Anatolia during the tenth and early eleventh centuries must have far surpassed the 70,000 thematic levies mentioned by the Arab sources for t he early ninth century. T h e success of Byzantine arms against the Arabs during this period is i n part to be explained by the effectiveness of this Anatolian manpower, a nd the importance of these Anatolian forces emerges from the obvious correlation between thematic decline and the Turkish invasions in the eleventh century. The professional mercenaries who took the place of the indigenous thematic soldiers in this period of crisis were ineffective replacements and were unable to halt the Turks. The military apparatus in Anatolia had an important role in the provincial economic life. I t contributed to the local economy by paying out salaries in gold to the officers and soldiers who lived in Asia Minor, and stimulating local industry, commerce, and agriculture by its expenditures. T h e government was able to feed into the business life of the Anatolians a comparatively steady a nd significant sum of coined money in the form of the military roga. One can gain some idea as to the sums of money involved i n military pay from the sources of the ninth and tenth centuries. During the reign of Leo VI the generals of the more important themes received the following cash payment:11 Anatolicon Armeniacon

Thracesion Opsicion

40 pounds of gold 40 40

Bucellarion Cappadocia Charsianon Paphlagonia Thrace Macedonia Chaldia Coloneia Mesopotamia Sebasteia Lycandus Seleuceia Leontocome Cihyrrheote Samos Aegean

30 20 20 20

30 10 plus 10 from

commercium

from commercium 5

5 5 5 I0

I0 I0

The pay of the thematic soldiers in comparison with that of the officiers was quite small, and yet the overall expenditure on military salaries was very substantial, as emerges from the incidental accoLmts of the period. I n the early ninth century, the military pay chests of the themes of Armeniacon in Anatolia and of Strymon in Europe amounted to 1,300 and 1,100pounds of gold respectively, or 93,600 and 79,200 gold solidi each.12 O n the basis of these figures it seems likely that the government paid out between 500,000 and I,OOO,OOO solidi annually to the soldiery of Asis Minor.13 The soldier was also entitled to part of the spoils of war, and i n many instanccs pensions were given to disabled soldiers and to the widows of the ~ l a i n . 1 ~ The army and navy required supplies, armament, and provisions on their frequent expeditions. Though the government undoubtedly acquired many of the necessary items by taxes in kind on the populace, the authorities also paid out cash to artisans and merchants to provide a wide assortment of items and services. Craftsmen were hired to make weapons of every type for the armed forces, to sew the sails for the ships, t o caulk the boats; merchants sold the government the cloth for the sails, rope, bronze, wax, lead, tin, oars, foodstuffs, and other necessary

A. Vasiliev, Byzance et b s Arabes I : La dynnstie d’dmorium (820-876).Edition fratyaise prepardepar H.Grdgoire et M. Canard (Brussels, 1g35),pp. gr-g3.C.Amantos, “MapGahai,” ‘EAAT~IKCI,V (Ig23), 130-136.Ostrogorsky, Geschiclite, pp. 109-110, 140.Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Caerimoniis, I, 651-656. Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Cnerimoniis, I, 652. The Mardaites of the west in the Cretan expedition of Leo VI numbered over 5,000, ibid. 655. l1 Ibid., 696-697. Ibn Khuradadhbih B.G.A., VI, I I I, gives the following salary range: 40, 30, 24, 12, I,lbs. of gold. Soldiers received between eighteen and twelve solidi per year. On the pay for the lesser officers and for the soldiers, Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Caerimoniis, I, 669.

EVE OB THE TURKISH CONQUEST

12 Theophanes, C/trono,era~/iiu,ed. C. de Boor (Leipzig, 1883-1885),I, 484, 489 (here. after cited as Theophanis): 13 Speros Vryonis, “An Attic Hoard of Byzantine Gold Coins (668-741)from the Thomas Whittemore Collection and the Numismatic Evidence for the Urban History ofByzantium,” Z.R.V.I., VIII (rg63),298-299.On the basis of these and other figures in Constantine Porphyrogenitus an estimate of 690,300 solidi was made for government militarv expenditures in Anatolia during the early ninth century. The Arab sources record ‘tha; the Anatolian levy of yo,ooo received pay of between eighteen and twclvc solidi, or between 1,260,000and 840,000 solidi. Thus the Byzantine and Arab sources tend to corroborate one another. l4 BrChier, Les institutions, p. 382. Five pounds of gold were given to the widows in the reign of Michael I.

EVE O F THE TURKISH CONQUEST

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

materials.lGThe administration saw to it that salaried craftsmen specializing in the production of military weapons were maintained in the principal towns,l6 and their production was quantitatively significant.17 The military organization ofByzantium, and the passage of armies through the provinces, thereby played a stimulating and significant role in the economic prosperity of Anatolia.18

no such abrupt decline or hiatus during the seventh century in Anatolia, though the Slavic invasions in the Balkans did cause a marked decline of many of the towns of the western half of the empire. This condition in the Balkans served to put in even bolder relief the economic and political importance of the continuity of towns and cities in Anatolia. I t is quite possible that a number of the towns may have decreased in size by the late seventh or the eighth century,21 or possibly have shifted their locations slightly to more strategic positions on higher ground,2a or been ‘‘ruralized,” b u t this does not mean that they did so to the point of becoming insignificant as an urban phenomenon. I t is doubtful that Byzantium could have survived as a centralized state without a money economy and towns, and it is even more doubtful that the Greek language and Byzantine Christianity could have spread and penetrated to the extent they did in Anatolia. Obviously what had happened to the Byzantine urban settlements in the Balkans did not occur in Anatolia. The raids of the Arabs were, in spite of their frequency, transitory affairs (when one compares them to the Slavic invasions of the Balkans which not only effaced cities but also Christianity, or to the Turkish invasions) .23 What were the characteristics of these Byzantine cities in the eleventh century? When one speaks of cities he thinks primarily in terms of autonomous municipal institutions. This is certainIy the case of the town in antiquity, where there were also divisions of the citizenry according to tribes, and finally a walled enclosurc. Obviously the Byzantine towns of Anatolia in thc eleventh century would hardly fit such a description, at least insofar as the meager sources permit conjecture. ‘The existence of

Towns and Commerce

By late Roman and early Byzantine times there had developed in Anatolia a large number of thriving cities and lesser towns with a considerable commercial life and money economy.19 The question has often arisen as to the continuity of this urban character of much of Anatolia into the middle Byzantine period. To what extent, if at all, did Anatolia continue to be the possessor of extensive urban settlements down to the period when the Turks first appeared ? This question is doubly important, first in that it bears on the relative importance of the area for Byzantine civilization and strength, and second because it is closely related to the problem of Muslim urban developments in Anatolia during the later period. Some students of the question have maintained that between the seventh and ninth centuries the polis of antiquity, and so cities generally, underwent a disastrous decline.20.But actually there seems to have bSen I n the outfitting of eleven ships that participated in the Cretan expedition of Constantine .VII and Romanus 11, the treasury paid out approximately twenty-two pounds of gold to .craftsmen and merchants for services and materials, Constantine Porphyrogenitus, D e Cuerimoniis, I, 673-676. This situation existed as late as the reign of John Vatatzes in the thirteenth century. Theodore Scutariotes, M.B., VII, 506-507 (hereafter cited as Theodore ScutariotesSathas). Leonis imperatoris tacfica, P.G., CVII, 1088-1093,on craftsmen in the army. l T I n Leo’s Cretan expedition there are extensive details,-Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Caerimoniis, I, 657-660. The strategus of Thessalonike was ordered to manufacture 20,000 arrows, 3,000 lances, and as many shields as possible. The archon of Hellas was to produce 1,000lances; the archon ofEuboea 20,ooo arrows and 3,000 lances. The generals of Nicopolis and Peloponnesus were to perform in a similar manner. T h e protonotarius of the Thracesian theme was to collect 20,000 measures of barley; 40,000 of wheat, hardtack, and flour; 30,000 of wine; 10,000“sphacta.” He was to prepare 10,000measures of linen cloth for Greek fire and ship caulking, and 6,000 nails for the ships, and so forth. Procopius, Anecdota, XXX, 5-7, records that the state post system had also provided business and cash to the inhabitants of the provinces by purchasing from them horses, fodder, and provisions for the grooms. It is not clear whether this system continued after Justinian I. ‘*Byzantine armies on the move spent considerable sums of money, Vryonis, “An Attic Hoard,” p. 300. The A O ~ W J T I Kor~ accounting officeof the army was in charge of moneys so spent, Leonis imperaloris tactica, P.G., CVII, 1092. ’OT. R. S. Broughton, Roman Asia Minor, in T. Frank, An Economic Suruey of Ancient 903-916.T h c Anatolian cities were able to recover from the Rome, I V (Baltimore, I@), crisis of the third century. A. H. M. Jones, The Greek C i p , j ; ~ n i Alexander to Justininn (Oxford, 1940), pp. 85-94. T h e principal exponent of this theory is A. P.Kagdan, “Vizantiiskie goroda v VIIX I vv,” Souetskaia Arkheologia, X X I (1954), 164-188;Dereonia i gorod u Viraniii IX-X vu, (Moscow, 1960), pp. 260-270.He relies very heavily upon the numismatic evidence which, however, is unsatisfactory and unreliable. For a critique of his theory, Ostrogorsky, “Byzantine Cities in the Early Middle Ages,” D.O.P., XI11 (1959),47-66; Vryonis, “An Attic Hoard,” p. 300, passim. On urban continuity see also, E. E. Lip;:, O&ki

istorii uizantiiskogo obizestua i kitltttry ~III-pervain polovilla I X ueka (Moscow-Leningrad, rg61), pp. 87 ff,; “K voprosu o gorode v Vizantii VIII-IX vv.” V.V., V I (1953),I x3 ff. M. J. Siuziumov, “Rol gorodov-emporiev v istorii Vizanlii,” V.V.,V I I I (1956), z6 ffa 21 E. ICirsten, “Die byzantinischc Stadt,” Bsrichte zum XI. Internoliorialem ByzurititiislenKungress (Munich, 1g58), p. 14,.There is even archaeological evidence for the temporary disappearance of a few towns, as for instance Corasium in southern Asia Minor during the seventh century, Kakdan, “Vizantiislcie goroda,” 186. z2 Kirsten, “Byzantinische Stadt,” p. 28. z3 Kaidan, “Vizantiiskie goroda,” p. 187, is ambivalent o n this point, H e attributes the decline and to a certain extent the disappearance of the Byzantine towns to the disanmearance of the slave method of production. He adds, however, that this was signifi--r,- - -cantly accelerated by the invasions of foreign peoples. The history of Arabo-Byzantine warfare and relations in Asia Minor is yet to be written. For the earlier period one may consult the following works. E. W. Brooks, “Byzantines and Arabs in the Time of the Early Abbassids, 750-813,” E.H.R., X V (]goo), 128-747; XVI (igoi), 84-92; “The Arabs in Asia Minor from Arabic Sources,” J.H.S., X V I I I (1898), 182-208. W. Ramsay, “The War of Moslem and Christian for Possession o f Asia Minor,” Studies in t h e History and Art of ilia Eastern Provinces of the Roman Enqire (Aberdeen 1906), pp. 281-301.J. Wellhausen, “Die I $ &b JI Histoire du conzmerce du Levant au moyen age (Leipzig, 1g23), I, 44, o o Al-Idrisi-Jaubert, 11, 393 Theophanes, I, 440. He brought 1,000builders and 200 plasterers.

SPI

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

cargoes. For if the Chersonites do not journey to Roumania and sell the hides and wax that they get by trade from the Pechenegs, they cannot live. If grain does not pass across from Aminsos and from Paphlagonia and the Bukellarioi and the flanks of the Armeniakoi, the Chersonites cannot live.92

Prior to the Seljuk invasions, the Byzantines possessed in eastern Anaiolia a number of comparatively prosperous commercial towns. One of the most important of these and located to the southeast of Trebizond was Artze, a fairly large townD3inhabited by numerous merchants, including not only local Syrians and Armenians but also many othcrs.Q4The town possessed and traded in all types of goods and wares that were produced in Persia, India, and ihe rest of Asia.Q6Theodosiopolis in the vicinity seems to have. been a n important caravan town that traded with the Georgians in the early tenth century,se Many of its inhabitants moved to the town of Artze where commercial conditions were more favorable, but after the Turkish sack of Artze much of the populace returned to Theodosiopolis. Ani, one of the most recently acquired cities of the empire in eastern Asia Minor, was a n important and very populous emporium, with great numbers of churches and grain silos.g7At the easiernmost extremity was the town of Manzikert, also recently acquired.08 Melitene, a large commercial towng0that had been incorporated into the empire during the reign of Romanus I, was later repeopled primarily with Jacobite Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Adm. Im)., pp. 286-287. Attaliates, 148, refers to it variously as “.rrohiTefav, vey&hqv , , x w p 6 1 ~ o h i v . ” Cedrenus, 11, 577, as ‘ * K W ~ ~ T T O ~ ~ Spupfav6pos Kal rrohbv Tihokrov &ouua.” Zonaras, m, 638, ‘‘ K W ~ ~ I T O ~6’qv IS ~ohcp Irhqebs ~’BVSKEI ah?, iv’ O ~ T W Ei.rroIp1, S K a l drpiepbv irmpf3alvouoa, Ep.rropo~G’fiaav 01 &Opw.rrot K a l I T ~ O ~ T O SJlv a h o i s O2

.. .

ITE~ITT~S.”

Cedrenus, 11, 577. Attaliates, 148, “ K a l ITCntTOfWV ChVfOV, 6Ua mEpUIKI] T E K a l ’IV61Kfi K U l fl hOl7Tfi ’ A d a ( p i p , .rrhiieoy o\jK EirapfOvq-rov +pouua.” The situation was much the same in the days of Justinian I, Procopius, History qf the Wars, 11, xxv, ‘‘ Kal .rraibla phr a4 O6

EVTacea IITTfihaT& t b ‘ l , KGval

6k ITOhhal lTOhUWepoTl’6TaTOl 6KqVTal dr/XWT&T”W drhh4hais K a l .rrohhol Zp~~opoi KM’ l p y a o f a v Iv -rahais oiKoijoiv. k TE yhp ’Iv8Gv K a l TGV I T h q u t o x h p w v ’Ipfipwv T&VTWV TE cbs d m i v TGV l v nbpoais @vQv K a l ‘ P w p a l o v TIVGV~h qopda EO-KO~I@~EVOI BvTaCOa &hhfihois~ ~ ~ ~ & h i h h Ctironique o ~ u i . ~ dc ’ Matthieu d’zdesse (gGz-1136)auec In continuation de Grkgoire leprttrejusqu’en 1162, trans., E. Dulaurier (Paris, 1858), pp. 83-84 (hereafter cited as Matthew of Edessa), elaborates on the wealth and numerous population. O8 Constantine Porphyrogenitus, D e Adtn. Imp., pp. 208, 214. O’ Matthew ofEdessa, p. 123.Attaliates, 79, ‘‘ v6his E m1p~yirhqK a i .rrohu&vOpw.rros.” O 8 I t is one of the few Byzantine towns whose personality momentarily shines through the darkness of the sourceless period. In the mid-eleventh century Toghrul attempted to take the city but after a furious siege that was unsuccessful, he decided to abandon the effort. The inhabitants of Manzikert then placcd a pig on a hallista and hurled it into the sultan’s camp with the cry, “Sultan! take this sow to wife and we shall give you Manzikert as dowry.” Matthew of Edessa, 101-102.Al-Idrisi-Jaubert, 11, 328, describes a commerce of salted fish taken from Lake Van and of clay for crockery. O 0 Matthew of Edessa, pp. 107 ff., remarks that its population was as numerous as the sands of the sea. Theophanes Continuatus, 415, 416-417, calls it in the tenth century, “ T b h f O q p O V K a l k&KOUoTOV K a l T & V U 6XUpbV Kal SUVWbV KdtUTpOV ” Melitene and the surrounding towns were quite prosperous, p. 416, .rrohu(p6pou~ TE K a l mo-rdrras odoas Kal oias ~ o h h h s.rrap&Eiv .rrpoa66ou~.” Melitene itself brought in a

.. .

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

ChristianslOO and to a lesser degree with Armenians and Greeks.lo1The few remarks tha t emerge from the sources reveal that this town was inhabited by wealthy merchants.lo2 Nisibis and Edessa were coniparatively populous and wealthy,lo3 obviously dependent far much of their prosperity o n trade with Syria.lo4Aniioch, though actually not in Asia Minor, was very important in the economic life of the empire and especially in the commercial activities of the Anatolian towns. It was one of the important points at which commerce flowed between the domains of Byzantiurn a n d Islam. This trade had no doubt always existed and the wars and ratzius only temporarily interrupted it.106Though much of this

rich revenue to the crown, ‘‘ T a h q v oih E ~ SKoupa-rcop[av hoKcc-racT-rfioaS b pauihE1SS rohhas Xihl&Gas xpuuiou Kai &pywplou ~ K E K ~ VSaopotpopeio8al I-rqolws I T E T T O ~ ~ ~ K E VG. , ” Ficker, Erlusse des Putriarcherz van Konstantittopel Alexios Studites (Kiel, 19111, p. 28, .rrirhts piv fi M E ~ I T Tp~yckhq - ~ ~ ~ K C C ~rohudrvOpw.rroS, d h l s &pxaia Kal d-irloqpos, Ev K U ~ +cicipos K & J ~ Kal xdpa id a h I j v 6kpfa K a l &yaefi, 06 ToiS druayKaiots p6vov EIS PIOv &ih)\h K a i Tais ~ r ~ p l r r o Ei s~ ST ~ P ~ E\jeuvoupivrp.” I V But perhaps this culogy was lifted from the legislation of Justinian, see Honigmann, I

I‘

“Malatya,” E I I . l o o Cltronique de Michel le Syrien Patriarche Jucobite d’dntioch, ed. and trans. J-B. Chabot (Paris, 1go5), 111, 130-131 (hereafter cited as Michacl the Syrian), says that the Greeks refused to settle there and so Nicephorus Phocas asked the Syrians and their church to move to Melitene as they were accustomed t o living between two peoples. Ficker, Rdasse, passim. Michael the Syrian, 111, 136. l o g Thus, in the elcventh century a wealthy inhabitant of Melitene, a Syrian Christian, is said to have ransomed 15,000Christians from the Turks a t five dinars a head, Michael the Syrian, 111, 146.Matthew of Edessa, pp. 107-108, says it was full of gold, silver, precious stones, brocades, and people. The C~ironographyof Gregory Abu’l Faraj the Son of Aaron, the Hebrew Pfpsiciaii commonly known as B a r Hebraeus beitig tfle First Part of fiis Political History ofthe World, trans. E. A. W. Budge (London, 1932), I, 178 (hereafter cited asBar Hebraeus), relates the story of the three sons of a certain Abu Imrun who were so rich that they struck the imperial gold coinage at their own expense, and, in addition, they are repoIted to have loaned Basil I1 100 centenaria of gold. I n the eleventh century these Syrian Christian merchants of Melitene were very active commercially, trading in Constantinople and in the lands under the sway of the Turks. Both the Armenians and Syrians had their own church and corporation of merchants in Constantinople. In the reign of Constantine X Ducas the walls of the city (destroyed in the tenth century by the Byzantines) were rebuilt at the expense of the wealthy Syrian inhabitants. Michael the Syrian, 111, 165. los Cedrenus, 11, 502, relates that the yearly tax, which went to the treasury at Constantinople was fifty pounds of gold. Edessa is one of the few cities for which there are population figures. According to Sawiras ibn al-Mukaffa’, ITisto7y of the Patriarclls o f the Egybtian Church, trans. and ed. A. S. Attiya and Y . Abd al-Masih, (Cairo, 1959), 11, iii, 305 (hereafter cited as Sawirus ibn al-Mukaffa’), the city had, in 1071-1072, 20,ooo Syrians, 8,000 Armenians, 6,000 Greeks, and 1,000 Latins, for a total of 35,000. For further discussion of the population of towns see below. Edessa was an important textile center and prior to its destruction by the Turks in the twelfth century was inhabited by silk merchants, weavers, cobblers, and tailors. Chabot, “Un Cpisode de l’histoire des Croisades,” Me7anges ogerts d M. Gustave Schhmberger (Paris, ~ g r q ) I, , 173-174. Its inhabitants resisted the Turks valiantly. lo( Matthew of Edessa, pp. 48, 130. l o fGibb, i “Arab-Byzantine Relations under the Umayyad Caliphate,” D.O.P., 1x1 ( I 958), Z ~ O - Z ~ I ,G . Le Strange, Bagfzdad duritig the Abbasid Caliphate f r o m Contemporary Arabic and Persian Sources (Oxford, 1gz4), p. 149, indicates the presence of Greeks in Baghdad. See also Yakubi, Les pays, trans. G . Wiet (Cario, 1g37), p. PZ. There is a particularly significant mention of it in the treaty concluded between the Byzantines and Hamdanids in 969-970, translated from the Arabic text by Canard, Hisstoire de la dynastie des Flamdanides de Jezira et de Syrie (Algiers, 1g51), I, 835. “En ce qui concerne la dime prClevCe sur (se q u i vient du) pays des Rum, des douaniers de I’empereur sikgcront tr I a

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

trade with the Muslim east was transacted in northern and eastern Asia Minor, a considerable portion of it must have entered into and passed through southern and central Anatolia. Anazarba and Podandus in the tenth and eleventh centuries were populous and prosperous, with thickly inhabited and productive clusters of villages in their environs.loOThe highland town of Tzamandus was also wealthy and of good size.lQ7 Adana, Tarsus, Mopsuestia, and Seleuceia wcre significant towns characterized by commercial enterprise.lO8 Caesareia, favored by its location on the commercial route connecting Mesopotamia-Syria with Anatolia, the seat of one of the most important Greek metropolitanates and an important point of religious pilgrimage, was the principal town of Cappadocia.lo’ Nigde, Archelais, and Heracleia, though certainly not as cot6 dcs douaniers de Qargawaih et Dakjur, et sur loutcs les merchandises comme or, argent, brocart grec, soie non travaillte, pierres prCcieuses, bijoux, pcrles, Ctoffes de soic fines (sundus), les douaniers imphriaux prtlCveront la dime; sur les ktoffes (ordinaires), lcs Ctoffes d e lin, les Ctoffes de soie L fleurs de diverses couleures (huzyun), les animaux el autres merchandises, ce seront les douaniers du chambellan et de Bakjur aprts lui qui prClCveront. la dime, Aprts eux tous ces drolts seront p e r p par les douaniers impCriaux.” For a complete analysis of this treaty preserved in I h m a l al-Din, see Canard, FIaindanides, pp. 833-837. Article twenty-one speaks of caravans coming from Byzantium to the domain of Islam. Canard, “Les relations politiques ct sociales entre Byzancc et les Arabes,” D.O.P., X V I I I (1964), 48-55. Aside from the commercial and industiial importance of Byzantine Mesopotamia, it wa5 also an important producer of wheat, Liudprand, Legatio, ed. J. Becker in Die Werke Lindpmnds van Cremona, 3d ed., Scriptores reruni geriimicnrum inti st4tii scholaiuin ex Monumentis Genmmzae Historicissel,aratiin editi (Hannover-Leipzig, I 9 I 5), p. I 98. loo Cedrenus, 11, 414-415. Zonaras, 111,502. Matthew of Edessa, p. 4 . Cinnamus, 100, in the twelfth century still regards Anazarba as ‘‘ T T ~ ~ Iwpiqavij. V ” Nicetas Choniates, 33, says of Anazarba, ‘‘ K O V ~ O T ~ ~o6aa ~ ~ OK S a i rohuCtv0po.rros.” Al-Idrisi-Jaubert, 11, 133, Anazarba produccd fruit in great abundance. M. Gough, “Anazarbus,” Anatolian Studies, I1 ( r g y ) , 85-150. Unfortunately source niatcrial is lacking here. In eastern Asia Minor information ureservcd bv the Islamic.. Svriac, , . and Armenian authors. who are provincial in nature, reveals incidental facts about the cities in this area. For northern and western Anatolia the saints’ lives, which arc also local in character, have preserved significant information. But for south and central Anatolia we have only thc 13yzantine chronicles, and they are concerned only with the capital. lo7 Cedrenus, 11, 4.23, ‘‘ 1 ~ 6 h i ~ , . dv drrroKpfipVcp-rr.hpq K E I ( ~ TrohU&U8pwTros ~ v ~ ~ Kai ‘rrhohq~mpIppl8fiS.” Zonaras, 111, 54, ‘‘ .rrohUnhq8q -rr6hlv.” Rardas Sclerus during his revolt was able to raise considerable sums of money from its inhabitants. Zonaras,

111, 541. lo8 Nicephorus Phocas recolonized Tarsus after its conquest. Bar Hebraeus, I, 171, “And Tars& was (re)built, and was exceedingly prosperous, and the supply of food therein was so abundant that 1 2 litres of bread were sold for one zGz.4. And many of her citizens returned to TarsBs, and some of them were baptized and became Christians; others remained in their Faith, but all their children were baptized.” Scylitzes, 11, 703, refers to Adana as a ~ 6 h 1 vSee . Tafel and Thomas, Urkunden, I, 52, for mention of the commercial ports of southern Anatolia. Al-Idrisi-Jaubert, 11, 133, refers to A d a m and Tarsus as large towns with an active commerce and fine stone bazaars. He is either referring to conditions of the eleventh century or else to the period of the reconquest and reconstruction of the towns of the area under hlcxius Comnenus. Seleuceia, after being rebuilt, attracted Jewish merchants fi-om Egypt as settlers, Ankori, Keraites, p. I 17. S. Goitein, “A Letter of Historical Importance from Seleuceia (Selefke), Cilicia, dated P I July I 137.” English summary of the article in Tarbiz, XXVII (1958), vii-viii. l o D When al-Harawi, Guide des lieux de &Yerittage, trans. J. Sourdel-Thomine (Damascus 1957), p. 133, journeyed through Anatolia in the latter half of the twelfth century the Byzantine hippodrome and baths were still to be seen. For an account of the shrine of St. Basil, see Attaliates, 94.

‘9

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

celebrated sack by the Arabs in the ninth century, was one o f the larger Anatolian towns,ll6 and the presence of Jews in the city during the early ninth century is possibly an indication that Amorium was the site of considerable commercial life.110 It has been assumed that the city had all but disappeared as a result of the Arab destruction. Attaleiates, however, who is very careful in the nomenclature that he applies to cities, towns, and villages, still refers to Amorium as a .rrohiTda in the eleventh century.l17 The largest and most important of the plateau towns in northwestern Anatolia was Dorylaeum. Located at the point of egress from and entrance to the plateau, its plain watered by the streams of the Bathys and Tembris, the city enjoyed the advantages that strategic location and generous nature bestowed. The fields produced rich harvests of grain and the rivers abounded in fish, the villages were densely populated and the city was embellished with stoas, fountains, and houses of illustrious citizens.lls Between Dorylaeum and Nicaea were the lesser towns of Malagina, Pithecas, and L e ~ c a e . 1 ~ ~ The northern rim of the plateau contained a number of towns, the most important of which was Ankara.lZ0Slightly to the east was Saniana (a military base) ,and farther north were Gangra and Castamon. Euchaita, midway between the Halys and Iris rivers, was a center of commercial

large as Caesareia, also drew their livelihood from their position on the road system of southern Anatolia. West of Caesareia was the city of Iconium, the administrative, communications, religious, and commercial focal point of south-central AnatoIia.llO Chonae and Laodiceia, west of Iconium, were urban agglomerates that lived from the traffic passing along the road leading from Iconium to the Maeander River valley. Located near the sources of the river, they were possessed of well-watered and productive countrysides. The lakes were well stocked with fish, the valleys supported livestock and a host of agricultural products which included liquorice, cardamum, myrtle, figs, and other fruits.11l Chonae, a town of respectable size, enjoyed a certain commercial prosperity as a result of the great trade fairs held at the panegyris of the Archangel Michael. Merchants traveled long distances to do business at this event, and the faithful came on pilgrimage to see the great church of the Archangel with its mosaics.l12Laodiceia, famed for its textiles in late antiquity, doubtlessly continued to produce these materials during the Byzantine period, for when Ibn Battuta saw the city in the early fourteenth century, he observed that the Greek textile workers were still making excellent clothes and materials.l13 Northwest of Iconium, along the road to Dorylaeum, existed a series of smaller towns that served as administrative, ecclesiastical, and military centers. These included Laodiceia Cecaumene, Tyriaeum, Philomelium, Synnada, Polybotus, Acroenus, Amorium, Caborcion, Santabaris, Nacoleia, Cotyaeum, Trocnada, and Pessinus.l14 Amorium, before its 110 Attaliatcs, 135, “ qv y&pT&E .rrhfiOsi TEKal pay6OEi &v6p6v TE Kal olKi6v K a l T ~ 8AAwv xpqa-rav xal (IlAWT6V 61apipovua, Kal l&ov n a v ~ o 6 m 6 vyIvq rpipowua”. W.Pfeifer, Die Pasdanhchaft von Nigde. Ein Beitrag zur Siedlungs-und Wirtschaftsgeogra&hie van hineranalolien (Greisen, 1957). Zonaras, 111, 693, brvepch-rrwv TE nohrrrrhf@Elav &ov Kal T i k I Tois 60Ko~ul ir/aeoiS ~ ~ q v o \ i p w o v . ” As the Seljuk

capital it continued to be a large town. When the members of the Third Crusade passed by the city they noted it to be larger than the city of Cologne. Al-Idrisi-Jaubert, 11, 310, describes it as a beautiful city where routes converged. When Ibn Battuta-Gibb, 11, 430, visited it in the first half of the fourteenth century it was still an impressive town, but it soon declined. Ibn Battuta-Defrtmery, 11, 281, ll1 Ansbert, ed. Chroust, M.G.H., S.R.G., Nova Series, V (Berlin, rg28), 75 (hereafter cited as Ansbert). Al-Umari-Quatremhre, p, 355, compared the gardens of the city to those of Damascus. The markets abounded in fruits, grapes, pomegranites, and wine, 118Nicetas Choniates, 230, “ n 6 h EfiGalyova ~ Kal p~y&Aqv.”With the stabilization of relations between Konya and the Byzantines in the late twelfth century, the panegyris recovered and was attended by the inhabitants of Lydia, Ionia, Caria, Paphlagonia, and Iconium see chapter iii. The church, with its mosaics, was larger than the church of St. Mocius in Constantinople, Nicetas Choniates, 523-524. Theodore Scutariotes-Sathas, 388. For references to the church as a site of pilgrimage, see below. 113lbn Buttuta-Gibb, 11, 425. Ibn Battuta-DefrCmery, 11, n7r-r7na The tradition of textile manufacture in the region of Laodiceia was already famous in the time of the geographer Strabo, XII, 8. 16. The gold embroidery which I b n Battuta mentions was a speciality of the craftsmen of Lydia and Phrygia in antiquity, Broughton, Asia Minor, p. 818. 11*For a discussion of these smaller towns, W. Ramsay, The Historical Geograp/y of Asia Minor (London, 1890) (hereafter cited as Ramsay, Geography), and his The Cities and Bishoprics ofphrvgia, Being an Essaj ofthe Local Histov ofphrygiafronr the Earliest Times to the *urkish Conquest (Oxford, I 895-97) (hereafter cited as Ramsay, Phfygia). 20

116Vasilievsky and Nekitene, “Skazaniia 42 amoriiskikh muzenikakh i tserkovnaia sluzba,” Zapiski inzperatorskoi akademii nauk, ser. VIII, vol. V I l , no. 2, p. I I , “ n6hs pEyfUTq $V Tois &VOTOhlKOiS7 f l S POpa?Kqs hIKpOT€kYS p6pEUIV %dUqp& T€ K a l mpiqmvfis K a l ~ p b qTQV PET& T ~ VpaaihEOovuav K a l T ~ Vh a u 6 v T T ~ ~ E W V Tp0KU8fipEVnl ~h p&Aio-ra -rrohu&vBpw.rrosK a l ’IrhijOos &pGOq.rov I T O ~ I T I K ~ VTE , Canard, “Ammuriya,” EI,. lloTheophanes Continuatus, p. 42. 11’ Attaliates, 12 I . Zonaras, 111,692, the Turks killed large numbers of the inhabitants when they devastated Amorium in the reign of Romanus IV. Al-Idrisi-Jaubert, 11, 301, 307, speaks of it as a beautiful town with forty towers, and as a commercial center where communication routes meet, but it is difficult to ascertain the period to which he refers. 118 Cinnamus, zgpzg5, ‘‘ T b 6B Aopbhaiov TOGTO q v plv BTE n 6 h 1 ~ qv paydthq TE E ~ E PTIS rQv $v ’Aulq K a l A6you &cfanohhoir. aepa TE yhp T ~ Vx6pov tmarahfi ThEiOTOV 4 K O V T a KU\ K C l T a T V E i , K a l 7TE6fa ?Tap’ U h f i V TkT-raTal hElbTl)76$ TE &pfiXav6v TI IrpopaivovTa K ~ A A o00ro ~, phrroi hirap& K a l o h w s E ~ Y E W ,d~ ~ f i v TE ~ 6 a GalyiAq v p&Aima ht6166vai Kal cippbv nap+uOaI &u-raXw. no-ra& ti& 6th TOO T $ ~ E~ i vCpa , T ~ ~ I T E I K a l i66uOai Kahbs K a l yE\icauOaI fi6rjs. n A f i O q ixelswv -rouoiirov 6B tvvfix~~at -roh(tl, doov E ~ S6alyiAeiav I-rois T Q ~ E& ? , I E V ~ ~ E V O VEAAITTQ~ 0 6 6 a ~ i jylvauOai. lvTcrirOa MEhiuuqv6v ITOTE Kaiuapi olKfai TE $@pK066p‘()VTUI hapnpal K a l KQpar rohv&vOpwnoi quav OEpp& TE aGr6pocra Kal a-roal Kal ~ ~ h u v o l , K a l Bua &VOpbrroIs ipovfiv &EI, .r&a 67) b x6pos &$ova TUpEiXEV.” Ramsay, Geograplly, pp. 202, 207. lg0 Its medieval walls alone would indicate its importance. Bryennius, 6445, says that in one of his numerous campaigns against the Turks the brother of Alexius Comnenus was captured. In order to ransom him he was obliged to raise several thousand gold pieces. This h e was able to d o from the rich of Ankara and the neighboring towns by promising to V Xpvuiov m-rrbpqauiv &@.” repay the loan with interest, “ lrohhol yhp T ~ ah6pwv On Byzantine Ankara, G. de Jerphanion, “Mtlanges d’archtologie anatolienne,” Milunges de I’Universilk S t . Joseph, XI11 (I928), 144-293. Grbgoire, “Inscriptions historiques d’Ancyre,” Byzantion, IV (1927-28), 437-468; “Michel I11 et Basile le Mactdonien dans les inscriptions d’Ancyre,” Byrantion, V (Igag), 327-346. P. Wittek, “Zur Geschichte Angoras im Mittelalter,” Festxchrvt Gearg Jacob (Leipzig, 1932), 329 ff. C. Karalevsky, “Ancyre,” D.H.G.E.

. ..

. .”

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

note and evidently of some size. Its fair attracted merchants from afar with the result that the city prospered.lZ1Amaseia, much as Ankara and Euchaita, was a town of importance as a result of its strategic location in the mountain passes (Psellus speaks of it as a famous city, “the city rnentioned by every tongue”.1zz) Its rural neighborhood, though chopped up by precipitous mountains, was nevertheless well watered and productive. Like so many other towns in northeastern Anatolia, Amaseia was located in a metalliferous region and the mines seem to have been worked in Byzantine and Seljuk times.12% Doceia, Neocaesareia, Sebasteia, Coloneia, Nicopolis, and Argyropolis were important administrative, ecclesiastical, and commercial centers of the conventional Anatolian type,la4 Anatolian towns were subject to ever-present and powerful currents of trade and commerce. I n spite of the aridity of the historical sources, it seems quite clear that Greek, Armenian, Jewish, Russian, Chersonite, Circassian, Georgian, Muslim, and Italian merchants traversed the maritime and hinterland trade routes. Maritime commerce came to the Anatolian coastal cities along the entire Black Sea, Aegean, and Mediterranean littorals. I n the north the trade followed the coastal towns ultimateIy reaching Constantinople in the west or Trebizond in the east. Much of this commerce must have deployed itself along the river valleys and mountain passes leading from the littoral to the towns of the plateau. The maritime commerce of the coastal towns was tied up with Constantinople, Cherson, and the Caucasus while the commerce of the Aegean coastal centers was connected with the Greek peninsula and the islands as well as with Constantinople. The sea trade of Attaleia was supplied by Egypt, Cyprus, Antioch, and the Aegean. The major land route from the east entered the various border cities from Antioch in the lal P. deLagarde and J. Bollig, Johannis Euchaitarum mtropolitae quae supersunt in cod. vaticano graeco 676 (Berlin, 1882) pp. 131-134, 207 (hereafter cited as John MauropusAS Nov. IV, 54. Lagarde), “ , -rroAv&vepwrov n6h1v la* Psellus-Renauld, 11, 166, ~b 6$ mkrqs yhd-rrqs j3ocb~avov mbhicrya.” Cecatrrneni strategicon et incarti scriptoris de oJiciis regiis libellus (Petropolis, 1896) p. 72 (hereafter cited as Cecaurnenus), mentions the existence of an important state prison, the Mapyapwfi. Alexius Comnenus found himself forced to rely upon the wealthy inhabitants of Amaseia in order to raise the ransom money with which to purchase Roussel from the Turks, Anna Comnena, I, 13. “-robs T& ~ p G 1 - acp8pov.ras K a i x p q y b o v ohopo\sv.ras.” The rich Amaseians, however, incited the poor of the city to riot in opposition to the suggested loan. Vailhd, “Amaseia,” D.H.G.E. las Vryonis, ‘‘The Question of the Byzantine Mines,” Speculum, XXXVII (1962), 7-8. When the Turks first invaded the area the inhabitants sought refuge in the mines, and the works were still being exploited in the thirteenth-fourteenth centuries at which time merchants from the Muslim world came to purchase the metal. lZ4 When the Turks attacked Sebasteia in the eleventh century, the churches with their high domes were so numerous that the Turks a t first hesitated to enter. It was at that time a city with numerous inhabitants and wealthy in gold, silver, prccious stones, and brocades, Matthew of Edessa, pp. I I 1-1 I z.Argryopolis, the Turkish Giimushhane, was a mining town, and when the Danishmendids took it, according to Turkish tradition, they struck their first coins from the metal mined there. The mining traditions of the Greeks of this town were still alive in the nineteenth century, see chapter vii. Bar Hebraeus, I, 223, mentions cloth merchants in eleventh-century Doceia. I

.I’

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

south to Trebizond in the north. Again, some of this commerce was sea borne from Trebizond to Constantinople and to other harbors, or from Antioch to Attaleia and other ports. But at the same time a good portion of this commerce found its way into the cities of the plateau via the Cilician Gates and other routes.lZ6 There is evidence for the existence of well-developed local industry in the Anatolian towns. The Anatolians manufactured brocades and various textiles of linen, wool, silk, and cotton; they wove carpcts, produced glassware and pottery, incense, bows, arrows, swords, shields, nails, rope, and other naval supplies; and they built ships. Certainly they must have produced many of the everyday items that they needed in their own urban and rural life. Various types of craftsmen, specialized labor, and merchants are mentioned on rare occasion in the texts and inscriptions.lZ0The peninsula was a major region of the Byzantine mining industry, producing silver, copper, iron, lead, possibly some gold, marble, alum, and semiprecious stones.lZ7Food production played a very l a bMinorsky, “Marvazi and the Byzantines,” A.I.P.H.O.S., X ( I 950), 4.62-464. Caravans travel from Syria to Constantinople where they have their depots. Also Nichacl the Syrian, 111, 185, 166-167. The routes are given in Ibn Khuradadhbih, B.G.A., VI, I O I ff. On the import of Byzantine luxury items into late tenth-ccntury Egypt, K. Roder, “Das M i d im Bericht Uher die Schatze der Fatimiden,” Z.D.M.G., LXXXIX ( 1 9 3 5 ) ~ 363-371; laaMinorsky, “Marvazi,” pp. 462-4.64, describes the Byzantines as “gifted in crafts and skillful in the fabrication of (various) articles, textiles, carpets . . ,” They are second only to the Chinese in thcse skills (a theme that reappears in the Mathnawi ofDjalal al-Din Rumi in the thirteenth century). The Christian inscriptions from Anatolia, though, incomplete (Grbgoire, Recueil des inscriJ%ions grecques clrre’tiennes d’Asie Mineure (Paris, I 922), I, 2 1 , 27, 91,) contain the epitaphs of marble workers from the regions of tenth-century Smyrna, eighth to tenth-century Tralles, and of a butcher from seventh and eighth century Caria. Thc hagiographical and other texts note various craftsmen. The anonymous author of the Hudud al-Alam-Minorsky, p. 156, describes Rum (Anatolia) as a very rich province producing great quantities of brocades, silk, textiles, carpets, stockings, trouser cords, For the export of Anatolian capets and textiles to thc Turks of Central Asia, Ibn Fadlan’s Reisebericlrl, ed. and trans. 2. V. Togan in AOlrntzdlungert Jiir die Kunde dcs Morgenlandes, vol. XXIV, pt. 3 (Leipzig) p. 64 (hereafter cited as Ibn Fadlan-Togan). See also Goitein, “The Main Industries of the Mediterranean Area as Reflected in the , The fact that Bokht-Isho Bar Records of the Cairo Geniza,” J.E.S.H.O., IV ( I ~ G I )175. Gabriel, physician of rhe caliph Murawakkil, wore gowns of Byzantine silk would indicate that Byzantine textiles were fashionablc in ninth-century Baghdad, Bar I-Iebraeus, I, 143. The Byzantine products of the silk industry, cspecially brocades, mandils, and material for upholstering, were widely demanded in the Mediterranean. On carpet production in eastern Asia Minor, Canard, “Armenia,” EI,. I t is of interest that I-Iudud al-Alam mentions Anatolia as an important center of the rug industry. The rugs of Sardes were considered to be among the finest in the ancient world. They were highly prized by the Achemenid royal court. Athcnaeus, De@zosoplristae, XII, 5’4, ‘‘ Kal 6 1 f p 6id T ~ S T O ~ ~ Wa2lhiis V mci)~hro-rieEyhv yAo-rarrLGwv XapGiavwv, icp’ b v OGGEIS txhhos E-rrdpcc~v~w fi @aoihah~,”and were associated by the Greeks with excessive luxury ,and efleminacy, VI, 155, , . , Ka-rkmo 6’ tmppMAovcTav ~ p ~ c ipdbt i~p y v p 6 ~ 0 6 0 K ~A ~ V ~ S \j-rr~o-rpwy&q I a p S i a v ~yiAo-rdt-rriGi T L ~ VT&WW TTOAWEAGV.~’ The textile industry of Anatolia was of great renown in late antiquity. For a detailed listing of the refercnces to thc various cloths and textiles produced in late ancient Anatolia, Broughton, Asin Minor, pp. 817-823. See also n. 570 in chapter iii. lZ7 Vryonis, “Byzantinc Mines,” passim. Ahrweiler, “Smyrne,” 18- I 9. Y . Manandian, 0 torgovle i gorodakh Arinenii v sviaei s mirovoi torgovle i drevnikfi vrernen (Erevan, 1g54), pp. 225 ff.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

provincial aristocracy contributed to the defense and expansion of Byzantium in the east. I n the eleventh century, however, this powerful class played a crucial role in the decline of the state.132

important role in the commerce of the towns, the Byzantine villages being more closely connected to the towns than was the case with many areas in western Europe.lasThe towns served as markets for the produce of the peasants most important items of which were grain, fish, wine, fruit, legumes, nuts, livestock, and lumber. Each town had its group of villages, the inhabitants of which brought these products to town, very often during the big fairs held on the feast day of the saints.129 Here the villagers sold their produce and bought the products of local or foreign industry.13”Many of these villages were quite large and thriving.131 Thus, parallel to the larger movements of trade, there was generated also this smaller local trade between the villages and the towns, which was just as important in some respects as the larger scale trade. I n this manner the farmers and herdsmen received cash for their goods. The towns in turn were able to dispose of the villagers’ produce both by sale among the townsmen and by selling it to merchants of Constantinople and other cities.

Dernoprafi 19 Unfortunately almost nothing is known about the numbers of the population in Byzantine Anatolia and its towns, for little has survived in the way of comprehensive tax registers or population figures. The silence of the sources and the thoroughness of the cultural transformation effected by the fifteenth century have led many scholars to conclude, erroneously, that Byzantine Asia Minor was sparsely inhabited. Estimates, which are really little more than educated guesses, have been made for the size of Anatolian population in antiquity. These estimates, all based upon an assumption of commercial prosperity and urban vitality in the period of the Roman and early Byzantine Empires, vary from 8,800,000 to 13,000,000.~~~ J. C. Russell has suggested that the population remained I

Great Landed Families One of the critical phenomena in the history of Anatolia was the evolution of the great landed families, whose deeds permeate the chronicles and legal literature of the tenth and eleventh centuries. Possessed of vast cstates and high official position in the provincial administration and military, they were largely responsible for the social and historical development in Asia Minor prior to the Seljuk invasions. Most of the families rose to power and eminence via the armies and then consolidated their position by an economic expansion that was largely, though not exclusively, based on the acquisition of great land holdings. These magnates, by virtue of their control of the provincial armies, wielded great power. Very often the exercise of the strategeia in a particular province tended to become semihereditary in a particular family, as in the case of the Phocas’ and the theme of Cappadocia. Aside from control of these thermatic armies, the large estates of the aristocracy enabled them to maintain large bodies of private troops. So long as the government was able to check their more extreme political and economic abuses, this les S. Runciman, “Byzantine Trade and Industry,” Cambridge Economic History (Cambridge, 1952), 11, 86-87. Ostrogorsky, “Agrarian Conditions in the Byzantine Empire in the Middle Ages,’’ Cambridge Economic History (Cambridge, 1941), I, zoo. Often the chroniclers describe the main Anatolian cities in conjunction with the clusters of villages around them: Attaliates, 81,Ani had rohlxvia and halepa; Attaliates, 95, Antioch had its KOkai; Attaliates, 131,Chliat had 7h Imb T O ~ O Vrohlxvia; Drexl ; 111, 502, Anazarba and Pertz, 11, 54, Euchaita had its x w p t d . , & [ Y ~ o I K ~ K &Zonaras, and Pondandus had xapih mhu&vBpw.rr&TE K a \ rawcpopa; Anna Comnena, 11, 279, Iconium had its K W ~ O T T ~ ~ E OBryennius, U; 58, Caesareia had its K W ~ O T ~ ~ E I ~ . lZ8 Zepos, J.G.R.,I, 271-272, regulates affairs having to d o with these fairs. 13n Drexl and Pertz, I, 133, describes this for Nicomedeia. 13‘ such for example were Cryapege near Caesareia, Attaliates, 146; Oreine, Drexl, and Pertz, I, 132.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

The following representative list of the estates and domiciles of the Anatolian magnates is drawn from a study in progress on the internal history of Byzantium in the eleventh century. I have not gone into the problem of the relation of this landlord class to the Anatolian towns. Cappadocia Anntolicon Paph1agonia Alyattes Mesanactes Doceianus Ampelas Radenus Souanites Goudeles Argyrus Theodora (wife of Theophilus) Scepides Botaniates Ducas Lecapenus Maniaces Curcuas Diogenes Musele Comnenus Ducas Sclerus Calocyres Maleinus Synnndenus Phocas Bourtzes Chaldia Boilas Straboromanus Xiphilenus Leichudes Gabras Coloneia Melissenus Cecaumenus Ducas Meso,bolatnia Charsianon Palaeologus Bitilynia Argyrus Maurix Maleinus Iberia Ducas Boilas Lycandirs Maleinus Pacurianus Melias Apocapes Cibprheote Screnarius Artiieniacon Ducas Dalassenus Maurus J. Beloch, Die Beuolkerung der griechiscli-rornisc~ie~IWell (Leipzig, 1886), pp. 277.ff. Broughton, Asia Minor, pp. 812-816. For more recent remarks on the methods of arriving at population figures in the ancient and medieval world, see H. Bengtson, Griechische Geschichte von der Anfdngen bis in die romische Kaiserreit, I d ed. (Munich, 1960), p. 421. C. Roebuck, Ionian Trade and Colonization (New York, 1959), pp. 21-33. J. C. Russell, “Recent Advances in Medieval .Demography,” Speculum, X L (1965)~84-101; Late Ancient and Medieval Population, Transactions of the American Philosophical Socieb, vol. XLIII, no. 3 (Philadelphia, 1958), p. 81,proposes a population of 8,800,000 around the year IOO A.D., and I 1,600,000 for Anatolia in the fifth century of the Christian era. The most recent survey of Byzantine demography is P. Charanis, “Observations on the Demography of the Byzantine Empire,“ Thirteenth International Congress of Byzantine Studies, Oxford, rg66, vol, XIV. 2.5

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

at the comparatively high figure of 8,000,000 during the middle Byzantine period but that it declined to 6,000,000 by the beginning of the thirteenth century and the Turkish period.la4 There are indications that by the tenth and eleventh centuries the population of Anatolia was growing. That there was a certain stability in Anatolian demography emerges from the survival, en masse, of the ancient towns.135 These towns were comparatively safe and shielded from the massive upheaval that enveloped urban society in much of the Balkans. As late as the eleventh century, such important cities as Melitene, Sebasteia, and Artze were unwalled despite the fact that they were close to the Muslim l a n d ~ . l 3 The ~ trade routes (actively plied by Muslim and Christian merchants) going through the towns, and the presence of dense village clusters in the environs of the cities are also factors that would tend to support the assumption of a certain demographic vitality. The active policy of transplanting peoples to Anatolia certainly contributed to the growth of the population,137and there are other testimonials to an incrcase in population in the two centuries prior to the Seljuk invasions. The older tax system, by which the c a p was tied to the iugum because of the insufficient labor force, was relaxed, and in the middle Byzantine period the system underwent a transformation by which the head tax and land tax were separated. The replacement of the reciprocal unit of the two taxes with a separate collection presupposes that the earlier scarcity of agricultural labor had disappeared, a conclusion supported by the growing land hunger of the landed magnates in the tenth century.138 A further indication of demographic stability and growth is the evolution of the ecclesiastical administrative structure in Asia Minor. The Byzantine requirement that each town should constitute a bishopric was observed as late as the twelfth >century.The basic stipulation for the existence of a bishopric was that an inhabited area should be sufficiently populous to be considered a town. If it were too small it could not be

134 Russell, “Recent Advances in Medieval Demography,” p. gg. 0. L.Barkan, “Essai sur les donntes statistiques des registres de recensement dans l’empire ottoman aux XVe et x V I c sikles,” J.E.S.H.O., I (1958)~ 20, 24, estimates the population of Anatolia in the early sixteenth century at about 5,0oo,ooo on the basis of the tax figures. The decline of the population is, according to Barkan, due to the unsettled conditions in the provinces. With the comparative pacification and normalization that ensued in the sixteenth century, the population increased considerably. Ostrogorsky, “Byzantine Cities,” pp. 61-62,reproduces a list of the more important towns that Theophanes mentions after the beginning of the seventh century for Asia Minor. Abydus, Adramyttium, Acroenus, Amaseia, Amastris, Amida, Amorium, h k a r a , Antioch of Pisidia, Attaleia, Caesareia, Chalcedon, Charsianon, Chrysopolis, Cyzicus, Dorylaeum, Edessa, Ephesus, Germaniceia, Iconium, Martyropolis, Melitene, Mopsuestia, Myra, Nacoleia, Nicaea, Nicomedia, Pergamum, Perge, Prusa, Pylae, Samosata, Sardes, Sebasteia, Sebastopolis, Sinope, Smyma, Syllaion, Synnada, Tarsus, Theodosiana, Theodosiopolis, Trebizond, Tyana. I3O Matthew of Edessa, pp. 83-84, I I 1-112. 13‘ For the details see . below. 138 Ostrogorsky, “Die Steuersystem in byzantinischen Altertum und Mittelalter,” Byrantion, VI (193I),23 1-234.

I I

included on the list of episcopal seats. The canon law and the commentatorsmakeitplain that the approintment of a bishop to a place depends unequivocally and exclusively upon the ‘* . -rrhijOoscivflph-rrwu. . . Bishops are to be ordained ‘‘ , E ~ CKduas S T&S I T ~ ~ E .I S T&S -rrohuavOp6nous . A bishop may never be appointed to “ . 6Aiyqu I T ~ A I UKai u6pqu.”1s0 During the course of the tenth and eleventh centuries new bishoprics appear and former bishoprics are promoted to archbishoprics or metropolitanates. The increase is due in part to the rise in population and prosperity of the Anatolian provinces as well as to new conquests in the ea~t.1~0 The chronicles and histories of the period refer to a large number of the towns by a nomenclature that differentiates them sharpy from villages. The sources use the terms &mu, T ~ ~ I STohiTda, , pqTpd-mohiS, KC~OTPOU to differentiate the town from the village, ~ c j p ~ ~l ,w p i o v . 1 ~A1

.. .. ..

. .” I

130 K. Rhalles and M. Potles, Zliv-ruypa T ~ V 0dwv K a l IEPGVKavdvwv (Athens, 1852-59), 111, 222-113, 245-248 (hercafter cited as Rhalles and Potles). 140 F. Miklosich et J. Mtiller, Acta et dipolmatn g r a m medii aeui sncra etprgana (Vienna, 1860-go),XI, 104 (hereafter cited as Miklosich et Miiller). De Jerphanion makes this observation in regard to Cappadocia, Une nouuelle Irouince de l’art byrantin: Les iglises rzlpestres de Capbadace (Paris, 1925-42), 11, li-lxii; lI,, 397-400 (hereafter cited as de Jerphanion, Cappadoca). I n southern Anatolia Cybistra was raised in rank to an archbishopric in the eleventh century, W. Ramsay, “Lycaonia,” Jahreshefte des dsterreichischett Archbologinhen hstiluts, VTI (1904),Beiblatt, I 15. For a more detailed treatment of this

point see chapter iv. 141 As early as the reign of Justinian I ~ 6 h i and s ~ h o ~ p owere v used interchangeably, Nauella CXXVIII, c. 20. These terms are used in the same manner by Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De. Adin. Imp., pp. 1 9 8 ~ ~ 0where 0 , Artze is referred to as a K&UTPOVand -rrohirdav. Attaliates, 28, 46, 89, go, 166,174, 199,201,206, 245, 249, refers to Adana, Amaseia, Manzikcrt, Rhacdestus as K&o-rpa a n d -rdAhaig. Smyrna is called both K & U T ~ O V and IT MI^, Anna Comnena, TI, 117, 118,as is Ephesus, AS Nov. 111, 554,Rudikov, Orerki, p. 74, has attempted to equate K & U T ~ O V only with -rrohJxvq instead of 1~6his. llbhiapa, -irohfXviov, and q~polipiovare generally employed lo designate settlements intermediate between towns and villages, which often have fortifications. But this differentiation is not as rigidly observed as that between n6Ais and K h p q . Cedrenus, 11, 423, 678,calls Tzamandus both d h i s and -rr6Aiupa. Kwpd~rohisand &yp6-rrohig1 seem to be applied to a settlement larger than a village but scattered and not formed according to a synoicismus. These could be rather large affairs and were not restricted to essentially agrarian establishments. Important commercial emporia could have the form of a K W ~ ~ I T O ~ Thus IS. Artze, though a K W ~ ~ T T O ~was I S , heavily populated and a rich center of commercial exchange of goods from Persia and India. Zonaras, 111, 638, “ K C O ~ ~ ~ O ~ 6’fiv TOGTO, -rrhr@t; 6’ ~ V Q Kalxdj, EI iv’ oCrrws E ~ I T O I ~ KU\ I, &pi0pbv hEppUhOWUU, gp-rropo~6’ fiouv ot &0pw-rroi, KUI nhoirros fiv a h o i s i ~ ~ p i r r d s .I”t had no walls, however. Phrygian Laodiceia was formed of several scttlements or villages scattered about the lower slopes of the mountain. I t was not a centralized town with extensive walls. Nicetas Choniates, 163,“ o h h i ofiaav w v o ~ ~ o w p ~c5s q vVGV kcbpa-rai, 036’ E & ~ K & VpuyvvpBvqv rEIXEcri, KWU 6Q KcbpaS E K K E X U ~ ~ V ~ Vm p l ~ h sO-rrwpEiaS T ~ V~ E ~ U E ( ~ o w v ~ v .X”w p d ~ o h was i ~ used to refer to a n ordinary village community. Dolger, Beitage zur byzantinischsn Fitiantuerwaltung, besonders des 10. und II. Jahrhundert (LeipzigBerlin, I927), pp. 66, 126, 134-135.The term xwpb~ohiscould refer to a settlement next to a town, which was separated from the town by walls. Xwp6.rrohis was thus possibly the equivalent of IT~O&UTEIOV or pai-r&riv. Constantine Porphyrogenitus, Be Adm. Imp., p. 2 16,Adranoutzi is a K&IYT~OV, but also has a considerable suburban area. “&TI Tb K&UTpOV Tb ’ApGaVoirrSqv 6UTlV 6xWpbV T&VW, iXE1 6QK a l paTf&rIV &a &s ~ o p d n o h i v . ”Honigmann, “Charsianon Kastron, Byrantion, X (1935),148-149.Rttaliates, 148,and Zonaras, 111,638, indicate that TIOAITEIa and xwp6lroAis were interchangeable terms.

I S

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

considered these towns to be large by the standards o f the day.142But just how large was .rrohvdrv0p~~os ? The city of Edessa in the year I 07 I was said to have 35,000 inhabitants. When the Muslim Nur al-Din captured the city three-quarters of a century later, 30,000 were killed, 16,000enslaved, and only 1,000escaped.143 The total population prior to the fall of the city, 47,000,indicates that the population had increased, a phenomenon to be explained by the flight of the agrarian population to the safety of the walls over a long period of time. The city of Tralles, which was rebuilt and recolonized with 36,000 inhabitants by the Byzantines in the thirteenth century (1280),was said to be ~roh~&tv0pw.rros.l~~ The number of captives taken from Anatolian .towns in the twelfth century will perhaps assist in giving some idea as to the size of towns. I n the midtwelfth century, Yakub Arslan carried away 70,000 Christians from Gaihan and A l b i ~ t a n , lOf ~ ~ the captives that the Turks took from Melitene in the eleventh century, 15,000were ransomed by the merchants of that city,lcBand c. I 124-25 during the course of a six-month siege of the city the inhabitants are said to have perished by the “thousands.”’47

Thud Melitene was probably a town comparable i n size to Edessa. There is some indication as to the size of a comopolis in the twelfth century. When the Seljuk sultan attacked the two comopoleis of Tantalus and Caria in western Asia Minor, he took away captive 5,000 of the inhabitants. This would indicate roughly 2,500 inhabitants for each of the two comopoleis. But Caria had been sacked on a previous occasion and was to suffer devastation and enslavement a third time. Thus its popuation was larger than 2 , 5 0 0 , ~perhaps ~~ about 5,000.1~0 The indirect evidence for an increase in the Anatolian population of the tenth and eleventh centuries and the few figures for town population would indicate that the epithet 1~0hu6~8pw.rro~ as applied by Byzantine sources to the cities has some numerical substance. A large city could have as many as 35,000 inhabitants, though it is likely that most of the towns were smaller. One may assume that towns had populations varying between 10,000 and 35,000.~~0 Caria, which was not a fullfledged town in the twelfth century, probably had a population of about 5,000.Dorylaeum had been one of the prosperous towns of the eleventh century. As a result of its destruction during the Turkish invasions, it was inhabited by only 2,000 Turkmens in the twelfth century, a figure that the historian Cinnamus considers to be insignificant when compared with the former size of the city.lS1Though th‘e evidence is very scant, one

A perusal of the texts of Bryennius, Zonaras, Attaliates, Psellus, Cedrenus, Cinnamus, Anna Comnena, Cecaumcnus, Constantine Porphyrogenitus reveals approximately seventy inhabited areas referred to as towns by these various terms: Manzikert, Perkri, Chliat, Artze, Kars, Theodosiopolis, Adranoutzi, Lycandus, Tzamandus, Amaseia, Ankara, Antioch, Abydus, Lycian Adrianople, Anazarbus, Castamon, Acroenus, Doryhum, Gangra, Iconium, Neocaesareia, Pracana, Pounoura, Trebizond, Oenoe, Sozopolis, Adana, Amorium, Pisidian Antioch, Edessa, Nicaea, Nicomedeia, Philomelium, Euchaita, Side, Syllaion, Synnada, Chalcedon, Podandus, Ani, Chonae, Germaniceia, Hierapolis, Melitene, Mopsuestia, Praenetus, Pylae, Sebasteia, Tarsus, Caesareia, Coloneia, Ephesus, Basilaion, Matiana, Parnassus, Sinope, Argaous, Amara, Tephrice, Samosata, Zapetra, Larissa, Abara, Ticium, Chelidonium, Chrysopolis, Attaleia, Cyzicus, Cius, Smyrna, Seleuceia. T h k of course does not exhaust the possibilities, for the notitiae episcopatum have not been utilized. 14a For the references to these towns and territories see the material above on Adana, Ani, Antioch, Artze, Iconium, Anazarba, Podandus, Tzamandus, Adramyttium, Amaseia, Dorylaeum, Sozopolis, Strobilus, Nicaea, Basilaion, Attaleia, Amastris, Trebizond, Melitene, Edessa, Chonae, Euchaita and Sebasteia. 143 Sawiras ibn al-Mukaffa’, TI, iii, 305. Bar Hebraeus, p. 273. Chabot, “Episode de I’histoire des Crusades,” pp. 176-177, when Zangi first captured the city two years earlier, in 1144, beween 5,000 and 6,000 were killed and io,ooo youths and maidens were taken captive. Zangi is said to have delivered the 10,000from captivity. Matthew of Edessa, p. 289, refers to an earthquake that killed 40,000 at Marash in the eleventh century. The sources are not to be taken literally. Pachymeres, I, 469. For the date, I. gevcenko, & i d e s sur la polhique entre Thdodore Metochife el Nicdphore Choumnos (Brussels, 1962), pp, 137-138. 14’ Matthew of Edessa, p. 344. When the Turks sacked the city of Artze in the eleventh century, Cedrenus, 11, 578, exaggeratedly reports that 150,000 of the inhabitants were slain. Bar Hebraeus, I, 426, relates that in 1256-57 the Mongol Baidju slew 7,000 in Albistan. l“Michae1 the Syrian, 111, 146. I n 1145, 15,000 captives were taken from Tell Arsanias. 14’ Matthew of Edessa, p. 315.

Nicetas Choniates, 655-657. The word KWM6lTOhls here may mean a large village, though it also has the meaning of a town scattered over a large area. lfioDolger, “Die byzantinische Stadt,” p. 12, has given a similar, though slightly lower estimate of between 5,000 and ZO,OOO. L. Torres Balbas, “Extension y demografia de las ciudades hispanomusulmans,” S.Z., 111(1955), 55-57, on the basis of area measurements, gives the following population estimates for eleventh-twelfth century Spain: Toledo 37,000 Zaragoza I 7,000 Almeria 27,000 Malago 15-20,000 Granada ~6,000 Valencia I 5,000 Mallorca 25,000 Barkan, “Les donnkes statistiques,” p. 27, furnishes reliable figures for some of the Anatolian towns in the years c. 1520-1530 (based on tax registers): Bursa 34,930 Tokat 8,354 Amid 18,941 Konya 6,127 Ankara 14,872 Sivas 5,560 Though the similar magnitudes of the Spanish figures (arrived at by area measurement) and the Ottoman figures (results of reliable tax registers from a later period) when combined with the Byzantine estimates do not necessarily prove anything, it is interesting that the size of the towns tend to range between similar extremes. Byzantium 5-10,000 to 36,000 (perhaps 47,000) 15,000 to 37,000 Spain 5,560 to 34993(3, Ottoman Empire See also Russell, “The Population of Medieval Egypt, Journal of the American Research Center in Eglpt, V ( 1g66), 69-82. 161 Cinnamus, 295. Ztinerarium Willelmi de Rubruc, ed. A. van den Wyngaert, in Sinica Fransiscana, ( I gzg), I, 327 (hereafter, cited as William of Rubruq-Wyngaert), reports that an earthquake killed more than IO,OOO people in Erzindjan in the mid-thirteenth century. Ramon Muntaner, Chronique d’dragon, de S i d e at de Grhe, trans. J. A. C. Buchon in Chroniques dtrangEres relatiues atix expdditions franjaises pendant le XIIP sidcle (Paris, I 841 ), p. 419, (hereafter cited as Ramon Muntaner-Buchon) relates that in the early fourteenth century (before the Turkish conquest), the peninsula of Artake (Cyzicus) had zo,ooo habitations, houses, farms, etc.

number of the towns are described by epithets (Toicxhq ~ ~ b h~rE ~ Y &, A T , . r r o ~ u & u e p ~ ~ opupiav6pos ~, nohbv T~OGTOV Exouc~a, dtvepcj.rrov T E .rroh~hfieElav Zxov, IT~AIS mpiqavfis, -duavepw.rroTdrrq, ~EYLOTT), vohi,av6poS, 1~hij0os Aaoij) which indicate that the contemporary observers

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

148

28 29

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

must conclude on the basis of this material that not only did the population of Asia Minor increase by the tenth and eleventh centuries, but the population of the towns and province as a whole was significant in absolute terms.152 Thus it would be incorrect to speak of Anatolia as semidesolate or depopulated on the eve of the Seljuk invasions.

Road System The large land mass of Byzantine Anatolia was closely knit by the system of roads which the empire had largely inherited from the days of the Roman Empire. There was some readjustment of the system which occurred with the transferral of the capital to Constantinople, but aside from that the road system persisted in its principal form down to Turkish times.163 The organization and maintenance of the road network was essential for the Byzantines in Asia Minor inasmuch as it was the means by which this province could be more tightly integrated into the empire. I t facilitated the movement of Byzantine armies and ensured areas threatened by the enemy with a more rapid defense. The roads also made easier the relative efficiencyof the bureaucrats who administered the provinces and who, at the same time, remained under closer supervision of the central government as a result of these roads. Of equal importance was the accessibility of the major Anatolian towns and cities to merchants, caravans, and currents of trade as a result of this arterial network.lj4 The ffequent use of these highways by the armies, officials, merchants, pilgrims, and others, is copiously noted not only by the Byzantine historians and hagiographers but also in the accounts of the Arab geographers and travelers. The major routes ran in a northwest to southeast direction, though there were smaller routes running in a north and south direction. The northwestsoutheast routes generally ascended rrom the coastal region of northwest Anatolia at some point along the Sangarius, cut through the mountains 152 This estimate of Anatolia’s demographic condition generally coincides with the results that Russell (“Population of Medieval Egypt,” pp. 81, gr-gg), has attained by entirely different methods. He suggests, on the basis of the area contained by the medieval fortress, that eighth-century Ankara may have had between 25,000 and 30,000 inhabitants. We must, at any rate, think oftown populations in terms of their size in late antiquity rather than in modern times, Thus the population density of Asia Minor in the eleventh century contrasts with the assertions of certain scholars that the peninsula was semidesolate on the eve of the Turkish invasions. M. Koprulu, Les origines de l’etnpire ottomatl (Paris, I 9351, p. 60. F. Siimer, O&zlar (Turkmenler). Tarilileri-boy tefkildti-destnnlari (Ankara, 1967)~p. XII. 153 Ramsay, Geography, p. 74. For the Seljuk and Ottoman routes, K. Erdmann, Das atiatoWie Karauansamq des 13. Jahrliunderts (Berlin, 1961), vol. I-II; Taeschner, Das anntolische Wegenetr naclr osmanischen Quelleii (Leipzig, I 924-26) I vol. I-II. For a reference to the survival of the Romano-Byzantine roads in western Anatolia, in the Turkish period see Hans Dernschwarn’s Tagebuch einer Reise nacfi Konstantinopel tirid Kleinasien (1553/55), ed. P. Babinger (Munich and Leipzig, 1923), p. 238. la’ On the merchant khans throughout the empire, P. Koukaules, Bu$av-rlvGu pi05 K d ~ O h ’ l o Y 6 s(Athens, 1941), II,, 128-140.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

separating the coastal region from the central plateau, and then traversed the plateau itself. Thus one route skirted the northern rim of the plateau going through Amaseia and Coloneia, another route cut through the central plateau region via Saniana and Sebasteia, and a third skirted the southernmost reaches of the plateau going through Iconium to the Taurus. The most important of these was the great military highway used by the emperors when marching out to meet the Arabs on the eastern borders. I t led from Nicaea via Pithecas, Leucae, and Malagina to Dorylaeum where the road climbed through the mountains onto the plateau. Then it proceeded through Trocnada and Pessinus, across the Sangarius River over the Zompus Bridge, through the town of Gorbaeus to the south of A n h r a , across the Halys River to the town of Saniana. Here the road forked, the branch leading to the southeast going through Mocissus and then branching again, the two branches going to the great Cappadocian center of Caesareia and to Tyana and Tarsus respectively. The other road leading from Saniana went almost directly east to the city of Sebasteia. Once more the highway branched into three routes : the northernmost leading to Nicopolis and Coloneia; the central branch going to Tephrice and Theodosiopolis; the southeast artery pushing to Melitene where it joined the road from Caesareia. A critical juncture of this highway was Saniana, for it was from this town that the three main branches went to the regions of the Taurus, Cappadocia, Melitene, Sebasteia, and Coloneia.lj5 There was a number of large military stations or camps along this highway, at which standing camps the armies of the various themes gathered and joined the emperor as he marched eastward to the borders.lj0 These military bases, or aplecta as they were called, were often important towns located on the main highway or within easy reach and were supplied with all the necessities for provisioning troops. The tenth-century emperor Constantine VII mentions six aplecta. The first, at Malagina east of Nicaea on the banks of the Sangarius, possessed the cxtensive stables of the emperor, an arms depot, and storehouses with provisions for the arrnya16’ This was probably the mustering center for the troops of the theme of Optimaton. Dorylaeurn, the gateway to the central plateau, was the Ramsay, Geography, pp. I 99-22 I . G. Kolias, “TlEpl ~ A ~ ~ K T O W E.E.B.E., ,’’ XVII (194I), 144-184. J. B. Bury, “The &lThrjKTa of Asia Minor,” Bu(Qv-rfs, 11 (191 I ) , 214-224. 15’ Constantine Porphyrogenitus, DeCaerinioniis, 1,444-445,459, and especially Ramsay, Geography, pp. 202 ff., for certain emendations of the text. Ibn Khuradadhbih, B.G.A., VI, I 12-1 13. J. R . Sterett, T h e W o & Expedition t o Asin Minor, Papers ofthe American School of Classical Studies at Athens, I11 (1884-85), 5, published a bronze tablet found at o r e n Koy in southeast Asia Minor. The inscription on the tablet was the identification of an animal from such a stable. ZGou Giaq(6pov) lS5

158

TQ edy &cppa$v(~~) .rrpoo-ra$u KW& e(E)i(ov) d m o v (6 )I’ &yyap((w)

3’

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

gathering place for the troops of the Thracesian and Opsicion themes. Ibn Khuradadhbih reveals that the emperor had constructed seven large bathing arcades over the hot springs of the city, and that each could accommodate 1,000men, no doubt intended for use by the armies. The third aplecton, the bishopric of Kaborkeion, was slightly to the south of the highway. The troops of the Anatolic and Seleuceian themes, together with those troops under the Domestic o f the Scholes, assembled at Kaborkeion, a site amply fed by the sources of the Sangarius River, and then marched to Trocnada on the military highway where they fell in with the advancing army.ls8 The fourth aplecton, Saniana, was on the eastern bank of the Halys, again a well-watered spot and thus capable of accomodating large numbers of men and horses. I t was here that the road forked, going on the one hand to Sebasteia, on the other to Caesareia and the Taurus mountains. If the emperor were marching to Cilicia, then the troops of all the eastern themes joined him at Saniana. But if he were marching directly east toward Melitene, only the troops of Bucellarion, Paphlagonia, and Charsianon met him at Saniana, while the troops of Cappadocia, Armeniacon, and Sebasteia met him at Caesareia, the fifth aplecton. The sixth aplecton was that of Dazimon. Here the troops of the Armeniacon were mustered, and when the emperor was marching to Sebasteia and points east, they joined him at the station of Bathys Rhyax .l6 A second trans-Anatolian highway skirted the southern confines of the Anatolian plateau, a route often referred to as the pilgrim’s route, though it was also animportant military and commercial artery. It too commenced at Malagina and progressed through Dorylaeum, Polybotus, Philomelium, and Iconium to the Cilician Gates.looThere were at least two variations of this route to Iconium: one athat went via Malagina-cotyaeumAcroenus-Polybotus-Philomelium-Iconiumand the other that traversed Malagina-Dorylaeum-Amorium-Laodiceia-Iconium. There was a third road that avoided Iconium altogether by going from DorylaeumPessinus to Archelais and then south through Tyana to the Taurus. Another highway left from Nicomedia and went through Ankara, south to Archelais, Tyana, and the Taurus.lsl Nicomedia and Ankara both served as important points of departure for the roads going across the northern regions of the Anatolian plateau. One route led from Nicomedia through Gangra (or an alternate route slightly to the north of Gangra), Euchaita (on the more southerly route), Amaseia, Neocaesareia, Coloneia, and Satala. Another road ran from Ankara to Gangra, Amaseia, and so on. There were also some important roads running north and south, perhaps the most prominent being the route from the coastal city of Amisus to 168 Ramsay,

Geograpfty, pp. 213-214,

Ibid., pp. 219-221. Zbid.,pp. 197 ff. lblIbid., pp. 197-198, and accompanying map, lbS

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

Amaseia and down to Caesareia. Undoubtedly, there were similar roads leading inland from such Black Sea ports as Heracleia, Amastris, Sinope, and Trebizond. I n the east, the road from Sebasteia went through Tephrice and Theodosiopolis to Manzikert, while Arabissus was similarly joined to Melitene in the east and to Germaniceia in the south via the passes of the Anti-Taurus while Germaniceia was in turn connected with Samosata.lo2 Of particular importance was the busy road from Attaleia via Cotyaeum and Malagina to Constantinople. An official of the post system, who resided in Attaleia, supplied horses and transportation for travelers going overland, or passage by ship to those going by sea. Ibn Hawkal states that while the journey took only eight days on the highway, the sea voyage, provided the winds were favorable, required fifteen days.lo3Side and other towns of Cilicia were similarly connected by traversible roads to the main highway system going through Iconium. I n western Asia Minor the roads for the most part seem to have followed the coastline and the river valleys. Anatolia was effectively served by this system of major roads, which went generally in a west to east, or west t o southeast direction. This network was intersected by numerous smaller roads, entering from the coastal areas of the northwest and west, and also by a smaller number of north-south routes cutting over the plateau. That the armies frequently used these roads goes without saying. Merchants, including Jews and Arabs, seem to have followed the great networks for commercial reasons with the result that knowledge of all the major land routes appears in the texts of the Arab ge0graphers.1~~ The roads were extensively traveled by pilgrims-pilgrims who visited not only the Holy Land but also the numerous shrines of the greater and lesser Anatolian saints.1o6 242-279. Honigmann, “Charsianon Kastron,” p, r5G. Osteuropaische und ostasiatische Streifiiige (Leipzig, 1go3), pp. 208-109. By way of example, al-Mukaddasi describes the journcy of a Muslim who traveled from Mayaferrikin via Coloneia, Neocaesareia, across the Ponlic region to the Sangarius River (Honigmann, “Un itinCraire,” pp. 263-267, 268). I t is of some interest thqt his itinerary followed the northwest route described abovc and that when he arrived in the region of the Bucellarion theme he remarks that there was an inn for Muslims. This was one of the Byzantine @vo6oxEia, hostels, which existed far travelers. Constantine Porphyrogenitus mentions such institutions in the region of the Sangarius, at Nicomedeia, and a t Pylae (De Caerimoniis, I, 720). But undoubtedly they existed throughout the peninsula. Al-Mukaddasi describes a second journey that led from Amid via Melitene, Tzamandus, Caesareia, Ankara, Sangarius, Nicomedeia to Constantinople (Honigmann, “Un itinbraire,” p.270). It is significant‘that this information comes from a Muslim rather than a Byzantine source and so one is able to deduce the commercial importance of these Anatolian networks. The presence of a hospice for Muslims in the Bucellarion theme is important evidence for inferring the presence of Muslim merchants in Anatolia. The same author mentions that there were Muslims in the cities of Bithynia, Trebizond, and Na’din an-Nuhas (Honigmann, “Un itintraire,” p. 263). lo6 Quite illustrative of this type of itinerant was St. Lazarus (d. 1054) who performed the pilgrimage both to the Holy Land and to various sanctuaries of Asia Minor. In his first journey Lazarus set out from the coastal town of Strobilus for the shrine of the Archangel Michael in Chonae. En route he fell in with a group of Cappadocian pilgrims, also la*Zbid., pp.

Ia3 Marquart,

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

T h Church Anstolia had an elaborate ecclesiastical organization of metropolitanates, arclil~islioprics,and bishoprics subordinated to the patriarch of Constnntinople.le* I n the earlier centuries this provincial organization of the church had followed the pattern of the imperial administrative orgaiiziation. Thus the town, or polis, became the seat of the bishopric. By the eleventh century, Asia Minor possessed approximately forty-five nietrop~litanates,~~~ ten archbishoprics,fGB and a great number of on their way to the shrine, and before arriving at the town, another pilgrim (a PaPhlagonian monk) joinctl the party. After a number of distractions, Lazarus finally made his W ~ to Y I’alestine whcre he visited the various shrines and churches. He then returned to Antioch. I r o m Cilicia he took the road going north by Mt. Argaeus to Caesareia where he prayed at the church of St. Basil. There he followed the northern route to Euchaita, the center of the cult of St. Theodore Teron, and departing from Euchaita m a d e his w a y through the .inatolic theme to Chonae, once more to the church of the Archangel. T h e last Irg of his long pilgrimage was from Chonae to Ephesus where Lazarus went to the church of St. ,John the Theologian (AS Nov. 111, 517-518). Ephesus remained a favorite pilgrim site through its Byzantine life, I n I 106-07 the Russian abbot Daniel (P.P. T.S., I”, ~ - 6 )visited , the tomb of St. John and relates that on the anniversary of the latter’s drath n holy dust arose from the tomb, which believers gathered as a cure for diseases. He visited the cave of the Seven Sleepers, the remains of the 300 holy fathers, of St. itlexander, the tomb of Mary Magdalene, the coffin of the Apostle Timothy. He saw t h e imagc of the Holy Virgin used to refute Ncstorius. Ramon Muntaner-Buchon (pp. 425, 465-+66), \\itnrsscd miracles at the tomb in 1304,and remarked that the exudations of the tomb were beneficial for childbirth, fever, and when thrown on the stormy sea would calm it. After the Turks took Ephesus they traded three of the relics of his cult t o Ticino Zacaria of Phocaea for grain. These included: a piece of the true cross taken b y St. John himrelf from the place where Christ’s head lay, and which was enclosed in gold a n d precioub stones and which had hung from the neck of St. John on a golden chain; a cloth t h a t hfary had made and given to St. John; a book of the Apocalypse written in gold letters by St. John. In 1%) the famous Georgian monk, George the Hagiorite, accompanied by his hiographer, journeyed from Antioch to Caesareia, and thence to the shrine of St. Theodore where they were graciously received by the archbishop. They then journeyed to t h e port of Amisus on the Black Sea and set sail for the Caucasus. P. Peeters, “Histoires monastiWes gkorgicnnes,” 8.4., XXXVI-XXXVII (1917-~g),I Z I - I Z ~ . H.Delehaye, “Euchaita et la ICgende de S.Theodore,“ in Anatolian Studies Presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay (Lolld’Jn, 1923)1PP. 133-134 (hereafter cited as Delehaye, “Euchaita et S. Thtodore”). For other referenccs to these Anatolian pilgrimages, AS Nov. I, 343; F, Halkin, “Saint lintoinc Ie Jeune et Petronas la vainqueur des Arabes en 863,” A.B., LXII (1944). 18?-22ja 218; 1’- Laurent, La Uie mrueilleusc de Saint Pierre d’&oa 837 (Brussels, 1956), PP. 87,9c)-lOr. Pilgrimages to the great shrines of Anatolia must have been commonplace. Notice that on his way to the shrine of the Archangel, Lazarus met other pilgrims from as far away 21 Cappdocia arid Paphlagonia. These pilgrimages were not limited to the ancient and rqtablishcd centen, for Lazarus was himselfvisited by many pilgrims on Mt. Galesium, iiicluding nut only Cheek Christians from the vicinity, but also by a Georgian, a baptized hfuslint, and by Jews. T h e rtnatolian road system saw a certain number of Latin pilgrims o n their way to the Holy Land, though most of them probably went by the sea route that skiited the westf‘rn anti southern coasts of the peninsula. BrChier, L‘e’glise et Z’Oridnt ou tnqeri-cige (Paris, 1gz8), pp. 43-47, Sonic churches in sauthmtern Anatolia were subordinate to the patriarchate of Antkxh. Ikck, K k h e und tlteologische Literattrr, pp, I 90-1 96. 4skald.tnovi& Gosudarslco,pp. 404-418.Gelzer, “Ungedruckte und wenig bekannte Ilisturr~ervcrzcichriissrdcr orientalischen Kirche,” B.Z., I (1894), 253-254. Caesareia, EPhesus, -“hkara, c+iCUS, Sardis, Nicomedeia, Nicaea, Chalcedon, Side, &bast&, Amns% bfelitelle, ‘rYana, Gangra, Claudiopolis, Neocaesareia, Pessinus, Myra, StauroPoli%Lnotiiceia,SYnndi, Iconium, Antiocheia, Pisidia, Perge, Mocissus, Scleuceia,

’‘* ’@’

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

suffragant bishoprics. In.tlic tenth century there had been approxilnatcly 37 I bishoprics subordinate to tliein,109 and by the eleventli century tlicrc was a significant increase in their number170 due largely to the cxpai1sion of the rroiitiers in tlic east.171 The rnctropoIitans were the ccclesiastical lords or largc areas and usually of a number of towiis as well as villagcs, over which towns were the bishops. The powcrs and influcnc:c of tliesc hierarchs in thcir respective provinccs were considerable, not only in the spiritual dornain but also in the sphere of administration and in the courts.172 It was the metropolitans and archbishops who linked the provincial administrative structure of the church to Constantinopl(~, patriarch, and emperor, They had the right to participate in t h c iiiectiugs of the synod i n Constai~hopleand also to participate in thc election ol‘ the patriarch. The elaborate structure 01’ I n c ~ r o p o l i t a n a t ~ s - l ~ i s l i ( ~ ~ ~ r i ~ s indeed or tlic whole ecclesiastical institution-was supported by cxtensivc properties and certain cash incomcs,l‘~It was with thcsc inc:om~sthat tllc: metropolitans and bishops provided for guestliouses, pourliousL.s, orphanages, hospitals and to a certain extent, local education. ’llw ecclesiastical as wcll as thc bureaucratic, adini~~istrativc pcrso111i~tWCTC recruited from the local population aid Constantinoplc, so t h a t tllc priesthood and liicrarchy represented Xiotli the capital and tlic proviuc:cxs. Asia Minor was not only the most itriportalzt 13yzantiilc province militarily and economically, but also it was so in the rcligialls domain. Anatolia possessed tlic riclicst, most ~ O ~ U ~ O mctropolilan~~t~’s U S ol’ h: cmpirc. Their importance relative t o that of tlic European mr.tropc)litanates is clcarly reflected in the onicial lists, the ~ ~ ~ l i ~]hco@rm~, l i n ~ composed for purposes of‘ protocol, where the melropo1itan;ltcs are liqtctl in order of thcir rank. Of the first twcnty-seven mctropolitaiiatcs listed in a notitia of thc elevc~ithcentury, only two werc located ill E u ~ o ~ thl:c , remailling twcnty-five were situated in Rn:t~olitt.~7‘J‘I’his c n ~ r g r sI W ~ C clearly when 0 1 1 compares ~ thc number or bishops to l x J b ~ u ~ iii c l lhc ~ t v o regions of the cnipire. In tlic first half of thc tenth century, thcrc \VC‘L‘V about 371 bislio~~rics in Asia Minor, 99 in Ih~ropo,18in thc Argeaii islvs, and 16 in Chlabria and Sicily.175Also, a i d most importallt, Asin Miimr

EVE O F THE TURKISH CONQUEST

was strewn with sanctuaries and cults of numerous saints. Some of the cults centered on the martyrs, others on the personages of later saints, and still others on the personalities of “mythical” saints. Asia Minor had been one of the earliest provinces of Christian missionary activity, intimately associated with the personality, activity, and writings of the Apostlc Paul. The cults and churches of the various Anatolian saints were famous not only among the Greek Christians but also among Latins, Georgians, Slavs, and others who visited them on the pilgrimage, and these cults were, of course, very important in the everyday life of the Byzantine inhabitants of Asia Minor. The list of the sanctuaries located in Anatolia is a long one, and some of these were especially popular.170 I n the westernmost regions the important cults included those of Tryphon at Nicaea, Polycarp at Smyrna, John the Theologian a t Ephesus, Nicholas at Myra, and the Archangel Michael at Chonae. O n the Black Sea coast were the shrines of Eugenius at Trebizond, Phocas at Sinope, and Hyacinthus at Amastris. The most famous of the martyrs’ sanctuaries in the hinterland included those of St. Theodore at Euchaita, the Forty Martyrs at Sebasteia, Mercurius and Mamas at Caesareia, and the various shrines of St. George i n the regions of Paphlagonia. Of equal importance were the churches of the fourth and fifth-century saints Basil of Caesareia, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Amphilochius of Iconium, all of whom had played such an important role in determining the evolution of the Eastern church. New sanctuaries continued to arise about the personalities of newer holy men, a fact that intensified the sanctity of Anatolia as a repository of T& &yia for the Byzantines. Ioannicius (d. 846) of Mt, Olympus in Bithynia, Michael Maleinus (d. 961) in Bithynia, Lazarus (d. 1053) on Mt. Galesium near Ephesus, Philaretus the Merciful (d. 792) of Paphlagonia, George (d. C. 802-807) of Amastris, Nicephorus (fl. tenth century) of Latmus in the district of Miletus, Paul (d. 955) in western Anatolia, Luke the Stylite (d, 979) in Chalcedon, Blasius (d. c. 911-912) of Amorium, the Forty-two Martyrs (d. 838) of Amorium, and many others were evidence of the intensity, if not the variety, of religious life in Anatolia during chis period. From these holy men came a considerable portion of the monastic, hierarchical, and missionary leaders. It was an Anatolian monk, St. Nicon tou Metanoeite, who in the tenth century left Asia Minor to convert the Muslims of newly reconquered Crete and the Slavs in the Mores.'-'? The great Athonite father and organizer St. Athanasius was born and educated in Trebizond. The eleventh-century professor of law a nd patriarch Xiphilenus was also born and partially 170 For a n extensive catalog of the cults of the Anatolian martyrs, Delehaye, Les origines du c d l e des marlyres (Brussels, 1933)~ pp. 145-180. 177 Lampros, “ ‘ 0 pros N~KCOVOS TOG ME-ravoEi-re,” N.E., 111 (1906), 151-152,

200--902.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

educated in Trebizond, while the illustrious twelfth-century archbishop of Athens Michael Acominatus and his brother the historian Nicetas Choniates were from Chonae. These men of Anatolia, who are so illustrative of the influence and importance of Anatolia as a spiritual reservoir of Byzantine society, are not unique. Less spectacular, perhaps, but of equal importance was the significance of these cults for the integration of the majority of the Anatolians into a generally homogeneous society and culture. These cults were absorbed by the Byzantine church, an institution that played such a critical role in unifying the empire. Though the church tended greatly t o regularize the practices attendant upon these cults in consonance with the Orthodoxy of Constantinople, many local strains were so firmly entrenched that they were simply accepted.l78 It has been repeatedly stated that the bishops and metropolitans, and the clergy in general, attempted to care for both the spiritual and physical needs of their flocks, and the local saints , in the eyes of the provincials, did much the same thing. I t was this close attachment of the provincial peoples to the saints which forced the church to accept many of the anomalous practices attendant upon their cults. T h e principal city or town of the saint was usually identified with that in which his bones rested, though of course there would be numerous churches and shrines (to say nothing of bones) associated with that particular saint elsewhere. Usually the saint was the possessor of a special town, and the inhabitants of that town thought ofthe saint almost as their co-citizen, and they naturally conceived of him as being partial to this city. In such a spirit an eleventh-century citizen of Trebizond addresses St. Eugenius as q$,6.rrohi, c p t A 6 . r r a ~ p t One . ~ ~ ~ of the most important functions of the saint was to protect his city from devastating invasions of various foreign peoples, which came to be such a salient feature of Byzantine life. The miracula of the various saints credit them with considerable success in this respect. St. Theodore is said to have routed the Arabs, who were besieging Euchaita i n 934, by appearing before the gates of the city on horseback.18o St. Eugenius performed the same task for the Trebizondines by interceding from abovc and turning away and smashing the bows and swords l V 8 This is a phenomenon that needs further study. T w o examples of this phenomenon, animal sacrifice and absorption of pagan deities into the Christian cult of saints, are among those that have been studied in some detail, F. Cumont, “L’archevkht de Ptdachtot et le sacrifice du foan,” Byzantion, VI (IgsI), 521-533. A. HadjinicolaouMorava, Saint-Mamas (Athens, I 953). See also M. Nilsson, Creek Popular Religion (New York, ig47), pp. 13-18, on the continuity of pagan practices, and on the link between the pagan cult of the heroes and the Christian cult of the saints. 17B Papadopoulos-Kerameus, 1st. Ira). in$., p. 51. AS Nov. IV, 53. The eleventh-century metropolitan of Euchaita, John MauropusLagarde, p. I 16, describes Theodore as “ ~ b v i v h e p o v &pXov-ra K a l T ~ vS~ p ~ x d p o u -rahqs K ~ ~ ~ O G XKOa i V-rrpom&rqv K a i Iqopov.” P. 132, he is ‘‘ b TOG X ~ I ~ W V ~ C ~ O haoir ~ci-rkPappCrpwv v p o ~ o h ~ ~ C ; ) This v . ” same phenomenon is to be observed in the miracula of the Muslim holy men of Seljuk Anatolia, as in the case of Djalal al-Din Rurni who saved Konya from the Mongols.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

of the godless barbarians.lsl George of Arnastris, while still living, went out of the walls of that city, gathered as many of the Christians in the neighborhood as he could, and then brought them to safety within while the Arabs were raiding the area.ls2St. Amphilochius is credited with turning away the Ismaelite army from the walls of Iconium.~83But these saints, not always content to remain on the defensive, often took the offensive, even leading the imperial armies to victory in foreign lands. The Archangel Michael js credited with helping Heraclius defeat the Persians,le4 and John Tzimisces as a result of the victory over the Russians in the Balkans, which he attributed to the intervention of St. Theodore, rebuilt the saint’s church in Euchaita.Ts6The saints also figure quite prominently, at least in their miracula, in the repatriation of Christians taken prisoner by invaders. Accordingly, Saints Theodore, Nicholas, and George answer the prayers of the local inhabitants of Caria, Paphlagonia, and Euchaita who have lost relatives to the Arabs, and then secure the return of these relatives from Crete and Syria.ls6 Some of the cults were particularly close to soldiers, those of the so-called military saints, Theodore, George, and Mercurius.l87 The saints are frequently alleged to have intervened with Byzantine administrative authorities, and especially with the tax collectors, on behalf of their co-citizens.lss The most numerous miracles and services, however, attributed to the saints are those that have to do with healing. In a period of history when knowledge of medicine had not progressed sufficiently, particularly in the more remote provinces that might be even less well equipped medically, it was to the local saint that the ill came, or sometimes they would travel long distances from their own villages and towns to the shrines of particular saints whose medical reputations were widespread. A steady column of lepers, epileptics, paralytics, and cripples marches. through the countless pages of the miracula on their way to the shrines in hope of cure. The provincials also appealed to the saints to still the dreadful forces of nature. If disease came upon their livestock, if la’ Papadopoulos-Kerameus,1st.

Tm.rlOi

Imp.imp., p. 76, Eugenius is “ T ~ KolvfiS S j u 6 v V6hEwg

K d nmpi60S 6ITdlTTa K a \ lTP6PaXE KUi ‘ppOUpi KCri

i u i v Iviptqqpa.”

TpOUT&TU KUi T&@l KOlVbV

Vasilievsky, T r u 4 , 111, 38-40. Bibliogrflpl&z Hflgbgra$hicn Groeca, 3d ed. (Brussels, 1957), I, 2 2 , j S 4Drexl and Pertz, I, 125, 185 Zonaras, 111, 534. A. Sigalas, ‘‘ ‘H 6iau~~ufi TOG h b TOG xpucri-rr~owrrapaSE6op6vwv 8awclrjrrwv 1-06 ‘AYlQu @ E o ~ ~ p o u ,E.E.B.I., ” I (rg24), 314-315. AS Nov. IV, 78. G. Anrich, H&‘S Ni.blflos. Der hi& Nikolaos in der grzecliischetz Kirche (Leipzig-Berlin, 1913), I, I 711733 175-r81,189-195,286. J. B.Aufhauser,MiraculaS. Georgii (Lcipzig, 1g13),pp. r3-18. Delehaye, Les &vdes grecques des snints inilitaires (Paris, 1909). S. Binon, Doclcments grecs inidi:dilselntifS ri S. Mercure de (Louvain, 1937). In one of the miracula of St. Theodore Of Euchait% a soldier of the region previous to a military expedition Went into the sanctuary and prayed to St. Theodore t o protect him, After the campaign the soldier and as an offering of thanks presented his sword to the saint. Sigalas, “AIaQKEufi” p. 328. 1u8 Vasihvsky, Trudy, III, 37, 43-47.

drought or floods destroyed the crops, one invoked the saints with special prayers and invocations.1eg The subject of religious conversion does appear in the hagiographical texts, though the accounts are not often as precise as onc would desire. St. Nicholas, at least accordillg to his miracula, was known as far afield as Muslim Egypt and Syria.lD0St. George -ipo.rraioirxos is credited with the conversion oC Muslims in Syria.lD1St. George of Amastris was responsible for the conversion to Christianity of the pagan Russ who, while raiding Amastris, broke into his sanctuary in order to steal the rich treasures they believed to be buried under his casket.lg2 Indeed, one of the tenthcentury Anatolian saints St. Constantine was himself a converted Jew.lDB St. Lazarus converted a village of heretics, probably Paulicians, i n the vicinity of Philetis in Caria,lg4 and the same hagiographer describes the conversion of a Saracen in Ephesus. The references to conversion are scattered and few in number, but there is no reason to doubt that the Church, through the shrines and sanctuaries, exerted a considerable proselytizing and missioning force upon the non-Christians and heretics of Anatolia. This role of the saints and their shrines as vital integrating forces in society is more forcefully illustrated by the activities of St. Nicon in Crete and Sparta and by the mass program of conversion which John of Ephesus implemented in the sixth century.105 The shrines of the saints, as indeed the whole of the ecclesiastical institution, were intimately involved in the economic life of the Anatolians. The saints and their churches were the sponsors of the local fairs (some of which were of an international character) or panegyreis held on the feast days of the saints. Such were the panegyreis of St. John at Ephesus,lfl6

1 8 0 An especially spectacular performance in this respect was that attributed to St. Eugenius of Trebizond. On one occasion when Trebizond had had a particularly severe winter with violent storms on the sea accompanied by heavy snows, the city was without sufficient grain supplies. As the winter storms made the seas too dangerous for the grain ships, the Trebizondines were threatened with starvation. St. Eugenius, however, intervened and calmed the seas so that the ships were able to bring grain to the starving city (Papadopoulos-Keramcu~,Ist, trafi. imp.,pp, 49-50). St. Nicholas intervened to procure grain for the starving inhabitants of Myra (Anrich, Hngios Nikolaos, pp. 132-133). l o o Anrich, Hagias Nikolaos, pp. 408-409,415. His hagiographer reports the story of one Syrian mule merchant who wore a golden likeness of the saint on his chest as a result OF having been saved by St. Nicholas whcn he was lost on ajourney to India. In another case a Muslim fisherman from Egypt, threatened by storms while at sea, promised to become Christian if St. Nicholas would save him. As a result of the saint’s intervention, the fisherman and his small boat entered the harbor of Attaleia safely, and he became a Christian. Ibid., p. 415. l o 2Vasilievsky, Trudy, 111, 65-69. AS NOV. 1V, 629-630. LO4 Ibid,, 111, 512, 54.3, 580, 1 0 5 Lampros, “Bio5 NIKWVOS,” pp. 150-151, 100-202. John of Ephesus, The Third Part g t h e Ecclesiastical History of Johrt cf Ephesus, trans. R. Payne Smith (Oxford, 1860), pnssini (hereafter cited as John of Ephesus-Payne Smith). lSRTheophanes,I, 4.69. On the ancient Greek panegyreis and their survivd as a religioeconomic institution in modern times see Nilsson, Greek Pojmlar Religion, pp. ~ ? - I o I . For a good description of a pagan, religious-commcrcial panegyris in Comana durlng the ancient period, Strabo, XII, iii. 36.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

St. Eugenius at Trebizond,lo7 St. Phocas at Sinope,l** St. Theodore at Euchaita,le* St. George throughout the lands of Paphlagonia,200and Michael at Chonae.201 These fairs were important for the church of the particular saint, a nd for the town and rural environs as well, by virtue of the economic activity and economic prosperity that they brought. These panegyreis attracted great numbers of people, both from the neighborhood and from far away. T h e Trebizondine fairs were international and attracted traders and goods from the whole of the Islamic and Indic worlds. Even farther inland, at such a town as Euchaita, John Mauropus remarks that a great host of people came to the celebration.202H e states that it was the great fame of the shrine of St. Theodore and the panegyris that had made it into a great, prosperous, and populous full of stoas and marketplaces.BO4 The pious from all classes of society made lavish gifts to the various saints in return for the services that the saints performed. The offering of the emperor John Tzimisces has already been mentioned, I n the eleventh century John Orphanotrophus was cured of a serious illness by St. Nicholas, so he lavished gifts on the church and built a wall around the city.20EThe middle classes were equally attached to the cults of the saints. Sailors and maritime merchants pIedged wheat and other items from their cargoes to saints Lazarus, Nicholas, and Phocas if they would guard them during their dangerous sea voyages and enable them to reap financial

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

profits from their commerce.20oMerchants and craftsmen are constantly streaming through the shrines of these Anatolian saints,207 as are also soldiers, government officials and, of course, the poor farmers and herdsmen.no8 The merchants and wealthy classes donated generously to the saints (one well-to-do family in Myra gave I O O gold pieces annually to St. Nicholas) ;20s the common folk gave more modestly. In the nziracula of St. Theodore a soldier presents his sword, a farmer gives an ox, and a poor woman is saving a chicken for the saint.210Gifts of such a nature were brought to the saint not only by the inhabitants of his town but very often by Christians living in another part of the empire.211 The saints’ shrines, and indeed the church as an institution, were cIosely connected with the economic life of the provinces, whether as the possessors of large landed estates and serfs, or as,the recipients of considerable wealth i n cash and kind, or as the sponsors of the large panegyreis.212T h e presence in a town of a saint’s shrine, of the bishop and his staff, were of great significance for any settled area. One must also keep in mind that from the seventh century until the foundation of the coenobitic institutions of Mt. Athos, Asia Minor was also the basic monastic province of the empire, the monastic foundations and traditions of Anatolia going back to St. Basil of Caesaieia and his zoo AS Nov. 111, 531-533, a merchant promises one-half of his cargo to St. Lazarus. Anrich, Hagios Nikolaos, pp. 130-131, 167-170, 415. Van de Vorst, “Saint Phocas,” p. 289, “pEpi6a UOI ptau ol ~cnrrihhdpavoi -riOkaui.’’ 2 0 ’ Sigalas, “AIaomufi,” pp. 312, 319, at the shrine of St, Theodore. AS Nov. 111, 532-533, 537. Van d e Vorst, “Saint Phocas,” p. 289. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, Zst. trap. imp., p. 58, at the shrine of St. Eugenius. One rather humorous anecdote from the miracula of St. George is quite illustrative of the incidental and anecdotal nature of these sources. There was a famous church of St. George in Paphlagonia known as Phatrynon. A group of young boys was playing next to the church and during the course of the games one boy contiilually lost, Finally he appealed to St. George promising to give him a cake (acpoyy*ov) if the saint should help him to win. After his luck changed, the boy did not forget his vow; he promptly marched off to his mother, obtained the cake, and placed it in the church as his offering to St. George. Soon afterward four merchants passing through the city came to the church to pray. Spotting the fragrant cake, they remarked that inasmuch as St. George could not eat it, they would eat it and give the saint 0ulJ.Idrpcrra.So they consumed the cake but then found themselves unable to get out of the church. They thus became somewhat morc generous and each gave one miliaresium to the saint, but to no avail. They raised the offering to one nomisma and finally to four nomismata beforc the church doors opened. UOU, Ka\ O n departing they remarked, ‘‘TQ & ~ I ErahpyIE K V I T ~ nmheiS T& crpoy~drr& f i p ~ I?IK~ uoi? &hho o k & ( Y O ~ & ~ O ~Aufhauser, EV.” Miruculu S, Georgii, pp. 103-107. The anccdote is of interest in showing the presence of itinerant merchants, of the offerings made even by children and, finally, that the saints were shrewd businessmen. Anrich, Hagios Nikoloas, p. 286. 210 Sigalas, “AI~~oxEu~~,” pp. 328, 333, 317. 211 T h e inhabitants of Gangra In Paphlagonia sent one pound of gold as an offering, Kapnopopia, to the church of the Archangel Michael in Chonae. Aufhauser, 121iracttlfl S, Georgii, pp. 108-113. St. George is not a t all jealous, in this particular incident, that his followers are making the gift to the patron saint of a different area. In fact, he intercedes to save both the gold and its purveyor from robbers so that they may reach Chonae safely! 21z For the church as a legal custodian of the property of others, there is the case of the church of St. Theodore of Euchaita which served as a guardian of the dowry of il recently deceased woman. Sigalas, “Aiamwfi,” pp, 322-333.

...

Papadopoulos-Kerameus, 1st. trap. imp., pp. 57-58. Van der Vorst, “Saint Phocas,” p. 289. N. Oikonomides, ‘‘ “Aytos 00~6s 6 XIVOT~E~S,” pp. 184-219; “Kavhv ’Iwu$-pTOG ‘Ypvoyp&~ouE ~ S “Ayiov @,w~dvT ~ Z i v o d a , ” A.D., XVIII (1g53), 218-240. John Mauropus-Lagarde, pp. I 34, 207-208. Aufhauser, Mirncula S. Georgii, p. 18. zol Lampros, Mtxaj’h ’AKopivbl7ou TOG Xovidrrou T& uo3(6pma(Athens, 1879), I, 56 (hereafter cited as Michael Acominatus-Lampros), iK .rrav-rbs EOvou5.” John Mauropus-Lagarde, p. I 3,1, ‘‘ a03 Ibid., p. 132, , Bpqpfas aPdrrou vohu&vOpwnov -rr6A1w.” zo4 He describes the brilliance of the celebration when the local people and officials have come together to chant, burn incense, pray, and, very important, to bring gifts to the saint. John Mauropus-Lagarde, pp. ,I3+ 207. Delehaye, “Euchaita et S. Thkodore,” p, 130. An industry that catered to pilgrlms as well as to the religious heads of the local population was the manufacture of black incense and gomphytis in the coastal towns of Macri and Myra. Daniel, P.P.T.S., IV, 6-7; “Makri and all the country as far as Myra produce black incense and gomphytis. It exudes from the tree in a viscous state, and is collected with a sharp-edged piece of iron. The treeiscalled zyghia and resembles thealder. Another shrub, resembling the aspen, i s called raka-storax. A huge worm, of the large caterpillar species, bores through the wood beneath the bark, and the worm-dust, which comes away from the shrub like wheat bran, falls to the ground, as a gum similar to that from the cherry-tree. This is gathered and mixed with produce of the first tree, and the whole is then boiled in a copper vessel. Thus it is that they produce the gomphytis incense, which is sold to the merchants in leather bottles.” Strabo, XII, 7.3., says that this same product was used by Anatolians in the worship of pagan Gods! It was still an important product o f the district of Attaleia in the eighteenth century, P. Lucas, Voyage du Sieur Paul Lrtcas failpar ordre du roi dam la Grdce, E’Asie Mineure, la Macidoine el 1’ Afigue (Amsterdam, 1714), 1, 244. 206 Cedrenus, XI, 512. I’8

.. .

4.1

EVE OF THE TURICISH CONQUEST

institution of a monastery a t Annesoi. The regions of Chalcedon, Mt. Auxentius, as well as the whole of the Opsicion theme, were important monastic centers. Mt. Olympus, Prusa, Nicaea, and the entire Propontid coast were literally strewn with these establishments. In thc south, Mt. Galesium, near Ephesus, and Latmus, i n the vicinity of Miletus, were the scenes ofvigorous monastic life. I n the district of Iconium, on the present day Kara Da& monastic communities thrived down to the Seljuk invasions. 213 T h e bishopric of Hagios Procopius (Urgiip) was the centcr of the famous troglodyte monasteries, while at Trebizond and the environs were located the famous monasteries of St. Eugenius, Vazelon, and Sumela. Many of these monasteries had existed for centuries when the Seljuks first arrived in Anatolia, while many were founded from the ninth through the eleventh century, At the moment of the Turkish invasions, the monasteries were thriving.214 Ethizograjlly

Perhaps the most interesting, and certainly the most perplexing problems facing the historian of Byzantine Anatolia are those that have to do with the languages, religions, and ethnic groups of the peninsula at various times. There has been considerable discussion, debate, and disagreement on all three of these items in regard to the inhabitants of Byzantine Asia Minor in the eleventh century. Some scholars have maintained that the Byzantine population of Anatolia was only lightly and superficially Hellenized and was, in fact, indifferent to the language, church, and government of Constantinople.216 Others have asserted that the population of the peninsula in the eleventh century was the same which had inhabited Anatolia since the days of the Hetites.210But from the point of view of language and religion, the principal discernible elements i n the culture of eleventh-century Anatolia, there is little that would lend weight to these suppositions. The dominant language of western, central, and eastern Anatolia to the confines of Cappadocia was Greek, and the dominant religion was that of the Greek or Byzantine church. In the regions of Anatolia east of Cappadocia this Greek element, though Present, was very weak in comparison with the non-Greek elements. Anatolia, however, had not always possessed this predominantlv Greek

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

character. The actual process by which Greek language and Greek Christianity had come to predominate was a long one, and one that has not been documented in siificient detail. T h e process of Hellenization in terms oflanguage and culture had begun centuries before thc pre-Christian era and continued long afterward. The linguistic situation or pre-Greek Anatolia, or rather of Anatolia in the first millenium of the pre-Christian era, has been compared to that of the Caucasus i n later times as “the meeting place of a host of unrelated languages.” 3l7 1t had hosted Urartians, Hetites, Phrygians, Lydians, Lycians, Carians, Cappadocians, Isaurians, Armenians, Kurds, Greeks, Jews, Cimmerians, and Persians, to name only the bettcr known ethnic groups. These peoples brought their own languages, for most of which there are extant remains, which in some cases are suficient to permit classification of the languages.218The majority of the people in western Anatolia seen1 to havc come from Europe and thc Aegean isles, whereas those in eastern Anatolia apparently came from both Europe and Asia. Of all thc languages and cultures of pre-Christian Anatolia, it was * Greek that showed itself to be the most dynamic. Greek colonies came to be established on the coasts of western and southern Asia Minor as early as the Mycenaean period, seemingly for commercial purposes.21D By 800 B.C. thc Aeolisns, Ionians, and Dorians had founded colonies along the western coast in considerable number, and these in turn colonized the shores of thc Black Sea, This second wave of settlement was fateful not only for the coastal regions but in the long run for the hinterland of Asia Minor as well, for it was the basis of a vast process of Hellenization which was to continue as late as Byzantine times. It is interesting that the progress of Hellenization at this early stage in a sense depended less on the numbers of settlers than upon the consequences of the economic and cultural superiority that these emigrants developed in Anatolia. Their influence i n classical times was centered on the coastal arca, for the a17 A. H. Saycc, “Languages of Asia Minor,” Atintalian Slirdies Presented to Sir William Milcllell Ramsay (London, I g23), p. 396. a18 A. Goetze, Kultrrrgesc/ric/ite des alkw Orients. Kleitiasietl, 2d ed. (Munich, 1957), pp, 180-183,193-194, ao[-204, 202-209. D. C. Swanson, “A Select Bibliography of the Anatolian Languages,” Bulletir~of the New York Public L i b r a y (May-June, 1948),3-26. D. Masson, “8pigFphie Asianique,” Orientalin, nov. ser. XXIII (1954)~ 439-442. J. Friederich, Kleiriaszattsclit S’rachdedtnalcr (Berlin, rg3z)). M. B. Sakellariou, La 7nzgrntton grecgrie eii Ionic (Athens, 1958), pp. 414-437.More recently Ph.J, Howink ten Cate, The Liiwian Population Groups ofLycin and Cilicia Aspera d u h g the Helltitistic Period (Leidcn, 1961). G. Neumann, Uiiteisuchiirzgeti zum Weiterleben Iielhitischetr zrnd lrlwisclreri Spracligtltes it1 liellcnistischer wid roniischer Zed (Wiesbaden, 1961).L. Robert, “Inscriptions inCdites en langue carienne,” Nelletiictr, V I I I (1950), 1-38, Some rather humorous incidents have occurred in the search for the remnants of these languages in modern times. One philologist claimed to have found Hetite spoken in an Anatolian village in the twentieth century. He announced this sensational discovery and promised a forthconling grammar of modern Hetite. But PriederiLh, “Angebliche-moderne Reste alte Kleinasiatischer Sprachen,” Z.D.M.G., LXXXVIII (1934)~ pointed out that the language in question was Circassian and spoken by Circassians who had Bed the Russian conquest of the Caucasus. B 1 O Goetze, Kultu,geschic/ite dds allen orients, pp. 182-183.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

geographical nature of Anatolia combined with the Persian domination of the plateau to limit Hellenization to the maritime regions.2a0 The penetration of Greek cultural influence inland continued at a slow rate, nevertheless, in the period from the sixth to the fourth century of the pre-Christian era. The Lydians had been particularly receptive to this culture, as were the fourth-century dynasts of Caria and Lycia, the inhabitants of the Cilician plain and of the regions of Paphlagonia.221 After the conquests of Alexander the Great and the establishment of the Epigonoi, the tempo of Hellenization greatly accelerated and henceforth Hellenism acquired the prestige of political domination and empire. The Hellenistic monarchs pushed the process through the foundation of Greek cities, while the more ambitious of the local population found their desires for advancement a stimulus to learn Greek. The indigenous urban settlements and villages of Anatolia in many places coalesced, on their own initiative, to form cities in the Greek manner. The Attalids were active in promoting Greek cities in western Asia Minor; the local kings of Hellenistic Anatolia adopted Greek as their official language and sought to imitate other cultural forms.222 I t was in the towns that Hellenization made its great progress, the process often being synonymous with urbanization. I n contrast, the rural areas were far less affected and retained more of the pre-Greek culture, as reflected in languages and religious practices.22s Urbanization continued under the Romans, so that i n a sense Rome maintained the traditions of Hellenization in the peninsula.224The geographer Strabo, himself an inhabitant of one of these Hellenized Anatolian towns (Amaseia) , comments on Hellenization by remarking that Lydian was no longer spoken in Lydia (though i t survived for a while among the isolated Cibyratae), and he implies that Carian was in the process of dying,225the language having acquired large numbers of Greek words.22@ The degree to which Hellenism had penetrated in the towns and cities of large portions of Anatolia is reflected in the 2ao Ibid.,pp. 210-21 I . By the late sixth century o f the pre-Christian era, Anatolia, the meeting ground of East and West, was subject to two rival processes, Ncllenization and, Iranization. 221 Ibid., p. 209. Jones, The Greek City, pp, 1-2,27-29. 2 2 2 S. K. Eddy, T h e King is Bead (Lincoln, Feb., 1961), pp. 163-182. Jones, The Greek City,pp. 40-50. Ibid., pp. 51-67. 236 Strabo. XIII. 4. 17, “-rh-rapoi 6$ yhhrrais ~ ~ G V 01 T O K$vp&at, -rij n1001kfl,Tq .%‘dPWV, Ta ‘EAAqvh, -rq AuSGV.” Thus Greek had also penetrated AvSGv S i ob6’ lxvos these more isolated areas. Strabo also remarks, “ T ~ S(yhb-5) BOT~V PV A u S ~ ~ . ”On the Hellenization of Lydian names and religion consult, Robert, Noms indigt‘nes duns 1’Asie Mineure grecoromaine (Paris, 1963); L. Zgusta, AnatoEische Personennamen (Prague, I 963) ; A. Laumonier, Les cultes indiglnes en Carie (Paris, 1ar;dl. ,. 210 Strabo, XIV. 9 . 28, uses the verb ~api&iv in a fashion parallel to O O ~ O I K ~ [ E I V , showing t h a t though the Carians spoke a n impure Greck, they spoke it extensively. On Carian, Robert, Hellenica, pp. 1-38. z

EVE O F THE TURKISH CONQUEST

comparatively large numbers of men of letters who appeared there i n But the literary aspect of Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine Hellenic culture was largely an urban phenomenon, and if its presence does show the degree to which many of the cities and towns had been Hellenized, it does not reflect at all on the rural areas, Even though Greek was the official as well as the literary language, it had not yet conquered the countryside. The slower rate of Hellenization of rural Asia Minor is reflected i n the survival of a number of the “Anatolian” languages as late as the sixth century of the Christian era, although even here Greek cultural influence of a type is to be seen in the rural areas and in their languages.z26 A study of thefortleben of these Anatolian tongues (one is not concerned here with Armenian, Georgian, Kurdish) demonstrates the losing nature of the battle they fought against the progress of Greek. The nature of the sources and the archaistic use of ethnic epithets often make it dificult to ascertain whether a linguistic or ethnic term is being used purely geographically rather than culturally. Consequently, the interpretation of what are apparently geographical terms as denoting ethnic groups has been more harmful than helpful. One of the better known cases of linguistic continuity is that of the language spoken by the Isaurians, who played such an important part in the fifth-century history of Byzantium, and whose language seems still to have been spoken as late as the sixth century.229There is evidence that Cappadocian was still known and spoken in the fourth century; Gothic 221 In Hellenistic times Perge in Pamphylia was associated with the mathematician Apollonius, Soli in Side with the phlosophcr Chrysippus and the poet Aratus. Mollus produced the grammarians Crates and Zenodotus. Tarsus contributed the poets Dioscurides and Dionysidcs and the town became one of the chief centers of philosophy, rivaled only by Alexandria. Greek poets, rhetoricians, historians, grammarians, biographers, doctors of note in thc Hellenistic and Roman periods arose in such Hellenized cities as Sardes, Alabanda, Tralles, Mylasa, Nyssa, Amaseia, Nicaea, Laodiceia, Pergamum, Nicomdeia, Anazarba, Prusa, Samosata, Caesareia, Aphrodisias, Cotyaeum, Laranda, Tyana. For this summary, Jones, 2% Greek City,pp. 280-283. 2 2 8 It has been customary to speak of these rural areas as completcly unaffected by the penetration of Hellenism, as for instance Jones, The Greek Cip, p. 288. But it is not only through the linguistic medium that a group or society is influenced. Certainly linguistic change is the most striking evidence of cultural change, but the other facets of human society (law, religion, art, etc.) can be receptive to outside influence independently of linguistic considerations. I t is also highly probable that in many areas where native tongues survived, the inhabitants were bilingual (Strabo, XIII. 4. 17). For modern examples one may cite certain Greek villages that speak both Greek and Arvanitika, but in which the cultural consciousness is exclusively Greek. Also there is the example of certain Anatolian towns and villages in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries which spoke Greek and Turkish. For other examples of Anatolian bilingualism in late ancient and early Byzantine times, C. Holl, “Das Fortleben der Volkssprachen in Kleinasien im nachchristlicher Zeit,” Ilcrmes, X L I I I (1908), 243-244, For an example of thc spread of Greek, Theodoretus, P.C., LXXXII, 1488D, “ 6 S& ~g ‘EAA&& X P T ~ ~ ~ cpwvfi. E V ~ SKih15 yhp ~b ykos hT3yXavEv bv.” a20 On what follows, Iloll, “Das Fortleben dcr Volkssprachen,” pp. 248-254. For the economic specialization of the Isaurians, C. Mango, “Isaurian Builders,” PO&C/t70Rioll. Fedsch$t Franz Dolger zit 75. CeOurtstag (Hcidelberg, 1966)~pp. 358-365.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

i n the fourth century; and Phrygian at least into the third ~entury.2~0 But these languages were for the most part dead or moribund in the sixth century of the Christian era.281Of these languages spoken in Anatolia, Neo-Phrygian has received the greatest amount of scholarly attention because of the survival of the Neo-Phrygian inscriptions. Those who have proposed a more lively continuity of these hnatolian languages i n western Asia Minor during the Byzantine period have concentrated on the case of Neo-Phrygian. The principal literary texts that have been brought to bear on the question are the ecclesiastical histories of Socratcs and Sozomenus, the contents of which refer to eveiits in the fifth century. Holl (and those who have followed him) has concluded as a result of two passages in these texts t ha t Phrygian was a spoken and understood language as late as the fifth century.232Let us look then at these two texts on which so many scholars have relied. Socrates mentions that the bishop of the Goths in Asia Minor, a certain Selinus, was the son of a mixed marriage, He was a Goth f r o m his father a n d a Phrygian through his mother. because of this he t a u g h t in both languages, readily, in the c h u r ~ h . 2 3 ~

And

This passage has been interpreted as meaning that Selinus addressed his congregation in both Gothic and Phrygian. But the real question is the meaning of dr~cpo-rkpa~s Tais ~ I C L ~ ~ K T O “in I S , both languages.” Does this mean that he really spoke both Gothic and Phrygian? Or, is the word Phrygian in the text simply a reference to the fact that his mother was from the district of Phrygia ? Here again one is faced with an archaistic use of a 230 Holl, “Das Fortleben der Volltssprachen,” p. 241, mentions Mysian and Lycaonian as possible languages in this period. But thcse two terms seem to be geographical rather than linguistic. I-Iarnack, D i e Mission iind Azis6reitutzg des Cht istenturns, 4 th ed. (Leipzig, Igq.), 11, 764, n. 4, maintains that Lycaonian was actually Phrygian. Jones, T h e Greek CiQ, p. 366, n. 43, rejects Mysian as a language. Strabo, XII. 8. 3, indicates that already by Roman times people were not sure as to what Mysian was, “pap-rupEiv 6k K a l T ~ V SI~AEKTOV ~ I ~ O A ~ ~yap I O V- r r q Ebai K a i pi@qdrylov.” This indicates, in contrast to 13011, that Mysian was no longer a spokcn language. See also J. G. C. Anderson, “Exploration in Galatia Cis Halym,” J.H.S., XIX (1899), 313-316. 231 11011, “Das Fortlebcn der Volkssprachen,” pp. 243-244, drawing upon an incident in the Iife of St. Martha, AS Mai V, 418-419, attempts to show that “Lycaonian” was a vital language in the sixth century. This incident has to do with the cure o f a man who was speechless. Upon being cured h e spoke in hisown tongue, ‘%TE T?J Big 8iaAiK.rc; 60@hoyGv T ~ V8Ebv &bay” But in effect this does not prove the vitality of “Lycaonian” (whatever tongue this may have been). The remainder of the story indicates just the opposite. The healed man felt compelled to relate the wonder to others. But as he spoke no Greek, “ofi yap ~~TT~UTCXTO T+ ‘EAhjvwv yh&mav,” he obtained the services of a bilingual interpreter who knew Grcekinaddition to “Lycaonian,” “8lqyEiTo T T E i~~~d t v 7 0 v TOrh-WV, &T6POu UUVbVTO5 a h + y l V d U K O V T O S T f i V ‘EAA~vIK~~v p V j V K a i 6p~r(VEiiOVTOS ?a m p l ahoc.” I n his desire to communicate, the healed Lycaonian was drawn into a society where the customary linguistic medium was Greek. The translator, a bilingual, symbolizes the process by which Greek was spreading. 232 Holl, “Das Fortleben dcr Volkssprachen,” pp. 247-248. W. M. Caldcr, M.A.M.A., VII, xv, xxxii. Priederich, “Phrygia,” P.W., pp. 868-869. a33 Socrates, P. G., LXVII, 648, “ . . &hr(vEs 6 TGV r o r 0 i j v ~ T ~ U K O V O &t)p ~, idprlc-rov iixwv 76 yivos. rheas u h fiv b ~ m p 6 s .Opric 6 i K U T ~ Hqidpa. K a i 61& TOGTO 6pToTiPaIS Tais 8lah6KTOlS h o l ~ w cKa-rh ; ~ f i vkKhquiav Bui8aoxe.”

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

term that refers to nothing more than a geographical district. The second language to which he refers is probably Greek. That this is so, and that the passage has nothing to do with the Phrygian language, emerges from the parallel text in Sozomenus which is much more explicit as to what this second language of Selinus was. Sozomenus narrates that Selinus was able to deliver sermons “not only in their national language [Gothic] ,but also in that of the Greeks.” 234 Both texts indicate the following. The Goths, w h o settled in Phrygia i n the fourth century, still preserved their national tongue i n the fifth, and so Selinas their bishop often addressed them in Gothic. But, as his mother was a non-Goth, a n inhabitant of the district of Phrygia, he could also speak Greek, the inhabitants of Phrygia having been Hellenized i n their speech. Thus, he used both languages, Greek and Gothic. This passage, then, does not prove the vigorous survival of Phrygian into the fifth century. Rather it shows the process of Hellenization at work among the Goths through intermarriage and religion.235 There is also the question of the body of Neo-Phrygian inscriptions. These are the latest texts o f the Anatolian languages (third century of Christian era), which have survived. As of 1956 the known and published number of such inscriptions was an even I O O , ~and ~ ~ practically all these have been dated to the third ~ e n t u r y . 2What ~ ~ is the significance of this material ? Would i t justify the proposition that Neo-Phrygian underwent a renaissance and that it was the living language of the people in a limitcd area of Anatolia? The majority of these inscriptions contain the epitaphs and names in Greek, with a curse on the would-be violators of the tomb written in Phrygian, Though a very few of the epitaphs are in Phrygian, they are usually in Greek, and in both cases the Greek alphabet of the period is employed. The curses themselves seem to be rigidly formulated with little variation.238 Thus Neo-Phrygian survives in these third-century 234 Sozomenus, 1’. G., LXVII, 1468, “ K d h i &KKhTlUhs I K W @ 6I8&UKEIv, Oir p6vov Ka-r&+p TUTPIOV a h i j v rpwvfiv, &?Ahyhp K a i T ~ V‘Ehh~vwv.” 236 Their descendants were still known as ror0oypaiKor (and not as Gotho-phrygians) in the eighth century, and the geographical term is mentioned in the late eighth century; Theophancs, I, 385. “Acta Graeca SS. Davidis, Syniconis et Georgii,” A.B., XVIII (18gg), 256. Charanis, “On the Ethnic Composition of Byzantine Asia Minor in the Thirteenth Ccntury,” npbacpopa E ~ SZdh’iTwVU 17. KuprmIGqv (ThessaloIlike, 1 9 5 3 )141 ~ (hereafter cited as Charanis, “Ethnic Composition,”). Aniantos, “ro-r0oypaiKolro-reoypmla,” ‘Ehhqvi~tr, V (1g32), 256. AL an earlier period the Celts had been similarly I-Iellenized and were called rahhoypaiKo1. Galatia was also called rahhoypaiala Strabo, XII. 5 . I . Appian, Mithradates, I 14,. Diodorus Siculus, V. 32. 5. Ammianus Marcellinus, XXII. 9. 5. On the absorption and Hellenization of the Celtic nobility in the early Christian era Bosch, “Die ICelten in Ankara,” Jnhr6tlclr Jir kkinnsinlischer2 Forschurig, I1 (1g52), 283-291. See also the remarks of L. Mitteis, Reichsrccht ~ i Volksrecht d in den ostliclien Prouitzzen des rornischen Kniscrreichs (Hildesheim, 1963), pp. z Z - Z ~ . On the use of rpaida to designate the Byzantine Empire see the interesting studyof P.Speck,“TPAl KIA und ’APMENIA. Das Tatigskcit cines nicht identifizierten Strategcn irn friihen 9. Jahrhunder,” J.O.B.G., XVI (196?), 71-90. 2 3 a Calder, At.A.M.A., p. xxix. a a 7 Ibid., p. ix, one is actually dated to the year 259 A.D. Calder attributes R few of the inscriptions to the end of the second century. a 3 8 Priederich, “Phrygia,” p. 870.

EVE O F THE TURKISH CONQUEST

monuments for the most part in fixed ritualistic, formulaic curses. One is not convinced, as a result, that Phrygian existed as a vital living language among the people. W. M. Calder, the foremost student of these inscriptions, has a t one point stated that these inscriptions “represent an artificial revival of the epigraphical use of the Phrygian language by the Tekmoreian Society.” The powerful influence of Greek is evident i n these inscriptions. Aside from the alphabet, there is the fact that most of the epitaphs are in Greek, as are most of the names. Though the number of these Neo-Phrygian inscriptions is in itself considerable (xoo), one should keep in mind the fact that in eastern Phrygia alone there were some 1,076 inscriptions found. Of these, 18 are i n Latin, 38 in Neo-Phrygian (or Greek and Phrygian), and 1,000in Greek.240Certainly some knowledge of Neo-Phrygian existed in the mid-third century. But there is some evidence for the assertion that it was artifically revived and that Greek probably was, already in the third century, decisively victorious in Phrygia.241 One may assume that by the sixth century the Greek language had triumphed over the various indigenous tongues of western and central Anatolia (to the regions of Cappadocia) .242 At least references to these early languages are, so far as it has been possible to ascertain, lacking in thc sources. It is true, however, that in the easternmost parts of Anatolia, Armenian, Syriac, Kurdish, Georgian, Arabic, and possibly Lazic not only survived but were spoken by the overwhelming majority. Political factors in the Byzantine period contributed to the victory of the empire’s language. In contrast to the Balkan peninsula, which from the sixth century and even earlier, received large numbers of migrations and settlements, Asia Minor was shielded from such large ethnic movements of peoples who might have changed the linguistic pattern, until the migrations of the Turks in the eleventh century.B43Perhaps this was partially Calder, “Corpus inscriptionurn neo-phrygiarum, 111,” J.H.S., XLVI (1gz6), 12. See also his “Philadelpheia and Montanism,” B.J.R.L., VII ( x g q ) , 352. p 4 0 Calder, B .J.R.L., VII, xxx. 241 Calder suggests that ;he Phrygians were bilingual in the third century, “Corpus inscriptionuin neo-phrygiarum, I,” J.H.S., XXXI (191I), I 63. He also supposes that the Phrygians ofGalatia had been completely Hellenized by the third century, for no Phrygian inscriptions have been found in Galatia. In M.A.M.A., VII, xiv, and in Anatolian Studies Presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay, p. 76, n. 4, he speaks of a fourth-century inscription from Phrygia, in Greek, which mentions the word Phrygia. R e postulates that this usage is indicative of the fact that the inhabitants of the area still felt themselves to be Phrygian. But the usage is more likely geographical, with perhaps no linguistic connotation, much in the same manner in which Socrates used the term Opbk. This archaistic geographical nomenclature was used throughout Byzantine history. Constantine Porphyrogenitus’ use of these terms led Rambaud, L’empire grec au dL4me sidcle (Paris, 1870), pp. 152-253, to conclude that all these linguistic groups existed to the end of the empire. Strabo, XII. 8. z I , in his day already bore witness to the process in which the Phrygians were disappearing as an ethnic group, for he mentions the disappearance of a number of Phrygian tribal divisions. 243 Jones, The Greek Cib, p. 294, and Taeschner, “Anadolu,” EIz, who have studied this problem from the Hellenic and Turkish sides, share the view that Anatolia was effectively Hellenized, a 4 3 Rambaud, L’empire grec, pp. 244-245. On the Laz, A. Bryer. “Some Notes on the Laz and Tzan.” B.K., XXI-XXII ( 1 9 6 6 ) ~174-195. a30

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

due to the fact that there was in existence a relatively strong and organized state to the east, first the Sassanid monarchy and later the caliphate, SO that Anatolia had something of a buffer against the peoples of central Asia. Though there were no large migrations of new peoples into Anatolia from the East, the Byzantine emperors over the centuries introduced non-Greek, as well as Greek, populations into their Anatolian provinces on numerous 0ccasions.~44The reasons for this transplanting of peoples were closely linked to state policy. In some cases the foreigners brought to Anatolia had been causing trouble for the empire in other provinces. Hence they were removed from their familiar social and ethnic environment, placed in a strange one, and subjected to Hellenization (often indirectly) and to Christianization (or i n the case of heretics, to Orthodoxy). On other occasions the transferred populations were brought for military purposes, or were Christians fleeing the conquests of the Arabs. I n this way the Goths were settled in Phrygia in the fourth century, thc Greek Cypriots were moved to Cyzicus by Justinian 11,245 and t h e Mardaites were sent to Attaleia.Z40 Similarly, odd groups of Armenian soldiers were settled in various parts of Asia Minor. Constantine V settled one group on the eastern borders,247 seventh-century Pergamum possibly had a n Armenian but the cmperor Philippicus (71 1-713) expelled a considerable number of Armenians from Byzantine Anatolia, causing them to settle i n Melitene and Fourth Armenia.249 The settlements of Armenians were most numerous in the easternmost regions of Byzantine Anatolia, as in the regions of Coloneia and Neocaesareia, where by the latter part of the seventh century they must have existed in considerable numbers.260 Probably there also was settled a 244 For the general practice of transplanting populations, Charanis, “The Transfer of Population as a Policy in the Byzantine Empire,” Comparative Studies in Sociely and Histop, I11 (1961), 140-154 (hereafter cited as ‘Transfer,”). On the general ethnographic picture the samc author’s “Ethnic Composition,” pp. 140-147; “Ethnic Changes in t h e Byzantine Empire in the Seventh Century,” D.O.P., XI11 ( ~ g s g ) ,25-36 (hereafter cited as “Ethnic Changes,”) ; “Slavic Element in Asia Minor in the Thirteenth Century,” Byzantiunz, X V I I I (1948), 69-83. Rambaud, L’etnpire grec, pp. z48 ff. m46 Theophancs, I, 365. Charanis, “Transfer,” pa 143. a’*o Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Cnerimoniis, I, 657, 668. I t is not recorded w h e t h e r the five detachments of cavalry which Justinian sent to fight on the Persian front (Procopius, History of the Wars, IV, xiv, 17-18), settled in Asia Minor or not. Theophanes, I, 364. Amantos, “MapSaf-ral.,” ‘EAAUVIK&, V (1g32), 13-136. 247 Charanis, “Transfer,” p. 144, but these were later removed by the Arabs. Agapius d e Menbidj, Kitab al’ Unvnn. Histoire universelle ed. and trans. A. Vasiliev, P.O.,V I I I ( I 912) , 531,538. 2 4 8 Charanis, “Ethnic Changes,” p. zg. Gelzer, Pergamon unter Byznntinern zmd Ostnnnen Abhand. der kotz. prauss. Akad. der Iyiss. (Berlin, 1go3),pp. 41 ff. 2 4 0 Theophanes, I, 382. Z6O O n the Armenians of Byzantium, Charanis, “The Armenians in the Byzantine Ernpirc,” B.S., X X I I (1g61),196-240; “Ethnic Changes,” p. 29. Grtgoire, “PrCcisions gkographiques et chronologiques sur les Paulicicns,” Acadhnie rojale de Belgiqrte, Bulletin de la classe des lettres et dcs sciences niorales et kolitiques, 5” strie, X X X I I I (1947), 297-298 (hereafter cited as “Prtcisions,”).

4.9

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

number of Armenian soldiers in the Armeniac theme,251 and it was customary to post Armenian contingenis in various parts of western Anatolia. In an expedition against the Arabs of Crete during the reign of Leo VI, there were mustered 500 Armenians from Platanion in the theme of Anatolicon and 500 more from Priene.252Under Constantine VII the tagmata of the east were bolstered for another Cretan expedition by the addition of 1,000 Armenian troops,2ts whereas Goo Armenians (possibly those of Priene) were to guard the shores of the Thracesian theme.25*All these references, however, are to scattered contingents of soldiers posted on the shores of the western Anatolian coast or on the eastern borders to fight the Muslims. Most of the large scale transplanting of Armenians from their homeland b y the Byzantine emperors, at least up to the tenth century, seems to have been made to the European Other groups were sent to Anatolia, such as the several thousand Persian soldiers who deserted to Byzantium in 834 and were then settled throughout Asia Minor.250In the course of the seventh and eighth centuries, the emperors transplanted considerable numbers of Slavs to the northwesternmost corner of the peninsula.267There are references to the presence of Slavs in the seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries. The first such mention would seem to be the 5,000 Slavs who deserted to the Arab invaders of Anatolia in 665.268Almost a quarter of a century later, in 688, Justinian I1 sent the Slavs, whom he had taken prisoner in Europe, to the theme of Opsicion,260and i n 692 he was able to raise a “Ethnic Changes,” p. 35. Constantine Porphyrogenitus, D e C a e r b m i i s , I, 652, 655-657. a6316id., pp. 666-667, but it is not clear whether they were settled there, or simply assembled and paid with the -viy[ycIcnaTfjs ’Avcrrohij~. 254 Ibid., p. 666. Charanis, “Ethnic Composition,” pp. 142-143. a55 Charanis, “Ethnic Changes,” p. 30. 250 Theophanes Continuatus, I I Q, I 24-125. Symeon Magister, 625-627,647. Cedrenus, 11, 1 3 1 . Vasiliev, Eyzmceet les Arabes, I, 92-93, 124-126. There existed a mosque in ninthcentury Ephesus (Ibn Khuradadhbih, B.G.A., VI, 106);in tenth-eleventh century Athens (G. Miles, “The Arab Mosque in Athens,” Hesperia, XXV (1956), 3zg-344), as well as in Constantinople. These were probably for Muslim captives, merchants, and inhabitants. In the eleventh century the metropolitan of Ephesus h a d an interpreter for the Saracens (AS Nov., 54z), and he converted a Saracen in Ephesus. Aside from the settlcment of Persians in ninth century Anatolia, and the settlement of the tribe of Banu Habih (Canard, Hamdanides, I, 737-739), a Christian Arab monk is mentioned in an inscription of onc of the Cappadocian troglodyte monasteries (de Jerphanion, Cajpadoce, II,, 2432 4 4 ) . These monasteries feature considerable pseudo-kufic decoration in their frescoes. Muslims are mentioned in the cities of Bithynia, Muslim merchants in Attaleia, Trebizond, Coloneia, Neocaesareia, Melitene, Tzarnandus, Caesareia, Ankara, and Nicomedeia (Honigmann, “Un itinhire,” pp. 263-270). AS Nov. 111, 590. Canard, “Quelques’ ‘A-catt’ de l’histoire des rclations entre Byzance et les Arabes,” Studi orientalistici in anore de Gioriio Leui Della Yida, I (Rome, I 956), 98-1 19. 257 There is an extensive literature on this subject, most recent of which are tlle following items. Charanis, “Transfer,” pp, 14.3-144; Charanis, “Ethnic Changes,” pp, 42-43. OstrogorskY, Geschichte, pp. 108-109. Charanis, “Ethnic Composition,” pp. 141-142; “The Slavic Element in Byzantine Asia Minor,” Byzantiotz, XVIII (1948), 69-83, and the COmnentS of G. Soulis, E.E.E.2,, X I X (1949), 337-340. 2s8 Charanis, “Ethnic Changes,” p. 42. Theophanes, I, 348. *” Charanis, “Ethnic Changes,” p. 42, Theophanes, I, 364. *a1 Charanis, 252

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

military force of 30,000 from among them. But when lie marched against the Arabs with his armies, 20,000 of these Slavs deserted to the enemy. Justinian was so infuriated that on his return he slew the remainder of the Slavs with their women and children a t Leucate on the Gulf of Nicomedia.200 T h e largest Slavic or Bulgaro-Slavic colonization in Asia Minor seems to have occurred during the eighth century. In the reign of Constantine V many Slavs fled the Balkans and were allowed to settle in the region of the Atarnas River not far from the Bosphorus. Nicephorus mentions that their number was 2 0 8 , 0 0 0 . ~Though ~~ this figure is doubtlessly exaggerated in the manner of medieval chroniclers, nevertheless after one has allowed for the exaggeration, this must have been the largest Slavic settlement in Asia Minor.202 That the Slavs were still to be seen as a n ethnic group in this northwestern corner of Anatolia i n the ninth century is recorded in Theophanes Continuatus.%68These are the last references to major Slavic settlements in Anatolia prior to the Turkish invasions. Constantine Porphyrogenitus does mention the presence of Sthlavesianoi i n the Opsicion theme in the tenth ~entury,~04 for i n his reign they hrnished 220 men for the expedition to Crete.205Their numbers are comparatively small as revealed in this Theophanes, I, 366. T h e exact interpretation and translation of this rather important text has excited some disagreement. Some have interpreted this passage to mean that Justinian destroyed the remnants of the Slavic colony and that the colony therefore disappeared. A. Maricq, “Notes SUP les Slaves dans le PtloponnCse ct en Bithynie,” Byzantion, X X I I (1952), 348-349, commented that in fact Justinian did not exterminate the whole colony, for such reasoning neglects the exaggeration with which it is always necessary to reckon in narratives of this type. Therefore the testimony of Theophanes as to the complete disappearance of this Slavic settlement must be discounted as the exaggeration of a medieval chronicler. Ostrogorsky, Gescliiclite, I 10, has rejected Theophanes’ testimony on the extermination of this group as being an exaggeration. However he does accept the numbers of Theophanes, I, 432, of a slightly later Slavic settlement as being exact and accurate figures. Whether one interprets Theophanes literally or makes allowance for exaggeration, the Slavic settlement under Justinian I1 was a considerable one, but at the same time it must have been greatly depleted if not exterminated. It is possibly to the Slavs that the author of the life of St. Peter of Atroa refers by the phrase, ivQiJAia EOvq, Laurent, L a vita retracta et les miracles posthumes de Saint Pierre d’dtroa (Brussels, 1958), .. . pp, 41-41. 261 Theophanes, 431. O n the exaggerated nature of the number, Charanis, “Ethnic Changes,” pp. 76-78. Theophanes Continuatus, 50, refers to Thomas as of Slavic origin, though his origin is elsewhere said to have been Armenian, Charanis, “Ethnic Changes,” p. 79, n. 3. This remarks on the continued existence of a Slavic element in Asia Mlnor. See also P. -snurce _ .... Lemerle, “Thomas le Slave,” Travaux et Mimoires, I (Paris, 1965), 257-297, Constantine Porphyrogenitus, D e Caerimoniis, I, 622. a65 Ibid., p. 666, but on p. 669, he mentions that there were only 127 in the Opsicion theme. I n regard to the continuity of the Slavic settlements of the seventh and eighth centuries the question has been raised whether these Sthlavesianoi were their descendants or not. I t i s difficult to answer this question from the text of Constantine Porphyrogenitus. It is conceivable that these tenth-century Sthlavesianoi might have been moved from Europe and posted in the Opsicion theme. The text reads “ . OI ZBAapquiavoi 01 KaOiu6dvTq ds -rb ’ O ~ ~ K I OIVt would .” seem a little strange that a tenth-century author would rcfer to them as KaeloOivTES if in fact they had been there since the seventh and eighth ZKAU~OI,~ K A a j h p a v o \ K a l p&ppapoi,” ~ ~ ~ K T IT?5 K & centuries. Amantos, ’AKaSqpIuS ’AOqvGv, V I I ( 1 9 3 2 ) 333-335. ~

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

text, for they furnished much smaller numbers of troops than the Armenians in western Anatolia. After this their presence is no longer noted, and it is quite probable that they were Christianized and Hellenized.200 A group about which comparatively little is known, but which was no doubt of commercial importance i n Anatolia, was that of the Jews. BY the time of the Roman Empire, the Diaspora of the Jews had resulted in Jewish establishments in over sixty Anatolian cities and towns.267 From the seventh to the eleventh centuries there are references to Jews i n Nicaea (tenth century), Abydus (10961, Pylae (eleventh century), Ephesus (eleventh century), Mastaura in the regions of the Maeander (eleventh ‘century), Amorium (ninth century), Cappadocia (seventh century), Neocaesareia (eighth century), and i n the border town of Zapetra (ninth century). Five more Anatolian towns are mentioned as having settlements of Jews during the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, and it is probable that Jews had lived in some of these towns even earlier. Theseinclude Chonae (c. I 150), Strobilus (eleventh century), Seleuceia ( I I37), Trebizond ( I I ~ o ) and , Gangra (1207).208 The reference to the Jews in these Anatolian towns is quite important, especially when one recalls the Constantinopolitan nature of the Byzantine sources. I t is highly probable that there were many more such towns but they simply have not been mentioned. In most cases they must have been in direct line of descent from the communities founded during the Diaspora, though a number of arrivals probably entered the empire during the late tenth century, following the Byzantine expansion to the east and the religious persecutions of the eleventh-century caliph al-Hakim.2Bg These Jews were settled primarily in the towns along the great roads of Anatolia along which flowed the commerce of the empire, and it is clear that they were actively engaged in commerce and the crafts. There is, however, no indication as to their numbers.2’0 The Practice of settling foreign military contingents (Mardaites, Slavs, Armenians, and Persians from the seventh through the ninth century) in Anatoh not only continued in the tenth and eleventh centuries, but the military troops settled increased in ethnic variety, I t is not always clear, esoF.Dvornik, Les Slaves, Bjzunce et Rome (Paris, 1gz6), p. 103. Charanis, “Ethnic Cbanges,” pp. 78-82. Vryonis, “St. Ioannicius the Great (754-846) and the ‘Slavs’ of Rithynia,” Bymittion, XXXI (1961), 245-248. zo7 J. Juster, Les Juys dans l’embire romain (Paris, 1 9 1 4 )I, ~ 188-194. See the basic work of Starr, The Jews,pnssim. Ankori, Keraites,passim. A. Andreades, “Les Juifs et le fisc dans l’empire byzantin,” Mdlarges Charles Diehl (Paris, 1930)~I, 7-29; ‘‘Oi‘EPpcilolhT@ PV[WTIU@ K P ~ E I , ”E.E.B.E.,VII (1927),3-23. Ahrweiler, “Smyrne,” p. 20. Chronique de Denys de Tell-Mahe, trans. J. 13. Chabot (Paris, 1895), p. 24. Beneievid, “K istorii Evreev v Vizantii VI-X v.,” Eureiskii Miysl, I1 (1gr6), 197-224, 305-318, was not available to. mp aoo Ankori, Keraites, p. 167. Starr, The Jews, pp. 27-30, Figures are given for the Jewish communities of the Balkan lands of the empire in the twelfth century by Benjamin of Tudela. The early tax registers for Ottoman Anatolian show almost no Jewish population at all in the sixteenth century, see chapter vii.

”’

EVE OF THE TURKlSH CONQUEST

however, if these tenth- and eleventh-century groups were permanently settled in a n area, or were simply temporarily quartered in Anatolia during the period of their military service. Contingents of Russ were sent to the regions of Trebizond i n the region of Romanus 1,271 and in the mideleventh century one tagma of RLUShad their winter quarters in northeast Anatolia, as did two tagmata of The eleventh-century documents list a bewildering variety of ethnic military groups in thc various provinces ofthe empire-Russians, Kulpings, English, Normans, Germans, Bulgars, Saracens, Georgians, Armenians, Albanians, Scandinavians, and other^.^'^ I t is very dificult to ascertain the numbers of these groups, their location, and whether they were permanent or temporary settlers. It was, however, the eastern regions of Byzantine Anatolia which contained the majority of the non-Greek populations-Kurds, Georgians, Lazes, Syrians, and Armenians. The eastern expansion of the tenth and eleventh centuries incorporated areas into the empire which were nonGreek in speech and non-Chalcedonian. The Kurds were numerous in such regions as Amid, Mayaferrikin, Chliat, Manzikert, Ardjish, and in the regions to the northeast of Lake Van. 274 Georgians and Lazes were to be found in the southeastern districts of the Black Sea coast. Of these eastern peoples i n eleventh-century Anatolia, the most important were the Syrians and the Armenians. In the tenth century the emperor Nicephorus Phocas, i n an effort to revive the city of Melitene which had been incorporated as a result of‘ the Byzantine reconquest years earlier, asked the Syrian Jacobite patriarch to repeople the areas of Melitene and Hanazit with Syrians and to establish his patriarchal seat in that area. I n this manner an extensive emigration of Jacobite Syrians to these regions took place. By the eleventh century they seem to have come in considerable numbers and possessed bishoprics in a large number of the eastern and southeastern towns: Zapetra, Tell Patriq, Simnadu, Saroug, Mardin, Gcrmaniceia (Marash), Laqabin, Hisn Mansur, Goubbos, Gaihan-Barid, Callisura, Mayefarrilcin, Arabissus, Melitene, Anazarba, Tarsus, Amid, Edessa, Kaisum, Nisibis, Tell Arsanias, Claudia, Hisn Ziad, Caesareia (at least by the twelfth century if not earlier), Samosata, and Gargar. They spread as far north as the Armenian town of Erzindjan where they possessed a monastery. Active i n Anatolian commerce, from which they acquired considerable wealth, the radius of their caravans comprehended the lands of the Turks in the east and i n the west Papadopoulos-Kerameus, 1st. trap. in!., pp. 40 ff. Cedrenus, 11, 624-625. The Normans Roussel and Herve had their estates in Asia Minor. Eleventh-century Edessa had 1,000 Latins, and the Armenian adventurer Philaretus based his political activity in Cilicia on a force of 8,000 Latin mercenaries in the eleventh century: 273 G. Rouillard and P. Collomp, Actes de Laura (Paris, I937), I, 83,. I I I. e 7 4 Minorsky, “Kurds,” EI1. For the Merwanids of Dlyarbeklr in the tenth and eleventh centuries, H. P. Amedroz, “The Marwinid Dynasty a t MaylfLriqin in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries,” J.R.A.S. (~gos),pp. 123-245. 271

z7a

EVE O F THE TURKISH CONQUEST

Constantinople itself. They were also important as physicians and in the translation of the Greek texts.276 The most significant movement of peoples into the Anatolian provinces ofthe empire was, however, that which brought in the Armenians during the tenth and eleventh centuries. This transplanting of large numbers of Armenians is closely connected wilh the Byzantine eastern expansion and the somewhat later western movement of the Seljuks. As a result of these two converging forces, Byzantium annexed Taron (968), Taiq ( IOOO), Vaspuracan ( I O Z I ) , Ani (I045-46), Kars (1064). The expansion of Byzantium into the east was accompanied by a large-scale emigration of Armenian princes, nobles, and their retinues to the lands of the empire. There had previously existed settlements of Armenians in these provinces between Tephrice and Melitene, and the Armeno-Byzantine general Melias had organized the newly formed theme of Lycandus in the early tenth century and colonized it with Armenians. As a result of the Byzantine conqucst of Cilicia and northern Syria, the government brought large numbers of Armenian colonists to both regi0ns.~7~ The newer emigrants were often posited upon the older stratum of Armenian population. In the tenth century the Taronites family received cstates in Celt~ene;~~’ the nobility of Taiq, after its absorption, acquired lands at Labaca, Arnasaciou, and Martisapao in the theme of Armeniacon (also at Ani, Tais, T z o ~ r r n e r e )In . ~ IOZI ~ ~ Basil I1 transplanted the population of Baaean to Chaldia,279and with the annexation of Vaspuracan, there took place a significant emigration of Armenians. When SenecherimHohvannes and his son David received landed possessions in Sebasteia, Larissa, Abara, Caesareia, Tzamandus, and Gabadonia in the theme of Cappadocia, they were accompanied by 14,000 men (and presumably by their families).280 In 1045-46 Gregory Bahlavouni exchanged his lands for estates in the province of Byzantine MesopotamiazB1and in the same year Kakig of Ani gave up his kingdom and settled within the empire, acquiring estates in the themes o f Cappadocia, Lycandus, and Charsianon.z82 a’a Michael the Syrian, 111, 130-146, 160. Bar Hebraeus, I, 169-178, 204. Honigmann, “Malatiya,” EII. Chabot, “Les bvbques jacobites du VIIIe au XIIIe sitcle d’aprts la chronique de Michel le Syrien,” R.O.C.,IV (1899), 443-451, 495-511; V (‘goo), 605G3G; VI ( I ~ o I )189-219. , J, Laurent, Byzance at 1es Tiircs seldjoucides dans C’Asie occidentalejusqu’en 1081 (NancyParis-Strasbourg, ~grg),pp. zg, 71..R. Grousset, Hislorie de l’drtnenie des origines ci 1071 (Paris, 19471, PP. 489,529. Asohk, Hutoire ztniuerseEle, trans. F. Maeler (Paris, 186g),II, 1 4 2 . 2 7 7 Cedrenus, 11, 375. Grousset, A m e n i r , p. 492. *lB I-Ionigmann, Die Oslgrenze des byzantitizschen Reiches uon 363 bis 1071 nach griechischen, arabischen, syrischen und armenischen Quellen (Brussels, I 935), pp. 222-226. Cedrenus, 11, 447-448. Grousset, Armenie, p. 548. I-Ionigmann, Oslgrenze, p. 173. Grousset, Armenie, p. 553. Michael the Syrian, 111, 133. Aristaltes of Lazdivert, Histoire d’drmenie, trans. Prud’homme (Paris, 1864) pp. 32-38 (hereafter cited as Aristakes). Cedrenus, 11, 4 6 4 Aristakes, pp. 32-38. Grousset, Armenie, p. 580. Dolger, Regestert, I,, no. 873. la* Grousset, Armenie, p. 581. Cedrenus, 11, 557-559. Honigmann, Oslgrenze, pp. 168, 175. Matthew of Edessa, p. 78.

”’

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

Finally in 1064 Gagik-Abas of Kars received lands in Tzamandus, Larissa, Amaseia, and C ~ r n a n a Though . ~ ~ ~ large-scale emigrations are specifically mentioned in only two instances, it must be assumed that all these princes and nobles were accompanied by considerable numbers of followers. So extensive was the number of Armenians in this diaspora that by the middle of the eleventh century there wcre three Armenian military corps stationed i n the cities of Sebasteia, Melitcne, and Tephrice.284 One of the principal Byzantine sources of the eleventh century Michael Attaliates remarks, ‘(the Armenian heretics have thronged into Iberia, Mesopotamia, Lycandus, Melitene, and the neighboring places.”285 Michael the Syrian confirms this in remarking that once SenecherimHovhannes had been installed in Sebasteia, the Armenians “spread throughout Cappadocia, Cilicia, and Syria.”28o

Religion

As important as the ethnic configuration of eleventh-century Anatolia and, in a sense, more dificult to reconstruct, is the religious and sectarian picture of the peninsula. The history of the Byzantine church in Anatolia as well as a comprehensive history of Anatolian heresies and their significance remain to be written. Paradoxically, Anatolia was at the same time the strength of the Orthodox church during the period between the seventh and the eleventh centuries, and also the nest of a number of smaller and larger heresies. The Greek church of history is in a sense the church of Asia Minor.287 Christianity, brought by such distinguished preachers as Paul and John of the Apocalypse, spread to hnatolia very early, and, up to the period of the first ecumenical council, it was, next to Egypt, the Christian land KaT’ C ~ O X ~ V Hellenism . had spread on a significant scale in Asia h/finor, and in many provinces local culture, the ethnic languages, and memories of ancient independence were so weak that they offered little resistance to Christianization. The presence of the large number of Jewish communities, the mixing of Judaism and paganism in thought, the spread of Greek as a universal medium of communication were all factors that prepared the region for a new religious syncretism. Though there were significant religious cults in Anatolia, they were not serious obstacles to the penetration of Christianity.288 The Christianity that emerged in Anatolia, Grousset, Armenie, p. 616. Matthew of Edessa, p. 126. Honigmann, Oslgret~re,p. O n the general absorption of the Armenian east, A. hkulian, EinuerleiDur~gannenisclren Territorien durch Byznnt iin XI. Jnhrhrmdert; ein Beitrag zur vorseldsclutken Periode der armenische Geschichle (1912)~284 Laurent, Byzance et les TWCS, p. 33. Cedrenus, 11, 626. Attaliates, 97. ISG Michael the Syrian, 111, 133. 287 Harnack, D i e Mission, 11, 734. 288 Ibid., pp. 732-733. I 88.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

however, bore the marks of t h e absorptive process. O n the one hand, because Hellenism was the dynamic culture of the peninsula Hellenism and Christianity fused, as is evidenced i n the philosophy and theology of the Cappadocian fathers. On the other hand, though paganism seems to have been effaced without too great a struggle, in disappearing it reappeared within the Many of the significant developments and struggles of the early church had appeared in Anatolia: the contest between the itinerant and local organization of the church, the struggle with gnosticism, the rise of monasticism, and the development of the metropolitan-episcopal structure. Asia Minor also witnessed a strong development in the cult of the relics. In the first century of the Christian era, Christian communities arose in such towns as Pcrge, Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Derbe, Lystra; in the regions of Galatia, Cappadocia, and Bithynia; in Ephesus, Colossae, Laodiceia, Phrygian Hierapolis, Smyrna, Pergamum, Sardes, Philadelpheia, Thyateira, Troas, Tralles, Magnesia ad Maeandrum, and others.200 A continuing expansion is observable in the second century,291 and by the third and fourth centuries Christianity had not only won over the Hellenes and Hellenized of the towns but had begun to absorb the cults of the rural areas. All this is reflected in the complex network of bishoprics and chorespiscopates established on Anatolian soil by the church. Paganism did not completely disappear, and even when it did vanish as the accepted or dominant religion of a particular locality, it quite possibly entrenched itself in some one of the heretical or schismatic sects that arose over much of the early Christian world. Some of the sects were indigenous to Anatolia, others were imports from different areas of the em~ire.2~2 The most important of these early indigenous Anatolian heresies was that of Montanism. Founded in the second half of the second century by Montanus (according to tradition a converted pagan priest, and possibly even a former priest: of Cybele), the heresy seems to have incorporated certain religious characteristics generally (though not exclusively) associated with the regions of Phrygia. These included a particular emphasis on the role of ecstatic prophecy, as well as the general emotional or “enthusiastic” approach to religion. The heresy apparently spread most effectively in Phrygia (it was known as the Phrygian or Cataphrygian Ibid., pp. 734. {bid., pp. 735-736. 281 Sinope, Philomelium, Parium, Nacoleia, Amastris (and other churches of Pontus), Hieropolis, and possibly Ankara, Otrus, Pepuza, Tymium, Apamaea, Comana, Eumenea. Ibid., pp. 737-738. For an introduction to Anatolian heresies, J. Gouillard, “L’htrtsie dans l’empire byzantin des origines au XUe sitcle,” Trauaw et Mkmoires, I (Paris, 1965), 299-324; “Le synodikon de I’Orthodoxie: Cdition et commentaire,” Travaux et Mkmoires, I1 (19671, 1-316. 2En

2so

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

heresy), Lycaonia, and the environs.293 This Phrygian heresy continued to exist for a number of centuries, though its vigor seems to have been spent early.294The sect is mentioned in the laws of Justinian I, and Procopius records that during the general persecution or heretics by that emperor, the Montanists of Phrygia locked themselves in their churches and set them afire, destroying both themselves and the edifice~.~~5 A sect that bore the name Montanist existed in the early eighth ccntury, a t which time its members refused to be converted and baptized in consonance with the decree of Leo I11 (72 1-722), and so once more they locked themselves in their religious buildings and consigned The sect had by then probably become themselves to the insignificant .2s7 Bardy, “Montanisme,” I).T.C., pp. 2358-2370. Calder, in a most suggestive article, “The Epigraphy of the Anatolian Ilercsies,” in Anatolian Studies Presented to Sir William Ramsay (London, I 923), 59-91 (hereafter cited as “Epigraphy,”), has described a n interesting group of Greek Christian inscriptions from Phrygia which date from the late second and the third century. These inscriptions included a number that are addressed as follows, Xpeioriavoi XpElomavois, Christians to Christians. According to Calder this is almost unique, for Christian tombstones revealing so openly the rcligious afiliation of the deceased belong to the postpersecution era. Prcvious to the period of toleration, with the exception of Rome, Christians did not dare to reveal so openly their religious identity. Therefore the unique appearance of these second and third century inscriptions is due to the activity of the Montanists in Phrygia. Calder repeats his ideas in “Philadelphia and Montanism,” B.J.R.L., V I I (1923), 25-38. Grtgoire, who formerly accepted this view, had more recently, Les Pkrsecutions (1951), p. 18, denied that thcse Christian epitaphs are to be attached to the Montanists. H e declared them to have been the work of “phancrochrttiens,” as opposed to Crypto-Christians. Though Calder has not proved his point conclusively, one is nevertheless imprcssed by the striking coincidence of the dating of the inscriptions, their uniqueness in the Christian world, and their chronological coincidence with the appearance of the Montanists. H e goes on to generalize (“Epigraphy,” p. 64), that these inscriptions also bear witness to a sectarian struggle in central Phrygia in this period. By that time the Phrygian heretical movement had been defeated by the church in central Phrygia, a n area teeming with Hellenized towns. So the heresy at the beginning of the third century turned north toward the more rural regions of the Tembris valley, a n area he assumes to have been only slightly affected by I-Iellenism. J. G. C. Anderson, “Paganism and Christiantity in the Upper Tembris Valley,” Studies in the History atid Art of the Ensterit Prouinces of the Emlire (Aberdeen, 1906), pp. 183-227. m‘1 Two sixth-century inscriptions were found which shed some light on the hierarchical structure of the sect, GrCgoire, “Du nouveau sur la hierarchic de la secte montaniste,” Byzantion, I1 (1925), 329-336. Caldcr and Grtgoire, “Paulinus, K O I V W V ~ de ~ Stbaste de Phrygia,” Acndimie royale de Belgique, Biilletiii de la clnsse des lettres et des sciences morales e t politiques, 5c ser., X X X V I I I (1952)~ 162-183. 206 Cod. Imt., I. v. 20. Procopius, Atiacdota, XI. 14. 23. a g o Theophanes, I, 401. 20’ The use of the term Montanist survived, however, in thc archaism so prevalent in Byzantine literary and intellectual monuments. I t would be difficult to prove that its recurrence in later years was anything more than a n archaism. I t is repeated in the Ecloga of Leo I11 and Constantine V where Manichees and Montanists are condemned to perish by the sword, XVIII. 52 (Zepos, J.G.R., II,61), where it would seem to apply to actual conditions. In the eleventh century it is used by a scholiast to denote someone who has left Judaism. Starr, The Jews, pp. 177-178. For further confusion of Jews and Montanists in the eighth century, Starr, The Jews, p. 92. Gouillard, “L’htrtsie,” Travnux et Mimoires I, 309-310. They are mentioned in canon 95 of the Council in Trullo (692) as Phrygians. Some scholars feel that by the ninth century what remained of the sect may well have merged with the Paulicians. Charanis, “Ethnic Changes,” p. 27. A. Scharf, “The Jews, thc Montanists, and the Emperor Leo 111,”B.Z., L I X (1966), 37-46, indicates that these eighth-century “Montanists” were actually a Jewish messianic sect.

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

EVE O F THE TURKISH CONQUEST

The ecclesiastical authors a n d inscriptions of the fourth and fifth centuries mention numerous less well-known and smaller heresies that had appeared in Anatolia, in the regions of Cilicia, Pisidia, Phrygia, Paphlagonia, and Lycaonia. These included Catharioi, Encratitai, Saccophoroi, Apostatitai, Tatianoi, Hypsistarioi, Euchitai, Novatians, and 0thers.2~8 Of these the more important, the Euchitai and Novatians, were examples of nonindigenous heresies, heresies that had entered Anatolia from points farther east and west respectively. It would be a mistake to think of Byzantine Anatolia as the spawning ground of the majority of those heresies that eventually made their appearance there. The Novatian schism, begun in third-century Rome, made its way to Anatolia where its rigorist doctrines may have h a d some appeal to a portion of the inhabitants. Novatians are mentioned i n Paphlagonia, in the towns of Cyzicus, Nicomedia, Nicaea, Cotyaeum, Ankara, and they came to be particularly strong in Plirygia and Paphlagonia, possibly due to the fact that they built on top of the remnants of much of the Montanist heresy.z9g They seem to disappear by the eighth century, a t least in the sources. The Euchitai (Messalians), so-called because of the preponderant emphasis that they placed upon prayer at the expense of certain sacraments, apparently originated in the Mesopotamian region of Osrhoene, and by the second half of the fourth century entered Anatolia. During the course of the fourth and fifth centuries, the heresy appeared in Lycaonia, Pamphylia, Lycia, Cappadocia, and Pontus. But its later history is veiled in obscurity, and whether the use of the term in the elcventh century is archaistic, or due to the fact that the later sects were in some way similar to the Messalians, or due to the actual continuity of the original sect, is not clear.300 The great heresy of Mani also made its appearance in fourth-century Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, and Lydia.so1 Later Anastasius I and Justinian I took severe measures against the heresy, and by the eighth century the term is used to describe other similar dualistic movements, in particular that of the PauIicians.302 2 0 8 For a detailed description of the inscriptions and the literary sources see Calder, “Epigraphy,” passim; C. Bones, “What are the Heresies Combatted in the Work of Amphilochius, Metropolitan of Iconium (c. 341-345-c. 395-400) ‘Regarding Falsc Asceticism’ ” The Greek Orthodox TheoloEical Review, IX ( I 963), 79-96; Holl, Amphiloclrius van Ikonium in &em Vedallnis zzi den grossen Kafpadoriem (Tiibingen-Leipzig, I 904), pp. 23 ff.As late as the ninth century there is mention of Nestorians (whether they refer to the fifth-century Christological heretics i s not clear) in the villages at the foot of Mt. Olympus of Bithynia. Laurent, La uie merueilleuse de Saint Pierre d’dtroa 037 (Brussels, 1 9 5 6 ) p. ~ 66. A. Amann, “Novatiens,” D.T.C., pp. 816-849. ‘O0 Bareille, “Euchaites,” D.T.C., pp. 1455-1465. E. dc Stoop, E d sir le dtJiusion du ManichPisme dans l’enzpire romain (Gand, I SOB), pp. 63-69, He mentions the heresies of t h e Priscillians and Eustathians in Asia Minor. ‘Oa Papadopoulos-Kerameus, A.I.2, IV, 382, for mention of a wandering Manichee in the region of Prusa in the first half of the ninth century. G. Bardy, “Manichbisme,” D.T.C., pp. 1841-1895.

I! t

ii 1 I

1. I

I 1

I i

i I I

1 i 1

Thus Byzantine Anatolia had, by the time of the losses to the Arabs of Syria, Egypt, and North Africa, enjoyed a respectable history of heresy. One is struck by the number of sects and also by the continuity of heresy in certain parts of Anatolia, but opinion has varied as to the degree the Anatolian population was heretical or orthodox. I t is a question that cannot be answered definitively. Certainly in the third, fourth, and fifth centuries heresies were numerous and common throughout many of the lands where Christianity was establishing itself, including Syria, Egypt, and Asia Minor, but also North Africa, Italy, and other parts of the Western world as well. One must view the presence of heresies in Asia Minor at this time partially against this background. On the other hand some of these heresies (Montanism, Novatianism, and Messalianism) seem to have persevered longer and to have left a more marked coloring on subsequent Anatolian heresies. T o what degree the presence of heresy can be related to the survival of non-Greek languages is yet one more of those “dificult” problems. The principle h a d been enunciated by Holl (and subsequently followed by others) that the heresies in Anatolia were toughest to cradicate in those areas where the Anatolian languages survived longest. Thus, he stated, the heretical sects found support in the local languages.303This is so general a statement that i t glosses over many important points. First, all surviving tombstones of Anatolian heretics are i n thc Greek language. And yet, earlier pagan tombstones have survived which have been inscribed in Phrygian. Why then, have none of the carly heretical Christian inscriptions, including those of the Montanists, been inscribed in one of the indigenous Anatolian tongues ? If, in fact, Holl’s dictum were strictly valid one would have expected to find epigraphical testimonial to this conjectured relation between the survival of heresy and that of indigenous languages. Obviously many of the pagan Anatolians were Greek-speaking (prior to their conversions to Christianity), and so wcrc great numbers of Christian heretics. The process of Hellenization had been operative for a long time previous to the birth of the Christian religion. I t is virtually impossible to substantiate Holl’s thesis that the heretical and linguistic lines i n central and western Asia Minor coincided to any significant extent.So4I t is quite possible or even probable, however, that an indigenous sect such as the Montanists, and nonindigcnous sects such as the Manichaeans and Messalians, had a marked effect on the subsequent religious Holl, “Das Fortleben der Volkssprachen,” p. 253. The Cappadocian speakers in the flock of St. Basil were Christianized long bcfore the Greek-speaking population of the southern Peloponrlese who were converted only in the ninth century. Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De. A d m Imp., trans. R. J. H. Jenkins, p. 237; “The inhabitants of the city of M a h a are not of the race of the aforesaid Slavs, but of the ancient Romans, a n d even to this day they are called ‘Hellenes’ by the local inhabitants, bccausc in the very ancient times they were idolaters and were worshippers of images after the fashion of the ancicnt Hellenes; a n d they were baptized and became Christians in the reign of the glorious Basil.” 304

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

development in Anatolia and that they left a rich legacy which was partially incorporated by later sectaries. Heresy in Asia Minor during the middle Byzantine period is closely linked first with the Pauliciaiis (and to a lesser extent with the Athinganoi and Iconocla~ts)~~5 and then in the eleventh century above all with the Monophysites. The Paulician heresy, having entered Anatolia from Armenia, would seem to fit much more closely the paw$ that Holl has suggested in the relationship of national language and heresy, though even here it would be wrong to describe it as a “national” heresy, for the Armenian church fought this sect (as well as that of the Thondralti) with as much energy and violence as did the Byzantine Further, Once the heresy entered Byzantine territory i t also attracted segments of the Greek population. By the mid-ninth century the sect was strongly established as a border principality in the regions of Melitene, Tephrice, Pontic Phanaroia, and C ~ l o n e i a . ~After ~ ’ the destruction of their state by Basil I, the Paulicians abandoned many of these regions and sought refuge farther to the east. I t was not untiI the region of John Tzimisces that the Byzantine eastward drive incorporated sufficient numbers of them to cause further concern. At this later date many of them were transplanted to T h r a ~ e . ~ ~ ~ 3D5 Starr, “An Eastern Sect, the Athinganoi,” Haruard Theological Review, X X I X ( I 936), 93-106. The appealance of a considerable literature on the Paulicians in the postwar era indidates that the interest in this heretical sect has, if anything, increased. The best guide to this literature is to be found in the studies of M. Loos, “Oh en est la question du mouvement paukien?” Izuulia tia inslitula za isloriia, XIV-XV (1964), 357-371 ; “Gnosis und mittelalterlicher Daulismus,” Listy Filulugicke, X C (1967), 116-1 27; “Zur Frage des Paulikianismus und Bogomilismus,” Byzanlinische Beitrage, ed. J. Irmscher (Berlin, 1964), pp. 313-333; “Le mouvement paulicien ?t Byzance,” B.S., XXIV (1963), 258-286; XXV (1964), 52-68; “Deux contributions A l’histoire des Pauliciens. I . A propos des sources grecques rkflktant des Pauliciens,” E.S., XVII (1956), 19-37; 2 . “Origine d u nom des Pauliciens,” B.S., XVIII (1957), 2 0 2 - 2 17. R . M. Bartikian, Zstznik dlia izGeer2iia islorii pavlikianskogo dviienia (Erevan, 1961), reviewed by Loos in B.S., XXIV (1963), 135-141. In this, and other studies (“Petr Citseliiskii i ego istoriia Pavlikian,” V.V., X V I I [1961], 323-358; “K voprosu o pavlikianskom dviienii v pervoi polovine VIII v,,” V.V., V I I I [1956], 127-131) he discusses among other things the Armenian sources and the reasons behind the westward movement of the Paulicians in the eighth century. See also his “Eretiki Arevordi (Syna Solntsa) v Armenii i Mesopotamii i poslanie armianskogo katolikosa Nersesa Blagodanogo,” in Ellinisiiieskii Bli&ii Vosiok, Vizanliia i Iratz (Moscow, 1967),pp. 102-1 12. S. Runciman, The Medieual Mcniclzee (Cambridge, 1955)~places the Paulicians in the broader movement of dualistic heresies throughout the late ancient and medieval periods. Further literature includes, J. E. Lipsie, ” I “Pavlikianskoe dvLenie v

Vizantii v VIII i pervoi polovine I X v.,” V.V,, V ( 1 9 5 s ) ~49-72; Ozerki islorii uizaniiiskogo ”Y obsceslua z’ krtliury (VIIIperuia polouina IX v . ) ) (Moscow-Leningrad, 1961), pp. 166 ff. F. Scheidweiler,“Paulikianer-probleme,”E.Z., X L I I I ( I gso), I 0-39. Grkgoire, “PrCcisions,” PP. 189-324; “Autour des Pauliciens,” Byzanlion, XI (1936), 610-614; “Les sources de l’histoire dcs PauliCiens, Pierre d e S i d e est authentiquc et Photius un faux,” Billleiin dc l’ficodhie de Be&/fle, XXII ( 1 936), 95-1 14; “Pour I’histoire des kglises pauliciennes,” O.C.P.,XI11 (1947), 509-514. K. Ter-Mkrttschian, Die Paulikianer i m byzanlirziscltetl Kaiwreich u t d uerwtndte Erscheinungen in &&en (Leipzig, I 893). *” Rullciman, Maniche% pp. 35-39. Grkgoire, “PrCcisions,” pp. 291-297, 308Runcin1an,Monicltee, p. 44. Cedrenus, 11, 382. Zonaras, 111, 52 1-522. 60

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

The Paulician heresy had also appeared in parts of Anatolia farther to the west. In the upheavals among the members of the Paulician community, one of their leaders, a certain Joseph, moved to Chortocopaeum in the vicinity of Pisidian Antioch in the first half of the eighth century.300 The Paulicians of western Anatolia survived as a sect for a considerable period, and they appear in the hagiographical literature of the tenth and eleventh centuries. St. Paul the Younger (d. 955) removed the most important and dangerous of these “Manichaeans” from the districts of the Cibyrrheote theme and Miletus.31a A century later St. Lazarus of Galesium converted a village of heretics in the bishopric of Philetis (under Myra), and though the heretics are not mentioned by name, their geographical location (identical with that of the Manichaeans of St. Paul the Younger) and the fact that St. Lazarus converted a Paulician in his own monastery311 would seem to indicate that these heretics were also Paulicians. As late as the tenth century the Paulicians were numerous in the regions of Euchaita wherc they seem to have caused the metropolitan considerable The history of the Paulicians of Byzantine Anatolia becomes complicated and obscure in the eleventh and twelfth centuries with the appearance of the term “Bogomil” in the lexicography of the Greek theologians and historians. Euthymius, a monk from a Constantinopolitan monastery, records that he had bcen present a t a trial of certain heretics in Acmonia of Phrygia sometime between 976 and 1025.H e relates that these sectaries were known by two names: i n the theme of the Opsicion they were called Phundagiagitai, but in the Cibyrrheote they went by the name of 309 Runciman, Manichee, p. 35. Theophanes, I, 488, possibly indicates that they were to be found in Phrygia and Lycaonia in the carly ninth century where along with the Athinganoi they appear as the befriended of Nicephorus I. 310 I. Sirmondi, “Vita S. P a d Iunioris,” A.B., XI ( I @ ) , 156, “ ’ A T T ~ ~ E ITGV ~IS dpqpkvov al ~mCrTGV pavlxalwv a h o G a~row6al.dv -robs BntaqpodpovS K a l T+ PAC~~TEIV -rriBavwTBpous, TQV dplwv K i ~ w ~ ~ a i b T-r6 o u~ q p iKal M I ~ ~ ~ T OpLaJp & ~KTET~TIKE.” The use of the word Manichee is archaistic and by this time it came to signify Paulician, Theophanes, I, 488, “TO, 66 MaviXaLwv, TGV vijv llavhlKlavGv KaAowpBvwv.” Also, Grumel, Regislres, Ia, 223. 311 AS Nov. 111, 5 1 z, 543. The saint’s life gives a vivid picture of the heretics’ hatred for the Orthodox. They are described as a numerous group with their center in one of the mountain villages. 312 This emerges from a letter of the mid-tenth century addressed to Philothcus, mctropolitan of that city (Darrouzb, &pistoliers, pp. 274-176). The sender of the letter, Theodore, metropolitan of Nicaea, opens by remarking that he sympathizes with the condition of Philotheus. The latter’s condition, or rather that of his ecclesiastical district, is the presence of heretics, ‘%I 66 uoi rhqebs alpmG6v-rwv -rrapowai&aav-rl 71-poumAdtoaoa Theodore then lists the necessary procedures for recciving into the Orthodox Church, Arians, Macedonians, Sabbatians, Novatians, Aristeroi, Tessareskaidekatitai, Apollinarians, Eunomians, Montanists, Sabellians, Jacobitcs, and Panlinislai. Without going into all of these, it would seem that Theodore is simply repeating an age old procedure without specific reference to conditions at Euchaita. However the phrase, “, . . K a l TO~OWS 61) -rob< - r r a u h ~ v ~ m m & ~p,i d v UOI 6 -rrA~iwvh6yos,” indicates that Philotheus had written at length to Theodore about the Paulinistai, and it is they who have caused him concern. No doubt .rrcrvhlvlmai (a fourth century sect) is an archaizing reference to .rravAlKlavol, Paulicians.

. . .”

EVE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iItl is~ possible . 3 1 9 that these Phundagiagitai and Bogomils of Anatolia were either the older Paulicians under a new name, or else they represent a mutation resulting from the grafting of Balkan Bogomilism onto the Paulician sect in a manner paralleling the relation of paulicianism and Bogomilism in the Balkans.314 In 1143 the Constantinopolitan synod condemned Clement of Sasima, Leontius of Balbissa, and the monk Niphon for spreading Bogomil practices in Ca~padocia.3~~ The terms Bogomil and Messalian, however, had comc to be used as exact and interchangeable equivalents in the twelfth century so that the question is once more obscured.310I n any case it is 318 G.Ficker, Die Phundogiagilen (Leipzig, rgo8), pp. 62-63. T h e twelfth-century metropolitan George Tornices reports the presence of heretics in Ephesus. R. Browning, “The Speeches and Letters of Georgios Tornikes, Metropolitan of Ephesos (XIIth Century),” &es du XII“ congris internntional d’lttudes byzarilines (Belgrade, 1964)~ 11, 424. rlnD. Obolensky, in his very useful book, The Bogomils. A Study i n Balkan Neofi[anichneistn (Cambridge, 1948), pp, 174 ff, concludes that as the heresy appears under a Bulgarian name (Bogomil) and at a comparatively late date (976-1025), and bccausc or the possible Bulgarian origin of one of its propogandists (John Tzurillas) the heresy was brought to Anatolia by the Bulgars in the latter half of the tenth century. H e feels that this was all the more likely because of the “close” connection between Bithynia and Opsicion with the Balkan Slavs. T h e writings of Euthyrnius, Obolensky continues, describe a fusion of Paulician and Messalian teachings, a fusion that characterized Bogolimism. Thus the Bulgarian origin of the doctrines he attributes to John Tzurillas is confirmed by this double influence, Paulician and Messalian. For, he says, it was only in Thrace (inhabitcd by Paulicans and Messalians) that such a fusion could have takcn place, and so Tzurillas must have brought these from Bulgarian lands. This view, however, of the origins of the Bogomils and Phundagiagitai in weslern Anatolia encounters certain obstacles. The term Phundagiagitai (carriers of a sack or pursc) is not of Slavic origin (though the Slavic torbeski appears later in the Balkans), and there is a good Anatolian precedent for this term in the so-called saccophoroi of the fifth century. Though the word “Bogomil” is of Slavic origin, it is possible that the term came to be applied to these Anatolian sects because of certain doctrinal similarities with the Bogomils of the Balkans. Byzantine usage OfhereticaI nomenclature had, by this time, become quite loose. The comparatively late date (976-1025) of Euthymius’ reference to the Bogomils and Phundagiagitai in western Anatolia does not necessarily prove that because of the time sequence the doctrines entered the peninsula from Bulgaria. For if the BogomilsPhundagiagiati are in reality the Paulicians, they were present in western Anatolia much earlier. Even the argument based on the supposition that a fusion of‘ Paulician and Messalian doctrincs, which so characterized Bogornilism in the Balkans and the Bogomils and Phundagiagitai in Anatolia, could have taken place only in the Balkans is not at all certain. Not only were the Paulicians present in western Asia Minor (from the eighth through the eleventh century) but also the Messalians in Paphlagonia and Lycaonia in the first half of the eleventh century. Thus the fusion of Paulician and Messalian could have taken place in Anatolia as well as in the Balkans (Grumel, Registres, 112, 263-264). Finally, to speak of “close” connections between Bulgaria and Bithynia-Opsicion in the eleventh century is to attribute to the eleventh century circumstances that may, or may not, have existed in the eighth century. R h a h and Potles, 80-9 I . Grumel, Regisires, I,, 88-93. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, “BOyOIJlhlKd,” V.V., I1 (1895)~ 720-723. On this see the articles of Loos and Gouillard. R h a h and Potles, 11,531-532, speaks of the OQahEvTivcawol as “01 EfipEe6VTE5 KW& d v Kaipbv TOG Ofi&Aevroy TOG pacrchBo5 Boydythoc, ~ ~ T OMaaahhlavoi, I K a l Ehi-ral, xai ’Ev6outrracrral.” VI,408, “ l l ~ p l MccooaA~~GvTGV v$ poyovlhov.” Also, v, 80. On this onomastic confusion in the tenth and eleventh centuries, H-C. Puech and A. Vaillant, Le trait4 contre les Bogomiles de C O ~ ~ le ~ QPrdlre S (Paris, rg45), p. 293. The Sermon of the thirteenth-century patriarch, Germanus 11, on the Holy Cross and the Bogomils does not specifically refer toBogomiIsin theNicaean Empire,P.G., CXL, 62 1-644. Rather it is a homily on the holiness of the cross and at the same time excoriating the Bogomils because of their doctrine on the cross. Loos, “Certains aspects du Bogomilisme

”’

EVE O F THE TURKISH CONQUEST

probable that the Paulician tradition in Asian Minor played some role in the movements variously referred to as Messalian and Bogomil at this later date. The most important influx of heretical Christian populations occurred i n the latter part of the tenth and in the eleventh century. Thcse were largely composed of Armenians and Syrian Monophysites, who came in to the eastern Anatolian provinces as a result of the Byzantine policies of transferring populati0ns.~1’ I t is possible that the Thondraki may have come i n at this time,318 and that heretical Jewish Keraites entered Anatolia in the tcnth century.310Attaliates remarked upon the influx of Monophysites, relating that the Byzantine districts of Iberia, Mesopotamia, and Melitene were full of them.320The important city of Melitene a n d its surrounding terrirories became the center of the Syrian Jacobites, whereas the Armenians had come as far west as Cilicia, Cappadocia, and Armeniacon. The Monophysites constituted by far the majority of the heretical population of Byzantine Anatolia in the eleventh century, and, of course, here linguistic differences coincidcd with heresy or religious diKerences. The narrative at this point has focused on the two cardinal points of the languages and religions of Byzantine Anatolia. As these were the salient aspects of cultural differentiation, it is by their definition that the cultural character of Anatolia can best be described. Unfortunately, many of the smaller details of this cultural picture have disappeared. There is every reason to believe that i n the late tenth and the early eleventh century, prior to the transplanting of the bulk of the Armenians and Syrians, Asia Minor to the eastern portions of Cappadocia, Trebizond, and to the northern confines of Cilicia was predominantly Greek-speaking and of the Chalcedonian rite. But Anatolia had not been so in late Roman and early Byzantine times. How, then, did such a cultural transformation come about ? The processes operative had, to a certain degree, come into being before the foundation of the Byzantine Empire. Hellenism, either as a linguistic or institutional phcnomenon, had by the time OF Constantine I existed in Anatolia in one form or another for over a millenium. During the Hellenistic and Roman periods the Hellenic tradition had struck profound roots i n Asia Minor and the local languages and cults were byzantin des I I C et I Z C sikcles,” B.S., X X V I I I (1967), 39-53, also shows reason to doubt the Bogornil affiliations of these personages. 317 Vryonis, “Byzantium: T h e Social Basis of Decline in the Eleventh Century,” G.R.B.S. XI (1g59), 169-173. Charanis, “The Armenians in the Byzantine Empire,” B.S., XXII (1961), 231-234. 318 Bartikian, “Otvetnoe poslanie Grigoriia Magistra Pakhlavuni Siriiskomu Katolikosu,” P.S., VII (196z), 130-145.I344 on the 10,000marabouts. Ricoldo-Laurent, p. I 14. The military character of these pre-Islamic practices survived in burial customs. The warrior’s horse was closely associated with the burial of the slain tribesman, Gordlevski, Iz6runnye Sock, I, 86-87. William of Rubriq-Wyngaert, pp. 186-187; William of Rubriq-Dawson, p. 73, reports that the Cumans in the thirteenth ccntury hung sixteen horsetails ar: the grave of the dead. Ibn Fadlan-Togan, pp. 27, 138-140, notes that they decked the dead man with his bow, sacrificed horses at the grave and ate them, and that a horse was buried with him so that in the next world he would have a mount to ride and a mare to furnish milk. The survival of human sacrifice in the cult of the dead is attested among Ottoman Turks from the fourteenth to the sixteenth centuries. The emperor John Cantacuzene reports in the fourtecnth century a version of this practice wherein slain Turkish warriors are buried with those enemies whom they have slain. If none can be found, Christian slaves are purchased and sacrificed at the grave in the belief that they will be the servants of the dead warrior in the next world, .John Cantacuzene, P.G.,CLIV, 545. See also

273

BEGINNINGS OF TRANSFORMATION

of the tribesmen were a constant source of difficulty for the sultans, T h e Turkmens of the Karamanids, Babai, and the Udj begs destroyed the Seljuk sultanate, while the Kizllbash of Anatolia openly supported the Safavids and forced the Ottoman sultans to adopt a policy of partial extermination. Very little is known about the family life and practices of the Anatolian tribes between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries, and certainly nothing that would have a bearing on their impact upon contemporary society. One would assume that the family order remained under the influences of pre-Islamic traditions, but that Islamic practices would gradually assert themselves. Polygamy among the nomads was known, both in the steppe and in Anatolia, but it is not possible to say how extensive it was. 7GG The payment of the bride price was also characteristic of the tenth-century Oghuz and the thirteenth-century Mongols,7G7and the marriage of the widows to their husband’s oldest son (the widows other than the mother of this eldest son) seems to have been a very widespread practice based on shamanistic beliefs. 708 chapter vi. Murad I1 bought 600 Greek slaves in the Peloponnese and sacrificed them to his deceased father. Chalcocondyles, p. 348, ‘‘wR!~6k &vl‘p&pawo~ &6pho&t ds BFm6sici Buulav drvfiy~-rQ ~UUTOG na-rpl, & I ~ E O ~ J ~ E V OTQ S q6vq TGV b 8 p i j v T O ~ C , J V . ” This custom seems to have survived in the sixteenth century, Bartholomaeus Georgieuiz-Goughe, in the chapter entitled “What is assigned to be done by the Testamentes of the Turkes, as welle of menne as women.” “But the women geve monye unto soultyers, for to kill a certaine number of Christians. They make account that by so doynge, it will greatlye profite the health of their soulcs.” Ibn Fadlan-Togan, pp. r4;25, 236-237. I n central Asia the Turks killed those near whom their comrade had dled. Schiltberger-Neumann, p. I 30. For human sacrifice among the Turks and Mongols of Central Asia, J.-P, Roux, La mort chez lespeuples altafques m i e n s et me‘diduaux (Paris, I963), pp. 62, 107-108, I I I , 117-118, 1-21, 123, 169-172. M: Eliade, Lechnrmriisnicetlestdc/~rii~ites archaiques de l’exlase {Paris, I 95 I ) , passim. A. Inan, Turihte ve 6ttgiitt jnmonizm. Materyallari ve arajtirnialar (Ankara, 1g54), pp. I 76-200. Mummification of the dead, another shamanist practice from Central Asia, is attested in thirteenth-century Anatolia, Turan, “Femseddin,” pp. 208-21 I . Danishmendname-MelikoE, I, 206. L. Icrader, Social Organizalion of Ihe MongolTrtrkic Pastoral Nomads (The Hague, 1963), pp, 22-23, and passim. John of Pian de Carpini-Wyngaert, p. go, notes the existence of polygamy among the thirteenth-century Mongols. Gordlevski, Izbrannye Sociz., I, 85. 787 Ibn Fadlan-Togan, pp. 22, 128-129. 788 Ibid., pp. 22, 129-131. William ofRubriq-Dawson, p. 104. “As for their marriages, you must know that no one there has a wife unless he buys her, which means that sometimes girls are quite grown up before they marry, for their parents always keep them until they sell them. They observe the first and second degrees of consanguinity, but observe no degrees of affinity; they have two sisters a t the same time or one after the other. No widow among them marries, the reason being that they believe that all those who serve them in this life will serve them in the next, and so of a widow they believe that she will always return after death to her first husband. This gives rise to a shameful custom among them whereby a son sometimes takes to wife all his father’s wives, except his own mother; for the “orda” of a father and mother always falls to the youngest son and so he himself has to provide for all his father’s wives who come to him with his father’s effects; and then, if he so wishes, he uses them as wives, for he does not consider an injury has been done to him if they return to his father after death.” William of Rubriq-Wyngaert, pp. 184-185. The marriage custom whereby the son takes the wives of the father (his own mother excepted) is the extension of the shaman belief that the man will be served in the next life by those who have served him in this

274

BEGINNINGS OF TRANSFORMATION

The domicile, diet, and clothing of the Turkmens were all a function and reflection of their itinerant life and economy. The tents were usually of wool or felt, round or long in shape. If round they were supported by concentric staves of wood; if they were oblong the woodcn supports were of a different type.7G0Some of the dwellings were collapsible and when the time came for the nomads to move on, the tents were simply dismantled and loaded upon the backs oE the animals.770 Observers note, however, the existence of another type of dwelling (as for instance among the Tatars of Tana), not collapsible, carried about on a large cart drawn by oxen.771 Brocquihe saw large encampments of Turkmens, on the plain of the Gulf of Ayas, whose tents could each house fourteen to sixteen individuals.772On occasion the nomads who had to winter in the severe climes of eastern Anatolia or Central Asia went underground “like m0les.”7~~ Their clothing was no doubt made of materials such as hides and wool, derived from their flocks, along with stuffs that they procured from merchants in the t o ~ n s . 7 7 ~ The Turkmen diet consisted primarily of meat, milk, cream, yogurt, and butter, which werc readily available from their but it was

life. Ibn Fadlan-Togan, pp. 2 1 , 25, 127-128, remarks upon Oghuz women that in spite of the fact that they do not veil themselves or hide their “shame,” they are chaste; well they might have been for the penalty in cases of adultery, as in cases of homosexuality, was ferocious. See the plates in Petersen and von Luschan, Reisen, vols. I, 11. John of Pian de Carpini-Wyngaert, p. 35. 771 William of Rubriq-Dawson, p. 94. “They make these houses so large that sometimes they are thirty feet across; for I myself once measured the width between the wheel tracks of a cart, and it was twenty feet, and when the house was on the cart it stuck out at least five feet beyond the wheels on each side. I have countcd to one cart twenty-two oxen drawing one house, eleven in a row across the width of the cart, and the other eleven in front of them, The axle of the cart was as big as the mast of a ship, and a man stood at the door of the house on the cart, driving the oxen.” William ofRubriq-Wyngaert, PP. ‘72-173. ‘72Brocqui~re-Schefer,p. 89. For the palatial, luxurious tents of Timur and his nobles see thc detailed description of de Clavijo-Le Strange, pp. 237-24.2. Ricoldus d e Monte Crucis-Laurent, p. I 14;“Armeniam autem transeuntes intrauimus in Turchiam, el inuenimus Thurchimanos, homines bestiales, qui sunt Sarraceni et habitant communiter sub terra ad modum talparum.” Al-Marwazi-Minorsky, p. 32, notes the same practice among the Kimak. He also dcscribes, p. 33, an instance of portable defense walls among the Turkish tribes of Tulas and Lu’r, “It is their custom, when going forth in any direction, that every horseman carries with him twenty tamarisk pegs two cubits long. When they come to their encampment, they all plant their pegs in the ground surrounding the site, and lean their bucklers against them: in this way in less than an hour round the encampment a wall is made which cannot be pierced.” 774 Ibn Bibi-Duda, p. 311, describes the Karamanid Turks as clothed in red caps, black kilims and charuqa (shoes), Ibn Padlan-Togan, p. 16, on heavy clothing worn in the steppe. William of Rubriq-Wyngaert, pp. 179-183. John of Pian de CarpiniWyngaert, pp. 33-34; Ibn Battuta-Gibb, 11, passim. Anna Comnena, 111, ‘43 on black as a color of mourning. Ibn Fadlan-Togan, p. 2 I . Zeno-Hakluyt, p. I 3 ; BrocquitreSchefer, p. 83; Von Luschan, Reisen, 11,passim, on the question of the veiling of women. 77G Brocquitre-Schefer, p. 89. Cinnamus, 9. Ludolph of Suchem-Stewart, p. 30. De Clavijo-Le Strange, pp. 122, 223-224. On the idols and cult of milk production, William of Rubriq-Wyngaert, pp. I 74-1 75.

275

BEGINNINGS OF TRANSFORMiYrION

supplemented by millet or other grain (which they themselves planted or else procured from villagers),776honey, fruit, and egg~ . ~ 77 The making of bread was adapted to itinerant life, with rather infelicitous results, if one is to believe those Westerners who tasted it. The oven of the Greeks and Armenians is conspicuous by its absence, its replacement being a portable arrangement. That day, accompanied by the Armenian, we once more lodged with the Turcomans, w h o again served us with milk. I t was here I saw women make those thin cakes [of bread] I spoke of. This is their manner of making them; they have a small round table, very smooth, on which they throw some flour, and mix it with water to a paste, softer than that for bread, This paste they divide into round pieces, which they flatten as much as possible, with a wooden roller of a smaller diameter than a n egg, until they make them as thin as I have mentioned. During this operation they have a convex plate of iron placed on a tripod, and heated b y a gentle fire underneath, on which they spread the cake and instantly turn it, so that they make two of their cakes sooner than a waferman can make one ~afer.77~

The tablecloth upon which they spread their meal was likewise designed for mobility and convenience, and served as both a cloth and pantry within which remnants of the meal were stored until the next sitting. I had, when eating, a table-cloth, like the rich men of the country. These cloths are four feet in diameter, and round, having strings attached to them, so that they m a y b e drawn u p like a purse. When they are used they are spread 77e William of Rubriq-Wyngaert, p. 175. De Clavijo-Le Strange, pp. 190-191, remarks that boiled millet in sour cream was a staple of the Chagatays. The diet of these latter included not only meat, milk, and sour cream, but rice, melons, and millet, the latter three of which they themselves cultivated in the summer. 777 De Clavijo-Le Strange, p. 1 2 2 , describes a dish made of clotted cream, eggs, and honey in bowls of milk, eaten in eastern Anatolia. De Clavijo-Le Strange, pp. 190-191, and Brocquitre-Schefer, p. 89, on grapes. I t is interesting that whenever wine is desired, the travelers invariably repaired to the houses or inns of Greeks. Also, the steady diet of flesh that travelers had to consume in Turkmen territory was a cause of dissatisfaction for these travelers. I t was relieved only in towns and villages where the cuisine was not that of the nomads. 7 7 8 Brocquihre-Wright, p. 315. De Clavijo-Le Strange, pp. 1 2 1 - 1 2 2 , noted the same method of preparing bread among the Turks who had settled down in the villages of eastern Anatolia by the fifteenth century. “Their bread in these villages was indeed of very bad quality, being made after a strange fashion. They take a little flour, knead it and make pan-cakes of the same. They then take a frying-pan set it on the fire and when it has got hot throw the thin cake of dough into it, which as soon as it is heated and baked through they remove. This was the only bread that they supplied to us in these villages.” On Greek loan words in Turkish having to do with baking, ovens, and bread, see chapter vii below. This nomadic method of making “bread” is described as late as the eighteenth century by the French traveler Lucas, Voyage du Sietir Paul Lricas f a i t par ordre du mi dans la Grke, 1’Asie Mineure, La Mace’doine et l’ilfrique (Amsterdam, 1?14),I, “7. “11s portent sur leurs chevaux quelques sacs de farine lorsq’ils veulent faire d u pain, ils en dela‘ient un peu dans de l’eau. Leur plte faite ainsi, ils I’applatissent for1 mince, 21 peu prts comme une pike de quinze fols: ensuite ils font un trou dans la terre, y allument du feu, mettent dessus une plaque de fer ronde, de l’epaisseur d’une cuirasse; & enfin lorsque cette plaque est CchaufCe, ils y etendent leur plte, qui y cuit ou plCtBt s’y stche.”

2 76

BEGINNINGS OF TRANSFORMATION

out; and, when the meal is over, they are drawn up with all that remains within them, without their losing a crumb of bread or a raisin.779

Brocquitre gives a vivid description of the nomad, at his meal, which clearly underlines the complete dependence of the cuisine upon the presuppositions of the organization o r their mobile life, complete with ruins in the background. At the foot of the mountains, near the road a n d close to the sea-shore, are the ruins of a strong castle, defended on the land side b y a marsh, so that it could only be approached by sea, or by a narrow causeway across the marsh. I t was inhabited, but the Turcomans had posted themselves hard by. They occupied one hundred a n d twenty tents, some of felt, others of white and blue cotton, all very handsome, and capable o f containing, with ease, from fifteen to sixteen persons. These are their houses, and, as w e do in ours, they perform in them all their household business, except making fires. W e halted among them; they placed before us one of the table-cloths before-mentioned, in which there remained fragments of bread, cheese, and grapes. They then brought us a dozen of thin cakes of bread, with a large j u g of curdled milk, called by them yogort. The cakes are a foot broad, round, a n d thinner than wafers; they fold them up as grocers do their papers for spices, and eat them filled with the curdled milk.7s0

The physiognomy of the tribesmen evidently set them off as sharply from the indigenous population as did their peculiar society, It is quite probable that fusion with other groups such as the Kurds, or later with Christians and converts, gradually altered the physical type in many areas and introduced further physical variety among them. 7 8 1 But 77O Brocquitre-Wright, p. 308. Variants of this “table-cloth” are to be observed among most of the Turco-Mongol peoples of the medieval period. De Clavijo-Le Strange, p. 1 2 1 , describes it in eastern Anatolia: “Next they would produce a leather mat for a table-cloth, as might be with us a round of [Cordovan] leather such as we call Guadamcir, and this with them is known as a Sofra, and on this they would place bread.” It was also used by the Chagatays of Timur. De Clavijo-Le Strange, pp. nz3-rzq. William of Rubriq-Dawson, p. 98, refers to captargac of the Mongols, “that is, a square bag which they carry to put all such things in: in this they also keep bones when they have not the time to give them a good gnaw, so that later thcy may gnaw them and no food be wasted.” Bartholomaeus Georgieuiz-Marshe, describes it as it was employed in the sixteenth-century Ottoman Empire, “The Mancr of the turkische tables, and how they seat at meat, Their table having to name Tsophra is made of leather: it is spread abrode and drawn together in forme of a purse.” 780Brocqui~re-Wright, p. 314, See de Clavijo-Le Strangc, p. 124, for a description of eating habits. ‘81 Such are the conclusions of von Luschan, Reisen, 11, 198-226, on the basis of the examination and cranial measurement of settled Christians and Muslims on the one hand, and of nomads on the other. The dangers, however, of reliance upon anthropometric considerations alone are amply demonstrated by von Luschan’s conclusions in the case of the origin of the Tahtadjis. On the basis of their cranial measurements he concludcs that they are descendants of a pre-Greek, pre-Turkish Semitic population (related to thc Phoenicians), Their religious practices, however, their babas, and their life in tcnts are all evidence for Turkmen origin, as are also the partial survival among them of clcarly discernible central Asiastic facial types (see especially the plates). Von Luschan’s study is nevertheless intcresting and valuable, and has been repeated, without the fascinating plates, in “Die Tachtadschy und andere Ueberreste der alten Bevolkerung Lykiens,” Archiuft’ir Anthropologie, XIX (18g1), 31-53. I am not competent to enter the complexitics of physical anthropology nor to attempt to evaluate the specific factors, aside from ethnic mixture, which effect change in cranial and other physical proportions. A considcrable attention and effort have been expended on the anthropometry of the

277

BEGINNINGS OF TRANSFORMATION

Byzantine historians of the eleventh and twelfth centuries imply that the facial configuration of the Turkmens differed greatly from that of the Greeks.782 T h e central Asiatic facial type, which must have been the dominant one, is clearly apparent in the description that Brocquikre gives of the Ottoman sultan Murad 11, whom he saw in Adrianople. In t h e first place, as I have seen h i m frequently, I shall say that he is a little, short, thick man, with the physiognomy of a T a r t a r . He has a broad and brown face, high cheek bones, a round beard, a great and crooked nose, with little e~es.78~

Though they may not have been large in physical stature by the standards ofnorthern Europe, their rigorous life and high protein diet preconditioned them to endure great hardships and physical distress, beyond those the farming and city populace could bear.784 ancient inhabitants of Anatolia by the Turkish scholars S. A. Icansu and M. S. Senyiirek. For the period under consideration there is very little material available liowevcr. s. A. Kansu, “SelFuk Tiirltleri hakkinda antropolojik ilk bir tetlcik ve neticeleri,” I,&i Tiirk Tarill Kongresi (Istanbul, I943), pp. 4.40-456. E. F. Schmidt, AnatoliQ Mirough the Ages. Orierilnl Institute Commu~iications,no. I I (Chicago, 1931), p. 148. A. Inan published a study on the basis of examination of 64.,000 modcrn Turks, L’Anntolie, le pays dc In ‘race’ turque. Reclierches sur lcs caractlres antlirolologiques des lo@lations de la Turqitie (Geneva I 939). I I'4 1,OI I

the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries contrasts greatly with the testimony of the twelfth- and thirteenth-century sources which indicated that the Christians were probably still the majority. The continuing upheaval, conquest, tribal migrations, and conversions attaincd a climactic intensity in the two hundred years separating these two groups of documents of the mid-thirteenth and mid-fifteenth centuries.0 The critical transformation of the population, prepared by the events of the eleventh and twelfth centuries was consummated in the late thirteenth, the fourteenth, and the early fifieenth century. But the absorptive process had been a long one, stretching over four hundred years. In the course of this interaction both groups influenced each other and both bore the marks of ihe experience. But important numbers of Christians did survive throughout the centuries of Ottoman rule and in the ninteenth century constituted a minority of considerable importance. Though there are no exact census reports for the ninteenth century, again there are sets of figures that give some idea as to the number and proportion of Christians, Muslims, and Jews (see chart on opposite page). Of the estimated 12,254,159 inhabitants, 9,676,714 (78.96 percent) were Muslim, and z , y j o , z p (19.2percent) were Christians7T h e Greek Orthodox element aniounted to 1,016,722or 8.3 percent. In these statistics the Muslim element again appears preponderant,* but the percentage o f Christians has almost tripled when Ibid., tables 4 a n d 7. There are some discrepancies in the tables, as for instance in the poEulation of Ankara. But for the correct figures see the Turkish version of this work, Ara;tirmalari," table 4. This overwhelming Muslim proportion in many of the Anatolian towns is also suggested by the comments of Evilya Chelebi on the number of Muslim and Christian quarters in the towns that he visited. See below for the causes that led to the survival of a higher proportion of Greek-speakers in Pontus. T h a t tribal migration into Anatolia continued in the sixteenth century seems to be suggested by the statistics in ibid., table 5. The tax hearths of the province of Anadolu in 1520-35 (A) and 1570 (13) show marked increase in nomads:

1520-30

1570-80 I__

7'2,268 116,219 It is possible that this increase is duc not only to arrival of new tribal groups, or to m o r e efficient tax registers, but also to a general and natural incrcase of population. At the same time, there is evidence for the transplanting of Greeks and Armenians from Analolia to the Balkans, G. D. Galabov and FI. W. Duda, Dze Prolokollbucher des Kadiumles (Munich, 1960), P. a firman dated 1618-19 fixes the djizye ofGreeks and Armenians from Anntolia settled in the district of Sofia. ' Reproduced in Taeschner, "Anadolu," EIz, who has taken it from the monumental collection of V. Cuinet, Titrpie d'ilsit. Giografillie administrative. Statisligue descril,liue e l mimtmk de I'Asie Minettre, vols. I-IV (Paris, 1890-95). The 9.676,7 14Muslims includes not only Turks but also a sizable Kurdish minority a n d lesser groups of Arabs and Circassinns.

447 446

RESIDUE IN TURKISH ANATOLIA

compared to the figures of the early sixteenth century (when the ratio was gz percent to 7.9 percent). How is this rather significant change to be explained ? The Ottoman sultans practiccd the policy of transplanting populations, and Balkan Greeks and other Christians were on occasion settled in Asia Minor, but there was also an important migratory current of Greeks from the Aegean isles as well as from other regions. The lush riverine valleys of western Anatolia offered greater economic opportunity for many of these islanders, and as they were only a few miles away many Greeks emigrated to Asia Minor during the centuries of Ottoman rule. I n this manner began a movement that reversed the exodus of Greeks from western Anatolia occasioned by the Turkish invasion of the eleventh and fourteenth centuries. Many of these Christians gradually made their way inIand as merchants, a movement that received considerable impetus with the building of the railroads in the latter half of the nineteenth century. Aside from these external factors, the Ottoman unification and pacification of Anatolia, and Muhammad the Conqueror’s regularization of the church’s status after the destruction of the Byzantine Empire, brought more felicitous conditions for the remaining Christian coinmunities in Anatolia. Not only did Asia Minor benefit from unified political rule but the Christians, protected (by the millet system) from further shrinkage of their communities, were henceforth effectively united with the spiritual and hierarchical head of the church in Constantinople. Accbrdingly, one sees a n increase in the number of Christian hearths by the end of the sixteenth century.1° Because a large number of thc Anatolian Orthodox Christians spoke Turkish rather than Greek in the nineteenth century when Cuinet gathered his statistics, many have declared these Orthodox Christians (the so-called Karamanlidhes) to be of Turkish rather than of Greek origin.11 The Grcek-speaking Christians who lived in Anatolia prior to the exchange of populations in 1923 were of two types. There were the Greelrspeakers who were descended from the Byzantine population resident in Asia Minor prior to the Turkish conquest, and there was a second group of Greek-speakers who came to Asia Minor after the Ottoman conquest. These latter were heavily settled on the western coastal and riverine regions, their main center being Izmir (Smyrna).12 O f the regions in which Greek-speaking populations (descended from Byzantine times)

1°Rarkan, “Essai,” table 5, shows a marked increase of Christian hearths in the province of Anadolu (western Asia Minor) from 8,511 hearths in 1520-30 to 20,264 in 1570-80. Again one must note that perhaps this rise is due to a variety of factors rathcr than to any single causc. l1 See below for a more detailed discussion of the origin of the Raramanli Christians. la Though therc is no definitive account of the later Greek migrations and settlements, onc may consult with profit the articles in the following Greek periodicals: Z~vocpavqs, i-kjVTOU, MiKpaoIonlKh XpOviK&, ~ O V T I ~ K‘Euda. ~ ~ ’APXE~OV

448

RESIDUE I N TURKISH ANATOLIA

survived into the nineteenth century, Pontus was the single most important. T h e Graccophone element survived in considerable numbers throughout the towns and villages located between Rize in the east and Cerasus in the west,lS Trebizond, Oenoe, Samsun (Amisus), and Gumiishhane constituting the principal centers. T h e Greek mining communities of the Pontus region, especially Giirnushhane, were actively colonizing other mining sites such as Ak Dag, Bulgar Maden, Bereketli Maden, farther to the south, and when the mining industry began to dccline about I 870 in Gumiishhane, they colonized elsewhere as well. A second area in which Greek-speakers were to be Found was the region south of Pontus and north of Cappadocia and centered in Shebin1Carahi~ar.l~ A third group of Hellenophones were those Dawkins studied ’*The best survey of this second category of Greek-speaking “Byzantines” is the remarkable work of R. M. Dawkins, Modern Greek i n Asia M i n o r (Cambridge, 1 9 1 6 ) ; “Modern Greek in Asia Minor,” J.H.S., X X X ( ~ g r o ) 109-132, , 267-291; “Notes on the Study of Modern Greek of Pontus,” Byzanlion, V I (1931), 389-400. The work by Archbishop Chrysanthos, ‘H kKKhT)oiaTpamSoGv.ros, A.D.,vols. IV-V ( I 936), ismonumental. The Greek language and history of Pontus have attracted considerable attention. 13. Kiepert, “Die Verbreitung der gricchischen Sprache im pontischen Kustengebirge,” Zeilschrqt der Gesellschoft fur Erdkunde, XXV (1890), 317-333. tsvocpdtvqq, I11 (igoG), 470-481, lists I O Z of these Greek-speaking villages. P. Triantaphylides, ‘Hiv l l b ~ khhq~v V I K ~ cpuhfi, ijrol T& novTlaK& (Athens, 1866),gives, among other important data, a history of the Greek-speaking towns and villages and the approximate number of the Greeks. Papamichalopoulos, 17EplfiyqolS ~ i ~5 b ~v ~ V T O(Athens, V I 903). The collective enterprise of F. Cumont, J , Anderson, H. GrCgoire, Studiu Potzlica, vols. 1-111 (1903-10), is also valuable. Other philological studies include the following: G. N . Hatzidakis, “Analogicn Bildungen im pontischen Dialect,” Indogermanische Forsclmngen, X X X I ( 1 g 1 2 - 1 3 ) 245-250; ~ D. E. Occonomides, Laullehre des Ponlischcn (Leipzig, 1908); Hatzidakis, ‘Tkpl T ~ lTovT1iGjs S Siahk-rou Kal16lq vapl T ~ IVv a h f j avahoylKBv uxqpmlopQv,” in his Olhohoywal ’Epdvai (Athens, I ~ X I ) 1-35; , A. A, Papadopoulos, “Zuppohj €15 ~ fEpEuvav i ~ T ~ TOVTIK~S S F I ~ ~ ~ K T O W’ABqvd, ,” X L V ( 1 9 3 4 ) ~15 ff. More dctailed studies on towns and villages in the Pontus area include: N. E. Lampadarios, nEp\ ’ApICOC KO\ TEp\ TOG nbVTOU I V y8VE1,” fEVOq&Vlls, 1 (1896), 172-190, 218240, 264-272, who discusses, among other things, the reasons for the longevity of Greek in Pontus; Anonymous, “ l l ~ p l ZhTaS,” EEvocpCrvqS, V ( I 908), 363-36q;_”ll~pl KOTUb p w v (‘OpGoF),” EEVOCp&VT)S, I1 ( I ~ o s ) ,561-565; “ ‘H Kpwyva,” aevo@vqs, V (1908), 341-348; I 2 18, 287-3509 439,444, 445 Bishopric, 1111, 2 6 , 32, 34., 35, 56, 61, 198ff.l 187-3503 355, 406, 439, 4441 445 Bithynia, 12, 1311, 2511, 33n, 36, 5011, 56, 6211, lorn, 107,1o8,11o,111, 113x1, 114, ~zoff~ 146ff., , 166, 188, 190, 217, 222, 228, 234, 250 ff., 285,300, 301, 318 and n> 321, 327, 343 a n d n , 3443 370", 4049 4.16, 426, 427, 440,467 ff., 477 Bive, 355 Biza' a, 441 Bizye, 296, 300, 314 Black Sea, 11, 15, 22> 23, 33, 34n, 36, 43, 53, 71, 110, 111, 114, 127, 133, '37, 14.1, '44, 161,223, 255, 480 Boghousag, 23011 Bogomil, 6 1-63 Bohemund, I I 7 Boilas, 25n Bokht-Isho Bar Gabriel, 2311 Boleron, z r g n Bollas, 3 3 ~ 333 , Botu, 242, 40011 Bona, 16, 16111 Borlu, r8on, 353 Bosphorus, 16, 51, 76, 87, gg, 105-107, I 14, 115, 135, 146, 169 Bostandji Babaogullari, 373n Botaniates, 25n, 73 Botaniatcs, Nicephorus, go, lorn, 105, 106, 107, log, 112 a n d n, 113 and n, 14.9, 160, 230% 239% 4052 476 Bourtzes, 25x1, nzgn Bourtzes, Bardas, 73, 186 Bourtzcs (villages of), 14811, 186, 218, 441 Bread, 276 and n, 277, 377 Britain, 412 Brocade, 16, 1811, Ign, m n , 23 a n d n , 199, 239n Brocquitre, Bertrandon de la (15thcentury Burgundian traveler), 262, 275, 281n, 480 Bryennius, Joseph (reflections on decline), 419-420 Bryennius, Nieephorus, 76, 87 and n, 98, loon, 105, 106, 108 Brysis, 314, 344 Bucellarion, 3n, 5, 16, 17, 32, 33n, 309 Buddha, 27 in,369" Bugduz (Turkish tribal group), 26011 Bukhara, 83, 367, 382n, 393

507

INDEX

Bulgar, I , 51, 53,7on, 179% 18on, 463 Bulgaria, 62n Bulgarian, 6 m , 90, 105, 131, 18on Bulgar Maden, 449 Bulgars (Volga), 270n Burdur, 400n Bureaucracy, 71-77, 104 ff., 403 Burhan &Din, 139, 140 Biirkludje Mustafa, 358 Bursa (Prusa), 14.1, 175n, q 7 n , 242, 259, 269n, 28ln, 344, 359, 362, 393 and n, 395 ff.,407,426 427, 445 Bumuk, 152, 181, 214n Butcher, 23". 384, 3gon Buiian (11th-century emir), 116n, 152, 15611, 165n, 173, 181, 182, 23411 Byzantine, passim Byzantine influences on and residue in Turkish Anatolia: on economic life, 475480; on folk culture, 481-497; on formal institutions, 463-475; physical residue of, 444-462 Byzantine literature, its reflection of and reaction to decline: genres of, 408-409; religious explanations of, 41 8-42 I ; religious polemic of, 42 1-436; secular explanations of, 4.09-416 Byzantium, passim Cabasilas, 105 Caborcion, 2 0 Cadi, 240n, 385,389 Cadmus, mountain, 296 Caesareia (Icayseri), 19, 20, 24.11, 26n, 28n, 31-36, 41, 45nj 5on, 53,54, go, 92, 95, '09, 11% 116, 122, '34, '43, '44, 145, 155 andn, 164, 167, 171, 184, 196,

Cahen, I oon,-Iorn Caicus River, 131, 146, 166, 250 ff, Cairo, 23611 Calabria, 35, 304 Calamus, 131, 150, 166 Calder, 48 and n Caliph, 52, 84, 224, 422, 425 Caliphate, 49, 71, 397 Callistus (metropolitan of Amaseia), 324 Callisura, 53 Calocyres, 2511 Calograias Bounos, 120 Camacha (Camachus), 35x1, 88, 304.~320 Camel, 220,264, 270 and n, 284 Cami Baykuri (theory on origins of Karamanlidhes), 455, 456 Cantacuzenus, John VI (1347-1354)~268n, 273n, 36on; composer of anti-Islamic Polemic; 424,4331434 Cappadocia, xiii, 3n, 5, 19, 24, 2511, 31, 32, 33% 42, 48, 52, 54-56, 58, 63, 81, 92,95, 104, 109, 110,114, 115, 155 and

508

n, 167, 170, 17511, 18on, 184, 198, 221, 291, 292, 309, 440, 479; Greek-speaking Christians in, under Turks, 449, 450 and n, 451,452 C a ~ ~ a d o c i a43,459 n, 50n, 56,59n, 641 90, 102, 195, ZZgn, 227, 238n, 239,24811 Caravan, IP, 23n, 30. 53, 135, 194n,zz3, 235, 247 and n, 248, 268n, 269,479 Caravansaray, 221 ff., 23611, 243, 147, 269, 351 ff., 382, 384 and n, 385n. See also Khan. Caria (Aphrodisias, Stauropolis), 2311, zg, 44, 128, 129, 137, 155, 166, 184 and n, 190 and n, 215, 218, 224,250,251, 253, 259J 2g6>47' Carla (province), 20, 38, 39, 65, 137, 148, 190 Carian, 43, 44 and n Carpenters (Christian), 384, 478 Carpet, 23 and n, 183 and n, 238 and n, 270 and n, 370n, 380, 398; Christian weavers of, 477 Caspian Sea, 82, 83 Cassianus (12th-century Byzantine official), I G m , 230 Castamon, 2 1 , 2811, 111, 118, 119 and n, 132, 138, 162, 167-169, 187, mgn, 246, 24.7, 362, 38% 393n, 394, 4oon, 416n, 421x1; Karamanlidhes in, 452 Catalan, 137, 244, 259, 26111, 263n, 268 Catana, 304 Cataphrygian, 56 Catepanates, 2 Catharioi, 58 Catholic, 361n Catholicus, 92 Catoicia, 252, 259 Cattle, 13, 264, 270 Caucasian, I 6 Caucasion, 300 Caucasus, 1 5 ~ 2 2 34n, , 43, 76, 107, 241 Cayster River, 146, 14.7, 150, 166, 188, 1g0.250 ff. Cecaumenus, Catacolon, 2511, 67, 73, 75,86 and n, 88,416n Cedrea, 153, 166, 169, 172, 185, 190, 215, mgn Cedrenus, 90 Celbianum, 127, 147, 151 Celenae-Apameia, I 23 Celesine (Celtzene, Erzindjian), 35n Celts, 4711, 410 Celtzene (Celesine, Erzindjian), 3511, 54, 931 959, 290, 291J 320, 339" Cenchrae, 252, 254, 259 Cephallenia, 309 Cerasus, 15, 35n, 205, 106, 30711, 449 and n Chagatay, 260, 261, 264, 26511, 26811, 27on, 276n, 277n, 27911,281n Chalcedon, 13, 26n, 28n, 34n, 36,42, 106, 113, 169, 30'3fE, 307", 310", 331, 3331 403

Chalcedon, Council of, 451, 8, 92, 317, Christopher, 233 Chrysippus, 45x1 318 Chalcedonian, 63,65,66 and n, 67,g2, 93, Chrysobull, 79 Chrysocephalus (Ayasofya Manastiri; 213 Chalcocondyles (on decline), 409" church in Trebizond), 354, 355 Chalclia, 3n9 5, 15, 25"s 54, 94, 3095 Chrysopolis, 2611, 2811, 106, 107, I I I , I 12, 449" 113, 169 Chaldian, 75 Chrysoscule, emir (Gedrigdj-Chrysoscule) , Chalvatiyya (mystical order), 368, 393x1 179n Chankiri (Gangra), I 15, 246 Chubuk-ovasi, battle of, 1402,140 Charax, 126, 189 Chukurova, 271n CharIkli (Turkish tribal group), 260n Church, xiii, 17, 34 and n, 36, 37, 41, 42, Charsianon, 3x1, 5, 2511, 26n, 32, 54, 88, 46, 55-69, 74, 75, 78, 194 F.3 218, 2 2 0 , 2.3811, 244, 248n, 287-350; administra309 Chartophylax, zozn, 349 tion of Greek church under Seljuks, Chartularioi, 349" emirs, Ottomans, 194-216, 227, 287Chavuldur (Turkish tribal group), 26011 350,406,444,445 ;Armenian, Go, I 96 ff., Chawcheth, 283n 2 1 1 , 403, 4.0711; conditions of, better in Chelidonium, 2811 Trebizond, 451 ;.confiscation ofproperty Chepni (Turkish tribal group), 193, 260n, of, a n d impoverization of, 285,287-302, 281n 311-323, 34.5, 346, 348, 351, 354, 355, Cherson, 14, 15, 16, 2 2 , 309 378, 380, 402, 406; congregations of, Chersonese, I 5, 406 339-345; conversion of, to mosque, etc., Chersonite, 16, 17 159, 197, 198, 212, 226 a n d n , 346, 348 Chibuk Khan, xiii and n, 35$, 357,484; 485, 486; Coptic, China, 2681-1, 367, 388n 403; decline of discipline in, 373-339; Chindi (Turkish tribal group), 26111 deprivation of ecclesiastical leadership of, 287 ff., 323-327, 350; destruction of, Chinese, 23". 39311 Chiones (Muslim theolgians; converts 14.5, 151"~155, 157 and n, 158, 195 ff., from Judaism) at court of Orhan, 427 2 1 2 and n, 2 2 6 and n, 252, 25311, 256, 286 ; disputes over jurisdiction and ChiOs, 115, 176% 298, 317, 326, 345, 358, property of, 327-332; Jacobite (Syrian), 386% 492 Chiote, 345, 358, 361x1 17, 18 and n, 196 ff., 403; Monophysitc, Chliara, 123, 131, 150, 151, 165, 174, 188, 60, 63, 67, 69, 15811, 418; recourse of, to Turks, 332-334 217, 218, 22on Chliat, 24n,28n,53, 97 ff., 159, 167, mIn, Ci (monastery), ago, 320 Cibotus, 1 I 6, 2 I 7 242 Choma, 114, 118, 121, 170, 191 Cibyratae, 44 Choma-Soublaion, 123, 125, 154 and n, Cibyrrheote, 3n, 4, 5, 2511, 61, 309 Cikar, 362, 39511 166, 174, 189, 217, 281n Cilicia, 32-34., 54., 55, 58, 63, 67, 108-1 10, Chomatenoi, I Izn 121, 128, 131, 144, 162, 163, 170, 17511, Chonae, 20, 2% 33n, 34n, 35n, 36, 37, 187, 188, 193, 198, zoo, 213, 216, 217, 4'", 52, 94, 95, 1239 125, IZ8, 129, I45> 223, 234, 235, 238n, 24711, 256 and n. 154, 161, 167, 171, 190 and n, zzz, 223, 261, 262,26g,272nr 479 235, 296,. 297, ,317, 3'9, 416n, 4.79; Cilician, 44, 53, I 19, 120, 133 Karamanlidhes In, 45zn Cilician Gates, 23, 32, 239 Chorepiscopate, 56 Ciminas, 131 Chortatzes, Basil, 129 Cimmerian, 43 Chortocopaeum, 61 Cimolus (medicinal earth at), 492 Chorum (Euchaita), 242, 28111 Cinnamus, ag, 149,231 Choudion (Saradj Ustu), 66n Christ, 34n, 35911, 371, 387"; in religious Circassian, 16, 4311, 44.611 Cistramon, 1 2 1 polemic, 423, 429, 430 ff. Christian, viii, 2311, 36, 38, 41, 4.9, 57n, 64, Cius, 13, 28n, 35n, 116, 149, 166, 2 1 1 , 30 I , 33 I ;shipyards at, 48 I 67,80, 85, 119, 133, 143 ff., 1.56, 158 ff., Claudia, 53, 247 176 ff., 185, 192 IT.,223 ff,,zGzn, 26311, Claudiopolis, 3411, 118, 126, 152, 166, 293 269, m n , 271, 279 IF., 286n, 287-359, and n, 304 407 ff.,445 ff: Christianity, 7, Ion, 39, 55, 56, 64, 67, Clavijo, de, 26211, 264, 265n,28rn Clazomenae, I I and n, 115, 150, 166, 161, 17gn, 185, 194ff., 28611,361 ff. Christianization, Christianized, I , 49, 52, 254n, 299, 3'63 3291 345 Clement of Sasima, 62 55, 641 69, 457; of Turks, 425 Cleterologion of Philotheus, 302, 308, 309 Chrtstological, 5811, 430, 431

509

INDEX

Coelo-Syria, 94 Coinage, xiii, 4, 6 and n, 7, 18n; akche, 354, 472; Arab imitation of Byzantine, 464; Byzantine influence on, of Danishmendids, Menguchekids, Saltukids, Artukids, Zangids, Sebuks, Ottomans, 473-475; debasement of Byzantine, 406; dinar, 18311, 249 and n, 366n; dirhem sultani, 183n, 353; hyperpera, 313, 314, 318; Italian influence on, of emirates, 4.75"; nomisma, 67, 22211, 312n, 472; Ottoman gold, 475n, relation of akche to aspron, 475 and n; solidus, 5, and n, 78; Tyrian dinar (silver), 223 and n, 353 Colchian, 16 Colida, 297, 3 19 Cologne, 221 Coloneia, 5 , 22, 25n, 2811, 31, 32, 33n, 49, 5011, 60, 88, 94, 97, 110, 118,162, 167, 309; Greek-speaking villages of, 449n Coloneian, 75 Colossae, 56 Comma, 3911, 55, 56, 115, 118, 128, 162, 1671 177,461 Commerce, 4, 6, 9-19, 12, 23, yo, 41, 52, 53,71, 79, 130 andn, 182,216,222,223, 235,245 ff., 25% 269,284, w n , 382, 398n9 400, 406, 4141 475 ff.,479 Commerciatius, I 5n, I 6 Commercium, 5, 472,473; as loanword in Turkish, 479,480 Comnena,Anna, 1x4, 148, 15111, 164., 181, 228,255,416n Comnenus, 2512, 72, 165n, 178, 1g4n, 217 ff., 218, 22gn, 285, 405, 406 Comnenus, Alexius I (1081-1118), 1 1 , rgn, zIn, m n , 76, 78, 79, 106, 108, off.,, 145, 146, 1,51 ff., 162, 163n, 169 If., 17911, 181, 186 ff., zoo ff,, 215 ff., 231J 2873 4'41 416, 4391 44: Comnenus, Alexius (ruler of Trebizond), '3' Comnenus, Andronicus I ( I 183-1 1 8 5 ) ~ 127, 146,149 ff., Igon, 23on Comnenus, David (ruler of Trebizond), 131 Comnenus, Isaac I (1057-1059), 73,74,75, 7811, 87 ff., 106, 109 Comnenus, Isaac (brother of Alexius I), 110, I 1 1

Comnenus, Isaac (brother of John TI), 23011 Comnenus, Isaac (usurper of power in Cyprus), 127, 130 Comnenus, John I1 (1118-1143)~119 ff., 146ff., 158, 162, 163n, 168n, 187, 189, 19% 2 1 5 % 228, 404, 407, 416, 441, 44zn, 461 Comnenus, John (nephew of John TI, who converts to Islam), 2 2 8 , 230, 231, 466, 467 Comnenus, Manuel ( I I th century), go, 97

Comnenus, Manuel I ( I 143-1 I~o),120 ff., 130, 146, 147, 150, 163, 165 and n, 184x1, 187 ff., 203 ff., 231, 262, 267, 404, 439,441 and n, 442 Confessors (Gouria, Semouna, I-labib; church of in Edessa), Ig7n Conrad (German ruler and Crusader), 12I Constantine, Asad al-Dawla, 232 Constantine, emir (of Iskilib), 232 Constantine, magistrus, 86 Constantine 1 (324-337), 63, 64, 433 Constantine V (741-775), 16, 49, 51, 5711, 180n Constantine V I (780-797), 10 Constantine V I I Porphyrogenitus (9x39591, 1.6, 2711, 31,48n, 50, 51 and n, 66 Constantine VIII (1025-1028), 73 Constantine I X Monomachus (10421055), ? I , 72974,759 80,859 87,89>18011 Constantine X I (1449-1453), 438 Constantinople, 2, 8-18, 22-24, 30, 33 and n, 35, 36, 43, 52, 53, 64, 68, 69, 71-74.76, 80 and n, 85, 86, 88, 92, 96, loo, 104-115, 122, 126, 127, 1-29, 130 and n, 132, 135, 136, '44, 146, 169, 17911, 18011, 195, 198 ff., 220, 221, mgn, 230nj 234% 2441 250, 2531 255 and n, 266, w n , 295, 297, 300% 338, 344, 345, 3 4 f f . 9 356, 360, 387 and n, 389, 3933 404ffj 428, 437ff.9 4791 496; churches in, appropriated by Turks, 484; Turkish princes in Byzantine, 466 Contophe, George (metropolitian of GanP a ) , 293 Copper, 239 CoPtic, 403, 42 1, 459 Corasium, 7n Corinth, 304 Cortzene, 290 Corvee, 224 Corycus, 163, 167, 217, 256, 259 GO% 295, 296, 315, 330 Cotoraicia (Gothograecia), I 72n Cotton, 23, 238, 26811, 27111, 337~1, 384; Christian workers of, 479 Cotyaeum (Kutahya), 20,32,33,35n, 4511, 58, 110, 112, 118, 121, 127, 132, 153, 161, 188, rgo ff., 297, 300, 302, 304, 310" Coula, 297, 319, 450; Karamanlidhes in, 456n Coxon, 171, 180, 214 Craftsmen, 5, 6 and n, 9, 10, 16 and n, 181-1, 23 and n, 41, 182, 183, 185, 216, 238, 256, 27011, 384 and n, 390 and n, 398 ff.; Christian, in Seljuk and Ottoman towns, 477 ff, Crates, 45n Cretan, 50 Crete, 3% 11,36,39,50, 51,96n,218,305, 351,419n Crimea, 223, 241 Crispin, 91, 92

INDEX

Crites, 15n Critobulus (on decline), 409" Croitzus, zggn Cromna, 253 Croulla, 252, 259 Crusade, 11511, 11811, 145ff., 163, 172, 174, 185, 194, 197, 214; First, 116, 117, 145,152,155, 157% 158% 162, 170, 178, 180, 181, 182, 185, 2 1 1 , 21411, 215n, 23411, 24011, 404; Second, 1 2 1 , 149, 150, 151, 188-190; Third, 20, 128, 14911. 154, 164n, 221, 247n, 262; Fourth, 126, I 32 ;Nicopolis ( I 396), I 40 92, 97, 103 Cryapege, Crypto-Christian, 57% 342, 343 and n, 360, 440 Ctesiphon, 397 Cuisine. See Folk culture Cultural change, religious and linguistic, etc., 1, 2, 34n, 36, 39, 43-45, 55-68, 109, 118, 143ff., 15811, 176ff., 194ff., 223-244, 258, 2 7 0 ff,, 286 ff., 340 ff,, 34311, 406 ff., 42 I ; among Armenians, 46111; of Bulgarian Muslims, 484:; Byzantine governmental measures in face or, 438-446, 465-497; circumcision a symbol of, 353, 359n, 36111, 388, 460; conversion to Islam, 351-402, 416, 417, 428, 441, 48411; evidenced in Turkish names of Greek Christians, 460 and n, 46111; Ibn Khaldun and Manuel 11 Palaeologus on, 406, 407, 408, 415; imitation of Turkish customs, dress, amusements by Greeks, 461 and n; in interdenominational guilds, 480; manifested in linguistic Turkifcation, 448, 452-460; partial, of Greek converts in Pontus and Crete, 46111; reflected in statistics, 444-448; among renegades in Turkish armies, 468; of Vallahades, 48311. See also Arabization; Christianization; Hellenization; Islamization; Turkification Cuman, 71, 218, 273" Curcuas, 2511 Cybele, 56 Cyclades, 296, 315, 330 Cydnus River, I I 7 Cydones, Demetrius, 286, 360n, 41511, 424 Cypriot, 49 CYPrW 13, 22, 127, 130, 232, 479 Cypsela, 3'4 Cyril (metropolitan of Side), 334, 338 Cyzicus, 12, 13, 26n, 28n, agn, 34% 49,58, 106, 113, 115, 116, 146, 149, 166, 254, 299If., 304, 307% 373, 314, 3'6, 3171 3'8, 321 Dadil, 353 Dadybra, 118,12g,162, 167,185,198,221, 227 Dalaman Chay, 134

Dalassenus, 25n Dalmatia, 309 Damascus, 97, roon, 182 Dandanaqan, battle of, 1040, 8 3 Danishmend, 386n Danishmendid, xiii, z m , I 15, I 18 ff., 138, 144, 155 ff., 176 ff., 1 2 0 ff., 230 Ayn al-Dawla of AIbistan and Melitene, 1'9 Dhu' 1 Karnain of Melitene (1152I I61), 4701 474 Dhu' I-Nun of Caesareia ( I 143-1I 74), Emir 119,Ghazi, 159n>173 184,474 and n Malik Danishmend, 115, 162, 1 7 1 %177, 181, 195 and n, 2 1 1 , 213, 220, 27311, 472,473 Malik Ismail (1164-1 173?), 474 Malik Muhammad (d. 1142), 119, 155 and n , 156, 16111, 173,174, 196, 19711 Yaghibasan of Sebasteia, r 19, 120, 1 2 2 Danishmendname, 11511, 145, 151n, 161, 176 Ff., '93, 195. 2 1 1% 215, 230n, 235n, 27311, 36011, 386n; on Byzantine cuisine, 481 ;on Graecophones, 461 Danube River, 71, 80, 85, 123, 410, 412 Dar al-harb, 194, 24211, 356 Dar as-suleha, 351, 354 396139 Darende, Daridjalar,122, David, 54 David 11, (1089-1 125; king of Georgia), 284,285 Dawkins, 44.9, 450 and n Daylamite, 98 Dazimon, 32 Dchqondid, 283 Decte, I I I Delilarkent, Deluh, 170 272n Demes, 8, 397n Demirclji, 139 Demography, z , 25-30, 165, 166, 179ff., 305 ff., 445-448; displacement in, 169184, 251 ff., 257, 258, 301n Ladik), 138, and n, Denek DenizliDagi, (Laodiceia, 375 ~ 225,. 238n, 245, 248, 2 8 376n; Christians in, textile industry, 477; Karamanlidhes in, 4521-1 Derbe, 56 Dercus, 314, 327 Derira, 65 Dernschwarnm, Hans (on Karamanlidhes of Yedikule), 454 and n, 483 and n Dervish, xiii, 179, 236% 272% 273% 334, 356, 358, 359,363-401 DespIna Khatun, 355 Deve Khan, 222 Develi Karahisar, I 39, 246 Devshirme, 24.0ff. Dhikr (dervish ritual), 365 Dhimmi, 183n,224, 387,388

511

INDEX

Dhu' 1-Kadr, 139, I42 Dhu' 1 Kadroghlu, 227, 262, 266. See also Zulkadriye Dhu' 1-Kadroghlu, Malik Arslan, 237x1 Diabatenus, Leo, 97, 98 Diaspora, 52 Didymon, Mount, I 10 Didymoteichus, 314 Digenes Acritas, 405, 408 Dihistan, 83 Dimitri I (1125-1154; king of Georgia), 284,285 Dimotika, 370" Dinar, emir, 88 Diocletian, 8 Diogenes, 25" Diogenes (pagan philosopher), 346 Diogenes, Romanus IV (1067-1071), 74ff., 90-104, 105 and n, 108-110, 153, 160,164, 18011, 211,216 Dionysides, 45" Dioscurides, 45" Divrigi (Tephrice), 140, m I n , 23511. 236 and n Diya &Din caravansaray, 30411 Diyarbekir (Amida), 53, 242, 394, 445 Djai Djuna, Karamanlidhes in, 45211 Djaitu, 39811, 39911 Djalal al-Din Karatay ibn Abdullah, 230", 243,252 Djalal al-Din Mankobirti, 133 Djalal al-Din Rumi, 23, 37n, 236, 137, 243,247"! 279n, 283,370",381-3921487 Djamal Seyid (disciple of Hadji Bektash), 379%380 Djan Baba, 374 and n Djandarid, 140 Djandarli (vizier of Muhammad 11),393 Djandarogullari, 138 and n, 392 Djanik, 140 Djawaketh, 285 Djemiskezek, 242 Djend, 382n W a d , 84, 95, 115, 171, 175, 192, 193, 273 and n, 286,357, 367,368 Djimri, '351 138n~243,245,256,283, 399n Djizre, 242 DjizYe (poll W, 224, 238, 246, 357, 359, 446n Dobrudja, 379 and n Doceia (Tokat), 22 and n, 104, 110, 122, 161, 167 Doceianus, 25n Dodurga, 260n Domestic of the Scholes, 32 Dorian, 43 Dorotheus (metropolitan of Peritheorium), 332,333 Dorylaeum (Eskishehir), 20, 2 1 , zGn, 28n, 29, 31, 32, 97, 116, 118, 121, 1-23,125, 126, 146, 147, 152, 153, 161, 166, 168, 170, 174, 175, 17811, 180, 181, 185, 188 ff., 196 ff., 217,240,261n, zGz,281n 512

Dracon River, I 14 Drama, 314 Drungus, 3n Ducas, 2511, 71, 73, 96, 100, I I O , 214 Ducas, Andronicus, 100, 101-104 Ducas, Andronicus (general of 12th-13th century), 130 Ducas, Constantine X (1059-1067). 18n, 73,75,89 and n, 90-95, I o m , 15811,216 Ducas, Constantine (general who rctakes Smyrna in late I Ith century), 181 Ducas (historian, exploration of decline), 4.09n Ducas, John, the Caesar, 74, ram, 102, 104, 105, 107, 111, IIzn Ducas, Michael VII (1071-1078), 75, 76, rorn, 104-106,11o-113, ~ G o a n d n171, , 180, 406 Duchies, 2, 117, 131 Dudak, 82 Duger (Turkish tribal group), z6on Dulgadirogullari, 266. See also Dhu' 1 Kadroghlu Dusturnmae-i Enveri, 348, 380 Dyrrachium, 304, 309 Ebulfeva (dervish order), 392 Ecdicon, 349 Ecloga, 57" EdebalI (dervish and father-in-law of Osman), 392 Edessa, 18 and n, zGn, 28 and n, 29, 53 and n, 76, 94, 116, 156ff., 165 and n, 167, 169, 171-173, 180, 182, 197, m I n , 22611, 234.11, 236n, 238 and n, 256, 259, 280n, 422, 424,485 Eflaki, 236, 237, 243, 283, 384, 386, 388x1, 3903 400-402 Egin, 66, Egoumeneia, 201 Egret Khan, 223 Egridir, 138, 142, 259, 386n, 393x1 Egypt, 1 7 13"~2 2 , 39 and n, 55, 59, 68, 13011, 139, 219, Z Z I - P Z ~ , mgn, 256, 351, 358n, 3651 4031 406, 408, 421, 4351 463 Elateia, 25411 Elbegkous (12th-century emir), I Ign Elchanes, 115, 146, 149, 150, 17911,441 Elelden ( I 2 th-cen tury emir), I I gn Eligmoi, 40811 Elvan Chelebi at Chorum, 485 Emirate, 133ff., 248, 2,6711, and 418. See also Beylik Encratitai, 58 English, 53, 75 Ephesus, 10 and n, 1 1 , 2711, 28n, 3411, 36, 39, 42, 5on, 52, 56, 62n, 115, 117, 137, 151 andn, 166,zzo, 227,24011,250,251, 257, '59, 269J 297 *>' 3O7", 310"j 316, 326ff*, 332, 339, 344ff., 36In, 425

INDEX

Epidosis (granting of a vacant episcopal see to another bishop as a means of economic support), 207,289-302,314ff., 352 Epigonoi, 44 Eregli (Heracleia), 259, 28111 Eretna, Ghiyath al-Din, 139 Eretreia (medicinal earth of), 492 Ermenak, 256n, z57n Ermonymus, Charitonymus, 4 2 I Er-Tokush (Seljuk gulam and oificial), 353 Erzerum (Theodosiopolis), 86, 97, I 10, 118, 159, 160, 168, 169, 216, 234., 242, 256,257,259,281n, 31 In, 359n, 386n Erzindjian (Celtzene), 2911, 53, I 18, rain, 226n, 238n, 239, 259, 271n, 281n, 374, 382,40on, 410 Eshrefogullari, I 38 a n d n Eskidje (Greek-speaking village in region of Nicopolis), 449" Eski Koy (Greek-speaking village in region of Nicopolis), 449" Eskishehir (Dorylaeum), 2 2 2 Esola (Greek-speaking village in rcgion of Nicopolis), 449n Ethiopia, 412 Ethnic, 4, 4.2-55, 69, 71, 75, 92, 93, 109, 174% 258, 2635277n Ethnography, 42-55, 82, 143, 179 ff. Euboea, 6n Euchaita (Chorum), 51,2&n, 28n, 32, 3411, 3511, 36-40, 61 and n, 162, 167, 242, 292, 304, 310% 326 Euchitai, 58 Eudocia, go Eumenea, 56n Eunomian, GIn Euphrates River, 71, 80, 97, 117, 156n, 179". 18on, 412 Europe, 5, 24, 35, 43, 50, 136, 137, 138, 14.0, 147, 187, 190, zoin, mgn, 23711, z39,~50~ , 5 3 254 , and n, 278,286,295, 299, 300, 303 ff'., 333, 338, 408, 413, 4'4,, 4.27>441, 44' Eurymedon River, 190 Eustathian, 58x1 Eustathius (metropolitan elected to Myra, transferred to Thessalonike), 205 and n Euthymius on "Bogomils," 61, 6zn Evliya Chelebi, 22811, 296, 38811, 446; on Karamanlidhes, 454, 456 and n Excuseia, 71, 78 Eymur (Turkish tribal group), &on Eyuphisar, 246, 247

Fertek (Cappadocian village) : Turkish syntactic and lexicographic penetration of spoken Greek, 458 Filubad, 415 Fish, 11, xzn, 1711, zon, 2 1 , 24, 153, z7In, 480 Flax, z4gn Florence, Council of, 1438-1439,362 Folk culture: in cuisine, 481-483; diffused by intermarriage and conversion, 483 ;in family life, 492-494; in religion, 483-492 Folklore: body of, during last centuries of Byzantium, 436-438; on fall of Constantinople and revival of the Greek empire, 42111, 436 ff.; relation of, to popular literature, 495-496; survival of Byzantine, among Christians of Anatolia, 408, 409,495 Forty Martyrs of Sebasteia: church of at Edessa, 197"; church of at Mardin; 19711; in Sebasteia, 36, 94 France, 337n Franks, 53, 86, 90, 91, 99, 103, 107, 109, 157, 158 and n, 234 and n, 265; in Seljuk armies, 468 Frederick Barbarossa, 128, 152-154, 164n, 191 and n, 193, I94n, 262, 26711 Frederick 11, 237 Frenkistan, 378 and n Fruit, izn, Ign, 24, 276 and n, 392, 400, 406 Funduklu, 661-1 Futuwwa, 363, 365, 396 ff.,480

Fata (plural fityan), 397 and n, 398 ff. Fatimids, 98 Fatwa, 382 Feilere (Greek-speaking village in region of Nicopolis), 44.9n Ferghanid, 18on Ferrash (custodian), 353

Garelle, 314 Gargar, 53, 157, 167, 183 Garmir Vank (monastery), 156, 196 Gatchian, 284 Gaul, 421 Gazila (Christian slave and wife of Badr al-Din), 358n

Gabadonia, 54, I I 0, I I I Gabras, 2511, 125, 16~,178,230,23rand n, '232,466 Gabras, Ihtiyar al-Din Hasan ibn Gabras, 231,232 Gabras, Theodore (neo-martyr), 360, 361n Gagik-Abas of Kars, 55 Gaihan, 28, 53, 156, 180% 184 Galatia, 481-1, 56, 107, 113 Galavatzes-Yalavach, I I 5 Galesium, Mount, 10, 3411, 36, 42, 61 Gallipoli, 23511; Greek maritime personnel in Ottoman tahrirs of, 481 Gallograecoi, Gallograecia, 47n Gandja, 8x11 Gangra (Chankiri), 2 1 , 28n, 32, 3411, 41n, 52, 117-119, 122, 162 and n, 167, 168, 169,177n, 187,293,302,304~3o6,323n, 34O>34' J 394, 44'" G a n w Bolu, Garadi 299, 314, 227 318

513

INDEX

Gedrigdj-Chrysoscule, 94, 96, 105, I 79" Geduk. 122 Gemlik, 242 Genesius, 68 Genoa, 136 Genoese, 141, r$n, 358 George 11, king of Georgia (1072-1089), 283 Georgia, 84, 110, 178, 230, 248, 249, 263, 279, 281n, 283 ff., 337, 362, 379, 380 Georgian, vii, 10, 16 and n, 17, 34x1, 36, 45, 48, 75, 86, 87, 93% 118, 159"> 160, 168, 172, 176, 178, 197, 2 1 1 , 227, 230n, 134,. 241,284,440;in Seljuk armies, 468 Georgio-Byzantine, zrgn German, 53,92, 97, 103, 128, 2 2 1 , 234 Germania (Tacitus), 41 I Germaniceia (Marash), 2611, 2811, 33, 53 Germanipolis, 331 Germia, 3511 Germiyan, 138, 139, 140, 141,238n, 31011, 373 and "J 376% 379, 386n9 392 Geyikli Baba, 392 and n, 393 and n Ghanimat, 241 Ghazi, 82, 171 and n, 266, 273, 356, 363, 365, 3671 380, 392n, 397 and n, 398 Ghazi Shehid Mustafa (double religious sanctuary at Arapli), 487 Ghaznevid, 82, 83 Ghiyath al-Din I Kaykhusraw ( I 192-1 I 96, 1204-1211), 128-131, 147n, 155, 184, 227, 230"; in Constantinople, 466 Ghiyath al-Din I1 Kaykhusraw (1237'245), 227 Ghurzono (Cappadocian village, spoken Greek in, under growing influence of Turkish), 459 Gibbon, 96n Gilman-i vakfi, 395 and n, 396 and n Giresun (Cerasus), 362, 395n Glassware, 23,420n Gnosticism, 56 Gocebc (nomad), 26111 Gokciinqi (nomad), 261x1 Gok Medresse, Sivas, 235 Golde: extinction of Greek in, among Christians by late 19th century, 458; survival of spoken Greek in, 450,45 I Golden Gate, 438 Goldsmith, 239 and n, 384 and n Gomphytis, 4,011 Gorbaeus, 31 Gordes, 139 G O ~ P198n, C ~ 3 5 ~ 1 3 7 9390, , 428 ff. Goth, 46, 473 49 Gothia, 297 Gothic, 45,46, 47 Gothograecoi, 47" Goubbos, 53 Goudeles, 25n, 105 GoYnuk, 343n, 362, 394 Graecia, 47" Graeco-Turks, 228, 231.11

514

Grain, 11-17, 2 1 , 24, 34n, 39n, 67, 152, 173, 174, 219, zmn, 26% 373, 377n, 406 Granada, ngn Granary, 12, 219, 34611 Graos Gala, 126, 189, 281n Grapes, Izn, zon Great Church (in Edessa), 197x1 Greece, 238x1, 337n, 404 Greek, viii, 2, 14x1, 16, 18 and n, 44,49, 61, 64., 67, 79, 80 and n, 85, 88, 92, 93, 97, 103, 108, 109, I I I , I I ~ 114, , 118ff., 140, 143ff., 15811, 15911, 162 ff., 175, 178, 180n, 182, 18311, 185ff., 265 ff., 276ff*, 287ff.2 337", 339, 343", 351, 352, 377n, 378n, 38% 386ff.9 3 9 7 k 401 and n, 402 ff., 4.21, 425ff.; in chanceries of Seljuks, Ottomans, Aydin, 461 ; geographical extent of, prior to Turkish invasions, 46 I ; inscriptions evident as late as 15th century, 4.62; language and literature, 7, 42-48, 53, 55, 57n159 and n, 65,67,68 and n, I 75n, 38111, 4.07, 4.11, 422, 428, 457; loanwords from, in Turkish, 462 &; in Pontus, Cappadocia, Pharasa, Silk, Golde, Livisi, 446-450; replacemen1 of, in inscriptions with Karamanlidhika, 462; speakers of, in Anatolia during post-Byzantine times, of two types, 445, 446; stages of retreat of, before Turkish, 458 ff.; use of by Djalal al-Din Ruini, Sultan Walad, and in Seljuk armies, 462, 468 Gregoras, Nicephoras, 228, 300,301,416n, 468 Gregory Magistrus Bahlavouni, 54, 68 Gregory Pacurianus, zrgn Guilds, 8, 73, 74, m n , 397n, 398 ff.,463, 480 Guiscard, Robert, I 14 and n, I 15, 146,494 Gulam, 8rn, I75,zq.o ff.,263,164,353,463 Giilbahar (imaret in Trebizond), 355 Giil Hisar, 248, porn, 4.0011 Gulshaniyya (mystical order), 368 Giimiishhane (Argyropolis) 40011, 449 Gumushtekin (Turkish emir), 156n Gurdji Khatun, 237 Gurgan, 26811 Guzalia (Rozalia?), 227n GYPSY, 6611 Hadjim Sultan (disciple of Hadji Bektash), 376% 379, 380 Ilagia Severina, 304 Hagios Procopius (Urgiip), 42 Hahavla (Turkophone Christian village in region of Nicopolis), 449n Haikhrum, 66n al-Hakim, 52 Halil (grandson of Badr al-Din; author of biography of Badr al-Din), 358n

Halys River (Kizil Irmak), 21, 31, 32, 97, Hereth, 285 160, 161, 162, 216 Heretic, heterodox, 39, 55, 56, 59, 67, 96, Hama, 28011 203, 335, 418; Muslim, 134 and n, 274, Hamd-Allah Mustawfi of Kazwin, 24Fn, 175,373,384 Hermon River, I I 7 248, 249 Hamdani, Yusuf (jurist), 366 Hermus River, 146, 166, 254 Hamdanids, vii, Ion, 67 Herodotus (on the Scythians), 434 Hamid, 140 Herve, Frankopoulos, 53, 76, 87" Hamido&llari, I 38 Hetaireiarch, 23411, 440 Hetairoi, I 00 Hamman, 352, 35311 Hanazit, 53, 184 Hetite, 42, 43 a n d n, 210, 2 1 I Hanefi, 353 H e t u m (Armenian governor of Seljuk Hani (official who looks after animals in Sinope), 230n caravansaray), 352, 353" Hetum (Armenian king), 228 Haradj, 177, 1831-1, 246 Hides, 16, 17 Harem, 227, 440; Christians in, 466 Hieracoryphites, I 19, 187 Harmana (Christian and wife of Ismail, Hierapolis, 18n, 56, 155, 166, 174, 190, son of Badr al-Din), 358 1911 296, 297, 3021 304, 317, 3'9 Harran, 157, 422 Hierapolis (Syria), 9 1 , 95, 96 Hasan of Cappadocia, I 1511, 147, 150,151, Hieropolis, Himmatiyya56n (mystical order), 368 181 Hasantamih (Greek-speaking village of Hisardjik, 380 Coloneia), 449n H i m Mansur, 53, 157, 167, 173 and n, Ilasnon of Edessa (Syrian physician), 23811 24711, 25611 Hisn Zaid, 53, 197 Hass,,354 Hatzi Koy (Greek-speaking village of Hispanization, I Nicopolis), 4.431 I-Iizanedar-i hass, 243 Havayici (official who administers pro- H0d.L 355 visions and storehouse of the caravan- Iloll, Holy Apostles 4.6, 59, Go(church in Edcssa), 197" ~ a r a y ) 3.52, , 353" Havzul (Greek-speaking village of Colon- Holy Land, 33 a n d n Holy Virgin, icon of (used to refute cia), 449n Haydariyya (mystical order), 368 and n, Nestorius at Ephesus), 34n Homer, 41 I 37' Hazr-i galle (tax), 24gn Horde, 265x1 Hekim Khan, 23511 Horse, 13, 182, 220, 264, 26811, 270, 27311, Helenopolis (Eleinopolis), 13, 96, 97 284 Helenopontus, 205 a n d n Ilortokop, 355 Hellas, 6n, 8911, 309 Hosius Eustratius (patriarchal monastery Hellene, 56 i n Prusa), 300, 316 Hellenic, 45, 48n, 64 Hulagu, 226n, 238n Hellenism, vii, I , 44, 55, 56, 57n, 63, 68, Humus, 28011 89, 104., 118,287, 428, 451; geograph- Hungary, 337 ical constriction of, 408, 4.98; outside Hurufi, 370, 371 Greece, 498 Husam al-Din (Mawlawi dervish), 40 i n Hellenistic, 8, 44, 45.and n, 63 Husayn Aga, 354 Hellenization-Hellenized, vii, I , 42, 43, 44 Huseyn, 372 and n, 45 and n, 47 and 11, 49, 52, 56, H u v a Ata, 375 and n 57n, 59, 64, 65,68, 69, I8on, 210,428, Hyelion, 126 457; profound in Anatolia, 498; super- Hypsistarioi, 58 ficial in much of Syria and Egypt, 490 Hyrtacium, 318 Hellespont, 254,286,2gg,300,318,413,426 Hemsin, 395 Henry, 130 Iberia (Georgia), 283 Heracleia (Thrace), 304, 305, 314 Iberia (Spain), I , 421 Heracleia Cybistra (Heracleous Como- Iberia (theme), 2511, 55, 63,74, 86, 94., 96, polis, Eregli), 19, 35n,g6, I 16, 163, 170, I10 180, 181, 223, 247 I b n al-Athir, 191, 281n Heracleia Pontica (Pontoheracleia, Bon- I b n Arabi, 224, 225 and n deregli), 14, 33, 108, I I I , 114, 160 ff.> I b n Battuta, 20, 183, 225, 126, 238, 248, 255,257, 310% 311% 320, 399 ff. Heraclius 253,416n (610-64.1), 38, 18on I b n Bibi, 173, 234, 243, 245, 281n, 28311, Heresy, 56-68, Z O O 380, 388% 398

5x5

INDEX

Ibn Budin, 247 Ibn Padlan, 260, 268n Ibn Hawkal, 33 Ibn Khaldun (laws of cultural change), 406 ff7 457 Ibn Khuradadhbih, 32 Ibn Said, 25011 Ibrahim Inal, 86, 87, 94, 159 Iconium (Konya), 20, 24-38, 42, 56, 96, 113n, 116, 118ff., 143ff., 167, 185ff., 218, 2591269% 282, 283, 292, 304, 307, 3'0% 326, 334, 3353 339, 341, 3941 44' Iconoclast, 69 Icons, 196 and n, 434; Muslim defacement of, 357; revered by 'Izz al-Din 11, and by Turks, 489 Ida, 252,254n I d o k 375% 376 Igdish, Pzgn, 241n. See also Mixovarvaroi; Marriage Igdish (Turkish tribal group), 260n Ilan Ovasi, 271" II Arslan, 213 Ilghazi (Artukid), 156, 157, 158, 173 353 Ilgin Khan, 235 Ilkhanid, 135, 138, 139, 248, 249 Imam, 351,353 and n Imams, Twelve, 372 Imaret, 236n, 350,351, 354,355,396n Immortals, I Izn Inales (12th-century emir), I Ign India, 17, 27% 39n, 40, 219, 222, 367, 388n, 410 Indje Minare, 236 Indje Su, Karamanlidhes in, 452n Industry, 4, 9, 12, 14-16, 23, 24,40n, 219; Christians in Turkish, 477 ff. Inegol, 396n Intermarriage: 131, 176, 227 ff,, 24111, 358% 370% ,416n, 463: 467, 483 fE, 492 ff.,offspring of, baptized, 488, 489; offspring of, often bilingual, 461 Ioanes patricius (son of), 232 and n Ioannicius (successively bishop of Nyssa and metropolitan of Mocissus), 338 Ionia, 20, 113, 148, 413, 414 Ionian, 43,410 Ior River, 284 Iqta, 399% 469 Iran, 83,84,267,268n, 382,393n, 398n Iranization, 44n Iraqi, 83, 180, 366 Iris River (Yeshil Irmak), P I , 160,161, 162 Iron (fortress built by Alexius I), I 16n, 217. See also Sidera Isa (son of Bayazid I), 141 Isa (Syrian physician), 23811 Isaurian, 43, 45 and n Isa Viran, 3961-1 Isawiyya (mystical order), 368 Ises, John (Turkish convert to Christianity), 442n

w-5

5'6

Isfahan, 83, 400 Isfelyar, 355 Isfendiyaro&Ilari, 141 Isidore (metropolitan of Thessalonike), 322 Iskenderum, 280n Iskilib, 354, 355 Islam, 18,Ign, 82, 109, 161, 171, 178, 179 andn, 194,200, 215, 224,2301 234,236, 24% 242, 272, 285, 289, 34% 349, 35'402,403,4O6,408,416, 421 ff.; apostasy from, 441 ; In religious polemic, 423 ff., 440. Islamic: society and institutions, vii, 174, 211, ZZ3ff., 232, 273, 280, 350-402; world, 16,40, 71,82, 17511, 240, 356 ff.; authors and literature in, Ign, 27911; law, 177, 285, 356; borrowings from Byzantine civilization, 464,465; relation of theology to Byzantine polemic, 464 Islamization, Islamized, vii, viii, 2 , 69, I 18, 178, 179,215,242,260, 271 ff., 284,286, 298, 310,340 ff.2 351-4029 406,4071 415, 421, 441, 442, 4443 451, 463, 484n; incomplete, of Greeks, 483; In Spain, 460 Ismail (emir), 116, 199, 2 1 1 , 213 Ismail (son of Orhan; religious discussions with Gregory Palamas), 427 Ismailite, 38, 269, 346 Ispahan-melesi (Turkophone Christian village in region of Nicopolis), 449n Isparta, 192, 28011; foundation of Greek schools in, 45rn; Karamanlidhes in, 45rn, 456n; recession of Greek in, 458 Israil (father of Badr &Din), 358n Istakhri, 16 Istanbul, 361n Istankus (Seljuk Christian mercenary), 234 Istilaho, 355 Italian, 14, 80, 126, 133, 263 Italy, ' 3 59, 7I3 791 337% 4043 410 Izmir (Smyrna), 138, 257; Greeks in Ottoman, 448 Iznik (Nicaea), 23711, 14.2, 157, 426,427 'Izz al-Din Kaykaus 11, 227 and n, 2 2 8 , 232, 234n, 244n,. 425, 440, 441; in Nicaea, Constantmople, 466; wears purple boots, 467

Jewish, 11% 13% 1% 55, 63, 233, z38n, 386,399,419,445 John (dcspot), 250 John Mauropus, 40 John Mcleteniotcs (protonotarius of Caesareia), z33n John of Damascus, 422 John of Ephesus, 39, 65 John Orphanotrophus, 40, 72, 73 John Tzimisces, 38, 40,60, 68, 72 John Tzurillas, 62n Joseph, 61 Joseph (metropolitan of Trebizond), 160 Joseph (ordained bishop of Limnia by Tagarid, 335 Josephites, 136, 334 Judaism, 55,57n, 66,435 I79n Justin I (518-5~7)~ Justin I1 (565-578), 17gn, 18on Justinian I (527-565), 9, 13, 1711, 27n, 49n, 57, 58, 65; equestrian statue of, xiii, 436 ff. Justinian 11 (685-695, 705-711), 4,49,50, 51 a n d n Kaaba, 38811, 434 Kachak, 16 Kahta, 140 Kahya Tepe (Greek-speaking village in region of Nicopolis), 449" Kainuk, 239" Kaisum, 53, 126, 156 and n, 1G7, 174,184, 196 Kakig of Ani, 54, gn, 93, 109 Kalandar, 272 and n, 17311, 367,368, 371, 385 Kalandariyya (dervish order), 365 ff. Kalatzouk (Greek-speaking village in region of Nicopolis), 449n Kallinoghlu (12th-century emir), I ~ g n Kalonoros (Alaiya), 227, 230 Kaloyan al-Qunewi (Greek architect of Konya), 235,236 and n Kalo Yani (Greek painter in Seljuk Konya), 389 and n Kamal &Din (emir), 384 Kamal al-Din of TiAis, 246 Kamal al-Din Rumtash ibn Abdullah, 243n Kamil of Egypt, 256 Kamishli (Greek-speaking village in Pontus), 449" Kanekah (dervish cloister), 354,365 Kanin, 307" Kannunname (Ottoman fiscal law for a province), 47 I Kanyukh, 231 Kapetru, 86 Kara Agach, 281n Kara Arslan (emir), 19711, 226 Kara Dag, 42 Karaevli (Turkish tribal group), 260n

Karagoz, 393n Karahanid, 82, 83 Karahisar, 138, 242,259, 281n Karakereviz (Greek-speaking village in region of Nicopolis), 44911 Karakoyunh, 139, 262, 28111 Karaman, 140, 24.2, 245, 386n, 394, 445, 466 Karamanid, 134n, 135, 138ff,, 228, 243, 247,249,262n, 261,269,274, 275n, 282, 283, 392: 3931 399n, 452 Karamanli, 23811, z3gn Karamanlidhes (Turkophone Greek Christians), 452-4,61; Cami Baykurt and theory of Turkish origin, 455-4+?7; disputed origins of, 448 and n ; earlicr history in accounts of Council of Bask, Angiollelo, Dernschwamm, Evliya Chelebi, 454; evidence for linguistic Turkification of, 458-459; historical parallels of, 459-461 ; literature of, 454, 455 and n ; a political question in 20th century, 453 Karamanoglu, 140 Karasi, 138, 140, 393 Karata (Kerete), Karamanlidhes in, 45211 Karatay, 23on. See also Djalal al-Din Karatay ibn Abdullah Karatekin, I 14, I 15 and n Karayazidjioghlu, 281x1 Kara Yusuf, 262 Karirn al-Din Mahmud of Aksaray, 224, ~ 2 5 234% , 243, 244ff., 281n, 283, 380, 464 Karis Dagi, 395 Karkin (Turkish tribal group), 26on Kars, 281-1,54, 55, 28011, Mgn; Karamanlidhes in, 4?2 Karshuni (Arabic written in Syriac characters), 459 Karthli, 283n Kashgari, 26011 Kastamonu (Castamon), , -242 Kataphygia, 186n Katochorion (Greek-sueaking village in region of Nicopolis), 449" Kavala (Kaballa), I 1311, 283, 38611 Kavli, 400 and n Kawiye (Geyve) ,400n Kayi (Turkish tribal group}, 26011, 28on Kayseri (Caesareia), 134, 139, 19311, z I n , 232,242,243,246,n56,259,27~n,281n, 352,354,3551 362,370n9 374,3751,377, 386n, 39911, qoon, 451, 458; Christians in Turkish textile industry of, 477; Greek-speaking villages in vicinity of, 450 and n; Karamanlidhes in, 452 and n Kazaruni, Abu Ishak ibn Shahsiyar (9631033; founder of Kazaruniyya), 367 Kazaruniyya (Ishakiyya; dervish order), '73.", 367, 393 Kegilik (Greek-speaking village in region of Nicopolis), 449n

5'7

INDEX

Kelkit Su, I 15 Kondistabl (in charge of foreign merKeltzana (Greek-speaking village in region cenaries in Seljuk armies), 234, 468 of Nicopolis), 449n Kontogmen (Turkish emir), I 1611 Kelu Khan, 374 and n, 375 Konya (Iconium), I 15, I 19 ff., 163, 169 ff., Keluk ibn Abdullah (architect), 236 178,180,181, 193 ff.,214 ff., 244 ff., 256 Kemah (Camacha), 242, 259 and n, 280% 283,287,311,334,352, 353, Keman, 383 355, 362, 3709 376, 380, 382 ff.2 393n, Keraite, 63 399% 400 and n, 401,4041 406,4453 459, Keshish D a g , 393 479; Christians in Turklsh textile Keul Khan, 271" industry in, 477, Kararnanlidhes in, 452 Kevele, 259 Kopruhisar, 259 Khan (inn, caravansaray), 12, 13, 3011, Koran, Ig8n, 2251 359", 364, 378n, 383n~ 391,413 and n, 428 ff. 133, 2 2 2 , 223, 236 and n, 247, 353, 354 Kharpert, 109 Kor4glu, editors of, in Karamanbdhika, Khazar, 81,82, 18on 495 Khidir (Muslim saint often equated with Kose Dag, battle, 1243, 134. 23111, 234 St. George or St. Theodore), 485 Kossovo Polye, battle, 1389, 140 Khidir Beg (ruler of Ephesus and brother Kozan (Sis), 271n of Umur Beg), 345 ff. Ksanos, 362, 395 Khlardjeti, 283, 284 Kufrusund, 281n Khodjend, 382n Kullar, 395 Khoshkadem ibn Abdullah (slave of Umur Kulping, 53 Kumral Dede (dervish), 392, 393 Beg), 396: Khudavendigiar, Karamanlidhes in, 452 Kumush Tekin, 94 Khurasan, 71, 82, 83 and n, 84n, 133, Kurd, 433 53, 85n, I 18, 277 181,3641366,369 and n, 3701 372,373, Kurdish, 45, 48, 446 Kurdistan, 83, 85 374, 382, 386, 393 Khurasan Salar, 89, 94, 15811 Kurluk, 4oon Khusraw (Turkish emir), 156n, 165n Kurucheshme Khan, 2 2 2 Khwarazm, 83, rq5,281n, 367 Kurultai, 26511 Khwarazmian, 247,260 Kusta, I 13n Khwarazmshah, 133 Kutahya (Cotyaeum), 138,222,242,281n, Kilidj I Arslan (1og2-1107), 165n, 181, 376n, 38611, 392, 393"; Christian magnate-soldiers allowed to hold lands 2'3 Kilidj I1 Arslan ( I 155-1igz), 1 2 0 ff., under Ottomans in, 469; Karamanliclhes 153ff.~171, 184, 194, 197, Iggn, 20811, in, 45211 2 1 1 , 2 1 2 , 227, 231 ff., 267n; in ConKutlumush, 94, I 15, 120, 239" stantinople, 466 Kyr Alexius (Scljuk ambassador to Kimak (tribe), 27511 CYPrus), 233 Kinik (Seljuk tribe), 81 and n, 266 Kipchaks, 83, 260, 281x1, 285 Kir (KYr), 257n Labaca, 54 Kir Farid, 227,230 and n, 232 and n Lacedaemon, 3, 14, 32211 Kirghiz, 366 Lacerion, 126, 189, 190, 281n Kir Hayi (uncle of 'Izz al-Din 11; varieties Ladik (Laodiceia, Denizli), 392, 399n, are Kirhane, Kiryane), 227n 4oon, 401 Kir Kedid (uncle of 'Izz al-Din 11),227n Lampe, 117, 123, 126, 154, 166, 170, 189, Kirman, 83 28111 Kirshehir, 246, 249, 3543 355, 369 Lampron, 109 Kitab-i Dede Korkut (Turklsh epic), Lampsacus, 12, 13, 254, 426, 427 273" Laodiceia ad Maeandrum (Ladik,Denizli), Kizil Avrat (Farava), 83 2 0 , 27n, 32, 34"145n, 56, 117, 118, 119, Kizilbash, 274 121-123, 128, 132, 154, 161, 167, 168, Kizil Irmak (Halys River), I 15, 160 181, 18311, 187, 189ff., 214, 223, q 4 n , Kizil Kodjaoghullari, 281n 238 and n, 24011,245, 24.711, 250x1, 296, Knights of Rhodes, 241 2971 3023 3043 3Ion, 3171 319, 328,386n Kobcur (tax on livestock), 24911, 270 Laodiceia Cecaumene (Combusta), 20, Kodjaili, 242 164, 167, 170, 21'7 Koinuk (Gieek-speaking village in rcgion Laptocome, mgn of Nicopolis), 449n Laqabin, 53 Kok Koy (Greek-speaking village in region Laranda, 45x1, 128, 134, 163, 236, 256n, of Nicopolis), 44911 257, 259,281n, 382, 386n, 400 and n Koladna, 259 Larissa, 2811, 54, 55

Larissa (in Thessaly), 295, 304 Lascarid, 165n, 216, 219, 220, 2 2 2 , 234 and n, 244,285,404 Lascaris, John IV (1258-1261), 136 Lascaris, Theodore I (1204-1222), 131, '47,219n Latin, 14% 18% 34% 36, 48, 53% 91, 9% 116-118, 123,126, 1ng,13off., 148,163, 214, 218,223, 231n, 298, 334,337,362, 404. Latinization: of Greeks in Sicily and Italy, 460 and n; of Spain and Gaul, 42 I Latmus, 36, 42, 151 Latmus, Mount, a18 Latrus, I I Z , 146, 14811, 151, 166, 169, 191 Latrus, Mount, 1 1 2 , 128, 195 Laz, 48% 53 Lazarus (patriarch of Jerusalem), 336 Lazic, 48 Lecapenus, 25n, 66 Lefke (Leucae), 242, 362 Legumes, 24 Leichudes, 25n Leimmocheir, 126 Lembus, 34.9n Lemnus, 314; medicinal earth at, 492 Lentiana, Mount, 172n, 187 Leo, Armenian, I I 9 Leo I11 (717-741), 57 and n Leo VI (886-912), 3 and n, 4, 8, 13n, 50, 303 ff, 445 Leo 11, Rupenid (d. I Z I ~ ) ,131 Leontius of Balbissa, 62 Leontocome, 5 Leontopolis, zoIn, 205,310, 315, 325,326, 339 Lesbos, z54n Leucae (Lefke), 2 1 , 31 Leucate, 51 Levant, vii, I , 421, 463 Libya, 410 Likhndon, 353 Limna (Caaoadocian village) - . : Turkish , .* replaces Greek in, as spoken language in nineteenth century, 458 Limnai, 154 Limnia, 291, 318, 325, 335 Linen, 15 and n, 23, 238n Liparites, 86, g6 Little Phrygia, I 2 I Litvon, 300 Litzasa (Greek-speaking village in region of Nicopolis), 449" Livestock, 12, 20 and n, 24, 38, 1 2 2 , 123, 127, 128, 130, 173, 191, 192, 196, 197, 220, 24,711, 248, 253, 256 and n, 261, 163 ff., 284, 375,406 Livisi, survival ofGreek in, 450 and n, 451 Logistike, 6n Lokman Perende, 369 and n Longinias, I 2 I Lopadium, 127, 131, 146, 149, 166, 217, 313r 314,318

Louis VII, I 2 I Louis of Blois, 130 Louma, 126, 151, 166 Ludolph of Suchem, 257, 394 Lumber, 24 Lu'r, z75n Lycandus, 5, 25nJ 28% 54, 55, 57, 95, 96, 170,184 Lycaonia, 46n,58,61n, 6211, 107, 291, 292 Lycia, 58, 131, 14.8, 166, 270% 450 Lycian, 43, 44 Lycus River, 161, 162 Lydia, zon, 44, 58, 65, 128, 148, 188, 190, 252,4'3 Lydian, 43, 44 and n, 219 Lyon, Council of ( I 274), I 36 ; museum of, 239" Lystra, 56 Macarius (metropolitan of Sebasteia), 335 322 (patriarch of Constantinople), Macarius Macedonia, 5, 8911, 92, r54n, 309 Macedonian: dynasty, 72; heresy, 6111, 433; theme and soldiers, 87 and n, go Macri, 40n; GuIf of (Fetiye), 132 Macri, Romanus, I 13n Madik (monastery), 256n Ma'din an-Nuhas, 33n Madytus,355 Madjka, 3 14 Maeander River, 20, 52, 121, 123ff., 128ff., 146, r47 and n, 151, 154, 155, 166, 184, 187, 18gff.,218andn,250ff., 28 In, 408 Maeroneia, 301, 314, 317, 322" Magedon, 250, 251 , 253n, 254. Magian, 387n Magnates (aristocracy) : Armenian, 229, 130n; as bearers of Byzantine influence in Turkish society, 465-467; Byzantine, 24-26, 71-78, 87% 105, 109, 131, 2 2 7 ff., 244, 403, 405; join in Ottoman conqucst of Bithynla, 468; Muslim, 228 and n, 375, 38511; Persian, 397; Tatar, 375n Magnesia a d Ilermum (ad Sipylum), 139, 248, 252, 254, 259,281n Magnesia ad Maeandrum, 56,219, 222 252 Mahmud, Turkish emir, I I 6n Mahmud Aga, 354 Mahmud of Ghazna, 8 i n Maina, 59n Malagina (Melangeia), 21, 31, 32, 33, 153, 166, 188, 217 Malarnatiyya, Malago, zgn 364, 367 Malatya (Melitene), 140, 242, 259 Maleinus, z5n, 72 Malikname, 82 Malik Shan (Anatolim Seljukprince), '4.7, 15011, 151

519

INDEX

Malik Shah (1072-10g2; sultan of Great Seljuks), 10511, 1 7 1 %17gn, 199,211,213, 226

Mallorca, zgn Mameluke, 134, 135, 139,215 and n, 245, 258

Mameluke (non-Egyptian),226,256 and n Mamplanes (Pamplanes, Balabanes, Kaplanes?; Turkish chieftain), 121, 188 Manes, 38911 Mangaphas, Theodore, 127,128, 131, 154, 15.5, I90n, 23on Mani, 58 Maniaces, 2511 Manichaem, 59, 61, 422 Manichee, 5711, 5811, 61 and n Manisa (Magnesiaad Maeandrum), 280n Manisa (Magnesiaad Sipylum), 40011 Mansur (Turk of Bithuyia, late 11th century), 106, I 13 Mansur (Islamic mystic), 384 Manyas, 242 Manzikert, 17 and n, 2711, 33, 53, 80, 87, 159, 163,216, 266 Manzikert, battle of, 1071, 69, 70 and n, 74-76,85,88,89,96-104, 106, 108, 1091 1 1 , 124-126, 142, 145, 152, 155, 160, 171, 179, 18011, 195, 215, 216, 260, 285, 405,406,444j 456,481 Marabout, 17.311 Marash, 28n, 116, 156, 167, 170, 171, 181, 182,184,194n,2I4,242,245,247,281n, 362 Marco Polo, 182, 183, 235, 238,401 Mardaite, 4 and n, 49, 52 Mar Dimat (monastery), 256 Mardin, 53, 19711, 27zn Mar Domitius (monastery), 197" Maritime life: Byzantine influence on Ottomans, 480, 481 and n; Greek loanwords in Turkish used in, 481 and n; Italian influenceon Ottomans, 480, 481 Mar Jacob (Nestorianchurch), 157, 19711, 236n Markos, 23211 Marmara, Sea of, 217,438 Marriage, 119,174 and n; concubinage, a form of, 359,432; kepin, a form of, 48311; polygamous, 274 and n; and prokpsis, 46G; ofsultans to Christian women, 466. See also Igdish; Mixovarvaroi Marta, I 13n Mar Thomas of Mardin, 226 Martinaces, 66 Martisapao, 54 Martolos, 25311, 468 MatrYr, 36 and n, 341, 342, 343 Martyropolis, 26n Maryandian, 252 Mary Magdelcne (tomb of at Ephesus), 34n Masons: Greek, 236, 237 and n, 478; Turkish, 237 520

Mastaura, 52 Mas'ud I (;116-1156), 119, 120, 121, '53, 156, 158, 159, 182 Mas'ud I1 (1282-1304), 361n Mas'ud I11 (1307-1308), 361n Masye (monastery), 256n Mathnawi, 18qn Matiana, &n Matrah-i sabun (tax), 249 Matthew (metropolitan of Ephesus), 269, 299, 328,330,344-348 Matthew ofEdessa, 93, 108, 156, 159, 170, 172, '73, 1991 2 1 1 Maudud, 157 Maurix, 14, 25n Maurozomes, 131, 147, Igon, 227, 230n, 232 and n, 234 and n, 461 Maurozomes (hetaereiarch at court of Orhan), 440 Maurus, 2,511 Mawlawi, xiii, 334, 38 1-392 Mawlawiyya (dervish order), 366, 368, 381-397: Mayaferrikin, 3311, 53 Mecca, 382 Medeia, 314 Mediterranean, 2 2 , 1 1 0 , 133,216,223,480 Medresse, 2 2 1 , 223,236n,243,350, 351 ff., 382, S85", 387n, 389, 396, 402 Megale idea, 438 Mekhitar the Patrician, 230n Mekteb (school), 354 Melaneia, 322 Melangeia (Malagina), 120, 121, 146,253, 259,301 Melanoudium, 113, 128, 151, 166, 195, 251,259 Meleke (Greek mother of Badr al-Din, convert to Islam), 358n Melenicon, 314 Meletius (Turk converted to Christianity), 425 Meleum, 150, 166 Melias, 2511, 54 Melissenus, 2511, 72, 105 Melissenus, Nicephorus, 106, I 13, 153, 230n Melissopetrium, I 10 Melitene (Malatya), 17 and n, 18n, 26 and n, 28 and n, ng, 31-34,49, 5on, 53, 54,55,60,63176,88,90> g2,94-96, 109, 11.5, 119, 122, 12611, 144, 145, 156, ff., 163, 167, 169, 171, 173 and n, 184, 196, 197n, 198, Iggn, 211, 213, 2 1 5 , 216, 22611, 227n,228n, 233 and n, 238 and n, 245, 14-79 256, 290, 291, 302, 306, 310, 320, 339% 407,414 Melkite, 422 Meloites, Jacob (on the Karamanlidhes), 456 Meion, 26811, 276n Melus, medicinal earth at, 497 Memres, 247

Menaqib al-Arifin, 38611, 389, 390, 391 Menbij, IIzn, d o n Menemen, 139,281n Menguchekids, 118, 133, 144, 155, 160 Menohort, 395n Menshur, 193n, 267n Mcnteshe, 140, 251, 28011, 281x1, 376n, 3791 386n, 392 Merak, 115 Meram, 362, 385, 390; Karamanlidhes in, 454 Mercenaries: Byzantine, 4, 74, 75, 76ff,, 87n, 8 4 9 1 ff., 104, 107, 11211, 152, 244, 278n, 403, 434; SeUuk, 134, 1.82, 234 and n, 403,404. Merchants, 5, 6n, 9, 10, 1 1 , 13 a n d n , 14 and n, 15, 17, 18 and n, ZP, 23, 30, 40, 41 and n, 99,216, 247 and n, 268,269, 270, 384, 387; Arab, 33; Armenian, 22, 88, a35n,479; Chersonite, 22; Christian, 26, 133, 226, 23811, 361 ; Circassian, 2 2 ; Greek, 16, 2 2 , 88, 130n, 2 2 1 , 222, 223, 235, z93n, 448, 479, 480n; Italian, 9% 2 2 2 ; Jewish, 12, Ign, 22, 33; Muslim, Ion, 2 2 and n, 26, 5011, 133, 185, 2 2 1 , 223, 382, 398n; Russian, 2 1 ; Syrian, 28, 47, 88, 235"; Turkish, 130n; Venetian, 11, 71979 Merend, 38211, 386n Merwanid, 53n Merzifon, I 39 Mesanactes, 25n Mesarya, 355 Mesopotamia: Byzantine, 5, 19 and n, 25n, 54,55r 58,63,,66,86,90,92,94,96, gg, 108, 109; Musllm, 83,84, 124, 175n, '94,.197", 401,422 Messallan, 58, 59, 62 and n, 63 Metabole, 107, 1 1 1 Metalwork, 239 and n, 4zon; Christian, under Turks, 478 and n Metathesis (transferral of hierarchs), 2 0 5 , 207, 327 Methymna, 3 I 4 Metochites, Theodore (reflections on Byzantine decline), 408-414 Metropolitan, 8, 9, 35, 37, 56, 61 and n, 109, nooff., 218, 22711, 287-350, 439, 444,445 Metropolitanate, 26n, 34, 35, 201 ff., 187-350, 355, 406,439, 444,445 Mevlud (work on the birth of Muhammad), 359" Michael (metropolitan of Ankara), 206, ?97n Michael (son of Maurus, patricius), 232 and n Michael (tax collector of Mylasa), I 30,147, I gon Michael Acorninatus, 37 Michael IV (1034-1041), 78 Michael the Syrian, 55, 102, 12611, 129, 156, 191, 2 1 1 , 212, 281n, 418

Middle East, I , 15, 16, 69,82, 83, 84, 193, 223,269, 405 Mihalich, 242 Mihrab, 378n Mikail Kose, 23211, 234~1,468 Milas (Mylasa), 4oon Miletus, 1 1 , 3511, 36,42, 61, 131,220, 250, 251, 259, 296, 297, 302, 3'5, 323n Millet, 219, 26811, 276 and n Mining, I In, 22 and n, 23,239 and n, 406, 478; communities, Greek, 449 and n Mirliva, 354 Mirokalo, 362, 395x1 Misse, 28in Mistheia (of Lycaonia), 35n Mitylene, I 15, '54, 304, 314 Mixovarvaroi, 176 and n, 182, 228, 229, 24111, 440,446. See also Igdish; Marriage Mlch the Armenian, I 75n Mocissus, 31, 34x1, 292, 302, 304,31on,326 and n' 335,338,341, 362,394 Modrenl, 343% 362,394 Mohair, 24.9" Mollus, 45n Monasticism, monastery, 41, 42, 5011, 53, 56, 61, 65, 93, 151 and "9 755-1579 1g5ff., 21311, 218, 220, 221, 224, 252, n, 256, 334, 3351 3541 3551 S87 253 and n, 389,407,450 Monemvasia, 295, 314, 318 Mongol, 37n, 133, 134 ff4, 215 and n, 224, 226n, 134, 244 ff., 256 and n, 258, 260, 271n, 272 and n, q 7 n , 283, 366, 370, 376,382,384,, 388,398n, 3 9 ~ 411,425, 9 469 Mongolia, 82 Monolycus (Turkish emir), I 1611, 176 Monophysite, 60,63,67,69, 158n, 418,422 Montanism, 56, 59,64 Montanist, 56, 57 and n, 6111, 67 Montanus, 56 Mopsuestia (Mamistra), 19, 26n,28n, 109, 116, 117, 119, 1 2 1 , 163, 167,256, 259 Morea, 36, 266n Moses, 359n, 390, 391 434, 435 Mosque, xiii, 501-1, 191-198, 221,223,235, 236 and n, 346, 348, 350, 351, 353 ff., 382, 38711, 39411, 39611, 402; churches converted to, 484, 485 Mossynian, 252 Mother of God (church in Edessa), 1g7n Mouseli (Greek-speaking village in region of Coloneia), 44911 Mozarab, 460 Mtcouar River, 284 Miicerred, 355 Mudaresun, I 09 Muderris, 353, 387,389,414,428 Mudurnu, 4oon Miiezzin, 352, 353 and n Mugla, 456n Muhammad (Anatolian bandit), 24711 Muhammad I (1413-1421), 141,396n 521

INDEX

Muhammad I1 (1451-1481),' 141, 142, 237% 24% 285, 291, 354, 370, 393, 448, 483 Muhammad Beg, Karamanid, 392n Muhammad Kushteri, 393n Muhammad the prophet, 178, 357, 358, 359% 369, 372, 390, 417; in religious polemic, 423 ff,, 429, 430 and n, 432 ff. Muharrem, 371 Mu'it, 353 Mules, 182,284 Mummification, '2741-1 Muntaner (Catalan chronicler), 281n Murad I (1362-1389)~140, 378,393 Murad I1 (1421-1451), 141, 298, 36111 Muralt, 18on Murid, 243,381,392 and n Musa (emir of Laranda), 382 Musele, 2511, 66 Musician, 233 and n, 237, 478 and n Muslim, vii, 12, 1411, 19, 26, 28, 33, 3411, 36,371 3 9 , and ~ ~n, 66,67,81n, 85391, 95,1o4,1m 129,134,143 fL158, 159n, IGrn, 163, 176ff., 193, 213 ff,, 221 ff., 236, 243, 244, 246n, 248, 25% 260, 162n, 263n, 272n, 273,277n, 27gn, 282, 283, 292 ff.,336 and n, 340, 3417 347, 348, 35Iff.3 402, 404, 412, 414, 417, 420, 422 ff., 445 ff. Musrif, 351, 353n Mustawfi Sharaf &Din Osman, 246 Mutawakkil, 2311 Miitevelli (administrator of pious foundation), 352, 353 Muzaffar al-Din, 231n Muzif (official responsible for looking after travelers and their food in caravansaray), 352 Mycale, Mount, 210 Mycenaean, 43 Mylasa, 4511, I 28, 2 1 0 Myra, 2% 34n, 36,39n, 4011, 41,61,151n, 205 and ni 2573 259, 295>296,302, 304, 3051 3109 329,3301 333 Myriocephalum, battle, I 176, 123 ff., 148, 166, 189,191, 193, 20811, 231, 262, 266, 1784 4411-1; site of, 154 W i a , 131, 146, 148, 166, 188, 250, 252, 254 Mysian, 4611 Mysticism, 273n, 363-402 Nacoleia, 20, 26n, 3511, 56n Nahiye, 359 Na'ib, 243 Na'ib al-hadra, 243 Nalindji Turbe, 236 Nlmari, tax, z4gn Namaz, qrayer, 353 Nasir, caliph, 397 Naupactus, 304 522

Nazianzuz, 35n, 36, 206, 292, 302, 310x1, 326,34r, 362, 394 Nazir, 352, 353n Neaniai, 397n,. 399,480 Neapolis (of Pisidla), 35n Nea Tactica, 303 ff. Neilus (patriarch of Constantinople), 330 Neocaesareia (Niksar), 22, 28n, 32, 33n, 34n3 49, 50n3 52, 95, 1071 115, 119, 1229 123, 145, 158, 162, 167, 171, 187, 204., 205n, 215,218,221,304, 30?n, 318,320, 323n,441, Mgn; Karamanlldhes in, 461 Neocastron (Chliara, Pergamum, Adramyttium), 131, 150, 190, 218, 252, 25311 Neocome, 96 Neo-martyr, 343,360 and n,361 and n, 362 Neo-Phrygian, 46, 47, 48 Neoplatonism, 372 Nereids, 420 Nerses of Lampron (on cultural change among Armenians), 407n, 453n Nesa, 83 Nestorian, 58n, Ig7n, 22611, 422, 430 Nestorius, 34n Nevshehir, Karamanlidhes in, 452n New Patras, 304 New Phocaea, 242, 299, 316, 329 New Rome, 71 Nicaea (Iznik), vii, 1 2 and n, 26n, 28n, 31, 34", 36, 421 45% 52, 58, 889 104, 105, 106, 112-116,121,127, 139,143 ff,, 166, 170,180, 181, 198n, 214, 22011, 228 and ", 24%244 f.3 253, 287, 301 and n, 3041 307", 3IIn, 317, 320, 321, 327, 3311 341 ff., 360, 362, 394, 406, 416n; Turkish princes in, 466 Nicaean Empire, 62n, 140 ff., 216,234 and n, 244ff., 285 Nicephoritzes, 72, 105 Nicephorus (metropolitan of Gangra), porn, 205 Nicephorus (patriarch), 51 Nicephorus I (802-811)) 61 Nicetas Choniates, 37, 125, 218, 22011,223, 28111,416and n; describes tax placed on Greek colonists by sultan a t Philomelium, 471 Nicetas of Amnia, 67 Nicetas of Byzantium (anti-Islamic polemicist), 423 and n, 424 Nicetas the Young (neo-martyr), 361 Nicomedia (Xzmid), 1 1 , 13, 24n, 26n, 2811, 3% 33n~34% 45% 50n, 51, 58, 106, I 1 I , 113, 116, 129, 137, 146, 152, 166, 19811, 22on, 253,300,~301,304,307n,414 Nicopolis, Anatolia, 22, 31 Nicopolis, Greece, 6n, 309 Nidir KOy, 216 Nif (Nymphieum), 139 Nig, 81 Nigde, 19, 139, 242, 246, 248, 249, 281n, 386n, 4oon,451 ;Greek-speaking villages in region of, 450 and n, 459

INDEX

Otluq Beli, battle of, 1473, 142 Nikomedianus, 236 and n Otrus, 56n Niksar (Nicomedeia), 246 Ottoman, viii, I , qgn, 3011, 52, 68, 10311, Niphon, 62 104,133,138-141, 144,175n, 198n, 228, Niphon (heretic of Iconium), 335 mg, 232 ff., 250,260,266,269 ff.,rg8 fE, Nis, Karamanlidhes in, 452 310, 3'8, 32Off,, 344, 355, 356, 3631 Nishapur, 369 367,368 and n, 37on, 382% 384,392 fF., Nisibis, 226n 18, 53, 94, 157, 158n, 167, ~ g p , 412, 41% 425ff.r 439, 440, 4 4 5 E ; agriculture influenced by Byzantine, Nizam al-Mulk, 17gn, 211n 475 timar, ff,;460-470 Christians in armies of, 468; Nomad, nomadism, 8111, 83, 84 and n, 1 2 1 ff., 1 8 4 % 258-285, 391, 404, 410 Ozan River (reciter (Amu of epics), Darya), 27311 83 ff., 434; diet, 268; disruptlon of agri- Oxus culture, 270; domicile and diet, 275277; economy, 269, 270; marriage among, 274; physiognomy of, 277, men 278; religion of, 271, 274. See also Turk- Pacaster, 227" Pachymeres, George, 255, 300, 380, 4.16 and n Nomadization, 184~194, 258-285; and Pacurianus, 25n sedentary population, 279-281 Paganism, 55, 56, 59, 65, 8 2 , 421 Non-Chalcedonian, 53 Norman, 53 and n, 71, 75,76,79,80n, 104, Painter, painting, Greek, 237 and n, 238 and n, 384, 389 and n, 478 and n 106-108, 1 1 0 , 114, 116, 146, 148, 152, Paipert (Bayburt), 15, 87, 116n, 162, 167, 404 385, 386n, 399% 400 and n, 449% North Africa, I , 59, 68, 351, 365, 421 46 9 Notaran, 233, 470 Noiitia episcopatum, 28n, 35, 290, 294, Palaealogus, 2 9 , 105, 136, 306, 307 Palaeologus, Andronicus I1 (I 282-1328), 295, 299-3'0, 439,444, 445 434 aIgn, 950,21i3, 293, 303 fF., Novatian, 58 and n, 59,61n Nur al-Din, 28, 122, 157, 159"~165, 175n, Palaeologus, Andronicus I11 (1328-1 341), 294, 295, 299,300, 303 f.2 439 19711, 226 and n, 4.qn Nur al-Din Djadjaoglu (Seljuk emir), 354 Palaeologus, Manuel I1 (1391-14!5), 140n, 2,9411; reflection of on decline, Nuts, 24 4.14; religious polemic of, 424, 427, 428, NvmDhaeum (Nif), 150, 151, 166, 310, 327 . , . 46 -. Nymphaeum, treaty of, 1214, 131 Palaeologus, Michael VIXI (1z59-1282), Nysa, 2 5 ~ , 2 5 9 136, '37, '445 234, 244, 247n7 257, 334, Nyssa, 36, 45n, 137, 338, 361 405, 467; as kondistabl at Konya, 4G8 Palaeologus, Nicephorus, 76, 1a7, 108 Palaeologus, Theodore (brother of Manuel Odo of Dcuil, 149, 150, 151 II), 416 Oenoe, 16, 2811, 118, 127, 161, 204, 44.9 Palamas, Gregory, 334, 34& 4zG and n, Officia, 2 0 1 , 20211, 31211, 349 and n 427"j 4291 439, 440 Oghuz, 82, 260 and n, 268n, 274, 27511 Palamite, 344n Oiconomus (clerical official), 302n, 349" Palermo, 23711 . Olive, 1411, ;84n, 219 Olympus, Mount (Asia Minor), 36,42,5811 Palestine, 34n, 253, 336 Paltzana (Greek-speaking village in region Opheos, 30711 of Nicopolis) , 449n Opsicion, 3n, 4,32,42,50, 51,61, 62n, 309 Optimaton, 3n, 31 Pambuklu, 353 Pamphylia, 45, 131, 148, 168, 187, 188, - . Oreine, 13n, 42" rgo, 1g2,250,271n, ~ 8 1 n294 , d r e n KOy, 31x1 Orhan, 140, 228n, 236, 300, 343, 392 ff., Panaretus (Trebizondine chronicler), 28 rn Panasium, 126, 189 190, z8In df07, 427, 440 Pancratius, 89 Oricante, 329 Panegyris (religious fair), a+ and n, 40, Orosius, 42 I 41 ; of Chonae, 20 and n, 40, I 54". 22% Ortakcilar, 395" 235; ofEphesus, 10, 39; oFEuchaita, 8 1 , Ortakon, 66n 22,40; pagan Greek, 39"; of Sinope, 14, Orthodox (Greek), 55, 59, 61n, 64, 176, 15,. 40, 161 ; survival of, in Turkish 213, 227,287,289,292, 346,348,422 ff., period, I 60 479; of Trebizond, 15, 16, 40, 435, 44.6 ff* Orthodoxy, 33, 49, 65, 68, 178 Pannoura, I 21 Ortokid, I 16n Papa Eftim Karahisaridhes, 454 and n Osman, 140, 253, 37on, 392 E.,4.07,458 Papa Michael of Melitenc, 233 Osrhoene, 58

523

INDEX

Paphlagonia, 3n, 5, 14, 16, 17, gon, 2511, 151, 166, 170, 181, 238n, 252, 298, 299, 32, 34n, 36, 38, 41% 44, 58, 80, "4, 306, 307n2 319, 3s6n, 414, 4.50, 45'; 127-129, 162, 166, 187,205 and n, 149, famous for swects in antiquity and 252,309 Ottoman era, 48211; Karamnalidhes in, Paracoimomenus, z34n 452n Parium, 3511, 56n, 299 Philanthropenus, Alexius, 136, 137, 250, Parnassus, 28n Paroicoi, 76, 78 Philaretus, 267 Brachamus, 5311, 76, 109, 1 1 0 , Partitio Romaniae, 130 178, 2 1 1 , 230n Patara, 15111, 257, 259 Philetas (Philetis?), 122, 189 Patmos, 456n Philetis: 39, 61 Patras, 304, 314 Philippi, 304, 314 Patriarch: of Antioch, 3411, 331, 332; of Philippicus (7 I 1-7 I 3), 49 Constantinople, 34, 35,36, 73,201,289Philippicus 1477, 303 if. 350,440 and n, 445; Jacobite, 92, 1g7n; Philippopolis, m g , 304, 314. of Jerusalem, 336, 337 Philocales, 72 Patzinaks, 16, 17, 75, 80 and n, 81, 85,87, Philomelium (Akshehir), PO, z8n, 32, 5611, Ben, 103, I 14, ]Son, 269,404 117, 118, 190, 1 2 1 , 130, 153, 154, 166, Paulician,.~g,58, 60-63, 67, 2 I I 169,170-172,180,184 ff., 190, 191, 214, Paulinistal, 61x1 215,218, 224% 441,471 Paura, 118, 161 Philotheus (metropolitan of Euchaita), 61n Pedachthoe, 35n Philotheus (metropolitan of Heracleia), Pegae ( W a ? ) , 218, z52, 154, 255, 299, 418n 302, groni 3'9, 4Z6, 427 Philotheus (patriarch), 302, 32 I Pelecanum, battle o f , 1329, 336n Phocaea, 1 1 and n , 34n, 115, 150, 166, Peloponnesus, 6n, 309, 420 zgg and n Pentacheir, 126, 151, 166 Phocas, 24, 25n, 72 Pentapolis, of Phrygia, 1 2 2 , 154, 189, 190, Phocas, Nicephorus, 53, 67, 72, 96n 191, z81n Phoenicians, 27711 Pentas, pentades (ranks of ecclesiastical Phoinix, 329 officials), 102, 31211, 349" Photius, 67 Pentateuch, 390 PhrYgia, 1 1 , 14% 20% 46, 4.7, 491 58, 61, Pepuza, 56n 65, 903 113r 123, 147, 148, 1667 184ff.j Pcrfume, 16 216, 217, 2509 252, 413 Pergamum, 12, 26n, 45n, 49,56, 122, 131, Phrygia, Capatiane, 205 and n 137, 150, 151, 167, 174, 188, 217, 218, Phrygian, 43,46 and n, 47, 48 and n, 56, zrgn, man, 254, 257, 298 and n, rgg, 57, 12% 185 302, 306, 31 1% 316, 323n, 329 Phundagiagitai, 61, 62 and n Per€% 26% 34n>452 56, 2943 295,302, 304, Phygela, I I and n, 96n 31% 314.1.315, 326, 329, 330, 333, 339 Phyllon, 295, 326 Periodeutal (itinerants), log, 2 10 Physicians: Christian, 238 and n, 478; Peritheorium, 332 Jewish, 238n Perkri, zan, 87, 145 Pilgrimage, 19, 20 and n, 30, 32, 33 ayd n, Persia, 17, 27n, 43, 84, 116, 146, 164, 171, 34?, 36, 4.011, 195; Turkish, to Christian 175, '79n, 180, 181,367,388n shrines, 486, 487 Persian, 4, 38, 44, 493, 50 and n, 52, 66, Pimolissa, 162, 167 87n> '99, '3'3 2 8 2 , 3", 337, 397 Pir, 365 and n, 405, 469; language, 428; Per- Pirab Sultan (disciple of Hadji Bektash), sians in Seljuk armies, 468 37? 34n,58, 148, 166, 187, Igzn, 227n, Persian (archaistic epithet for Turk), 189, Pisidla, 199,324,361n 281n, 294, 307"~310,323n, 325 Pervane, 134, 1351 228, 384, 390 Pissa, 129 Pervaneogullari, 138 and n Pithecas, 2 1 , 31, 146n, 153, 166, 188, 217 Pessinus, 2 0 , 31, 32, 3411, 294, 301, 304 Planudes, Maximus, 28 rn Peter of Bracieus, I 30 Plastentza (Albistan, Comana), I 16, 214 Peter the Hermit, 14611, 152 Platanea, 253, 259, 301 Phanaroia (Pontic), 60 Platanion, 50 Pharasa, survival of Greek in, 450 and n, Plato, 68, 387 and n, 420; associated with 45 I ; becomes bilingual, 459 St. Amphilochius of Iconium and Phatrynon (church of St. George in revered by Muslims, 485 Paphlagonia), 4111 Pletho, George Gemisthus, 408, 420 Philadelpheia (Alashehir, Kallatebos), 56, Podandus, 19, 24n, 28n, I 10, I I 7 1171 121, 127, 128, 131, 140, 147, 150, Poimamenum, 116, 149, 166, 188

524

INDEX

Polybotus (Bolvadin), 20, 32, 117, 153, 166, 176, 185, 190 Pompeiopolis, 35n, 259, 415n Pontic, 16, 33" Pontine, 15, 230 Yontoheracleia (Reracleia Pontica, Bonderegli), zg3 ff., 302, 310 and n, 318 ff., 34% 3623 394 Pontus, 16, 5611, 58, 107, I I I , 16011, 16111, 169,266n; survival of Greek-speakers in, 44611, 44.9, 451,458; Turkisms in Greek of, 458 Pope, 337 Postinpush (dervish), 393 Pottery and ceramics, 1311, 1711, 23, mzn; Christians in manufacture of, 477 and n Pounoura, 28n Poupakes (Turk converted to Christianity), 442n Pousgouse, Lake, 120, 121, 215, 2 2 2 , 235, 479 Pracana, 28x1, 120, 1 2 1 , 163, 167 Prachinon (Turkish emir), I ~ g n Praenetus, 28n, 106, I 13 Priene, 50, 220, 251, 259 Priscillian, 58n Procopius, 57, 436 Proedrus (eccleslastical title), 29.5, 300 Proiconnesus, 35n, 307n, 313, 314, 318, 326n Pronoia, 71, 78, 2 1 8 and n ; relation of to timar, 468,469, 470 Propontid,42, 114, 115, 146, 150, 152, 166 Prostaxis, zoo ff. Prostitute, 240n, 384, 385 and n Prosuh (Turk converted to Islam), 442n Protonotarius, 6n, 23311, 47on Prusa (Bursa), 1 2 , 26n, zgn, 42, 45n, 127, 130, 137, 146, 152, 166, 22011, 253, 300, 301 and n, 306, 30711, 310 Psalms, 390 Psellus, Michael, 1311, 2 2 , 71, 73-75, 89, 100

Pseudoalexius, Pseudoalexii, I ng, 147, 154, 191, 19311, 230n, 26rn, 267n Ptolemy, z37n Pylae, 12, 13, 26n, 2811, 3311, 52, 106, 113, 121,217and n Pylles, Michael (Greek scribe of Murad I1 converted to Islam), q61n

Qadiriyya (dervish order), 365 Qalan, tax, 249" Qargaqaih and Bakjur, Ign Qubadabad, z21n Qushairi, 364

Rabbon Symeon (Syrian physician), 238n Radenus, 25n Rama (Turkmen chieftain), I 21 ,14711,189 Ramadan, 361, 435 Ramazan, 139, 142,466 Rashid al-Din, 23711 Rasul Baba, 379,380 Rawwadid, 81n Raymond of Aguliers, I 78 R"YY? Razzra,9418, 174, 263 Rebab, 383 Red Apple (Kizil Elma), 437, 4.38 Religious polemic: Christology and Trinity in, 430-431; cult and ritual in, 434-435; ethics in, 431-434; origins and development of, 4.21-428; validity of scriptures in, 428-430; victory of Islam Rhaedestus, in, 435-43627n Rhodes, 132, 233% 241,255, 295,296, 3O4J 315,330 Rhomaios, 89, go, 1 1 1 , 153, 164, 186, 189, 2553 269,316, 320, 321, 475 Rhomaniotissa (monastery in Cius), 320, 331 Ribat, 365 I I 7 Rhyndacus, Rice, n71n, r76n Ricoldus de Monte Crucis (d. 1320; Latin author of anti-Islamic polemic translated into Greek), 282, 424, 428 ff. Rifa'iyya (mystical order), 366 Rind (runud, akhi), 392, 396 ff. Rizaion, 307 Rize (Rizaion), 362, 399n, 449 Row, 4 Roman, 8,25, 30 and n, 44,45 and n, 4.611, S2, '3, 337, 4O5, 4'IJ 4I.31 42'1 43' Romania (Byzantine Empire), 149 Romanization, I Romanopolis, 109 Romanus I (920-gqq), 1 7 , 53, 68,76n Rome, 411,57% 58 Roumania (Byzantine Empire), 17, 4,38 Roussel of Bailleul, zzn, 53, 76, 99, 103, 106-108,1 1 0 , 1 1 1 , rIzn, 152, 162,180 Rowers, 235n Rozaion, 314 Rukn al-Din Kilidj Arslan IV (12481264)9 22.7, 2431 2 4 247 ~ Rukn al-Dln Sulayman I1 (1196-1204), 130 and n, 147,164 R u m (province of Anatolia), I on, 23n, 1I , 104, 174, 1g4n, z i p , 236n, 248, 249, z55nJ 311n, 361n, 363, 369, 378, 388% 394,399 Rum, Rumi, Urum (as designation for Greek Christian), z55nJ 38711, 388n, 4451 456n Runud (rind), 382, 385n, 392 Rupen I11 (1175-1187), 131 Ruphinianae, 106, I 13

525

INDEX

Rushaniyya (mystical order), 368 Russell, 25 and n Russia, 261, 26811, 334 Russian, RUSS,10, 16,. 38, 39, 431-1, -53, 71, 75, 106, 234 and n; in Seljuk armies, 468 Sabacan, 422 Sabbatian, 61n Sabcllian, 6111, 433 Saccelarius, 349n Saccelion (ecclesiastical office), zozn, 349n Saccelou, zozn Saccophoroi, 58, 62n Sacrifice: of Abraham, 435; of animal, 37n, 371 and n, 489-491; ofhorse, 27911; of human, among nomads, r73n, 27411, 4331 43? Sa'd al-Dln, 24211, 356 Sa'd al-Din Abu Bakr al-Mustawfi alArdabili, 243 Sa'd al-Din Khan caravansaray, xiii Sadik, 378 Saewulf, 151 Safavi, 14212, 274 Saffron, 239n Sahib Fahr al-Din Ali, 228 Sahib Fahr al-Din of Kazwin, 245, 246 Sahib Isfahani caravansaray, 385n Sahibo&~llari,138 Sahnegi (tax), 249 Saint (see below) : Alexander, tomb at Ephesus, 34" Amphilochius of Iconium: church of, xiii, 36,.38, 64, 487; church of, scene of Turkish pilgrimage, 487; church of a t Konya converted to mosque, then abandoned as hostile to Muslims, 386; revered by Muslims at Konya as Eflatun (Plato), 485 Athanasius of Trebizond and Mount Athos, 36 Athenagenes of Pedachthoe: sacrifice of fawn to, 490 Basil of Caeiareia, Ign, 34n, 36,41, 59n, 951 '55, 178>'95 Blaslus of Amorurn. Antioch, 159, 199 Cassianus, church in 96 . 1

Charalambus: annual sacrifice to at church in Zele, 490; associated with Hadji Bektash, 485 Chariton (monastery), 387 and n, 487 Christodoulus, 15111, 169, 418 Constantine the Jew, 39, 66 Cosmas, church of the mendil in Edessa, 197n Cosmas and Damianus, 484n Eugenius, 15, 16, 36, 37, 391-1,40, 4111, 42, 160, 222 George, 36, 38, 39, 40, 4m, 360; church of in Edessa, 19711; church of in Cappadocia, 440 and n; depicted

526

as dragon slayer on Danishmendid coinage, 474; equated with Khidir, George 485 Hagiorite, 34" George of Adrianople (d. 1437; neomartyr), 36x11 George of Amastris, 141-1,36, 38, 39 Gregory of Nazianzus, 26, 333 Gregory of Nyssa, 36, 335, 361 Hyacinthus, 36 Ioannicius, 36 Jacob the Persian, 341, 342 John Baptist: church of in Edessa, 1g7n; church of (Kizil Avli) at Pergamum, converted to mosque and abandoned, of Cappadocia: body John 486 ROLISSOS paraded through Urgup a t request of Turks to curb cholera, 486 John Theologian, 34n, 36, 39, 55, 151, 195,346 Lazarus of Mount Galesium, 33n, 34n, 36,409 41"s 61, 67 Luke the Stylite of Chalcedon, 36 Macarius, 334 Mamas of Caesareia, 36; double sanctuary for Christians and Muslims at Ziyaret Kilise, 487 Martha, 46n Mary of the Mongols, church of in Constantinople, 484 Mercurius of Caesareia, 36, 38, 360 Michael, neo-martyr in Egypt, 361n Michael: church of in Edessa, 1g7n; church of at Tepedjik in Bithynia visited by Turks for cure of insanity, Michael 486 Maleinus, 36 Mocius, ion Nicephorus of Latmus, 36 Nicholas of Myra, 36, 38, 39 and n, 40, 41, 151n, 195; associated with Sari Saltik, 485; monastery of, a t Sinassus, 377n Nicon tou Metanoeite, 36, 39 Paul the Apostle, 36, 55 Paul the Younger (d. 955), 36, 61 Peter of Atroa, 51n Philaretus the Merciful, 36, 67 Philotheus, 254n Phocas: church ofin Sinope, 14,36,195; monastery of at Trebizond, a healing shrine, 486; panegyris of, 1 5 ~ 4 0161; , patron saint of merchants and seamen, Pholine 14n of Izmir, church of visited by Turks for cure of eye ailments, 486 Polycarp, 36 Procopius, 360 Sabbas, church of near Konya, 4.87 Sophia, doors of venerated by Turks, 485n Sophia of Pergamum, 486

INDEX

Stephan, church of in Edessa, 1g7n Theodore Teron, 34n, 36, 37,38 and n, 40, 41 and n; church of in Edessa, 197; often equated with Khidir, 485 Thomas, church of in Edessa, 197" Tryphon, 36 Sairam, 366 Sakaria River (Sangarius), 373" S a k r (Turkish tribal group), 260n Salah al-Din, 163 Salbakus, 296 Salor (Turkish tribe), 260n Saltpeter, 24gn Saltukid of Erzerum, 118, 133, 144, 155, I 60 Samad (epithet of Allah in Sura), I 12,431, 442 Samanid, 82 Samaritan, 432x1 Samarqand, 23711,262 and n, 382n Samavna, 358 Same (emir), 127 Samokalo, 283 Sam% 3% 5, I 15,309,492 Samosata, 26n, 28n, 33,45n, 53,157 and n, 175, 182,240, 24.W Sampsun (in western Apatolia), 131 Samsum (Amisus), 139, 123, 242, 246, earn, 449 Samtzhe, 283 SamueI Alusianus, 91 Samuh, 76,87,89194 Sandikll, 28011 Sangarius River, 30, 31, 32, 3311, 97, 107, 118, '37, 153, 187, 190, 2533 255, 343n Saniana, 21, 31, 32 Santabaris, 20, 185, 190 Sanuto, Marino, 183 Saracens, 10 and n, 14, 39, 5011, 53, 67, 183,434Saraf al-Din, 248 Saraf ~ i s a r , - z 4 $ Sarahor, 353 Sarakhs, 83 Sarapata Mylonos, 122, 189 Saray, 23611, 382 Saraydjik, 353, 396 Sardes, 2311, 2611, 3411, 4511, 56, I 17, 150% 166, I70r234", 252, 298, 302, 304, 305, 310x1 Sardica, canons of, 204, 209 Saridagounion, Greek of, heavily influenced by Turkish, 459 Sari Ismail (disciple of Hadji Bektash), 379. 380 Sarikoy, 37311 SarI Saltik, 378 ff.; identificd with St. Nicholas, 485 Saroug, 53 Saruhan, 139, 140, 141, 28111, 33611, 392 Sassan (Turkish emir), 251, 348 Sassanid, 49,397n, 436 SataIa, 32

Saviour, church of in Edessa, I 97n Sayf al-Din Karasunqur, z43n Sayfi, 400 and n Scaliarius, I I 5, I 7gn, 441 Scamander (Troad), 252,254 and n Scandinavian, 53 Scepidis, 25n Sceuophylax (ecclesiastical office), 20211, 349n Schiltberger, 225, 357, 358 Scholarius, Gennadius, 286, 360 ff., 453 Sclerus, 2 9 , 72, 73 Sclerus, Bardas, I gn Screnarius, 25n Scyth, 14, 15; as style of life, 410 ff., 434 Seals, Danishmendids imitate Byzantine, 470 and n Sebasteia (Sivas), 5, 22, 26 and n, pan, 29n, 31, 32, 33, 3 4 h 36, 54, 55, 76, 9197, 103, 1155 1221 145, 159 and nJ 1641 167, 171, 184, 185, 220, 231, 259, 292, Sebastopolls, 304, 306: 323n~ 26n 326, 3419 362, 394 Sebastus, 236 and n Second Cappadocia, 205 and n Selefke (Seleuceia), 259 Seleuceia, 3n, 5, I g and n, 28n, 32,34n,52, 1631 1673 217, 304,339 Selge, 35" S e h I (1512--1520), 239,345,355 Selinus (bishop of Goths), 46, 47 Seljuks, Great, 82 ff., 171, x93 Seljuks of Rum, vii, viii, I , 1111, zon, 3011, 37% 4% 54, 68, 69-142, 41% 439, 440 passim; employ Greek scribes, 470; ethnic diversity in armies of, 468 Selymbria, 301 Sema' (musical and dancing ritual of Mawlawis), xiii, 383 and n, 384 and n, 385 and n, 388, 389 and n Semazen bashi (leader of Mawlawi sema), 383" Semendere (Cappadocian village), Turkish penetration of spoken Greek in, 458 Semitic, z77n Senecherim-Hohvannes, 5 4 , 5 5 8 I Sennacherim the Evil, 135, 136 Serbs, I, 2 I 8,35gn, 463 Serhenk, 242 Serres, mgn, 314, 322" Seven Sleepers, 34n Seveverek, 230nr 36294, 157, 158 and n, 167, 178, Sevindjik, 301 Seyid Abdal, 400 and n Seyid Ghazi Tekke, xiii, 221% 222, 273 Seyid Muhammad Harran of Akshehir, 370" Shabaninyya (mystical order), 368, 393n Shaddadid, 81n, 86, 188 Shadiliyya (mystical order), 365 Shahinshah (brother of Kilidj I1 Arlsan), 122, 123, 184 527

INDEX

Sham al-Din Altun Aba, 232, 353 Shaman, shamanism, 271 ff., 366, 36911, 371 and n Shams al-Din Hass Oguz, 243 Shams al-Din Isfahani, 425 Shams al-Din of Tabriz (mystic), 383 Shamsiyya (mystical order), 368 Sharia, 364 Sharjf al-Dawla, I I I , 2 I 3 Sharki Karahisar, 139 Shebin-Karahisar, 449 Sheep, 220, 270,284 Shiite, 369 Shipbuilders, 235n,420n, 480 Shira, 355 Shiraz, 400 Shurkhan, 83 Sibyla, I P I Sicily, 35,71,96n 106,304,305, 3O9J351, 404 Side, 28n, 331 34nJ4sn>152, 294> 295, 302J 3'42 306J 31°, 3'4 and n>3'5, 325 and n, 334, 340 Sidera (Iron) (fortress), 217 Silk, Izn, 1311, 15n, 1811, Ign, 23 and n, 183, 238 and n, 398n,420n, 467 and n, 47 7 Sille (Syllaion, Sillyum?), 387n; retreat of Greek before Turkish in, 459; survival of spoken Greek in, 450,451 Silo, 17, 246 Silsile, of dervishes, 369 and n Silversmith, 237n Silmnadu, 53 Sinai, 220 Sinassus, 377 and n; Christian ceremony at, in honor of Hadji Bektash's miracle, 485 Sinope, 14, 26n, 281-1, 33, 36, 56n, 114, 115-117, 130, 132, 138, 141, 160, 161, 167, 176, 797, 198,221,223, q o n , 233, 236, 242, 246,293,310 and n, 326, 327; medicinal earth at, 492 Sis, 242, 256, 362, 390 Sisiya-Comana (Comana Pontica), 177, 362 Sitt Khatun (wife of Muhammad 11),237 Sivas (Sebasteia), 139, 140, 241, 242, 246, 2 4 4 28In, 374, 385, 386n, 399n, 400 and n, 401,445; Karamanlidhes in, 452 Sivrihisar, 373n Siyaqat, 243 Siyasatname of Ni\zam al-Mulk, I 79" Siyurgal, 469 SkabalanoviE, 303 ff. Skopia, 105 Slave, slavery, ~ q n ,174 ff., 182, 2 1 2 , 24OR., 251 ff., 268, 269, 27311, 27411, 282, 284, 346; domestic, 240,241,39qn; commercial (prostitution), 240n; milltary and administrative, 240 ff. Slavs, I,4, 7,36, 50-52,59n, 62n,68, 135, 180% 457,470

528

Smarohsa, 355 Smyrna (Izmir), 1 1 , 231-1, 261-1, 28n, 35n, 36,56, 1x5, 117, and n, 149q 150, 151, 166, 169, 181 a n d n, 217, 22on, 259, 298, rgg and nJ 304, 30711, 310 and n, 31111, 317, 326, 329 a n d n, 338, 348, 349,.364 481 Smyrniote, 239,338 Socrates, 46, 4811, 384 Sofia, transfer o f Greeks and Armenians from Anatolia to b y Ottomans, 446n Sofra (nomadic tablecloth), 27713 Solemnia, 2 10 and n Soli, 45 Solymas (Turkish emir), 122, 189 Somketh, 284, 285 Soskayastos (monastery), 355 Souanites, 25n Sozomenus, 46, 47 sozopolis, 28n, 118, 119, 120, 127, 154, 166, 168, 187, ~ g o f f . ,205, 216, 299, 319,315 Spahi, 469 Spain, zgn, 351, 410, 421; Arabization in, 460; Islamization in, 460 Spa% 39 Sphrantzes, on decline, 409 Stauropolis (Caria), 34n, 296, 302, 304, 310n9 3141 3'5, 323n, 330 Stenon, 329 Stephen of Perche, 131 Sthlavesianoi, 51 and n Strabo, 44 Straboromanus, 2511, 105 Strategus, strategeia, 2, 6n, 8, 9, 24 Strobilus, 1 1 andn, 28n, 33n, 52, 113, 137, 166J 169, I95 Strymon, 5, 309 Sufi, Sufism, 273, 363 ff., 393x1 Sugar, 3 8 4 , 3 8 5 ~ Sugdaia, 241, 295, 326 Suhrawardi, 24.3 Suhrawardiyya (mystical order), 365 Sukman (son ofArtuk), 116, 157n, 165 Sulayman, 105 and n, 106, 113 and n, IIhff., 181, 196, 197, P I I Sulayman Chelebi (Ottoman poet), 359n Sulayman I Kanuni (1520-1565),23gn,393 Sultaniyya, 386n Sultan Khan caravansaray, xiii Sultan Walad (d. 1312; son of DjalaI aIDin Rumi), 283, 38111, 382 and n, 383, 385 and n, 392, 401n; Sultan WaIad devri, 383n Sultanyiigi (Eskishehir), 354 Suludja Kara Oyiik, 369 Sumare-i Kobcur (tax), q g n S u m e h 4% 355, 495; monastery of visited by Turks for cure, 486 Sungurlu, 280n Sunni. 2 7 1 3upah (Greek-speaking village in region of Nicopolis), 449" I

INDEX

Sura, 423 ff. Surmene, 355 Suruj, 116 SUSUZ,362, 379 Swine, 13 Syllaion (Sillyum, Sille?), 26x1, 28n, 304, 31.0, 315, 325 and n, 331, 339 Synnada, 12n, 14n, 20,26n, 2811, 34% 66, 297, 302J 3'4, 3I7, 319 Synnadenus, 25n, 105 Synod, 35, 62, 194, 205 ff., 248n, 300 fs., 380, 381, 391,4183 442 Synthronon, 207 Syria, 3n, 15, 18, 19, 23n, 38, 39, 54, 55, 59, 68, 180, 194 a n d n, 235 and n, 247, 248, 267, 279, 351, 405, 408,422 Syriac, 23711; authors, Ign, 81x1; language, 48, 23511, 421, 422; retreat of before Arabic, 459 Syrian, vii, 17, 18n, 39n,53,63, 69,88,92, 93, 121, 143, 15811, 172, 194.ff., 2 1 1 ff., 234,235,238 a n d n , 247,403,418,4.63,479

Taronites, 54-66, 162 Taronites (Christian physician of Orhan), 2 3 9 427,440 Tarsia, 129 Tarsus, 19 and n, 26n, 28n, 31, 45n, 53, 109, 116, 117, 119, 121, 127, 144, 169, 28111 171, 180 and n, 181, 182, 214,256, 259, Tasawwuf, 363 Tasthane (vestiarium), 382 Tatar, 261 ff.,334% 337, 374 ff. Tatianoi, 58 Taticius, 2 I 4n Taurus, 31,32, 93, 104, 108, 109, I 10, I 14, 116, 133-135, 138, 162, 168-170, 181, 193, 194n, 233") 245,261nJ 27l? Tavas (Tabai), 270n,281n, 310n, 362,379, 380, 386n, 400n Tax, 2 , 5, 10, Ian, 26, 67, 7.5, 76, 79, 8o and n, 85, 107, 113, 130, 136, 177, 183 and n, 184, 197, Iggn, zorn, 20717, 210, 213, 218ff., 224 and n, 233 and n, a45 ff., 270 and n, 280, 314, 322, 346n, 392", 350, ,359, 405, 406, 433, 4-64; Byzantine influence on Seljuk and Ottoman systems, 47 1-473 Teberra, 371 Tcke (Turkish tribal group), 26on Tekeili, 141 Tekfur Pinar, 39611 Tekke (dervish monastery), xiii, 246, 375, 378, 383, 385 and n, 393 ff., 402; churches converted to, 484-485 Tekmoreian society, 48 Tell Arsanias, 28n, 53 Tell Bashir, 156 and n, 167, 196 Tell Tembris Patriq, River, 53 2 1 , 57% IZI,188, 190

Tabai (Tavas), 380, 394. T a b k u r (tax), 249 T a b r i z , 81n, 86, 22811, 23711, 263, 337, 382n, 386, 39811, 400" Tachir, 285 Tacitus, 411, 412 Tacticon, 308 ff. Tadj al-Din (son of Ahmad al-Rifa'i), 385, and n Tadj &Din Husayn, 2 2 8 Tadj al-Din Motazz, 183" Tagaris, George, 336n Tagaris, Manuel, 336n Tagaris, Paul, 335 ff. Tephrice 76, 118(Divrisi), 28n, 31, 33,54, 55,60, Taghlabite, 67 T a g m a t a , 4, 50, 5% 75, 9 1 Tessareskaidekatitai, 6 In, 67 Tahrir defter, 471 Tevella, 371 Tahtadji, xiii, 27211, 27711 Textiles, 15, 16, 1811, 20 and n, 23 and n, Tailor, 384 183 and n, 2 2 2 , 238 and n, 239 and n, Taiq, 54., w g n 401"; Byzantine influence of o n Seljuk Tais, 54 ceremonial robes, 467; Christian weavTalebe, 353 ers, spinners, tailors of, 477 and n TaKrnel?;ini, 354 Tharnar (Gurdji Khatun?; donor of Tamis, gg, 103 church of St. George a t Beliserama), Tana, 261, 268 440 and n Tangripermes, I I 5, I 50 Theban, w g n T a n i k (Armenian butcher), 387n Tannsuwiyya (mystical order), 368 Tantalus, ng, 129, 155, 166, 184, 190, 215, 218, 224n, 471 Tao-Khlarjeti, 66, 2811-1 Ta'ous, 384n and wife'of Orhan), 343,440 a n d n T a p d i k Emre, 373" Tarakli-yenidjesl (Yaniya), 343, 393% Theodora (wife of Theophilus), 25n Theodore (metropolitan of Nicaea), 61n 394,400" Theodore Abu Qurra, 422 Tarchaniotes, Joseph, 98, 99 Theodosiana, 26n Tarh (tax), 249n Theodosiopolis (Erzerum), 17, 26n, 28n, T a r i q a , 365, 383 ff. 3IJ 33 Taron, 54, 290

519

INDEX

Theodosius (metropolitan of Melitene), 29% 320 Theophanes, 16, 51n Theophanes (d. 1381; metropolitan of Nicaea), 327 and n, 343,36on, 440 Theophanes Continuatus, 51 Theophilus (829-84~)~ 4, 25n,66 Theophylactus (metropolitan of Attaleia), 295 Thessalonike, 6n, 20511, 220, mgn, zggn, 304 ff., 3093 3747 3!8, 331, 338, 344.426 Thiryanus Ala al-Din (Greek convert to Islam and Mawlawi dervish), 387 ff. Thomas the Slave, 51n Thondraki, 60, 63 Thoros, 121, 156n, 453" Thrace, 5 6 0 , 6211,8911, 131, 299, 300, 309, 344,410, 4'4 Thracesian, 3n, 4,611, 11,32, 50, 1 2 0 , 127, 309 Thracian, 210, 211,35811 Threshing sledge (Tykane), xiii, 476n, 477" Thyateira, 56, 486 Thynia, 114, 146, 166 Thyraia, 137, 251, 252, 259 Thyrianus (Greek architect), 235, 236 and n Ticino Zacharia of Phocaea, 34n Ticium, 28n Tielze (studies of on Greek loanwords in Turkish), 462 ff.,476 ff., 481 and n Tifis, 284 Tili, 1 2 1 Timar, 354, 355; relation to pronoia, 468-470 Timothy, Apostle, tomb of at Ephesus, 34n Timur, 140, 141, 215, r37n, 26off., 269, 27on, 272n, 275n, 277n9.z79n, 29311, 298, 301 Timurtash (Mongol governor), 13811, 139, 224, 225 Tire (Thyraia),4oon Tirmid, 38211 Tium, 253 Tiyul, 469 Toghrul (1054-1063), 1711, 82-84, 87 and n, 267 Toghrul (emir of Amaseia), I 1911 Tohma River, 122 Tohum, 18012 Tokat (Doceia), zgn, 115, 139, 232q 242, 246, 259,386n, 38711,445,446 Toledo, rgn Torah, 359" Torbeski, 6211 Torlak Hu-Kemal, 358 Tornices, 66, 74, 232n Tornices, Eulhymius, 203 Tornices, George, 6211 Tornices, Leo, 86 Tornik (emir of Tokat), 232 Tosia, Karamanlidhes in, 452n

530

Tourkopouloi, mgn, 24111, 26311; converts to Christianity, 441, 44211; settled around Vardar, 441 Towns: Byzantine, 6-34, 37, 41, 44, 4511, 52,531 56,57n, 58,64, 659 107%110-1 13, 116, 120, 121, 126, 128, 143ff., 165,166, 167 ff., 185, 209, 210, 217 ff., 249, 250 ff., 282, 286n, 386 ff.; Muslim, 6, 2937350 Trachm Stadia, 137 Trajanopolis, 304, 314, 32211 Tralles, 231-1, 28, 45n, 56, 126, 137, 151, 166, 250,251, 253, 259, 269 Transcaucasia, 84, 85 and n, 168 Transoxiana, 133 Trebizond, vii, 141-1, 15-17, 2 2 , 23, 2611, 33 andn, 35-37, 39nj 40, 52,531 68, 110,112,114,117, 131, 141, 144, 160ff., 167, 169, 1791-1, 197, 228 and n, 233, 235n, '391 241J "S6, 281n, 291, 293n, 304, 307n, 337,354,355,360 and n, 362, 442, 449 and n>469,486,495 Trebizond, empire of, 216, 231, 291, 451 Trebizondine, 16, 133, 193, 266n, 282n, Trinity, 29 I in religious polemic, 413, 4.30, 431 Tripolis (in western Anatolia), 155, 166, 174, 190, 191, 219n, 251, 259 Trnagir, 24911 Troad, I 18 Troas, 56 Trocnada, 20, 31,32 Trullo (council), 5711, 176, zoo, lorn, 206 Tsiaous, Turko-Georgian, I 76, I 79" Tsorokh River, I 7911, 284 Tulas, 275n Turbe, 236,354,39411; churches converted to, 484,485 Turcomania, 182, 267 Turgutlu, 139 Turk, 4,6, 18n, Pin, x n , 23n, 28,34n,53, 68, 76 ff., 104 ff., passim; converted to Christianity, 4.41 and n, 442; of mixed ethnic origins, 463; as noble savage in writings of Metochites, 410 ff. Turkestan, 366, 367, 382n Turkey, 377% 455 Turkification, I , I 18, 260, 281, 351 and n, 406, 415, 451, 457, 498; of Karamanlidhes, 4071-1, 452-461 ; of Turkophone Armenians, 459 Turkish invasions and conquests of Anatolia, I , 2 , 4, 7, 15n, 17, 24, 26, zg and n> 30 and n, 42, 48, 51, 541 6'3, 69-142, 291, 297ff.:, 318, 349, 351, 403-406, 416, 418, 448, passim; nature Of, 143-168, 144-258 Turkish language, 45"; advance of, 456 ff. Turkmen, 29, 711 83, 849 85, 94, 103. I 10, 1 1 2 , 118fF., 147, 148ff., 184-194, 223, 231, 238n, 241, 244 ff., 256 ff., 258-286, 367, 370, 371, 376, 399, 403 ff. See Nomad

INDEX

Vazelon, 42 Turkophone 180n, 28211 Venetian, I I , 71, 79, 80, 136, 405 Turm, Qn Venice, 7 I , 79 Tutuch, 108, I I I , 15611, 182, 234 Tyana, 26n, 31, 32, 34n, 45% 292, 30% Vilavetname of Hadii Bektash, 236, 28rn, 3049 306 Tyche, asmotive force in Byzantine decline, 408n, 409 ff. Tykane (doukane, dugen, threshing sledge), 476n, 477" Tymium, 5611 Vine, 14n, 184"~239 Tyre, 331, 337 Volga, 366 Tyriaeum, 20, 171 Tyropaeum, I 10 Tzachas, I 15 and n, I 16, 146, 147, 150 Wakf (Muslim pious endowment), 224, and n, 176n, 181, 2 1 1 , 481 230n, 232,239,246 and n, 352 A:, 37on, Tzamandus, 1g,27n, 28n, 33n, 50% 54,55, 395 a n d n, 396 and n, 464 I22 Wax, I G , 17 Tzat, 65, 66n Wheat, 6n, 1411, Ign, 40,219, 255n, 27111, Tzimisces, 66, 303 ff. 377 and n, 378 Tzourmere, 54, rzgn William of Rubruque, 183, 260 Tzybritze, 124 William of Tyre, 174, rgb Tzykes (Turkish emir), I Ign Wine, 6n, 16, aon, 24, 177,219, 2 3 g , ~ n , 255rf, 276n; making of, a Christian speaalty, 483 and n; produced in Udj, 133, 136, 191, 192 and n, 248, 261, Christian vineyards of Cappadocia, 262,269,274,27g, 281n, 3gzn,400 and n Begshehir, 483 Uighur, 139 Ulagadj (Cappadocian village), Turkish Wittek, 69 syntactic and lexicographic pentration Wool, 23, 268, 270, 27542on of Greek, 458 Ulema, 352, 359, 364., 373, 382, 383, 384, Xantheia, 314 3855 402 Xerus, 23on Uluburlu, 138, 192, 259 Xerxes, 4 I o Umar (caliph), 224, 225 Umayyads, 224, 263x1, 363, 498; imitate Xiphilenus, 2.511, 36, 71, 75 Byzantine policies and administrative practicies, 463, 464; of Spain, 4,60 Umur Beg, 1 7 % 328,332, 345,347,395nJ Yaber (Turkish tribal group), 2601-1 Yaghi Siyan, 214 396n Yakub Arslan, 28, 184 Ungro-Vlachia, 301 Yakub Chelebi, 141 Ural-Altai, 7 I Yakuti Beg, 9 3 Urartian, 43 Yalova (Pythia), 362, 394 and n, 485 Urfa (Edessa), 280n Yalvach, 138 Urgiip (Hagios Procopius), 42, 377 Yankoniya (Euchaita, Chorum), 177, 362 Ushak,, 19% 379 Uze, 71, 75, 80% 89n, 90, 99, 103, 123, Yarliq, 24.9 Yasawi, Ahmad, 364,366, 369 and n 278% 404 Yasawiyya, 365, 366 and n, 368n, 392" Uzun Hasan, 141, 263, 265, 2 7 2 % 466 Yashichvmen, battle of, 1230, 134 Yayla, 2.79,284 Yazidjioglu (Ottoman chronicler, guilty of Valencia, zgn anachronisms), 470" Van, Lake, 53,81n,87, 97, 15% 167 Yazir (Turkish tribal group), 26on Vanak, 362 395" Yemen, 38811 Varangian, 86, 90 Yenibagche, 353 Vardar River, 441, 457 Yenishehir, 393, 395" Vaspuracan, 54, So, 81 and n, 86 Yeshil Irmak (Ir~s),115 Vatatzes, Alexius, 23on Yiakoupes (emir Kyr Basil), 440,460n Vatatzes, Andronicus, I 2 3 Vatatzes, John Comnenus (governor Of Yigit, 400 Yinanc, 17gn, 18on Philadelpheia), I 27 Vatatzes, John I V (1222-1254), 132, 219, Yiva (Turkish tribal group), 26011 Yomra, 355 2 2 0 , P i i n , q g n , 312% 407,495 Yozgat, 280n Vatatzes, Manuel, 230n

53'

Vryonis Decline of Medieval Hellinism in Asia Minor - PDFCOFFEE.COM (2024)

References