Elizabeth A.

Zachariadou
/1/

1 Romania and the Turks

"- (c. 1300-c. 1500)

Dr. Elizabeth A. Zachariadou

VARIORUM REPRINTS
London 1985

\/
 British Library CIP data Zachariadou, Elizabeth A.
Romania and the Turks (c. 1300 - c. 1500)-
~L S~iLj-;S (Collected studies series; CS211)
1. Turkey - History - Ottoman Empire, 1288-1918
DC 1. Title
LI '2 1 956 DR486
,23.3 ISBN 0-86078-159-3
r fi ~:. ~l CONTENTS
Copyright©1985 by Variorum Reprints
Preface ix-x

Observations on Sorne Turcica

of Pachyrneres 261-267
Revue des Etudes Byzantines 36.
Paris, 1978

II Pachyrneres on the 'Arnourioi'

of Kastarnonu 57-70
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 3.
Oxford, 1977

III Trebizond and the Turks (1352-1402) 333-358

"ApXefov IIôvTov35.
Birmingham Symposium "Black Sean
March1978.
Athens, 1979

Published in Great Britain by
Printed in Great Britain by
IV Manuel II Palaeologus
on the Strife Between Bâyezïd
and I):âçlï Burhân al-Din Al).rnad 471-481
Bulletin of the School of Oriental
and African Studies XVIII.
London, 1980
Variorum Reprints
20 Pern bridge Mews London W11 3EQ
V The Catalans of Athens
Butler & Tanner Ltd and the Beginning of the Turkish
Frorne, Sornerset Expansion in the Aegean Area
821-838
VARIORUM REPRINT CS211
Studi Medievali, 3a Serie, XXI.
Spoleto, 1980
u
ghazi of the marches. Just before the Bapheus battle, he was at
peace with the Byzantine Emperor; but when he saw Osman's
army including also many Turks from the Meander region he
could not restrain himself any longer and he joined the forces of
the Ottomans.'s Three years later when relations between the
Mongols and the Byzantines became closer, he appeared willing
to pass into Byzantine service, asking for the area near the
Sangarios from Andronikos II.'9
One word about Ali's brother. According to the oriental
sources Yavlak Arslan had a son Mahmud whose laqab was either
Husam ed-din or Nasir ed-din. 40 I think that it can be
established now that his laqab was Nasir ed-din, as this person
can be identified with the Nasir ed-din of Pachymeres who was a
hostage for several years in Constantinople. Presumably he
survived because he did not participate in the fatal family visit to
Mansur, being lucky enough to be absent from Kastamonu and
kept as a hostage by the Emperor. 41 Nasir ed-din and Ali, the
descendants of <;:oban, must be the sons of Amourios, who,
according to Gregoras, ruled over the region between Sangarios
42
and Paphlagonia around 13 00 .
Therefore Pachymeres' account is not incompatible with the
oriental sources. And perhaps it is fully trustworthy. Atleastone
son of Izz ed-din II, Malik Constantine, and one son ofYavlak
Arslan, Nasir ed-din, lived in Constantinople in Pachymeres'
days. News concerning the families of the ex-sultan and the U<;
begi (both of them fathers producing a great numbe: of males)
would have reached the capital. Actually the Byzantme author
whose complicated style is as obscure as ~is archaic language
adds new information to the data of the onental sources.
Pachymeres, II, pp. 332-3.
3 8. . .
39.Pachymeres, II, pp. 45g-60; cr. LalOu, op. Cit., p. 17 6 .
40.Cahen, 'Q.uestions d'histoire', p. 154· . commerce anatolien au debut du XlIle siecle~ Melanges Louis Halphen, Paris ]95 1 ,
Between the years 1273 and 1275 the Byzantines defeated t~e Turks of
4 I.
Paphlagonia; perhaps Nasir ed-din was taken as a hostage at that time, see R.
J. Loenertz, 'Memoire d'Ogier, protonotaire, pour Marco ~t Marchett~
nonces de Michel VIII Paleologue aupres du Pape Nicolas III , Byzan/ma
Franco-Graeea, p. 5 6 1.
4 2. Gregoras, I, pp. 214- 1 5.
III
TREBIZOND AND THE TURKS (1352.1402)·
Before the capture of Constantinople by the crusaders Trebi-
zond and its region were already an independent state J. In the
early years of its life this state appeared determined to dominate
the Black Sea and strove to expand towards the West. The Trape-
zuntine plans fell through quite early owing to the effective resi-
stance of the empire of Nicaea and that of the Seljuk sultanate.
As is known, the capture of Constantinople by the Latins was syn-
chronized with the reestablishment of Seljuk unity in Asia Minor.
The Seljuks were also determined to dominate the Black Sea as
demonstrated by their eagerness to conquer the port of Sinope and
their campaign against the Crimea '. The antagonism between the
two states resulted in an ill fated Seljuk attack against Trebizond
in 1223 3 • However, despite this incident, the Seljuks were on the
• List of abbreviations on p. 357 - 358.
I. A. A. Vas i liev, The Foundation 0/ the Empire 0/ Trebizond, Specu-
lum 11 (1936) 3 - 37; O. Lam psi des, !Tee! r~v 1lieva,v <OV "enrov, reOv Me-
ynA"'v Kol'vryveOv, 'AQXelov 116\'tov 31 (1971-1972) 5-17; d. N. Oikono-
e
mid S I La decomposition de ['empire byzantin a La veille de 1204 et Ies origines
de l'empire de Nicee: a propos de La ,Partillo Romaniae», XVe Congres Internatio-
nal d'Etudes Byzantines, Athenes 1976, Rapports et co-rapports, Ristoire I.
2. T u ran, Sel,uklular, p. 302 - 307, 357 - 31\3; the author connects the
attack against Trebizond with the campaign against the Crimea, which he
dates of 1228; see next note (3) on this subject.
3· C a hen, Turkey, p. l25, writes that Trebizond was probably
attacked by M'.1giseddin Tugrnl-~ah of E"erum in 1223; d. ide m, Le
p. 95 and also, Questions d'histoire de la province de Ka.stamonu au Xl/Ie siecle
Sell'nklu Ara~tlrmalaT1 Dergisi 3 (1971) 150. Bryer, TiJrkmens, p_ 123:
adopted this point. Two Trapezuntine sources reporting the event indicate
?Iearly that Trebizond was attacked by the Seljuks in that year. The enemy
IS not called merely Melik: Panaretos, p. 61, qualifies him as .Melik
s~ltan. ; Fontes, ~. "7, as .Melik sultan, the son of the great sultan Alaed-
din' M~reover. It IS reported that Melik sultan left from Konya and that
h.e recr~lt~d hiS army from Malatya and Sivas: Fontes, p. 118 and 122;
frnally It .IS noted that Melik was a symbol of unity for the Turks and
more pn~clseJy,_ for those living in Konya, in Erzerum and in the countr;
of Germlyan (t"'v KUQfl'UV&v: earliest mention of the Germiyanoglu)' Fontes
p. 131. Therefore T u ran, Sel,uklular, p_ 361 - 363, seems more acc~rate o~
111 111

334 TREBIZOND AND THE TURKS (1352.1402) 335

whole successful, and for a large part of that time 'I'rebizond
apparently a tributary to them 1. Was
'I'he more or less peaceful coexistence of the empire of Tr b'
· I ' e 1-
zon d and the Sel]uk su tanate was disturbed by the Mongols \Vh O
in 1243 invaded Asia Minor. 'I'rebizond, sharing the fate of all tl
other states of that area, became a tributary to the Mongols 2. bIe
she profited from the new situation. 'I'he Mongols made th~ c·~t
of 'I'~briz
the political and cOll1me~cial centr~
of Asia, a fact Whi1C~
contnbuted much to the economIC prosperity of Trebizond. Th
reasons for this increased prosperity are too well known to be
repeated here. 'I'he Trapeznntines also managed to annex th:
important harbour of Sinope for approximately thirteen years".
'I'he pax mongolica did not prevail for long in Anatolia owing
to two factors: a) the rise of the 'I'urcoman frontier principalities
and b) the revolts of the last Mongol commanders of Anatoliu.
Some explanations are perhaps helpful.
a) 'I'he Mongol invasion caused a great migration of 'I'urcoman
tribes to Asia Minor. They settled mainly in the front ier zones co
between the old Seljuk state and the Christian territories. As is Q)
well known, the llkhanids had great trouble keeping the tnrbulent CI)
Turcomans under control and were obliged to undertake several
campaigns against them. Howe I-er, despite the snperiority and
1I1I
determination of the 1I10ngols, in the second half of the XIllth ~
(,)

these events; however he places them in 1228; but the date given by the CO
two Trapezuntine sources is 6731 = 1222/23; Pan are t 0 s adds that It was
the second year of Andronikos I, i. e. 1223·
1. Fontes, p. 131; ct. Tu ran, Selcuklular, p. 362 .
2. B. S P u I e r. Die Mongolen in Iran, Berlin 1968', p. 65· It is worth
recalling, however, that Trebizond is not mentioned among the provinces
and principalities paying tribute to the Ilkhan Abu Said in 1335: S puler,
op. cit., p. 322' 326.
3. Mar i e N y s t a z 0 p 0 11 lOll, La demiere reconquete de Sinope par Ie!
6
Greos de Trebizonde (J254 -1267), Revue des Etudes Byzantines 22 (19 4) 2,1'
2~9; the author attempts to explain the conquest of Sinope by the Trape·
zuntines by reviewing Seljuk politics; nevertheless Anatolia was under
Mongol control in those years and the explanation of the event is perhaps
to be found in the relations between Trebizond and the Mougols. Be that
as it may, the Trape7,tlntine conquest of Sinope was temporary and the
important harbour was given as a fief to the Mongol commander of An~IO'
lia known as the Pervane; see N. K a I' m a z, Peruulle Mu'iniid·dtn Sui,)·
man, Ankara 1970, p. 1II' 122.
336
century and early in the XIV th , the Turcomans were able to
establish a number of principalities, the ghazi emirates, confronting
the Christian states '.
b) The Mongol commanders in Anatolia began to demonstrate
a tendency for independence_- a certain separatism. After a series
of revolts - major or minor - the last I1khanid commander of Ana-
tolia, Eretna, declared himself independent in 1341. His rule
extended from Nigde and Akseray in the South, to Koloneia ($arki
Karahisar) and Erzincan in the East and up to Samsun in the
Pontic regions. His residence was in Sebasteia (Sivas) or in Kay-
sed (Kaisareia)". Because of his possessions in the Pontic regions
he is mentioned in a Venetian document of 1344 as the .lord of the
whole Turkey of the Black Sea» 3.
Eretna died in 1352, and under the reign of his son Mehmed
the unity of this Anatolian state was already weakening. Mehmed
was assassinated in 1365, apparently by persons entrusted with the
administration of his provinces '. His death meant the end of poli-
tical unity in central Anatolia. Several local lords became inde-
pendent. Thus in the second half of the XIyth century the whole
of Islamic Anatolia formed a mosaic of small independent princi-
palities; some of them established in the frontier zones by Turco-
mans fighting against the Christians, the ghazi emirates; others
created by the separatist will of their leaders who profited from
the dissolution of the Ilkhanid state of Anatolia.
The relations of the new independent lords were by no means
friendly. Actually the whole history of the country in those years
I. P. \V itt e k, Deux chapitres de I'histoire des Turcs de Roum, Byzantion
11 (I936) 285 - 319; ide m, The Rise of the Ottoman Empire, London 1958,
p. 29 - 37· d I . B 1
2. 1. H. U z u n 9 a r § I II, Siva, - Kayseri ve dolaylarmda Eretna evett, e-
leten 32 (1968) 161 - 176; cf. S p u I e r, Die ~ong~len ~n Ira.n, p. 129' 137;
S p. V r yon i s, The Decline of Medieval Hellent'm <n A"a Mmor and the Pro·
ce" of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century, Berkeley - Los
Angeles - London '971, p. 139 - 140; Encyclopaedia of Islam', s. v. Eretno
(article by C 1. C a hen). . . di
3 R. !If 0 r 0 z z 0 dell a Roc c a, Notizie da Caffa, Studl m onore .
A. Fa~fani, v. II!, Milan 1962, p. 277: .Ratana est dominus tocius Turchle
Maris Maius.· . Ie r
Y ii eel Burhaneddin p. 22 - 23; the data given in T a k v 1m d'
4
p. 73, . permit to" place the assassination of Mehmed in Sep t em b er 1365 an
not vaguely in 1365166.
TREBIZOND AND THE TURKS (1352 - 1402) !;l37
't of a series of wars- sometime simultaneous - among the
conSIS s . d f h
vanoUs Ior ds, e ach one of whom was trytng
. . . to expan urt
, er.
Moreover, around the time of the assaSSID~tlon of Eretna s son,
there appeared the kad~ of Sivas, Burhaneddln Ahmed, who d,re~m­
ed of reuniting central Anatolia under his rule and reestablt~htng
Eretna's state. The intentions of Burhaneddin caused a, senes ,of
wars' some of the local lords took his side, but others resisted him
fierc~IY. Trebizond which is situated in the region had to withstand
all the consequences of this situation '.
In order, therefore, to discuss the relations of 'rrcbizond with
her neighbours in the end of the XIIlth and through the XIyth
century the following three points must be taken into consideration:
I) the foundation of the Turkish emirates in the frontier zones
2) the collapse of the I1khanid state in central Anatolia which
resulted in the independence of almost every large city
3) the rise of Burhaneddin in Sivas which, after all was said
and done, remained the political centre of central Anatolia.
We have two main sources for the study of Trapezuntine-
Turkish relations in the XIVth century: a) the chronicle of Pana-
retos whose short entries report only events occurring within the
Trapezuntine empire or concerning the Trapezuntine imperial
family j he tends to ignore the rest of Asia Minor. b) The work
Bezm u Rezm of ibn-f.>,rdashir, a protege of Kadi Burhaneddin, who
gives valuable information about central Anatolia since he himself
was interested in events resulting from the policy of Sivas 2. The-
refore our two sources complement one another up to a point.
Up until the middle of the Xlyth century the Trapezuntine
emperors seem to have confronted any menace coming from the
Turks with arms. But in the second half of that century they seem
to ha ve initiated a new policy, based on family alliances. In this
1. On the Eastern frontier of Trebizond see M. K u r san ski s
l'empire de Trebizonde et In Geortrie, Revue des Etudes Byzantines 35 (19--)
237- 256 (especially p. 247 - 256 ). "
2. Ibn:A.rdashir wrote his work in Persian: Aziz ibn A.rda-
•
~ I r A.s tar a bad t,. Bezm u Rezm, Turkiyat EnstitUsu, Istanbul 1928. I used the
extensl."e summary In German made by G i e sec k e. On ibn _A d h.
see Giesecke, p. 6. 12. r as Ir
 338
respect they followed an already established Byzantine tradition 1
with one difference: the Trapezuntines gave real princesses to the
Turks, while the Constantinopolitans - with the exception of John
VI Kantakouzenos 2_ gave only illegitimate daughters, presumably
because the Constantinopolitans considered such daughters as bon-
nes pour ['Orient. In order to explain this difference one must per-
haps keep in mind that the Byzantines considered the Trapezunti.
nes themselves as barbarians. Pachymeres qualifies the emperor of
Trebizond as a «barbarian»s, a term with a well known pejorative
meaning. On another occasion Pachymeres, mentioning the Patriarch
of Constantinople Germanos III (1265 - 1266), a member of the
Gabras family 4, remarks that the Patriarch's enemies used to call
him by a Turkish nickname and to say that he originated from the
same place as the Turks. They did all this because the Patriarch
was a Lazian which in Pachymeres' terminology means a Trape-
zuntine 5. Apart from Pachymeres, Gregoras, when relating some
events of the history of Trebizond, introduces them by remarking
that he is going to write about events which took place in other
nations: EV aAAol~ E{}VEcrl 6. As is known, the Byzantines used the
term E{}VO~ to designate peoples considered by them as barbarians.
Finally it is perhaps worth remarking that the Byzantine emperor
Andronikos III sent his illegitimate daughter as a wife to Basil, the
1. See the marriages of Byzantine princesses with the Mongol khans:
St. Run c i man, The Ladies of the Mongols. El. 'W~'U1V K. I. . AI"'vtov.
Athens '960, p. 46· 53·
2. D. M. N i col. The Byzantine Family of Kantakouzenos (Cantaeuzenu,)
c. 1100· 1460, A Genealogical and Pro,opographieal Study, Washington 1<)68,
p. 58 - 62 .
3. Pachymeres, ed. Bekker, Bonn 1835, v. I, p. 520: iJn.Q~·
'1""''' YUQ Il<iQ~aQo. rov ....
4. Germanos III Gabras is not mentioned by A. A. M. B rye r, ~ By·
zantine Family: the Gabrade, c. 979 - c. 1653, University of Birmingham, HI~tO'
rical Journal 12 (1970) 164 - 187; nor by A. Brye r - S. Fa s sou 1a k 1 S.-
D. M. N i col, A Byzantine Family: the Gabrades. An Additional Note, Byzanh-
noslavica 36 (1975) 38· 45· , •
5. Pac h y mer e s, ibid., p. 282: "Qoo6."tone.oVOI,a ileQo",ov.~ alnu\
di. on '"elvo. to yevoe; to ouveyyve; A6.~o. f]v, to tI· aVE"allev "ai ra~Qa•... '
xQoaef.lwxmv'to 'to yevo; w~ EXeii}£'Y 0\1 o1to{h" "ai. to ileQou<ov elva.. lhoolloAo-
yeit'o .. ..
6. Gregoras, ed. Schopen, Bonn 1829, v. II, p. 677,67 8.
TREBIZOND AND THE TURKS (1352 - 1402)
339
Trebizond I Such was by then a typical Byzantine
emperor 0 f .
esture towards an oriental lord. . .
g . the marriages of Trapezunt10e pnncesses
Let us now exam10e
as well as the resulting alliances. , .
The first wedding took place in 1352. The el~peror ~ .sIster
married Kutlu beg, the son of TuraH. Kutlu beg IS qualIfIed b;
Panaretos as emir of the «Amitiotai» 2. Thus, the emperor s
brother-in-law was the chieftain of the Turks wh~, by them~elves
or with others, had attacked Trebizond repeatedly 10 the fortIes of
the XIVth century.
More precisely, the Amitiotai began attacking tbe. Trapezunt-
ine territories from 1340. Within four years they ~arned out ~our
raids (1340-1343) 3. One of these raids was partIcularly senoUS
because they attacked the city of Trebizond itself 4. In 1348 the
Amitiotai participated in a major operation against Trebizond: the
abi Eyne beg, lord of Erzincan 5, and the rikabdar Mehmed beg,
governor of Bayburt 6, attacked Trebizond with tbe help of the
1. G reg 0 r a s. ibid.• p. 678: 'Y~I'6 v6llav tOU veov ~aol).e", ••AvtlQovi·
"ov tau ila).alO/.6yav 1'lvyatEQu; cf. on the snbject of the -barbarism' of the
Trapezuntines S. K a r po v, Trapezundskaja imperija v vizantijskoj istoriCeskoj
literature XliI - XV vV" Vizantijskij Vremennik 35 (1973) 154.164.
2. Pan are to s. p. 70; on the wedding ct. B rye r. Tiirkmens.
p. 134 - 135; ct. J. E. Woo d s, The Aqquyunlu, Clan. Confederation, Empire.
Minneapolis· Chicago, 1976. p. 46 - 47.
3. Pan are t 0 s, p. 65, 66, 67: in August 1340, in JUly 1341, in Au·
gust of the same year and in June 1343 (the raid of August 1341 has been
omitted by B rye r, Tiirkmen" p. 144).
4· A second source for this ,aid is L i v a den 0 s, p. 64·66 and d.
p. 223 - 225.
5· According to ibn· Ardashir, Giesecke, P.32, Eyne beg
became master of Erzincan by byiug it; cf. S ii mer, Mogollar, p. 127 and,
mainly Y ii eel, Ara~t<rmalar I, p. 666 - 669. Eyne beg died in June 1362 ,
a few months after another campaign against Trebizond: T a k vim I e r,
p. 81; ct. infra p. 349, n. 2.
6. Pan are t 0 s, p. 68: altO to Oa'lt6Qt 6 MaXI',,-t EtxmtaQI' with a
varia lectio •EQ"e;t,ciQle;; on Etx£"t6.Qle; I Rikabdar. see V. L. Men age,
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 40 (1977) J59 -160.
As Mehmed was a rikabdar, one Can guess that he was the governor of Bay-
burt. It is not certain that MaXl'at, i. e. Pan are t 0 s· transcription, cor.
responds to Mehmed; it could also correspond to Mahmud; cf. Pan are _
to s, p. 64, TUl'uQtcic"'e; I Demirta~. To be noted that there is a medrese in
Bayburt erected by an emir Mahmud d11ring the Ilkhanid period Bayburt
became a caravan city during the Mongol period: O. T u ra 11, Dogu .1na-
 HI

340 TREOIZOND AND THE TURKS (1352 - 1402) 341

<;epni 1 and the Amitiotai. After all of these vexing incide t h

emperor married his sister to th e son 0 f t h' h' n s t toe term to 'Aj.!llTtV seems to designate a CDuntry - not a city - since
ea clef in order
obtain peace. it is mentiDned in the same context with Misir (Egypt) and Kurdi-
stan I. Therefore, one can assume that the Trapezuntines of the
\Vho were these Amitiotai? Two Oriental ·sources th
'b' " e Works XIVth century used the name Amitiotai fDr the people living in or
o f, I n-Ardaslur and of Abu Bakr Tahranl (author of the 0 ff"IClal
history of the Akkoyunlu 2) make it clear that Panaretos ref originating from the country ·Aj.!~nv, which should be the regiDn
' . ers to Df Diyarbekir, known as a separate prDvince under the MDngDl
the Akkoyunlu federation of tnbes. Yel there is a problem' A .
tiotai is obviously an adjecti ve indicating origin. If one r~m ml- administratiDn 2.
h d' f h d" , oves 'fhis cDnclusion fits within the framewDrk Df the known histDry
teen I~g, 0 tea :ectlve, -WJt!)," one is inclined to recognize in
the remaining word, Aj.!lt-, the city of Amida, called by the 11:US _ of the AkkDyunlu. It is reported that in the early years of their
Iims Diyarbekir. But as is known, the Akkoyunlu became mast histDry the Akkoyunlu were established in the region of Diyar-
of the city of Diyarbekir much later; and for this reason the t ers bekir". Panaretos's term Amitiotai, in my opinion, derives from
. - " p erm the Akkoyunlu's Dwn tradition regarding their origin. Like all
A mltlOtal In anaretos appears as a puzzling anachronism".
Perhaps, however, an explanation can be given. The city of TurcDmans of thDse years, the Akkoyunlu moved towards the fron-
Amida is never mentioned in Panaretos' text. On the other hand tier zones and thus approached the Pontic regions 4. In the forties
in a Trapezuntine horoscope composed in 1336, the geographical of the XIVth century they were established in the regions of Bay-
burt and Erzincan s.
It is not c.l~ar why they attacked Trebizond in 1340. According
'!,olu Tiirk Devletleri Tarihi, Istanbul 1973, p. 31 - 42; on Bayburt See R. R.
Una 1, Alonuments islamiques pre.ottomans de La ville de Bayburt et de 56S environs, to ~ lat~r traditIon, the Akkoyunlu invaded the Trapezuntine terri-
Revue des Etudes Islamiques 40 (1972) 99 - 103 (including a map). tOfles In order to avenge the death of a chieftain of the tribe of
1. On the yepni (an Oltu.z tribe) see F. S U in e r, Anadolu'da ya~ayan D_u~a.rlu killed by the Trapezuntines. This tribe was living in the
Mzi ii<;-oklll oguz boylarlna mell$llp te~ekkiiler, Iktisat FakUltesi Mecmuasl 11 (1950 ) VIClDlty of Ba~burt and Erzerum 6. Be that as it may, they later
441 - 453; ide m, Oguzlar (Tiirkmenler), Tarihleri, Boy te~kilati, Destanlarl, Ankara collaborated
. .WIth the emirs of the two I'mport an t caravan CIties
' ,
1967, p. 318- 323; d. also Encyclopaedia of Islam', s. v. Cepni (article by against Tr.eblzond. They were, accDrding to ibn-Ardashir, compe-
F. SUm e r). B rye r, Tiirkmell$, p. 132 and 144, thinks that the leader of
tent warflors, prompt to offer military services to lords who
the yepni was Boz-Dogan (noolloy,,,·~.I; unique mention of Boz-Dogan in
Pan are t 0 s, p. 68: "ai &,," tOJV 'Aftl tlrotOJV 6 TotlQa"irce" "at 6 rroolloY("'~1
appealed to them. It seems that the Trapezuntine emperor wished
xai T~.=viIlE' ouv a,hol.; therefore one can assume safely that Boz-Dogan
was an Amitiotes, i. e. an Akkoyunlu. 1.80r. Trap., p. 40.
2. Abu B a k r T a h ran i, Kit a b - i Diy arb a k r i y Y a, ed. N. 2.Islam Ansiklop d' . . .
Lug.l- F. SUmer, v. I·II, Ankara 1962-69; ct. IsHim Ansiklopedisi, Ill. H. YIn an,)' S'~ lSI, S. v. D,yarbek", especially p. 618 - 621 (article by
, u mer, Karakoyunlular p 33 -" f S .
s. v. Akkoyunlular (article by M. H. Yin a n d. Mongolen in Iron, P 35" S" M,'" 04, c. pu I er, Die
3. Analysis of the problem in B rye r, Tiirkmens, p. 133; however the p. 31. . ! t1 meT, ogollar, p. £09; Y Gee I, Burhaneddin,
statement that Koustouganes w.s the first member of the Amitiotai dyna- 3· On the Akkoyunlu see I H U
sty to emerge in documentary evidence is not accurate. Pan are t 0 s, p.63, Akk~yunlu Karakoyunlll devletleri, A'nk;r Z U ~,a r§ Ill, Anodol" beylikleri ve
mentions Koustouganes only Once without qualifying him as an Amitiotes; Anslklopedisi s. v Akk I I ( a 1969, p. 188· 198 ; cf. also Islam
, . oyun II ar Yin a n ,J . I E
the name of Koustouganes does not appear at all in S g 0 u r 0 p 0 u los' s. v. Akkoyunlll (article by V 111' ' a so ncyclopaedia of Islam'
poems. Moreover the tentative hypothesis of B rye r, Tiirkmell$, p. 134, that p. 38 - 43. . In 0 r sky); mainly Woo d s, Aqqllyunlu:
under the term Amitiotai one could see the placename Omidia, seems most 4· Other Turcomans of thei . hb' .
unlikely, since this would imply a march of Turcomans from the coast same direction; Turcomans f r ~;g Ourtng regIOns moved towards the
(where Omidia was situated) towards central AnatoHa. At least during the oglu, are attested in th . rom eppo, the Inal-ogolu and the Kopek
B h e regIOn of Tokat in th XI V' •
first half of the XIVlh century the TurconIan~ always headed from the Ana' Ur aneddin, p. 61, n. 8. e lh century: y Ueel,
tolian plateau to the coast where the frontier zones were situated. There is 5· Islam Ansiklopedisi s v A k k
6. SUm e r , n.ara~oyunlular,
v •. ' "
p. 26. - 0 y U n luI a r (Y,nan")', cf. note 6.
no evidence for the opposite - at least not to my knowledge. y
 THE TURKS (1352. 1402)
342 TREBIZOND AND
. them - by land
aign agal nllt . 1
to detaclI them from the lords of Bayburt and Erzincan and to win dertoo k a successful camp umably their emu .
them over to the Trapezuntine side I. For this reason he proceeded ell1pero r un_ and captured Koustouganen, pres Bayram appearS on
nd by sea I K d gan In 13 13
oo
.
to a family alliance, thus initiating a long range policy. As We ~is nall1e was apparent y UC;:. 0 d . not altogether clear, agaInst
shall see, Trebizond profited much frum the family alliance with
the Akko)'unlu, and in the years which followed good relations
the scene as t~le h:roT~~ ~~I:~~~sl:ip between Kiic;:dog a n ~ntdh::~;
the Trapezuntll1es.. 3 an event, Bayram, the a
with the Turcoman lords were maintained and reinforced by two ram cannot be estabhshed . fIn] Ynsidered as the founder of the
more marriages of Trapezuntine princesses to Akkoyunlu leaders' . . can be sa e y co S I
Ibrahim Hacl ennr, th Haci emirogullarl. evera
The second wedding took place in I358. According to Panare~ d asty known as e . bl
short-lived petty yn h d t the head of a consldera e
tos, another sister of the emperor married the emir Hatzimiris . 2 Bayram marc e a d f
years later, In 133 : h pushed back 4. The ate 0
(Haci emir), the son of Payramis (Bayram); Had emir had his army against Treblzond, but I t: waws In 1357 his son, Ibrahim
castle in Chalybia and was the emir of Chalybia". The exact loca- , d h' not exact Y k no n .
Bayram s eat IS . .d against territories in the very
tion of Chalybia is not known; Panaretos implies that it could be Had emir, led a destructl ~e ra~
reached from Kerasunt. Ibrahim Had Emir, the new brother-in-law . . 'ty of the city of Treblzond . .
of the emperor, as well as his son Siileyman are mentioned in the VICIOI . d bl' h peaceful relatIons
Af tl t the emperor deCide to esta IS
work of ibn-Ardashir. Moreover, a certain Cao;amir or Ca~amia with h~:- an~a gave him his own sister as a wife. :rhe n:w b.roth:r-
(obviously a Haci emir) is mentioned by Clavijo. With the help of in-law of the emperor was more than an i?fluentlal chIeftaIn, Itke
these three sources one can venture to locate the territories of the Kutlu beg. He was the emir of a ghazi emIrate tha: thre~tened the
Had emirogullan. One may also form an idea about the family . b u t th e P roblem was solved by. a matrimolllal albance.
emplIe; ., .
into which the Trapezuntine princess married. As for the western frontier of thIS emirate, It was contIguous
According to Panaretos, Chalybia was taken by the Turks with the territories of the lord of Niksar, Taceddin c;:elebi also
sometime between 1280 and I297. Then the Turks carried out a eventually husband of a Trapezuntine princess. This fact is reported
large scale raid resulting in the devastation of the whole country- by both Panaretos and ibn-Ardashir. Both authors say that the lord
side 4. Panaretos does not state from whom the Turks took Chaly- of Niksar wished to expand at the expense of the Had emirogul-
bia. However, it sounds most probable that they took it from the lan, and for this reason he marched against their territories 6.
Trapezuntines. The chronological period is most significant: it Ibn-Ardashir adds a detail: the sultan of Sivas, Burhaneddin, who
corresponds with the years of the rise of the various emirates form-
ed by Turcomans who were gathered together by Mongol pressure
in the frontier zones. Some years later the Turks of Chalybia I. Pan are los, p. 63; on Koustouganes see p. 340, n. 3, supra;
Fontes, p. 61 - 62; d. N. A. 0 i k 0 nom ide s, E1J/1E{OJpG nEel roov €711U1:0-
il1\'aded the coastal regions and blockaded Kerasunt. In 130I the Miv re1Jyoelov rov XtovteiOov, 'AQXslov nonov 20 (1955) 40 - 42.
2. Panaretos, p. 63; ct. Bryer. Tilrkmens, p. 143.
I. This interpretation has been proposed by Y ii c e I, ArafllTmalar r, 3· It would be unreasonable to identify Koustouganes/Kiic;:dogan with
p. 667; d. also lhe remarks of Woo d s, Aqquyunlu, p. 47 - 48. Dog-anclk menlioned by a I . U mar i, p. 350; to do so one should first
2. Due a 5, Historia Turco·Bizantioo, ed. V. G r e C UJ Bucarest J95 81 change lhe form of the name given by Pan are t 0 s and then presume
p. 163 - 165; Osman Karayiiliik, son of Maria Grand Komnena and Kutlll thaI lhe Trapezuntine emperor released Koustouganes.
beg, married a daughter of Alexios III or Alexios IV. Uzun Hasan :Iso 4· Panarelos, p.64.
married a Trapezuntine princess: B rye r, Tilrkmens, p. '49, nole 146; M. K 11 r· 5·. Pan are t os, p. 72; a temporary conquest of Kerasunt by the
T urks IS reporled by L i v a d . . . .
5 a n ski s, A utour de 1a demiere princesse de Trebizonde: Theodora, fille de Jean belo . " en 0 s, p. /9, as havlIlg happened shortly
IVet epouse d'Uzun Hasan, 'AQr.siov novtOu 34 (1977' 78) 77 - 87; d. Woo d s, at l~e t 1:,+' ; . II IS known lhat Trebizond was attacked by the Akkoyunltl
Aqquyunlu, p. 100 - 101 ; also F ran c esc a L u c c h e t t a, L' .affare Zen' th l~ Ittle, Supra, p. 339; but lhe raids of the Akkoyunlu did n t h
in Levante nel prirrw cinquecento, Studi Veneziani 10 (1968) 109 - 219·
e tttoral to the West of Tr b' d" 0 reac
altribule lhe conquest of Keras e ,tzoln th' foTr thIS reason one is inclined to
3. Pan are t 0 s, p. 72, 73 - 74. 6. See In . fra p. 351. un 0 e urks of Chalybia .
4. Pan are t 0 s, p. 51.
,. III
345
344 THE TURKS (1352. 1402)
TR BalZOND AND

interfered in this war on the side of the Haci emirogullan t . . rlenk. Clavijo does not mention \~ho was
. , ook and a wbutary to Tllnu h sts that the Trapezunttne ter-
t h e fortress of Iskefser, whIch belonged to Taceddin, and gav . unt· but as e sugge t'll
to Siiley~an Haci emir?glu I. This fortress, situated in the So:t~~ the lord of K eras '. .' bable that Kerasunt s I
ritories started in Trrpolls 1, It seems pro
east of Nlksar, was obvIOusly somewhere on the frontier of the two
Muslim lords. belonged to Siileyman. ' . and in this case the
The third wedding took place In 1379, M r
Therefore, t~le territory ar.ound G~lkoy. is a reasonable place . aceddin 2, was by far the best. He wa~ a ~s 1m
to locate the emuate of IbrahIm HacI emIr 2. Later, in 1396/- br~degroom'l ~'3. l rd of a most venerated Muslim City, Nlksar
Ibrahim's son and successor, Siileyman, conquered the port ~; prrncke,. a c;e. e) IWheroe the tomb of Melik Dani~mend is to be found j
Kerasunt s. (Neo -alsarela , h I k f er and
lord of some smaIl but important fortresses suc a~: e ~
Some years later Clavijo, on his way to Samarcand, mention Sonusa 4. lord also of the fertile plain of Phanarola lyIng b:-
a certain Haci emir 4, most probably Siileyman.. Haci emirogVlu I asS tween Amasya and Niksar near the river Iris (Ye~il Irm6ak~. ThIS
the lord of two smalI coastal places 5 between Dnye and Kerasunt plain, qualified by Strabo as the best place in the tontos , IS :o~­
nected by land routes with Erzincan and Amasya ; therefore It IS
I. G i e Sec k e, p. 67; Y ii c e I, Burhuneddin. p. 91; d. infra p. .145, strategicaIly important.
n. 4.
2. B rye r. TiJTkmeM, p. 132 and map, mentions a castle (GolkaI' Ri.
xelles 1947. p. 238. B rye r, Maps, p. 104, misled by Le Strange's trans-
lise Kale) in this locality; this could well be the oamtoxaatQov of Had lation of C I a v i j 0, mentions a locality Santo Nicio not to be found in
emir mentioned by Pan are t 0 s, p. 73. The domains of Had emir have any other source.
been connected with Ol\'aiov! Onye; tbis assumption .!s not supported by
1. C I a v i j 0, p. 74. B rye r, Tiirkmens, p. 131, hesitates to accept CIa·
the sources. Pan aretos, p. 68, reports a capture of Dnye in 1346/7 with.
vijo's data because it took the latter almost three days to travel from Ke-
out mentioning by whom; anyhow it was temporary. Onye remained for
rasunt to Trebizond; however C I a v i j o' s journey was long because of
long under Trapezuntine rule: in 1379 the wedding of Taceddin with the
bad weather (cfizo tienpo contrario. , eel viento era contrario. 1 ce el viento
princess Eudokia took place there: Pan are t 0 s, p. 79; after Timurlenk's fue contrario- etc. ,.
campaign, C I a v i j 0, p. 73, found the place under a Greek lord. On the other
hand ibn - A r d ash i r does not mention Onye as a possession of Had emir; 2. On Taceddin see U z U n c; a T§ Ill, Anadolu beylikleri. 5upra p. 341,
the place·name appears in G i e sec k e, p. 66 and 85, but it constitute>; n. 3, p. 153 - 15t; mainly a g u z, Taeeddin ogulla".
an addition - not altogether successful - to i b Ii - A r d ash i r' s text: . 3· Pan are to s, p. 74 and 78: <toii t'~a,a",~ Tat~ntiv'j>, «oii Tnt~la.
I express my thanks to Prof. W. Millward, who checked ibn·Ardashir's nv~ t~la,(",~,; Kutlu beg and Had emir have only the title UIl'lQa, in
text for me. Therefore the emirate of Had emir is not accurately located Panaretos, 1'.70,72,74,76; on ~elebi see P. \Vittek, Der ,Beiname.
in B rye r, Turkmens, passim and map; the alternative place he proposes, d.. O.m:-nuehen Sultans Mehemmed f, Eretz - Israel v. 7 (1963), L. A. Mayer
1. e. Golkoy Kilise Kale seems more probable. Memo,,"l Volume, p. 144 - 157.
3. Giesecke, p. 110. 4.. heOn Q
Iskefser
II see F r . T a e s c h n e r, D as anatohsehe
.
Wegenetz naeh
4. C I a v i j 0, p. 73: Ca~amir, ca~amia; B rye r, Turkmens. p. 129' osmanlle n ue en Leipzig 1924 v II f J
Tskefse t ' . . ,p. 54; c. a so the place names
130, misled by Le Strange's translation, mentions, with a question mark, d' . r ura~ and ~skefser Flndicak in the same region: Tiirkiye Ansiklo.
this lord as Altamur and as the successor of Taceddin; on Taceddin's pe lSI, s. v. Re~ad,ye' cf supra P 344 n S (d
as a possession of Ta;eddin' G" 'k' I. onus a to ay Ta~ova) appears
successors see p. 351, U. 4. ibn-Battuta p 43 6 ' f' RleHsec e, p.64. T heplace is mentioned by
5. The first place was called Leona, C 1 a v i j 0, p.73, i e. Bow" today , . ,c. . art man n Zu E I" T. 10 1 b •
ober.,. Euphrat- und Tigru. Cebiet Der I I ' W va se e e i $ Reiun im
Vona; see on this locality B rye r, Maps, p. 104; cf. ide 01, TiJrkm,ns. gin, 15. ve 16. astrlarda eyalet.; R" s ~~9f~1919) 18~ ..188; also T. G 5 k b i I·
p. 131; ct. also the description of the place in A. Del a t t e, Leo Portulans · k um. a I ar DerglSI 6 (1965) 51 - ,4.
S. G lesec e, p.88. '
Croc., IT, Complements, Bruxelles 1958. p. 33. The second place waS Stoma
Ii. MiQo; Exovaa toii Gonou to .
(Greek l;t0l'a: mouth), situated according to C I a vi j 0, p. 73. near to a ne s, Cambridge Mass. 1954 v V ~Q"HGtOV, S t r abo n, ed. H. L. J 0-
,bocca de un Rio,; the river is apparently the Bazar-su. Stoma is most pro: I I' . , . , p. 394 - 395·
bably the locality of San Thomas to be found on the map of Vescoo te . 7. sam Anslklopedisi, s. v. Nik.ar (article by II D
.
k
a r - 0 t).
B rye T, Map•• p. 105; and in A. Del a t t e, Les Portulan. Crees 1, Bru·
 III
3-!S
wedding, the Sivas people mounted an expedition against Niksar
because Taceddin had declared himself independent through refu-
sing to pay his annual tribut · The cam~~ign f~ile~, a~d the Sivas
7
arm v withdrew after plundenng Taceddlll s terntones . Therefore
in 1379 when the wedding took place, T~ebizond and Niksar had a
common enemy: Sivas. Moreover Taceddlll had proven that he was
able to maintain his independence.
The Sivas group openly showed their disapproval for the family
alliance between Trebizond and Niksar. Panaretos reports that
when the emperor and his daughter arrived at Kerasunt to join his
future son-in-law, a message came from the capital: K\lI~ Arslan
was about to march down against Trebizond. The emperor left the
bride in Kerasunt and returned to Trebizond with his nobles. He
fortified the castle and set the country in read.!ness. Then he
returned to Kerasunt and led his daughter to Unye where the
wedding took place 2. Panaretos reports that the emperor took
Limnia at that time without clarifying from whom he took it 3.
Perhaps Limnia was temporarily occupied by Taceddin in order to
excercise pressure upon the Trapezuntine emperor.
A fourth wedding took place in the second half of the XIVth
century: a Trapezuntine princess - most probably a daughter of
Alexios III - was given in matrimony to Mutahharten, the lord of
Erzincan and Bayburt and of some other important places. This
marriage is reported by Clavijo who visited Erzincan in 1404 when
Mutahharten was already dead 4. The wedding most probably took
place after the year 1379 when Mutahharten became the lord of
Erzincan. The match was certainly most profitable for the Grand
Komnenoi, and a review of the relations between the empire of
Trebizond and the lords of the two caravan cities of Bayburt and
Erzincan is not out of place.
As we saw, the emirs of those two cities attacked Trebizond
in 1348; and I expressed the opinion that this event led to the
marriage of the emperor's sister to the Akkoyunly Kutlu beg who
was thus won over to the Trapezuntine side. In the years that
Y u eel, BurluIneddin, p. 38 - .19·
1.
2. Panaretos, P.79-
3· Pan are t 0 s, p. 79- see Y ii eel, Ara§wmalar 1,
4. C I a vii 0, p. 86·87; on Mutahharten
p. 67\.67 2 •
III
TRIlBIZOND AND THE TURKS (1352. 1402) 349
followed, Panaretos does not report incidents with the emirs of
Bayburt and Erzincan. However, the situation changed in 1360
and 1361. Trebizond was attacked by Hoca Latif of Bayburt and
later by Eyne beg of Erzincan. The former was killed by the Tra-
pezuntines in q6r " and the latter died the next year 2. Imme-
diately afterwards a young man, Pir Hiiseyn, son of an emir, ap-
peared on the scene. After a civil war, he became master of
Erzincan, and within two months he conquered the city of Bayburt
as well. It is not known who exactly the opponents of Pir Hiiseyn
were nor who helped him to accomplish the conquest of those two
most important caravan cities 3. Only one fact is certain: that
throughout his rule, for about r6 years, there are no recorded
hostilities between his domains and Trebizond.
I. XOt~lQA("('I'~<;, presumably Hoca Liitif, is twice mentioned by
Pan are t 0 s, p. 73. qualified as '''.'I'aA1]-, i. e. governor, of Bayburt: in
April 1361 Hoca Latif prevented the emperor from erecting ,Tou Kou"ou. in
the region of Chaldia (B rye r, Tiirkmens, p. '45, gives an inaccurate trans-
lation of Panaretos' passage); .Tou Kou"ou. was probably a fortress.
In July 1361 Hoca Latif attempted a new raid in the region of Ma,ka but
he was defeated and killed by the people of Ma,ka (Mat1;ou''''ta.j. Mention
of Hora Latif in Libadenos, p. Ill; ct. also p. 23 0 .
2. Pan are t 0 s, p. 74: Eyne beg besieged the castle of rOAaxa for
sixteen days in Octoher 1361. This campaign of Eyne beg is also mention-
ed in T a k vim 1e r, p. 81: in October 1.161 Eyne beg besieged the .Riig-i
Trabizon •. One can safely assnme that rOAaxa and .Rug-i Trabizon. is the
same place but its exact locality remains unknown. B rye r, Tiirkmens.
p. 145, wonders whether rOAaX" is Rola~a. The village Rola~a is situated
between Rize and Trebizond: see Turkiye Ansiklopedisi, s. v. Araki,; it
seems unlIkely that the emir of Erzincan attacked these territories and for
this reason the identification rOAaxa I Rola~a must perhaps be excluded.
A passage of Pan are t 0 s, p. 77, suggests that ro,ax" was an important
c~stIe for the control of Chaldia. One is inclined to propose that it was
sItuated somewhere near the caravan road. On Eyne beg cf. also supra,
p. 339. n. 5. .
.1:T a k vim 1e r, p. 81; this is the only source of the events in question;
~f.0 ~ u. c e ~'
Bu:haneddin, p. 3~. note 101 and Y u eel, Araftlrmalar I. p. 669-
7 , Pu Huseyn s opponents lD Bayburt are mentioned by name: T a k v i ni-
Ie r, p. 8,; but nothing is known about their background. Pir Huseyn set
off from $arki Rarahisar which belonged to Eretna: supra P 3'6 n 2'
howe . 6 h . <
I • '" • I
d'ff ver In 13 2, W en Pu Hiiseyn appeared on the scene the links of the
I erent pr~vinces with Sivas were loose; therefore one 'cannot say much
on the relatIOns between Pir Hiiseyn and the sou of Eretna.
,
III
350
Pir Hiiseyn died in 1378/9, and immediately Burhaneddin of
Sivas, along with KI1I~ Arslan - the already mentioned enemy of
Trebizond - tried to conquer Erzincan; but they failed, although a
part of its population was favourably disposed towards the Sivas
administration I. A new man appeared - Mutahharten - who Was
able to become the master of the city with the support, among
others, of the Akkoyunlu Kutlu beg 2, the first Turk who married
into the Trapezuntine imperial family.
If one takes into consideration that the Akkoyunlu were long
time allies of Trebizond, that the new emir Mutahharten success-
fully opposed an enemy of Trebizond - KI1I~ Arslan - and even-
tually married a daughter of the emperor, one may conclude that in
1378/79 the Trapezuntines through their allies contributed to the
establishment in Erzincan of an emir favourably disposed towards
them. One may also wonder whether Pir Hiiseyn's success in Bayburt
and Erzincan in 1362 was not also accomplished because of Trape-
zuntine help; Pir Hiiseyn was not tlnfriendly towards Trebizond.
In conclusion then, in 1379 the Trapezuntine policy of marriage
alliances seemed very successftll. The two neighbouring Turkish
principalities were under the rule of relatives of the imperial
family. These principalities bordered on the southwestern frontier
of the Trapezuntine empire since they extended up to Limnia, i.e.,
all along the Pontic coast which was under Trapezuntine rule. Thus
a Pontic block was formed, hostile to Sivas. On the other hand the
administration of Sivas had failed to conquer Erzincan: Mutahhar-
ten was established in that city with the help of the Akkoyunlu;
he was definitely hostile to Burhaneddin and eventually married
a Trapezuntine princess. It is perhaps worth recalling that Niksar
is connected with Erzincan by a land road 3. The only possible
l. Giesecke, P.31-33; d. Yiicel, Burhaneddin, p. 39-41; d.
Woo d s, Aqquyunlu, p. 48. . Bucarest 1966, p. 80; but nothing more is known about 'them'. .
2. G i e sec k e, p. 32; the good relations between the TrapezuntlDe
emperor and KntJu beg are shown by the attempted visit of the emperor to
his brother-in-law in 1363; the visit was cancelled because of the ~Iack
death: Pan are t 0 s, p. 75 (B rye r, Tiirkmens, p. 145 - 146, gives an IDac-
curate translation of this passage); also hy the visit of Kutlu beg to Tre-
bizond in 1365 and the visit of the emperor to Kutln beg 1366: Pan a re'
t as, p. 76. ya
3. This is the road followed by ibn - Battuta who went from Amas
to Erzincan; 1 bn - Ba ttu t a, p. 436 - 437.
III
TREBIZOND AND THE TURKS (1352 - 1402) 351
threat to the empire cou1~ come f,rom K t,I t~ A rs I a n who was active
in Koyul Hisar and later ID Sarkt Karahlsar. ,
Nevertheless, the success was of short duration., BurhaneddID,
proclaimed sultan in Sivas in 13811, consolidated hiS power, too~
Tokat and attacked Niksar 2. A war broke out between the ~aci
emirogullan and Taceddin during which the latter was k.~lled
(24th October 1386) 3; after that his successors 4 as well as S~ley­
man Haci emiroglu were obliged to recognise the overlordshlp of
Burhaneddin 6. After Kutlu beg's death in 13896, a conflict erupted
between Mutahharten and the Akkoyunlu, who for this reason
passed for a time into the service of Burhaneddin 7. There cannot
be any doubt that all these events had serious consequences for the
empire of Trebizond. Btlt unfortunately there is no detailed Tra-
pezuntine source for those years.
In any case, events with more serious consequences soon took
place: the expansion of the Ottomans to the Pontic regions in 139 1 8;
l. Y ii eel. Burhaneddin, p. 59 -63.
2. Y ii eel, Burhaneddin, p. 81 - 85.
3· Pan are t 0 s, p.80, dates the event of October, 24th, Wednesday
of the year 6895 of the tenth indiction, 1. e. of 1386; in this year the 24'"
of October was a Wednesday; therefore Pan are t 0 s' date appears most
trustworthy and on the base of it the dates given by Y ii eel, Burhaneddin,
p. 77 - 92, must be revised. A small correction is to be done in Pan a _
: e t 0 5' text and, more precisely, the change of the place of a comma:
Instead of c'KC.ttu. 'tOU f\'EQOU yaJA~Qo;:; 'tou ~aa'AE<O;, ,,'Lou lOV EX XaAu~i(Lc; Xat'~"­
!J.U~l1l 'tou, AEYOJA£VOu ~olJAaJ.lci!l1tEx» one must read: c'KC.t'tu 'tau ftEQOU yall~Qoij
YOU ~aCll1.EC"'; .uiou, YOU FX Xa1.1!~(a, Xa<~u~uQ~, <ou l.eyofll',"01! ~ou>.a~ci~".x.,
B rye r, Turkmens, p. 148, note 140, misled by the place of the comma
thou~ht th~t Siileyman Haciemiroglu was married with another Trape:
zuntlne prIncess.
4· Taceddin had four sons: lIIahmud, Alparslan, KI119 ATslan and Sii-
l~~I~an, se.e on :he,m0 g u z, Taceddin ogullart, p. 480 - 487. Taceddin produced
c 1 rell With hiS frapezuntine wife; S p h Tan t z e s ed V G
r e c u,
5· G 'II
Ta dd'
1 e sec k e
,.
p 66 -67', cf . Y"u c e,1 B
urhaneddin, p. 89-91' 0 g U z
ce m ogu aft, p. 476 - 479. ' I
6. Klltlu beg's tomb' . S· .
B " IS In Inur, a Village near Bayburt· see A. ~
1 e y g u, Er.erum, Tarth" Amtlart, Kitabeleri, v. I, Istanbul 1936'? .
was unable to see the article of G G" , p. -55 . 256 ;
kaylerinde Turk mimari eserleri Sanat T' 'h~l~e~sever - A. A I tun, Bayburt
7· Y ii .eel ' Burhanedd~nJ
'. an I ra~lJnnalarJ 3 ([970) p. ,1"j - 4".
p. 152 ~ 153. I
8. ElIzabeth A. Zachariado
between Baya.id I and K d' B h " u, Manuel/[ Palaeologos on the strife
a, ur an al-Dm (m press).
, III
III
TREBIZOND AND THB TURKS (13S2 - 14(2)
353
352
later the campaign of Timurlenk in Anatolia 1. Like all the sm a 11 cities 1. In the XIVth century al-Umari describes the Trapezun-
states of Asia Minor, Trebizond took Timur's side. She put h tine empire as «continuously crossed,. by people travelling to the
flee.t at his disposal and becan:e.a trib~tary
to him 2. She remain:~ Crimea 2.
anti-Ottoman up to the end, siding with Uzun Hasan, i.e. the lord It is worth drawing attention to the Trapezuntine horoscope
of Tabriz, who controled the cities of Bayburt and Erzincan. of 1336, which gives a clear picture of the Trapezuntine society,
Can one see any stable factors determining Trapezuntine poli- apparently a fairly affluent one. Many predictions are recorded
tics? I think that the Trapezuntine emperors at least in the XIVth about the merchants with much nuance. There is a distinction
century had two main preoccupations beyond the mere security of drawn between merchants who travel', small merchants who sell
their own state: the security of the caravan roads leading from the in the bazar' and intermediaries who sell goods imported by sea 5.
Pontic coast to the cities of Bayburt and Erzincan and the control There is also reference to fluctuation of prices 6, to demand for
of the ports - whether small or large - along the Pontic coast. gold and silver', to the fall of the price of perfumes, of pearls
Both preoccupations were related to trade. Trebizond has always and of fish 8. There is hardly anything predicted with respect to
been known as a centre of trade, the outlet of the caravan road the crops and in general with respect to the local production.
from central Asia to the Black Sea and as the harbour from which Apparently Trebizond remained a rich entrepot, a large bazar, up
one could sail to Southern Russia or to Constantinople'. to her last days. Bessarion in a eulogy for his native city remarked
Arab authors report the yearly fairs in the city and remark on that Trebizond seemed to have perpetual fairs j and that the Tra-
her importance as a commercial centre 4: during the expedition pezuntines constantly traveled for trade across the Pontos or Asia
of one of the Seljuk sultans against Trebizond, the suspension of Minor and to the Middle East 9.
trade with Southern Russia and the Greek territories greatly injured
the Muslim merchants 5. Once the city an independant state - if
not earlier - the Genoese and the Venetians established themselves I. Hey d, Histairedu Commerce, supra, p. 352, n. 3; Greek merchants (pre·
there, and she was frequented by European merchants from other sumabl~ Trapezuntines) joined the Genoese caravans going from Trebizond
toTabnz:G.Forche·
G . r 1 , IV<' ..
av£. e naVJgGz£one a Genova nel trecento. II c. Liber
T a~a.ne., Genoa 1974, p. r6 (the Genoese travelling from Trebizond to
I. Timurlenk's army was already in Anatolia at the end of 1393 or a r~z were not allowed to take with them foreigners 'exceptis Venetis et
GreelS»).
the beginning of 1394: Y ii c e I, Ara~ttrmalar II, p. 166· 167; Y ii eel's
argument is supported by a Venetian document of July 1394, reporting, 2. AI·Umari, P.380.
among other matters: 'partes Basaiti molestantur ad presens ab Imperato' 3· Har. Trap., p. 40: ,0L, Efl"6Qo,, ,a~,aL(l auxv&. fl"'&' XEQaOU,.
rem Tartarorum., S. L j ubi C I Monumenta spectantia historiam Slavorum Merl· 4· ~ar. Trap., p. 40: '~L, "a~aQlcb,a" ,axv''l,a El, ,&., "Qu~"" au,-
5. Har. Trap.• p. 40' X"Qao,'). _, OlV.
dionalium, v. IV, Zagreb 1874, p. 33 2 ' 334· a~, E~"Qx6fl"va. . fla ,a,a '01, fl",a"Qa,oua, ,&. EX 'ii, {}a)"ua-
2. M. Mat h i Ide A I e x a n'd res cu· De r sea, La campagne de Tim.r
e" Anatolie (1402), Bucarest 1942, p. 52 and 123 "124· On the other Pontic d.~Q'~ELal) etc.Trap., p '41'
6. Har. . 'fl" t'Qt"'0
R).·
l]
• • •
1CQOC; a'XQL~€,aV:t, cet5wv £\J'6fJvia .. , cwvi}c;
principalities which passed to Timurlenk's side (the Taceddin ogllllan p .41·.~ "
included) see Y ii eel, Ar~ttrmalar II, p. 171; on Mutahharten's role see 87· Har.
u Trap . , . ,.,'~Ol' aQyuQOU xa' XQua'ou.
. Har. L ' p . 39'.,.
8 Trap. "V"
Q Ijl'XOlV, '.Q
- h,U'oflaQyuQOlv tXllUOlMiv
Y ii c e I, Ara~t"malar I, p. 6'12 - 716. 9. p. amp ro s, BT}(1(]ae iwvO )E'
VOflv~flOlV 13 (19 16) 162 _163 and 187' (;88
I •
3. W. Hey d, Histoire du commerce du Levant au Moyen Age, v. II, Paris
16
r;,;,;"lOv ./(;
Tean.Cowm, NEoc; 'E).),,'l-
1886, p. 92 - 107; ct. V r yon is, The Decline 0/ Medieval Hellenism, p. 15- ; prosperous and important up t 't II . d e fact that Trebizond remained
S. P. K a r p 0 v, Trapezundskaja Imperlja I russkle zemli, Vizantijskij Vremen· by th e emperor's determination 0to1 0S ast ays h is SOwn
h by various events:
nik 38 (t977) 38 - 47; ide m, Osobennosti razvltija pazdnevlzantljskago goroda' Le con/lit entre Genes et I'empire de T"!b~:a~~e ~ e G~noese; see N. Ban esc u,
106 1449), Atti V Congr. Intern 8t d' B' e ala ve,lIe de la canquete turque {1418-
emporlja (Trapezund v XIII.XV vv.), Vizantijskie Ocerki, Moscow 1977, p. 79. .
1 will of the Florentines to ha~e u.I' IZ. 1939, v. I, p. 4 - 10; also by the
4. T u ran, Dagu Anadalu Turk devletleri, supra p. 339, n. 6, p. 29' 3 2 ; 1
F. S ii mer, Saltuklular, Sell'uklu Ara§tlrmalan Dergisi 3 (197 1) 43 ' 43 •
0 Dacumentl sulle relazlani delle cltt' P;IVI eges in Trebizond; see G. Mull e r
S. Ibn al·Athir in W. Bart ho I d, Turkestan down to the Mongol Inva· renee 1879, p. 186- 189 (of the a ;scane call' Oriente cristlana e col Turchi. Flo:
y ar (460). On the commercial exchanges
'ion, London 1958, p. 395
III
354
Trade was a source of considerable income for the Trapezun-
tine state as merchants were obliged to pay several duties, usually
higher than in other cities of Asia minor 1 On the other hand the
Trapezuntine emperor was responsible for the security of the
foreign merchants within his territories, that is, for the security
of the roads 2. Friendly relations with the rulers of Erzincan and
Bayburt were a necessity for the Grand Komnenoi. Both these
rulers were able to prevent merchants from reaching Trebizond or
to ruin the security of the caravan road situated within the Tra-
pezuntine territories. For this reas~n to t.he extent possible the
Trapezuntines maintained good relatIOns with the lords of Bayburt
and Erzincan. They also succeeded in establishing alliance with
the Akkoyunlu chieftains located in the vicinity of those cities.
Apart from the trade carried over. the caravan r~ad, there was
also the trade in the ports of the Pontic coast .on a higher or lower
scale; borne by large vessels coming and gomg from Europe; or
by small vessels sailing from one to another harbour .of the Black
Sea up to Constantinople 3. Rare information concern mg. the local
production is to be found in the sources: purchase of wme from
between Trehizond and Constantinople in 1436 - 1438, see V. D 0 r i n i .
T. Be r tel e, Il libra dei conti di Giacomo Badoer, [Romel. '95 6, p. '4, '5, 25,
nd passim (some cases of purchase of Silk and pepper from
27, 291 35 39 a
I ,
Trebizond).
1 There was a duty paid by merchants who imported goods ~n Tre-
bizond in order to transport them to inner regions (f.V tote; ';00 floQo.alv):
D A Z a k y t h i nos Le chrysobul/e d' Alexis III Comnene empereur de Treb..onde
en'fa~eur des Venitiens, Paris 1932, p. 32 and 54 - 61.; also an ad.ditional d~t~
aid for the weighing of the lloods: Z a k y t h In 0 s, op. ctt., p. 64 - 5,
P . . d IU . 1391 an d 1396'. [G M
these duties were malUtalUe . . Tho mas, .2 .
R. Predelli], Diplomatarium Veneto·Levantinum, v. II, Ve?lCe 18.99' p. 9
d 25 _ 25" it is to be added that the Venetians did .not pay
230 an p0 . , . d' ( I t ponderatlOnem):
weighing duties in Mente§e and IU Ay In non so van E I' a
ibid., p. 295; on the earlier treaties with Aydin and ~ente§e see. ,~z di~
bet h A. Z a c h a ria do u, Sept traites inedits entre Ven..~ et les em,,~~ ddi ~a­
et de Mense§e (J331 - 1407), Studi Preottomani e Ottoman!, Conveg
6 0
Poli , 24 - 26 Settembre '974, Napoli 197 , p. A229 '-I24 . ,
xaL 'tol; 'XaatQOI~
2. a,a'l'u).,attOflOvO' f.V OAU tn )(roQa tiie; ,..a""hflae; flo U
.'
a1ltiie;: Z a k y t h i nos, op. cit., p. 31.
d'aNaires grec. et latin. a ConsCanW
3. N. A. Oikonomides, Hommes "J'
napl. du XIII. au XV••Ucle (in press).
III
TRBBlZOND AND THB TURKS (1352 - 1402) 355
Lilllnia and Kerasunt 1 or hazelnuts 3. However, the port of Ke-
rasunt is known as the «scala» of another precious merchandise,
frequently mentioned in the sources, the alum of Koloneia 3. Sarki
Karahisar belonged to Sivas, blit alum continued to be sold in
Kerasunt. As already said, after having fought to prevent the Haci
emirogl u from conquering this port, the Grand Komnenoi finally
managed to keep it under their rule by making Ibrahim Haci emir
a member of their family. Later they further insured the possession
of their littoral by introducing Taceddin into the imperial family.
Trade was the preoccupation not only of the Grand Komnenoi
but also of the rulers of Sivas, although less is known on this
subject. Sivas was situated in the middle of the other caravan road
from Ayas to Tabriz and on the road followed by merchants from
Syria and Mesopotamia who travelled to the Crimea. Actually for
those merchants it was the place of rendezvous for forming a ca-
ravan to reach the Black Sea. The presence of Genoese merchants,
coming from Ayas or from Caffa, is attested in Sivas at the end
of the XIlIth century; furthermore a Genoese consul was established
in the city 4. Sivas was also frequented by the Venetians~.
1. M. B a I a r d, Gene. et l'Outre.Mer I. Le. acte. de Caffa du notaire Lorn-
berto di Sambuceto (1289 -1290), Paris - The Hague '973, p. 307.
2. B rye r, Tiirkmens J p. 122, note 26.
3. Fr. B a I d u c c i Peg 0 lot t i, La pratica della mercatura, ed. A.
E van s, Cambridge Mass. '936, p. 369: i1 migliore allume che si lavori;
mentions of the alum of Koloneia: G. Bra t ian u, Actes de. notaire. genal!
de Pera et de Caffa de 10 fin du trei.Ume .;ecle (1281.1290), Bucarest '927, p. 88;
B a I a r d, Genes et l'Outre-Mer, p. 105; R e nee Doe h a e r d, Le. relations
commerciale! entre Genes, la Belgique et l'Outremont d'apre3 le3 archives notariale3 gi-
noi.e. aux XlIIe et XIVe sUcle., v. III, Bruxelles - Rome '94', p. 1058 - 1°59;
cf. the conflict of the Genoese and Zaccaria of Chio because of the alum
of the Black Sea: Pachymeres (Bonn) v. I, p. 420.
4. Hey d, Hi.toire du commerce, v. I, p. 298 and v. II, p. 79 and 93 ;
cf. Bra t ian u, Actes, p. 87 and 169' '70; B a I a r d, Genes et l'Outre.Mer,
p. 246, 265, 358; Doe h a e r d, Le. relations, v. III, p. 760 -761, 827. 828 ,
828. 82 9.
5. Peg 0 lot t i, Pratica, p. 63, 65, 91 and 229 gives the equivalence
of the weights and measures of Sivas with those of other cities; also Z i b a 1-
donedaCanal, ed. A. Stussi-F. C. Lane-Th. E. Marston-
. O. 0 r e, Venice '967, p. llO, gives the equivalence between Ayas and
Sivas; cf. also the equivalence of the measures of Sivas with those of Flo-
rence in Fr. B 0 r I and i, El libro di mercantie et U3anze de'i. paui, Torino
1936 , p. 31.
 III III
856 357
TRBBIZOND AND THB TURKS (1352. 14ll2)

When Venetians and Genoese were expelled from the C '

, E f1mea
10 I343, retna sent ambassadors to the khan to negotiate
' '1'
b,et ",:e~n th e tw,o maCl~ll~le peace
:epub les and the Tatars 1. The event is
slgmfteant for Its clanfteatIon of the commercial relations
, , among
VenIce, Genoa, central Anatolta and Southern Russia and
indication of Eretna's concern for trade as an
Burhaneddin's action as depicted by ibn-Ardashir is that of
dauntless warrior continuously fighting against various enem'les,a
,
However, BurhaneddlO launched several campaigns in order to
conquer Tokat and Amasya, The distance from Sivas to Amasya is
about 200 km. On the road leading from Sivas to Amasya and pas-
sing on to Tokat seven caravanserays erected by the Seljuks 2
have been preserved. The buildings indicate clearly that the road
was highly used by merchants and that Amasya and Tokat were
important commercial centres 3, The road from Tokat leads to
Erzincan, merging there with the caravan road for Tabriz. To the
West the road leads up to Brussa which by the end of the XIVth
century began to develop as a commercial centre 4.
Therefore, Burhaneddin's repeated attempts to conquer Tokat
and Amasya can be explained j he wanted to take control of this
important road thereby undoubtedly gaining important income from
the duties collected from the merchants 5. On the other hand one
can understand the alliance between Amasya, Niksar, Golkoy and
Trebizond in that the lords of these regions wished to control the
road themselves without recognizing the overlordship of Si vas.
The crucial point for all parties remained one: Erzincan.
The Pontic littoral certainly attracted Burhaneddin as indicated
by his relations with Kastamonu and Sinope 1. In the beginning
he had no opportunity to expand towards the coast as the Trape-
zuntines protected it well by their alliances with Taceddin and
Haci emir. Moreover, the petty lords of Bafra and Samsun were
unfriendly to Sivas and usually sided with the lord of Niksar a.
Soon the Ottomans appeared and conquered the coast up to
Samsun 3. In the same year Siileyman Haci emiroglu, then a vassal
to ~ivas, conquered Kerasunt. Burhaneddin proceeded to stage
speCIal celebrations in his capital showing that he considered the
event exceptionally important 4. Immediately he commanded one
of his emirs to erect a fortress in the vicinity of Sarki Karahisar 5.
Nevertheless when the Ottomans and Burhaneddin set out to
con~uer th~ South Pontic coast, it was already too late for both
parties; Tlmurlenk was already in Asia Minor.
"
ABBREVIATIONS

DelI a Roc c a, Caffa, supra p. 336, n. 3, p. 277, 279.

I. A I· U m a ri: M. Qua t rem ere No' d ['
lek alabsar *i memalek al .,/ ot~Ce e ouvrage qui a pour titre j.fe.sa~
M. K e m a I 6 z erg in, Anadolu'da Se19uklu Kervanserayla", Tarih
2. J I amsor, I' oyaKes des yeux cia l
rent.. contrees (ms. arabe 583) Nt' . ns es royaumes d.. diffe.
Dergisl 20 (1965) 141 - 170 (with a map). Bibliotheque du Roi XIII ('P ~ tees et Extralts des .Manuscrits de la
3. Ibn· Bat t uta, p. 436, mentions the ,spacious streets and bazaars' B , a n s 1835) 334 - 381.
of Amasya; on Tokat see T u ran, Dogu Anadolu Turk devletleri, p. 28- 31. rye r, Map" A. B rye r, The Littoral 0/ h .
4, Y ii c e I, Burhaneddin, p. 175' 177; Y ii c e I, Ara~t<rmalar II, p. 163; Fourteenth Century Portolano Ma •A ~ t e .Empzre of Trebizond and tllJO
'P', QXSlOV lIonol! 24 (1961) 97' 127.
it is to be added however that during the second half of the XlVth century
the part of the road leading to Brussa could not be used owing to the con·
flict between the Ottomans and Burhaneddin. On the development of Brussa existed in earlier years On the d t·
through Ka~amanid te~ritory se: te: nC~lllect:d from the land·routes passing
as a commercial centre during the XVtb century see H. I n a I c I k, Bursa
that the dUhes were named after T .c t k, Bursa, p. 142" 143 " to note
and the Commerce of the Levant, Journal of the Economic and Social History
demands for money of the dUke of Cu:e~~a~ tribe.s. It is worth recalling the
of the Orient, 3/ll (1960) 131' 147, On the importance of the road during the p. 81: C I a v i j 0 and his com . a ta avazttes reported by C I a vi .
Ottoman period see N, S tee n s g a a r d, Carracks, Caravans and Companies: nOn eran mereadores.. panlOns refused to pay answering 'que el~~~
The Structural CrisiJ in the European· A.ian Trade in the Early 17th Century, Odense
1. V ii eel, Burhaneddin
1973, p. 31' 34; also J e an· Lou i s B a c que - G ram m 0 nt, Notes sur
2. Y ii c e 1,
Burhaneddin' p. III .. 1]2.
une sauie de soies d'lran en 1518, Turcica 8/II (1976) 237' 253· 3• V U- I ' p. 138
64" 65 and II 1
5. Peg 0 lot t i, Pratica, p. 28. 29, gives a long list of the duties paid e , BurhaneddilJ
C p • 112.
4. Y" I ' .
at each caravan stop of the road between Ayas and Tabriz. On the duties 5. Y ~ c e , Burhaneddin, p. 148'-
paid on the road Tabriz·Tokat in the XVItb century see S tee n s g a a r d, u C e I, Burhaneddin, p. 149.
Carroclu, Caravans and Companies, p. 31' 34; these duties in all probability