Chapter I
. I shall deal with these misconceptions singly.
1. THAT OSMAN WAS A PRINCE OF ILLUSTRIOUS BIRTH.
Chalcocondylas is responsible for the first and widest diffusion of this error in western Europe. He claims that Osman is the great-grandson of Duzalp, ‘chief of the Oghuzes’; grandson of Oguzalp, who, aspiring to succeed his father, reached ‘in a brief time the highest fame in Asia’; and son of Ertogrul, who, in 1298,[657] with his fleet, devastated the Peloponnesus, Euboea, and Attika.[658] Closely allied to the account of Chalcocondylas is that of Hussein Hezarfenn.[659] According to Ali Muhieddin,[660] Seadeddin,[661] and Hadji Khalfa,[662] the grandfather of Osman was Soleiman Shah, prince or bey of Mahan in the Khorassan, who was compelled to leave his country at the approach of Djenghiz Khan, and lived seven years in Armenia. As he was returning home, he was drowned in the Euphrates. Two of his sons, Ertogrul and Dundar, turned back into Asia Minor, and were, through the kindness of the Seljuk Sultan, Alaeddin I, given a residence near Angora, and, later, on the confines of Bithynia. Neshri places the time of residence in Armenia as 170 years, and declares that Soleiman Shah was leader of 50,000 families.[663] Practically all of the European historians who have written later than the publication in Europe of Chalcocondylas, Ali and Seadeddin have followed closely these authorities.[664]
The western writers, whose works appeared before the translation and publication of the eastern historians, or who followed earlier western authorities, are either vague or uncertain concerning the parentage of Osman,[665] or give an entirely different story of the rise of his family. He is supposed to be the son of a Tartar shepherd, called Zich,[666] who rises to fame at the court of Alaeddin I by defeating in single combat a Greek cavalier that had killed many of the favourites of the Seljuk Sultan.[667] According to others, who give nearly the same story, the name of Osman’s father is ‘the madman Delis, a shepherd’.[668] For his success in killing the Greek, the Sultan rewards him with the castle of Ottomanzich, which is often confused with Sugut, and is claimed to be the origin of Osman’s name.[669] By another story, which is asserted to be the invention of Mohammed II, who thus wanted to legitimatize in the eyes of the world his claim to the throne of the Caesars, Osman is the descendant of a certain Isaac Comnenus, a member of the imperial Byzantine family, who fled to the court of the Seljuks of Konia, and became a Moslem.[670]
In this, as in the discussion of other misconceptions which follow, we are not at all justified in throwing out categorically the testimony of the early western writers every time that they conflict with the eastern authorities, or in ignoring them entirely, as Hammer, Zinkeisen, and Jorga have done. We must remember that Chalcocondylas and all the Ottoman historians are _very late_, that they cite no sources upon which to base their assertions or inferences, and that they write with the intention to please, and under the necessity of pleasing, the Ottoman court, at a time when its rulers had become so powerful that they could not brook the recording of an humble origin for their royal house. The extravagant descriptions of Seadeddin, for example, when he speaks of Osman’s court, and his expressions such as ‘laying his petition humbly at the feet of his royal master’, &c., seem much out of place in a narrative about primitive and exceedingly plain and simple people. The western writers claim to have sources for information which are as early and as good as those of Ali and Seadeddin. Some of them certainly had.[671] We cannot claim for these writers that their stories be accepted as fact. But we can claim that they be accepted as an honest reflection of late fifteenth-and early sixteenth-century opinion concerning the founder of the Ottoman royal house--opinion derived from stories which were current in Constantinople at that time, and which, for lack of definite history, were circulated among the Osmanlis themselves up to a very much later period.[672]
The later western historians have taken, without critical examination, the Ottoman accounts of the origin of their royal family, as they have of the relationship with the Seljuks of Konia, practically at their face value. But it is not hard to prove a good case against the Ottoman historians.
The story of Soleiman Shah, prince of Mahan and leader of 50,000 families, living and ruling in the neighbourhood of Erzerum between 1224 and 1232, is very easy to disprove. The name of Mahan is often given to two cities, Dinewer and Nehawend.[673] It is rather the designation of a plain in which these two cities lay. In 1229, Sultan Djelaleddin, after his defeat by the Mongols at Mughan, passed the winter in the plain of Mahan. A certain Izzeddin was lord of the fortress there. He had been rebellious _some years before_, but was ‘now serving Djelaleddin devoutly’.[674] In the history of Djelaleddin, I find absolutely no mention of a Soleiman Shah in connexion with Mahan or any other place in that region. With 50,000 families, Soleiman Shah would have been a factor in Armenia between 1224 and 1232. For that is precisely the time when Djelaleddin, Sultan of Kharesm, his logical suzerain or his enemy, was struggling with the Seljuks of Konia in that very region! In 1229, Djelaleddin was at Erzindjian, and ravaged the whole country.[675] At the same time, a cousin of Alaeddin I, a very powerful ruler, Rokneddin, was lord of Erzerum, and was strong enough to be at enmity at the same time with Djelaleddin’s invading army and with Alaeddin of Konia.[676] Other Arabic historians, and the Seljuk historian of this period, confirm the history of Mohammed-en-Nesawi in its leading points, but they, no more than the historian of Djelaleddin, make any mention whatever of a Soleiman Shah, or of an Ertogrul.[677] Nor is Soleiman Shah and his family mentioned in any of the Arabic genealogies prior to the seventeenth century, although these exist in great numbers.[678] There is only one Ottoman genealogy prior to the tables of Hadji Khalfa.[679]
The best authority on the western Turks, the late Léon Cahun, conservator of the Mazarine Library in Paris, declares that the Turkish tribes of the time of the purported Soleiman Shah and Ertogrul had no family ties. They knew no rank other than that of a man higher up in the army. In inheritance, the younger son got the land, and the older sons the movable possessions of the father. There were no family names; there are none to this day. The Turks who came into Asia Minor were without name or family. They wandered far and sold their services to get established family ties.[680]
There is one more testimony concerning the humble origin of the Ottoman royal house. The different historians of the relations between Timur and Bayezid I all speak of the taunt flung by Timur at Bayezid concerning the Ottoman ruler’s lack of royal ancestors.[681] Bayezid never made any response to this taunt, and confined his boasting, which was by no means of a modest sort, to his own and his father’s achievements, and to his power as a European ruler.
We cannot establish the ancestry of Osman. It is altogether probable that he had none of note, but was what Americans would call ‘a self-made man’.
2. THAT OSMAN BEGAN HIS CAREER AS A VASSAL OF ALAEDDIN III, SULTAN OF ICONIUM, UPON WHOSE DEATH, IN OR ABOUT 1300, OSMAN AND NINE OTHER TURKISH PRINCES DIVIDED THE INHERITANCE OF THE SELJUCIDES; THAT OSMAN PROVED MORE POWERFUL THAN THE OTHER PRINCES, AND FOUNDED AN EMPIRE UPON THE RUINS OF THE SELJUCIDE EMPIRE.
When I call this statement, in its entirety, a misconception, I realize that I am attacking the idea of the founding of the Ottoman Empire which has been voiced by the most eminent historians and has an accepted and unquestioned place in textbooks and encyclopaedias, and in general histories.
In a French translation of Chalcocondylas, published in 1662, under the woodcut of Osman, we find these four lines:
‘De simple Capitaine en des Pays déserts, Près du grand Saladin la Fortune m’attire; Et là de ses débris je fonde cet Empire, Qui menace aujourd’huy d’engloutir l’Univers.’
I quote this verse because it seems to me to express concisely the commonly accepted idea of the foundation of the Ottoman Empire, as I find it written everywhere. Hammer, whose eighteen volumes contain a wealth of material upon the Ottoman Empire not elsewhere to be found, and who shows remarkable erudition as well as care and critical powers, perpetuates the tales about Ertogrul and Osman and the court of Konia. He makes the categorical statement, ‘The empire of the Seljuks broke up, and on its ruins arose that of Osman’.[682] Creasy has popularized the opinion of Hammer in the English-speaking world.[683] Lane-Poole, who has written the only general history of the Ottoman Empire in English in our generation, has tacitly accepted the common tradition.[684] Zinkeisen and Jorga, the only later historians whose names can be coupled for scholarly work with that of Hammer, are most unsatisfactory in their failure to take up critically the Ottoman traditions of the early days of the Empire.[685] Leunclavius, the sole writer in Western Europe before Hammer, whose work might be called ‘scientific’, discusses exhaustively and compares critically all authorities existing at his time (1590) on most minute points of early Ottoman history, but is almost silent on the grave inconsistencies and contradictions arising from the question of the relation between the Osmanlis and the Seljuks of Konia.[686] There is the same silence in Cantemir and his translators.[687] The latest Ottoman historian says: ‘Osman’s military and political career naturally divides itself into two parts, that in which he was vassal of Alaeddin, and that in which he became sultan.’[688] An Oriental whose work has enjoyed great vogue in France declares: ‘Osman pursued through every obstacle the realization of his plan, which consisted in founding upon the ruins of the Seljuk Empire a great, free, and independent state.’[689]
I find one German scholar who, briefly touching upon the foundation of Osman’s power, rejects or ignores the connexion with the Seljuks of Konia; but he goes further afield, and makes the astonishing statement that Osman conquered Bagdad, allowed the Khalifs only spiritual power, called himself Sultan, and became master of the Moslem world, thereby connecting the Mongol conquest of Mesopotamia with the Mameluke conquest of Egypt, and attributing it all to Osman![690]
If we had good ground for rejecting the princely origin of Osman, our justification for impugning and discarding the connexion of Osman with the Seljuks of Konia is stronger still.
Kaï Kobad Alaeddin, the only Sultan to whom the name of Alaeddin is given by common consent,[691] died in 1236.[692] He was succeeded by Kaï Khosrew II, Giazzeddin, or Ghizatheddin, who was Sultan at the time of the great Mongol invasion of Asia Minor. In the spring of 1243, Erzerum was sacked without having received any help from Konia. Some months only after this event did Kaï Khosrew move. He was defeated at Mughan, near Erzindjian, in a decisive battle,[693] and fled to Angora, abandoning his baggage. Erzindjian fell next. Then Kaï Khosrew withdrew to Sivas, and from that city sent an embassy to the Mongols, making his submission and promising an annual tribute of four hundred thousand pieces of silver. The Mongol armies penetrated as far as Smyrna. Everywhere submission was complete, although no effort was made to provide a new government for the conquered regions in the western part of the peninsula. The Emperor of Trebizond became a vassal of the Mongols.[694]
The battle of Mughan cost the Seljuk Empire its independence.[695] After 1246, when Kaï Khosrew died, the situation of the Seljuks of Konia is depicted by Shehabeddin in these words: ‘The princes of the family of Seljuk kept only the title of sovereign, without having any authority or any power. There was left to them only that which concerned their own person and their houses, the insignia of royalty, and sufficient money for expenses of an indispensable necessity. The power belonged to Tartar governors, who managed everything without opposition. It was in the name of the princes of the family of Djenghiz Khan that the public prayer was made, and that gold and silver money was struck.[696] When the dynasty of the Seljucides had arrived at the last degree of weakness ... races of Turks seized a large part of these countries.... The Turks recognized the pre-eminence of the prince of Kermian.’[697] There is not a word of any possible Ottoman supremacy even in his own day, fifty years later. Every source on the latter half of the thirteenth century which I have consulted corroborates the testimony of Shehabeddin.[698] I have space to give only a few of the facts which I have gathered concerning the fortunes of the Sultans of Konia during the period 1246-1300, when Ertogrul and Osman are pictured by the Ottoman historians, and by the European historians who have followed them, as basking in the sunshine of Seljuk imperial favour.
After the death of Kaï Khosrew, the empire was divided between his three sons, who, however, seemed to rule in common as vassals of the Mongols, for their names were asserted to appear together on coins in 1249.[699] During the decade after the conquest, the Mongols overran western Asia Minor. We read that Sultan Rokneddin went with the Mongol general, Baïchu, into winter quarters _in Bithynia_,[700] and that Baïchu received orders from Khulagu Khan in 1257 to pillage the entire Seljuk dominions. In 1264, Abulfeda gives Rum, with its capital as Konia, among the provinces ruled by Khulagu.[701] Bibars, Sultan of Egypt, succeeded in occupying Konia for a brief time in 1276.[702] In 1278, Abaka Khan opened negotiations with Haython, king of Little Armenia, with the view of making him Sultan of Rum. In 1282, Bibars, writing to Ahmed Khan, says: ‘At this moment Konghurataï’ (a Mongol general) ‘is in the land of Rum, _which is subject to you and pays you taxes_.’[703] In 1283, Ghizatheddin, who was ruling with the merest semblance of royalty in Konia, was deposed by Ahmed Khan, exiled to Erzindjian, and replaced by Masud. There was anarchy everywhere in Asia Minor at this time.[704] The distinguished French Orientalist, M. Huart, who studied in Konia itself the inscriptions of the Seljuk Sultans, could find nothing after this period to indicate that the two final sultans who followed Ghizatheddin were more than playthings of the Mongols.[705]
The testimony of Marco Polo is most precious to us here. When he passed through this country in 1271 he says that Konia, Sivas, Caesarea and many other cities of ‘Turquemanie’ were subject to the Tartars, who imposed their rule there.[706] It was his impression that the Turcomans were subject to local rulers, and responded to no central authority.
The last days of the Seljuks are most obscure. Masud ruled until 1296, when he was deposed by Ahmed Khan. For two years there was no ruler. Whether Firamurs ever ruled is a matter of doubt.[707] The last Sultan is generally given as Kaï Kobad, who remained Sultan for four or ten years.[708] However, there was no Sultan actually ruling as sovereign in Konia either in 1290 or in 1300. Neither Masud nor Kaï Kobad could have given Osman feudal rights or a charter of independence. There was no dissolution of the Seljuk Empire in 1300. In all except mere name, it had become extinct before Osman was born.
The Mongol conquerors never extended their political system to western Asia Minor. But, from 1246 to 1278, the Anatolians, Moslem and Christian alike, were in constant terror of the Mongol hordes. After 1276, the Mongols were too occupied with the Mamelukes of Egypt, and with the dissensions arising in the eastern part of their great empire, to pay much attention to the remote Turkish tribes of Rum. During the last quarter of the thirteenth century, there was no change in the _status quo_ of the Seljuks at Konia that affected in any way the fortunes of these tribes. We can explain their rise into independent principalities, not by the disappearance of the Seljuk Sultans, but by the diversion of Mongol energy to other quarters.
Among early western writers there was great divergency of opinion about the number of the ‘Seljuk heirs’. I have found them represented as one,[709] three,[710] four,[711] five,[712] and seven.[713] Pachymeres, if we can trust the text of the Bonn edition,[714] is the earliest writer to mention the traditional number of ten.[715] When the Seljuk Empire fell before the Mongols, it had no heirs in Asia Minor. During the latter half of the thirteenth century and the first quarter of the fourteenth century (1250-1325) an innumerable number of village chieftains endeavoured to form states. There were many more than ten. The states which existed at the beginning of the reign of Orkhan I have put into another appendix.[716]
There is no record of Osman having attacked his Turkish neighbours. The testimony of the best Ottoman authorities is categorical on this point. Orkhan extended his father’s dominions very little to the south: not at all towards the east. Murad’s activities in Asia Minor were the least successful part of his career, and were by no means permanent. Sherefeddin Ali, whom we may regard as the best contemporary source for the end of the fourteenth century, states explicitly: ‘Bayezid reduced under his dominion a large portion of the country of Rum, that is to say, the provinces of Aïdin, of Menteshe, of Kermian and of Karamania, a thing which his ancestors had never been able to bring to an end.’[717]
In view of the facts of the case, it is strange that the idea of Osman as the powerful heir of the Seljuks, who mastered the other aspirants to that honour, has had such a long lease of life through centuries. Many of the early writers made Osman master of all Asia Minor.[718] It is commonly recorded that he captured Sivas.[719] One writer placed in that city his capital.[720] Another credited him with the capture of Konia.[721] Misinformation of this sort was given to Charles VI of France by returning pilgrims,[722] and, a century and a quarter later, to Frances I.[723] The early idea of the Osmanlis as an Asiatic people, of large numbers,[724] who conquered Asia Minor and then overthrew the Byzantine Empire,[725] has persisted to this day. One of the sanest Ottoman writers of modern times, who has brought wide knowledge and judgement to bear upon the history of the Ottoman army, is led astray by this misconception. He says, ‘It was the Arabic and Persian states that the Ottoman Empire had to fight _before_ _any other_’. So it is natural that he should be puzzled by finding in the military museum at Constantinople early Ottoman weapons on Byzantine and European models. He explains this by saying that these weapons were not used by the Osmanlis, but must have been captured, for the Osmanlis, naturally, would use Persian and Arabic models![726]
But Colonel Djevad is not more in error than the two greatest French authorities on Ottoman architecture. Saladin, in his summary of Ottoman history, instructs his readers as follows: ‘Alaeddin III, conquered by the Mongols, abandoned the sovereignty to Osman.... When the Osmanlis penetrated into Anatolia ... in proportion to the extension westward of the Ottoman Empire, we shall see the influence of Byzantine architecture increase.... Little by little, as the Turks approached Constantinople, this impregnation of the influence of Byzantium had an increasingly greater importance in the development of Ottoman art.’[727] This misconception of the origin of the Osmanlis leads him to state: ‘It is then indispensable to study the Seljuk monuments of Konia, which have _necessarily_ served as models to the first Ottoman monuments.’[728] From his premisses, Saladin has argued rightly. But his historical facts are wrong. Even if they were not, his conclusion could still be proved wrong. The refutation of his statement exists in the two earliest Ottoman buildings, the school and the kitchen for the poor at Nicaea, the date of whose construction Seadeddin places in 1331.[729] Both of these are typically Byzantine. In Brusa there is no Ottoman building of the Seljuk type which can be proved to have been constructed prior to Mohammed I (1413-21).[730] Parvillée, to whom the whole world owes a debt of gratitude for his able reconstruction of the precious historic monuments of Brusa, starts his scholarly work on Ottoman architecture in the fifteenth century with these words: ‘Towards the end of the thirteenth century the Seljuk Empire disappeared. On its ruins arose that of Osman.’ He not only follows Hammer: he uses his very words![731] From the historical point of view, I maintain that the Byzantine influence was an indissoluble factor in the evolution of Ottoman architecture from the very beginning. In this I am supported, from the expert architect’s point of view, by the two German authorities on this subject.[732] The Seljuk, Arab, and Persian influences entered in at a considerably later period.
There exists in tradition and in law an intimate connexion between the House of Osman and the Grand Tchelebi of Konia. This has been pointed to as a confirmation of the hypothesis that the Ottoman sovereigns derived their authority originally from the Seljuks of Rum. I do not deny the force of tradition. In the absence of early records, the beginning of this connexion must remain a moot question. But the evidence from outside sources makes reasonable my doubt as to the existence of this connexion before the reign of Mohammed I or Murad I.
There are two other arguments which might be adduced in this appendix, the questions of Osman’s title as an independent ruler, and of the chieftainship as an elective office among the Turkish tribes. But both of these have already been discussed in the text and the foot-notes of the chapter on Orkhan.
APPENDIX B
THE EMIRATES OF ASIA MINOR DURING THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY
In order to support the contention of this book, that the Ottoman Empire was founded (in the durable sense of that word) upon the ruins of the Byzantine Empire _as it existed at the time of Osman_ (1300), and gained its power and prestige in the Balkan peninsula rather than in Asia Minor, there must be set forth, as far as it is possible to do so within the limits of an appendix, an _exposé_ of the extent and power of the other emirates of Asia Minor during the fourteenth century. Such a review is useful, not only to prove the argument, but also to enable the reader to follow intelligently the development of Ottoman power; for there are difficulties attendant upon the writing and the reading of a history where the geographical names are unfamiliar. The writer is faced with the dilemma of making his work meaningless or uninteresting: meaningless if he fails to enlighten his readers as to the places and peoples whom he mentions; uninteresting if he interrupts his narrative with technical, encyclopaedic explanations.
A special map accompanies this appendix. The list of emirates contains after each name a number in brackets, which refers to the map. As in almost all cases the geographical limits are vague, the general position only of each emirate can be given. To put in definite boundary lines would be mere conjecture. Then, too, at different times during the fourteenth century, independent emirates overlapped each other. Sometimes they were confined to single cities or villages.
In preparing this appendix, I am indebted to several modern scholars whose work is most suggestive.[733] But I believe that this
[Illustration: THE EMIRATES OF ASIA MINOR IN THE 14^{TH} CENTURY]
is the first attempt to compare the Asiatic possessions of Osman, Orkhan, Murad, and Bayezid with those of their Turkish rivals for the purpose of illustrating the slow growth of the Ottoman Empire in Asia Minor, and the first time that contemporary sources have been drawn upon for this purpose.
From the eleventh to the thirteenth century, we are able to reconstruct the political status of Asia Minor, in a general way, from the narratives of pilgrims and the experiences of the Crusaders. From the beginning of the fifteenth century on to the present day, we have a wealth of sources for the history of Asia Minor in the writings of European travellers, which are valuable not only for their geographical indications and their observations on the life of the people, but also for their testimony in corroborating or disproving the statements of Oriental historians, who are so often lacking in precision and verisimilitude. For the fourteenth century, however, reliable European sources are lacking.
This lacuna is filled by the travel records of two Moslems of more than ordinary intelligence and powers of observation.
The long-lost manuscript of the travels of Ibn Batutah was one of those important finds that made the French occupation of Algeria so memorable an event in the annals of the advancement of learning. Its translation into French in 1843 made accessible for the first time a contemporary source of the highest value for the political and social life of the whole Moslem world during the first half of the fourteenth century. For Ibn Batutah travelled from his home in Morocco to the confines of China. He lived a while in each country that he visited, and wrote from the sympathetic and understanding point of view of a member of the Moslem clergy. Ibn Batutah visited Asia Minor between 1330 and 1340.[734]
Shehabeddin was an Arabic writer from Damascus,[735] who died in 1349. He wrote a voluminous work of twenty volumes, called _Footpaths of the Eyes in the Kingdoms of Different Countries_.[736] He was a contemporary of Ibn Batutah. Shehabeddin did not enjoy the advantage of visiting personally the many emirates of western Asia Minor, as did Ibn Batutah; but he states that he has based his record of these countries upon the eye-witness information furnished to him by word of mouth by Sheik Haïdar of Sir Hissar.[737] The agreement between Ibn Batutah and Shehabeddin on the state of affairs in Asia Minor during the first half of the fourteenth century is so general that one can claim for their statements, which are, in large part, the basis of this appendix, most substantial grounding.
The other sources are the Byzantine historians, the chronicler of the Catalans, the Catalan Map of 1375,[738] the annalist of Trebizond, the points of contact with the Cypriotes, the chevaliers of Rhodes, the Italian traders, the Osmanlis and the Mongols and Tartars. For a few of the emirates there are coins extant. Inscriptions on public edifices, such as mosques, pious foundations, baths and fountains, are unfortunately lacking, not only for the history of the Turkish emirates but for the Osmanlis as well.[739]
In the list that follows, twenty-six of the emirates existed during the reign of Orkhan, between the years 1330 and 1350. They are mentioned either by Ibn Batutah or by Shehabeddin, in most cases by _both_, as independent in their day. The others are either earlier or later than Orkhan’s reign, and comprise a portion of earlier emirates, from which they had become detached. After the Turkish emirates, given alphabetically, are placed the non-Turkish independent states in Asia Minor.
Adalia: _see_ Satalia Adana (1) Afion Kara Hissar: _see_ Karasar Aïdin (2) Akbara (3) Akridur (4) Akseraï (5) Aksheïr (6) Alaïa (7) Altoluogo: _see_ Ayasoluk Angora (8) Armenia: _see_ Little Armenia (44) Arzendjian: _see_ Erzindjian Attaleia: _see_ Satalia Ayasoluk (9) Balikesri (10) Berkeri (Birgui, Berki): _see_ Aïdin Borlu (11) Brusa (12) Caesarea (13) Cilicia: _see_ Little Armenia (44) and Adana (1) Daouas: _see_ Tawas Denizli (14) Djanik: _see_ Kaouïa Egherdir: _see_ Akridur Ephesus: _see_ Ayasoluk Erzindjian (15) Fukeh (16) Germian: _see_ Kermian Gul Hissar (17) Guzel Hissar: _see_ Aïdin Halik (Halicarnassus): _see_ Fukeh Hamid (18) Iakshi(19) Ionia: _see_ Aïdin Kaïseriya: _see_ Caesarea Kandelore: _see_ Alaïa Kaouïa (20) Karamania (21) Karasar (22) Karasi (23) Kastemuni (24) Keredeh (25) Kermasti (26) Kermian (27) Konia: _see_ Karamania Kul Hissar: _see_ Gul Hissar Kutayia: _see_ Kermian Ladik (Laodicea): _see_ Denizli Larenda: _see_ Karamania Limnia (28) Lydia: _see_ Sarukhan Magnesia: _see_ Sarukhan Marash (29) Marmora (30) Menteshe (31) Milas: _see_ Fukeh Miletus: _see_ Palatchia Mikhalitch (32) Nazlu (33) Nicaea (34) Palatchia (35) Pamphylia: _see_ Tekke Pergama: _see_ Karasi Sarukhan (36) Satalia (37) Sinope (38) Sis: _see_ Adana Sivas (39) Sulkadir: _see_ Marash Tawas (40) Tekke (41) Theologos: _see_ Ayasoluk Tokat (42) Tralles: _see_ Aïdin Ulubad (Lopadion) (43) Little Armenia (44) Trebizond (45) Phocaea (46) Smyrna (47) Byzantine possessions (48) Cypriote possessions (49) Mongol and Tartar possessions (50) Rhodian possessions (51) Egyptian possessions (52) Catalan possessions (53)
The material that can be gathered about these Turkish emirates, the two independent Christian states, and the spheres of influence of outside Christian and Moslem states in Asia Minor in the fourteenth century, would make a book in itself. In this appendix I desire to give only enough to indicate the relative strength and vitality of each state. It must be borne in mind that my object is not to write the history of these emirates, or of Asia Minor as a whole, during the fourteenth century, but _to demonstrate how little of Asia Minor was really incorporated in the Ottoman possessions at the time that, and during the thirty years after, the capital of the new empire was established in Adrianople_.
ADANA (1)
In the Taurus Mountains, on the northern limits of Lesser Armenia, and to the south-east of Karamania, the Turcoman tribes through whom Marco Polo passed seemed to him to enjoy an independent existence. Up to the time of Murad I, they formed no state, but between 1373 and 1375 the family of Ramazan took the chieftainship. When the Mamelukes destroyed the Armenian kingdom (1375), the Ben-Ramazan dynasty established itself at Adana, on the Sarus, in the fertile Cilician plain.[740] The Ben-Ramazan emirs managed to keep from being absorbed either by the Karamanians or the Egyptians. After the complete subjugation of Karamania by the Osmanlis, they submitted to Selim I about 1510, under the stipulation, however, that the emir, Piri pasha, should hold office for life as vali of Adana and Sis. Sis was frequently coupled with Adana in the title of the Ben-Ramazan.
AÏDIN (2)
Aïdin comprised the greater part of Ionia, with a portion of Lydia, if we take its boundaries to be those of the present vilayet of the same name. It comprised, at the time of its greatest extent, Smyrna, Ephesus, and Tralles. Smyrna was captured by the crusaders in 1344. Ephesus was at times independent under the name of Ayasoluk. Tralles, called Guzel Hissar, and sometimes also Birgui or Berki, was the capital of Aïdin in the time of Orkhan. Later, Ayasoluk, and, last of all, Tira, were the successive capitals.
The emirate was founded by Aïdin, a contemporary of Osman, who was succeeded by his son Mohammed about 1330. Ibn Batutah regarded Mohammed as a very powerful prince, who was especially strong on the sea. His eldest son, Omar, who succeeded him in 1341, met death in an unsuccessful attempt to recapture Smyrna in 1348. His relations with Cantacuzenos are given in the chapter on Orkhan. Isaac, fourth of the line, reigned from 1348, until he was dispossessed by Bayezid in 1390. He died in exile at Nicaea. His sons, Isaac II and Omar II, were placed again on the throne in 1403. The line of Aïdin became extinct soon after. A usurper, Djuneïd, Ottoman governor of Smyrna, managed to keep the power until he was assassinated in 1425. It was not until then that Aïdin definitely passed into the hands of the Osmanlis.
After the death of Aïdin, the founder of the dynasty, the territory of the emirate seems to have suffered some diminution, aside from the loss of Smyrna. One of the sons, Soleiman, married a daughter of Orkhan, while another, Khidr, ruled independently at Ayasoluk, which was lost for a time to Rhodes twenty years later. Under Omar, the Turks of Aïdin were very active in the Aegaean Sea, and made large invasions of Thrace and Macedonia in 1333 and 1334. They co-operated with the Genoese of Phocaea against the Greeks and the Osmanlis, and were at times allied with the emirates of Sarukhan and Menteshe, with whom they are frequently mixed by the Byzantine historians. The western historians almost invariably gave credit to the Osmanlis for the maritime exploits of these emirates during the fourteenth century.[741]
AKBARA (3)
At some time before 1340, a certain Demir Khan, son of Karasai, emir of Pergama, ruled in Akbara, whose location is given by Shehabeddin as ‘south of Brusa and Sinope, and north of Mount Kasis’. This emirate was probably destroyed by Orkhan in the expedition of 1339-40. It was a region along the borders of Mysia and Phrygia, which had been able to resist the encroachments of Kermian owing to the mountainous character of the country.[742]
AKRIDUR (4)
This city was at the south end of the lake of the same name (to-day called Egherdir), and was within the limits of the emirate of Hamid. But, like Nazlu, it had frequently a wholly independent existence, and both Shehabeddin and Ibn Batutah, as well as other writers, mention its emirs as if independent of the emir of Hamid, and these rulers are given from the families of Tekke and Hamid. The Osmanlis first reached the northern end of Lake Egherdir in 1379, and incorporated Akridur about 1390.[743]
AKSERAÏ (5)
This is the ancient Archelaïs, and is three days north-east of Konia on the road to Kaïsariya (Caesarea). In the time of Ibn Batutah, it was one of the most beautiful and most solidly built cities of Asia Minor, and was ruled by the emir Artin, possibly an Armenian, who was vassal of the Mongol ruler of Persia. Later, Ak Seraï was incorporated in Karamania, to which it belonged at the time that the Osmanlis, under Bayezid, first entered it.[744]
AKSHEÏR (6)
Aksheïr, between Kutayia and Konia, belonged alternately to Kermian and Karamania--perhaps at times it recognized the suzerainty of the emir of Hamid. Its position made it a border city, prey to the changing fortunes of the Osmanlis and Karamanlis for thirty years. In 1377, when Murad compelled the emir of Hamid to sell a portion of his dominions, he regarded Aksheïr as having been in Hamid. It was, however, at that time practically independent, using the rival pretensions of the emirs to the east, west, and south as a means of preserving a precarious autonomy.[745]
ALAÏA (7)
This city was sometimes called Kandelore, a corruption of its ancient name Coracesium. Its fortunate position at the east side of the Gulf of Adalia enabled it to play an important part in the commercial history of the eastern Mediterranean for a century and a half. In the time of Ibn Batutah and Shehabeddin, Yussuf, brother of the emir of Karamania, was its ruler. During the fourteenth century Alaïa was more or less dependent upon Karamania, but sometimes upon Tekke. For many years it paid tribute to Cyprus, and negotiated its affairs independently of both Karamania and Tekke. In 1444 its prince, Latif, meditated a raid upon Cyprus, from which he was deterred only by the defeat of the Egyptians before Rhodes. In 1450 Latif concluded a treaty of peace with the Cypriotes through the medium of Rhodes. His successor, Arslan bey, got help from Cyprus against Mohammed II. Alaïa was subdued by the Osmanlis only in 1472.[746]
ANGORA (8)
The history of Angora during the first half of the fourteenth century is obscure. It depended upon none of the emirates which arose after the break-up of the Seljuk Empire of Konia. Throughout Phrygia there were small village chieftains, such as Osman had been at Sugut. Angora may have acknowledged Kermian for a short period, but the proprietors of that region resisted the efforts of Karamania to incorporate them. The fortress of Angora was captured at the beginning of the reign of Murad, but it was not until Bayezid broke the power of Kermian and Karamania that the country round about the city became ottomanized.[747]
AYASOLUK (9)
This is the Ottoman corruption of Altoluogo, the Genoese name for the Byzantine Theologos (ἅγιος θεολόγος--St. John) which occupied nearly the same site as the ancient Ephesus. This city has caused much confusion to writers. It was captured from the Greeks by Sasan, who ruled there as its first Turkish emir in 1308.[748] Later it seems to have fallen into the hands of Aïdin, and became the principal commercial city of his flourishing emirate. The emir’s coins were for a time struck there, but later when Guzel Hissar (Tralles) was capital of Aïdin, Ayasoluk was practically independent under a younger brother of Mohammed, and uncle of Omar. In 1365 the chevaliers of Rhodes had evidently made a serious attempt to cut into the hinterland of Aïdin from Smyrna, for they struck coins at Ayasoluk. Its later history is that of Aïdin and Palatchia. Timur directed the operations against Smyrna from Ephesus in December 1402.[749]
BALIKESRI (10)
This city is to the south-west of Brusa, on the road to Pergama. It would naturally be included in the emirate of Karasi, but had an independent sovereign, Demir-Khan, when Ibn Batutah visited it. It was annexed by the Osmanlis after the deposition of the emir of Balikesri. The exact date of this acquisition cannot be determined.[750]
BORLU (11)
An inland district south-west of Kastemuni and north of Angora, possibly the same as Boli, where Ali, a son of Soleiman padishah, of Kastemuni and Sinope, ruled as independent sovereign between 1330 and 1340.[751]
BRUSA (12)
The descriptions of Orkhan’s realm, which to Ibn Batutah and Shehabeddin was the emirate of Brusa, as it was seen through the eyes of his contemporaries, have been cited in the text of this book. Until the end of the reign of Murad, the Ottoman possessions were small enough to be distinguished under the name of Brusa, where the Osmanlis established an emirate at the death of Osman.
CAESAREA (13)
This important city, in the east of Asia Minor, on the confines of Armenia, was during the first half of the fourteenth century under the control of the Mongols, and, for a very few years, acknowledged the overlordship of Karamania. But, for the thirty years coincident with the reign of Murad, it had emirs of its own, as had Tokat and Sivas. For we know that Burhaneddin, through whose misfortunes Bayezid became involved with Timur, had been kadi of the emir of Caesarea, on whose death he divided ‘with two other emirs’ his dominions. Caesarea fell into the power of the Osmanlis between 1392 and 1398.[752]
DENIZLI (14)
This emirate was on the site of Laodicea on the Lycus, and was called Ladik by the Arabs, and Denizli, or Denizlu, by the Turks. Mount Cadmus and Hieropolis were also within its limits. It was at the upper end of the Maeander Valley, bounded on the west and north by Aïdin, and on the south by Menteshe and Tawas. In the fourteenth century, the city of its emir was probably on the Maeander and not on the Lycus. Shehabeddin compared the gardens of Ladik, or Denizli, to those of Damascus. No higher praise could have come from his lips. We know nothing of its later history. About 1350 it was probably absorbed by Aïdin or Menteshe.[753]
ERZINDJIAN (15)
Erzindjian, like Erzerum, was subject to the Mongols in the early part of the reign of Orkhan. There was a prince named Aïnabey ruling there in 1348, however, who, with two generals of Hamid, attacked Trebizond.[754] Coins were struck in the name of Alaeddin of Karamania in Erzindjian in the decade following 1350. But coins of Mohammed Artin, emir of Erzindjian, were struck there about 1360.[755] Bayezid pushed his conquests a day beyond Erzindjian to the castle of Kemath. He did not, however, conquer Erzindjian; for we have its emir, a vassal of Timur, appealing to his overlord for aid, when Bayezid summoned him to appear at Angora, bringing the treasures of his dependencies with him. His authority extended to and included Erzerum about 1400.[756]
FUKEH (16)
Ibn Batutah calls this country Milas. There were in fact two cities, Fukeh and Milas, under one sovereign at the time of Ibn Batutah and Shehabeddin. As Milas was near the site of Halicarnassus, or on that site, and was sometimes called Halik, the geographical position of this emirate, on the coast opposite Cos, is immediately grasped. It was dependent, in a certain sense, upon Menteshe, and was later absorbed by Menteshe. Orkhan was the emir about 1330. Some years later, Shehabeddin estimated that the emir of Fukeh had fifty cities and ten thousand horsemen. The last vestige of the independence of Fukeh was destroyed by the Rhodians with whom they were continually in conflict, and who got a foothold on the mainland and built a castle at Halik in 1399.[757]
GUL HISSAR (17)
At the time of Ibn Batutah, Mohammed Tchelebi, brother of the emir of Akridur, was established here on the border of Pamphylia and Caria, between Satalia and the Maeander River.[758] The fact that in such a position an independent prince could maintain himself as late as 1330--perhaps later--demonstrates that the emirates of Tekke, Menteshe, and Hamid must have been of very slow growth, like that of Brusa, and that these Turkish emirs who were rivals of the house of Osman evolved slowly, just as the Osmanlis did. The fiction of a tenfold division of the Seljuk dominions becomes very apparent when we consider the position of Gul Hissar (often called Kul Hissar), Alaïa, Tawas, and Fukeh--to cite instances only from the south-western corner of Asia Minor.
HAMID (18)
This emirate, of very late development in comparison with those of Sarukhan and Aïdin, was formed by the absorption of a number of little states--each hardly more than a village. The emir of Hamid started by incorporating Akridur and Nazlu. During the last decade of the reign of Orkhan, Hamid grew rapidly, until it extended from Aksheïr to the western end of the Taurus. It was entirely an inland emirate, and had little chance of resisting the Osmanlis under Murad. The last emir willed his dominions to Murad in 1381, but the country had to be conquered step by step. Bayezid made it an Ottoman province in 1391.[759]
IAKSHI (19)
A small emirate north-west of Sarukhan, on the sea-coast opposite Mitylene. It is mentioned only by Shehabeddin, and for the purpose of fixing the boundaries of Sarukhan.[760]
KAOUÏA (20)
This is the modern Djanik, on the Black Sea between Samsun and Sinope. It had an independent line of four emirs, and probably maintained its independence until after the Ottoman conquest of Kastemuni.[761]
KARAMANIA (21)
Until after the campaign of 1386, Karamania was a far more powerful emirate in Asia Minor than that of the Osmanlis. The Karamanlis were the actual successors of the Seljuks, and maintained themselves in Konia. While the Osmanlis were confined to a very small corner of Anatolia, the Karamanian dominions extended from the Euphrates and the Amanus to the Gulf of Adalia, on both slopes of the Taurus. Except in the maritime emirates of the Aegaean Sea, the Karamanlis and their emir were the great power in the peninsula of Asia Minor. Their independence was not broken by Bayezid, for they recovered their former glory after the intervention of Timur, and successfully withstood Mohammed I, Murad II, and Mohammed II. As in the latter half of the fourteenth century, the Karamanian emirs of the first half of the fifteenth century were allied by marriage with the house of Osman, but refused to do homage to the Ottoman sovereigns.[762]
Limits of space prevent mentioning here the many grounds upon which the Karamanians were able to and did keep their independence in the face of both Constantinople and Cairo. It was only at the end of the fifteenth century that we find the fiction of the Karamanian vassalage to the Osmanlis and of the connexion between the Seljuks and the Osmanlis appearing in the Ottoman chronicles, which on this count are, as I have pointed out elsewhere, wholly unreliable. It is astonishing that their version of the rise of the Osmanlis in Asia Minor has been accepted for so many centuries by western historians.[763]
KARASAR (22)
An abbreviation of Kara Hissar. This is probably the modern Afion Kara Hissar, a picturesque town between Eski Sheïr and Konia on southern limit of the emirate of Kermian, of which its prince was a vassal. Its importance was in its location at the junction point of the roads from the north-west and west into Karamania.
KARASI (23)
The emirate which lay between the possessions of Orkhan and Sarukhan was called, after the founder of its dynasty, Karasi. Its capital was Pergama. There is a discrepancy between the accounts of Shehabeddin and Ibn Batutah, the forming making Pergama subject to Balikesri, and the latter giving Balikesri as independent. Ottoman historians make Balikesri the northernmost city of the emirate of Karasi. The limits of Karasi, outside of the immediate vicinity of Pergama, cannot be determined. There were several small independent emirates in the hinterland of the lower end of the Sea of Marmora and the Dardanelles. The emir of Karasi was an ally of Aïdin and Sarukhan in the first coalition formed to combat the growing power of the Osmanlis. Karasi was the first emirate to be destroyed by the Osmanlis, and the only one of importance incorporated under Orkhan. This was because it lay nearest to the Ottoman emirate.[764]
KASTEMUNI (24)
This emirate, at its zenith, comprised practically all of the ancient Roman province of Paphlagonia. It was formed by Ali Omar bey, who started as lord of the inland city of Kastemuni, and whose son Abdullah, in the lifetime of Osman, drove Ghazi Tchelebi from Sinope. The emirate had many vicissitudes and changes in dynasty. In the time of Ibn Batutah, Soleiman padishah was the sovereign, and had extended his rule from Heraclea on the Black Sea coast almost to Trebizond. His son Ali ruled at Borlu, and another son Ibrahim Shah, who succeeded Soleiman, contested Samsun with the emperor of Trebizond. Ibrahim was the younger son, and was designated as his successor by Soleiman. Under the third dynasty of Kastemuni, the ben-Isfendiar, the emirate was at the height of its power. Its fleets swept the Black Sea, and did much harm to the Greeks of Trebizond and the Genoese of Kaffa. Kaouïa was absorbed, and its eastern boundaries included Osmandjik. The emirs of Menteshe and Aïdin took refuge here, and the refusal of the emir of Kastemuni, Bayezid, to give them up, led to the invasion of 1392. Bayezid and the fugitive princes fled to Timur, who restored them after the battle of Angora. Isfendiar, son of Bayezid, managed to retain Sinope, and a large portion of the interior, for thirty years. He was father-in-law of the Ottoman sultan, Murad II. When Clavijo visited Sinope in 1404 Isfendiar had forty thousand men to put in the field against the Osmanlis. It was not until after the fall of Constantinople that Kastemuni finally lost its independence.[765] As the history of this emirate is involved with that of Sinope, see also below under Sinope.
KEREDEH (25)
This was a small emirate, sometimes called also Kerdeleh, between Kastemuni and Boli, which was absorbed by the Osmanlis in the latter part of the reign of Orkhan. It was already in danger of Ottoman aggression when Ibn Batutah visited it on his way from Brusa to Kastemuni.[766]
KERMASTI (26)
On the Adranos River, one day south of Mikhalitch, and two days west of Brusa, this city was conquered by Orkhan in his first campaign after the fall of Nicomedia.[767]
KERMIAN (27)
Kermian, or Guermian, took its name from a Turcoman chief who held Kutayia about 1300. It was the earliest definite emirate which arose in western Asia Minor after the dissolution of the Seljuk Empire. Shehabeddin wrote: ‘Turkish tribes seized the greater part of the Seljuk possessions. The Turks recognized the pre-eminence of the emir of Kermian.’ The great fortress which still crowns the hill of Kutayia is supposed to have been erected by Kermian.[768] Kermian’s son Ali became master of all of Phrygia, possibly at one time including Angora in his emirate. Orkhan wrote to Ali as equal to equal, and gave him the title of ‘emir of Anatolia’.[769] Ali had forty thousand horsemen and seven hundred castles and villages. He was the equal of the emir of Karamania and more powerful than Orkhan.
Kermian was the first of the larger emirates to feel the change which the successes in the Balkan peninsula had made in the fortune of the Osmanlis. A granddaughter of the older Ali, and great-granddaughter of Kermian, was married to Bayezid, and Murad compelled the emir of Kermian to cede the north-western portion of his estates as his daughter’s _dot_. When Bayezid made his first campaign against Karamania he annexed the remainder of Kermian. The emir, his brother-in-law Yakub, fled to Timur, and was restored. The Osmanlis definitely incorporated Kermian in their empire in the second decade of the fifteenth century.[770]
LIMNIA (28)
A small emirate in the mountains between Trebizond and Erzindjian, whose emir, Tasheddin, married the daughter of the emperor of Trebizond in 1379. In 1386, Tasheddin could put an army of twelve thousand men into the field. There were several other very small Turkish emirates around Trebizond. Not enough, however, is known of them to make it worth while to mention them.[771]
MARASH (29)
An independent emirate was established here after the fall of the Lusignans in Cilicia, which was also known by the name of the founder of the dynasty, Sulkadir. It maintained its independence against the Karamanians, Egyptians, and Osmanlis until 1515, when its last prince fell in a battle with Selim.[772]
MARMORA (30)
An emirate on the borders of the Sea of Marmora, between Cyzicus and the Dardanelles, which had struggles and alliances with the Catalans, Byzantines, and Turks of Balikesri. It became a vassal state of Karasi, and was ruled from Pergama. After the destruction of Karasi, its territory was shared by the Catalans of Bigha and by Orkhan.[773]
MENTESHE (31)
Like Hamid, Menteshe was of late formation. The chief who gave his name to this emirate was a contemporary of Orkhan, and was sometimes known by the same name. He was allied by marriage to Soleiman, son of Aïdin, through whom he gained the former possessions of Aïdin south of the Maeander River. The emirate probably started at Mughla, and did not have much importance until it had absorbed Tawas and most of Fukeh. The emir of Menteshe possessed great influence during the latter part of Orkhan’s reign and the reign of Murad, and, like Aïdin and Sarukhan, the Turks of Menteshe, through their trading, were more in contact with the outside world than were the Osmanlis. Their port, known to the Venetians as Palatchia, was the ancient Miletus. The emirate of Menteshe suffered decline in the latter days of Murad’s reign through the Venetian usurpation at Palatchia. At the time of Bayezid’s invasion, the emir fled to Sinope and then to Timur. The emirate was restored by Timur, and was not definitely incorporated in the Ottoman empire until the reign of Murad II.[774] (_See_ Fukeh, Palatchia, and Tawas.)
MIKHALITCH (32)
This was one day west of Brusa and a day south of Mudania. After the fall of Brusa, Turkish or Byzantine rulers maintained themselves in Mikhalitch until the expedition of Orkhan against Karasi. After that it became Ottoman.[775] Some of the prisoners held for ransom after Nicopolis were detained in Mikhalitch, and one of the most illustrious of them died there.[776]
NAZLU (33)
This was a small emirate east of Denizli, which was absorbed by Hamid about 1350.[777]
NICAEA (34)
Shehabeddin says that Nicaea was the centre of an emirate whose ruler possessed eight cities, thirty fortresses and an army of eight thousand horsemen. The emir was Ali, a brother and neighbour of Sarukhan. I have been unable to identify this place.[778]
PALATCHIA (35)
Like Ayasoluk in relation to Aïdin, Palatchia, the ancient Miletus, in relation to Menteshe was at times independent, and at times the capital and seaport of the emirate. Clavijo confused Palatchia with Ayasoluk, and claimed that Timur summered (he means wintered) there. In another place he speaks of having travelled with a brother of Alamanoglu, brother of the emir of Altoluogo _and_ Palatchia.[779] When Menteshe had his capital at Mughla, there was undoubtedly another emir at Palatchia, who might also have been the man spoken of above as emir of Fukeh. But there can be no certainty on this point. Venice, from 1345 to 1405--and later--was interested in Palatchia, and had a consul and large commercial interests there. Different negotiations and treaties, in which the Osmanlis do not figure, attest the interest of Venice, and the independence--at least from the Osmanlis--of Palatchia throughout the fourteenth century.[780] Cyprus and Rhodes at times tried to get the supremacy of Palatchia.[781]
SARUKHAN (36)
Sarukhan was throughout the fourteenth century an emirate of far more importance than its rather restricted territory would seem to indicate. This was largely on account of the high qualities of its rulers and the daring of its sailors. It extended from the Gulf of Smyrna on the south to the Aegaean coast opposite Mitylene on the north, and was wedged in between Aïdin and Karasi. The hinterland was indefinite, and did not matter much as the Turks of Sarukhan were first and last mariners. They were the most important factor in the triple alliance against Orkhan in 1329 and 1336. After the Ottoman occupation of Pergama, and the disappearance of Karasi, they held the Osmanlis back for a hundred years (with the exception of the few years of Bayezid’s invasion). They were frequently in alliance with the Genoese of Phocaea and the Byzantines, and hired out as mercenaries and for transporting troops and food to Christian and Moslem alike. The long lease of life which Philadelphia enjoyed as a city of the Byzantine Empire is witness of their friendly relations with the Greeks throughout the reigns of Osman, Orkhan, and Murad.[782] Magnesia was capital of this emirate. It was not destroyed until Smyrna fell into the hands of the Osmanlis in 1425.[783]
SATALIA (37)
Satalia is listed as an emirate separately from Tekke for the same reason that Ayasoluk is given separately from Aïdin, Palatchia separately from Menteshe, and Sinope separately from Kastemuni. It began and ended as a separate and independent emirate, with its own lord. Its history is treated below under Tekke. The modern name of Satalia is Adalia, from _Attaleia_, and gives its name to the gulf on the southern coast of Asia Minor. Nicolay has confused Satalia with Ayas, the ancient Issos.[784]
SINOPE (38)
An emirate was founded about 1307 in Sinope by the last descendant of the Seljuks of Rum, who was known as Ghazi Tchelebi[785] who in 1313, in co-operation with the Greeks of Trebizond, attacked Kaffa. But in 1318 we find the Turks of Sinope burning almost all of the city of Trebizond, and in 1323 massacring the Genoese colony in their own city. Soon after this the emir of Kastemuni conquered Sinope.[786] The Turks of Sinope were to the Black Sea what those of Sarukhan were to the Aegaean. In 1361 they nearly captured Kaffa.[787] Their later history is that of Kastemuni.
SIVAS (39)
The history of Sivas between the time of the Mongol withdrawal and the aggression of the Osmanlis is not known. But that it must have had independent princes can be inferred from the story of how Kadi Burhaneddin came to rule there (cf. above under Caesarea). Its disastrous conquest by the Osmanlis, and then by Timur, has been told in the chapter on Bayezid’s reign.
TAWAS (40)
This was a maritime emirate extending east into Lycia and west as far as the mainland opposite Rhodes. It was the only one of the early emirates to possess islands. Its pirates were true descendants of those whom Pompey opposed, and were continually in conflict with the Rhodians and Cypriotes. Tawas was absorbed by Tekke and Menteshe, but not before 1340.[788]
TEKKE (41)
Tekke grew up into a powerful emirate in Pamphylia and Lycia. Its expansion to the north was stopped by the Taurus, and to the west by Alaïa and Karamania. Tawas, which it later absorbed, Menteshe, Rhodes, and Cyprus were its other great rivals. Its history is centred around the city of Adalia, then called Satalia, in which there were merchants of the larger Italian cities. Adalia was taken from the emirs of Tekke in 1361, but they regained it when the Genoese were threatening Famagusta in 1373. The Osmanlis, under Murad, crossed the Taurus by way of Sparta, into Tekke, but failed to capture Adalia. It remained independent until 1450.[789]
TOKAT (42)
This city was either under the Mongols or independent throughout the fourteenth century. Its fortunes were similar to those of Caesarea and Sivas.
ULUBAD (43)
This city, between Bithynia and Mysia, was conquered by Osman, and then lost. It came again into the power of the Osmanlis in Orkhan’s campaign of 1339. A relative or ally of Andronicus III lived there.[790]
INDEPENDENT CHRISTIAN STATES
There were two Christian states in Asia Minor during the fourteenth century.
LITTLE ARMENIA (44), so called to distinguish it from the classical Armenia of the upper Euphrates valley and the mountains between Asia Minor and the Azerbaïdjan, was a portion of Cilicia in the south-eastern corner of Anatolia, south of the Taurus mountains. A dynasty of Armenian kings, who had successfully held off the Seljuks of Konia, and had maintained its position in the fourteenth century by siding with the Mongols and Tartars against the Egyptians, was overthrown between 1360 and 1374 in three invasions by the Egyptians, who made Tarsus their frontier fortress.[791] Ahmed ben Ramazan, however, in 1379 established a Turkish emirate at Adana, which survived throughout the fifteenth century. The Osmanlis were masters of a portion of Hungary before their power was felt in Cilicia.
TREBIZOND (45), in the north-eastern corner of the peninsula, in the country where Mithridates in his kingdom of Pontus had defied the Romans, came into no contact with the Osmanlis during the century. Nor was it the object of aggression on the part of Timur.[792] It resisted successfully, with its Greek and Laze population, on land and sea, the attacks of the Turks of its hinterland and of Sinope.
TERRITORIES DEPENDING ON OUTSIDE STATES
At the mouth of the Gulf of Smyrna, on the northern promontory, was the Genoese self-governing colony of PHOCAEA (46), of which much has been said in the chapter on the reign of Orkhan. Phocaea had many vicissitudes, but maintained its independence as a Latin colony throughout the fourteenth century, and knew how to turn aside the possible aggression of Timur. It was never even temporarily dependent upon the Osmanlis.[793]
SMYRNA (47) was wrested from the emir of Aïdin by the crusaders of 1344, and, for the rest of the fourteenth century was a Christian city, independent of the Osmanlis and the Turkish emirs alike. It was Timur who brought it again under Moslem control. But it did not pass to the Osmanlis for many years after this reconquest.
The Byzantines, after they had been driven out of Bithynia and Mysia, managed to maintain PHILADELPHIA (48), through their friendship with Sarukhan, until the end of Murad’s reign.
The CYPRIOTES (49) exercised a powerful influence in the southern portions of Asia Minor throughout the fourteenth century. As we have seen, they held Adalia for some years. In 1360, the emirs of southern Anatolia were so divided and opposed to each other, and needed so greatly the help of Cyprus against the Karamanians, whom they feared much more than the Osmanlis, that they became for many years tributary to Cyprus.[794] The Cypriotes were also interested in Cilicia.
In 1327, the year after Osman’s death, the power of the MONGOLS (50) reached for a few years the Mediterranean. After Bahadur Khan’s death, in 1335, the Mongol Empire was divided up. Suzerainty in Asia Minor fell to the Sultan of Irak (Persia), who, until Timur’s coming, fought with the Karamanians for some of the most important cities of eastern Anatolia. When Ibn Batutah went through the peninsula, Erzerum, Erzindjian, Sivas, Caesarea, Amassia, Nigdeh, and Ak Seraï were ‘cities of the Sultan’.[795]
The chevaliers of RHODES (51) did not come into Asia Minor until 1310, when they won from the Turks and Greeks the island which was to give them their most commonly used name. They were continually in conflict with Tawas, Alaïa, Adalia, Tekke, Menteshe, Fukeh, and Aïdin. But they never came into contact with the Osmanlis until after the fall of Constantinople. On the mainland, the chevaliers helped to take Smyrna in 1344, and defended it against the Turks for sixty years. They wrested Ayasoluk from Aïdin for a while about 1365. Several times they gained a foothold in Fukeh and Menteshe, and in the last year of the century established a fortress at Halik (Halicarnassus).[796]
The Mamelukes of EGYPT (52) were not only interested in Cilicia, and held that country from 1360 to 1379, and at other times, but also invaded Karamania on different occasions. They reached Konia at the end of the thirteenth century, the beginning of the fifteenth century, and again, under Ibrahim pasha, twice in the third decade of the nineteenth century. During the reign of Murad I, the Egyptians called Cilicia up to the Taurus _Bab-el-Mulk_, the Royal Gateway. Konia was entered by an Egyptian Sultan in 1418. The Karamanians of that day, who, according to the Ottoman historians, were vassals of the Osmanlis, had no interest in or fear of Mohammed I. They were engaged in a civil war which led to Egyptian intervention.[797] If Konia and the rest of Karamania was under the Osmanlis, why was there not Ottoman intervention in the quarrel between Mohammed and Ali for the Karamanian throne?
Last of all, the CATALANS (53), whose history is given in the chapter on Osman, did not all leave Asia Minor with the ‘Grand Company’. Throughout the reign of Orkhan the principality established at Cyzicus left its traces in the Marmora and Dardanelles coast and hinterland. Nothing more strikingly illustrates the lack of Ottoman activity in Asia Minor during Orkhan’s day, even at the very threshold of Bithynia, than the fact that he left the Catalans in possession of Bigha at his death. Murad, in 1363, although his presence was urgently needed on the Maritza to defend his new conquest of Adrianople against a Serbian invasion, was compelled to delay for months to eject the Catalans from Bigha.[798]
CONCLUSION
_Orkhan’s emirate, then, was but one of more than thirty independent states which existed in Asia Minor during the decade from 1330 to 1340._ During his lifetime, and the lifetime of his father Osman, the other better-known emirates had been slowly forming by the absorption of small independent villages and cities. Although several of the emirates that have been given above were ephemeral, and some of them duplicated practically the same territory at different periods in the fourteenth century, others, such as Aïdin, Kermian, Karamania, Sarukhan, and Tekke, were far more powerful in Asia Minor than Orkhan or than Murad. That Bayezid had not crushed the life out of the larger emirates is proved by the ease with which they were revived by Timur, and by their survival during the first half of the fifteenth century.
Karamania, for one, remained powerful and flourishing long after the political life of the Balkan states had become extinct. Karamania demanded one hundred years of strenuous effort on the part of the conquerors of the Byzantine Empire before it could be subjugated. _The Osmanlis crossed the Balkans more than a century before they crossed the Taurus._
This exposé was written in order to show:
1. That Osman fell heir to no part of the Seljuk dominions;
2. That the Seljuks had many more heirs than the traditional ten;
3. That Osman and Orkhan carved their state out of the remnants of the Byzantine possessions along the upper end of the Sea of Marmora and in the Valley of the Sangarius--a very small portion indeed of Asia Minor;
4. That Murad, the wonderful conqueror of the Balkan peninsula, was only one of several rulers in Asia Minor, and not the most powerful of these, and that there were large portions of Asia Minor with which neither he nor his successor Bayezid came into contact at all;
5. That neither Bayezid, with his tremendous prestige in Europe, nor his brilliant successors of the fifteenth century, gained undisputed possession of Asia Minor. The Osmanlis were not masters of Asia Minor until long after their inheritance of the Byzantine Empire was regarded in Europe as a _fait accompli_.
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES
I. Approximate Dates in the Legendary Period.
II. Important Events in the First Century of Ottoman History.
III. Progress of Ottoman Congress under the First Four Sovereigns.
IV. Comparative Table of Rulers.
V. The Fourteenth Century in Byzantine History.
VI. Relations between Venice and Genoa and the Levant from 1300 to 1403.
VII. The Popes and the Moslem Menace in the Fourteenth Century.
I. THE LEGENDARY PERIOD
1219--Soleiman Shah, with 50,000 nomad Turkish families, settles in neighbourhood of Erzindjian.
1224--Soleiman Shah is drowned in the Euphrates. Ertogrul and Dundar, two of his sons, settle near Angora.
1230-40--Ertogrul establishes himself in the valley of the Kara Su, north-west of Kutayia.
1259--Osman is born at Sugut.
1289--Ertogrul dies.
Osman captures Karadja Hissar and Biledjik.
1290--Osman kills his uncle Dundar.
1290-9--Osman, having extended his possessions westward, founds an emirate, and takes up his residence at Yeni Sheïr.
II. IMPORTANT EVENTS IN THE FIRST CENTURY OF OTTOMAN HISTORY
1299--Osman, Turkish emir in the valley of the Kara Su, makes Yeni Sheïr, between Brusa and Nicaea, his residence.
1301--Osman defeats the Byzantine heterarch Muzalon at Baphaeon, near Nicomedia.
1308--Kalolimni, island in the Sea of Marmora, is occupied. Ak Hissar and Tricocca are captured.
1317--Investment of Brusa begins.
1326--Brusa surrenders. Osman hears the news on his death-bed at Yeni Sheïr.
1329--Byzantines under Andronicus III are defeated at Pelecanon (Maltepé).
Nicaea surrenders.
1333--Alaeddin pasha, brother of Orkhan and first vizier, dies.
Death of Bahadur Khan removes the Mongol menace.
1337 or 1338--Nicomedia surrenders.
1338--Karasi, first of the Turkish emirates to be absorbed, is incorporated in Orkhan’s state.
_c._ 1338--Osmanlis reach the Bosphorus at Haïdar Pasha.
1343--Empress Anna makes overtures to Orkhan for aid against Cantacuzenos.
1345--Orkhan accepts proposal of alliance with Cantacuzenos.
First Osmanlis cross to Europe to fight for Cantacuzenos against Anna.
1346--Orkhan marries Theodora, granddaughter of the Bulgarian czar and daughter of Cantacuzenos, who is besieging Constantinople with Ottoman aid.
1348--The ‘Black Death’ ravages Europe.
1349--Cantacuzenos calls again upon Orkhan for aid. Twenty thousand Ottoman horsemen are sent to help in preventing Salonika from falling into Serbian hands.
_c._ 1351--First convention between Orkhan and the Genoese.
1353--Soleiman pasha, Orkhan’s elder son, in response to the third appeal of Cantacuzenos for Ottoman aid, brings an army into Thrace, helps in the recapture of Adrianople, and defeats the Serbians at Demotika. For this aid, a fortress on the European shore of the Dardanelles, probably Tzympe, is given to Orkhan.
1354--An earthquake, which damaged the walls of Gallipoli, enables the Osmanlis of Soleiman pasha to capture the city. Orkhan refuses to give up Gallipoli, breaks with Cantacuzenos, and orders the Osmanlis in the Hellespont to extend their conquest in the direction of Constantinople.
_c_. 1357--Demotika and Tchorlu are captured for the first time by the Osmanlis under Soleiman pasha.
1358--Soleiman pasha dies from the fall of a horse at Bulaïr.
1359--Orkhan dies, and is succeeded by Murad.
1360-1--Conquest of Thrace.
1361--Second serious ‘Black Death’ plague in Europe.
_c._ 1362--Murad creates corps of ‘janissaries’.
1362 (1363)--John V Palaeologos binds himself by treaty to recognize Murad’s conquests in Thrace, and to give him military aid against the Turkish emirs of Asia Minor.
1363--Serbian and Hungarian crusaders are defeated on the banks of the Maritza.
Murad takes up his residence in Demotika.
1365--Ragusa makes commercial treaty with Osmanlis, promising tribute.
1366--Adrianople becomes the first capital of the Ottoman Empire.
Amadeo of Savoy’s crusade; captures Gallipoli, but soon abandons it again.
1369--Capture of Yamboli forces Sisman of Bulgaria to become, like the Byzantine Emperor, a vassal of Murad.
1371--Battle of Samakov gives the Osmanlis control of the passes into the Plain of Sofia.
Battle of Cernomen opens up Macedonia to the Ottoman conquest.
1372--Moslem colonization of Macedonia, at Drama, Kavalla, Serres, and Veles, gives the Osmanlis a position of preponderance in the Balkan peninsula.
1373--John Palaeologos, failing to receive aid from the West, becomes Ottoman vassal.
1374--Unsuccessful conspiracy of Manuel to recover Serres causes Ottoman siege of Salonika.
1379--John and Manuel agree to increase their tribute of gold and soldiers, and to surrender Philadelphia, the last Byzantine possession in Asia, for Ottoman aid in ousting Andronicus IV from Constantinople.
1384--Osmanlis aid Thomas in besieging Janina.
1385--First Ottoman invasion of Albania.
Battle of Savra destroys Balsa’s power.
Osmanlis occupy Sofia.
1386--Osmanlis capture Croia and Scutari, but return these fortresses to prince of Zenta.
The fall of Nish makes Lazar of Serbia Ottoman vassal.
1387--Genoa concludes formal treaty with Murad.
Murad, with army containing Greek, Serbian and Bulgarian contingents, defeats Alaeddin of Karamania at Konia, but has to withdraw without tangible results.
1388--Venice concludes commercial treaty with Murad.
1388--Osmanlis are defeated by Serbians and Bosnians at Plochnik, thus preventing invasion of Bosnia.
League of Serbians, Bosnians, Bulgarians, Wallachians, and Albanians formed against the Osmanlis.
First Ottoman army enters Greece upon invitation of Theodore Palaeologos to fight against the Franks.
1389--Osmanlis destroy Serbian independence at Kossova.
Murad is assassinated on the battle-field. Bayezid succeeds to the throne, and has his brother Yakub strangled.
BAYEZID (1389-1403).
1387--Bayezid marries sister of Stephen, son of Lazar, and makes Serbians his allies.
1390--First Ottoman naval expedition makes raid on Chios, Negropont, and Attika.
First Ottoman raids into Hungary.
1391--Second invasion of Karamania, followed by siege of Konia, results in cession by Alaeddin of north-western portion of Karamania.
First Ottoman siege of Constantinople.
1392--First defensive campaign against Sigismund is fought in Bulgaria. Hearing that Timurtash had been defeated by Karamanlis, Bayezid transports army to Asia, and destroys Alaeddin’s army at Ak Tchaï. The Osmanlis are now the dominant race in Asia Minor.
1394--Osmanlis first appear in the Adriatic at the mouth of the Boyana.
1395--Bayezid summons Ottoman vassals to his court at Serres.
Ottoman siege of Constantinople becomes pressing.
1396--Crusade of Western chivalry, co-operating with Sigismund of Hungary, meets with disaster at Nicopolis in Bulgaria.
Ottoman invaders of Wallachia are defeated at Rovine, but in raids into Hungary Peterwardein is burned, and sixteen thousand Styrians carried off into captivity.
1397--First Ottoman invasion of Greece. In the Peloponnesus, Argos is taken by assault.
After defeat at Megalopolis, Theodore becomes Ottoman vassal.
1397-9--Movement of Moslem Anatolian population into the Balkan peninsula.
1398--Osmanlis and Serbians make destructive raid on Bosnia.
1400--Timur captures and destroys Sivas.
1402--Timur defeats and makes prisoner Bayezid at Angora, overruns Asia Minor, occupies Brusa, and takes Smyrna from the Christians by storm.
1403--Timur withdraws to Samarkand.
Bayezid, still a prisoner, dies on the homeward march at Ak Sheïr. His sons dispute the succession.
III. PROGRESS OF OTTOMAN CONQUEST UNDER THE FIRST FOUR SOVEREIGNS
OSMAN (1299-1326)
1299--Osman, local chieftain at Sugut, has extended his conquests from the valley of the Kara Su westward to Yeni Sheïr.
1308--Kalolimni, island in the Sea of Marmora, becomes first Ottoman maritime possession.
Ak Hissar, at the entrance to plain of Nicomedia, and Tricocca, which ensured land communication between Nicaea and Nicomedia, are captured.
1308-16--Sovereignty is extended over the peninsula between the Gulf of Nicomedia and the Black Sea, almost up to the Bosphorus.
1317--Fortresses are erected near gates of Brusa.
1326--Brusa surrenders.
ORKHAN (1326-59)
1329--Occupies Nicaea.
1330-8--Conquest of shores of Gulf of Nicomedia up to Scutari on the Bosphorus.
1334-8--Conquest of emirate of Karasi.
1337-8--Occupies Nicomedia.
_c._ 1339--Acquires Mikhalitch, Ulubad, and Kermasti.
1353--Cantacuzenos cedes fortress on European shore of Hellespont.
1354--Gallipoli is occupied.
1354-8--The Osmanlis occupy the Thracian, Chersonese, and the European shore of the Sea of Marmora as far as Rodosto. Demotika is captured, and Constantinople cut off from Adrianople by the occupation of Tchorlu.
MURAD (1359-89)
1360--Captures Angora and suppresses independence of village chieftains between Eski Sheïr and Angora.
1360-1--Conquers Thrace from the Maritza River to the Black Sea, including Adrianople.
1361--Lalashahin captures Philippopolis.
_c._ 1362--Creation of the corps of janissaries.
1362 or 1363--John V Palaeologos binds himself by treaty to recognize Murad’s conquest of Thrace, and to give him military aid against the emirs of Asia Minor.
1366-9--Conquest of Maritza Valley up to the Rhodope Mountains, and of Bulgaria, up to the main Balkan range.
1370-1--Occupies the fortresses and passes in the Rhodope and Rilo ranges.
1371-2--Conquers Macedonia up to the Vardar River.
_c._ 1376--Portion of emirate of Kermian, including Kutayia is annexed as _dot_ of the emir’s daughter, in marriage arranged with Bayezid.
1377--Emir of Hamid sells to Murad territories between Tekke, Kermian, and Karamania. The acquisition of Ak Sheïr brings the Osmanlis to the frontier of Karamania.
1378--Conquers Tekke, except Adalia and Alaya.
1380--Conquers Macedonia, west of the Vardar. Prilep and Monastir become Ottoman frontier fortresses.
1385--Occupies Okhrida.
Plain of Sofia and upper valley of the Struma River are conquered.
1386--Valleys of the Morava and Nisava are conquered, and Nish falls.
1388--Invasion of northern Bulgaria reduces Sisman to more humiliating vassalage. The Osmanlis retain the fortresses of Shuman and Nicopolis.
BAYEZID (1389-1403)
1391--Captures Adalia, first Ottoman seaport on the Mediterranean.
Ak Sheïr and Ak Seraï ceded by Karamania.
1393--Bulgaria, to the Danube, becomes Ottoman territory.
1393-5--Conquers Samsun, Caesarea, and Sivas, and annexes emirate of Kastemuni.
1397--Conquers Thessaly, Doris, Locris, and the north-eastern corner of the Peloponnesus.
1398-9--Gradually occupies Southern Albania and a part of Epirus.
IV. COMPARATIVE TABLE OF RULERS
BYZANTINE EMPIRE[799]
_The Palaeologi_
ANDRONICUS II (the Old), 1282-1328.
MICHAEL IX (co-emperor), 1295-1320.
ANDRONICUS III (the Young), 1328-41, by whose second wife, Anna of Savoy, was born
JOHN V, 1341-01, whose three sons were:
ANDRONICUS IV (co-emperor), 1355-?
MANUEL II, 1391-1425.
Theodore, despot of the Morea, 1359-.
The son of Andronicus IV was
JOHN VII (co-emperor), 1399-1403.
_The Cantacuzeni_
JOHN VI, regent, 1341-7, co-emperor, 1347-55, two of whose daughters married Orkhan and John V, and whose son was
MATTHEW, co-emperor, 1355-6.
HUNGARY
LOUIS THE GREAT, 1342-82 (King of Poland, 1370-82).
His two daughters were:
Hedwig, to whom fell the crown of Poland, and who married Jagello of Lithuania, who became King of Poland under the Christian name of Ladislas V.
Mary, to whom fell the crown of Hungary, 1382-92.
Mary married
SIGISMUND of Luxemburg in 1386, who became sole ruler of Hungary after Mary’s death, and, later, Holy Roman Emperor.
HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE
_House of Luxemburg_
CHARLES IV (I as King of Bohemia), 1355-78.
His two sons were:
WENCESLAUS, who succeeded to the imperial crown on the death of his father and was deposed in 1400;
and SIGISMUND, King of Hungary, who was elected emperor in 1410.
FRANCE
PHILIPPE IV, _le Bel_, 1285-1314, and his sons
LOUIS X, PHILIPPE V, and CHARLES IV, last of the Capetians. 1314-28.
PHILIPPE VI VALOIS, 1328-50.
JEAN, 1350-64.
CHARLES V, 1365-80.
CHARLES VI, 1380-1422.
Philippe de Bourgogne, son of King Jean, and father of Jean de Nevers, and Louis d’Orléans, second son of Charles V, were vying with each other for the control of their insane nephew and brother, Charles VI, during the reign of Bayezid.
ENGLAND
EDWARD I, 1270-1307.
EDWARD II, 1307-27.
EDWARD III, 1327-77
(took the title of King of France in 1339).
RICHARD III, 1377-99.
Deposed in 1399, and succeeded by
HENRY IV (of Lancaster).
V. THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY IN BYZANTINE HISTORY
1300--The emir of Menteshe invades Rhodes.
1301--First Byzantine defeat at hands of Osmanlis at Baphaeon.
1302--Michael IX takes command of Slavic mercenaries in Asia Minor: they force him to allow their return to Europe.
Roger de Flor arrives at Constantinople with eight thousand Catalans, and is married to a niece of Andronicus.
1303--Catalans sack the island of Chios.
1305--Death of Ghazan Khan frustrates Byzantine hopes of a Mongol attack upon the emirs of Asia Minor.
Catalans compel the emir of Karamania to lift the siege of Philadelphia, but quarrel with Greeks and Slavic mercenaries. Roger exacts title of ‘Caesar’ from Andronicus, and is later assassinated by Michael IX at Adrianople.
1306-9--Catalan ‘Grand Company’ forms state at Gallipoli.
1310--Catalans leave for Greece, and set up military democracy in Athens.
The Knights of St. John of Jerusalem capture Rhodes.
1311--The emir of Menteshe fails in attempt to recapture Rhodes.
1311-14--Turkish freebooter Halil defies the Emperor in the Thracian Chersonese, and is finally defeated with the help of the Serbians.
1317--Brusa, Nicaea, and Nicomaedia begin to be menaced.
1326--Brusa falls. Andronicus III, on his wedding trip from Constantinople to Demotika, is set upon and wounded by raiding Turks.
1327-8--Andronicus III plots to oust his grandfather, who, in turn, invites Serbians to attack young Andronicus in the rear; young Andronicus besieges army of his grandfather and Serbians at Serres, and captures Salonika. Old Andronicus calls upon Bulgarians, but before their aid arrives, young Andronicus succeeds in entering Constantinople and deposing his grandfather.
1329--Andronicus III is defeated at Pelecanon by Orkhan in an attempt to relieve Nicaea. Nicaea surrenders.
Andronicus III, at Phocaea, tries to incite emirs of Aïdin and Sarukhan to attack Orkhan.
1333--Turks of Sarukhan make a raid on Macedonia, while their vessels enter the Sea of Marmora and seize Rodosto.
1334--Andronicus is compelled to send army to save Salonika from raiding Turks.
1336--Andronicus asks Turkish emirs to help him in siege of Genoese at Phocaea.
1337 or 1338--Nicomedia and the last Byzantine possessions in north-western corner of Asia Minor are conquered by the Osmanlis.
1340--Stephen Dushan crosses the Vardar, captures Serres, and crowns himself there as ‘master of almost all the Roman Empire’.
1341--After death of Andronicus III, Cantacuzenos crowns himself at Demotika.
1342--Civil war between Cantacuzenos and widow and son of Andronicus III, during which both sides make overtures to Osmanlis, Serbians, and Bulgarians.
1345--Cantacuzenos receives aid from Orkhan, and pays for it by marrying his daughter to the Ottoman emir.
1347--Dushan crowns himself Emperor of Constantinople. Agreement between John Cantacuzenos and John Palaeologos to share Byzantine throne.
Black Death plague reaches Constantinople.
1349--Cantacuzenos calls Osmanlis into Europe again to save Salonika from the Serbians.
1349-53--Civil war between Cantacuzenos and Palaeologos.
Palaeologos flees to Tenedos.
1353--The Osmanlis, who had been helping Cantacuzenos against Palaeologos, capture Gallipoli, and invade Thrace.
1354--Cantacuzenos, having vainly appealed to the Pope, Venice, Bulgaria, and Serbia to aid him against the Osmanlis, is deposed by popular revolution in Constantinople, and becomes a monk.
John Palaeologos recalled from exile.
1355--Dushan dies on his way to attack Constantinople.
1354-8--Palaeologos succeeds finally in subduing Cantacuzenos’ son Matthew.
1358--While Osmanlis are advancing in Thrace, John V, at command of Orkhan, is besieging Phocaea.
1361--Adrianople and Philippopolis captured by the Osmanlis.
1363--John V signs treaty of vassalage to Murad.
1366--John V journeys to Buda to enlist aid of Louis of Hungary, and on return journey is made prisoner by Sisman in Bulgaria.
1373--John V, seeing that his visit to Rome and his appeals to western princes are of no avail, recognizes Murad as his suzerain, promises to do military service in Murad’s army, and gives his son Manuel as hostage.
Thrace and Macedonia are practically lost, and the Byzantine Empire has become merely the city state of Constantinople.
1374--As the result of a rebellion undertaken by Andronicus together with the son of Murad against the two fathers, John V consents to deprive his son Andronicus of his sight, and shuts him up in the Tower of Anemas.
1375-89--Civil war between John and Manuel and Andronicus, in which Venice, Genoa, and Osmanlis play a decisive part. John and Manuel purchase Ottoman aid at the price of giving up Philadelphia, the last Byzantine possession in Asia Minor.
1391--Manuel, serving as vassal in Ottoman army, is threatened with loss of eyes, if Emperor John does not demolish the towers on the walls of Constantinople, which he has rebuilt. He obeys and dies soon after. Manuel escapes from Brusa upon learning of his father’s death. His flight is followed by the first Ottoman siege of Constantinople.
1396--Bayezid contemplates taking Constantinople by assault, but is deterred by arrival of crusaders in Hungary.
1397--Siege of Constantinople is renewed, after Nicopolis.
1399--Crusade of Boucicaut helps Byzantines temporarily.
1400-2--Manuel, having made peace with his nephew John, sails for Italy and spends two years in fruitless endeavour to get aid from western princes.
1401--John makes treaty to give up Constantinople, if Bayezid should win from Timur.
1402--After Bayezid’s defeat at Angora, Manuel returns to Constantinople.
John is banished to Lemnos, and Ottoman colonists expelled from Constantinople. Overtures are made to Timur.
1403--Manuel recognizes Soleiman as successor of Bayezid, and renews treaty with him.
VI. RELATIONS BETWEEN VENICE AND GENOA AND THE LEVANT FROM 1300 TO 1403
1328--Venetian sovereignty of Negropont is menaced by Turkish pirates.
1344--Venice aids Cyprus and Rhodes in the capture of Smyrna.
1345-50--Dushan negotiates frequently with Venice for aid in capturing Constantinople.
1351-3--War between Venice and Genoa. Sea power of Genoa is broken at battle of Lojera. Genoese are assisted by Orkhan.
1355--Matteo Venier and Marino Faleri warn the Senate that the Byzantine Empire must inevitably become the booty of the Osmanlis, unless Venice gets ahead of them.
1361--Venetian Senate make overtures to John V for alliance against Murad, but withdraw when they see the rapid success of Murad’s campaign in Thrace.
1370-1--Venice and Greece are engaged in a struggle for economic supremacy in Cyprus.
1375--John V gives Tenedos to the Venetians. The Genoese come into conflict with the Venetians over economic privileges at Constantinople.
1379-81--Venice and Genoa go to war over the question of Tenedos and the Byzantine succession to the throne. In the Peace of Turin, it is provided that Tenedos remain unfortified, and that Andronicus IV be recognized the heir to John V.
1386--Genoese make treaty with Byzantines.
1387--Genoese make commercial treaty with Osmanlis.
1388--Venetians make commercial treaty with Osmanlis.
1389--Venice and Genoa renew treaties with Bayezid.
1393--Venice decides to treat with Sigismund of Hungary for defensive alliance against Osmanlis.
1396--Venetian aid in Nicopolis crusade is half-hearted.
1397--Venice urges Genoese of Pera not to treat with Bayezid, and makes accord with Genoa to aid Byzantines.
1401--Venice and Genoa engaged in another sea struggle for supremacy in the Levant.
1402--Both Venetians and Genoese aid Osmanlis, fleeing from Timur after Angora, to cross into Europe. They renew their treaties with Osmanlis, recognizing Soleiman as Bayezid’s successor.
VII. THE POPES AND THE MOSLEM MENACE IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY
1306--Clement V exhorts the Venetians to co-operate with Charles de Valois in the reconquest of Constantinople.
1307--Clement V urges Charles II of Naples to re-conquer Constantinople, but his interest is diverted by a project of a crusade to support Cyprus and Cilician Armenia against the Egyptians.
1309--Papal court transferred from Rome to Avignon.
1310--Clement V encourages Knights of St. John to drive both Greeks and Turks out of Rhodes.
1327--John XXII does not respond to appeal of Andronicus II to aid Byzantium against the Turks.
1333--Similar unsuccessful overture is made by Andronicus III.
1334--Papal effort to form crusade against Turks results in the capture of Smyrna.
1347--Marquis de Montferrat, heir to the Latin Emperors, makes agreement with Clement VI to conquer Constantinople.
At the same time appeals are received at Rome from Cantacuzenos for union of western princes against Osmanlis.
1349, 1350, 1353--Cantacuzenos makes three more overtures to Clement VI and Innocent VI.
1352--Inhabitants of Philadelphia appeal to Pope for aid, promising return to Roman communion.
1363--Urban V on Holy Friday gives the cross to several princes of the Occident.
1366--Urged by Urban, Amadeo of Savoy sails for the crusade against the Osmanlis. He spends his efforts in releasing John V from the Bulgarians, and abandons the Byzantines when they refuse to return to the Roman Church. Urban writes to Louis of Hungary to put off his crusade until the union of the Churches is accomplished.
Urban V denounces the traffic of the Italian Republics with Moslems.
1369--Emperor John V, at Rome, abjures errors of Orthodox Church, and receives from Pope letters, recommending that Christian princes come to his aid.
1371--Gregory XI makes appeal to Christian nations to co-operate with Genoa in saving the last Christians of the Holy Land.
1372--Gregory urges Louis of Hungary to resist the Osmanlis before they advance farther into Europe, and orders a crusade to be preached in Hungary, Poland, and Dalmatia.
1373--Gregory, receiving the last envoy from John V, bursts into tears, and says that he will save Constantinople, if only the Byzantine Emperor will cause his people to renounce their heresies and return to the Roman Church.
1378--The Great Schism.
1388--Urban VI sends two armed galleys for the defence of Constantinople, but is unsuccessful in raising crusade.
1391--Boniface IX stirs up trouble between Latin and Greek Christians in the Balkan peninsula.
1398 and 1399--Boniface IX orders crusade to be preached throughout Christendom for the defence of Constantinople.
1399--Boucicaut, the only one to respond, goes to the aid of Constantinople.
1402--Smyrna is lost to Timur.
1403--The strife between rival Popes, Benedict XIII and Boniface IX, makes impossible a papal effort to take advantage of the civil strife between the sons of Bayezid, after Timur’s abandonment of his conquests in Asia Minor.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. CLASSIFIED BIBLIOGRAPHY
NOTE
The Classified Bibliography contains only the names of authors. Following the classification, the books and editions are given in detail under the authors’ names in alphabetical order.
I shall be grateful for corrections and amplifications. The work on this bibliography has been done largely in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, and I have been handicapped by the lack of a complete catalogue.
No attempt whatever has been made to follow a definite system of spelling of Oriental and Slavic names, for arbitrary changes in spelling on my part would confuse the reader who desires to find in a library catalogue the authors given. I have retained the spelling (except in rare instances where there were divergencies in different editions of the same book) of the author’s name as given by himself or by his editor or publisher. As far as the letter ‘G’, I have made the spelling conform to that of the General Catalogue of the Bibliothèque Nationale. Beyond ‘G’, there is, as yet, no norm.
=Bibliographers of Printed Books.=
Apponyi; Auboyneau; Boecler; Chevalier; Dherbelot de Molainville; Eichhorn; Fabricius; Fevret; Fitzclarence; Fraehn; Franke; Hadji Khalfa; Halle; Houtsma et al.; Oesterly; Omont; Pogodin; Potthast; Welter; Zenker.
=Bibliographers of Oriental MSS.=
Ahlwardt; Ali Hilmi; Apponyi; Auboyneau; Blochet; Browne; Cusa; De Goeje; De Jong; Derenbourg; Dorn; Dozy; Fevret; Flügel; Hadji Khalfa; Karamianz; Lampros; Pertsch; Rieu; Rosen; Schéfer; Slane; Smirnow; Sprenger; Welter.
=Numismatists.=
Blau; Djevdet; Engel; Friedländer; Ghalib; Karabacek; Lane-Poole; Lavoix; Makrisi; Pinder; Schlumberger; Serrure; Stickel.
=Chronographers.=
Aladdin Ali; Arabantinos; Assemanus; Hadji Khalfa; Knaus; Loeb; Mas Latrie; Mullach; Müller; Muralt; Rasmussen; Strzygowski; Wüstenfeld; _Chronicon Breve_ (in Ducas).
=Collections of Contemporary Records.=
OTTOMAN: Feridun, Collection of.
The authenticity of the documents in this collection cannot be definitely established.
BYZANTINE: Dieterich; Miklositch; Müller; Predelli; Sathas.
HUNGARIAN, SLAVIC, and RAGUSAN: Daničić; Fejér; Gelčić; Jorga; Ljubić; Makusev; Miklositch; Miltitz; Müller; Noradounghian; Racki; Safařík (Schaffarik); Sathas; Thallóczy; Theiner; Wenzel. (_See also under_ Kossova _and_ Nicopolis.)
VENETIAN: Alberi; Brown; Fejér; Jorga; Ljubić; Makusev; Miklositch; Minotto; Müller; Noiret; Noradounghian; Predelli; Racki; Romanin; Rymer; Safařík; Sathas; Testa; Thomas.
PAPAL (Avignon and Rome): Baluze; Bosquet; Dudik; Jorga; Romanin; Theiner; Werunski.
The literature about the individual popes, and the collections of documents published, registers, letters, etc., are so numerous, that I cannot include even a selection here. The reader is referred to Chevalier’s _Répertoire des sources historiques du Moyen Âge_, where, under each pope, will be found the most complete and most recent bibliographical references.
GENOESE (including Pera Colony): Belgrano; Jorga; Miklositch; Müller; Noradounghian; Olivieri; Predelli; Testa.
OTHER ITALIAN CITIES: Jorga; Müller.
FRENCH: Boislisle; Bongars; Bouchon; Charrière; Delaville Leroulx; Dorez; Garnier; Jorga; Kunstmann; Leuridan; Lot; Molinier; Moranvillé; Potansque; Raimboult; Roncière; Tarbé.
ENGLISH: Rymer.
=Contemporary Chronicles.=
BYZANTINE: Cantacuzenos; Nicephoros Gregoras; Pachymeres; Panaretos (for Trebizond).
CATALAN: Moncada; Muntaner. (_See also_ Frenzel.)
FRENCH: Enguerran de Monstrelet; Eustache des Champs; Froissart; Gilles; Marche; Nangis; Ursins; Wavrin; Anon.: Cronicorum Karoli Sexti; Chronique du duc Loys de Bourbon; Chronique du religieux de Saint-Denis; Chronique des quatre premiers Valois; Livre des faicts de Jean le Maingre, dit Bouciquaut; Relation de la Croisade de Nicopolis (serviteur de Gui de Blois). (_See also under the Editors_: Bellaguet; Géraud; Godefroy; Kervyn de Lettenhove; Lacabane; Lemaitre.)
HEBREW: Joseph ben Joshua.
MOREA: Chronique de Morée; Breve Chronicon (see Ducas).
ORIENTAL: Aboulpharadji; Hayton.
RUMANIAN: Urechi.
SAVOY: Anon. Anciennes Chroniques.
SERVIAN: Abbey of Tronosho; Chronicle of Pek.
VENICE: Bonincontrius; Caroldo; Guazzo; Villani (3).
=Venetian Archives (History and Guides to).=
Alberi; Baschet; Cecchetti; Mas Latrie; Toderini.
The archives for the fourteenth century are listed in the Alphabetical Bibliography.
=Travellers and Geographers=. (Those in italics are contemporary or nearly contemporary.)
ASIA MINOR: _Abulfeda_; Ainsworth; Baedeker; _Belon_; _Bergeron_; _Bertrandon de la Broquière_; Bruun; Busbecq; Chardin; Cholet; Cuinet; Edrisi; Evlia Tchelebi; Fresne-Canaye; Ghillebert de Launoy; Hadji Khalfa; Hellert; Houzeau; Huart; Huber; _Ibn Batutah_; Macarius; _Mandeville_; _Marco Polo_; Michelant; Mostras; Naumann; _Nicolay_; Ortellius; Ramsay; Rennell; Sarre; _Schiltberger_; Seiff; _Shehabeddin_; Sidi Ali Ibn Hussein; Tavernier; Tchihatcheff; Texeira; Texier; Trémeaux; Vivien de St. Martin.
Ibn Batutah is the best contemporary authority.
CONSTANTINOPLE AND BALKAN PENINSULA: _Abulfeda_; Baedeker; Belgrano; _Belon_; _Bergeron_; Boué; Bruun; Busbecq; _Clavijo_; Hadji Khalfa; Hammer; Hellert; Huber; Jireček; Macarius; Manutio; Miklositch; Mostras; _Nicolay_; Olivieri; Ortellius; Sathas; _Schiltberger_; Sefert; Sidi Ali Ibn Hussein; Tafel; Tozer.
Clavijo is the best contemporary authority for Constantinople in the latter part of the reign of Bayezid.
I have listed only those whose works I have referred to, or who seem to me to have intimate, direct bearing on the subject. Many others, however, could be consulted to advantage. _See_ Potthast, _Bibliotheca Historica Medii Aevi_, ii. 1734-5.
=Seljuk Historians.=
Ahmed Ibn Yusuf; Houtsma (editor); Ibn-Bibi; Mirkhond (Mirkhwand).
=Early Arabic, Persian, and Armenian Historians.=
Ahmed Ibn Yusuf; Ahmed Ibn Yahia; Hayton; Ibn al Tiktaka; Ibn Khaldun; Khondemir; Makrisi; Mirkhond (Mirkhwand); Mohammed-en-Nesawi; Reshideddin; Texeira; Anon. _Derbend Namé_.
=Ottoman Historians and Chroniclers.=
Abdul Aziz; Ahmed Jaudat; Alaeddin Ali (Ibn Kadi Said); Ali (Mustafa Ibn Ahmed); Ashik-pasha-zadé (Ahmed Ibn Yahia); Atha; Ayas Pasha; Djelaleddin, Mustapha; Djemaleddin; Djemaleddin-al-Kifty; Djevad bey, Ahmed; Fehmi; Feridun, Collection of; Geropoldi, Antonio (trans.); Hadji Khalfa; Hezarfenn, Hussein; Ibn Ali Mohammed Al-Biwy; Idris, Mevlana (of Bitlis); Kheirullah; Kourbaddinmakky; Mohammed Ferid bey; Moukhlis Abderrahman; Mustafa; Nedim; Neshri; Nichandji pasha Mehmet; Said; Seadeddin; Tahir-Zade; Anon. _Mira-ari-tarikh_.
No authenticated Ottoman records exist for the fourteenth century. The nearest writers to events are Ashik-pasha-zadé, Idris, Mouklis Abderrahman and Neshri. The historian enjoying the greatest reputation for authority is Seadeddin.
=Western writers on Ottoman Empire before 1600.=
Adelman; Aenaeus Sylvius; Alhard; Aretinus (Leonardo Bruni); Augustinus Caelius; Aventinus; Bertellus; Boecler; Bongars; Busbequius; Cambini; Camerarius; Campana; Cervarius; Chytraeus; Clavijo; Corregiaio; Cousin (Cognatus); Crusius; Cuspianus; Donado da Lezze; Drechsler; Egnatius; Foglietta; Foscarini; Geuffraeus; Giorgievitz; Giovio; Gycaud (ed.); Hoeniger; Konstantynowicz; Lonicerus; Menavino; Montalbanus; Pfeiffer; Podesta; Postellus; Ramus; Reusner; Richer; Sabellicus; Sansovino; Schiltberger; Secundinus; Spandugino; Traut; Anon. _Series Imp. Turc._ and _Tractatus de ritu et moribus Turc._
Most of the early western books are in Latin, but the authors are Greek, Italian, French, German, Spanish, Austrian, and Polish. The majority of them are as early as, if not earlier than, the first Ottoman chroniclers.
Clavijo and Schiltberger are contemporary and eye-witness authorities for the reign of Bayezid. Konstantynowicz’s book claims to be the memoirs of a janissary in the reign of Murad II.
Busbequius, Donado da Lezze, Geuffraeus, Giorgievitz, Menavino, Spandugino, and the author of _Tractatus de ritu_ gained their information first-hand from living in Turkey.
=General Western Ottoman Historians= (seventeenth and eighteenth centuries).
Cantemir (a Rumanian); De la Porte; Du Verdier; Febvre; Formanti; Gibbon; Knolles; Mignot; Ohsson; Petits de la Croix; Ricaut; Sagredo; Schulz; Servi; Vanel.
=General Western Ottoman Historians= (nineteenth century).
Castellan; Collas; Creasy; Dräseke; Ebeling; Errante; Fehmi (a Turk); Ganem (a Syrian); Hammer; Hertzberg; Jonquière; Jorga; Jouannin; La Garde de Dieu; Lamartine; Lane-Poole; Lavallée; Lüdemann; Rambaud; Salaberry, de; Wirth; Wüstenfeld; Zinkeisen.
Hammer and Zinkeisen wrote the exhaustive and authoritative histories of the nineteenth century. The splendid work of Professor Jorga, of the University of Bucarest, belongs to our own twentieth century, and is the most important contribution of contemporary scholarship to the history of the Balkan peninsula under Ottoman domination. But none of these three authoritative historians pays particular attention to the actual foundation of the Ottoman Empire. Dräseke and Rambaud have only touched upon the problems involved in reconstructing the fourteenth century period.
=Mongol and Tartar History.=
Aboul-Ghazi-Bahadour; Bonaparte; Bretschneider; Cahun; Chavannes; Dorn; Erdmann; Guignes; Hammer; Hirth; Howorth; Khondemir; Mohammed en Newasi; Reshideddin; Vambéry; Wolff.
=Byzantine Empire and Frankish and Italian Greece.=
Ameilhon; Arabantinos; Berger de Xivrey; Byzantine Historians (_see under_ Alphabetical Bibliography, on p. 367); Curtius; Djelal; Ducange; Finlay; Florinsky; Gibbon; Gregorovius; Hammer; Hase; Hertzberg; Hody; Hopf; Kampouroglou; Karamzin; Lampros; Lüdemann; Migne; Miller; Moncada; Moniferratos; Mullach; Müller; Muntaner; Niebuhr; Paparregopoulos; Parisot; Rodd; Sathas; Stritter; Tafel; Tozer. (_See also_ Slavs of Balkan Peninsula.)
=Collections of Byzantine writers.=
Bonn (Niebuhr); Migne; Paris (Louvre) and Venice.
=Historians and Chroniclers of Rumania.=
Cantemir; Costin; Hasdeu; Miller; Picot; Urechi; Xénopol.
Costin and Urechi are nearest the events.
=Slavs of Balkan Peninsula.=
Borchgrave; Daničić; Dlugosz; Drinov; Engel; Florinsky; Guérin-Songeon; Jireček; Kállay; Kanitz; Konstantynowicz; Miller; Orbini; Pray; Pučić; Raić; Ranke; Safařík (Schaffarik); Thallóczy. (_See also under_ Kossova _and_ Nicopolis.)
No contemporary writers.
=Hungary= (including biographers of Sigismund).
Acsady; Aschbach; Beckmann; Bonfinius; Engel; Fessler; Furnhaber; Fvaknói; Kern; Kupelwieser; Levec; Maélath; Maurer; Pór; Pray; Sambucus; Schoenherr; Schwandtner; Szálay; Szentkláráy; Szilagyi; Theiner; Thurocz; Vambéry; Wenzel. (_See also under_ Kossova _and_ Nicopolis.)
=Venice.=
Agostini; Barbaro; Bembo; Berchet; Bonincontrius; Caresino; Caroldo; Cicogna; Dandolo; Daru; Guazzo; Hazlitt; Hodgson; Mas Latrie; Romanin; Sanuto; Sismondi; Villani; Anon. _Cronica Dolfina_.
=Genoa.=
Belgrano; Canale; Giustiniani; Sauli; Sismondi; Stella.
=Other Italian cities.=
Cambiano; Datta; Gattaro; Guichenon; Müller; Sismondi; Anon. _Anciennes Chroniques de Savoye_ and _Monumenta Pisana_.
=Collections of Italian writers.=
Muratori; Tartini.
=Rhodes.=
Bosio; Caoursin; Vertot.
=Cyprus.=
Bustron; Macairas; Mas Latrie.
Papal Archives, Guide to Brom.
=Papal relations and Crusades against Turks.=
Baluze; Bernino; Boislisle; Bongars; Bosio; Bosquet; Caoursin; Cribellus; Datta; Delaville Leroulx; Dozy; Dräseke; Eubel; Jorga; Kunstmann; Lardito; Lot; Le Quien; Mas Latrie; Mézières; Molinier; Paris; Petrarca; Postansque; Raimboult; Raynaldus; Sanudo; Stewart; Theiner; Thomas; Torez; Wylie.
_See_ note above _under_ Collections of Contemporary Papal Records.
=Kossova.=
Avril; Mijatovitch; Novakovitch; Pavitch.
=Nicopolis.=
Brauner; Froissart; Kiss; Koehler; Rez; Schiltberger; Szentkláráy; Anon. _Relation ... par un serviteur de Gui de Blois_.
=Relating to Timur.=
Abderrezzah; Arabshah; Clavijo; Hayton; Hussein Abu Halib; Langlès; Mexia; Mezdob; Moranvillé; Nazmi Zadé; Perondino; Sherefeddin; Silvestre de Sacy; White; Anon. Dominican Friar and Memoirs of Tamerlane.
Arabshah, Clavijo, Sherefeddin, the Dominican friar and the Memoirs (possibly) are contemporary.
=Art and Architecture.=
Djelal; Franz; Karabacek; Kuhnel; Lavoix; Migeon; Parvillée; Saladin.
=Literature and Languages and Oriental Ethnology.=
Alberi; Aristov; Dethier; Dieterici; Donner; Dufresne; Fejér; Huart; Jacob; Koelle; Krumbacher; Kúnos; Liliencron; Miklositch; Mordtmann; Mullach; Nemeth; Pavitch; Rémusat; Toderini; Vambéry. (_See also under_ Kossova _and_ Nicopolis.)
=Commercial History.=
Charrière; Cornet; Delaville Leroulx; Depping; Heyd; Jorga; Mas Latrie; Pigeonneau; Schanz; Tafel.
=Black Death.=
Covino; Hecker.
Covino is a contemporary.
II. ALPHABETICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABDERREZZAH. _Hist. de Schah-Roch, des autres enfants de Tamerlan et des princes leurs descendants._ Trans. by A. Galland. Bibl. Nat., fonds fr. 6084-5. Same, with variations, 6088-9.
ABDUL AZIZ. _Razoat-ul-Ebrar._ History of Ottoman Empire from foundation to Sultan Ibrahim. Turkish. Unpublished and untranslated.
ABOULFEDA. 1. _Géographie d’Aboulfeda_, trad. de l’arabe en français, et accomp. par notes, par M. Reinaud et M. Stanislas Guyard. Paris, Impr. Nat., 1848-83. 3 vols. 4to.
In his _Dict. Bibl._, under no. 3472, fol. 552-3, Hadji Khalfa gives list of Aboulfeda’s sources.
2. _Aboulfedae Annales Muslemici_, arabice et latine, opera et studiis Jo. Jacobi Reiskii. Leipzig, 1754, 4to. Copenhagen, 1789-94. 5 vols. 4to (ed. J. G. C. Adler). Pocock MS. trans. into Latin by J. Gagnier, Oxford, 1722.
ABOUL-GHAZI-BAHADOUR-KHAN. _Histoire des Mongols et des Tartares_, éd. et trad. par Baron Desmaisons. Petrograd, 1871-4. 2 vols. 8vo. Latin trans. by C. M. Fraehn, with Tartar text. Kasan, 1825, folio. French trans. Leyden, 1726, 12mo. German trans. Göttingen, 1780, 8vo, by Dr. Dan. Gottlieb Messerschmid. English trans. by Col. Miles, London, 1838, 8vo.
ABOULPHARADJI, GREGORIUS. 1. _Syriac Chronicle_, trans. into Latin by Bruns and Kersch. Leipzig, 1789. 2 vols. 4to.
This edition contains a continuation by an anonymous author from 1286 to 1297, which is most valuable for end of Seljuks of Konia.
2. The author trans. his work into Arabic, which was published from Bodleian MS. with Latin trans. by Edward Pocock, Oxford, 1663-72. 2 vols. 4to. Trans, from Latin into German, Leipzig, 1783-5. 2 vols. 8vo.
ABOUL YOUSSOUF IBN TAGHRY. _Elmanhal essafy._ MS., Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds arabe, 748.
Used by Ch. Schéfer in establishing relations between Bayezid and Sultan Barkuk of Egypt.
ABUL FALLAH FUMENI. _See_ Dorn.
ADELMAN or ADELMANSFELDEN. _De origine, ordine et militari disciplina magni Turcae._ Date and place missing. Fol.
ADLER, J. G. C. Editor of Abulfeda.
AEHRENFELD, MOSIG VON. German trans. of Safařík, P. J.
AENAEAS, SYLVIUS (Pope Pius II). _Opera quae extant omnia._ Basel, various editions. Fol.
AGOSTINI, GIOVANNI. _Istoria degli scrittori veneziani._ Venice, 1752-4. 2 vols. 4to.
AHLWARDT, WILHELM. _Verzeichnis der arabischen Handschriften der k. Bibliothek zu Berlin._ Berlin, 1887-94. 6 vols. 4to. Also edited Ibn al Tiktaki and Ahmed Ibn Yahia.
AHMED IBN YUSUF (ABUL ABBAS). Chapters 45 to 53 of his Universal History, which deal with Karamanlis, Seljuks, and Osmanlis, translated by Rasmussen, in _Annales Islamismi_, pp. 61-134.
AHMED IBN MOUSA (AL KHAYALI). _Religion ou théologie des Turcs._ Trad. anon. 2nd ed. Brussels, 1704, 12mo.
AHMED IBN YAHIA. _See_ Ashik-pasha-zadé.
AHMED IBN YAHIA (AL BALADOURI). Arabic text of chronicle from Petermann MS. no. 633, of Berlin, edited and published by W. Ahlwardt. Leipzig, 1883, 8vo.
AHMED JAUDAT. _Considérations sur l’histoire ottomane._ Bibl. de l’École des lang. viv. orientales, 2e série, vol. ix. Paris, 1886, 8vo.
AHMED MOHAMMED, Sheik. Ed. Calcutta edition of Arabshah.
AINSWORTH, W. F. _Travels and Researches in Asia Minor._ London, 1842. 2 vols. 8vo.
ALADDIN ALI IBN KADI SAID. Abridged Chronology of Ottoman Hist. Untranslated. See Hadji Khalfa, _Dict. Bibl._, no. 7754, fol. 1326.
ALBERI, EUGENIO. _Relazioni degli Ambasciatori veneti al senato nel secolo XVI_, raccolte et pubbl. da Eugenio Alberi. Florence, 1839-63. 15 vols. 8vo.
Ottoman Empire, 3 vols., 1840, 1844, 1855. Does not go back to our period. But there is an excellent glossary of Turkish words in the introduction to vol. i.
ALHARD, HERMANN KUMMEN. _De imperio turcico discursus academicus._ Ed. tertia, Hanover, 1689.
In Bibl. Nat., Paris, this book is bound with the Reiske ed. of Drechsler, and is wrongly attributed to Andrea Bosio on the title-page.
ALI (MUSTAFA IBN AHMED) or MUHIEDDIN. _Kunhu’l-Akhbar._ Chronicle of Ottoman History up to Mohammed the Conqueror. Text published Constantinople without date. German trans. (from MS. brought to Emperor Ferdinand by Beck in 1551) by Johannes Gaudier. Latin trans. by Leunclavius and J. B. Podesta. Italian trans. by Geropoldi, Venice, 1686. See these four names.
Zenker, in his _Bibl. Orientalis_, Leipzig, 1846-61, wrongly calls Leunclavius a translation of Seadeddin, which has led into error Jorga, the latest historian of the Ottoman Empire. See his _Gesch. d. osm. Reiches_, i. 150, note 1 (Gotha, 1908).
ALI BEN SHEMSEDDIN. _See_ Dorn.
ALI eff. HILMI AL DAGHESTANI. Catalogue in Arabic of Turkish and Persian books in the Khedivial Library. Cairo, 1888. 2 vols. 8vo.
AMEILHON, H. P. _Histoire du Bas-Empire._ Cont. by LEBEAU, CHAS. Tomes xviii-xxi. Paris, 1835-6. 4 vols. fol. Tomes xxii-xxix. Paris, 1781-1817. 8 vols. 12mo.
APPONYI, Graf ALEX. _Ungarn betreffende, im Ausland gedruckte_ _Bücher und Flugschriften_, gesammelt und beschrieben. Vols. i and ii, up to 1720. Munich, 1903.
Ed. limited to 125 copies.
ARABANTINOS, PANAGIOTIS. Χρονογραφία τῆς Ήπείρου. Athens, 1856-7. 2 vols. 8vo.
ARABSHAH, AHMED. _Portrait du Gran Tamerlan avec la suite de son histoire._ Trad. de l’arabe par Pierre Vattier. Paris, 1658, 4to. Arabic text, ed. Jacob Golius, Leyden, 1636, 4to. Also from collation of four MSS. by Sheik Ahmed Mohammed, Calcutta, 1812, 8vo. 2nd ed., 1818, la. 8vo. Latin trans. by S. H. Manger, Leovardiae, 1767-72. 3 vols. sm. 4to.
Slane in _Notices et Extraits_, 1re partie, vol. xix, introd. lxxxviii, warns against trans. of Manger, and also his Arabic reprint.
Turkish trans. by Nazmi Zadé, _Tarikh Timuri ghiurgian_. Constantinople, 1729, 4to.
ARBAUMONT, D’. Ed., in collab. with Beaune, of Olivier de la Marche.
ARCQ, DOUËL D’. Editor of Enguerran de Monstrelet.
ARETINUS (LEONARDO BRUNI). _Libellus de temporibus suis._ Venice, 1475, 4to. 2nd ed., 1485.
ARISTOV. _Bemerkungen über die ethnischen Bestandteile der türkischen Stämme und Völkerschaften._ Petrograd, 1897.
ARMAIN, M. MS. trans. in French of Hadji Khalfa’s _Djihannuma_.
ARNOLD OF LÜBECK. Continued Chronicle of HELMOLDUS.
ARNOLD, T. W. Editor of _Encyclopédie de l’Islam_. See Houtsma _et al._
ASCHBACH, JOSEPH. _Geschichte Kaiser Sigmunds._ Hamburg, 1838-45. 4 vols. 8vo.
ASHIK-PASHA-ZADÉ, AHMED IBN YAHIA. Tarikhi-Ashik-pasha-zadé. Vatican MS.
Dervish Ahmed cites the book of sheik Yakhshi ibn Elias, imam of Orkhan. He writes in reign of Bayezid I. This is the nearest approach extant to an Ottoman source for the 14th cent. _See_ no. 6 under Hammer.
ASSEMANI, J. S. _Kalendaria ecclesiae universae ... ecclesiarum orientis et occidentis._ Rome, 1755. 6 vols. 4to.
AUBOYNEAU, G. (in collab. with Fevret, A.). _Essai de Bibliographie pour servir à l’histoire de l’Empire Ottoman: livres turcs, livres imprimés à Constantinople, et livres étrangers à la Turquie, mais pouvant servir à son histoire._ Paris, 1911, fol., la. 8vo.
Of this work, planned to be an exhaustive Ottoman bibliography, only the first fasciculus, on _Religion, Mœurs et Coutumes_, has appeared. M. Auboyneau died in 1911. I have been unable to ascertain if M. Fevret intends to continue the work, for he is mobilised in the French army at present.
AUGUSTINUS CAELIUS (CURIO). _Sarracenicae historiae libri tres...._ Frankfort, 1596, fol.
AVENTINUS, IOHANNES. _Liber in quo causae miseriarum, quibus Christiana resp. premitur, indicantur, Turcicaeque saevitiae reprimendae ratio declaratur._ In Lonicerus, vol. i.
AVRIL, ADOLPHE DE. _La Bataille de Kossova_, Paris, 1868, 12mo.
AYAS PASHA. _Hist, des princes de la dynastie ottomane, précédée d’un abrégé de l’hist. des Selj. et des souverains du pays de Karaman...._ 17th cent. MS., no. 1021, Schéfer col.
BAECA, GASPAR DE. Spanish trans. of Paulo Giovio’s account of Timur in Clavijo.
BAEDEKER, KARL, editor. _Konstantinopel, Balkanstaaten, Kleinasien, Archipel und Cypern._ Mit 18 Karten, 50 Plänen und 15 Grundrissen. 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1914, 12mo.
BAIOCENSIS, PETRUS. _Chronicon_ (1350-92). Basel, 1512, fol.
BALUZE, ÉTIENNE. _Vitae paparum Avinionensium ab 1305 ad 1394._ Paris, 1693. 2 vols. 4to.
2nd volume contains documents.
BARBARO, FRANCESCO. On efforts of Venetians vs. Osmanlis before capture of Constantinople, _see_ Agostini, ii. 107-8.
BARONIUS, CAESAR. For _Annales Eccl._, see Raynaldus.
BASCHET, ARMAND. 1. _Les Archives de Venise._ Paris, 1857, la. 8vo. Amplified edition of same, Paris, 1870, 8vo.
2. _Histoire de la Chancellerie secrète_ (de Venise). Paris, 1870, 8vo.
BASSETT, R. Editor of _Encyclopédie de l’Islam_. See Houtsma _et al._
BASSIANATO, FRANCISCO. Latin trans. of Paulo Giovio.
BEALE, T. _An Oriental Biographical Dictionary._ New edition, revised and enlarged by H. Keene. London, 1894, la. 8vo.
BEAUNE. Ed., in collab. with d’Arbaumont, of _Les Mémoires d’Olivier de la Marche_.
BECKMANN, G. _Der Kampf Kaiser Sigmunds gegen die werdende Weltmacht der Osmanen, 1392-1437._ Gotha, 1902, 8vo.
BEKKER, IMMANUEL. Editor of Chalcocondylas and Pachymeres in Bonn edition.
BELFOUR, F. C. English trans. of Macarius.
BELGRANO, L. T. _Documenti riguardanti la colonia di Pera._ pp. 97-336, 931-1004; appendix with engravings and map of Pera; in vol. xiii of _Atti della Società ligure di Storia patria_. Genoa, 1877-84. 2 vols. la. 8vo.
BELLAGUET. Editor of _Chron. du Religieux de Saint-Denis_.
BELLI, COSTI. Italian trans. of Ricaut.
BELON, PIERRE. _Les Observations de plusieurs singularitez et choses ... en Grèce, Asie, ..._ etc., rédigées en 3 livres. Paris, 1553, sm. 4to.
In second part is: ‘Les mœurs et façons de vivre en Grèce et en Turquie.’
BEMBO, Cardinal PIETRO. _Historiae Venetiae libri XII._ Aldine ed., Venice, 1551, fol. Numerous other ed., also Italian trans.
BERCHET, GUGLIELMO. _La Repubblica di Venezia e la Persia._ Extract from _Bolletino consolare_, vol. ii. Florence, 1865, 8vo. Also editor of Marino Sanuto the Younger’s _Diarii_.
BERGER DE XIVREY. ‘La vie et les ouvrages de l’emp. Manuel Paléologue.’ In _Mém. de l’Acad. des Inscriptions_, vol. xix, partie 2, pp. 1-301. Paris, 1853, 4to.
Based on Bibl. Nat., fonds grec, no. 3041.
BERGERON, PIERRE, ed. _Voyages faits principalement en Asie dans les XIIe, XIIIe, XIVe et XVe siècles._ The Hague, 1735. 2 vols. 4to.
Benjamin de Tudelle, Jean de Plan-Carpin, Père Ascelin, Guillaume de Rubruquius, Marco Polo, Hayton, Jean de Mandeville, &c.
BERNINO, DOMENICO. _Memorie historiche de ciò che hanno operato li summi pontefici nelle guerre contro i Turchi fino all’ anno 1684._ Rome, 1685, 8vo.
Starts with Urban V, 1362.
BERTELLUS, PETRUS. _Imperatorum Osmanidarum Historia._ Vicenza, 1699.
‘Paulus Iovius ne comparandus quidem ad hunc.’ Boecler, p. 103.
BERTRANDON DE LA BROQUIÈRE. _Le voyage d’outremer_, 1422-33, éd. par C. Schéfer. Paris, 1892, la. 8vo.
BLAU, O. _Die orientalischen Münzen des Museums der k. hist.-arch. Gesellschaft zu Odessa._ Odessa, 1876, 4to.
BLOCHET, E. _Cat. des MSS. orientaux Schéfer._ Paris, 1900. _Cat. des MSS. orientaux Decourdemarche_, Paris, 1909.
BOECLER, JO. HENRY. _Commentarius Historico-Politicus de Rebus Turcicis...._ Buda, 1717, 16mo.
In bibliography gives 317 titles of books on Turkey publ. up to 1704, but no oriental titles, and no MSS.
BOISLISLE, DE. ‘Projet de Croisade du premier duc de Bourbon.’ In _Bulletin de la Soc. d’hist. de France_ for 1872.
BOJNIČIĆ, IVAN. German trans. of Klaić.
BONAPARTE, Prince ROLAND. _Documents de l’époque mongole des 13e et 14e siècles._ (Documents lithographed.) Paris, 1895, la. fol.
BONER, JÉRÔME. German trans. of Bonfinius.
BONFINIUS, ANTONIUS. _Rerum Hungaricarum Decades Quatuor (373-1495)._ Basel, 1568, fol. Hanover, 1606, fol. German trans. by Jérôme Boner, Basel, 1545, fol.
BONGARS, JACQUES (editor). _Gesta Dei per Francos, sive orientalium expeditionum historia 1095-1420._ Hanover, 1611. 2 vols. fol.
BONINCONTRIUS, LAURENTIUS. _Annales ab 1360 ad 1458._ In Muratori, xxi. 1-162. Milan, 1732, fol.
BORCHGRAVE, ÉMILE DE. ‘L’emp. Étienne Douchan de Serbie et la péninsule balkanique au XIVe siècle.’ In _Bulletin de l’Acad. royale de Belgique_, 8e série, viii. 264-92, 416-45. Brussels, 1884, 8vo.
BOSIO, IACOMO. _Dell’ istoria della ... religione ... e militia di S. Giovanni Gierosolimitano._ Rome, 1594-1602. 3 vols. fol. Other editions, Rome, 1621; Rome and Naples, 1629-34; of vol. iii, Rome, 1676, and Naples, 1695.
Vol. ii, from 1292 to 1522.
BOSQUET, FRANÇOIS. _Pontificum Romanorum Avigniensium historia ab 1305 ad 1394._ Paris, 1632, 8vo. (Documented.)
BOUCHÉ-LECLERQ, A. French trans. of Curtius.
BOUCICAUT, MARÉCHAL DE. _See_ Anon., _Livre des faicts_.
BOUÉ, AMI. 1. _Turquie d’Europe._ Paris, 1840. 4 vols. 8vo.
2. _Recueil d’itinéraires dans la Turquie d’Europe._ Vienna, 1854. 2 vols. 8vo.
BRATUTTI, VINCENTE. Italian trans. of Seadeddin.
BRAUNER, ALOIS. _Die Schlacht bei Nicopolis._ Breslau, 1876, 8vo.
BRETSCHNEIDER, E. 1. _Notes on Chinese Mediaeval Travellers to the West._ Shanghai, 1875, 8vo.
2. _Mediaeval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources_, fragments towards the knowledge of the geography and history of central and western Asia from the 13th to the 17th cent. (In Trübner’s Oriental series.) London, 1888. 2 vols. 8vo.
BRIOT. French trans. of Ricaut.
BROM, GISBERT. _Guide aux Archives du Vatican._ 2nd ed. Rome, 1911, la. 8vo.
BROWN, RAWDON L. _Calendar of State Papers ... in archives and collections of Venice, and in other libraries of northern Italy._ London, 1864. Vols. i (1202-1509), xx, la. 8vo.
BROWNE, E. G. _Cambridge Oriental MSS. Cat._, Cambridge, 1900. _Handlist of Gibb Col. of Turkish Books_, ibid., 1906.
BRUNS, R. J. Latin trans. of Abulfaradj in collab. with Kersch.
BRUUN, PHILIPP. 1. _Constantinople, ses sanctuaires et ses reliques au comm. du XVe siècle._ Extraits du voyage de Clavijo. Trans. from Spanish. Odessa, 1883, 8vo.
2. ‘Geogr. Bemerkungen zu Schiltbergers Reisen.’ In _Sitzungsberichte der k. Bayer. Akad. der Wiss._, 1869, Munich, vol. ii.
These notes, translated into English and revised, are given in Telfer’s trans. of Schiltberger.
BUCHON, J. A. C. Editor of Froissart; Ducange; and anon., _Livre des faicts de Bouciquaut_. French trans. of Muntaner.
BURY, J. B. Editor of Gibbon.
BUSBECQ, OGIER GHISELEN DE. 1. _A. G. Busbequii omnia quae extant._ Leyden, 1633, fol.
2. _Epistolae Turcicae._ Amsterdam, Elzevir, 1660, 12mo.
3. _Life and Letters of_, ed. by C. T. Forster and F. H. B. Danniell. London, 1881. 2 vols. 8vo.
4. _De re militari adversus Turcas instituenda consilium._ In Folieta, pp. 25-76.
BUSTRON, FLORIA. _Cronica_ (1191-1489). Island of Cyprus. In Italian. Ed. by Comte de Mas Latrie, in _Mélanges historiques_, v. 1-532. Paris, 1886, 8vo. Also in Sathas, _Bibl. graeca medii aevi_, vol. ii. Venice, 1873, la. 8vo.
CABASILAS, S. Editor of Martin Crusius.
CAHUN, LÉON. _Introduction à l’histoire de l’Asie: Turcs et Mongols._ Paris, 1896, 8vo.
CAMBIANO, GIUSEPPE. ‘Historico discorso.’ In _Mon. Hist. Patria Scriptorum_, i. 930-1421.
Excellent for relations of Piedmont with the Levant up to 1560.
CAMBINI, ANDREA. _Commentario della origine de’ Turchi et imperio della casa ottomanna._ Florence, 1527, 12mo (2nd ed. s. l., 1537). Also published in Sansovino, pp. 141-81.
CAMERARIUS, JOACHIMUS. _De rebus turcicis commentarii duo accuratissimi, a filiis ... collecti ac editi._ Frankfort, 1598, fol.
CAMPANA, CESARE. _Compendio historico ... con un sommario dell’origine de’ Turchi, e vite di tutti i prencipi di casa ottomanna...._ Venice, 1597, 8vo.
CANALE, MICHEL GIUSEPPE. _Nuova istoria della repubblica di Genova._ Florence, 1858-64. 4 vols. 16mo.
CANTACUZENOS, JOHN. _See under_ Byzantine Historians.
CANTEMIR, DEMETRIUS. _Istoria imperiului Ottomanu._ Rumanian trans. from Latin, by Joseph Hodosiu. Bucharest, 1876. 2 vols. la. 8vo. Eng. trans. from orig. MS. by N. Tindal, London, 1734, 2 vols. 4to. French trans., Paris, 1734; German, Hamburg, 1735.
CAOURSIN, GUILLAUME. _Historia ... von Rhodis...._ Strassburg, 1513, fol. Also found in his _Opera_, Ulm, 1496, fol. Anon. English trans. under title: _History of Turkish Wars with Rhodians, Venetians_, &c.... written by Will Caoursin and Khodja Afendy, a Turk. London, 1683, 8vo.
CARESINO, RAPHAEL. Continued Dandolo’s _Cronica_ in Muratori, vol. xii.
CARLI, GIO. RINALDO. Italian trans. of Hadji Khalfa’s Chronological Tables.
CAROLDO, GIOVANNI GIACOMO. _Chronique vénétienne._ Bibl. Nat., Paris, MS. anc. fonds, 9959-63. Extracts from years 1362-4 are printed in _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_ (1873), xxxiv. 68-72.
CASTELLAN, A. L. _Mœurs, usages, costumes des Othomans et abrégé de leur histoire._ Paris, 1812. 6 vols., 18mo.
CECCHETTI, B. Collaborator with T. Toderini.
CERVARIUS, LUDOVICUS. _De Turcarum Origine, Moribus et Rebus Gestis commentarii._ Florence, 1590, 8vo.
CHALCOCONDYLAS, LAONICUS. Λαονίκου Χαλκοκονδύλοὺ ’Αθηναίου ἀπόδειξις ἱστοριῶν δέκα Greek-Latin editions, _see_ Byz. Hist, at end of bibliography. French trans. by Blaise de Vigénaire. Paris, 1662. 2 vols. fol. Latin trans. by C. Clauser and recension by I. Bekker (for Bonn edition).
I have found the Latin trans. very incorrect in many places: there are frequent glosses. (See Appendix A, first footnote.)
CHAMPS, EUSTACHE DES. _[Oe]uvres inédites de ..._, ed. by Tarbé. Paris, 1849, 8vo (vol. i).
CHARDIN, JEAN. _Voyage en Perse et autres lieux de l’Orient._ Amsterdam, 1711. 10 vols. 12mo.
CHARRIÈRE, ERNEST. _Négociations de la France dans le Levant_, ou _Correspondances, mémoires et actes diplomatiques des ambass. de France à Constantinople, ... Venise, Raguse_, &c. Paris, 1848-60. 4 vols. 4to.
CHAUVIN, VICTOR. French trans. of Dozy’s Essay on Islam.
CHAVANNES, ÉDOUARD. _Documents sur les Tou-kioue occidentaux._ With map showing disposition of Turkish tribes of Central Asia. Petrograd, 1903, 4to.
CHAZAUD, P. P. Editor of _Chronique du duc Loys de Bourbon_.
CHEVALIER, ULYSSE. _Répertoire des sources historiques du Moyen Age._ (Nouvelle édition, augmentée.) Paris, 1905-7. 2 vols. la. 8vo.
Most complete reference work in existence for bibliography of 14th Century Popes.
CHOLET, Comte ARMAND-PIERRE. _Voyage en Turquie d’Asie._ With map. Paris, 1892, 8vo.
CHYTRAEUS, DAVID. 1. _Historia ecclesiarum in Graecia._ Francfort, 1583, fol.
2. _Narratio belli cyprii inter Venetos et Turcas._ In Foglietta, pp. 96-111.
CICOGNA, E. A. _Storia dei Dogi di Venezia._ 3rd ed. Venice, 1867. 2 vols. fol.
CLAUSER, C. Latin trans. of Chalcocondylas.
CLAVIJO, RUY GONZÁLES DE. 1. _Historia del gran Tamerlan, e itinerario y enarracion del Viage de la Embaxada que Gonzalez le hizó, por mandada del muy poderoso Señor Rey Don Henrique el Tercero de Castilla._ Seville, 1582, fol. Madrid, 1782, 4to. English trans., by Clements R. Markham, in Hakluyt series, London, 1859, 4to. Russian trans., by L. Sreznavski, Petrograd, 1881, 8vo.
2. Extracts from above, describing Constantinople in 1403, translated into French with notes by Bruun, Philip, under whom it is listed.
COGNATUS. _See_ Cousin.
COLLAS, LOUIS. _Histoire de l’Empire Ottoman._ Paris, 1862, 16mo. Republished 1880, 1898. Fourth edition, revised by E. Driault, Paris, 1913, 32mo.
COLOTENDI. French trans. of Texeira.
CORREGIAIO, DON MARCO U. _Della vera maniera del vincere il Turco._ Padova, 1571, 12mo.
COURNAND, Abbé. French trans. of Abbé Toderini.
COUSIN, GILBERT. _Gilberti Cognati Chronicon Sultanorum et principum Turciae serie continua usque ad Solymannum magnum._ Frankfort, 1558, 8vo.
Best consulted in vol. i, pp. 399 f., of _Opera in 3 tomos digesta_, Basel, 1562, fol.
COVINO, SYMON DE. Bibl. Nat., Paris, MSS., fonds latin 8369-70: contemporary account of the Black Death of 1348 by a Paris physician, mostly in form of a hexameter poem.
CREASY, SIR EDWARD S. _History of the Ottoman Turks._ New ed. London, 1877, 12mo.
This abridgement of von Hammer has no historical value. It contains, however, an admirable chapter by Creasy himself on the legislation of Mohammed II.
CRIBELLUS, LEODRISIUS. _De expeditione Pii papae II in Turcas libri duo._ In Muratori, xxiii. 21-80.
From MS. in secret archives.
CRUSIUS, MARTIN. _Turco-Graeciae libri octo_ ... quibus Graecorum status sub imperio Turcico in politia et ecclesia ... describitur.... Edidit S. Cabasilas. Basel, 1584, fol.
## Book I contains political hist. of Constantinople from 1391 to 1578.
CUINET, VITAL. _La Turquie d’Asie._ Paris, 1890-5. 4 vols. la. 8vo.
CURTIUS, ERNEST. _Griechische Geschichte._ 6th ed. Berlin, 1887-9, 3 vols. 8vo. French trans. of 5th ed., by A. Bouché-Leclercq, Paris, 1883-4. 5 vols. 8vo. Greek trans. by S. P. Lampros, Athens, 1898-1901. (Βιβλιοθήκη Μαρασλῆ.) 6 vols. 8vo.
The last volume, in all editions, covers our period.
CUSA, S. _Ex codicum orient. qui in R. Bibl. Panormi asservantur catalogo._ Panorma, 1878, 8vo.
CUSPIANUS, JOHANNES. 1. _De Turcarum origine, religione et tyrannide._ Leyden, 1654, 12mo (1st ed., Antwerp, 1541, fol.).
2. _Oratio protreptica: qua Christiani ad bellum Turcicum excitantur._ 1527. In Camerarius, fol. ed. of Frankfort, 1598.
CZINÁR, M. Index to Fejér’s _Codex Diplomaticus_.
DANDOLO, ANDREA. _Cronica._ (Venetian history from earliest times to 1339. Continued by Raphael Caresino up to 1388.) In Muratori, xii. 1-524.
DANIČIĆ, GJURO. _Rječik iz kniřevnich starina srpskich_ (Dictionary of the minor Old Servian Chronicles). Belgrade, 1863-4. 3 vols. 8vo.
DANIELL, F. H. B. Collab. with Forster in editing and trans. Busbecq.
DARU, PIERRE ANTOINE. _Histoire de Venise._ Paris, 1819. 7 vols. 8vo.
DATTA, P. _Spedizione in Oriente di Amadeo VI conte di Savoia._ Turin, 1826, 8vo.
DAVY, MAJOR WILLIAM. English trans. of Prof. White’s ed. of Persian text of Timur’s memoirs.
DAWSON. English trans. of Nicolay’s _Voyages_.
DÉFRÉMÉRY, CHARLES. Editor of Mirkhond’s _Hist. of Sultans of Kharesm_; and French trans. of Khondemir and Ibn Batutah.
DE GOEJE, M. J., and DE JONG, P. _Catalogus codicum orient Bibl. Acad. Lugduno-Batavae._ Leyden, 1865. 3 vols. 8vo.
DE LA PORTE, Abbé(?). _Tableau de l’Emp. ottoman_, où on trouve tout ce qui concerne la religion, la milice, le gouv. civil, et les grandes charges et dignités de l’Empire. Frankfort, 1757, 12mo.
DELAVILLE LEROULX, J. _La France en Orient au XIVe siècle._ Paris, 1868. 2 vols. 8vo.
Vol. ii contains ‘pièces justificatives’ and admirable bibliography.
DEPPING, J.-B. _Histoire du commerce entre le Levant et l’Europe depuis les Croisades jusqu’à la fondation d’Amérique._ Paris, 1830. 2 vols. 8vo.
DERENBOURG, HARTWIG. _Les manuscrits arabes de l’Escurial._ Paris, 1884. (Uncompleted.)
DESCHAMPS, EUSTACHE. _Œuvres inédites d’Eustache Deschamps._ Éd. par P. Tarbé. Reims, 1849, 2 vols. 8vo.
Volume i. 164-6 contains the remarkable ballads on the battle of Nicopolis.
DESMAISONS, BARON. Trans. into French and edited Abul-Ghazi.
DETHIER, P.-A. (in collab. with Mordtmann). _Epigraphie von Byzanz und Konstantinopel_ (up to 1453). Vienna, 1864, 4to.
DHERBELOT DE MOLAINVILLE. _Bibliothèque orientale._ Paris, 1697, fol.
DIETERICH, KARL. _Byzantinische Quellen zur Länder-und Völkerkunde (5.-15. Jhd.)._ Leipzig, 1912. 2 vols. 4to.
Selections, translated into German. In our field, at least, not well chosen, and of little value to the serious student.
DIETERICI, FRIEDRICH HEINRICH. _Chrestomathie ottomane_, précédée de tableaux grammaticaux et suivie d’un glossaire turco-français. Berlin, 1854, 8vo.
DIEZ, H. F. VON. German trans. of Sidi-Ali.
DJELAL, ESSAD. _Constantinople de Byzance à Stamboul_: traduit du turc par l’auteur. Paris, 1909, la. 8vo.
Very unsatisfactory from historical and archaeological point of view for early Ottoman and Byzantine periods: but the second part gives an interesting study of Ottoman architecture of the post-conquest period.
DJELALEDDIN, MUSTAPHA. _Les Turcs anciens et modernes._ Constantinople, 1869, 8vo.
DJEMALEDDIN. _Osmanli Tarikh._ (Ott. hist. with bibliographical notice of the Ottoman historians.) Constantinople, 1896, 8vo.
DJEMALEDDIN-AL-KIFTY. MS. of Seljuk hist. up to 1245 in Konia. Kasan MS., no. 155.
DJEVAD bey, AHMED (Colonel). _État militaire ottoman, depuis la fondation de l’Emp. jusqu’à nos jours...._ Trans. into French by Georges Macrides. Only volume which has appeared is: _Le Corps des Janissaires depuis sa création jusqu’à sa suppression_. Constantinople, 1882, 8vo. With album 4to containing 311 pictures and designs.
Col. Djevad is the only writer who has used the oldest documents in the Ottoman Ministry of War.
DJEVDET, Effendi. ‘Coup d’œil sur les monnaies musulmanes.’ Trans. from Turkish by Barbier de Meynard in _Journal asiatique_ for 1862, p. 183.
DJUVARA, T. J. _Cent projets de partage de la Turquie, 1281-1913._ Paris, 1913, 8vo.
DLUGOSZ, JOHANN. _Historiae polonicae libri XII._ Ed. by J. G. Krauss, with extra book, also in Latin, containing extracts from other early Polish writers. Leipzig, 1711-12. 2 vols. fol.
DOCHEZ, LOUIS. French trans., abridged, of Hammer.
DOMENICHI, LUDOVICO. Italian trans. of Giorgievitz.
DONADO DA LEZZE. _Historia turchesca._ (1300-1514.) Edited, with notes in Rumanian, by Dr. I. Ursu. Bucharest, 1909, 8vo.
This is a collation of two MSS., Bibl. Nat., fonds ital. 1238, and Arch. Nat. Fr., Aff. étrangères, Turquie, no. 2, fol. 410-517.
DONNER, O. _Sur l’origine de l’alphabet turc._ In the Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Aikakanskirja (Journal of the Finno-Ougrian Society), xiv. Helsingfors, 1896, 8vo.
DOREZ, LÉON. Editor of fragments of Sanudo the Elder in conjunction with Roncière, and translator into French of Morosini’s _Cronica_.
DORN, B. 1. _Muhammedanische Quellen zur Geschichte der südlichen Küstenländer des Kaspischen Meeres._ Shireddin, Ali ben Shemseddin and Abul Fallah Fumeni, trans. and annotated by Dr. Dorn. 4th volume contains short stories of Khans by Persian, Arabic, and Turkish writers. Petrograd and Leipzig, 1850-8. 4 vols. 8vo.
2. _Die Sammlung von morgenl. HSS. zu St. Petersburg._ (Including Kasan MSS.) Petrograd, 1866, 8vo.
DOZY, REINHART P. A. 1. _Essai sur l’hist. de l’Islamisme._ Trans. from Dutch by Victor Chauvin. Leyden, 1879, 8vo.
2. _Cat. Cod. orient. Bibl. Acad. Lugd. Batav._ Leyden, 1851-77. 6 vols. 8vo.
DRAESEKE, J. 1. ‘Michel VII’s attempt to reunite the Churches.’ _Zeitschrift für wissensch. Theologie_, 1891.
2. ‘Der Uebergang der Osmanen nach Europa im XIV. Jahrhundert.’ In _Neues Jahrbuch für das klassische Altertum_, xxxi, p. 7, fol.
DRECHSLER, WOLFGANG. _Chronicon Saracenicum et Turcicum._ With additions by Reiskius and Bosio. Leipzig, 1689, 8vo. The original Chronicon is printed in Sansovino, i. 207-17, and in Augustinus Caelius, pp. 73-90.
DRINOV, M. S. _The origin of the Bulgarians and the commencement of their history._ (In Bulgarian.) Philippopolis, 1839, 8vo.
DUCANGE, CHARLES. 1. _Historia Byzantina._ Paris, 1680, fol. Ibid., ed. par Buchon, Paris, 1826. 2 vols. 8vo.
2. _Histoire de Constantinople sous les emp. français._ Paris, 1659, fol.
DUCAS, JOHANNES. _See under_ Byz. Historians.
DUDIK, B. _Auszüge aus päpstlichen Regesten für Oesterreichs Geschichte, von 1308-1604._ In _Archiv für Oest. Gesch._, xv, 185 f.
DUFRESNE, C. _Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae graecitatis._ Paris, 1682, 2 vols. fol. Leyden, 1688. 2 vols. fol.
DU PONT, Mlle. Editor of Wavrin’s _Chronique d’Engleterre_.
DU VERDIER, GILBERT SAULNIER. _Histoire générale des Turcs._ With Sultans’ portraits. Paris, 1653. 2 vols. 12mo; 3rd ed. 1662. Paris, 1665. 3 vols. 12mo. Lyon, 1682. 3 vols. 12mo. Ital. trans. by Ferdinando Servi, with additions from 1647 to 1662. Venice, 1662, 4to.
EBELING, FRIED. WILHELM. _Geschichte des Osmanischen Reiches in Europa._ Leipzig, 1854, 8vo.
ECKHARDT, FRANZ. German trans. of Thallóczy, L.
EDRISI, MOHAMMED (Sherif). _Géographie_, traduite par A. Jaubert, Paris, 1836-40. 2 vols. 4to. Latin trans. by Gabriel Sionita and John Hesronita. Paris, 1619, 4to.
Arabic title: ‘The jewels touching the division of the countries.’ Hadji Khalfa, no. 12734, fol. 2142-3, says this work was composed for Roger of Sicily.
EGNATIUS, JO. BAPTISTA. _De origine Turcarum._ Paris, 1539, 12 mo.
EICHORN, J. G. _Repertorium für biblische und morgenländische Litteratur._ Leipzig, 1777-86. 9 vols. 8vo.
ENGEL, ARTHUR (in collaboration with Raymond Serrure). _Traité de numismatique du moyen âge._ Paris, 1891-1905. 3 vols., la. 8vo.
Vol. iii contains for our period coins of Balkan States, pp. 1399-1427; of Byz. Emp. and Trebizond, pp. 1408-9; and of emirates of Asia Minor, pp. 1421-2.
ENGEL, JOHANN CHRISTIAN VON. 1. _Geschichte des Ungrischen Reichs und seiner Nebenländer._ Halle, 1797-1804. 5 vols. 4to. I. Geschichte des alten Pannoniens und der Bulgarey (1797). II. Staatskunde und Gesch. von Dalmatien, Croatien und Slawonien (1798). III. Gesch. von Servien und Bosnien (1801). IV. Gesch. der Moldau und Walachey (2 vols., 1804).
2. _Geschichte des Freystaates Ragusa._ Vienna, 1807, 8vo.
ENGUERRAN DE MONSTRELET. _Chronique._ Ed. by Douël d’Arcq. (Vol. i.) Paris, 1857, 8vo.
ERDMANN, FRANZ VON. _Temudschin der unerschütterliche._ Life of Djenghiz Khan. Leipzig, 1862, 8vo.
Pp. 172-84 contain translation of Resheddin, giving account of tribes of Asia at accession of D. K., which Erdmann had previously published as a trans. at Kasan, 1841.
ERRANTE, VINCENZO. _Storia dell’ Impero osmano._ Rome, 1882-3. 2 vols. 16mo.
EUBEL, CONRAD. _Hierarchia Catholica Medii Aevi, sire Summorum pontificum, ... cardinalium, ecclesiarum antistitum series, ab anno 1198 ad annum 1431 perducta._ Regensburg, 1898, 1901. 2 vols. 4to.
EUSTACHE DESCHAMPS. _Œuvres inédites._ Vol. i. Ed. by Tarbé, Paris, 1849, 8vo.
EVLIA TCHELEBI. 1. _Muntakhabat._ Extracts from his voyages relating to Constantinople. Bulak (Cairo), 1848, 8vo.
2. _Siyyah Nameh._ Constantinople, various editions. Narratives of Travels in Europe, Asia, and Africa. Trans. by Joseph von Hammer. London, 1834-50. 2 vols. 4to.
FABRICIUS, J. A. _Bibliotheca latina mediae et infimae aetatis._ Hamburg, 1734-46. 6 vols. 8vo. Florence, 1856. 6 vols. 8vo. (A reprint of Mansi’s 1754 Padua edition.)
FALLMERAYER, JAKOB P. Editor of Michel Panaretos.
FEBVRE, MICHELE. _Teatro della Turchia_, dove si rappresentano i disordini di essa, il genio, la natura et i costumi di 14 nazioni che l’habitano.... Milan, 1681, 4to. Venice, 1684, 4to. French trans. by author, Paris, 1682, 4to.
FEHMI, YOUSSOUF. _Histoire de la Turquie._ Paris, 1909, 8vo.
FEJÉR, GYÖRGY. 1. _Codex diplomaticus ecclesiasticus et civilis Hungariae._ Buda, 1829-44. 43 vols. 8vo. Chron. tables by K. Knaus, Buda, 1862, 8vo. Index by M. Czinár, Buda, 1866, 8vo.
2. _Croatiae ac Slavoniae cum regno Hung. nexus et relationes._ Buda, 1839, 8vo.
3. _A Kunok eredete._ (The Cumani.) Pest, 1850, 8vo.
4. Editor of Pray’s _Commentarii_.
FERIDUN, Collection of. Letters and answers of Ottoman Sultans to eastern monarchs and to their own subjects. Paris, MS. anc. fonds turc, Bibl. Nat., 79. Printed in Constantinople, 1847, 2 vols. fol. For list of letters, with description of contents, see Langlès, in _Notices et Extraits_, v. 668-9.
FESSLER, IGNAZ AURELIUS. _Geschichte von Ungarn._ German trans. from Hungarian by Ernest Klein. 2nd ed., Leipzig, 1867-83. 5 vols. 8vo. (Vol. ii contains 1301-1457.) Publ. 1869.
FEVRET, A. Collab. with G. Auboyneau in compiling bibliography for Ottoman History.
FINLAY, GEORGE. _History of Greece from the Conquest by the Romans to 1864._ Edited by H. F. Tozer. Oxford, 1877. 7 vols. 8vo. (Vol. iv contains mediaeval Greece and the empire of Trebizond.)
FIORINI, VITTORIO. Editor of new edition of Muratori.
FIRNHABER, FRIEDRICH. ‘Beiträge zur Geschichte Ungarns.’ In the _Archiv zur Kunde österreichischer Geschichtsquellen_, 1849.
FITZCLARENCE, GEORGE (assisted by A. Sprenger). _Kitab Fihrist al-Koutoub._ (A catalogue of Arabic, Persian and Turkish books relating to the art of war and to history.) S. l., _c._ 1840, 8vo.
FLORINSKY, P. T. 1. _Joujnie Slaviane i Visantia vo vloroi tchetverti XIV veka._ (The South Slavs and Byzantium in the 2nd quarter of the 14th cent.) 2nd ed. Petrograd, 1882. 2 vols. 8vo.
2. The Younger Andronicus and John Cantacuzenos (in Russian). Journal of the Ministry of Public Instruction, Petrograd. July 1879.
FLÜGEL, GUSTAV. 1. _Die arab., pers. und türk. Handschriften der k.-k. Hofbibl. zu Wien._ Vienna, 1865-7. 3 vols. 8vo.
2. Latin trans. of Hadji Khalfa’s bibliographical lexicon.
FOGLIETTA, UBERTO. 1. _De causis magnitudinis Imperii Turcici._ Leipzig, 1594, 12mo. (1st ed., Rome, 1574.)
2. _Historia Genuensium libri XII._ Genoa, 1585, 4to.
FORMANTI, NERIOLAVA. _Raccolta delle historie delle vite degl’ imperatori ottomani sino a Mehemet IV regnante...._ Venice, 1684, 4to.
FORSTER, C. T. Ed. and trans. Busbecq in collab. with Daniell.
FOSCARINI, LUDOVICO. Writings against the Turks found in Agostini, i. 65-107.
FRACASSETTI, J. Editor of Petrarch’s Letters: Italian trans. of the _Senilium_.
FRAEHN, C. 1. _Indications bibl. relatives ... à la litt. historico-géograph. des Arabes, des Persans et des Turcs._ Petrograd, 1845, 8vo (Russian and French in parallel columns).
2. Fraehn was the first editor of Abul-Ghazi.
FRANCK, SEBASTIAN. German trans. of anon. _Tractatus de ritu et moribus Turcarum_.
FRANKE, O. _Beiträge aus chinesischen Quellen zur Kenntnis der Türkvölker und Skythen Zentralasiens._ In Abhandlungen der K. preuss. Akad. der Wissenschaften. Berlin, 1904, 4to.
FRANZ pasha, JULIUS. _Die Baukunst des Islam._ 3rd vol. of 3rd part of the _Handbuch der Architektur_. Darmstadt, 1887, la. 8vo.
FRENZEL, C. _Ramon Muntaner._ Berlin, 1852, 8vo. Halle, 1854, la. 8vo.
FRESNE-CANAYE. _Voyage du Levant._ Edited by H. Hauser. Paris, 1897, 4to.
FRIEDLÄNDER, JULIUS (in collab. with Pinder). _Beiträge zur älteren Münzkunde._ Berlin, 1851.
FROISSART. _Chroniques._ 1. J. A. C. Buchon, ed. Paris, 1835. 3 vols. 8vo.
2. Luce, S., ed. up to 1377. Paris, 1869-82. 8 vols. 8vo. Continued and finished by Gaston Raynaud. Paris, 1884-99. 3 vols. 8vo.
3. Kervyn de Lettenhove, ed. Bruxelles, 1870-77. 25 vols. 8vo. Vol. xv (1871), 1393-6; vol. xvi (1872), 1397-1400.
GAGNIER, J. Latin trans. of Pocock MS. of Abulfeda.
GALLAND, ANTOINE. Translations in MS. in Bibl. Nat., Paris, of Seadeddin, of Mirkhond’s Hist. of Djenghiz Khan, and of Abderrezzah (2 separate translations).
GANEM, HALIL. _Les Sultans ottomans._ Paris, 1901. 2 vols. 8vo.
GARNIER, J. _Chambre de comptes de Bourgogne_, in ‘Inventaire-Sommaire des archives départementales, Côte-d’Or, arch, civ.’ Dijon, 1878.
GATARO, ANDREA. _Historia Padovana_, 1311-1506. In Muratori, xvii. 1-944.
GAUDIER, JOHANNES. German trans. of Ali Muhieddin.
GELČIĆ, JOSEPH. 1. _Monumenta Ragusina._ Libri reformationum Tomus v (1301-36). In _Mon. spect. hist. Slavorum merid._, vol. xxix. Agram, 1897, 4to.
2. Collab. with Thallóczy in _Relat. Ragus. cum regno Hung._
GÉRAUD, HERCULE, Ed. _Chronique latine de Guillaume de Nangis de 1113 à 1300._ Paris, 1843, 8vo.
GEROPOLDI, ANTONIO. _Bilancia historico-politica dell’ impero ottomano_, &c. Venice, 1686, 4to. Contains: Annali de’ Sultani Osmanidi scritti dal Gran Cancellier ALI: portati da C/poli all’imp. Ferdinando l’anno 1551 da Girolamo Bek da Leopoldstorf: Per ordine di Cesare tradotti in tedesco da Giovanni Gaudier Interprete Cesareo, in Latino da Giovanni Leunclavio, etc. Corretti poi, e confrontati con nuovi MSS. dall’ Auttore.
This is Ali Muhieddin. _See under_ Ali (Mustafa Ibn Ahmed) above, and note accompanying. _Also under_ Zenker.
GEUFFRAEUS, ANTONIUS (or GEUFFROY). (Cheval. de S. Jean de Jérusalem.) _Briefve description de la court du Grant Turc et ung sommaire du règne des Othmans...._ Paris, 1543, 4to. (Reprinted in Schéfer’s ed. of Spandugino.) Latin trans. by W. Godelevoeus in _Historia Belli Cyprii_ and in Petro Bizara, _Bellum Pannonicum_, Basel, 1573, 1578, 1596. German trans. by Nicolaus H. von Tauber, Basel, same dates. English trans. by R. Grafton, London, 1546. Italian trans., Florence, 1551.
GHALIB, ISMAIL. Imperial Museum: Catalogue of old Moslem coins. (In Turkish.) Constantinople, 1894, 8vo.
GHILLEBERT DE LANNOY. _Œuvres de ----, Voyageur, diplomate et moraliste_ ... recueillies et publiées par Ch. Potvin. Notes géogr. et carte par J.-C. Houzeau. Louvain, 1878, 8vo.
GIBBON, EDWARD. _Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire._ Ed. J. B. Bury. London, 1896-1900. 7 vols. 8vo.
GIORGIEVITZ, BARTOLOMEO. 1. _Prophetia de maometani et altre cose turchesche._ Trans. by L. Domenichi. Florence, 1548, 12mo.
2. Pilgrimage to Jerusalem, Italian trans., in Lonicerus, vol. i.
3. _De origine imperii Turcarum eorumque administ. et disciplina._ Wittenberg, 1560, fol. Reprinted 1562. Also in Lonicerus, vol. i. Trans. into Dutch, 1544. (For editions, _see_ Hauser ed. of Fresne-Canaye, p. 318.)
GIOVIO, PAOLO. 1. _Commentario delle cose de’ Turchi...._ Addressed to Emperor Charles V. Rome, 1535; Venice, 1540; in Sansovino, pp. 226-45.
2. _Origo Turcici imperii, vitae omnium Turc. imperatorum, ordo ac disciplina Turcarum militiae exactissime conscripta._ Ex Italico Latinus factus Francisco Bassianate interprete. Paris, 1539, 12mo.
3. _Vida del Gran Tamerlan._ Spanish trans. by Gaspar de Baeca, in Clavijo.
GIUSTINIANI, AGOSTINO. _Annali della repubblica di Genova._ Genoa, 1537, fol. Modern edition, Genoa, 1855. 2 vols. 8vo.
GODEFROY, THÉODORE. Editor of Jean d’Ursins and of _Le Livre des faits de Boucicaut_.
GODELEVOEUS, W. Latin trans, of Geuffracus.
GOESANUS. _See_ Ramus, Johannes.
GOLIUS, JACOB. Editor of Elzevir edition of text of Arabshah.
GONZÁLES. _See_ Clavijo.
GREGORAS, NICEPHOROS. _See under_ Byzantine Historians, p. 367.
GREGOROVIUS, FERDINAND. _Geschichte der Stadt Athen im Mittelalter, von der Zeit Justinian’s bis zur türk. Eroberung._ Stuttgart, 1889. 2 vols. la. 8vo. Greek trans., with notes, by Lampros, S. P., Athens, 1904. 2 vols. 8vo. (In Βιβλιοθήκη Μαρασλῆ.)
GREIFFENHAG, ANDRÉ MÜLLER. Latin trans. of Hayton.
GRIGORIEFF. French trans. of Khondemir.
GUAZZO, MARCO. _Cronica._ Venice, 1553, fol.
GUÉRIN-SONGEON. _Histoire de la Bulgarie depuis ses origines jusqu’à nos jours_ (485-1913). Paris, 1913, 8vo.
GUICHENON, S. _Histoire généalogique de la royale maison de Savoye_ (999-1643). Lyons, 1660, 3 vols. 4to.
GUIGNES, JOSEPH DE. _Histoire générale des Huns, des Turcs et des Mongols._ Paris, 1756-8. 5 vols. 4to.
GUYARD, STANISLAS. Collab. with Reinaud in French trans. of Abulfeda.
GYCAUD, B. (publisher). _La Généalogie du Grand-Turc, ... avec l’origine des princes_, &c. Lyon, 1570, fol.
HADJI KHALFA, MUSTAFA IBN ABDALLAH, KIATIB TCHELEBI. 1. _Djihannuma_ (mirror of the world). A Universal geography, but does not include Europe. Uses 19 Arabic sources, but principally Abulfeda. Printed in Turkish, Constantinople, 1732, fol. Latin trans. in MS. by Mathias Norberg, at Lund, Sweden (_see_ Toderini, iii. 135). French trans. in MS. by M. Armain, in Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds français, nouv. acq., nos. 888-9, with exhaustive index, and splendid introduction on life and work of Hadji Khalfa.
2. Geography of Balkan peninsula, trans. by Hammer under title _Rumeli und Bosna_, Vienna, 1812.
3. _Kitab Kyachfaddyunoun an atamy alkontoub alfounoun_: The Clearing of doubts concerning the names of books and sciences. A bibliographical dictionary, in Arabic, containing 13,494 titles, and referring to 25,614 works. Latin trans. from Vienna, Paris, and Berlin MSS. by Gustavus Flügel. London, 1835-42. 3 vols. 4to. French trans. in MS. in Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds arabe, 4462-4, by Petits de la Croix, 3 vols. la. fol., with minute index. M. de la Croix rightly boasted of his work that it was ‘traduit, recueilly et redigé avec grand travail, et grande assiduité et exactitude’. Arabic original in parallel columns.
4. _Tuhfatu’l-Kibar fi Esfari’l-Bihar._ History of the Maritime Wars of the Osmanlis. Publ. at Constantinople, with 7 maps, 1729, fol. A French translation of this printed edition by La Rocque is in the Leyden Library, MSS. orientaux, no. 1599. It is called: ‘Histoire des conquêtes des Ottomans sur les Chrétiens tant dans la mer Noire que dans la mer Méditerranée avec les noms des places et les circonstances des victoires.’ First part trans. into English by James Mitchell. London, 1831, 4to.
5. _Takvimi-Tevarikh._ Chronological Hist., in Turkish, Persian, and Arabic. Constantinople, 1733, fol. Italian trans. by Rinaldo Carli, Venice, 1697, 4to.
Zenker, following Reiske, regards Carli’s trans. as incorrect and unfaithful. But Toderini, iii. 145, vigorously defends Carli from this charge. Hadji Khalfa, in _Dict. Bibl._, no. 3474, fol. 553, calls this work of his ‘the erection of histories’, and describes how he compiled it.
HALLE, J. _Hungarica et Turcica ... betreffende Bücher und HSS._, &c. Kat. XXXV. Munich, 1907.
169 titles before 1550 listed.
HAMMER, JOSEPH VON. 1. _Geschichte des Osmanischen Reichs._ Pest, 1827-34. 10 vols. 8vo. French trans. by Hellert, in collab. with author. Paris, 1843. 18 vols. 8vo and atlas, la. fol. French abridged trans. by Dochez, Paris, 1844. 3 vols., la. 8vo. Also Italian trans. by Antonelli, Venice, 1829. Concise English abridgment by Creasy.
2. Trans. of Hadji Khalfa’s geography of Balkans under title: _Rumeli und Bosna_.
3. English trans. of Evlia Tchelebi’s voyages.
4. _Geschichte der Goldenen Horde._ Buda-Pest, 1840.
5. _De byzantinae historiae ultimis scriptoribus ex historia Osmanica elucidandis._ In _Commentationes_ of Kön. Akademie der Wiss., Göttingen, 1823-7.
6. Study on Ahmed-ibn-Yahia-ibn-Ashik pasha, in _Journ. asiatique_, vol. iv.
HARTMANN, R. Editor of _Encyclopédie de l’Islam_. See Houtsma _et al._
HASDEU. _Istoria critica a rominilor._ Bucharest, 1875, 8vo.
HASE, C. B. _See_ Manuel II Palaeologos.
HAUSER, H. Editor of Fresne-Canaye’s _Voyage_.
HAYTON, FRÈRE JEHAN. 1. _Le Livre des merveilles et des royaumes._ Illuminated MS. Bibl. Nat., fonds fr., no. 2810 réserve. A trans. into French by Nicolas Salcon, who received the story from the author’s own mouth. _Les Fleurs des histoires de la terre dorient compillées par frère Hayton ... cousin du Roy Darménie, par le commandement du Pape. La première partie contient la sit. des royaulmes dorient environ 1300._ Paris, 1475, 4to. Also in Bergeron.
2. _Historia Tartarorum._ In MS. Leyden, fonds latin, no. 66; Oxford, cod. Ashmol., no. 342.
HAZLITT, WM. C. _The Venetian Republic._ New ed. London, 1900. 2 vols. 8vo.
HECKER, J. F. K. _Der schwarze Tod im 14ten Jahrhundert._ Berlin, 1832.
HELLERT, J. J. Trans. into French and edited Hammer. Made atlas to go with his translation.
HELMOLDUS OF BUZOVIA. _Chronica Slavorum, seu Annales._ Edited by Reiner Reineccius. Frankfort, 1581, fol.
All except first two books written by Arnold of Lübeck. About Slavs of central Europe in relation to Holy Roman Empire. Helmoldus’s chronicle ends 1150.
HERTZBERG, GUSTAV FERDINAND. _Geschichte der Byzantiner und des Osmanischen Reiches bis gegen Ende des 16ten Jahrhunderts._ Berlin, 1883, 8vo.
HESRONITA, JOHN. Latin trans. of Edrisi in collab. with Gabriel Sionita.
HEYD, WILHELM. 1. _Beiträge zur Geschichte des Levantehandels im 14. Jahrh._, in Festschrift zur 4. Säcular-Feier der Universität zu Tübingen.
2. _Geschichte des Levantehandels im Mittelalter_, Stuttgart, 1879. 2 vols. 8vo. French trans. by Furcy-Raynaud, Paris, 1885-6. 2 vols. la. 8vo.
HEZARFENN, HUSSEIN. _Kanounnamé._ Dated 1673. MS. col. I. L. O. St. Petersburg, no. 10. French trans. by Petits de la Croix, under title ‘État général de l’Emp. ott., par un solitaire Turc’. Paris, 1695. 3 vols. 12mo.
Petits de la Croix does not give Hezarfenn as author, but I find in M. de la Croix’s MS. index to Hadji Khalfa’s bibliographical lexicon, in the Bibl. Nat., Paris, in vol. iii. fol. 186, in his own handwriting, the statement that Hezarfenn is the ‘solitaire Turc’.
HIRTH, F. _China and the Roman Orient_: researches into their ancient and mediaeval relations as represented in old Chinese records. Leipzig and Munich, 1885, 8vo.
HODGSON, FRANCIS C. _Venice in the 13th and 14th Centuries._ London, 1910, 12mo.
HODOSIU, JOSEPH. Rumanian translator of Cantemir.
HODY, H. _De Graecis illustribus._ London, 1742.
HOENIGER, NICHOLAUS VON KOENIGSHOFEN. _Der türckischen Historien und wahrhafften Geschichten, Thaten, Handtlungen, Krieg, Schlachten, Sieg, Belagerungen und Eroberung zu Wasser und zu Landt aller Staetten, etc.... bis auff das Jahr 1578._ Basel, 1578, fol.
For 16th cent. in history, but reflects German ideas of the Osmanlis and their origin. The author calls the Prophet Mohammed ‘eyn Engel des Teufels’.
HOLMES, GEORGE. Editor of 3rd ed. of Rymer.
HOPF, K. 1. _Griechenland im Mittelalter und der Neuzeit._ Parts 85 and 86 of Ersch and Gruber’s _Allgemeine Encyklopädie_. Leipzig, 1870. 2 vols. 4to.
A marvel of erudition, but marred by poor printing and lack of index.
2. _Les Giustiniani, dynastes de Chios._ Trans. into French by E. A. Vlasto. Paris, 1888, 12mo.
3. _Veneto-Byzantinische Analekten_, in _Sitzungsberichte der Wiener Akademie_, xxxii. Vienna, 1859, 8vo.
4. _Chroniques gréco-romanes._ Berlin, 1873, la. 8vo.
HOUDAS, O. Ed. and trans. Mohammed-en-Nesawi.
HOUTSMA, TH. 1. Editor of Seljuk texts, including Ibn Bibi.
2. Article on Seljuks in _Encycl. Britan._
This has hardly been changed in the new edition, so reference to 9th ed. is satisfactory.
3. Editor, in collaboration with Basset, Arnold and Hartmann, of new _Encyclopédie de l’Islam_.
HOUTSMA, BASSETT, ARNOLD, HARTMANN, Editors. _Encyclopédie de l’Islam._ Dictionnaire géographique, ethnographique et biographique des peuples musulmans, publié avec le concours des principaux orientalistes, par Th. Houtsma, R. Bassett, T. W. Arnold et R. Hartmann. Leyden, 4to. Vol. i (A-D) appeared in 1913.
HOUZEAU, J.-C. Notes géogr. and map for Ghillebert de Lannoy’s _Voyage_.
HOWORTH, HENRY H. _History of the Mongols from the 9th to the 19th Century._ London, 1876-88. 4 vols. 8vo. (Lacks index.)
HUART, CLÉMENT. 1. _Konia: la ville des Derviches Tourneurs._ Paris, 1897, 8vo.
2. Paper on ‘Épigraphie arabe d’Asie Mineure’, in the _Revue sémitique_, Paris, 1895, 8vo.
HUBER, MAJOR R. Map of Ottoman Empire, with administrative divisions and military routes. Constantinople, 1901.
HUSSEIN (un solitaire Turc). _See_ Hezarfenn.
HUSSEIN ABU HALIB. Persian trans. of Mongol or Turkish MS. found in the Yemen, which purported to contain the autobiographical memoirs of Timur. _See under_ Anonymous, p. 366 ad fin.
IBN AL TIKTAKA. _History of the Islamic Empire_ (in Arabic). Ed. by W. Ahlwardt. Gotha, 1860, 8vo.
IBN ALI MOHAMMED AL-BIWY. _Dourar-al-Othman._ ‘The precious pearls touching the source and origin of the Ottoman House.’ Hadji Khalfa, in _Dict. Bibi._, fol. 867.
This is the _only_ Ottoman genealogy mentioned by Hadji Khalfa, although he gives more than sixty Arabic titles of genealogies.
IBN BATOUTAH (ABU ABDULLAH). Arabic text of Voyages, edited and translated into French by C. Défréméry and B. R. Sanguinetti. Paris, 1853-9. 4 vols. 4to.
Vol. ii, 1854, pp. 255-353, gives Voyage through Asia Minor.
IBN BIBI (NASREDDIN YAHIA). _Seljuk-Namé._ Persian original lost. An abridgement, in Persian, of the original is no. 1185 of the Schéfer MSS. in the Bibl. Nat., Paris, and has been edited and published by Th. Houtsma, in his _Recueil de Textes relatifs à l’hist. des Selj._, vol. iv, Leyden, 1892, 8vo. M. Schéfer translated several chapters of this MS. into French in _Bibl. de l’École des langues viv. orientales_, série 3, vol. v, Paris, 1889, 8vo. Turkish translation, as contained in Warner MS. 419, Leyden, and MS. turc 92, Bibl. Nat., Paris, edited by Houtsma in _Recueil_ above cited, vol. iii, Leyden, 1891, 8vo. M. Houtsma promised a French translation, but it has never been forthcoming.
This is the work of which Nöldeke speaks in _Zeitschrift der D. M. G._, xiii. 170 (1859), as an unidentified work by an Ottoman historian of the reign of Murad II. As a matter of fact it is merely a translation, and was not written by an Osmanli.
IBN KHALDOUN. _Universal History._ The Prolegomena, Arabic text, are edited by Quatremère in _Notices et Extraits_, vol. xvi (1858), and translated by Baron de Slane in vol. xvii (1859). German abridged trans, by Thornberg in _Nova acta Reg. Soc._, vol. xii, Leipzig, 1844.
IDRIS, Mevlana (of Bitlis). _Ilesht-Bihisht._ The Eight Heavens.
One of the two earliest extant Ottoman histories. Written in Persian for Bayezid II about 1500. There is no translation, and complete MSS. are rare. But one has access, not only to the facts recorded and opinions of Idris, but also to his wonderful imagery, for Seadeddin has copied him copiously and, in fact, embodied many literal translations of Idris in his ‘Crown of Histories’.
JACOB, GEORG. _Türkische Bibliothek._ Folk-stories. Berlin, 1904-5. 3 vols. 8vo.
JAUBERT, A. M. Editor of Mirkhond’s _Djenghiz Khan_; and French translator of Edrisi’s Geography.
JIREČEK, CONST. JOSEPH. 1. _Geschichte der Bulgaren._ Prague, 1876, 8vo.
2. _Die Heerstrasse von Belgrad nach Konstantinopel, und die Balkanpässe._ Prague, 1877, 8vo.
JONQUIÈRE, Vte A. DE LA. _Histoire de l’Empire ottoman._ Paris, 1881, 8vo. New edition, revised and enlarged, with excellent maps. Paris, 1914. 2 vols. 8vo.
JORGA, N. 1. _Notes et Extraits pour servir à l’hist. des croisades au XVe siècle._ Paris, 1899-1902. 3 vols. 8vo. I. Comptes de la colonie de Péra. Documents pol. des Arch, de Venise et Gênes jusqu’à 1436. II. Archives de Vienne, du Vatican, de Naples, Florence et Raguse jusqu’à 1453. (Mostly Ragusa.) III. Venise et Gênes de 1436 a 1453. Traités, ... projets et exhortations,--opuscules jusqu’à 1453.
2. _Philippe de Mézières et la croisade au XVIe siècle._ Fascic. 110, 2e série, _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, vol. xviii. Paris, 1896, 8vo.
3. _Geschichte des Osmanischen Reiches nach den Quellen dargestellt._ Gotha, 1908-13. 5 vols. 8vo. In Allgemeine Staatengeschichte, I, 37 _Werke_. (Vol. i up to 1451.)
JOSEPH BEN JOSHUA, Rabbi (Sephardic). Chronicles (in Hebrew). Venice, 1554; Amsterdam, 1730. English trans, by C. H. F. Biallobotzky. London, 1835-6. 2 vols. 8vo.
JOUANNIN, J. M. _La Turquie._ In collaboration with Jules Van Gaver. Paris, 1840, 8vo. (Coll. _Univers pittoresque_.)
JOURDAIN, A. L. M. French trans. of Mirkhond.
JOVIUS, PAULUS. _See_ Giovio, Paolo.
KÁLLAY, BENJAMIN VON. _Geschichte der Serben von den ältesten Zeiten bis 1815._ Trans. into German by J. H. Schwicker. Buda-Pest, Vienna, and Leipzig, 1878-9. 2 vols. 8vo. (Einleitung ‘bis zum Ende des 18. Jahrh.’, i. 1-173.)
KAMPOUROGLOU, D. G. Ιστορια τῶν Άθηναίων· Τουρκοκρατία. Vol. i. Athens, 1899.
KANITZ, FELIX. _Das Königreich Serbien und das Serbienvolk von der Römerzeit bis zur Gegenwart._ (Monographien der Balkanstaaten, vol. i.) Leipzig, 1904, 4to.
KARABACEK, J. _Das angebliche Bilderverbot des Islams._ Vienna, 1876.
KARAMIANZ, N. _Verzeichnis der arabischen Hss. der K. Bibl. zu Berlin._ Berlin, 1888, 4to.
KASEM BEY, MIRZA A. Trans. and ed. of Derbend Namé.
KATONA, ST. _Historia critica Regum Hungariae._ Buda-Pest and Klausenburg, 1779-1817. 42 vols. 8vo.
KEEN, MRS. A. English trans. of von Ranke’s _Serbien_.
KEENE, H. Editor and reviser of Beale’s _Oriental Biographical Dictionary_.
KERN, TH. VON. Editor of Anon. _Chronik aus Kaiser Sigmunds Zeit_.
KERSCH. Latin trans., in collab. with Bruns, of Abulfaradj.
KERVYN DE LETTENHOVE. Editor of most complete edition of Froissart.
KHALFIN, IBRAHIM. Turkish trans. of anon. memoirs of Timur.
KHEIRULLAH. Hist. of Ottoman Emp. from foundation to Ahmed I (in Turkish). Constantinople, 1854. 2 vols. 8vo.
KHONDEMIR. _Habib Essher._ History of the Mongols, in Persian. French trans. by Grigorieff. Petrograd, 1834, 8vo. Also partly trans. by Ch. Défréméry in _Journal asiatique_, Paris, 1852, no. 2.
KISS, K. _A’ Nikapolyi ülkoset._ Thesis of Magyar Academy. Buda, 1855, 8vo.
KLEIN, ERNEST. German trans. of Fessler.
KNAUS, F. Chronological Tables for Fejér.
KNOELLE, S. W. ‘On Tartar and Turk.’ In _Journal of Royal Asiatic Society_, New Series, xiv. 125-59. London, 1882, 8vo.
KNOLLES, RICHARD. _The general Historie of the Turkes to the rising of the othoman family, with all the expeditions of the Christian princes against them. Together with the lives and conquests of the othoman kings and emperors._ 5th ed., with continuation from 1621 to 1638. 30 portraits. London, 1638. 2 vols. fol.
KOEHLER, G. _Die Schlachten von Nikopoli und Warna._ Breslau, 1882, 8vo. With 2 plans.
KOLLAR, A. F. Latin trans. of Seadeddin.
KONSTANTYNOWICZ, MICHAIL. _Panietniki Janczari_ (Memoirs of a Janissary). Warsaw, 1828.
Trans. into French by Théodore d’Okszu. But I could find no copy of this trans. in the Bibl. Nat., Paris.
KOUTBADDINMAKKY. History of the conquests of the Osmanlis (in Arabic verse). Turkish trans. by Mevlana Mustafa ibn Mohammed Khosreu-zadé.
Detailed description in Hadji Khalfa, no. 1795, fol. 324-5.
KRAUSS, J. G. Editor and continuator of Dlugosz.
KRUMBACHER, KARL. _Geschichte der byzantinischen Litteratur (527-1453)._ 2nd ed. Munich, 1897, 4to. (9th vol. of _Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft_.)
KUHNEL, ERNST. ‘Zur Geschichte der byzantinischen und türkischen Kunst.’ In Baedeker’s _Konstantinopel und Kleinasien_, 2. Aufl., 1914, pp. xliii-lxiv.
KÚNOS, IGNACE. ‘Chansons populaires turques.’ With Turkish text in Latin characters. _Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenl. Gesellschaft_ (1899), liii. 233-55.
KUNSTMANN. _Studien über Marino Sanudo den Älteren._ Munich, 1855, 4to.
KUPELWIESER, L. _Die Kämpfe Ungarns mit den Osmanen bis zur Schlacht bei Mohacz._ Vienna, 1895, 8vo.
LACABANE, LÉON. _See_, on ‘Chroniques de S. Denis,’ in _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_ (1840-1), ii. 62.
LA CROIX. _See_ Petits de la Croix.
LA GARDE DE DIEU, L. DE. _Histoire de l’Islamisme et de l’Empire ottoman._ Brussels, 1892, 8vo.
The author of this book took no trouble whatever to get at the facts of Ottoman history. It is more full of errors than a modern work has any reason to be.
LAMARTINE, A. DE. _Histoire de la Turquie._ Paris, 1855. 8 vols. 8vo.
LAMPROS, SPIRIDON P. 1. _Catalogue illustré de la collection de portraits des Empereurs de Byzance._ Athens, 1911, 8vo.
2. Greek trans. of Gregorovius’ _Geschichte der Stadt Athen im Mittelalter_.
3. _Catalogue of the Greek MSS. on Mt. Athos._ Cambridge, 1895, 1900. 2 vols. 4to.
4. Greek trans. of Curtius’ _Griechische Geschichte_.
LANE-POOLE, STANLEY. 1. _Catalogue of Oriental Coins in the British Museum_, vol. viii. _The Coins of the Turks._ London, 1883, 8vo.
2. _The Mohammedan Dynasties._ London, 1894, 8vo.
This book contains an amplification of a paper on the successors of the Seljuks in Asia Minor, which appeared in vol. xiv, New Series, of the _Journal of the Royal Asiatic Soc._, pp. 773-80. London, 1882, 8vo.
3. _Catalogue of the Bodleian Library Mohammedan Coins._ Oxford, 1888, 4to.
4. _Turkey._ In the ‘Stories of Nations’ series. London, 1888, 8 vo.
LANGLÈS, L. 1. French trans. of the anon. memoirs of Timur.
2. Listing and translation of titles in the Collection of State Papers of Feridun, which see.
LANZ, K. FR. W. German trans. of Muntaner’s _Cronica_.
LARDITO, J. B. _Historia del estado presente del imperio otomano, con un compendio de los progresos de la Liga Sagrada contra los Turcos._ Salamanca, 1690, 4to.
LA ROQUE. French trans. of Hadji Khalfa’s _Maritime Wars_, in MS. in Leyden Library.
LAVALLÉE, THÉOPHILE. _Histoire de la Turquie._ Paris, 1859. 2 vols. 8 vo.
LAVOIX, HENRI. 1. _Cat. des Monnaies musulmanes de la Bibl. Nat._ (Vol. iii finished by M. P. Casanova.) Paris, 1887-92. 3 vols. 4to.
2. ‘Les Arts musulmans.’ In the _Gazette des Beaux-Arts_, Paris, 1875.
LE BAS, PH. _Asie Mineure depuis les temps les plus anciens jusqu’à la bataille d’Ancyre, 1402._ Paris, 1863, 8vo.
This is the first part of Texier’s work in the series _L’Univers pittoresque_.
LEBEAU, CHAS. _See_ Ameilhon, H. P.
LEBEUF, Abbé. Collab. with P. Paris in a paper on Philippe de Mézières.
LEFÈVRE-PONTALIS. Introduction and commentary to the French trans. of Morosini.
LEMAÎTRE, HENRI, ed. Gilles le Muisit. Paris, 1905, 8vo.
LE QUIEN, MICHEL. _Oriens Christianus._ Paris, 1740. 3 vols. fol.
LE ROULX. _See_ Delaville Leroulx.
LEUNCLAVIUS, JOHANNES (Johann Lewenklau). 1. _Annales Sultanorum othmanidorum a Turcis sua lingua scripti Hieronymi Beck a Leopoldstorf Marci fil. studio et diligentia C/poli advecti 1551._ Divo Ferd. Caes. opt. max. D. D. jussuque Caes. a Joanne Gaudier dicto Spiegel, interprete turcico, germanice translati. Joan. Leunclavius ... latine redditos illustravit et auxit usque ad annum 1588. Cum omnium memorabilium toto opere contentorum accuratissime elaborati.... Frankfort, 1596, fol.
A translation of Ali, and not of Seadeddin, as has been erroneously believed.
2. _Pandectes historiae turcicae_, &c. Notes in same volume with 1.
1 and 2 are reprinted in vol. clix of Migne’s _Patrologia Graeca_, Paris, 1866, pp. 572-922.
3. _Historiae Musulmanae Turcorum de monumentis ipsorum exscriptae libri XVIII._ Frankfort, 1591, fol.
Von Hammer, in his monumental work, is far more indebted to Leunclavius than to any other previous writer for the earlier part of his history.
LEURIDAN, E. _Les châtelains de Lille._ Paris, 1873.
LEVEC, FR. _Die Einfälle der Türken in Krain und Istrien._ Laybach, 1891, 8vo.
LILIENCRON, R. VON. _Die historischen Volkslieder der Deutschen vom 13. bis 16. Jahrh._ Leipzig, 1865-6. 2 vols., la. 8vo.
For songs on Nicopolis defeat.
LJUBIĆ, SIME. _Monumenta spectantia ad hist. Slavorum meridionalium._ Agram, 8vo. Vol. iv (1358-1403), 1874. Vol. v (1403-11), 1875. Vol. v contains a supplement of documents from 1301-97.
LOEB, ISIDORE. _Tables du calendrier juif depuis l’ère chrét. jusqu’au XXXe siècle._ Paris, 1886, 4to.
LONGNON, JEAN. Editor of anon. _Chronique de Morée_.
LONICERUS, PHILIPPUS. _Chronicorum Turcicorum, in quibus Turcoman origo, principes, imperatores, bella, praelia, caedes, victoriae, reique militaris ratio ... exponuntur...._ Frankfort, 1578, fol. Ibid., 1584. 2 vols. 8vo.
Contains reprint of Giorgievitz, Aventinus, _et al._
LOT, H. 1. ‘Projets de croisade sous Ch. le Bel et sous Philippe de Valois.’ _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, 4e série (1859), v. 503-9.
2. ‘Essai d’intervention de Ch. le Bel en faveur des Chrétiens d’Orient.’ Ibid. (1875), xxxvi. 588-600.
LUCE, SIMÉON. Editor of Froissart, and of _Chronique des quatre premiers Valois_.
LÜDEMANN, W. VON. _Geschichte Griechenlands und der Türkei._ Dresden, 1827. 4 vols. 12mo.
MACAIRAS, LÉONCE. Cyprus Chronicle, Greek text with French trans., by E. Miller and C. Sathas. Paris, 1881-2. 2 vols., la. 8vo. The text alone is published in Sathas, _Bibl. graeca medii aevi_, vol. ii. Venice, 1873. (From 1193 to 1458.)
MACARIUS, Patriarch of Antioch. Travels of. Trans. from Arabic into English by F. C. Belfour. London, 1829-36. 2 vols. 4to.
MACRIDES, GEORGES. French trans. of Col. Djevad bey.
MAÉLATH, Count J. _Geschichte der Magyaren._ Regensburg, 1852-3. 5 vols. 8vo.
MAKRISI, ABU MOHAMMED. 1. _Hist. des Sultans mameluks._ French trans., accompanied by historical and geographical notes, by E. Blochet. (From the papers which appeared in _Revue de l’Orient latin_, vols. vi-xi.) Paris, 1908, 8vo.
2. Treatise on Mohammedan coins, composed between 1415 and 1420. Latin trans., with Arabic text, by O. G. Tychsen. Rostock, 1797. French trans. by A. I. Silvestre de Sacy, Paris, 1797, 12mo.
MAKUSEV, W. 1. _Italjanskie archiwy i chranjaschtschiessja w nich materialy alja slavanskoi istorii._ (Italian archives and chronicles, and the materials in them for Slavic history.) Moscow, 1870-72, 4 vols. 8vo. (Vols. xvi-xix of _Sapiski imperat. akad. nauk._)
2. Also contributed to _Monumenta hist. Slav. merid._
MANAVINO. Italian trans. of Lonicerus.
MANDEVILLE, SIR JOHN. _Voiage and travel, which treateth of the way to Hierusalem_, &c., 1322-56. In Wright, J., _Early Travels in Palestine_, pp. 127-282. For French version, _see_ Bergeron.
MANGER, SAMUEL HENRY. Latin trans. of Arabshah.
MANUTIO, ANTONIO (?). _Viaggi fatti da Venezia alla Tana ... et in C/poli; con la descrittione ... di Città, Luoghi, etc. Contains, fol. 120-58, Libri tre delle cose de’ Turchi._ Venice, 1543, 12mo.
MARCHE, OLIVIER DE LA. _Mémoires._ Ed. by Beaune and d’Arbaumont. Vol. i. Paris, 1883, 8vo.
MARCO POLO. _Le Livre de Marco Polo, citoyen de Venise ... rédigé en français sous sa dictée en 1298._ Edited, with notes, by M. G. Pauthier. Paris, 1865. 2 vols., la. 8vo. Trans, into English and edited by H. Yale. London, 1875. 2 vols. 8vo. Wm. Marsden’s earlier English trans. has recently been republished in Everyman’s Library.
MARKHAM, CLEMENTS R. English trans. of Clavijo.
MARSDEN, WILLIAM. English trans. of Marco Polo.
MAS LATRIE, Comte RENÉ DE. 1. _Histoire de Chypre sous les Lusignans._ Paris, 1852-61. 3 vols. 8vo.
2. Editor of Florio Bustron’s _Cronica_, 1191-1489. (In Italian.) In _Mélanges historiques_, v. 1-532. Paris, 1886, la. 8vo.
3. _Le Trésor de chronologie, d’histoire et de géographie pour l’étude et l’emploi des documents du moyen âge._ Paris, 1889, la. fol.
4. Various papers on the commercial relations between Cyprus and Asia Minor in the 14th cent., in the _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_.
I desire to acknowledge my indebtedness to 3 and 4 of Comte de Mas Latrie in my study of the emirates of Asia Minor.
5. ‘Liste des princes et seigneurs de divers pays, dressées pour l’expédition des lettres de la chancellerie du doge de Venise au XIVe siècle,’ in _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, vol. 26, pp. 43 fol.
MAURER, CASPAR. _Ungarische Chronica oder Beschreibung von allen ungarischen christlichen Königen, wie auch Kriegs-Empörungen, Schlachten, etc.... mit den Türcken (1390-1661)...._ Nürnberg, 1664, 12mo.
MENAVINO, GIOVANNI ANT. _I cinque libri delle leggi, religione e vita dei Turchi e della corte e d’alcune guerre del gran Turco._ Florence, 1518 and 1551. Venice, 1548. Also in Sansovino, i. 107-36. German trans. by Heinrich Müller. Frankfort, 1563, fol.
Menavino was brought up as a slave-page in the serail of Bayezid II.
MESSERSCHMID, D. G. German trans. of Abul-Ghazi.
MEXIA, PEDRO. _Petri Messiae von Sibilia vilualtige beschreibung, Christenlicher und Heidnischer Keyseren, Kunigen, weltweiser Manneren gedachtnuszwirdige Historien, löbliche geschicht...._ Basel, 1564, fol. German trans., by Lucas Zollikofer, of Mexia’s _Historia imperial_. Mexia’s account of Timur is reprinted in Seville ed. of Clavijo.
MÉZIÈRES, PHILIPPE DE. _Epistre lamentable et consolatoire sur le_ _fait de la desconfiture_ (Nicopolis). In Kervyn de Lettenhove’s ed. of Froissart, xvi. 444-523.
See Appendix BB in Wylie’s _History of Henry IV_, iv. 323-6; also _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_ for 1873, and _Académie des Inscriptions_, xvi. 491 and xvii. 219; and under A. Molinier and P. Paris below. Title of citizen of Venice given June 22, 1365, recorded in _Commemoriali_, vol. vii, fol. 47 vº.
MICHELANT, HENRI (in collab. with Gaston Raynaud). _Itinéraires à Jérusalem, et descriptions de la Terre Sainte, rédigés en français aux XIe, XIIe et XIIIe siècles._ Geneva, 1882, 8vo. (_Archives de l’Orient latin_, série géogr., vol. iii.)
MIGEON, GASTON. Manuel de l’Art musulman: II. _Les Arts plastiques et industriels._ Paris, 1907, 8vo.
MIGNE, J.-P. _Patrologiae Graecae cursus completus._ Contains the Byzantine historians, Ali Muhieddin and Leunclavius.
MIGNOT, ABBÉ. _Histoire de l’Empire ottoman depuis ses origines jusqu’à la paix de Belgrade en 1740._ Paris, 1771. 3 vols. 12mo.
MIJATOVITCH, ELODIE LAWTON. _Kossova: an attempt to bring Servian national songs at the battle of Kossova into one poem._ London, 1881, 12mo.
This is a translation, following Pavitch in general lines.
MIKLOSITCH, FRANZ. 1. _Monumenta Serbica._ Vienna, 1858.
2. In collab. with Müller. _Acta et diplomata Graeca res Graecas Italicasque illustrantia._ Vienna, 1865-70. 4 vols.
3. In collab. with Müller. _Acta patriarchatus Constantinopolitani, 1315-1402._ Vienna, 1860-62. 2 vols. 8vo. (Also republished as volume ii of No. 2 above.)
4. _Bildung der slavischen Personen: Bildung der Ortsnamen aus Personennamen._ Vienna, 1858, 4to.
MILES, COLONEL. English trans. of Abul Ghazi.
MILLER, E. Edited and trans., in collab. with Sathas, the chronicle of Macairas.
MILLER, WILLIAM. 1. _The Balkans: Rumania, Bulgaria, Servia, and Montenegro._ (In ‘Story of Nations’ series.) London, 1896, 8vo.
2. _The Latins in the Levant: a History of Frankish Greece (1204-1566)._ London, 1908, 8vo.
MINOTTO, A. S. _Acta et diplomata ex tabulario Veneto usque ad medium seculum XV. summatim regesta._ Venice, 1870-74. 3 vols. 8vo.
MIRKHOND or MIRKHWAND. 1. Life of Djenghiz Khan. Persian text edited by Am. Jaubert. Paris, 1841, 4to. Three separate trans. into French by Galland are in the Bibl. Nat., Paris, in MS. fonds fr., 6080-83.
2. The History of the Ismaelians of Persia has been trans. into French by Jourdain.
3. A Latin trans. of the History of the Seljucides was published at Giessen, 1837.
4. The Persian text of the Hist. of the Sultans of the Kharesm was edited by Défréméry, Paris, 1842, 8vo.
MITCHELL, JAMES. English trans. of first part of Hadji Khalfa’s _Maritime Wars_.
MOHAMMED FERID bey. _Tarikh eddaulet il-Osmaniyeh._ Hist. of Ott. Emp. (in Arabic). 2nd ed., Cairo, 1896, 8vo.
MOHAMMED-EN-NESAWI. _Histoire du Sultan Djelaleddin, prince du Kharezm._ Texte arabe publié et traduit par O. Houdas. Paris, 1891-5. 2 vols. la. 8vo.
MOLINIER, A. _MSS. de P. de Mézières_, in _Archives de l’Orient latin_, i. 335-64 (Paris, 1883), or, separately, Genoa, 1881, 8vo.
MONCADA, JUAN DE. _Expedicion de los Catalanes y Aragones contra Turcos y Griegos._ Madrid, 1885, la. 8vo. Barcelona, 1842, la. 8vo. Also in _Tesoro de autores illustres_, vol. iii, and _Biblioteca de Autores Españoles_, vol. xxi.
MONIFERRATOS, ANTONIOS. Διπλοματικαὶ Ένέργειαι Μανουὴλ βʹ Παλαιολόγου ἐν Έὐρώπῃ καὶ Άρίᾳ.] Athens, 1913, 8vo.
MONSTRELET. _See_ Enguerran de Monstrelet.
MONTALBANUS, JOHANNES BAPTISTA. _De Turcarum moribus commentarius._ Leyden, 1643, 32mo. Ibid., 1654, 16mo. This work was first published more than a century earlier in the _De origine_, &c., of Cuspianus.
MORANVILLÉ, HENRI. ‘Mémoires sur Tamerlan et sa Cour.’ _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, lv. 433-64. Paris, 1894.
Reprint, in full, of the memoir of the Dominican Friar who brought letter of Timur to Charles VI, after MSS. in Bibl. Nat., fonds fr. 5624 and 12201. Text of this letter is reprinted and commented upon by A. I. Silvestre de Sacy in _Acad. des Inscriptions_ (1822), vi. 470-522. Together with Clavijo and Schiltberger, the Dominican Friar gives contemporary evidence of highest value for the battle of Angora.
MORDTMANN, J. H. 1. ‘Beiträge zur osmanischen Epigraphik. I: Inschrift von Mihalitsch.’ _ZDMG._ (1911), lxv. 101-6.
2. Collab. with P.-A. Déthier in _Epigraphie von Byzanz und Konstantinopel_.
MOREL-FATIO, A. _Chronique de Morée aux XIIIe et XIVe siècles._ Text, with French trans. Paris, 1911, 8vo.
MORIS, M. French trans. of Diez’s German rendering of Sidi Ali.
MOSTRAS, C. _Dictionnaire géographique de l’Empire ottoman._ St. Petersburg, 1873, la. 8vo.
MOUKHLIS ABDERRAHMAN. _Enis out Moussamirin._ Schéfer MS., quoted by him in Bertrandon de la Broquière, p. 170, n. 3, for the first Ottoman operations around Adrianople.
MULLACH, A. _Conjecturen._ Berlin, 1852. (Corrects narrative of Ducas.)
MULLER, G. _Documenti sulle relazioni delle città toscane coll’ Oriente cristiano e coi Turchi fino all’ anno 1531._ Florence, 1879, 4to.
MÜLLER, JOSEPH. 1. ‘Byzantinische Analekten,’ pp. 336-419, in vol. ix of the _Sitzungsberichte der k.-k. Akademie der Wissenschaften_, hist.-phil. Kl., Vienna, 1852, la. 8vo.
2. ‘Über einige byzantinische Urkunden von 1324-1405.’ In vol. vii of _Sitzungsberichte_, &c.
3. In collab. with Miklositch, _Acta et dipl. Graeca_, &c.
4. In collab. with Miklositch, _Acta patriarchatus C/politani_.
MUNTANER, RAMON. _Cronica o descripcio dels fets é hazanayes del inclyt rey Don Jaime_, etc. Trans. from Catalan into French by Buchon. Paris, 1827. 2 vols. 8vo. German trans. in _Bibl. des lit. Vereins_, vol. viii. Stuttgart, 1844, 8vo. German trans. by K. Fr. W. Lanz, Leipzig, 1842. 2 vols. la. 8vo. _See also_ FRENZEL.
MURALT, ÉDOUARD DE. _Essai de Chronographie byzantine (1057-1453)._ Basel and Geneva, 1871-3. 2 vols. 8vo.
There is a wealth of erudition and research in this work. The bibliography, however, is very unsatisfactory, and one is frequently puzzled in verifying important references. Muralt confuses Arabshah with Sherefeddin, puts Ibn Batutah at 1320, and Shehabeddin at 1331.
MURATORI, LUDOVICO ANTONIO, editor. _Rerum Italicarum Scriptoree._ Milan, 1732-51. 28 vols., la. fol. (For Florentine writers _see_ Tartini.)
A new edition of Muratori, including Tartini, has just been completed by a body of Italian scholars, working at Rome under the direction of Vittorio Fiorini.
MUSTAFA IBN MOHAMMED KHOSREU-ZADE (Mevlana). Turkish trans. of Koutbaddinmakky.
NANGIS, GUILLAUME DE. _Chronique latine de 1113 d 1300._ Paris, 1843, 8vo.
NAUMANN, EDMUND. _Vom goldenen Horn zu den Quellen des Euphrat._ Munich and Leipzig, 1893, 8vo.
NAZMI ZADÉ. Turkish trans. of Arabshah.
NEDIM. _Munedjem-Bachi._ Ottoman Hist, up to Mohammed IV. In 3 vols.
NEMETH, JULIUS. ‘Die türkisch-mongolische Hypothese.’ In _Zeitschrift d. deutschen morgenl. Ges._ (1912), lxvi. 549-76.
Against the hypothesis.
NESHRI. The Vienna Codex, Hist. Osm. 15, is partly trans. by Th. Nöldeke in _ZDMG._, vols. xiii and xv (1859 and 1861). xiii. 176-218 contains the beginnings of the Ottoman family and its history up to death of Osman, xv. 333-80 contains Bayezid I. József Thúry, in _Török Magyarkori Történelmi Emlékek_, series 3, vols. i and ii, has translated most of Neshri. Budapest, 1893.
NICEPHOROS GREGORAS. _See under_ Byzantine Historians.
NICHANDJI pasha, MEHMET (the Little). Brief Hist. of Ott. Emp. up to 1560. In MS. Col. I. L. O., Petrograd.
NICOLAY, NICOLAS DE. _Les quatre Livres des navigations et pérégrinations orientales._ Lyon, 1567, fol. German trans., Nürnberg, 1572; Italian, Antwerp, 1576; ibid., Venice, 1580; English, by Dawson, London, 1585; Dutch, c. 1590.
NIEBUHR, B. G. Editor of _Corpus Script. Hist. Byzantinae_.
NIKIOU, JEAN DE. _Chronique_, trad. française du texte éthiopien, par H. Zotenberg. _Notices et Extraits_, vol. xxiv, 1re partie, pp. 343-587.
NOIRET, HIPPOLYTE. _Documents inédits pour servir à l’hist. de la domination vénétienne en Crète de 1380 à 1485, tirés des Arch. vén._ Paris, 1892, 8vo.
NÖLDEKE, TH. German trans. of portions of Neshri.
NORADOUNGHIAN, GABRIEL. _Recueil d’actes internationaux de la Sublime Porte avec les Puissances étrangères._ Tome i, 1300-1789. Paris, 1879, 8vo.
In Turkey there are no Archives d’état before the 17th cent. From 1307 to 1534 in this volume the editor merely refers to other books. His compilation is of no value until 1535 for furnishing source material for Ottoman History.
NORBERG, MATTHIAS. Latin trans. of Hadji Khalfa’s _Djihannuma_.
NOVAKOVITCH, STOJAN. _Kosova, Srbske narodne pjesmé o boju na Kosova._ Belgrade, 1871, 8vo; also Agram, 1872, and Belgrade, 1876.
Attempt to bring fragments of folksong into one narrative of battle of Kossova.
OESTERLY, HERMANN. _Wegweiser durch die Literatur der Urkundensammlungen._ Berlin, 1882. 2 vols. la. 8vo.
OHSSON, IGNACE MOURADJA D’. 1. _Tableau général de l’Empire ottoman._ Paris, 1788-1824. 7 vols. 8vo.
This work, interrupted by the Revolution and the author’s death, was completed, after d’Ohsson’s notes, by his son Charles. Vols. v-vii appeared in 1824.
2. _Histoire des Mongols depuis Ghengiz Khan jusqu’à Timour Bey._ Amsterdam, 1852. 4 vols. 8vo.
OKSZA, THÉODORE D’. Editor and French trans. of Konstantynowicz.
OLIVIERI, A. _Carte e chronache manoscritte per la storia genovese esistenti nella bibl. della R. Università ligure._ Genoa, 1855, 8vo.
OMONT, HENRI. _Documents sur l’imprimerie à Constantinople au XVIIIe siècle._ In the _Revue des Bibliothèques_, Paris, July-September, 1895.
ORBINI, DOM MAURO. _Il Regno degli Slavi, hoggi corrottamente detti Schiavoni._ Pesaro, 1601, fol.
ORTELLIUS, ABRAHAMUS. 1. _Synonymia Geographica...._ Antwerp, 1578, 4to.
2. _Theatrum orbis terrarum._ Antwerp, 1579, la. fol.
3. _Thesaurus geographicus ... nomina_, &c. Antwerp, 1587, fol.
PACHYMERES. _See under_ Byzantine Historians, p. 367.
PAGANO, C. _Delle imprese e del dominio dei Genovesi nella Grecia._ Genoa, 1846, 8vo.
PALAEOLOGOS, MANUEL. _Dialogi XXVI cum Persa quodam de Christianae religionis veritate._ Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds grec, no. 1253.
C. B. Hase, in _Notices et Extraits_, vol. viii, 2e partie, pp. 309-82, gives interesting critical account of this MS., with Greek text and Latin trans. of first two dialogues. The dialogues were with a Moslem Hodja, probably in 1390, when Man. Pal. was serving in the Ottoman army at Angora.
Most valuable description of Bayezid’s court and eloquent testimony to the humiliation of the Byzantine imperial family.
For other works of M. Palaeologos, see Migne, _Patrologia Graeca_, clvi. 82-580.
PANARETOS, MICHAIL. Περὶ τῶν τῆς Τραπεζοῦντος βασιλέων τῶν Μεγάλων Κομνηνῶν. Chronological account of Trebizond (1204-1386), with a continuation to 1424.
Edited by J. F. Tafel, in the _Opuscula_ of Eusthasius of Thessalonika, pp. 362-70, Frankfort, 1832, 4to. Also by Fallmerayer, in Abhandlung der k. Bayerischen Akad. der Wissenschaften, Munich, 1844, 8vo.
PAPARREGOPOULOS, K. Ιστορία τοῦ Έλληνικοῦ ἔθνους ἀπὸ τῶν ἀρχαιοτάτων χρόνων μέχρι τῶν νεωτέρων. Athens, 1865-74. 5 vols. 8vo. 4th edition, revised by P. Karolides, Athens, 1903.
PARIS, P. (In collab. with Abbé Lebeuf.) ‘La Vie et les Voyages de Philippe de Mézières.’ _Mém. de l’Académie des Inscriptions_, nouv. série, vol. xv, 1re partie, pp. 359-98.
PARISOT, VAL. _Cantacuzène, homme d’état et historien, ou examen critique comparatif des ‘Mémoires’ de J. C. et des sources contemporaines._ Paris, 1845, 8vo.
PARVILLÉE. _Architecture et décoration turques au XVe siècle._ With preface by Viollet-le-Duc. Paris, 1874, la. fol.
It was Parvillée who, under Ahmed Vewfik pasha, restored the monuments of Brusa.
PAUTHIER, M. G. Editor of Marco Polo.
PAVITCH, A. _Narodne Pjesme o boju na Kosova, 1389._ In Mem. of the Acad. of Sciences and Arts of Agram. Agram, 1877, 8vo.
A critical essay on the national songs of the Servians, followed by a narrative in verse, combining the songs which deal with Kossova.
PERONDINO, PIETRO (Pratense). _Magni Tamerlanis Scytharum imperatoris vita._ Florence, 1553, fol.; Basel, 1556, fol.
PERTSCH, WILHELM. _Verzeichniss der türkischen Hss. der k. Bibl. zu Berlin._ Berlin, 1899.
PETITS DE LA CROIX. 1. _Abrégé de l’hist. ottomane._ Paris, 1768. 2 vols. 12mo.
2. French trans. of Hussein Hezarfenn.
3. French trans. in MS. of Hadji Khalfa’s lexicon under title _Dictionnaire bibliographique_. In the Bibl. Nat., Paris.
4. French trans. of Sherefeddin’s hist. of Timur.
PETRARCA, FRANCESCO. _Epistolae de rebus familiaribus et variae...._ Stud. et cura J. Fracassetti. Florence, 1859-63. 3 vols. 8vo. Italian trans. of _Senilium_ by the same author. Florence, 1869-70. 2 vols. 12mo.
PFEIFFER, DAVID. _Imperatores Turcici, Libellus de Vita, Progressu et rebus gestis principum...._ Basel, before 1550, 12mo. Reprinted under title _Imperatores Ottomannici_, Basel and Wittenberg, 1587, 8vo.
Eulogy of Ottoman sultans in verse.
PHRANTZES, GEORGE. _See under_ Byz. Historians.
PICOT, ÉMILE. 1. Editor and French trans. of Urechi’s Rumanian chronicle.
2. _Généalogie de la famille Brankovitch_, in _Columna lui Traianu_, new series, 4th year, Jan.-Feb. 1883, pp. 64 f. Bucharest, 8vo.
PIGEONNEAU, HENRI. _Histoire du commerce de la France._ Vol. i. Paris, 1885, 8vo.
PINDER, M. Collab. with Friedländer in numismatic work.
POCOCK, EDWARD. Editor and English translator of Abulfaradji.
PODESTA, JO. BAPTISTA. 1. Trans. from the Turkish _De gestis Tamerlanis_.
2. _Translatae Turcicae Chronicae._ Pars prima, continens originem Ottomanicae stirpis, undecimque eiusdem stirpis Imperatorum gesta, iuxta traditionem Turcarum. Omnia a praenominato authore ex originali Turcico in Latinam, Italicam et Germanicam linguam translata. Nürnberg, 1672, fol. But only into Latin.
A trans. from diff. MSS. of Ali. But Bratutti’s trans. of Scadeddin has been used for interpolations and corrections or additions.
POGODIN, P. _Übersicht der Quellen zur Geschichte der Belagerung von Byzanz durch die Türken._ Journal of the Ministry of Public Instruction, St. Petersburg, August 1889.
POLO, MARCO. _See_ Marco Polo.
PÓR, A. (in collab. with G. Schönherr.) Volume covering period 1301-1429 in Szilagyi’s _A Magyar Nemzet Története_. (History of the Hungarian Nation.) Budapest, 1895, la. 8vo.
POSSINUS, PETRUS, S. J. Notes to Pachymeres.
POSTANSQUE, A. _De libro secretorum fidelium crucis._ (For Marino Sanudo.) Montpellier, 1854, 8vo.
POSTELLUS, GUILLAUME. 1. _De la Republique des Turcz ... exposant la manière de lever et nourir ceulx dont on en guerre se serft, avec son origine, estatz, Revenu et Domeyne, en brief._ Dédié à François Premier. Bibl. Nat., Paris, MS. fonds fr., no. 6073. (Written c. 1520.) Published: Poitiers, 1560, 8vo.
2. _De originibus Gentium Orientalium, maxime Turcarum._ Basel, 1540, 8vo.
This Latin text differs from 1, so I have listed it as a separate work.
POTTHAST, A. _Bibliotheca Historica Medii Aevi._ Berlin, 1896. 2 vols. 4to.
Vol. ii. 1047-1735 contains a very suggestive (but not thorough) _Quellenkunde für die Geschichte der europäischen Staaten während des Mittelalters_.
POTVIN, CHARLES. Editor of Ghillebert de Lannoy.
PRAY, GEORGE. 1. _Annales regum Hungariae, ab an. 997 ad an. 1564 deducti._ Vienna, 1754-74. 5 vols. 8vo. (Vol. ii, 1301-1457.)
2. _Commentarii historici de Bosniae, Serviae ac Bulgariae, tum Valachiae, Moldaviae ac Bessarabiae, cum regno Hungariae nexu._ Edited, with documents, by G. Fejér. Buda, 1837, 8vo.
PREDELLI, RICCARDO. 1. (In collaboration with Thomas.) _Diplomatarium Veneto-Levantinum, sive acta et diplomata res Venetas, Graecas atque Levantinas illustrantia a 1300 ad 1454._ Venice, 1880, 1899. 2 vols. 4to.
2. Editor of _I libri commemoriali della republica di Venezia regesti._ Vols. 1-3 (1081-1375), in _Monumenti storici della deput. Veneta_, series I, Venice, 1876, 8vo.
PUČIČ, MEDO. _Spomenitzi Srbski od 1395 do 1423._ Belgrade, 1859.
* * * * *
QUATREMÈRE, ÉTIENNE. French trans. of Shehabeddin, Makrisi, and Reshideddin (unfinished). Editor of the Prolegomena of Ibn Khaldun.
* * * * *
RAČKI, FRANCIS. _Documenta historiae Croatiae periodum antiquam illustrantia._ Agram, 1877.
RAIČ. _Hist. variorum Slavorum, imprimis Bulgarorum, Chrobatorum et Serborum._ Buda, 1823.
RAIMBOULT, MAURICE. ‘Les dessous d’un traité d’alliance en 1350.’ _Bulletin historique et philologique_, Paris, 1902.
Notice on two documents: 1. Latin text of project of treaty between Pope, Cyprus, Venice, and Rhodes, of which Mas Latrie, _Hist. de Chypre_, ii. 217, published the text after _Commemoriali_, vols. iv and v. 2. Unpublished Provençal text of letter which set forth in detail difficulties of getting this treaty signed, from MS. in Arch. des Bouches-du-Rhône, Fonds de Malte, liasse 86.
RAMBAUD, ALFRED. ‘L’Europe du Sud-Est: Fin de l’Empire grec.--Fondation de l’Empire ottoman (1282-1481).’ In Lavisse et Rambaud, _Histoire générale_, iii. 789-868. Paris, 1894, la. 8vo.
RAMSAY, SIR W. M. _Historical Geography of Asia Minor_, with 5 maps. London, 1890, la. 8vo.
RAMUS, JOHANNES (GOESANUS). _De Rebus Turcicis libri tres._ Louvain, 1553, 12mo. The first book of the three is by Secundinus.
RANKE, LEOPOLD VON. _History of Servia and the Servian Revolution._ Trans. by Mrs. A. Keen. London, 1858, 16mo.
First chapter contains an illuminating résumé of relations between Byzantium and Serbia in middle of 14th cent.
RASMUSSEN, JANUS LASSEN. _Annales islamismi, sive tabulae synchronistochronologicae Chaliforum et regum orientis et occidentis._ Copenhagen, 1825, sm. 4to. Contains, pp. 61-134, trans. of Ahmed ben Yussuf, _Historia Turcarum, Karamanorum, Selgiukudarum, Asiae Minoris_, &c.
RAYNALDUS, ODERICUS. _Annales ecclesiastici ... Baronii ... ab anno 1198._ Tomes xiii-xxi. Rome, 1646-77. 9 vols. fol. Lucca, 1746-56. 15 vols. fol.
There have been so many editions, abridgements, and translations of the _Annales_ that I have given my references to this work _under the year_, so that any edition might be consulted.
RAYNAUD, GASTON. Editor of Froissart, and, with Michelant, of the Jerusalem Itineraries.
RAYNAUD, FURCY. French trans. of Heyd’s _Levantehandelsgeschichte_.
REINAUD, J. T. French trans. of Abulfeda.
REINECCIUS, REINER. Editor of Helmoldus and Arnold of Lübeck.
REISKE, JO. JACOB. Latin trans. of Abulfeda and Chronological Tables of Hadji Khalfa; editor of Drechsler.
RÉMUSAT, ABEL. _Recherches sur les langues tartares._ Paris, 1820, 4to.
RENNELL, J. _Treatise of the Comparative Geography of Western Asia._ Vol. i. Asia Minor. London, 1831, 8vo.
RESHIDEDDIN, FADHL ALLAH. _Djami ut Tevarikh._ Hist. of the Mongols of Persia. Quatremère trans. into French the first part, Paris, 1836, la. fol. Erdmann trans. into German the review of the various tribes of Asia at accession of Djenghiz Khan, with account of their origin. Kasan, 1841. In his German life of Timur, pp. 172-84, Erdmann practically repeats this portion verbatim.
The earlier portion of Abul-Ghazi is practically an abridgement of Reshid.
REUSNER, NICHOLAS. _Epistolarum Turcicarum variorum et diversorum authorum libri XIV._ Frankfort, 1598-9. 4 vols. 4to.
‘in quibus Epistolae de rebus Turcicis summorum pontificum, imperatorum, regum, principum ... ad nostra tempora leguntur.’
REZ, PETER VON. Lament for defeat of Nicopolis, in Liliencron.
RICAUT, PAUL. _A History of the Present State of the Ottoman Empire containing the Political maxims of the Turks, their religion_, &c. 5th ed. London, 1682, fol. 6th ed., ibid., 1693. 2 vols. 8vo. French trans. by Briot. Amsterdam, 1678, 16mo; 1696, sm. 8vo, with 16 engravings. Italian trans. by Costi Belli. 2nd ed. Venice, 1673, 4to.
RICHER, CHRISTOPHER. _De rebus Turcarum ad Franciscum Gallorum regem Christianissimum._ Paris, 1540, 8vo. (Liber I. De origine Turcarum et Ottomanni imperio. Liber III. De Tamerlanis et Parthi rebus gestis.)
RICOLDUS. _See_ my note to Anon. _De ritu et moribus Turcarum._
RIEU, C. P. H. 1. _Catalogue of Persian MSS. in British Museum._ London, 1879-83. 3 vols.
2. Supplement to above. London, 1895.
3. _Catalogue of Turkish MSS. in the British Museum._ London, 1888.
RODD, SIR RENNELL. _The Princes of Achaia and the Chronicles of Morea: a Study of Greece in the Middle Ages._ London, 1907. 2 vols. 8vo.
Excellent map of mediaeval Greece.
ROMANIN, SAMUELE. _Storia documentata di Venezia._ Venice, 1853-61. 10 vols. 8vo.
For attempts of Venice in 14th cent. to league Christians against the Turks, vols. iii and iv.
RONCIÈRE. Editor, in collab. with Dorez, of fragments of Marino Sanudo.
ROSEN, BARON VICTOR. 1. _Notices sommaires des MSS. arabes du Musée asiatique._ Petrograd, 1881.
2. _Remarques sur les MSS. orientaux de la col. de Marsigli à Bologna._ Paris, 1884, 4to.
RYMER, THOMAS. _Foedera, conventions, literae ... acta publica inter reges Angliae et alios ... ab 1101 ... ad nostra ... tempora._ Editio tertia. Revised from original MSS. in Tower of London, by George Holmes. London, 1739-45. 12 vols., la. fol.
* * * * *
SABELLICUS, ANTONIUS. In Lonicerus, fol. 105-12.
SAFAŘÍK, IVAN. 1. _Elenchus actorum spectantium ad historiam Serborum et reliquorum Slavorum meridionalium ... quae in archivo Venetiarum reperiuntur._ Belgrade, 1858, 4to.
The notes are in Servian, but with Latin translation.
2. _Acta archivii Veneti spectantia ad historiam Serborum._ Belgrade, 1860.
SAFAŘÍK, PAUL JOSEPH. _Slovanské Starořitnosti._ Prague, 1837, 4to. Trans. under title _Slawische Alterthümer_ by Moses von Aehrenfeld, with notes by Heinrich Wuttke. Leipzig, 1843-4. 2 vols. 8vo.
SAGREDO, GIOVANNI. _Memorie istoriche de’ monarchi ottomani._ Venice, 1676, fol.; 1688, 4to.
The first of modern writers who, though acquainted with Ottoman ‘sources’, deliberately prefers to follow the Byzantine writers who were contemporary.
SAGUNDINO, NICHOLAS. _See_ Secundinus.
SAID. _Ghulcheni-Méarif._ Hist. of Ott. Emp. from foundation to 1774. In 2 vols.
SALABERRY, DE. _Hist. de l’Emp. ott. depuis sa fondation jusqu’à ... 1792._ Avec des pièces justificatives. Paris, 1813. 4 vols. 8vo.
SALADIN, H. Manuel d’Art musulman. Vol. i. _L’architecture._ Paris, 1907, 8vo.
SALCON, NICOLAS. French trans. of Hayton.
SAMBUCUS, JOANNES (of Tirnovo). _Reges Ungariae ab anno 401-1567 uersibus descripti._ In Bonfinius, fol. 891-6.
SANGINETTI, B. R. French trans., in collab. with Ch. Défréméry, of Ibn Batutah.
SANSOVINO, FRANCESCO. 1. _Gli annali turcheschi o vero vita de’principi della casa athomana._ First edition. Venice, 1568, 4to. Edition from which I quote is Venice, 1573, 4to.
2. _Historia universale dell’ origine et imperio de’ Turchi, nella quale si contengono la origine, etc., de’ Turchi._ Venice, 1654. 2 vols., la. 8vo.
A collection of various writers on the Ottoman Empire.
SANUTO, MARINO (TORSELLO). 1. Memorial to King of France urging crusade, 1321. Written in French. In Bongars, _Gesta Dei per Francos_, ii. 5.
2. Letters published by Dorez and Roncière in _Bibl. de l’Ecole des Chartes_ (1895), lvi. 34-44.
3. _Secreta fidelium crucis._ In Bongars, vol. ii. _See also_ thesis of Postansque, and study by Kunstmann. Four books, written between 1306 and 1321, urging a crusade. Book III trans. into English by Aubrey Stewart, in Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society, vol. xii, London, 1896, 8vo.
SANUTO, MARINO (THE YOUNGER). 1. _Vite de’ Duchi di Venezia._ (1421-93.) In Muratori, xxii. 399-1252.
2. _Diarii._ Ed. by Gugl. Berchet. Venice, 1877-1900. 56 vols. 4to.
I have given the younger Sanuto’s work here, because he is so often confused with the elder.
SARRE, FRIEDRICH. _Reise in Kleinasien, Sommer 1895. Forschungen zur seldjukischen Kunst und Geographie des Landes._ 76 Tafeln. Map by Kiepert. Berlin, 1896, la. 8vo.
SATHAS, C. N. 1. _Documents inédits relatifs à l’hist. de la Grèce au moyen âge (1400-1500)._ Paris, 1880-1. 2 vols. 4to. Maps of Crete, the Aegean, and Sea of Marmora in 15th cent. I. contains Canc. Secreta, 208 doc., from 1402 to 1500; II. Misti, 549 doc., from 1400 to 1412.
2. Τουρκοκρατουμένη Έλλάς. Athens, 1869.
3. Edited and trans., in collab. with Miller, the Cyprus chronicle of Macairas.
4. _Bibliotheca graeca medii aevi._ 6 vols. I-III, Venice, 1872-3; IV-VI, Paris, 1874-7.
SAULI, LUIGI. _Della colonia Genovesi in Galata._ Turin, 1831. 2 vols. 8vo.
The valuable information in these volumes is practically without dates, and there is no index.
SCHAFFARIK, JANKO. _See_ Safařík, Ivan.
SCHÉFER, CHARLES. French trans. of portion of Ibn Bibi. Editor, with copious notes, of Bertrandon de la Broquière, Spandugino, and a portion of Geuffraeus. His collection of oriental MSS. has recently enriched the Bibliothèque Nationale. The catalogue of his library, published in 1903 by H. Welter, Paris, is an addition to the bibliography of Oriental history, geography, and philology.
SCHILTBERGER, JOHANNES. _Gefangenschaft in der Turckey._ Frankfort, 1557, 4to. Best modern German edition is: Ed. by K. Fr. Neumann under title _Reisen des Johannes Schiltberger._ Munich, 1859, 8vo. (Hammer used earlier reprint of Munich MS., _Reise in den Orient_, Munich, 1813.) English trans. by J. Buchan Telfer, R.N., with notes by Prof. P. Bruun of Odessa, published by the Hakluyt Society, London, 1879, 8vo, under title _The Bondage and Travels of Johann Schiltberger_.
SCHLUMBERGER, G. _Numismatique de l’Orient latin._ Paris, 1878, 4to.
SCHMITT, JOHN, Editor. The chronicle of Morea. Τὸ Χρονικὸν τοῦ Μορέως. (From the Copenhagen and Paris MSS.) London, 1904, 8vo.
SCHÖNHERR, G. Collab., with Pór, A., in the latest authoritative Hungarian history covering the 14th century.
pp. 478-90: Monnaies d’Imitation à légendes latines frappées par les princes ou émirs turcomans du Saroukhan, d’Aïdin, et de Mentesché.
SCHULZ, C. G. _Geschichte des osmanischen Reichs._ Leipzig, 1772, 8vo.
SCHWANDTNER, J. G., editor. _Scriptores rerum Hungaricarum veteres ac genuini._ Tomus i. Vienna, 1746, fol.
SCHWICKER, J. H. German trans. of Kállay.
SEADEDDIN, MOHAMMED BEN HASSAN (KHODJA EFFENDI). _Tajul-Tevarikh._ The Crown of Histories. Constantinople, 1862. 2 vols. 4to. Of this most celebrated Ottoman historian, whose chronicle covers from the origin of the family, there are translations as follows:
1. BRATUTTI, VICENZO. _Cronica dell’ origine e progressi della casa ottomana, composta da Saidino Turco._ Parte prima, Osman-Mohammed I, Vienna, 1649, 12mo. Parte secunda, Murad II and Mohammed II, Madrid, 1652.
Hammer uses this translation.
2. KOLLAR, A. F. _Seadeddini annales Turcici usque ad Murad II._ Turcice et Latine cura Ad. Fr. Kollar a Kerestan. Vienna, 1755 fol.
3. SEAMAN, WM. _The Reign of Sultan Orkhan, translated from Hodja effendi._ London, 1652, 8vo.
4. _History of the Turkish war with Rhodians, Venetians, Egyptians, Persians and other nations, written by Will Caoursin and Khodja Afendy, a Turk._ London, 1683, 8vo.
This is an anon. trans. of Caoursin’s _Historia Rhodi_ and Seadeddin’s recital of the siege of Rhodes under Mohammed II.
5. GALLAND, ANTOINE. _Histoire ottomane, écrite par Saadud-din Mehemed Hassan, plus connu chez les Turcs sous le nom de Cogia Efendi, mise en françois par Antoine Galland, Professeur et Lecteur royal en langue arabe._ A translation in MS. of Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds turc, 64. Vol. i, up to Murad II, is lacking. Vol. ii is in the Bibl. Nat. under fonds fr., 6074. A third volume, fonds fr., 6075, contains Bayezid II and Selim I.
Zinkeisen used this translation. But Jorga, i. 150, n. 1, is in error in believing that Zinkeisen had access to complete trans. This has been lacking since 18th cent. The whole comment of Jorga is confusing. He mixes Seadeddin with Neshri, and follows Zenker’s erroneous statement that Leunclavius’s _Annali_ is a trans. of Seadeddin.
6. The story of the capture of Constantinople by Mohammed has been translated into French by Garcin de Tassy, Paris, 1826, and by Michaud, in his _Bibl. des Croisades_, vol. iii; into English by Gibb, Glasgow, 1879; and, in part, into German by Krause, _Die Eroberungen von Konstantinopel im XIII. und XV. Jahrhundert_, Halle, 1870, 8vo.
SEAMAN, WILLIAM. English translator of portion of Seadeddin.
SECUNDINUS, NICOLAUS. _Liber de familia Autumanarum ad Eneam,_ _Senarum episcopum._ Fol. 133-41 of MS. Latin 414 of K. Bibl., Munich. Published as Liber I in Johannes Ramus, which see.
This letter, written to Aenaeas Sylvius, afterwards Pope Pius II, from Naples, is one of the first western accounts of the Osmanlis. In the title-page of ‘De rebus Turcicis’, printed 1553, Secundinus is called ‘vetustissimo autore’.
SEFERT, M. _La Dalmatie, y compris ... Patras, Athènes._ Manuel de voyageur avec 88 gravures et 32 cartes et plans. Guide illustré Hartleben, no. 64. Vienna and Leipzig, 1912, 12mo.
SEIFF, J. _Reisen in der asiatischen Türkei._ Leipzig, 1875.
SERVI, FERDINANDO. _Compendium Historiae Turcicae._ Venice, 1689. This is a trans. into Latin, then Italian, of Du Verdier. Some bibliographers have treated this as an original work.
SHEHABEDDIN, ABUL ABBAS AHMED. _Mesalek al absar fi memalek alamsar._ Footpaths of the eyes in the Kingdoms of the different Countries. Existing fragments, which include Asia Minor, trans. into French by Quatremère, in _Notices et Extraits_, xiii. 152-384, from MS. in Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds arabe, no. 2325.
Quatremère in discussing whether S. is from Damascus, Marash or Morocco, has overlooked Hadji Khalfa, Lex. Bibl., no. 10874, fol. 1832, who unhesitatingly calls him ‘écrivain de Damas’.
SHEREFEDDIN ALI (YEZDI). _Zéfer Namé._ But MS. in Bibl. Nat., Paris, reads _Kitabi fatih namehi Emir Timour_ (a Life of Timur by his own secretary). Trans. into Turkish by Mohammed ben al Agemi. Trans. into French by Petits de la Croix, under title _Histoire de Timourbec, connu sous le nom du Gran Tamerlan, empereur des Mongols et Tartares_. Paris, 1722. 4 vols. 12mo. No index. Another edition of same, Delft, 1723. 4 vols. 8vo.
Muralt, in the bibliography of his _Chronographie byzantine_, has fallen into the error of identifying Sherefeddin with Arabshah.
SHIREDDIN. _See_ Dorn.
SIDAROUSS, S. _Les Patriarcats dans l’Empire Ottoman et spécialement en Égypte._ Paris, 1907, la. 8vo.
SIDI ALI IBN HUSSEIN (Khatib Roumi). The Mirror of the Countries. Narration of Voyages. German trans. of Diez, trans. into French by Moris, with foreword on life and times of Sidi Ali. Paris, 1827, 8vo.
SILVESTRE DE SACY, A. I. French trans. of Makrisi’s _Numismatics_. Editor of letter of Dominican Friar. _See_ note under Moranvillé, Henri de.
SIONITA, GABRIEL. Latin trans. of Edrisi in collab. with John Hesronita.
SISMONDI, J. C. L. SISMONDE DE. _Histoire des républiques italiennes du moyen âge._ Paris, 1809. 8 vols. 12mo. New ed., Paris, 1840. 10 vols. 8vo.
SLANE, G. DE. 1. _Catalogue des bibliothèques de Constantinople._ In MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds arabe, no. 4474.
2. _Cat. des MSS. arabes de la Bibl. Nat., Paris._ 2 vols., 1883 and 1895. Still in MS.
3. Trans. into French Ibn Khaldun’s _Prolegomena_.
SMIRNOW, W. D. Collections scientifiques de l’Inst. des Langues orientales du Ministère des aff. étrang. Vol. viii, _Manuscrits turcs_. Petrograd, 1897, 8vo.
SOLAKZADÉ. Hist. Ott. Emp. from beginning to Soleiman II, in 1 vol.
SPANDUGINO, TEODORO. _I commentari di Teo. Spandugino Cantacusino, gentil’huomo Constantinopolitano. Costumi e leggi de’ Turchi: origine de’ Prencipi Turchi._ Lucca, 1550. Florence, 1551. Also in Sansovino, pp. 107-36, 182-206. Charles Schéfer has published and edited an early French MS. trans. of above: _Petit traicté de l’origine des Turcqz_. Paris, 1896, 8vo.
Excellent for erudite display of bibliographical knowledge, but Schéfer’s comments on chronicle are disappointing, and his chronology is inaccurate.
SPIEGEL. _See_ Jo. Gaudier.
SPRENGER, A. _See_ Fitzclarence, George.
SREZNAVSKI, L. Russian trans. of Clavijo.
STELLA, GIORGIO. _Annales Genuenses._ (1298-1409.) Continued by ‘Frater Johannes’ to 1435. In Muratori, xvii. 947-1318.
STEWART, AUBREY. English trans. of portion of _Secreta fidelium crucis_ of Marino Sanuto (Torsello).
STEWART, CHARLES. English trans. of anon. Memoirs of Timur.
STRITTER, J. G. _Memoriae populorum, olim ad Danubium, Pontum Euxinum, paludem Maeotidem, Caucasum, mare Caspium et inde magis ad septentriones incolentium, e scriptoribus Byzantinis erutae et digestae._ Petrograd, 1779. 4 vols. 4to.
Numerous writers have gone to Stritter, and quoted from him, in citing Byzantine writers of 13th and 14th cent.
STRZYGOWSKI, JOSEF. _Die Calendarbilder des Chronographen vom Jahre 354, mit 30 Tafeln._ Berlin, 1888, 4to.
SZALAY, LADISLAS. _Geschichte Ungarns._ Trans. from Hungarian by Heinrich Wögerer. Buda-Pest, 1866-9. 3 vols. 8vo.
SZILAGYI, ALEXANDER. Editor of _A Magyar Nemzet Törtenete_.
TAFEL, G. L. F. 1. _De Via Egnatia._ Tübingen, 1842.
2. _Symbola critica ad geographiam Byzantinam spectantia._ K. Bayer. Akademie, vol. v.
3. Editor of Panaretos.
4. _Urkunden zur älteren Handels-und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig._ Vienna, 1856. (In collab. with Thomas, G. M.)
TAHIR-ZADE, AHMED AGA. _Tarikhi-Aga._ Constantinople, 1876. 5 vols. 8vo. General Hist. of Ott. Emp. from foundation.
TARBÉ, P. Editor of Eustache Deschamps.
TARTINI, J. M., ed. _Rerum Italicarum Scriptores_. Florence, 1748-70. 2 vols. la. fol. (A supplement to Muratori: codices of Laurentinian Library.) Newly edited, Rome, 1909, by V. Fiorini _et al._, as vols. xxvi and xxvii of the new Muratori.
TAUBER, NICHOLAS VON. German trans. of Geuffraeus.
TAVERNIER, JEAN-BAPTISTE. _Les six voyages ... qu’il a faits en Turquie, en Perse et aux Indes, pendant quarante ans. Nouvelle éd., reveüe et corrigée._ Paris, 1713. 5 vols. 12mo.
TCHIHATCHEFF, P. DE. _Asie Mineure: description physique statistique et archéol._ Avec atlas de 28 cartes. Paris, 1853-6. 2 vols. 8vo.
TELFER, J. B. English trans. of Schiltberger.
TEXEIRA. _Voyages de Texeira, ou l’Histoire des Rois des Perses._ Trad. de l’espagnol par Colotendi (d’après Barbier). Paris, 1681. 2 vols. 12mo.
Texeira follows Mirkhond.
TEXIER, CHARLES. _Asie Mineure: description géogr., hist. et archéol._ Paris, 1862, 8vo. In series ‘L’Univers illustré’. A larger and earlier edition was published in Paris, 1839-49. 3 vols. fol., with 241 plates and maps.
THALLÓCZY. (In collab. with Gelčić.) 1. _Diplomata relationum reipublicae Ragusinae cum regno Hungariae._ Buda-Pesth, 1887.
2. _Studien zur Geschichte Bosniens und Serbiens im Mittelalter_ ... übersetzt von Dr. Franz Eckhardt. Munich, 1914, 8vo.
THEINER, AUGUSTUS. 1. _Monumenta vetera historiam Hungariae sacram illustrantia._ Maximam partem nondum edita. Ex tabulariis vaticanis deprompta, collecta ac serie chronol. disposita. Ab Honorio III. ad Clementem VII. (1216-1526). Rome, 1859-60. 2 vols. fol.
2. _Vetera monumenta Slavorum meridionalium historiam illustrantia._ Rome and Agram, 1863, 1875. 2 vols. 8vo.
Contains papal letters for our period.
THOMAS, A. _Les lettres à la cour des papes ... 1290-1423._ Rome, 1884, 8vo. Also in _Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire_, vols. ii and iv.
THOMAS, G. M. 1. Collab. with Tafel in compilation of _Urkunden zur älteren Handels-und Staatsgeschichte_.
2. Collab. with Predelli in _Diplomatarium Veneto-Levantinum_.
THORNBERG. Latin trans. of Ibn Khaldun.
THURÓCZ, JOHANN. _Illustrissima Hungariae regum chronica._ In Schwandtner, i. 39-291.
THURY, JOSEF. Hungarian trans. of Neshri.
TINDAL, N. English trans. of Cantemir.
TODERINI, Abbé JEAN-BAPTISTE. _De la littérature des Turcs._ Trad. de l’italien en français par l’abbé Cournand. Paris, 1789. 3 vols. 8vo.
Toderini was chaplain to the Bailie of Venice at Constantinople from 1779 to 1785. In historical points he follows Cantemir pretty closely. Of the Ottoman historians he seems to know only Seadeddin and Hadji Khalfa.
TODERINI, T. (in collab. with B. Cecchetti). _Il R. Archivio di Venezia._ Venice, 1873, 8vo.
TOZER, H. F. 1. _The Church and the Eastern Empire._ London, 1888. 4to.
2. Editor of 1877 edition of Finlay.
TRAUT, VEIT. _Türkischer Kayser Ankunft Krieg und Sieg wider die Christen biss auf den Zwelfften yetzt Regierenden Tyrannen Soleymannum._ With 15 woodcuts. Augsburg, 1543, fol.
TUDELLE, BENJAMIN DE. In Bergeron.
TYCHSEN, O. G. Latin trans. of Makrisi.
URECHI, GRÉGOIRE. _Chronique de Moldavie, depuis le milieu du XIVe siècle jusqu’à 1594._ Texte roumain en caractères slavons. Traduction par Émile Picot. _École des Langues viv. orientales_, vol. ix. Paris, 1879, 8vo.
URSINS, JEAN-J. DES. _Histoire de Charles VI._ Edited by Godefroy. Paris, 1614, 4to.
URSU, I. Editor, with Rumanian notes, of Donado da Lezze.
VAMBÉRY, HERMANN. 1. _Alt-osmanische Sprachstudien._ Leyden, 1901, 8vo.
2. _Hungary._ ‘Story of Nations’ series. London, 1898, 8vo.
3. _Geschichte Bocharas oder Transoxaniens._ Stuttgart, 1872.
VANEL. _Abrégé nouveau de l’histoire gén. des Turcs ... depuis leur établissement jusqu’à présent. Avec les Portraits des Empereurs ottomans tirez sur les meilleurs originaux._ Paris, 1689. 3 vols. 12mo.
VAN GAVER, JULES. Collab. with Jouannin.
VATTIER, PIERRE. French trans. of Arabshah.
VERTOT, ABBÉ. _Histoire des chevaliers de Saint-Jean._ Amsterdam, 1732. 7 vols. 12mo.
VIGÉNAIRE, BLAISE DE. French trans. of Chalcocondylas.
VILLANI, GIOVANNI. _Historia universalis_ (in Italian). Muratori, xiii. 1-1002.
Villani died of the plague in 1348.
VILLANI, MATTEO, and his son FILIPPO. _Historia ab 1348 ad 1365._ A continuation of the _Historia universalis_. (Also in Italian.) Muratori, xiv. 1-770.
A most valuable contemporary record for first conquests of Murad I in Europe.
VIVIEN DE SAINT-MARTIN, LOUIS. _Description historique et géogr. de l’Asie Mineure._ Paris, 1852. 2 vols. 8vo.
VLASTO, E.-A. Trans. into French portion of Hopf which relates to Giustiniani family of Chios.
VULLERS, J. A. Latin trans. of Mirkhond.
WAVRIN, JEAN DE. _Les Chronicques d’Engleterre._ Edited by Mlle. du Pont. Paris, 1858-63. 2 vols. 8vo.
WENZEL, G. _Monumenta Hungariae historica._ Buda-Pest, 1876, 8vo.
WERUNSKI, E. _Excerpta ex registris Clementis VI et Innocentii VI ..._ (541 documents from 1342 to 1360). Innsbruck, 1885, 8vo.
WHITE, JOSEPH. Editor of Clarendon Press (1783) Persian text of Timur’s memoirs.
WIRTH, A. _Geschichte der Türken._ 2nd ed. Stuttgart, 1913, 12mo.
WÖGERER, H. German trans. of Szalay.
WOLFF. _Geschichte der Mongolen._ Breslau, 1872.
WRIGHT, J. Editor of Mandeville.
WÜSTENFELD, FERDINAND. 1. _Vergleichungs-Tabellen der muhammedanischen und christlichen Zeitrechnung, nach dem ersten Tage jedes muham. Monats berechnet und im Auftrage und auf Kosten der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft._ Leipzig, 1854, 4to.
This is reproduced in Mas Latrie’s _Trésor de Chronologie_, &c., pp. 549-622.
2. _Geschichte der Türken mit besonderer Berücksichtigung des vermeintlichen Anrechts derselben auf den Besitz von Griechenland._ Leipzig, 1899, 8vo.
A book full of inaccuracies and misleading statements: altogether unworthy of the author of the _Tabellen_.
WUTTKE, HEINRICH. Editor of German trans. of P. J. Safařík.
WYLIE, H. _History of England under Henry IV._ London, 1884-98. 4 vols. 12mo.
XÉNOPOL, A. D. _Histoire des Roumains._ Paris, 1896. 2 vols. 1a. 8vo. This is a translation, revised and abridged by the author himself, of _Istoria Rominilor din Dacia traiana_. Jassy, 1888-93. 6 vols. 8vo.
YAHIA, NASREDDIN. _See_ Ibn Bibi.
YALE, H. English trans. of Marco Polo.
ZAGORSKY, VLADIMIR. _François Rački et la renaissance scientifique et politique de la Croatie._ Paris, 1909, 8vo.
pp. 178-81 contain exposé of Bosno-Serbo-Croatian relations at time of Ottoman conquest.
ZENKER, J. TH. _Bibliotheca Orientalis._ Leipzig, 1848-61. 2 vols. 4to. Vol. i contains: Arabic, Persian, and Turkish books from invention of printing to 1840; vol. ii, a supplement of preceding up to 1860, and books on Christian Orient.
Compiled in haphazard fashion: very incomplete: most important works are omitted: in giving translations Seadeddin is confused with Ali.
ZINKEISEN, JOHANN WILHELM. _Geschichte des Osmanischen Reichs in Europa._ Gotha, 1840-63. 7 vols. 8vo. In Allgemeine Staatengeschichte, I, 15 _Werke_. Vol. i up to 1453.
Jorga’s recent work is 37 in the same series.
ZOLLIKOFER, LUCAS. German trans. of Pedro Mexia.
ZOTENBERG, H. French trans. of Jean of Nikiou.
ANONYMOUS
_Acta patriarchatus Constantinopolitani_ (1315-1402). In Miklositch and Müller, _Acta et diplomata_, vol. i.
_Anciennes Chroniques de Savoye._ Cols. 1-382 in _Monumenta Historiae Patriae_: Scriptores, vol. i.
Contemporary account of Amadeo’s expedition to the Levant.
_Chronik aus Kaiser Sigmunds Zeit (1126-1434)._ Edited by Th. von Kern, in _Die Chroniken der deutschen Städte_, Nürnberg, i. 344-414. Leipzig, 1862, 8vo.
_La Chronique du duc Loys de Bourbon._ Ed. by P. P. Chazaud, Paris, 1876, 8vo.
_Chronique de Morée._ Edited for Soc. Hist. France by Jean de Longnon. Paris, 1911, 8vo.
_See also_ Rodd, Sir Rennell, Schmitt, John, and Morel-Fatio, A.
_Chronique du religieux de Saint-Denis._ Edited by Bellaguet, in Coll. des Doc. inédits sur l’hist. de France, XVII, tome ii. 504. Paris, 1839-52. 6 vols. 4to.
Nicopolis expedition, ii. 425-30, 483-532.
_Chronique des quatre premiers Valois._ (1327-93.) Edited by S. Luce. Paris, 1861, 8vo.
_Cronica Dolfina._ Bibl. Marc., Venice, MS. ital., class 7, no. 794.
_Derbend Namé._ English trans. with Turkish text, by Mirza A. Kazem bey. St. Petersburg, 1851, 4to.
The Dominican Friar’s Account of Timur. _See_ Moranvillé, Henri, and Silvestre de Sacy, A. I.
Έπιρωτικά (Epirotica). _Historia Epiri a Michaele Nepote Duce conscripta._ Six fragments, forming pp. 207-79, in _Historia et Politica Patriarchica Constantinopoleos_. (In _Corpus Script. Byz._) Bonn, 1849, 8vo.
_La Généalogie du Grand-Turc_ (Lyon ed.). _See_ Gycaud.
_Livre des faicts du bon messire Jean le Maingre, dit Bouciquaut._ Bibl. Nat., fonds fr., no. 11432. Th. Godefroy edited and published this MS., Paris, 1620, 4to. Modern editions: Collection Petitot, VI and VII; Michaud et Poujoulat, II; and Buchon, _Choix de chroniques_ (Panthéon littéraire), III. Paris, 1853.
_Memoirs of Timur._ Supposed to be an autobiography in Djagatai Turkish, MS. of which was discovered in the Yemen.
1. Persian trans. by Abu Halib Hussein. The text was edited by Professor White, and publ. by the Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1783, with a trans. into English by Major Davy. A second English trans. was made by Charles Stewart, under title _Mulfuzat timüry_ or autobiographical memoirs of the Moghul emp. Timur. London, 1830, 4to.
2. French trans. from Persian by L. Langlès, under title _Instituts politiques et militaires de Tamerlan_, écrit par lui-même. Paris, 1787, 8vo.
_Mira-ari tarikh Osmani._ (Ottoman history.) Constantinople, 1876, 8vo.
_Monumenta Pisana._ In Muratori, xv. 973-1088.
_Relation de la Croisade de Nicopolis par un serviteur de Gui de Blois._ The two MSS. in the Library of the Duc d’Arenbourg and the Ashburnham collection are published by Kervyn de Lettenhove, in his edition of Froissart, xv. 439-508; xvi. 413-43.
_Series Imperatorum Turcicorum._ In Foglietta, _de Originibus_.
_Tractatus de ritu et moribus Turcarum._ Cologne, c. 1488; Wittenberg, with preface by Martin Luther, 1530; German trans. by Sebastian Franck, without place, 1530; augmented edition of Franck’s trans., Berlin, 1590. The same work under title _Tractatus de ritu, moribus et multiplicatione nequitiae Turcarum_, Paris, 1514, 8vo.
By a Christian slave under Murad II. Rambaud, _Hist. gén._, iii. 867, cites an edition of Paris, 1509, 4to, which he attributes to Ricoldus. But I do not find this name in other editions.
SERBIAN CHRONICLES
Chronicle of the Abbey Tronosha. Chronicle of Pek, quoted by Mijatovitch.
BYZANTINE HISTORIANS
1. _Historiae byzantinae scriptores._ Louvre ed. Paris, 1645-1711. 38 vols. fol. Venice, 1727-33. 23 vols.
2. _Corpus scriptorum historiae byzantinae._ Ed. by Niebuhr. Bonn, 1828-78. 49 vols. 8vo.
3. _Patrologia Graeca._ Ed. by Migne. Paris, 1857-66, 161 vols. 4to.
The writers who deal with the 14th cent. are:
1. Pachymeres (1258-1308). Bonn, 1835. 2 vols. 8vo. Rome, 1660.
2. Nicephorus Gregoras (1204-1351). Bonn, 1855. Paris, 1702, 2 vols.
3. Johannes VI Cantacuzenos (1320-57). Bonn, 1828-32. 3 vols. 8vo. Paris, 1645. Migne, ciii-civ.
4. Manuel I Palaeologos (1388-1407). Migne, clvi. 82-582.
5. Chalcocondylas, Laonicus (1298-1462). Bonn, 1843. Paris, 1650. Migne, vol. clix.
6. Ducas, Johannes (1341-1462). Bonn, 1834. Migne, clvii. 750-1166. Paris, 1649. Chronicon Breve--added to Ducas.
7. Phrantzes, George (1259-1477). Bonn, 1838. Migne, vol. clvi. Vienna, 1796.
8. Panaretos, Michail (1204-1386). For Trebizond. _See_ editions under his card.
9. Historia Epirotica. Bonn, 1849. (In vol. xxiii.)
VENETIAN ARCHIVES
Original MS. collections referred to in my book:
I. _Commemoriali._ A transcription of miscellaneous acts, bulls, &c., 1295-1787. 33 vols. la. fol. Vols. i-ix, 1295-1405. i, 1295-8. ii, 1309-16. iii, 1317-26. iv, 1325-43. v, 1342-52. vi, 1353-8. vii, 1358-62. viii, 1362-76. viii (2), 1376-97. ix, 1395-1405. The _Commemoriali_ have been edited by Riccardo Predelli. _See also_ Thomas.
II. _Misti_ (Deliberationes mixtae). ‘Continentes res terrestres et maritimas.’ 1293-1440. First 14 volumes (1293-1331) were burned in 1574 or 1577, but indices have been preserved in the Rubricarii. 60 vols. fol. xv-xxxii, 1332-67; xxxiii-xli, 1368-88; xlii-xlix, 1389-1413. Rubricarii. Indices of the Misti. 4 vols. i, 1293-1368 (32 registers); ii, 1368-89 (9 registers); iii, 1389-1413 (9 registers).
III. _Secreti_ (Deliberationes secretae). For foreign affairs. 1345-1401. Numbered by letters. 19 vols., A to S, of which only four remain. A and B, 1345-50; R (now called E), March 1388-97; and L, May 1373-Feb. 1376. One feels deeply the loss of these records, especially of S, which went from April 1397 to Feb. 1400.
IV. _Patti._ 7 registers of treaties from 883 to 1496.
V. _Liber Albus._ Treaties, privileges, &c., with the Levant (principally for commerce) up to 1348.
VI. _Libri Secretorum Consilii Rogatorum_, commonly called ‘Cons. Rog.’. A continuation of the Secreti from April 10, 1401, to Feb. 26, 1476. These volumes bear Arabic numerals, not letters. There are 27 registers, of which no. 1 contains the Anatolian campaign of Timur and the downfall of Bayezid.
In the classified bibliography, the collections in which documents from Venetian records have been published are grouped.
INDEX
Adalia, 158, 296, 297-8.
Adana, 74, 282, 296, 298-9.
Adrianople, 39, 91, 100, 103, 112, 114, 121, 123, 125-6, 171-87, 207, 231-2, 261; unique place of, in Ottoman history, 139.
Afion Kara Hissar, 11, 290.
Aïdin, 65, 86, 158, 185-6, 191, 228, 283, 286, 291; Ottoman absorption of, 185, 259, 274, 287.
Akbara, 69, 284.
Akridur, 284, 288-9.
Ak Seraï, 16, 162, 187, 189, 237, 284, 300.
Ak Sheïr, 154, 187, 260, 284-5.
Ak Tchaï, battle of, 188-90.
Alaïa, 285, 289.
Albania, Ottoman invasions of, 147, 159-60, 170, 183, 206, 243.
Albanian nobility, conversion of, to Islam, 76.
Albanians, value of, in Ottoman army, 159.
Alaeddin Kaï Kobad, composition of army of, 16-17; connexion with Osmanlis, 20-2, 264, 266, 269; fortifies Sivas, 246.
---- of Karamania, 165-7, 187-90, 288; sons of, set free by Timur after Angora, 257.
---- pasha (brother of Orkhan), 70-2.
Alexander of Bulgaria, 103, 138-9, 170.
Ali pasha (grand vizier of Bayezid), 171-2, 199-200, 234.
Altoluogo, 286.
Amadeo of Savoy, crusade of, 128, 130; proselytizing zeal of, aids conquests of Murad, 141-2; intervenes to make peace between Venice and Genoa, 155; hostility to Theodore Palaeologos, 228.
Amassia, 250, 300.
Anatoli Hissar, 234.
Anatolia (_see_ Asia Minor).
Angora, 16, 68, 155, 162, 188, 191, 250, 259, 264, 285-6, 288; battle of, 251-5, 262; capture of, by Osmanlis, 68, 156.
Anna of Savoy, 91-4, 129.
Argos, population of, deported to Anatolia, 230.
Armenia, Little, kingdom of (_see_ Cilicia).
Armenians, bravery and massacre of, at Sivas, 248.
Asia Minor, railways in, 11-12; new ethnic elements in, 14-15; obscure geographical names in, 32; exodus of Greeks to coast of, 35; Catalans in, 36-8, 123, 301; importance of Aegaean islands for control of, 43; not conquered by early Osmanlis, 68-9, 300-2; Black Death in, 96; Crusaders’ road through, 162; Bayezid nominal master of greater part of, 191; Timur invades, 257-60; Mongol invasions of, 270-3, 300; Turkish emirates in, 277-301.
Athens, Osmanlis in, 231.
Attika, Ottoman invasions of, 147, 186, 205.
Ayasoluk, 185, 283, 286, 295.
Bagdad, 244, 249, 269.
Balikesri, 66, 69, 286, 291, 294.
Balkan Christians prefer Ottoman rule to that of Catholics, 133, 194, 240.
---- peninsula, distance between cities of, 162; Moslem immigration into, 196, 230-91; Venetian fear of Hungarian hegemony in, 207; Ottoman activities cease in, 243.
Balsa of Albania, 159.
Baphaeon, battle of, 34, 45.
Bayezid, assassinates Yakub upon his accession, 180; marries daughter of Lazar, 183; conquers Anatolian emirates, 184-91, 274; invests Smyrna, 185; completes conquest of Bulgaria, 195; receives privileges in Constantinople, 199; propitiated by Venetians and Genoese, 204-5, 207; continues subjugation of Albania and Greece, 230, 243; defeats crusaders at Nicopolis, 216-24; invades the Morea, 228-32; settles Anatolian Turks in Balkan peninsula, and pushes siege of Constantinople after Nicopolis, 230-4; extends conquests to valley of the Euphrates, and comes into contact with Timur, 244; defies Timur, 246; defeated by Timur at Angora, 251-5; taken prisoner and humiliated, 253-6; dies at Ak Sheïr, 256; arrogance of, 181-2, 209, 227, 246, 249; origin of nickname _Yildirim_, 188; contemporary western conception of, 208; change of character after success, 225, 235, 249, 257; claims to greatness as a statesman, 235; humble origin of, 245, 267; wrong tactics at Angora, 251-2; discussion of cage story, 255-6; durability of conquests of, 262.
Bayezid, sons of, confusion of western writers concerning identity of, 246, 252; fate of, after Angora, 255; fight for succession, 259.
Belgrad, 162.
Bigha, Catalan colony of, 123, 294, 301.
Biledjik, 11, 12, 22, 33.
Black Death, 95-6, 115.
---- Sheep, dynasty of, 245.
Bogomile heresy, 93.
Boli, 286, 292.
Borlu, 286.
Bosnia, Ottoman invasions of, 147, 184, 191. (_See also_ Tvrtko.)
Bosnian nobility, conversion to Islam, 75.
Bosphorus, 32, 45, 59, 233-4, 237, 260-1.
Boucicaut, crusade of, 128, 236-9; in Nicopolis campaign, 212-23; tries to raise ransom at Constantinople, 226; crusaders left behind by, save Constantinople, 242.
Brusa, 12, 13, 22, 32, 45, 46, 54, 84, 122, 125, 152, 185, 188, 198, 225, 257, 275-6, 286-7; captured by the Osmanlis, 46-8; place in Ottoman history, 125.
Buda, John Palaeologos at, 130; Nicopolis crusaders at, 211.
Bulaïr, 101, 111.
Bulgaria, incorporated in Ottoman Empire, 195.
Bulgarians, early propagation of Islam among, 26; refuse to aid Byzantines against Osmanlis, 103; first conflict with Osmanlis in Thrace, 111-14; make John Palaeologus prisoner, and are attacked by Savoyard crusaders, 129-30; struggle against Osmanlis in Thrace, 139-40; resist Hungarian attempts to convert them to Catholic faith, 141; lose Sofia, 161; Ottoman invasion and conquest, 171-3, 194-5; aid Osmanlis in Karamanian campaign, 188; oppressed by Greek patriarchate, 195-6.
Bunar Hissar, 112, 139.
Burgas, 129, 142.
Burhaneddin of Caesarea, 190, 287, 297.
Byzantine architecture, influence of, upon Ottoman, 275-6.
---- emperor, glamour of title in Western Europe, 241.
Byzantines, civil dynastic strife among, 35, 47-9, 57-61 91-4, 98-105, 149-54, 197-200, 237-9, 259; first contact with Osmanlis, 34; receive aid from Catalans, 37-40; seek aid of Genoese and Serbians, against Turks, 41; menaced again by western schemes of conquest, 42; lose Bithynia to Osmanlis, 45-9; defeated by Osmanlis at Pelecanon, 59-61; weakness of opposition of, to Orkhan, 106; abasement of, before Murad, 122; fail to cooperate with other Balkan Christians against Osmanlis, 123, 139; make treaty with Genoese, 162; reduced to city state of Constantinople, 232-4, 242-3; aided by Boucicaut’s crusade, 236-9, 242; fail to take advantage of defeat of Bayezid by Timur, and help Ottoman armies in retreat to Europe, 261.
Caesarea, 16, 190, 248, 272, 284, 287, 300.
Callixtus, patriarch, 101-3, 144.
Cantacuzenos, Helen, 94.
----, Irene, 91, 94, 103.
----, John, wounded by Turks, 48; at battle of Pelecanon, 60; prevents marriage alliance between Orkhan and Dushan, 90; usurps imperial purple, 91; marries daughter to Orkhan, 93; forces widow of Andronicus III to recognize him as co-emperor, and marries daughter to John Palaeologus, 93-4; asks aid of Orkhan against Dushan, 98; dynastic war with John Palaeologus, in which Osmanlis help him, 99-102; forced to abdicate, and becomes monk, 103; character of, 104-5; responsibility for introducing Osmanlis into Europe, 92-5, 97-100, 102-3, 105-10; grand-daughter of, in harem of Bayezid, 230.
----, Matthew, turns against father, 98; Patriarch Callixtus refuses to consecrate as co-emperor, 101-2; forced by John Palaeologus to abdicate, 103.
----, Theodora, wife of Orkhan, 93-4, 98, 107.
Catalans, aid Byzantines in Asia Minor, 37-8; form state at Gallipoli, 39; go to Thessaly, 40; sack Chios, 43; mercenaries of Cantacuzenos, 103; remnants of, at Bigha, 123, 301.
Cattaro, 134.
Charles IV (Holy Roman Emperor), 138.
---- of Durazzo, 192.
---- VI of France, rejoices over death of Murad, 178; opposes Bayezid, 202, 208-9, 233; insanity of, 202, 209, 242; receives Manuel Palaeologus, 241; Timur proposes to share world with, 249; misinformed about origin and power of Osmanlis, 208-9, 274.
---- Thopia, lord of Durazzo, 159.
Chios, 43, 163, 186, 205.
Chivalry, last effort of, in crusade against Bayezid, 211-14, 217-20, 222-4, 225-8.
Christians in Ottoman Empire, civil status of, 77-8.
Cilicia, 13, 271, 282, 293, 298-9, 300.
Constantine, Bulgarian prince of Kustendil, 140, 143, 173.
Constantinople, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 24, 36, 41, 79, 91, 100, 121, 125, 148-9, 162, 196-200, 205-7, 232-4, 235-9, 241-3, 259-60.
Corfu, Venetians alarmed about safety of, 243.
Croia, 160.
Crusaders, road of, to Jerusalem, 162.
Crusades, end of, 13, 14, 203; perversion of, in 14th century, 143.
----, Nicopolis the last, 203.
Cypriotes, join league against Murad, 163; fighting Genoese, 239; relations with Rhodes and Anatolian emirates, 285, 290, 295, 297, 299-300.
Damascus, 240, 250, 279, 287.
Dardanelles, 22, 128, 261, 291, 293; ‘question’ of, 152, 203, 237.
Demotika, 48, 57, 90, 91, 99, 100, 105, 112, 114, 121, 125, 150.
Despina, daughter of Lazar, marries Bayezid, 183; disgraced by Timur, 256.
Djagataï, 244.
Djenghiz Khan, 13, 16, 26, 41, 53, 74, 243-4, 256, 264, 270.
Dobrotich, 140, 170.
Drama, 146, 158, 161.
Durazzo, 159, 162, 201-2, 206.
Dushan, Stephen, 86-90, 94, 98-9, 143, 201.
Edebali, Sheik, 23-4, 27.
Egherdir, 284, 288.
Elbassan, 159.
_Emir_, confused by contemporary western writers with Murad, 213; transcribed into ‘admiral’, 163.
Enos, 114, 123.
Ephesus, 258-9, 283.
Epiros, Ottoman invasion of, 159.
Ertogrul, father of Osman, 20-2, 28, 263-4, 267.
Erzerum, 20, 266, 270, 288, 300.
Erzindjian, 20, 246, 248, 259, 266, 270, 272, 288, 293, 300.
Eski Baba, 112.
---- Sheïr, 11, 12, 22, 32, 290.
Evrenos, general of Murad, 112, 143, 146.
----, general of Osman, 48, 76.
---- of Yanitza, 171, 228, 230.
Famagusta, 239, 298.
Flor, Roger de, 37-9, 43.
Fratricide, Ottoman legal sanction of, 180-1.
Gallipoli, 39, 41, 100-3, 111, 129, 221.
Genoese, aid Michael IX, 41; supposed to have instigated Turkish attack on Rhodes, 44; help Osmanlis, 97-8, 100, 107, 165; fight with Venetians for Tenedos, 152-5; make treaty with Byzantines in 1386, 162; make treaty with Osmanlis in 1385, and join league against them in 1386, 163; fail to aid Nicopolis crusade, 207; under protection of France, 236; encourage Timur to attack Bayezid, 249; help Ottoman army to cross to Europe after Angora, 261; wars with Venetians, 96-7, 152-5, 262; at Kaffa, 294.
Ghazan Khan, 26, 36-7.
Grand vizier, origin of office, 71.
Greece, conquests of Osmanlis in, 171, 186, 228-30, 232.
Gul Hissar, 69, 288-9.
Gumuldjina, 112.
Guzel Hissar, 283, 286.
Hadji Ilbeki, 123-4.
Halicarnassus, 288, 300.
Hamid, 86, 157, 165-6, 187, 284-5, 289.
Hedwig of Hungary, becomes Queen of Poland, 192.
Henry IV of England, not at Nicopolis, 214; turns from crusades to efforts for English crown, 233; receives Manuel Palaeologus, 241; wants to help to save Constantinople, 242; tries to convert Timur to Christianity, 259.
Hungarians, first conflict with Osmanlis, 122-4; aid of, solicited by John Palaeologus, 128-30; urged by Gregory XI to fight Osmanlis, 136-7; attack Bulgarians, and are driven back, 141; attack Venice, 154; border nobles co-operate with Serbians at Kossova, 170.
Hungary, first Ottoman raid into, 183-4; first battle of Osmanlis on soil of, 191; separation of crown of, from Poland, 192; interest of, in checking progress of Osmanlis, 203-4; hegemony of, in Balkans feared by Venice, 207; Ottoman invasion of, after Nicopolis, 224.
Hunyadi, 194.
Ibn Batutah, 69, 277-80.
Ishtiman, 142, 160-2.
Islamic state, theocratic conception of, 72-3.
---- teaching, concrete results of, 75.
Ispahan, 259.
Istip, 158, 160-2.
Italians, city ideal of, 14.
Jagello of Lithuania, converted and becomes Ladislas of Poland, 192.
Janina, 159.
Janissaries, institution of, 80, 117-21; number of, in early Ottoman history, 118-19, 253; rôle of, in early history not important, 119-20, 173.
Jean de Nevers, 210, 212, 218, 223, 225-8.
Jeanne d’Arc, 106, 209.
Jews, cruelty of Tartars to, at Brusa, 267.
Kaffa, 165, 264, 291.
Kaouïa, Ottoman absorption of, 69.
Karamania, 165-7, 187-90, 259, 274, 285, 289-90, 300-2.
Karamanlis, power of, in fifteenth century, 190, 290, 301-2.
Kara Khalil Tchenderli, 112.
---- Yuluk, 190.
---- Yussuf, 244-5.
Karasi, 66, 69, 257, 286, 291, 294.
Kastemuni, 191, 259, 291-2, 297.
Kastriota, George, 170.
Kavalla, 146, 161.
Keraïtes, 14.
Keredek, Ottoman absorption of, 69.
Kermasti, 68, 292.
Kermian, 156, 166, 188, 271, 274, 284, 285, 292-3.
Khaïreddin, 146, 159.
Kharesmians, 17.
Kharesm, distinct from Khorassan, 19.
Kharput, 190, 244.
Khorassan, 19, 25, 244, 264.
Kirk Kilissé, 112, 139.
Kir Sheïr, 250.
Koësé, Michail, 52, 76.
Konia, 6, 11, 13, 16, 166-7, 187, 189, 260, 270-2, 274, 284, 290-300.
Kossova, battle of, 174-8, 203-4; regarded as victory by Bosnians, Italians and French, 178.
Kustendil, 140, 143, 173.
Kutayia, 12, 22, 34, 156-7, 166-7, 188, 257-8, 284, 292.
Lalashahin, 111, 114, 123-4, 126, 142-3.
Laodicea, 287.
Lazar, election of, 148; tributary to Murad, 149; increases tribute after fall of Nish, 162; sends contingent to Murad for Anatolian campaign, 166; dies at Kossova, 177.
Lemnos, 269.
Louis of Hungary, defeated by Osmanlis, 124; attacks Bulgarians, 141; prejudices Christians of Balkans against Catholic faith by attempts of forcible conversion, 141, 194; ignored by Tvrtko of Bosnia, 168-9; death, and contest over succession of, 192.
Lulé Burgas, 112.
Macedonia, Ottoman conquest of, 145-9, 158-9.
Macedonians, uncertainty of, regarding nationality, 144.
Maeander River, caution concerning identity of, 294.
Magnesia, 258.
Malkhatun, wife of Osman, 23-4, 27, 275.
Mamelukes, in Asia Minor, 282, 293, 300-1.
Marash, 279, 293.
Maritza, battle of, 122-4, 144.
Marko, 52, 76.
Marmora, Ottoman absorption of, 69.
Marriage, reason for abandonment of, by Ottoman sultans, 183, 256.
Mary of Hungary, marries Sigismund, 193.
Matthew, patriarch, 243.
Megalopolis, battle of, 230.
Menteshe, 158, 185-6, 191, 259, 274, 283, 287-8, 289, 294, 297, 300; emir of, invades Rhodes, 43-4.
Messembria, 139.
Mézières, Philippe de, agitation of, for crusade, 160, 203.
Michael Asan, conflict with Byzantines, 59; repudiates Serbian marriage alliance, 87.
Midia, 139.
Mikhalitch, conquered by Osmanlis, 68; Nicopolis prisoners at, 225, 294; Timur’s army reaches, 257; emirate of, 294.
Miletus, 294, 295.
Mircea of Wallachia, promises to co-operate with Lazar against Osmanlis, 170; defeated by Osmanlis, and helps Bayezid against Hungarians, 192; negotiates with Bayezid to desert crusaders, 214; withdraws from Nicopolis during battle, 221; defeats invading Ottoman army, 224.
Modon, 230, 240, 243.
Mohammed I, becomes undisputed Ottoman sultan, 262; building activity of, 275-6; Karamanians not dependent upon, 301.
---- II (the Conqueror), legislation of, 72-3, 195; desire of, to connect origin of family with Byzantine imperial family, 265.
---- Sultan, grandson of Timur, 251-2.
Monastir, 158-9, 195.
Mongols, invasion of Asia Minor, 13, 16, 17, 36-7, 300; attempts of Christian missionaries to convert, 14, 26; connexion with Byzantines, 36-7, 41, 65; exposure of women symbol of conquest among, 256.
Morea, 170-1, 228-32, 240, 243.
Mughla, 294, 295.
Murad, first European conquests, 111-15; creates corps of janissaries, 117-20; decides to build Ottoman empire in Balkan peninsula, and makes Adrianople his capital, 125; extension of conquests in Bulgaria, 138-43, 159-61; conquers Macedonia, 145-9, 158-9; extends sovereignty in Asia Minor, 155-8, 274; treaties with Ragusa, Venice, and Genoa, 126-7, 163-4; first conflict with Karamania, 165-7; reaches Danube by further conquests in Bulgaria, 172; destroys Serbian independence, and is killed, in battle of Kossova, 175-7; method of assimilating Balkan Christians, 115-21; policy in empire-building, 125; organization of conquered territories, 147-9; policy in Byzantine dynastic quarrels, 149-55; anxious not to alarm Venice, 160; kindness to non-combatants, 167; policy towards Serbian league, 171; character of, 178-9; confused with Bayezid by western travellers and writers, 208-13; contemporary western conception of, 208.
Musalla, highest mountain in Balkan peninsula, 143.
Mytilene, 163, 205.
Nagy Olosz, battle of, 191.
Nauplia, 230.
Nazlu, 284, 289, 295.
Nicaea, 12, 13, 32, 45-6, 54, 84, 111, 185, 257, 275; captured by the Osmanlis, 56-7, 61-3; emirate of, 295.
Nicomedia, 11, 12, 13, 32, 45-6, 54, 84, 111, 185; captured by the Osmanlis, 63-4.
Nicopolis, 172-3, 193-4, 196; crusade and battle of, 203, 206, 208-24; identification of, 215; significance of battle of, 262; ransom of prisoners taken at, 225-8.
Nilufer, wife of Orkhan, 25, 62.
Nish, 158, 161-2, 183-4.
Okhrida, 159.
Orkhan, first battles of, 46; adds Nicaea and Nicomedia to his emirate, 56-7, 61-4; defeats Byzantines at Pelecanon, 60-1; completes conquest of Bithynia, 64; invades and annexes portions of neighbouring emirates, 66-8, 291-2, 294; invited by Cantacuzenos to aid him against Anna, and receives Cantacuzenos’s daughter as bride, 92-4; invited again by Cantacuzenos into Europe to aid him against John Palaeologus, 98-9; first conquests in Europe, 100-6; has Byzantines at his mercy, 107-8; Ottoman historians unsatisfactory in accounts of reign of, 65; contemporary statements as to power of, 69-70; legislation of, 70-3; policy of towards Christians, 75-80; organization of army of, 81-4; death of, and estimate of his character, 109; extent of emirate of, 301-2.
Orsova, 215.
Orthodox Christians, animosity against Catholics and unwillingness for reunion of Churches, 128, 132-4, 141, 194.
---- Church, loses hold on Levantine Christians, 49; oppresses Bulgarians, 195-6.
Orthography, oriental, 5-6.
Osman, birth of, 22; conversion, marriage, and dream of, 23-9; principality of, in 1300, 32; first battle with Byzantines, 34; conquests of, from Byzantines, 45-9; legends concerning power and character of, 50-2, 263-76; reincarnation of early khalifs, 52; elected as chief of tribe, 55; army of, 81; parentage of, 263-5, 267; relation of with Anatolian Turkish emirs, 17, 44-5, 273-4, 300-2; error of attributing coinage to, 51.
Osmandjik, 265, 291.
_Osmanli_, connotation of this word, 29, 50, 78, 80-1.
Osmanlis, originate on border of Bithynia, 19, 25, 28, 30-2; complete conquest of Bithynia, 62-4, 80; become a distinct race, 78-81; first invasion of Europe, 100; advance into Thrace, 101; conquer Thrace, 121-6, 149; conquer Bulgaria, 139, 143, 149, 160-1, 171-3, 193-6; conquer Macedonia, 144, 149, 158-9, 183; conquer Servia, 161-2, 173-8, 182; conquer Thessaly, 147, 228-30, 232; invade Albania, 147, 159-60, 183, 206, 243; invade Attika, 147, 186, 205; invade Bosnia, 147, 184; invade Hungary, 183-4, 191, 224; invade Wallachia, 192, 224; invade the Morea, 171, 228-30, 232; conquests of, in Greece, 171, 186, 228-30, 232; absorb Anatolian Turkish emirates, 66-9, 155-8, 185-7, 190-1, 274; invade Karamania, 165-7, 187-90, 290; besiege Constantinople, 198-9, 232-4, 236; naval raids of, 186, 205; first cross the Danube, 191-2; first cross the Vardar, 147; contemporary western misconception of their character, 216-17, 247; composite blood of, 115-17, 126; character of, 74-5; distinct from other Anatolian Turks, 19, 28, 31, 78-9, 115, 126, 217, 228, 283; tolerance of, 74, 81, 115, 179; rule of, preferred by Balkan Christians to that of Catholics, 133, 141, 194-5; not raiders, but colonists, 149, 186; not feared by Europe until they appeared in Thrace, 111.
Ottoman architecture, Byzantine influence in, 275-6.
---- army, organization of, 81-4; Christian elements in, 166, 173, 184, 187-8, 217, 252.
---- ceremonial of holding ambassadors’ arms in audience with Sultan, 178.
---- historians, unsatisfactory accounts of reign of Orkhan, 65.
---- history, lacks early sources, 17, 265.
---- legislation, beginning of, 71-3.
---- navy, beginning of, 186; weakness in reign of Bayezid, 205-6, 234, 237-8.
Palaeologos, Andronicus II, looks to Mongols and Catalans for aid against Turks, 35-7; bestows title of Caesar on Roger de Flor, 39; menaced by Mongols, Venice, and French princes, 41-2; civil strife with grandson, 48, 57-9; refuses to co-operate in crusade planned by Marino Sanudo, 49; seeks aid of papacy against Turks, 85.
----, Andronicus III, set upon by Turks on wedding journey, 48; captures Salonika, 58; deposes grandfather, 59; defeated by Osmanlis at Pelecanon, and abandons Nicaea, 59-61; invites aid of Anatolian emirs in siege of Phocaea, 65-6, 86; makes overtures to John XXII, 85; marries sister to Czar Michael of Bulgaria, 87; on death-bed entrusts empress and son and heir to care of Cantacuzenos, 91; assassinates brother, 181.
----, Andronicus IV, charged with suggesting to Bulgarians that they keep his father prisoner, 128; rebels against father, and is imprisoned, 149-51; escapes, imprisons father and brothers, and gives Tenedos to Genoese, 153; treaty with Genoese, 163.
----, John V (I), under guardianship of Cantacuzenos, 91; forced to marry daughter of Cantacuzenos, and to accept father-in-law as co-emperor, 94; exiled by Cantacuzenos to Tenedos, 99; returns from exile, and forces John and Matthew Cantacuzenos to abdicate, 103; at the mercy of Orkhan, 106-8; unpopularity of, with Byzantines, 115; treaties of, with Murad, 122, 128, 136; fails to send aid to Balkan crusaders at Maritza, 122; tries to get aid from Venetians against Osmanlis, 128; goes to Buda to seek aid from Louis of Hungary, and is made prisoner by Bulgarians, 128-9; release secured by Amadeo of Savoy, and promises to submit to Roman Church, 129-30; visits Rome, and becomes Catholic, 134-5; last desperate appeal to Pope, 137; war with Alexander of Bulgaria, 139; passes over Andronicus, and raises Manuel to imperial purple, 149; blinds son Andronicus at Murad’s command, 150; refuses to receive fugitive Manuel at Constantinople for fear of Murad, 152; gives Tenedos to Venetians, 153; aids Osmanlis to conquer Philadelphia, last Byzantine possession in Asia, 154, 197; treaty with Genoese, 152-3; ignominious death of, 198.
Palaeologus, John VII (II), rebels against grandfather and uncle, 197; co-operates with Osmanlis against Manuel, 199-200, 237-8, 243; becomes co-emperor with Manuel, 238-9; banished by Manuel to Lemnos, 259.
----, Manuel II (I), ransoms father from Venetian merchants, 135; serves in Ottoman army, 136, 149, 154, 187, 197; made co-emperor by father, 149; fails in conspiracy to drive Osmanlis from Serres, and has to seek pardon of Murad at Brusa, 151-2, 231; gives Bayezid privileges in Constantinople, 199; fails to enlist support of Pope and Western princes, 200, 206, 233, 239; marries son to Russian princess, 232; receives aid from Boucicaut, 236-9; accepts John VII as co-emperor, 238; unsuccessful visit to Europe, 240-3; expels Osmanlis from Constantinople, and offers to become vassal of Timur, 259; appeals to Rome and Venice for aid against Timur, 260.
----, Michael IX, unsuccessfully opposes Turks in Anatolia, 35; at Adrianople, 39; flees before Turks of Halil, 40.
----, Theodore, serves in Ottoman army, 149; imprisoned by Andronicus IV, 153; summoned, as ruler of the Morea, to do homage to Bayezid at Serres, 171, 200, 229; invites Osmanlis to enter the Morea to aid him against Frankish lords, 228; defeated by Osmanlis at Megalopolis, 230; tries to dissuade Manuel from trip to western Europe, 240.
Palatchia, 286, 294-5.
Papacy, and Eastern crusades, 41, 85; invited to intervene to save Constantinople from Osmanlis, 95; tries to raise crusades against Osmanlis, 122, 129, 132, 136-8, 141, 153, 201-2, 235-6, 241; consistently denounces traffic of Italian republics with Moslems, 154. (_See also under_ Popes.)
_Pasha_, origin of this title, 71-2.
Pergama, 284, 286, 291, 294.
Petrarch, hatred of schismatics, 133.
Philadelphia, 13, 34, 105, 154, 296, 299.
Philippe d’Artois, 212, 217-18, 223, 225.
---- de Bourgogne, 202, 209-10, 212, 218, 226, 236, 242.
---- le Bel, plans to retake Constantinople, 41-2; aids in conquest of Rhodes, 44.
Philippopolis, 114, 122, 139, 161-2, 231.
Phocaea, Byzantines and Anatolian emirs besiege, 66, 283, 296; John Palaeologus attacks at command of Orkhan, 107-8; not dependent upon Osmanlis, 299.
Plochnik, battle of, 169.
Popes: Gregory X, 164. Boniface VIII, 164. Clement V, 41-2, 44. John XXII, 85. Clement VI, 95. Urban V, 122, 129-32, 134-6, 141, 164. Gregory XI, 136-8, 153, 164. Urban VI, 201. Boniface XI, 201-2, 235, 262. Benedict XIII, 202, 235-6, 241.
Popova Shapkah, 143.
Prilep, 158.
Princes’ Islands, 35.
Pristina, 92, 144.
Ragusa, first Christian state to make tributary treaty with Osmanlis, 127.
_Raïa_, meaning of the word, 77.
Rhodes, 43-4, 186, 205; grand master of, at Nicopolis, 219, 221; chevaliers of (_see_ Saint John, Knights of).
Rhodope Mountains, 140, 143, 147.
Rilo, monastery of, 195.
Riva, 237.
Rodosto, 65, 101.
Rumeli Hissar, 234.
Rustchuk, 172.
Saint John, Knights of, conquer Rhodes, 43; resist Turks, 44, 283; capture Smyrna, 85, 283; conspire with Pope to seize the Morea, 240; lose Smyrna to Timur, 258; relations with Cyprus and Anatolian emirates, 285-6, 295, 297, 299-300.
---- Sophia, mosque of, 60, 93, 94, 102, 154, 233.
Salona, duchy of, conquered by Bayezid, 229-30.
Salonika, 40, 58, 65, 79, 92, 98, 100, 121, 145, 181, 231.
Samakov, battle of, 142-3, 160.
Samarkand, 244, 251, 256, 260.
Samsun, 191, 196, 291.
Sangarius, 11, 12, 32, 38, 45, 302.
Sarukhan, 65, 86, 158, 185-6, 191, 228, 259, 283, 291, 295-6.
Savoy, origin of armies of, 44. (_See also_ Amadeo and Anna.)
Savra, battle of, 159.
Scutari (in Albania), 160.
Scutari (on the Bosphorus), 60, 64, 94, 108, 234.
Seljuk architecture, influence upon Ottoman, 275-6.
Seljuks, invasions of Asia Minor, 15-16; changes of religion, 26.
---- of Rum, contest Asia Minor with Byzantines, 13; relations with Osmanlis, 20-2, 32, 268-76; subject to Mongols, 270-2; end of dynasty, 297.
Serbian Church, autocephalous, 144-5.
---- empire of Stephen Dushan, 86-90.
Serbians, illusions of, concerning their fourteenth-century empire, 86, 90, 175, 201; first enter Macedonia to help Byzantines against Turks, 41; aid Andronicus II against his grandson, 58; conflict with Orthodox Church, 89-90, 144-5; refuse to aid Byzantines against Osmanlis, 102; defeated by Osmanlis at Maritza, 122-4; anarchy among chieftains of, in Macedonia, 144; defeated by Osmanlis at Cernomen, and lose Macedonia, 145-8; become subject to Osmanlis, 160-2; help Murad in Karamanian campaign, and are punished for looting, 167; form league against Murad, and are defeated at Kossova, 168-78; treachery of their nobles, 173; cast fortunes definitely with Osmanlis, 182-3; aid Bayezid in Karamanian campaign, 188; last of Dushan’s following disappear in Macedonia, 201; fidelity of, to Bayezid at Nicopolis, 220; fight in Ottoman army at Angora, 252.
Serres, 58, 144, 147, 152, 158, 161, 200, 229.
Shah-Rokh, son of Timur, 255, 258.
Shehabeddin, 69, 277-80.
Shuman, 172.
Sigismund, first invasion of Bulgaria, 188, 193-5; becomes king of Hungary, and sends threat to Bayezid, 193; tries to get support of Italian republics against Bayezid, 205-7; leads Nicopolis crusade, 210-24; boastfulness of, before Nicopolis, 216; flees from battle-field, 220-1; character of, 193, 222.
Silistria, 196.
Silivria, 237.
Sinope, 191, 291-2, 296, 297.
Sis, 282.
Sisman, John, 128, 140-3, 170, 172-3, 194-6.
Sivas, 190, 270, 272, 274, 287, 297, 300; destruction of, by Timur, 243, 245-8.
Slavery, Greek abhorrence of, 116; connivance of Italian republics in, 165.
Smyrna, 11, 79, 85, 185, 258-60, 270, 283, 286, 299-300.
Sofia, 142, 158, 160-2, 172, 231.
Soleiman pasha, son of Orkhan, 100-1, 105, 108, 111.
Soleiman Shah, grandfather of Osman, 20, 266.
---- tchelebi, son of Bayezid, 195, 245-8, 252-3, 257-61.
South Slavs, character of, 170.
Sozopolis, 129, 142.
Stambul, origin of name, 199.
Stephen Lazarevitch, kral of Serbia, vassal and brother-in-law of Bayezid, 182-3; fights for Osmanlis at Nicopolis, 220; and at Angora, 253.
Stracimir, 140-1.
Sugut, 12, 22, 25, 33, 63, 115, 285.
Taharten, emir of Erzindjian, 246.
Tarsus, 24, 216, 298.
Taurus Mountains, 24, 125, 187, 289, 298, 300-2.
Tchataldja, 115.
Tchorlu, 105, 112, 162.
Tekke, emirate of, 158, 165-6, 186-7, 285, 289, 297-8.
Tenedos, importance of, to control Dardanelles, 152; struggle of Venice and Genoa for, 152-5; John VII Palaeologus banished to, 236.
Thessaly, Ottoman conquest of, 147, 228-30.
Thingizlu, 69.
Thomas, despot of Janina, 159.
Timur, origin of name, and conquests of, 244; charges against Bayezid, 190, 245-6; destroys Sivas, 247-8; makes overtures to Occidental princes, 249; invades Asia Minor, and crushes Bayezid at Angora, 250-4; degrades Bayezid and Despina, 255-6; pushes to Aegaean Sea, and captures Smyrna, 257-60; death of, 260; infirmity of, 244; lacked constructive policy in conquests, 257, 260-1; restores Anatolian emirs deposed by Bayezid, 257, 259, 283, 288, 290, 292-3, 294.
Timurtash, 142, 158, 166, 187, 188-9, 254.
Tirnovo, 140, 142, 172, 194-6.
Tokat, 190, 250, 287, 298.
Trebizond, 13, 162, 270, 280, 288, 291, 293, 297, 299.
_Tughra_, origin of, 127.
Turin, treaty of, 155.
Turk, connotation of word in Ottoman Empire, 78-81, 228; lacks family ties and family name, 267.
Turkey, connotation of word in fourteenth century, 107.
Turkish chieftainship elective rather than hereditary, 54, 276.
---- raids in Aegaean Sea, Macedonia and Thrace, 36-40, 65, 84, 185-6, 261, 283.
---- emirates of Asia Minor stronger than Osmanlis, 30, 274, 290, 301-2.
---- refugees from Thrace in 1912, 16.
---- women not veiled in fourteenth century, 157.
Turks, character of Anatolian, 15.
Tvrtko, kral of Bosnia, 168-70, 178, 183-4, 201.
Ulubad, 68, 298.
Uskub, 88, 174, 183.
Valona, 159.
Varna, 129, 172.
Venetians, interfere in Byzantine dynastic quarrels, 35; invited by Clement V to co-operate in reconquest of Byzantine Empire, 42; menaced in Aegaean by Turks, 84; relations with Stephen Dushan, 88-90; wars with Genoese, 96-7, 152-5, 262; urged by fellow countrymen to oppose Orkhan, 107; fail to protect Byzantines against Murad, 128; detain John Palaeologus because of debts, 135; refuse to contribute seriously to crusade against Osmanlis, 137; struggle with Genoa for Tenedos, 152-5; sapped by prosperity, 163; make commercial treaty with Murad, 164; opposition to Hungarians, 169; indifference to Murad’s conquests, 170; refuse to buy Lemnos from Byzantines, 200; fail to aid in Nicopolis crusade, 203-7; in Athens and Salonika, 230-1; prefer to curry favour with Bayezid rather than defend Constantinople, 233; reception of Manuel Palaeologus and their pacifist policy, 240; alarm over appearance of Osmanlis on Adriatic, 243; help Ottoman army tocross to Europe after Angora, 261; at Palatchia, 294-5.
Visconti, Giovanni Galeazzo, 131, 210, 236, 240.
Viza, 139.
Vukasin, 145-6, 159, 173.
Wallachia, Ottoman invasions of, 192, 224.
Wallachians, aid Bulgarians against Hungarians, 141; aid Osmanlis against Hungarians, 192; worth of, as soldiers, 192; aid Osmanlis in Bulgaria, 193; withdraw during battle of Nicopolis, 221; successfully resist Ottoman invasion after Nicopolis, 225.
Wenceslaus, 210, 235.
Western Europe, inability to understand Eastern Europe, 132-3.
White Sheep, dynasty of, 190, 245.
Widin, 140, 141, 142, 196, 215.
Yakub, killed by brother Bayezid after Kossova, 180.
Yakub, general of Bayezid, 230.
Yamboli, 140, 142.
Yeni Sheïr, 28, 32, 34, 258, 275.
Printed in England at the Oxford University Press
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The Keraites, a tribe of large numbers, established on the frontier of China, were Christians in the early times: Resheddin, Quatremère edition, i. 93. The Council of Lyons sent missionaries to Mongols in the reign of Innocent IV, 1245. For account of missions to Mongols in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries see Howorth, i. 68 f., 189-92; ii. 183 _n._; iii. 72-5, 278-81, 348-55, 576-80: also documents of the Ming period, trans. by Hirth, p. 65.
[2] I have witnessed a similar migration, when the Bulgarians broke into Thrace in October 1912. The progress of the fleeing Turks, even on the plains, was painfully slow, and the mortality was frightful.
[3] Neshri (Nöldeke’s translation), in _Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft_, xiii. 190.
[4] Seadeddin, _Casa Ottomana_ (Bratutti trans.), i. 6.
[5] Neshri, xiii. 190.
[6] See Appendix B for these emirates.
[7] There is a collection of State papers in Persian, Arabic and Turkish, Feridun (Bibl. Nat., Paris, MS. turc, 79), which contains some letters and decrees of the earliest sultans, but there is no proof of the authenticity of these documents.
[8] Neshri and Idris, end fifteenth century; Seadeddin, end sixteenth century; Hadji Khalfa, seventeenth century. See Bibliography.
[9] In the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, I have examined, as far as I know, all the books concerning Turkey printed before 1600. See list in Bibliography.
[10] Jorga, _Geschichte des Osmanischen Reiches_ (in the _Geschichte der europaïschen Staaten_), published 1908-13, preface and i. 152-3.
[11] Up to the death of Ertogrul (1288), I follow Neshri, _ZDMG._, xiii. 188-98, unless otherwise specified. Direct quotation is indicated by quotation marks.
[12] A.D. 1219. Evliya effendi, i. 27, gives A.H. 600; Seadeddin and Hadji Khalfa, A.H. 619; Drechsler, _Chron. Saracenorum_, A.H. 610.
[13] Or Kharesm? Schéfer, in preface to his translation of Riza Kouly’s embassy to Kharesm, _Bibl. de l’École des langues viv. orientales_, 1re série, vol. iii., says that Kharesm in part was identical with Khorassan. But Shehabeddin, trans. by Quatremère in _Notices et Extraits_, xiii. 289, declares that Kharesm is a country distinct from Khorassan. Hadji Khalfa, _Djihannuma_, MS. fr., Bibl. Nat., Paris, nouv. ac., no. 888, p. 815, supports this opinion. The very fact that these writers are so careful to make this assertion shows, however, that there was much confusion as to these terms. According to Vambéry, Kharesm is still in Djagatai Turkish, the diplomatical and political name for the modern Khanate of Khiva. Howorth, _History of Mongols_, ii. 78, says that the Turkish tribes remained in these countries after the Mongol conquest. Is this the Organa or Urgheuz of Marco Polo?
[14] Hussein Hezarfenn, ii. 287, and Chalcocondylas (_Patr. Graec._, Migne, vol. clix), 21, call the father of Ertogrul Oguzalp. For critical discussion see Appendix A.
[15] This title is invariably given by Neshri to every ruler in the direct line of Osman, just as he calls the Christian opponents of the Osmanlis unbelievers.
[16] Probably Sultan Inoenu, anticipating the later name of this district.
[17] Sagredo, the Italian historian, whose work was greatly esteemed by Gibbon, makes the curious error of calling Alaeddin ‘Lord of Aleppo and Damascus’.
[18] ‘A great mountain situated between Kutayia and Brusa’: Hadji Khalfa, _Djihannuma_, fol. 1975; ‘The paths up this mountain are so difficult that one on foot has a thousand pains to reach the top’: ibid., fol. 1850.
[19] Rasmussen, _Annales Islamici_, p. 41, confuses this city with Kutayia, and gives its capture by Ertogrul under date of 1285.
[20] Thus in Ali and Neshri. Seadeddin attributes this dream to Ertogrul. But the confusion between Ertogrul and Osman is marked in all the Ottoman historians.
[21] The Ottoman historians give as reason for the refusal the social difference between his daughter and the ‘young prince’. This is an excellent illustration of how, writing in the zenith of Ottoman prosperity, the historians lost their sense of proportion or were actually compelled to write in flattering terms of the founder of their royal house.
[22] Hammer, i. 67, in relating this dream, has transcribed with fidelity and felicity the Persian poetry of Idris.
[23] Leunclavius, _Pandectes_, p. 113, following Ali, attributes the moon dream to Ertogrul, and places it at Konia. Boecler, _Commentarius de rebus turcicis_, pp. 104-5, following Chalcocondylas, does likewise, but relates the Koran dream of Osman. Seadeddin, p. 11, makes the dream distinctly religious, and while not mentioning the love story or Malkhatun by name, infers that Osman receives intimation of his marriage with Edebali’s daughter only through Edebali’s interpretation of the dream. This failure to mention Malkhatun is all the more significant when we see later how much attention Seadeddin gives to Nilufer. Evliya effendi, ii. 19, says that through the marriage of Osman to Malkhatun, the Ottoman sultans became descendants of the Prophet!
[24] I should except from this statement Rambaud, who, in _Hist. générale_, iii. 822-4, states that the conversion of the Osmanlis to Islam took place during the chieftainship of Osman. The general character of the work to which he was contributing, and the limits of space, did not allow him to give any reasons in support of this position. Vanell, _Histoire de l’Empire ottoman_, p. 357, says that Ertogrul was a pagan until he became converted through reading the Koran.
[25] From personal acquaintance with them, I can testify that these nomads (Yuruks) have remained up to the twentieth century with only the most vague idea of Mohammed and with no idea at all of the Koran and the ritual observances of Islam.
[26] See Shehabeddin, MS. Paris, Bibl. Nat., fonds arabe 2325, fol. 69 vº-70 rº, citing Mesoudi and earlier writers for the propagation of Islam among the Bulgarians.
[27] Cf. Cahun’s masterly contribution to _Hist. générale_, ii. 887.
[28] Abul Faradj, _Chronicon Syr._, pp. 606-8.
[29] The Ottoman historians mention none, either of friendship or enmity, during the entire life of Osman.
[30] The improbable connexion between Ertogrul and Osman and the Seljuk sovereigns of Konia has been accepted without question by European historians, on the strength of the assertions of the Ottoman historians. This is curious, because the evidence against this connexion is overwhelming. The Seljuk Empire of Rum lost its independence at the battle of Erzindjian, 1244 (cf. Heyd, _Histoire du commerce dans le Levant_, i. 534). Neshri himself confesses that after this date ‘now remained only the bare name of the Seljuk Kings’: _ZDMG._, xiii. 195. In view of the established facts of history, it is astonishing that European historians should have up to this time perpetuated, and given their sanction to, a fiction which was invented for the purpose of helping Mohammed II to incorporate Karamania in his empire! The limits of a footnote forbidding the adequate discussion of this question and the citation of the authorities, I must refer my readers to Appendix A.
[31] Neshri, _ZDMG._, xiii. 196, says seventy years. But in his reckoning he constantly contradicts himself. _Sheïr_ means city, _eski_ old, and _yeni_ new.
[32] All the Ottoman historians agree upon this number.
[33] ‘The unbelievers and believers of that land honoured Ertogrul and his son’: Neshri, p. 197. That Christians lived everywhere without molestation in the midst of non-converted Turkish tribes is asserted by Heyd, ii. 65.
[34] It is altogether likely that Osman received his name at the time of his conversion. Is it not significant that his father, his brothers, his son even, as well as most of his warriors, had purely pagan Turkish names?
[35] _Tableau de l’Empire ottoman_, iv. 373.
[36] See Appendix B.
[37] During the late war with the Balkan allies, the newspapers of the world spoke of ‘driving the Turks back to Asia, where they belong’, and of the re-establishment of the Ottoman capital at Brusa or Konia!
[38] See Armain’s translation of the _Djihannuma_ (Mirror of the World), a universal geography by Hadji Khalfa, in the Bibl. Nat., Paris, MS., fonds français, nouv. ac., nos. 888-9. The section on Asia Minor, although written in some detail, does not contain many of the names which we find in the Ottoman historians. I wish to register a protest against inflicting on students and readers of history lists of names that can have no possible meaning to them. I have omitted from this work the names of places and persons upon which I can get no light.
[39] Hadji Khalfa, op. cit., fol. 1917, makes an error in giving the distance from Brusa to Yeni Sheïr as two days. I have driven from Brusa to Nicaea in one day of not fast going. Yeni Sheïr is on the main road between these cities, six hours from Brusa and four hours from Nicaea.
[40] The early European historians make the wildest statements about Osman’s field of action. Many of them call Ottomanjik, a place four days or five north-east of Eski Sheïr, his first conquest: Cuspianus (Antwerp ed., 1541), p. 6; Spandugino, in Sansovino, p. 143; Egnatius, p. 28. Cf. Hadji Khalfa, op. cit., fol. 1789. But this place was not captured by the Osmanlis until the reign of Bayezid: Evliya, op. cit., ii. 95. Paulo Giovio, an Italian historian greatly esteemed in his day, puts among the notable conquests of Osman the city and district of Sivas, as does also Rabbi Joseph, in his famous _Chronicles_, Eng. trans. of Biallobotzky, ii. 505. Donado da Lezze, _Historia Turchesca_, Rumanian edition of Ursu, pp. 4 and 5, makes him conqueror of Rum, province of Sivas, Phoenicia, ‘et altri luoghi’! Cuspianus, _De Turcarum Origine_, quotes Donado da Lezze almost literally. Richer, _De Rebus Turcarum_, written for the information of Francis I of France, says, p. 11: ‘Circiter 1300, Ottomannus impune invitis omnibus _summam imperii_, quod ante partitum tenebant factiosi magistratus, _occupavit_, seseque Asiae minoris sive Anatoliae _imperatorem_ nominare sit aggressus. _Syvam_, quae eadem cum Sebaste est, _expugnavit_, et oppida ad Euxinum posita _non pauca_ cepit.’ (The italics are mine.) Hussein Hezarfenn, one of the Ottoman historians whose work has been most widely read and quoted in Europe, says of Ertogrul, _who never saw the sea_, ‘He equipped several ships, with which he made a raid into the Aegaean Sea, pillaged the islands, descended upon Greece, penetrated up to the Peloponnesus, and returned to his home (_the little village of Sugut!_) laden down with wealth and followed by a great army composed of experienced warriors of all sorts of nations whom the renown of his bravery and his good fortune attracted to his service: which increased so greatly his reputation in Asia that Sultan Alaeddin even found it to his advantage to cultivate him’: trans. of _Petits de la Croix_, ii. 288-9.
[41] I am not sure that I am justified in using the expression ‘undisputed sway’ even for this small territory. Pachymeres, IV. 30, pp. 345-7, speaks of a certain Soleiman pasha, who was threatening Nicomedia in 1303; and V. 23, p. 427, of Alisur retiring to the Sangarius after Roger had relieved Philadelphia in 1307.
[42] Probably the first conquest of Osman. This city, on the Kara Su, is still a thriving place. Its situation is most picturesque. The author of the _Arabic History of the Kurds_ (Bibl. Nat., Paris, MS. of Ducaurroy, fol. 151 rº, 152 rº) makes Biledjik the city granted to Ertogrul by Alaeddin, and declares that he captured Sugut (Sukidjeh) from the ‘infidels of Tekkur’.
[43] Angelcoma of the Byzantines.
[44] The only conquest of Osman not in the direction of Byzantium. Hadji Khalfa, op. cit., fol. 1851.
[45] ‘Situated between Yeni Sheïr, Brusa, and Aïnegoel. They count one day from Yeni Sheïr to Yar Hissar by the road which goes to Kutayia’: Hadji Khalfa, fol. 1917.
[46] The Ottomans name this place Kuyun Hissar. See Schéfer edition of Spandugino, p. 16 _n._
[47] Pachymeres, IV. 25, p. 327, says the battle was fought July 27. Jorga, _Geschichte des Osmanischen Reiches_, i. 157, is in error in placing date June 27; Hammer, i. 190, and Jorga both give year 1301. Muralt, _Chronographie Byzantine_, ii. 480, has this battle under 1302.
[48] Pach., IV. 25, p. 335.
[49] Cantemir, Rumanian ed., i. 20, seems to infer that Osman attacked Nicomedia after this battle. He is certainly wrong in stating that Osman captured Kutayia. See pp. 274, 292-3.
[50] Pach., V. 9; Gregoras, VII, i, p. 214.
[51] Pach., in Stritter, _Memoriae Populorum_, iii. 1086-7; D’Ohsson, _Histoire des Mongols_, iv. 315. Andronicus made a second appeal in 1308, and gave his own sister, Marie, who is known to later Mongol historians as ‘Despina Khatun’, to Mohammed Khodabendah Khan, after Khodabendah’s conversion to Islam: ibid., iv. 536; Hertzberg, _Geschichte der Byzantiner und des Osmanischen Reiches_, p. 461.
[52] I can find no justification for Howorth’s statement, ‘This alliance seems to have had a restraining influence upon the Turks’, in his _History of the Mongols_, iii. 464.
[53] See _Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes_, vi. 318, where the date of this momentous event is given as ‘vers 1305’.
[54] Pach., V. 14, pp. 399-400; 21, pp. 410, 417.
[55] Pach., V. 23, pp. 426-8; Greg., VII. 3, p. 221.
[56] Pach., V. 21, p. 423; Greg., loc. cit.
[57] Greg., loc. cit. Cf. Muralt, after Latin authorities, ii. 487.
[58] Pachymeres, Books V, VI, and VII; Gregoras, Book VII, _passim_, and Phrantzes, Book I; Moncada, _Expedicion de los Catalanes_; Muntaner, in _Bibliothek des lit. Vereins zu Stuttgart_, vol. viii. For their later adventures there is an excellent account in Finlay, _History of Greece_, iv. 146-56.
[59] Andronicus wrote to his empress, urging her not to try to return to Constantinople from Salonika by land: Pach., VII. 12, p. 586; Chalcocondylas (ed. Bonn), I, p. 19.
[60] Greg. VII. 8, pp. 254-8; Chalc., I, p. 19; Jorga, op. cit., i. 160, speaks of ‘die schöne mit Perlen und Edelsteinen geschmückte _Krone_’ of Michael. Was it not rather a turban? See Hammer, i. 364, note x.
[61] ‘The emperor of Constantinople fears the anger of the Khan of Kapdjak and is eager to disarm him by protestations of submission and efforts to obtain a continuance of the truce. Things have always been on this footing since the children of Djenghiz Khan began to reign in this country’: Shebabeddin, Paris MS., fol. 70 rº.
[62] Ducange, _Hist. de Constantinople sous les Emp. Français_, map section, p. 46.
[63] Ducange, _Hist. de Constantinople sous les Emp. Français_, map section, p. 54.
[64] The Venetians were jealous of the growing power of Genoa and the hostility shown to Venetian merchants at Constantinople. See Appendix B. Also Heyd, _Handelsgeschichte des Mittelalters_, i. 366.
[65] Ducange, ibid., p. 57; Buchon, _Collection des chroniques nat. fr._, p. lv.
[66] Muralt, _Chronographie Byzantine_, ii. 493, no. 21, _n._
[67] A rabble without arms actually arrived at Marseilles. The ships were prevented from leaving Brindisi by a storm. Cf. Iacomo Bosio, _Della Historia della Religione_, ii. 1. At the very moment this effort to start a crusade was ending in dismal failure, the two kings on whose behalf it was planned were engaged in a bitter quarrel! Clement V, _Epistola Comm._ vii. 773-4, 787.
[68] Les Giustiniani, _Dynastes de Chios_, Vlasto’s French translation of Hopf’s great monograph, p. 8.
[69] Mas-Latrie, _Histoire de Chypre_, ii. 602.
[70] Mas-Latrie, op. et loc. cit.; Heyd, French edition, i. 537.
[71] A splendid field for historical research, which, as far as I know, has never yet been touched, is the compilation, from the Vatican records, of the dates for the extinction of the dioceses of the early Christian world in Africa and Asia. When did the bishops of these dioceses begin to be appointed and consecrated _in partibus_?
[72] Bosio, op. cit., ii. 37; Abbé Vertot, _Histoire des Chevaliers de Malte_, i. 106.
[73] See Bosio, ii. 37 f., and Vertot, i. 101 f. With a view to glorifying the Order, and also the Duke of Savoy, this fiction has been fabricated and perpetuated. Even such a serious work as that of Muralt gives, upon the strength of Raynaldus, who merely quotes Bosio, Osman as leader of this attack upon Rhodes: see _Chronographie Byzantine_, ii. 507. During the recent war between Italy and Turkey, when it was a question of Rhodes, more than one leading Italian newspaper revived this story of the founder of the Italian royal house defeating the founder of the Ottoman royal house. There is, of course, no foundation whatever for the statement.
[74] So Clement V evidently believed. See his letter to the Genoese in _Epistola Comm._ vii. 10.
[75] That the Sangarius used to run into the Gulf of Nicomedia instead of into the Black Sea is the opinion of many geographers, ancient as well as modern. There have been a number of projects to connect the Sangarius, Lake Sabandja, and the Gulf of Nicomedia by canals that would give a deep waterway across the plain and prevent the frequent overflooding which has always been a source of loss to cultivators in that region.
[76] Idris, quoted by Hammer, i. 192.
[77] Brusa is three hours by carriage from its port on the southern side of the Gulf of Mudania, or one hour by narrow-gauge railway. One can reach Nicaea either from the Gulf of Mudania or that of Nicomedia.
[78] Pach., VII. 18, pp. 597-9.
[79] Pach., VII. 25, p. 620. The Turks call this castle Hodjahissar.
[80] Ibid., loc. cit. But Pachymeres puts the number of these Tartars as 30,000, which must be at least a tenfold exaggeration.
[81] Seadeddin, translation Brattuti, p. 27. Bratutti, whose transcription of Turkish names is often unintelligible to me, calls Karadja Hissar ‘Codgia’.
[82] Ibn Batutah, _Voyages_, ii. 320, speaks of buildings which must have been erected at these baths by Orkhan within the decade following the capture of Brusa. Earlier buildings, according to him, were constructed ‘by a Turcoman king’: ibid., p. 318. Tchekirdje is still a favourite resort for foreigners as well as for natives.
[83] Cantacuzenos and Gregoras.
[84] Greg., IX. 2, p. 401.
[85] Cant., I. 42, pp. 204-6, 208; Greg., VIII. 15, p. 384; Greg., IX, c. 1, pp. 390-2, says it was the young Andronicus who first planned to break again with his grandfather. However that may be, the impression among the Greeks in Asia Minor who were endeavouring to hold back the enemies of the empire must have been the same!
[86] Greg., IX. 1, p. 392.
[87] In the volume on ‘L’Ancien Régime’ in Taine’s _Origines de la France contemporaine_, pp. 3-6, there is a wonderful analysis of the effect of early Latin Christianity upon the pagan mind. The Greek Church of the fourteenth century could produce no such impression.
[88] From the earliest Ottoman times to the present day religion and nationality have not been divorced. Osmanli and Moslem were synonymous terms, just as to-day in the Balkan peninsula, where the Ottoman Empire was really founded, Turk and Moslem are synonymous terms. When once this is understood, the student and traveller is freed from his preconceived notion that the ‘Turks’, as that expression is to-day understood in Turkey, are an Asiatic race, who have held the country as conquering invaders.
[89] Jorga, i. 162, is mistaken in saying, ‘überall wurden die Goldmünzen Osmans gern angenommen.’ Hadji Khalfa says that Osman struck no money. Also Colonel Djevad bey, _Histoire militaire de l’Empire ottoman_, i. 95. Save several silver pieces, which are not proven genuine, of the collection of Abbé Sestini (Salaberry, _Hist. de l’Emp. ott._, iv. 193), I can find record in numismatic collections of no money of Osman. For discussion of this question see Hammer, i. 117, who cites several Ottoman historians against coinage before Orkhan, and Toderini, _Historia della letteratura ottomana_, French trans., iii. 183.
[90] Appendix B, on the Emirates of Asia Minor during the Fourteenth Century, contains the identification and description of these neighbours.
[91] See Shehabeddin, Paris MS., 139 vº, which is cited in part on p. 70.
[92] The chieftainship among the Turks was elective rather than hereditary. The Armenian Haython, who had excellent opportunities for observing their customs at this period, wrote: ‘Puisque les Turcs pristrent la seigneurie de Turquie, ilz ordonnerent un seigneur entre eulx, lequel ilz appelerent le Soudan’: MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds français, 2810, fol. 230 vº. Hussein Hezarfenn says (ii. 287-9) that Ertogrul succeeded his father by election and, in turn, manœuvred to secure the election of Osman. Evliya effendi, i. 27, declares that Osman was elected chief. This is also stated by Barletius, in Lonicerus, vol. ii, fol. 231-2; Spandugino; Cantemir (Rumanian ed.), i. 19; and Vanell, p. 359. Cf. Chalcocondylas (ed. Migne), col. 24.
[93] For dates see Bibliography.
[94] Nöldeke’s translation, in _Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlândischen Gesellschaft_, xiii. 214-17.
[95] Gregoras, IX. 1, pp. 390-2. But Cantacuzenos, I. 42, pp. 208-15, maintains that young Andronicus heard that his grandfather was preparing a _coup_ before he thought of taking any action himself.
[96] Cant., I. 44, pp. 215-16; Greg., IX. 1, p. 392; Phrantzes, I. 6, p. 35.
[97] Cant., I. 4-5, pp. 216-23; Greg., IX. 1, p. 396.
[98] Cant., I. 50, pp. 248, 252; Greg., IX. 3, pp. 405-7.
[99] Cant., ibid.; Greg., IX. 3, pp. 407-9.
[100] Cant., I. 52, pp. 260-2; Greg., IX. 4, pp. 409-10; Cant., I. 53, pp. 267-70.
[101] Cant., I. 55, pp. 277, 281-2; Greg., IX. 4, p. 414.
[102] Cant., I. 55-II. 1, pp. 277-312; Greg., IX. 4-8, pp. 411-32; Phr. I. 6, p. 35.
[103] IX. 8, p. 431.
[104] Cant., II. 28, p. 473; Greg., IX. 14, p. 461, and X. 1, p. 474.
[105] II. 3, p. 324.
[106] Cantacuzenos uses this same expression concerning the collecting of the army with which Andronicus III repelled an invasion of seventy Turkish vessels in the autumn of the same year. Cf. II. 13, p. 390.
[107] I have gathered the account of this battle from Cant., II. 6-8, pp. 341-60; Greg., IX. 9, pp. 433-5; Phr., I. 7, pp. 36-7; Chalcocondylas (ed. Migne), I. 11, col. 32. It is interesting to note how much space Cantacuzenos gives in contrast to the brevity of the other writers.
[108] II, c. 8, 363. Seadeddin, Neshri, and Idris agree with Gregoras, IX. 13, p. 458, in putting the fall of Nicaea in 1330 or 1331. Gregoras euphemistically says the city was ‘pillaged by the Turks’. But Leunclavius, on the authority of Ali, gives A.H. 734, which would be 1333 or 1334.
[109] Phr., I. 7.
[110] In _Djihannuma_, Paris MS., fol. 1934.
[111] When I was in Nicaea in 1913, the imam of the Yeshil Djami told me that there were seventy thousand houses at the time of the Ottoman conquest. This is the local tradition.
[112] Hammer, i. 146, makes this claim.
[113] Ibn Batutah, ii. 322-3. For discussion of the value of Ibn Batutah’s testimony see Appendix B and Bibliography.
[114] Miklositch-Müller, Act. LXXXII, anno 1339, and Act. XCII, anno 1340.
[115] There is no way of establishing the date of the fall of Nicomedia. The Ottoman historians report that it was added to the dominions of Orkhan in 1326, the year of his accession and of the fall of Brusa. It is best here to follow the unanimous testimony of the Byzantine sources, which is in accord with the natural inference that Nicomedia fell some time after Nicaea: Greg., XI. 6, p. 545; Phr., I. 8, p. 38. Hammer cannot disregard the testimony of Gregoras here. He ingenuously suggests that the city might have been lost by the Osmanlis, and recaptured. Cantacuzenos (II. 24, p. 446, and 26, p. 459) says that Andronicus III went twice to the aid of Nicomedia in 1331, but he does not record the loss of either Brusa or Nicomedia. In the collection of Feridun, Bibl. Nat., Paris, MS. anc. fonds turc 79, there is a diploma appointing Soleiman governor of Nicomedia in 1332, but the authenticity of the earlier pieces in this collection is open to grave suspicion (cf. Bibliography).
[116] Howorth, iii. 613.
[117] Canale, i. 215.
[118] Not an actual defensive alliance against Orkhan, as Schlumberger, _Numismatique de l’Orient latin_, p. 480, supposes. See Cant., II. 13, pp. 388-90; Phr., I. 8, p. 37.
[119] Cant., II. 28, pp. 470-3.
[120] Ibid., 22, p. 435.
[121] Ibid., 25, pp. 455-6.
[122] Cant. II., 29-30, pp. 480-4; Greg., XI. 2, p. 530.
[123] Hammer, quoting Ashikpashazadé, i. 150-1.
[124] Mordtmann, in _ZDMG_. (1911), lxv. 105, basing his statement, like Hammer, on Ashikpashazadé, Vatican MS., fol. 33, gives A.H. 735, 737, or 740. The earliest of these dates is precluded by the testimony of Ibn Batutah, who found these places still independent about A.H. 735. A.H. 737 might be possible, if we decide that Orkhan accomplished everything during the one expedition against Pergama. Mordtmann, still quoting Ashikpashazadé, says that these three cities were held by relatives of the Palaeologi. If this be true, it goes to prove that there must have existed all along in the reigns of Osman and Orkhan quasi-friendly relations between Moslem and Christian. There was certainly no religious fanaticism during this period of Ottoman history.
[125] ‘Les Osmanlis avaient étendu leur domination en Asie Mineure et absorbé les états dont l’indépendance avait jusqu’alors empêché l’unité politique de l’Empire musulman!’ Delaville-Leroulx, _France en Orient au XIVe siècle_, i. 118. ‘Osmans Sohn Orkhan Kleinasien unterworfen hatte’: Wüstenfeld, _Geschichte der Türken_, p. 16. ‘Orkan s’impadroni di quasi tutta la Natolia’: Alberi, in preface (viii) to series III, vol. i, of _Relazione Ven. Amb._ One of the earliest western historians gives Orkhan’s ambition as ‘solus cupiens in minore Asia regnare’: Cervarius, p. 5. Even Hammer, i. 150, is considerably ahead of time in saying, in one of his chapters on Orkhan, ‘Les hordes ottomanes se précipitèrent du haut de l’Olympe comme une avalanche, franchissant montagnes et vallées, ajoutant à leurs possessions les neuf royaumes nés des débris de l’Empire seljukide, inondant Asie Mineure depuis l’Olympe jusqu’au Taurus.’ Hammer does not mean to give this wrong impression, but one has to read very closely not to get it. See discussion of this error in Appendix B.
[126] Cant., IV. 37, p. 284. Is it on the strength of this evident error of a Greek writer that Evliya effendi, ii. 229, says ‘Orkhan captured Angora from the Prince of Kutayia of the Kermian family’? Hussein Hezarfenn, following Chalcocondylas, is an example of an Ottoman historian basing his statements on a Greek authority.
[127] For the time of Ibn Batutah and Shehabeddin see Appendix B, p. 279. Mas-Latrie, _Trésor de Chronologie_, col. 1796, after careful collation of Shehabeddin and Ibn Batutah, comes to the conclusion that Orkhan added the emirates of Balikesri, Marmara, Akbara, Kaouïa, Keredek, Kul Hissar, and Thingizlu to his state between 1349 and 1360. This, too, is discussed in Appendix B.
[128] Marmara, for example, is given by the Ottoman historians as a conquest made by Osman. See Hammer, i. 89. But it is mentioned as an independent principality by Shehabeddin, in _Notices et Extraits des MSS. de la Bibl. du roi_, xiii. 358, 366.
[129] Ibn Batutah, ii. 321-2.
[130] Shehabeddin, Paris MS., fonds arabe 2325, fol. 139 vº-140 rº.
[131] Ibid., fol. 125 vº.
[132] Hammer, i. 110-11, says that Alaeddin, ‘stranger to the profession of arms, occupied himself solely with the cares of state’, but on p. 133 he has Alaeddin commanding the troops in battle while Orkhan watches from the top of a hill!
[133] For the derivation of vizier, with the double meaning of burden-bearer and the one who aids, see Ibn Khaldun, _Prolegomena_, in _Notices et Extraits_, xx. 4.
[134] Gen. xxviii. 11-18.
[135] Sale’s translation, c. 20, verse 30, p. 234.
[136] Col. Djevad bey, p. 20, _n._ 2. Col. Djevad claims that von Hammer’s derivation of the word ‘pasha’ from the Persian is wrong. But he gives no reason which would satisfy the philologist when he asserts that this word is essentially Turkish. Nor does he attempt to explain its original meaning. ‘Pasha’ is probably a shortened form of ‘padishah’. See _Century Dictionary_, v. 4228.
[137] According to the biographer of Brusa, cited by Hammer, i. 146, _n._ 4.
[138] I do not understand what Hammer means when he says, i. 116, that the _Kanunnamé_ must be taken in the sense of political rather than ecclesiastical law. The two cannot be separated in Islam. Or, perhaps, it is better to say that there is no political law. The very word _Kanun_ was taken from the Greeks, was used by them for ecclesiastical law, and its adoption by the Osmanlis (at a much later period than Orkhan) serves to emphasize the fact that there was no other land of law conceivable than the law of the Church. The word _Kanun_ had of course other meanings, but in its collective legal sense it seems to have stood only for rules or laws that had to do with things ecclesiastical or religious. See the various meanings of this word in A. Souter’s _Text and Canon of the New Testament_ (London, 1913), pp. 154-5.
[139] This petition is in the Litany of the Prayer Book of Edward VI. Cf. Schaff, _Church History_, iv. 151.
[140] I do not mean to assert that religious feeling has played no part in the massacres of our own day. But these massacres were arranged by the government, who incited the Moslems to attack their Christian neighbours, inflaming the ignorant mind more by an appeal to racial hatred, to loot, to lust, than to defence of the sacred faith. In the Armenian massacres it was represented to the ignorant village Moslem that the Armenians were plotting to set up an independent government or to betray the fatherland to some European power. I was in Adana during the terrible massacre of 1909, and make this statement from personal experience and observation.
[141] Michail Koëzé, Marco, and Evrenos were Greeks. Cf. Leunclavius, _Pandectes_, p. 125.
[142] Up to the time of the Tanzimat, in 1849, Christians were called _raïas_. The original meaning of _raïa_ was a flock, and was not a term of contempt, but a recognition of the fact that Christians were a taxable asset to the nation, at so much per head.
[143] In western Asia Minor, in Macedonia and Thrace, up to the present day the convert to Islam, no matter of what race, is immediately classified before the law as a Turk. When the Sublime Porte, after the reoccupation of Adrianople in the summer of 1913, laid a memorial before the Powers, it was claimed that the large majority of the population of the vilayet of Thrace was ‘Turkish’. This word had absolutely no racial significance. Every Mohammedan in Thrace, no matter what his race or language, would be considered a Turk. The Young Turks, when they established the Constitution in 1908, tried to revive the word ‘Osmanli’ as a term including all Ottoman subjects. But they not only failed to convince the nation--they failed to convince themselves--that a Christian could really be an Osmanli, with the full rights and privileges enjoyed by the Moslems.
[144] Ricaut, ed. 1682, p. 148. For confusion of the name ‘Turk’ with ‘Saracen’ by early western writers, see _Chronique latine de Guillaume de Nangis_, Géraud ed., i. 46, 86-8; _Mémoires d’Olivier de la Marche_, Beaune and d’Arbaumont ed., i. 22-5, iv. 83; _Gilles le Muisit_, Lemaître ed., p. 196. The mistake of Ricaut is common with many of the fifteenth-to seventeenth-century writers on the Crusades.
[145] Matthew of Edessa (Urfa), fol. 8 of MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds arménien, No. 95, quoted in _Notices et Extraits_, ix, 1^[ère] partie, p. 281, speaks of ‘les calamités que des peuples barbares et corrompus, tels que les Turcs et les Grecs, LEURS SEMBLABLES, ont causées’.
[146] This was true even of the conquest of Constantinople, which caused much more dismay and regret in Europe than among the Greeks. See the remarkable letter of Francis Fielphus to Mohammed II in _Bibl. de l’École des langues vivantes orientales_, série 3, xii. 63-6, 211-14.
[147] Cf. Rambaud in _Hist. Générale_, ii. 816.
[148] In Constantinople, Smyrna, Salonika, and the lesser coast cities of the Ottoman Empire, as well as in many of the cities of the interior, one feels the atmosphere of Sabbath rest much more on a Sunday than on a Friday.
[149] Evliya effendi, ii. 241.
[150] In the _Djihannuma_, p. 951.
[151] In a popular Anatolian love-song, there is the line, ‘Benim sevdijimie din var iman yok’, ‘She whom I love has religion, but not a bit of faith’, which illustrates the lack of deep religious feeling in the Osmanli. In this he is like the Greek, and different from the Slav, the Persian and Arab. See Kúnos, _Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft_, liii. 237.
[152] At Balikesri the sultan Dambur told Ibn Batutah that ‘the men follow the religion of their king’: ii. 317. Here was the principle of _cuius regio eius religio_ two centuries before Augsburg!
[153] Col. Djevad bey, pp. 18-19.
[154] Edward III of England had created a sort of obligatory military service. His organized infantry took part in the Battle of Crécy, 1346. Lavisse-Rambaud, _Hist. générale_, iii. 76.
[155] Halil Ganem, i. 39.
[156] This still holds. In October 1912, on the Seraskerat Square in Constantinople, I saw Sultan Mehmed V give over the command of the army for the Balkan War to Nazim pasha.
[157] Col. Djevad bey, p. 18.
[158] Bertrandon de la Broquière, Schéfer ed., pp. 220-1.
[159] This statement needs especial emphasis, as many historians have followed Chalcocondylas and Bosio in attributing the corsair fleets to Osman and Orkhan. An instance of a careful modern historian making this error is found in Romanin, _Historia documentata di Venezia_, iii. 147, where he says, ‘La lega ... per raffrenare l’ognor erescente potenza _ottomana_.’
[160] In Bongars, _Gesta Dei per Francos_, ii. 313.
[161] This letter, from the manuscript in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, is published in _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_ (1906), lxvii. 587. Other documents on this mission, ibid. (1892), liii. 254-7.
[162] See papers of H. Lot in _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, 4e série (1859), v. 503-9, and (1875) xxxvi. 588-600. Also Bosio, ii. 58.
[163] Raynaldus, Ann. 1334, pp. 17-19. As the repetition of all the negotiations in connexion with papal attempts for crusades cannot be included in the text of my book, I refer the reader to the section on papal negotiations in the Chronological Tables.
[164] Deliberation of Senate, November 18, 1333, in _Misti_, XVI, fol. 40.
[165] Raynaldus, Ann. 1344, p. 11; Stella (in Muratori), col. 1080; Dandolo, p. 418; Greg., II, p. 686; Cant., III, p. 192; _Mon. Hist. Patr._ x. 757; _Misti_ for 1344, fol. 30; Rymer, _Acta Publica_, vol. ii, part IV, p. 172; _Commemorialia_, iv. 80.
[166] For relations of Rhodes with Smyrna from 1347 onwards, see Bosio, _passim_, but especially ii. 80 and 118-19.
[167] Serbian chronicles, quoted by von Kállay, _Geschichte der Serben_, i. 66.
[168] In the fratricidal war of July 1913, the ignorant Serbian peasants really believed that they were fighting to take from the Bulgarians ‘the sacred soil of the fatherland’, as their newspapers and addresses to the soldiers called Macedonia. The name of St. Stephen was invoked when they went into battle.
[169] Orbini, _Il Regno degli Slavi_, p. 259, gives a circumstantial account of the assassination. He says that Stephen gave the order to men who strangled the old king in his cell at midnight. This does not prevent Orbini from saying later of Stephen ‘fu huomo molto pio’! Borschgrave, p. 266, is not certain of Stephen’s connivance.
[170] J. Schafarik, _Elenchus actorum spectantium ad historiam Serborum_, XXV-XXVII.
[171] I find no documentary authority for the often repeated statement that this coronation took place at Skoplje (Uskub or Scopia). At the time of the recent Balkan War, the Serbians, in order to preserve their friendly relations with Greece, supported the Uskub theory. But see Ljubić, _Monumenta spectantia ad hist. Slavorum meridionalium_, ii. 278, 279, 326; _Commemorialia_, IV; _Secreta Rog._, A. 33.
[172] ‘Stephanus, D. G. Serviae ... Albaniae, maritimae regionis rex, Bulgariae imperii princeps et fere totius imperii Romaniae dominus’: Ljubić, ii. 278.
[173] Ibid., ii. 326.
[174] Ibid., loc. cit.
[175] _Secr. Rog._, A. 33.
[176] _Misti_, xxiv. 12.
[177] Ibid., xxiv. 110.
[178] _Secr. Rog._, II, B. 4; _Misti_, xxiv. 103.
[179] Cf. _Misti_, xxv. 7, 10. Fiorinsky, _The South Slavs and Byzantium in the second quarter of the Fourteenth Century_, quoted by Borchgrave in _Bulletin de l’Académie royale de Belgique_ for 1884, 8e série, iv. 429-30.
[180] _Commem._ iv. 172.
[181] _Misti_, xxvi. 16-22; _Commem._ iv. 157.
[182] MS. Vatican 3765, quoted by Raynaldus, ann. 1347, XXX.
[183] Fiorinsky, p. 207.
[184] Engel, _Geschichte von Serbien_, 285-6; Müller, _Beiträge Byz. Chron._, p. 406 _n._
[185] Cant., IV. 43, p. 315; Greg., XXVII. 50, p. 557; von Kállay, i. 69.
[186] Cant., II. 9, pp. 363-70; Greg., XII. 3, p. 582; Ducas, p. 6.
[187] Cant., II. 1, pp. 14-18; 40, p. 560; and III. 4, p. 91; Greg., IX. 11, pp. 560-8; XII. 2, p. 576.
[188] Cant., II. 24-7, pp. 145-67; Greg., XII. 11-16, pp. 608-26; Phr. I. 9, p. 40; Ducas, 6, p. 24, to 7, p. 26.
[189] Cantacuzenos tries to make out that this was a justifiable arrangement, as this district had already been conquered by Stephen Dushan. But Ducas, 6, p. 26, and 8, p. 30, declares that Cantacuzenos sacrificed the empire to the Serbians.
[190] Cant., III. 57, pp. 347-8; Greg., XIII. 4, pp. 648-52.
[191] _Misti_, xxi. 35.
[192] Greg., XVI. 6, pp. 834-5; Ducas, 7, p. 29; Clement VI, _Epp. Secr._ vii. 99. ’Άμυρ is either ‘Emir’ or ‘Omar’.
[193] Cant., III. 31, p. 498; Ducas 9, pp. 33-4; Chalc., I, p. 24.
[194] Cant., III. 81, pp. 501-2; 84, pp. 518-19; 85, pp. 525-9.
[195] Cant., III. 95, pp. 585-9; Greg., XV. 5, pp. 762-3; Ducas, 9, p. 35.
[196] Greg., XV. 2, p. 749.
[197] For the action against Barlaam spoken of here, see Muralt, ii. 575, No. 17; p. 576, No. 22; p. 578, No. 37.
[198] Cant., III. 98, p. 604, to IV. 4, p. 29; Greg., XV. 9, p. 781, to 11, p. 791; Ducas, 9, p. 37, to 10, p. 38.
[199] Cant., IV. 1, p. 12, to 2, p. 19.
[200] Cant., IV. 4, p. 30; 5, p. 32; 20, p. 147.
[201] Cant., IV. 9, pp. 53-7.
[202] Raynaldus, ann. 1349, XXXI.
[203] Clement VI, _Epp. Secr._ viii. 248-50.
[204] Cant., IV. 13, p. 85.
[205] Marco Guazzo, _Cronica_, p. 269; Stella, _Annales Genuenses_, in Muratori, xvii, col. 1090.
[206] MS. Vatican 2040, cited by Muralt, ii. 618: Petrarch, _Epp. fam._ vii. 7. For historical and medical importance of the black death, see Hecker, _Der schwarze Tod im 14ten Jahrhundert_ (Berlin, 1832). MSS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds latin 8369-70, contain an interesting contemporary account, mostly in hexameter verse, by Symon de Cavino, a Paris physician.
[207] _Breve Chronicon_ at end of Ducas, cited by Finlay, _History of Greece_, iv. 409 _n._
[208] In 1340 Venice had refused a loan of ships and money to Edward III of England on the ground that she needed all her resources ‘to guard against the Turkish danger about to become universal’: Wiel, p. 204.
[209] On March 17, 1351, Petrarch addressed from Padua to Doge Andrea Dandolo a letter of remonstrance and warning against engaging in a war with Genoa. This letter is quoted in Hazlitt, iii. 122.
[210] The Genoese archives contain a treaty between the Byzantine Empire and Genoa, dated May 6, 1352, which says: ‘debbono eziandio ritenersi per valide e ferme le convenzioni e la pace stipulata dai genovesi con Orcan bey.’ Belgrano, _Atti della Società Ligure di Storia Patria_, xiii. 124.
[211] The Signory of Genoa, writing to the Podesta of Pera, March 21, 1356, said: ‘Nobis, vobis ac omnibus ianuenibus est notorium et manifestum quantum bonum et gratias habuimus a domino Orchano amirato Turchie ad destructionem et mortem tam venetorum quam grecorum tempore guerre nostre’: ibid., p. 127.
[212] In the treaty of 1387 with Murad, the Genoese said: ‘quam inter recolendam memoriam magnifici domini Orchani patris sui ex una parte et illustrem Commune Ianue ex altera’: ibid., p. 147.
[213] Cant., IV. 11, pp. 68-77; Greg., XVI. 6, p. 835, to XVII. 7, p. 865.
[214] Cant., IV. 16-17, pp. 104-5, 108-11, 114-30; 19, pp. 133-5; 22, p. 156; Greg., XVI. 1, p. 795; XVIII. 2, p. 876. Phr., I. 9, p. 40, gives this as the time Cantacuzenos married his daughter to Orkhan.
[215] Cant., IV. 30, pp. 218-20; Greg., XXVI. 19, p. 86, and 22, p. 88. For explanation of action of Venetian admiral, Pisani, see histories of Daru and Romanin.
[216] Villani, _Historia Venetiana_ (Muratori), xiv. 200; Canale, _Nuova istoria di Genova_, i. 222.
[217] Cant., IV. 33, pp. 246-7; 36, p. 266. Cantacuzenos had tried to get the Bulgarians to attack Stephen Dushan in 1351. Cf. Cant., IV. 22, pp. 162-6.
[218] Greg., XXVII. 30, pp. 150-1.
[219] Cant., IV. 36, pp. 265-6; Greg., XXVII. 55, p. 171, and XXVIII. 3, pp. 177-8; Cant., IV. 34, pp. 247-50; Greg., XXVIII. 7, pp. 181-2.
[220] Cant., IV. 34, pp. 250-3; 36, p. 266; Greg., XXVIII. 19, p. 188.
[221] About two hours on horse from Gallipoli.
[222] Seadeddin, i. 58-63.
[223] Gilbert Cousin, _Opera_, i. 390 (evidently copying Drechsler), and Egnatius, _de Origine Turcarum_ (Paris, 1539), p. 29, give date A.D. 1363. But do they not follow Phr., I. 26, p. 80?
[224] Donado de Lezze, p. 7, and Paolo Giovio, both ardent Venetians, and Rabbi Joseph, i. 245, give the names of these vessels, though differently. Nicolas de Nicolay, who passed through the Hellespont in 1551, says that this story of the Genoese was a tradition of the locality. He locates the castle of Tzympe a few miles from the Aegaean end of the strait! _Les quatre livres des navigations_ (1587 ed.), p. 58. Sauli, _Della Colonia Genovese in Galata_, ii. 44-5, vigorously defends the Genoese against this calumny.
[225] There is no room for doubt about this date. Cf. Cant., IV. 38, pp. 277-80; Greg., XXXIII. 67, p. 220, and XXVIII. 40-2, pp. 202-4; Villani, p. 105; _Byz. Annalen_, ed. Müller, in _Sitzungs-Berichte der Wiener Akademie_, ix. 392; Muralt, _Chronographie Byz._, ii. 643.
[226] This place figured in the recent Balkan War. It was here that the Osmanlis stationed their army for the defence of the Dardanelles.
[227] Greg., XXIX. 26, p. 241.
[228] Greg., XXVIII. 30, pp. 195-201.
[229] Cant., IV. 37, pp. 270-2; 38, p. 276; Greg., XXIX. 17-18, pp. 234-6; 49, p. 257.
[230] At least, Cantacuzenos, IV. 38, p. 276, claims that he ransomed Tzympe.
[231] Cant., IV. 38, p. 283.
[232] Rumanian Chronicle, cited by Gregorović, _Relations of Serbia with her Neighbouring States, principally in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries_, Kazan, 1859, in an appendix.
[233] Cant., IV. 39-43, pp. 284-307; Greg., XXIX. 27-30, pp. 242-3.
[234] Cant., IV. 49, pp. 358-60.
[235] Tchorlu was the head-quarters of the Ottoman General Staff during the first month of the Balkan War. After the battle of Lulé Burgas, it became the head-quarters of the Bulgarians. From here the attack upon the defences of Constantinople was directed.
[236] Muralt, ii. 640, No. 10, _n._
[237] Greg., XXIX. 34, pp. 224-6.
[238] During the five years following the proclamation of the Constitution in 1908, I lived, and travelled extensively, in the Ottoman Empire. Rarely did I meet a foreigner engaged in business there who had the slightest sympathy with the Osmanlis in their aspirations or in their successive crushing misfortunes. This is not a criticism, but merely the record of a fact.
[239] Schafarik, CVII.
[240] The expression ‘la terre que les Turcs tiennent’ is always used to designate Asia Minor in the opinion which the council of the French King Philippe de Valois gave concerning the route to be followed in the abortive crusade of 1332. See Archives Nationales, Paris, P. 2289, pp. 711-12.
[241] See p. 97, and notes 3 and 4 on that page.
[242] Quoted from the Cancelleria Secreta by Romanin, iv. 232.
[243] This letter is reproduced by Jireček, _Geschichte der Bulgaren_, p. 309.
[244] Greg., XXXVII. 52, p. 558; 59-63, pp. 561-3; 67-9, pp. 565-6; XXXVI. 6-8, pp. 504-9; Cant., IV. 44, p. 320.
[245] The generally accepted date of Orkhan’s death is 1359 or 1360, following Ottoman sources. But Jireček, a careful and able scholar, p. 321, n. 10, is inclined to accept March 1362. There is great confusion about this period. I think that the Ottoman date is undoubtedly correct here.
[246] ‘Der eigentliche Begründer der osmanischen Macht war Orchan’, Fessler, _Geschichte von Ungarn_, ii. 151.
[247] Col. Djevad bey, p. 254.
[248] Seadeddin, i. 80.
[249] Seadeddin, i. 82; Hadji Khalfa, _Rumeli_, p. 19.
[250] But Matteo Villani, in Muratori, xiv. 672, who is followed by Leunclavius, says that Demotika was abandoned to Orkhan in November 1361.
[251] Cf. marginal note in Barberini MS. of Pachymeres, cited by Muralt, ii. 663, No. 9.
[252] Seadeddin, i. 84-5; Hadji Khalfa, _Rumeli_, p. 22.
[253] All the Ottoman historians.
[254] MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds turc, No. 79, p. 25; Leunclavius, _Annales_, p. 30; Seadeddin, i. 85.
[255] Muklis Abderrahman Efendy, quoted by Schéfer, in his edition of Bertrandon de la Broquière, p. 170, _n._ 3.
[256] Seadeddin, i. 89; Hadji Khalfa, _Rumeli_, p. 52.
[257] Villani tells of its terrible ravages in 1360 ‘ricominciata in diversi paesi del mondo’, Muratori, xiv. 653, 688-90, 727.
[258] Ibid., pp. 649-50. He declares that Murad had been ‘molte volte tentato di vincere Constantinopoli’.
[259] Cf. Finlay, iv. 45, 169.
[260] Seadeddin, i. 42. Hammer, i. 384-5, n. viii, says that Ottoman historians are unanimous in this assertion as against Byzantine sources. Col. Djevad bey, the modern Ottoman authority on military history, is disappointing and unconvincing in his discussion of this question. On p. 25 he gives 726 (1326) for the date, and on p. 78 730 (1329). He cites no sources, for there are none, and has to admit, p. 54, that Murad I made the laws for the janissaries. Among early European historians there is much divergency. Spandugino, p. 185, attributes their origin to Osman, and the name from the village of Sar: they are ‘the young men of Sar’. Ricaut, ed. 1682, p. 357, also attributes to Osman. Reineccius, influencing the Latin editor of Chalcocondylas (see ed. Migne, p. 26, _n._ 11), makes Osman the founder, and derives the name from ‘Januae’: they are the _custodes corporis_. Leuncl., _Pandectes_, p. 129, discusses these theories without coming to any conclusion. Giovio, Geuffraeus, and Nicolay, p. 83, attribute origin to Murad II. Certainly it was not earlier than his day that the janissaries attracted attention in Europe. D’Ohsson, vii. 311, asserts that there was no definite organization until Mohammed II. Mignot, i. 119-20, is in favour of the theory that Murad I created this corps.
[261] Seignobos, in _Hist. générale_, ii. 334.
[262] Col. Djevad bey, p. 251, says that Anatolian Christians were exempt to give time to recuperate ‘after the exhausting struggles of generations’. But exhausting struggles had been no less frequent and no less severe in the Balkan peninsula. Gibbon’s suggestion, that the levies were made in Europe because Moslem and Christian Anatolians were not apt for war, shows how completely the great English historian missed the _raison d’être_ of the janissaries.
[263] Hammer, i. 126.
[264] Col. Djevad bey, p. 90.
[265] Ibid.
[266] Ibid., pp. 55-6; Ducas, p. 16; Leunel., _Annales_, p. 34; Ricaut, pp. 358-9.
[267] Lavallée, i. 190-1.
[268] Phr., I. 26, p. 86; Chalc., I, p. 25. Cf. Michaud, _Hist. des Croisades_, v. 275.
[269] Seadeddin, i. 91.
[270] This colony was at Bigha. See Appendix B, p. 301.
[271] Phr., I. 26, p. 80.
[272] Katona, x. 393.
[273] Chale., I, p. 30, and the chronicle of Rabbi Joseph, i. 240, confuse this battle with that of Cernomen, near the same place and with the same result, in 1370. But there were certainly two distinct battles. Louis of Hungary took part in the first, as is shown by the date recorded at Mariazell and by a diploma in Fejér, _Cod. Dipl. Hung._, 9e partie, vii. 212. Cf. Aschbach, _Geschichte Kaiser Sigmunds_, I. 87. The account in Vambéry’s _Hungary_, Story of Nations Series, p. 171, is wholly wrong.
[274] Seadeddin, i. 94.
[275] Miltitz, ii. I^{ère} partie, 166.
[276] Col. Djevad bey, p. 97, _n._ 1; Engel, _Geschichte Rag._, p. 141; Hammer, i. 231, 405. But this was also Timur’s ordinary method of signing ordinances: cf. Shereffeddin, iv. 55. The document, with the marks of Murad’s hand, is preserved in the museum of the Communal Palace at Ragusa.
[277] Villani, x. 30.
[278] Cf. Hazlitt, iii. 216.
[279] Urban V, _Epp. secr._ iv. 114.
[280] ‘Il le print por prisonnyer, et le destint a cause de ce que le roy de Bourgarye sy sestoit accorde et alyez secrettement avecques le turc’: _Chronicques de Savoye_, col. 300.
[281] Cf. Jireček, _Geschichte der Bulgaren_, p. 325.
[282] Cibrario, _Storia di Savoya_, iii. 193. But I have followed closely the account of the expedition as given in the anonymous French chronicle, cols. 299-319, in _Monumenta Historiae Patriae_, Turin, 1840, vol. i. There is a modern book by Datta. Cf. also Delaville le Roulx, i. 148 f.
[283] Urban V, _Epp. secr._ iv. 124.
[284] Ibid., iv. 240.
[285] Greg., XXV. 17, p. 41.
[286] Urban V, _Epp. secr._ ii. 230; Petrarch, _Senilia_, iv. 2.
[287] ‘Nescio enim an peius sit amisisse Hierusalem an ita Bizantion possidere. Ibi enim non agnoscitur Christus, hic neglegitur dum sic colitur. _Illi_ (Turcae) _hostes, hi scismatici peiores hostibus_: illi aperte nostrum Imperium detractant: hi verbo Romanam ecclesiam matrem dicunt: cui quam devoti filii sint, quam humiliter Romani pontificis iussa suscipiant, tuus a te ille datus patriarcha testabitur. _Illi minus nos oderunt quam minus metuunt. Isti autem totis nos visceribus et metuunt et oderunt._’ _Senilia_, vol. vii.
[288] In the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem, and in the Church of the Holy Nativity, Bethlehem, anarchy--even bloodshed--is prevented only by the constant vigilance of the Ottoman military authorities. If one asks the Latin and Greek priests in Jerusalem, they will admit without shame that this statement is true.
[289] Miklositch-Müller, _Acta et diplomata graeca_, CLXXXIV.
[290] _Epistolae secretae_, vi. 1-10.
[291] Ibid., vi. 3.
[292] The date of this visit is certain from the formal act of abjuration, which is given in full in Raynaldus, ann. 1369, XI. Ducas, c. 11, and Chalc., I, p. 25, are in error in placing this voyage later. Berger de Xivrey, _Mém. de l’Acad. des Inscriptions_, xix, 2e
## partie, p. 35, suggests that the Byzantine historians have confused
this voyage with that of Manuel, thirty years later.
[293] _Epp. secr._, viii. 37, 38, 80.
[294] By an encyclical: _Epp. secr._, viii. 4. Cf. also his letters to the doges of Venice and Genoa, ibid., p. 24.
[295] Ibid., viii. 55.
[296] Phr., I. 22, pp. 52-3; Chalc., I, pp. 50-1; Morosini, p. 13.
[297] Phr., I. 11, p. 46.
[298] Gregory XI, _Epp. secr._ iii. 36, 58.
[299] Chalc., I, pp. 51-2.
[300] Raynaldus, ann. 1371, VIII.
[301] _Epp. secr._, ii. 32, 87. Similar letter to Louis in December 1375, ibid. v. 46. Other letters reprinted in Fejér, 9e partie, iv. 583 4; v. 54-6; vi. 155-6.
[302] Bernino, pp. 15-20.
[303] Fejér, 9e partie, iv. 427-8.
[304] Ibid., v. 52-3.
[305] Rymer, _Acta Publica_, III, part 3, pp. 38-40.
[306] On December 12, 1374, Gregory XI wrote to John from Avignon, predicting that his ‘alliance with Murad’ would bring about the destruction of the empire: _Epistolae secretae_, iv. 68.
[307] Raynaldus, ann. 1378, XIX.
[308] Jireček, _Geschichte der Bulgaren_, p. 317.
[309] Cant. IV, 50, pp. 362-3.
[310] Although Engel says 1353, others 1356, and the Rumanian chronicle 1371, there can be no question that 1365 is the correct date; for both Byzantine and Ottoman historians speak of Alexander as Bulgarian Czar in 1364, and do not mention him later, while Sisman and his brothers come immediately into prominence.
[311] Schiltberger, Neumann ed., p. 93.
[312] Orbini, pp. 472-3.
[313] Bonfinius, II. 10.
[314] Fessler, _Geschichte von Ungarn_, ii. 152.
[315] Wadding, _Annales minorum_, ann. 1369, XI.
[316] _Epp. secr._, VI. 131, 136.
[317] Called Ishebol by the Ottoman historians.
[318] By the second division of the Ottoman army under Timurtash. Murad himself had captured Sozopolis. Cf. Jireček, p. 326.
[319] Seadeddin, i. 104. He does not give the name of the Serbian kral.
[320] The peasantry around Samakov will point out to you the ridge, south-east of the modern town, over which he vanished. They believe that Sisman haunts the foothills of the Rhodope mountains, and rides headless in the night down into the plain. This tradition, and the statement of Ducange, viii. 289, that Sisman died in 1373 in Naples, makes possible the theory that there were three successive Sismans connected with the Ottoman conquest of Bulgaria.
[321] Hadji Khalfa, _Rumeli_, p. 38.
[322] von Kállay, _Geschichte der Serben_, i. 152.
[323] Ibid., i. 152-9; Jireček, op. cit., 319-20; Ljubić, _Monumenta spect. ad hist. Slav. merid._, iv. 189.
[324] Cant. IV., 50, pp. 360-2; Müller, _Chron. Byz._, under 1364.
[325] Miklositch, _Acta Serbica_, CLIII.
[326] Ibid., CLX.
[327] Sons of a poor Dalmatian nobleman: Ducange, _Familiae Byz._ viii. 294.
[328] At Ipek, with an independent patriarch: Engel, _Geschichte von Serbien_, p. 279.
[329] Miklositch-Müller, _Acta gr._, CLXII; MS. Wiener Bibl., Gesch. gr., No. 47, fol. 290.
[330] Ibid., CLX; ibid., fol. 286.
[331] Orbini, p. 275.
[332] Engel, op. cit., pp. 321 f. For documented details, Müller, ed. _Byz. Analekten_, pp. 359-64, 405-6, based on Vienna MS. referred to above.
[333] Now called Cermen or Tchirman.
[334] Svilengrad, now the frontier station of Bulgaria, was known from 1361 to 1913 as Mustapha Pasha. Before the recent Balkan war, it was the frontier railway station of Turkey.
[335] But there were certainly two distinct battles here, in 1363 and in 1371. See p. 124, _n._ 2, above.
[336] Ducange, op. cit., p. 294; Bialloblotszky’s translation of Rabbi Joseph, i. 240; Klaić, p. 199; Jireček, pp. 329-30. Zinkeisen, i. 224, confuses this battle with the one fought in 1363.
[337] In Miklositch, _Chrestomathia palaeoslav._, p. 77.
[338] Phr., I. 26, p. 80, gives the capture of these cities in the same campaign as that in which Monastir was acquired, with 1386 as date. But the Serbian chronicles are so explicit here that we can follow them without hesitation, especially as they are seconded by the Ottoman historians. Cf. Hammer, i. 241, and Zinkeisen, i. 229.
[339] Pope Gregory XI, writing to Louis of Hungary, May 14, 1372, informed him that the Osmanlis had conquered some parts of Greece, ‘subactis quibusdam magnatibus Rasciae, tum in eis dominantibus’. Rascia was Servia. Theiner, _Monumenta Hungarica_, ii. 115.
[340] Gregory XI, _Epp. secr._ ii. 32-3.
[341] According to Amilhau and Jireček, who rely on Reynaldus, ann. 1364, XXVIII, this first invasion of the Greek peninsula took place in 1363. But the Turks referred to in that year, probably of the perennial corsair type, could not have been Osmanlis. They were from Aïdin or Sarukhan.
[342] Klaić, _Geschichte Bosniens_, p. 200.
[343] Hammer, i. 242, 409, places the first relations of Lazar with Murad after the fall of Nish, which he erroneously puts in 1376. See below, p. 161, _n._ 3.
[344] Gregory XI, _Epp. secr._ iii. 42.
[345] June 15, 1373: Andrea Gataro, in Muratori, xvii, col. 176.
[346] Ducas, 12, pp. 43-4; Phr., I. 11, pp. 49-50.
[347] Chalc., I, pp. 42-3. But Murad, according to the Collection of Feridun, when he wrote to the Prince of Karamania, stated that Saoudji had been conquered in a pitched battle: MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds turc, No. 79, p. 30.
[348] Letter just cited; Chalc., I, pp. 44-5; Phr., I. 12, p. 51. Saoudji is called Kontouz by Ducas, Mosis by Phrantzes, and Saouzis by Chalcocondylas. I cannot find the reading Siaous which Hammer, i. 412, and _n._ lix, attributes to Chalcocondylas.
[349] Chalc., I, p. 46; II, p. 69; Phr., I. 12, p. 51; Duc., 12, p. 44.
[350] Canale, ii. 16.
[351] Clavijo de Gonzáles, 15 vº and 16 rº.
[352] So Phrantzes thinks, I. 12, p. 51: ταύτην ὠμότητα καὶ ἀπανθρωπίαν ὁ ’Αμουράτης ἐποίησεν ἀεὶ εἰς τὰ πάντα καλῶς πολιτευόμενος.
[353] Chalc., I, pp. 46-7; Phr., I. 11, pp. 47-9.
[354] Romanin, iii. 255. This project, according to Cicogna, _Istoria di Venezia_, vi. 95, was first broached to John at the time of his visit to Venice in 1370.
[355] Raynaldus, ann. 1376, XXIII.
[356] _Epp. secr._, vi. 236.
[357] Ducas, 12, p. 45.
[358] Caresino, in Muratori, xii.
[359] Ducas, 12, p. 45; Chalc., II, p. 63; and Phr., I. 13, p. 54, say that Bayezid had given him 1,000 men, and had often advised him to have his father and brothers assassinated. Cf. Muralt, ii. 706.
[360] Sauli, ii. 57.
[361] Quirino, _Vita di Zeno_, cited by Muralt, ii. 707, Nos. 6-9.
[362] Ducas, 12, p. 45.
[363] The fortunes of Salonika at this period are obscure. See p. 231, below.
[364] Chalc., II, p. 63; Phr., I. 13, pp. 55-6.
[365] Chalc., II, p. 64. But Ducas, 4, p. 19, says that Bayezid captured this city.
[366] Bonlinius, II. 10; Sanudo, _Vite de’ Duchi_, in Muratori, xxii, col. 680.
[367] An excellent brief account of this war is found in Wiel’s _Story of Venice_, pp. 227-37.
[368] The Genoese forced John V to make peace with Andronicus in November 1382: Sauli, ii. 260.
[369] Cicogna, op. cit., vi. 97; Romanin, iii. 301.
[370] Hadji Khalfa, _Djihannuma_, fol. 1852; Evliya effendi, ii. 229.
[371] The testimony of Ibn Batutah, who travelled extensively among the Turks in Anatolia, southern Russia, and elsewhere between 1325 and 1340, is conclusive on this point. ‘Whenever we stopped in a house of this country (Anatolia), our neighbours of both sexes took care of us: _the women were not veiled_ ...’: ii. 256. ‘I was witness of a remarkable thing, that is, of the consideration which the women enjoy among the Turks: they hold, in fact, a rank more elevated than that of the men.... As for the women of the lower classes, I have seen them also. One of them will be, for example, in a cart drawn by horses. Near her will be three or four young girls.... The windows of the cart will be open and you can see the women’s faces: _for the women of the Turks are not veiled_.... Often the woman is accompanied by her husband, whom whoever sees him takes for one of her servants’: ii. 377-9. No student can have any doubt whatever upon the position of Turkish women during the fourteenth century. As among all vigorous peoples, the women of the Osmanlis held a high place, and were never secluded. It was not until Murad II that even the sovereign had a harem. The Moslem conception of the inferiority of women was not prevalent among the Osmanlis until after the reign of Soleiman the Magnificent. Immediately it became prevalent, the race began its decline.
So universal did veiling become in the seventeenth century that it was adopted by Christian and Jewish women in Turkey as well. See Père Febre, _Théâtre de la Turquie_ (1682), pp. 164-5. Père Febre spoke from personal experience ‘dans la plupart des lieux de la Turquie’.
[372] Hadji Khalfa, _Rumeli_, p. 96.
[373] _Historia epirotica_, Bonn ed., p. 228.
[374] Ibid., pp. 230-1.
[375] Ducange, viii. 292.
[376] Jireček, op. cit., 340.
[377] _Misti_, XL. 154.
[378] See below, p. 203.
[379] Silvestre de Sacy, in _Mém. de l’Acad. des Inscript._, vii. 327-34. But the commandant could hardly have been carried by his falconer in such a fashion as far as Philippopolis. The Ottoman historians probably forgot that Ishtiman, at the mouth of the pass, on the road to Philippopolis from Sofia, contained an Ottoman garrison.
[380] According to the anonymous _Ein gantz neu Reysebuch von Prag auss biss gen Constantinopel_, Nürnberg, 1622, p. 33, Sofia was captured in 1362. Hadji Khalfa, _Rumeli_, p. 51, with whom Schéfer, ed. Bertrandon de la Broquière, p. 202 n., seems to agree by citing, says Sofia capitulated in 780 (1378). Seadeddin, i. 125, is followed by Hammer, i. 250, Klaić, p. 237, and others in fixing the date as 1382. But these same authorities give 1375 and 1376 for Nish, which is altogether impossible. Phr., I. 26, p. 80, seems to place the capture of Sofia for 1385. This is the most reasonable date. It is consistent both with the topography of the places in question and with Murad’s methods of campaigning, as exemplified by all his conquests, to place the taking of Sofia close to the end of his reign, and within a year or two before the capture of Nish. To corroborate this date, letters in the collection of Feridun can be cited. Indje Balaban’s letter to Murad, announcing the acquisition of Sofia, is not dated. But immediately after it is the response of Murad, in which he gives to Indje Balaban for life the government of the new province, and states that he is sending him a fine horse and robes of honour because of his success. This letter is dated from Adrianople in the middle of the month of Redjeb, 788, which corresponds to 1386 in our era. These letters are in MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds turc, No. 79, pp. 31-2.
[381] Nish, from its geographical position, could not have fallen in 1375, as Chalcocondylas says. Hammer, i. 241, and Zinkeisen, i. 230, show an amazing nonchalance in transporting the Osmanlis from Kavalla, Drama, and Serres in the course of this one year, 1375. Engel, _Geschichte von Serbien_, p. 341, who, according to Hammer, ‘deceives himself by thirteen years in placing the capture of Nish in 1388’, is eleven years nearer the truth than Hammer! Strumnitza, from a diploma delivered in the name of the Serbian empress Eudoxia (Müller, _Acta Serbica_, CXXXI), was independent in 1379. Sofia did not fall before 1382. How, then, could Nish have been an Ottoman fortress from 1375?
[382] Von Kállay, i. 166.
[383] For distances between cities in the Balkan peninsula, see Jireček’s important and interesting work, _Die Heerstrasse von Belgrad nach Konstantinopel und die Balkanpässe_, p. 122. Jireček, for time of transit, depends upon Hadji Khalfa.
[384] Text in Sauli, ii. 260-8.
[385] _armiratus_ or _amiratus_, then _amiralus_, of which we have made admiral, originally had nothing whatever to do with the sea. It is a corruption of _emir_.
[386] ‘Magnificus et potens dominus, dominus Moratibei, magnus armiratus et dominus armiratorum Turchie’: the whole text is reproduced from the Genoese archives by Belgrano, in _Atti della Società Ligure di Storia_, xiii. 146-9, and by Silvestre de Sacy, in _Notices et Extraits_, xi. 58-61. Cf. Canale, ii. 59.
[387] ‘Contra illum Turcum filium iniquitatis et nequiciae, ac Sancte Crucis inimicum, Moratum bey et eius sectam, cristianum genus sic graviter invadere conantes.’ The text of this treaty is also in Belgrano, ibid., xiii. 953-65.
[388] Text in Romanin, iii. 386-9. There was an earlier law of similar nature enacted in 1334.
[389] Cf. Delaville Leroulx, i. 159-60.
[390] Romanin, iii. 331.
[391] _Bullarum_, III, part 2, pp. 4, 92, 338; Urban V, _Epp. secr._ iii. 25, iv. 256; Gregory XI, _Epp. secr._ ii. 32-3, v. 88-9, 311; Philippe de Mézeray, p. 19; Raynaldus, ann. 1372, XXIX. In 1425 Martin V repeated the anathema against those who sold Christian slaves to the Turks: _Bullarum_, III, part 2, p. 454.
[392] MS., Bibl. de Bâle, A 1, 28, fols. 232-54, cited by Delaville Leroulx, i. 70, n. 2. Adam’s project was a revival of Sanudo’s attempt to ruin Moslem trading.
[393] _Monumenta historiae patriae_, i. 320; iii. 336, 371.
[394] In 1432 Bertrandon de la Broquière met at Damascus one of these Genoese of Kaffa, who sold slaves to the Sultan of Egypt: _Voyage_, Schéfer ed., p. 68.
[395] Chalc., I, p. 53; Phr., I. 26, p. 81. Cf. Hertzberg, p. 503.
[396] Seadeddin, i. 130-2, draws here upon Idris and Neshri, and has been followed by all the Ottoman historians down to the present day.
[397] Col. Djevad, pp. 62-3. He speaks of Alaeddin bey ‘ayant levé l’étendard de la révolte’, and calls the punishment of the Serbians in this campaign the chief cause of Kossova.
[398] Chalc., I, p. 53; Phr., I. 26, p. 81.
[399] Up to 1383, in outlining the career of Tvrtko, I have followed Klaić, pp. 201-3.
[400] Schaffarik, _Acta archivii Veneti_, &c., CXLI.
[401] In a letter of April 1, published in Ljubić, iv. 185-6.
[402] _Misti_, xxxix. 113.
[403] Klaić, p. 237; Jireček, p. 341. But von Kállay, i. 166, attributes this victory to George Kastriota of Albania.
[404] Orbini, p. 361.
[405] Hopf, in Ersch-Gruber, _Allgemeine Encycl._, lxxxvi. 49.
[406] _Chronique de Morée_, p. 516. Evrenos is called Branezis. This is not the Evrenos heretofore mentioned, but another Christian renegade, of Macedonia. Cf. Finlay, iv. 233 _n._
[407] Jireček, _Die Heerstrasse_, &c., p. 147.
[408] Leunclavius (1611 Frankfort ed.), pp. 268-76. Jireček, _Geschichte der Bulgaren_, pp. 341-2, points out that Seadeddin and Leunclavius, whom Zinkeisen, i. 252-5, follows, are in error in representing the Bulgarians as wholly subdued in 1388.
[409] Mijatovitch, from Serbian sources, p. 13.
[410] Ibid., pp. 16-17.
[411] The railway between Mitrovitza and Skoplje (before the Balkan War Uskub) passes through the plain of Kossova. When this railway is connected through the former Sandjak of Novi Bazar with the Austrian (?) railways in Bosnia, Kossovapol will be on one of the great transcontinental routes.
[412] The date June 15 is fixed by the Serbian chronicles and songs and by unbroken tradition. Also by Tvrtko’s letter to Florence. But Tvrtko, in another letter to the inhabitants of Trau in Dalmatia, gives June 20 (Pray, _Annales_, ii. 90). Seadeddin stands alone in placing the death of Murad on the 4th Ramazan (August 27). The other Ottoman historians, as well as Chalcocondylas, Ducas, and the anonymous _Hist. Epirot._, speak of these events occurring ‘in the springtime’.
[413] _Chron. of Abbey of Tronosha_, section 54, p. 84, and _Chron. of Pek_, p. 53: cited by Mijatovitch, p. 12 n.
[414]
‘Sans arrêter, pendant quinze jours pleins, J’ai cheminé le long des hordes turques, Sans en trouver ni la fin ni le nombre.’--A. d’Avril, p. 36.
[415] Orbini, pp. 314-15. See also the Serbian songs about Kossova, which are accessible in the form of a continuous narrative in French by Adolphe d’Avril, and in English by Mme Mijatovitch, based on the composite poems of Stoyan Novakovich and A. Pavich.
[416] Solakzadé, cited by Col. Djevad bey, p. 196. The bow was used as an offensive arm by the Osmanlis until the middle of Murad II’s reign.
[417] Seadeddin, i. 147-52; Chalc., I, p. 53; Ducas, 3, pp. 15-16; _Hist. Epir._, p. 234; the Serbian chants; Bonincontrius, col. 52; and the modern writers, Hertzberg, pp. 503-7; Jireček, pp. 342-4; Fessler, ii. 254; von Kállay, i. 166; Klaić, pp. 236-40. Most illuminating of all is Rački, in Croatian, in _Jugoslav. Akademie_, iii. 92 f.
[418] Clavijo de Gonzáles, fol. 27 rº.
[419] _Annales_, ii. 186.
[420] This speech, from the chronicle of Monk Pahomye, is given in Mijatovitch, p. 17.
[421] Busbecq, English ed., i. 153; cf. Ricaut, ed. of 1682, p. 159.
[422] Const. Porphyr., i. 394, 396, 405.
[423] Howorth, ii. 796, commenting on Stoddard’s audience with the Emir of Bukhara.
[424] Text in _Mon. spect. hist. Slav. Merid._, i. 528-9.
[425] _Chronique du Religieux de St.-Denis_ (ed. Bellaguet), ii. 391.
[426] MS., Wiener Bibl., Gesch. gr., 48.
[427] As far as such records are accessible in the great collection of Miklositch and Müller. The statement of Ducas, 23, p. 137, about the persecutions of Christians by Murad, is without any foundation.
[428] Phr., I. 26, p. 82; Chalc., I, p. 59; Duc., 3, p. 16; also the Ottoman historians.
[429] Sura IV, verse 94 (Sale trans., p. 64).
[430] Sura V, verse 53 (ibid., p. 77).
[431] Hammer, iii. 302-4. Rambaud, _Histoire générale_, iii. 831, is mistaken in attributing this law to Bayezid.
[432] Ruled 1350 to 1369.
[433] In 1330. Panaretos, p. 7.
[434] In 1320 at Salonika: Greg., VII. 13, p. 271.
[435] Month of Shaban, a.h. 791: MS. turc, Bibl. Nat., Paris, No. 79, pp. 35, 40. Cf. Langlès, in _Notices et Extraits_, v. 672.
[436] Froissart, IV. c. 47, in Kervyn ed., xv. 216-17. Froissart calls Bayezid ‘Amoruth-Baquin’, confusing him with Murad. See below, p. 213, _n._ 2.
[437] Abul Yussif ibn Taghry, _Elmanhal Essafy_, Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds arabe, No. 748, ii, fol. 70.
[438] Vuk Brankovitch, as the reward of his treason, received half of Lazar’s inheritance, however, with Pristina as capital. His family continued as Ottoman vassals, with varying fortunes, for a hundred years.
[439] Ducas, 4, p. 6.
[440] Kantitz, _Serbien_, pp. 254 f.
[441] Busbequius was informed at Constantinople that marriage had been abolished in the Ottoman royal family because Bayezid took to heart the disgrace of Despina by Timur. But Ricaut, p. 296, thinks that it was because of dowry expense and the desire of the Ottoman sovereigns to keep free from family alliances. Naturally, the difference of religion in time prevented the Osmanlis from finding brides for their sovereigns among the European royal families. If they married among their subjects, there was always fear of intrigues in the wife’s family. At a time when family alliances meant so much in Europe, the Ottoman Empire suffered greatly from this disability.
[442] Seadeddin, i. 158.
[443] Klaić, p. 248. I think Romanin, iii. 331, has confused Stephen Bulcovitch with Stephen Tvrtko. For it is difficult to understand what he means by the ‘pace vergognosa’ with Venice.
[444] Old Servian chronicle, quoted by Klaić, p. 271: ‘quasi totaliter destruxerunt Bosniam et populum abduxerunt.’
[445] Klaić, pp. 324-5.
[446] Accounts differ as to the place. There is some doubt as to whether the independence of Aïdin was totally destroyed before the restoration of Isa’s sons by Timur. Cf. Schlumberger, p. 484; Mas-Latrie, _Trésor de Chronologie_, col. 1800. Hammer, i. 300, cites no authorities for his statements about this usurpation.
[447] Bosio, ii. 143.
[448] Ibid., ii. 148.
[449] There is the same dearth of information about the details of the destruction of the power of the emirs of Sarukhan and Menteshe as there is about Aïdin. Hammer says simply, ‘Les principautés de S. et M. furent incorporées à l’empire ottoman,’ i. 300. He gives no authorities.
[450] Ducas, 13, p. 47.
[451] _Dialogi XXVI cum Persa quodam de Christianae religionis veritate_, Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds grec, No. 1253: partly printed in _Notices et Extraits_, vol. viii, 2e partie, and in Migne, 156, pp. 111-74. In _Notices et Extraits_, loc. cit., C. B. Hase has given an interesting critical account of the dialogues, and the circumstances under which they were written.
[452] Seadeddin, i. 163. In Hammer, i. 301, in the sentence ‘quoique, depuis la paix renouvelée avec lui par Orkhan, les deux nations eussent continuellement vécu dans des relations de sincère amitié’, is not Murad meant instead of Orkhan?
[453] Evliya effendi, ii. 21, tells how Bayezid passed _seven times in one year_ from Anatolia to Wallachia.
[454] In matters relating to the progress of Ottoman conquest in Asia Minor, French, German, and British writers have been content to repeat, without critical comment, what they have culled from Leunclavius or the translations of Seadeddin. In many cases, they have gone back no farther than Hammer, and have transcribed, often literally, Hammer’s words. Hammer himself, in this early period of Ottoman history, in spite of his attainments as an orientalist, has relied mainly on Leunclavius, and on Bratutti’s Italian translation of Seadeddin.
[455] ‘La principauté _fut pour toujours réunie à l’empire_,’ Hammer, i. 308. In speaking of this second campaign, Hammer starts by saying, ‘Le prince de Karamanie avait de nouveau _levé l’étendard de la révolte_’. This is hardly the expression to use for the action of an independent prince. Alaeddin had never made himself the vassal of the Ottoman emirs.
[456] Striking testimony to the later power of the Karamanlis is given by Bertrandon de la Broquière, who visited the court of Ibrahim with the Cypriote ambassador in 1443: cf. Schéfer’s edition of his voyage, pp. 108-20. See Appendix B below, where the relations of the Osmanlis with the emirates of Asia Minor during the fourteenth century are discussed in detail, with fuller citation of authorities.
[457] Howorth, iii. 749.
[458] Sherefeddin, iii. 256, who is the only contemporary authority, says that Bayezid put him to death. This was one of the charges made by Timur against Bayezid.
[459] The earliest possible date could be 1393. Perhaps the Osmanlis first appeared near Sivas at this time. But Bayezid would hardly have undertaken so long and perilous an expedition before his position was secure in Karamania. Sherefeddin gives the more likely date 1395, while Ibn-Hedjir places the death of Burhaneddin in 1396.
[460] So d’Ohsson fils, vii. 442, says, but gives date 1390. Hammer more correctly puts it in 1391. Xénopol, in his authoritative and carefully documented history, gives a little different account of Mircea’s early relations with Bayezid, and attributes to Mircea a larger influence in the calculations of Murad than he deserves. But the exposition of Mircea’s policy in relation to Poland, Hungary, and the Osmanlis, as given by Xénopol, cannot be overlooked or disregarded by the student of this period.
[461] ‘Pierre Aron fut le premier des hospodars qui paya un tribut aux Turcs’: Costin’s _Hist. de la Moldavie_, p. 367, in _Notices et Extraits_, vol. xi.
[462] Phr., I. 13-14, pp. 58-9, and 26, p. 82; Bonfinius, iii. 2; _Chron. Anon. de St.-Denis_; Chron. of Drechsler; Campana, fol. 8 (but gives date 1393). Leuncl., _Annales_, p. 51, following Ottoman sources, speaks only of Sigismund’s defeat. This earlier victory and the disastrous retreat are mentioned also in several of the French chronicles which relate the expedition of 1396.
[463] Engel, _Gesch. von Ungarn_, ii. 368, who draws on all the earlier Hungarian authorities.
[464] Russian source cited by Muralt, vol. ii, No. 10 n.
[465] Cf. Baedeker, _Konst. und Kleinasien_, 2. Aufl., p. 46.
[466] Jireček, _Gesch. der Bulgaren_, pp. 347-9, gives Slavic sources for this date, and quotes Camblak’s graphic description of the terrible sacking of the city, the massacre, and the destruction of the churches.
[467] In Czech, the word _jazyk_ signifies _language_ as well as _nation_ (cf. Lützow, _Life and Times of Master John Hus_, p. 239). This illustrates the Slavic conception of nationality, and explains in a nutshell the Austro-Hungarian and Balkan problems. To the Slav, there can be no other test of nationality. The Bulgarian propaganda in Macedonia, carried on through the church and the schools, has been the resurrection of the nation through the language. The Greeks have used the Orthodox Church to combat and stifle this movement. They claim as Greeks all members of the Orthodox Church, while the Bulgarians claim that Bulgarophones, even if not attached to the exarchate, belong to the Bulgarian nation.
[468] Schiltberger, Neumann ed., p. 65. On this question cf. Jireček, op. cit., pp. 350-2; Miller, p. 189; and illuminating note of Rambaud, in _Hist. générale_, iii. 832 _n._ Also p. 143 of this book and accompanying foot-note.
[469] Schiltberger, op. et loc. cit.
[470] These cities, or rather, their fortresses, were captured and evacuated several times by the Osmanlis, especially Widin.
[471] Hammer, at the beginning of the reign of Bayezid, i. 295-7, relates the history of the quarrel between Andronicus and his father and Manuel, the rescue from the Tower of Anemas, &c., as if these events happened in 1389 and 1390, and gives the capture of Philadelphia for 1391. He has been led astray here by the story of Ducas, and by the fact that the Byzantine historians speak of Bayezid instead of Murad in connexion with the negotiations for restoration. By the internal evidence in the Byzantine historians themselves, the chronology of this period cannot be decided. But, by reading Phrantzes and Chalcocondylas in the light of Quirino, the continuation of Dandolo, and the archives of the colony of Pera, and also by piecing out the length of time of these events and matching them with Bayezid’s occupations during the first two years of his reign, it is not difficult to decide to place the Andronicus _versus_ John and Manuel struggles just before the Chioggia war. At any rate, Andronicus died ten years before the date Hammer gives to these events!
[472] Poem cited by Muralt, ii. 738, No. 1.
[473] MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds grec, No. 1253, fol. 198 vº.
[474] John V Palaeologos was of those who, in the words of Bernino (p. 9), ‘consumavasi vanamente il tempo più in dolersi delle calamità che in repararle’.
[475] Ducas, 13, pp. 25-49 _passim_; Chalc., II, pp. 66, 81-2.
[476] Evliya effendi, i. 29-30; ii. 21, who repeats the persistent Ottoman tradition of his day, that is also found in Hadji Khalfa and Nazmi Zadé. Cf. the Genoese accounts of Pera in Jorga’s scholarly _Notes à servir_, &c. i. 42. According to Schéfer, in his edition of Bertrandon de la Broquière, p. 165, there was a provision that slaves escaping to Constantinople should be given back, but we cannot be sure that this stipulation was made under Bayezid I. The date of the installation of the cadi, &c., is open to question. Some authorities place it after Nicopolis.
[477] Shehabeddin, fol. 72 rº, writes _Istanbul_; Sherefeddin, iv. 37, is transcribed by Petits de la Croix _Istanbol_; Arabshah, p. 124, transcribed by Vattier _Estanbol_. Wylie, i. 156, _n._ 2, gives the time-worn popular derivation from εἰς τὴν πόλιν; also Telfer, in his edition of Schiltberger, p. 119. Why go so far afield? _Istambul_ is a natural contraction of Constantinople. As the Greeks pronounced this long word, the syllables _stan_ and _pol_ bore the stress, and were naturally put together for a shortened form. As for the initial _I_, which has troubled the philologists, its explanation is easy to one who knows the Osmanlis. They cannot to this day pronounce an initial _St_ without putting _I_ before it.
[478] Neshri, trans. Nöldeke, _ZDMG._, xv. 345; Seadeddin, i. 189; Saguntinus, p. 187; Drechsler, p. 228, says: ‘octo annos vexatur et obsidetur.’
[479] Duc., 13, p. 50.
[480] Muralt, ii. 753, No. 29.
[481] _Secr. Cons. Rog._, III, E 84.
[482] Chalc., II, pp. 80-1; Phr., I. 13, pp. 57-8; 26, p. 82.
[483] Miklositch, _Acta Serbica_, CCIV. Hammer, i. 341, calls this Constantine ‘fils de Twarko’, meaning Stephen Tvrtko, I suppose. But I cannot find that the Bosnian king had such a son, or any reason, if he had, why this son should have been at Serres.
[484] Ibid., CCXXIII. For the later kings of the dynasty which Vuk founded, see Picot’s careful article in _Columna lui Traianu_, new ser., Jan.-Feb. 1883, p. 64 f.
[485] _Epp. cur._, ii. 64.
[486] _Epp. cur._, ii. 103-4. Urban VI in 1387 had written a letter from Lucca inciting the Frankish princes to a war against ‘schismatics’ in Achaia.
[487] _Secr. Cons. Rog._, iii, E 74.
[488] Miklositch-Müller, _Acta Graeca_, CCCCXXXV.
[489] Chalc., II, p. 75; Duc., 13, p. 73.
[490] Chalc., loc. cit.; _Epp. cur._, ii. 300-1, 311; iii. 261.
[491] Cf. Jorga, in _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, 2e série, 110e fascic.; Molinier, MSS. de P. de Mézières, in _Arch. de l’Orient Latin_, i. 335-64; Del. Leroulx, i. 201-8.
[492] ‘Nostra dominatio audiverat de morte ipsius dom. Morati, de qua maximam displicentiam habuerat, quia semper eum habuimus in singularissimum amicum, et dileximus eum et statum suum. Similiter audivimus de felici creatione sua ad imperium et dominium ipsius patris sui, de quo nos fuerimus valde letati, quia sicut sincere dileximus patrem, ita diligimus et diligere dispositi sumus filium et suum dominium et habere ipsum in singularem amicum’ ... &c.: _Misti_, xli. 24, reprinted in full in Ljubić, iv. 269-70.
[493] Ibid., xlii. 58-9; the treaty is in _Commem._, viii. 150. Cf. Romanin, iii. 330.
[494] Euboea is called Negropont, the Peloponnesus Morea, Lesbos Mytilene, while Crete is frequently called Candia and Chios Scio, in mediaeval and modern times.
[495] _Misti_, xlii. 55.
[496] Ibid., xliii. 156.
[497] _Secr. Cons. Rog._, iii. E 81.
[498] ‘Ire contra dictos Turchos ad damnum et destructionem suam’: ibid., p. 94, cited in Ljubić, iv. 335-6.
[499] _Misti_, lxiv. 140.
[500] Ibid., lxiv. 156.
[501] We must reject the statement of Morosini, MS. Wiener Bibl., fol. 135 rº, that Bayezid ‘entered in arms in the Strait of Romania with so many galleys that one could not navigate in the strait’, and doubt the opinion that Monicego, with his forty-four Venetian and Genoese galleys, had to force the Bosphorus, and contributed powerfully ‘a la destrucion del dito Turcho’.
[502] _Misti_, xliii. 29.
[503] Ibid., xliii. 5: ‘confidasse in Dio, confidasse nei provedimenti che saprebbero à fare i principi christiani, scrivesse al Papa e a questi promovendo una lega generale’.
[504] Ibid., xliv. 108.
[505] Ibid., xliv. 128.
[506] Belgrano, pp. 152-3.
[507] _Lib. iurium_, ann. 1392, fol. 474, in Turin archives, printed in _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_ (1857), 4e série, iii. 451-2.
[508] _Religieux de St.-Denis_, ed. Bellaguet, i. 319-21.
[509] _Chronicorum Karoli Sexti_, ed. Bellaguet, i. 709-11. The relations of the ambassadors of Sigismund with the Duke of Burgundy and with Charles VI are found in _Religieux de Saint-Denis_.
[510] On September 13, 1395, in the presence of ambassadors from all parts of Christendom, and also ‘del gran Turco, del Rè de’ Tartari, del gran Soldano, del gran Tamerlano e di molti altri Principi infedeli e ribelli alla Fede christiana’, who were treated like Christians and lodged at the expense of ‘il Signore di Milano’, Galeazzo was solemnly raised to ducal rank and invested with the Duchy of Milan by Wenceslaus: Andrea Gataro, in Muratori, xvii, col. 820.
[511] _Mémoires de Madame de Lussan_, iii. 5.
[512] The references to Froissart which follow are given from vol. xv of Kervyn de Lettenhove’s edition, and the references to Schiltberger from the English translation in the Hakluyt Society series, vol. lviii, unless otherwise specified.
[513] See the sources and references for Nicopolis grouped in the classified bibliography. Although the citations in the text of my narrative are mostly from Froissart and Schiltberger, all chronicles and contemporary sources available have been used in the preparation of this section, especially Bellaguet’s edition of _Religieux de Saint-Denis_, ii. 425-30, 483-522 (Bellaguet’s notes, however, on these sections are very disappointing).
[514] Froissart, pp. 218, 221, 223.
[515] Ibid., pp. 227-8, 230, 394-8. A complete list of the chevaliers, compiled from sources, is found in Buchon, and, in much more complete and accurate form, in Delaville Leroulx, ii. 78-86.
[516] Froissart, and other earlier writers, have several ways of designating Bayezid. Froissart calls him Amorath-Baquin (p. 216), Amorath (p. 226), le roy Basaach, dit l’Amourath-Bacquin(p. 230), l’Amourath-Bacquin many times, and l’Amourath three times in one paragraph (p. 311). Chroniclers and writers of the fifteenth century were continually confusing Bayezid with Murad (cf. Cuspianus, Secundinus, Sylvius Aeneas, Donado da Lezze, Paolo Giovio, _et al._). From the different ways Froissart designates Bayezid, it is very clear that he is not mixing him with Murad, but that by ‘dit l’Amourath-Bacquin’ he means ‘_l’émir-pacha_’. The fact that he uses the definite article so frequently and says several times ‘l’Amourath’ is proof positive of this. His transcription of the title _emir_, and that of many other western writers, led later historians to think the chroniclers meant Murad! It is merely a coincidence that the words are so similar. Froissart, however, would be capable of mistaking Murad for Bayezid. On p. 216 he calls Sigismund Henry, and on p. 334 Louis! Olivier de la Marche (éd. Beaune et d’Arbuthnot), i. 83-4, speaks twice of ‘Lamourath-bahy’. Here, too, there is not a confusion of Murad and Bayezid. He, like Froissart, means to say ‘l’amiral-pacha’. On ‘amiral’ for ‘emir’ see above, p. 163, _n._ 2.
[517] Froissart, pp. 230-1, 242.
[518] Donado da Lezze, p. 9.
[519] Leunclavius, _Hist. Musul. Turc._, preface, p. 14, speaks of how grateful Sigismund was later for the services rendered to him personally by the Burgrave in the Nicopolis campaign, and that the friendship formed then led to the later advancement of the house of Brandenburg.
[520] Wylie, i. 6, 158, quoting Ducas, 13, and _Venetian State Papers_ (Brown), i. 85. Ducas knew nothing of Nicopolis, while the Venetian reference is based on a misapprehension.
[521] Lavisse, _Histoire de France_, iv. 311: ‘on l’avait vu à la bataille de Nicopoli sur les bords de la Baltique avec les chevaliers _teutoniques_.’ Lavisse has evidently mixed up the Nicopolis expedition with the earlier Prussian one in which Henry did take part. His statement on the same page that Henry IV took part in the Boucicaut expedition is another error.
[522] Conclusive proof of the whereabouts of Henry in the summer of 1396 is found in the letter ‘escript ... le xxe jour d’augst’. This letter is in Arch. Nat., Paris, J. 644: 35^{11}. For the expeditions in which Henry _did_ take part, when he was Henry of Derby, see vol. lii of the Camden Society, edited by Lucy Toulmin Smith, London, 1894, 4to.
[523] Froissart, p. 244.
[524] Phr., I. 14, p. 59; Bontinius, III. 2.
[525] Engel, _Geschichte der Bulgaren_, p. 468. According to the authority who has made the most exhaustive study of the Nicopolis expedition, Sigismund disposed of 120,000 men in all, including the western allies: Kiss, in _À Nikápolyi ülkozet_, p. 266. Kiss’s estimate is corroborated by the _Cronica Dolfina_, which says that Sigismund had one hundred thousand men under arms in 1394. Sanuto quotes this in Muratori, xxii, col. 762. Cf. also Hungarian Nat. Archives, Dipl. 8201, 8212, 8214, 8493, 8541.
[526] Schiltberger, p. 2.
[527] Bruun, in his _Geographische Anmerkungen zum Reisebuch von Schiltberger_ (_Sitz.-Ber. k. Bay. Akademie_, 1869, ii. 271), tried to prove that the battle was fought, not at Nicopolis on the Danube, but near the ancient Nicopolis of Trajan’s foundation. But in his notes to the English translation of Schilt., Hakluyt, lviii. 108-9, he assents to the contention which Kanitz makes in _Donau-Bulgarien_, ii. 58-70, that the battle was near Nicopolis-on-the-Danube. An examination of the chronicles corroborates Kanitz’s hypothesis over against the ingenuous argument of Jireček. Some historians have been so unmindful of geographical considerations as to put the battle at the ancient Nicopolis _ad Haemum_, of which Ortellius, p. 225, speaks.
[528] Schiltberger, p. 2.
[529] Froissart, pp. 251, 262-3, 310, 329. ‘Miscreant’, of course, in its original sense.
[530] Ibid., p. 310.
[531] Ibid., pp. 311-17; _Relig. de St.-Denis_, pp. 490-7. Schiltberger, p. 3, attributes this initiative to Jean de Nevers, whom, like many other writers on Nicopolis, he calls, by anticipation, Duke of Burgundy. Cf. Donado da Lezze, p. 9, who says: ‘Il signor Carlo, _prima_ Duca di Borgogna.’ Also Morosini, p. 6. Sigismund is frequently spoken of as German emperor at the time of Nicopolis. Cf. Chalc., ed. Migne, col. 76: ἡγουμένου Σιγισυούνδου Ῥωμαίων βασιλέως τε καὶ αὐτοκράτορος.
[532] Rabbi Joseph, i. 252.
[533] Froissart, pp. 313-16; _Relig. de St.-Denis_, pp. 490 f.; Rabbi Joseph, p. 253; Schiltberger, p. 3; Seadeddin, i. 184; Neshri, in _ZDMG._, xv. 345-8. Cf. authorities cited in Bibliography.
[534] Froissart, p. 317. Hermann de Cilly and the Burgrave of Nürnberg are said by some authorities to have thrown themselves in front of Sigismund, and to have saved him and carried him off to the boat.
[535] The bitterness against and contempt for the Hungarians is expressed in the following verses:
‘Nichopoly, cité de payennie, Au temps là où li sièges fut grans, Fut delaissés par orgueil et folie; Car les Hongres qui furent sur les champs Avec leur roy, fuitis et récréans, Leur roy meisme enmainent par puissance, Sans assembler.’ _Œuvres inédites d’Eustache des Champs_, ed. Tarbé, 1849, i. 166.
[536] Schiltberger calls him ‘der hertzog auss der Sirifey, der genant despot’: _Bibl. des Lit. Vereins_ (Tübingen), clxxii. 4.
[537] Cf. Miller, in Story of Nations Series, pp. 290-1.
[538] Belonging to the grand master of Rhodes: Froissart, p. 317. But Morosini, p. 15, and others, say that he went directly on board Monicego’s galley. It is a pity that Hammer, in his description of the battle of Nicopolis, relied so much on such an unreliable third-hand authority as Abbé Vertot. Skentkláráy, _À dunai hajóhadak törtenéte_, says that Jean de Vienne commanded the galleys.
[539] Schiltberger, p. 6.
[540] Bonfinius, one of the earliest Hungarian historians, recorded that Sigismund had boasted that he would not only turn the Osmanlis out of Europe, but also that with the army under his command, if the sky fell, it could be held up on their lances: _Decades_, ii. 403.
[541] ‘Sigismund was cruel and sensual, perjured and frivolous, rapacious and dissolute, fierce and pusillanimous, a byword and object of horror to the Bohemians, hated and despised by the Germans, a warning to all rulers. His companion, John XXIII, lewd and murderous, a simonist and an infidel, was a true comrade for Sigismund in all evil deeds’: Dr. Flajshans, in _Mistr Jan Hus_: quotation translated by Count Lützow, _John Hus and his Times_, pp. 137-8.
[542] Froissart, pp. 330-1.
[543] But not until he ‘regracioit les dieux et les déesses selon la loy où il creoit et que les paiens croient’: Froissart, p. 321. The ignorance among the western chroniclers of everything pertaining to the Osmanlis--or the wider circle of Mohammedan peoples--was appalling.
[544] Schiltberger, p. 5. Cf. Froissart, pp. 322-8; _Relig. de St.-Denis_; _Chronique de Boucicaut_; _Chronique des 4 premiers Valois_, éd. Luce, p. 326; and the other chronicles and secondary authorities given in Bibliography.
[545] Xénopol, in _Hist, générale_, iii. 882, whose writings furnish the most reliable and most accessible data for Rumanian history, allows his patriotism to get the better of his judgement when he writes that this unimportant skirmish was a complete defeat inflicted upon Bayezid, and that ‘le Sultan court jusqu’à Adrinople’! Xénopol makes no attempt to explain the battle of Nicopolis, and Mircea’s action in and after the battle.
[546] Schiltberger, p. 6. Chalc., II, pp. 76-80, who exaggerates the raid to the point of saying that Bayezid reached the environs of Buda.
[547] _Secr. Cons. Rog._, iii. 134-5. _Mém. d’Olivier de la Marche_ (éd. Beaune et d’Arbuthnot), i. 199-200, reads as if Bayezid had actually taken possession of Hungary.
[548] MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds turc, No. 79, pp. 61 f. (collection of Feridun). For wrong date, see Langlès, in _Acad. des Inscriptions_, iv. 673-4.
[549] Schiltberger, p. 7, who would have been chosen himself for Egypt but for the fact that he had been wounded.
[550] Froissart, p. 341; Rabbi Joseph, p. 254.
[551] Froissart, p. 345. In xvi. 40, Froissart makes a mistake in saying that the body of the Comte d’Eu was ‘en ung sarcus rapporté en France et ensevely en l’eglise Saint-Laurent d’Eu, et là gist moult honnourablement’. The tomb in St. Laurent is merely a memorial. Philippe was buried in the chapel of a monastery in Galata, where, seven years later, Clavijo, fol. 17 vº, saw his burial-spot, but unmarked. His tomb is described by Bulladius, who saw it in 1647, in his notes to Bonn ed. of Ducas, p. 560. Cf. Mordtmann, _Beiträge zur osmanischen Epigraphik_, I, in _ZDMG._ (1911), lxv. 103.
[552] Froissart, xv. 329, 332, 342 f., 355-8; xvi. 16.
[553] Godefroy, _Hist. de Boucicaut_ (1620 ed.), i. 16; Ducas, p. 52.
[554] _Chronique d’Enguerran de Monstrelet_ (ed. Douet d’Areq), i. 332-3; Froissart, xvi. 57-9.
[555] Jean de Nevers, as Duc de Bourgogne and leader of the faction against the king’s brother, openly accepted the responsibility of the assassination of the Duc d’Orléans. This was the beginning of the Burgundy-Armagnac civil war, which delivered France to the English until Jeanne d’Arc appeared to awaken the French to a feeling of nationality.
[556] Froissart, xvi. 47. For ransom, ibid., pp. 37-8, and Rabbi Joseph, i. 254; also _Livre des faicts_ of Boucicaut, _passim_.
[557] Raynaldus, ann. 1364, No. XXVIII. Jireček, _Gesch. der Bulg._, p. 323, says that at this time ‘Osmanen erschienen in Attika’. He has mistaken roving Turkish corsairs of Sarukhan or Aïdin for the Osmanlis. It must have been these Turks who attacked Thebes.
[558] For the deliverance of the grand master of Rhodes, Jean Ferdinand d’Hérédia: Ducange, viii. 296.
[559] _Chron. Breve_ at end of Ducas, p. 516.
[560] Ibid. According to Finlay, iv. 233, he captured Akova. Cf. Muralt, ii. 741, citing Guichenon MS., and Ducange, viii. 39, 296.
[561] Phr., I. 16, p. 62; 26, p. 83; Chalc., II, pp. 67-9.
[562] Muralt, under 1395 and 1397, gives the same expedition. From internal evidence of Byzantine historians, one might put the Morean expeditions in either or both of these years. But cf. _Chron. Breve_, p. 516, and the silence of the Ottoman historians on an expedition in 1395.
[563] Chalc., II, p. 67; Seadeddin, i. 192.
[564] Chalc., II, p. 67; Seadeddin, i. 192.
[565] _Chron. Breve_, p. 516; Phr., I. 16, p. 62; Chalc., II, pp. 97-9.
[566] Seadeddin, i. 193.
[567] The Venetians seized Athens in 1395, and sent Antonio Contareno to act as governor.
[568] Hammer describes the capture of Athens in 1397 in i. 350, and again in 1456 in iii. 51.
[569] Gibbon and Hammer follow Chalcocondylas in this error. Cf. Berger de Xivrey, in _Mém. de l’Acad. des Inscr._, vol. xix, partie 2, pp. 29-30.
[570] Seadeddin, i. 180.
[571] Ducas, 13, p. 50; Chalc., II, p. 59; Idris.
[572] The land walls of Salonika, still standing, are eloquent proof of the difficulty which confronted their assailants before the days of cannon.
[573] Phr., I. 17, p. 64.
[574] See p. 199. There is serious difference of opinion as to just when these concessions were made.
[575] Feridun collection, letter from Adrianople, ordering kadis to prepare for siege of Constantinople: Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds turc, No. 79, p. 60.
[576] Ducas, 14, p. 53; Canale, ii. 62. Leunclavius, _Annales_, p. 52, puts this in 1391/2.
[577] Karamzin (Russian ed. of 1819), v. 164.
[578] Miklositch-Müller, _Acta Graeca_, DCXXXVI.
[579] Ibid., DXIV, DXV, DXVI.
[580] Froissart, xvi. 132-3.
[581] _Religieux de Saint-Denis_, ii. 559-62, 564.
[582] _Secreta Consilii Rogatorum_, E iii. 138, 146, printed in Ljubić, iv. 404.
[583] Ibid., p. 137.
[584] _Misti_, xliv. 210, xlv. 443; Belgrano, _Arch. Gen._, 1396-1464, pp. 175 f.
[585] Ducas, 14, p. 53; Chalc., II, p. 80; Sherefeddin, iv. 38.
[586] ‘El Cuirol castello de Grecia está despoblado y destruydo y el dela Turquia está poblado’: Seville ed., 1582, fol. 17 v°. Busbecq, i. 131, wrote: ‘stand two castles opposite each other, one in Europe and the other in Asia.... The former was held by the Turks a long time before the attack on Constantinople.’ Busbecq was, of course, misinformed, as Rumeli Hissar was built in 1452. It is still standing in excellent preservation. Anatoli Hissar, of which only one tower remains intact, was built between 1392 and 1397. There is no way of determining the exact date. But Saladin, in _Manuel de l’Art Musulman_, i. 482, displays his usual inaccuracy concerning facts of Ottoman history, when he gives 1420 as the date for Anatoli Hissar.
[587] Phr., I. 14, p. 60; Chalc., II, p. 83; Ducas, 14, p. 53.
[588] Venice contemplated action against the Osmanlis with the aid of France, Hungary, and Genoa. Cf. _Secr. Cons. Rog._, E iii. 137-44.
[589] _Epp._, v. 26, 99, 293-5.
[590] Edition of Seville, 1582, fol. 16 v°-17 r°.
[591] My account of this expedition is taken from MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, fonds fr., No. 11432, _Livre des faicts du bon messire Jean le Maingre, dit Bouciquaut_. For printed editions, see Bibliography.
[592] The chronicler makes the most astonishing assertions as to these raids, saying that the chevaliers reached Ak-Seraï! He evidently had no idea of local geography. I have been unable to identify several of the places mentioned.
[593] I have walked in one day from Riva to a point on the Bosphorus not many miles above Constantinople. When one reads the history of the Osmanlis in the country of their origin, the fact that from the very beginning of their history they were practically within sight of the imperial city is vividly impressed upon one.
[594] The Byzantine historians give little attention to Boucicaut, and are in contradiction with his chronicler on this point. Phr., 15, p. 61, says that John, who had been in the court of Bayezid, fled to his uncle because he had been slandered to Bayezid, and was afraid for his life; and Chalc., II, p. 84, that it was John who commanded the 10,000 Osmanlis against the city, and that Manuel shared the throne with him in order to save the city. Muralt, ii. 762, is a year in advance of the actual date.
[595] _Chron. de Saint-Denis_ and Juvenal d’Ursins. But these are really the same source, according to Lacabane, _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, ii. 62.
[596] Foglieta and Stella, in Muralt, ii. 778, No. 61.
[597] Sanudo, in Muratori, xxii. pp. 794-8.
[598] Chalc., II, pp. 83-4; Ducas, 14, pp. 54-6. For Rhodes and the Pope in the Morea, Phr., I. 16, p. 63; Bosio, ii. 154.
[599] September 10, 1400, in _Misti_, xlv. 33.
[600] _Livre des faicts_, fol. 53 r°-55 r°, and Wylie, pp. 159-65. Wylie has collated admirably the sources on Manuel’s visit.
[601] Text is published in Theiner, ii. 170-2.
[602] _Epp._, v. 300-2; vi. 92.
[603] ‘Cum Dom. summus Pontifex advertens quod perfidus ille Baysetus Princeps Turchorum, manu potenti et brachio extento in Christianum Populum maxima feritate extitit debachatus ad Exterminium Civitatis Constantinopolitanae et universitatis Populi Christiani _nisi eius nephanda propositio resistatur_, omnes et singulos qui, pro Liberatione et Subsidione Manuelis Imp. Cpni et dictae Civitatis suae, Manus adiutrices porrexerint ...’ etc.: Rymer, vol. iii, part 4, pp. 195-6.
[604] Clavijo, who visited Constantinople the following year, reports this, fol. 7 v°.
[605] Miklositch-Müller, _Acta_, DCXXVI.
[606] Strikingly shown in letter of April 20, 1402: _Canc. Secr._, i. 58.
[607] _Misti_, xlv. 19-23, 25-6, 29-30, 35, 87; xlvi. 37. Several of these are published in Ljubić, iv. 579, 590.
[608] Knoelle, in _Journal R. A. S._ (1822), xiv. 125; Nöldeke, in _ZDMG._ (1859), xiii. 185, _n._ 6.
[609] ‘Toutesfoiz il a la main senestre et pié senestre comme impotent et ne s’en puet aidier, car il a les nerfs coppez’: Dominican Friar, p. 463. ‘Infirmus, ut dicitur, a cingulo infra’: Stella, in Muratori, vol. xvii. col. 1194. Cf. Sherefeddin, i. 55, 381. The English corruption Tamerlane is from Timurlenk, the latter syllable signifying lameness.
[610] Sherefeddin, ii. 222.
[611] There is an excellent account of the dynasties of the Black and White Sheep, with list, following Mirkhand, in Teixera, ii. 24-39, 69-70. For the later activities of Kara-Yussuf, Teixera, ii. 355; de Guignes, iii. 302.
[612] Langlès translation, p. 260.
[613] Ibid., pp. 258-62; Sherefeddin, iii. 255-62; Clavijo de Gonzáles, fol. 25 r°-26 v°.
[614] Chalcocondylas and Raynaldus are wrong in calling him Ertogrul, and in stating that he was killed in the subsequent siege. Sherefeddin, iii. 267, calls him Mustafa, and Schiltberger, p. 18, Mohammed. That it was Soleiman is proved by the agreement of the Ottoman historians with Arabshah, p. 124, and with Clavijo, fol. 26 r°, whose ‘Musulman Tchelebi’ is Soleiman.
[615] Hadji Khalfa, _Djihannuma_, vol. ii, fol. 1776.
[616] Clavijo, fol. 26 r°; Arabshah, p. 125.
[617] Clavijo, fol. 26 v°-27 r°; Arabshah, p. 125; Sherefeddin, iii. 267-9; Dominican Friar, p. 264; Schiltberger, p. 18. Schiltberger says 21 days, and 5,000 horsemen buried, and 9,000 virgins carried off by the Tartars.
[618] It is impossible to understand why Muralt, with all the authorities he had at hand, places the taking of Sivas in 1395: _Chronographie Byzantine_, ii. 753, No. 26. The contemporary authorities cited above establish the date. Cf. also letter from Crete, in Jorga, _Notes à servir_, &c., i. 106, _n._ 3. There is a full discussion of the proper dating of the Ottoman aggression against Sivas, Caesarea, and Erzindjian, and the probability of two Ottoman campaigns, one before and one after Nicopolis, in Bruun’s note to the Hakluyt edition of Schiltberger, pp. 121-2.
[619] The letters exchanged between Charles VI and Timur are preserved in the French archives. The Turkish text of these letters, with Latin translation, is published by Charrière, introd., i. 118-19.
[620] Stella, in Muratori, xvii. 1194.
[621] ‘En la qual batalla se acaescieron Payo de Soto Mayor e Hernan Sanchez de Palaçuelos Embaxadores’: Clavijo, fol. 1 r°, col. 2.
[622] Letters of Timur and Bayezid in Arabic and Persian in Feridun collection, MS. Bibl. Nat., Paris, ancien fonds turc, pp. 65-91. Cf. Langlès, in _Notices et Extraits_, iv. 674, for list and dates of these. Sherefeddin, iii. 396-416.
[623] Sherefeddin, iv. 1-6. For description of route from Sivas to Angora, Hadji Khalfa, _Djihannuma_, ii. fols. 1803-4. Timur’s own account of his march and the battle of Angora is very brief: ‘Je pris moi-même le chemin d’Ancouriah. Bayezid, suivi de 400,000 hommes, tant cavaliers que fantassins, vint à ma rencontre; on livra la bataille, et je la gagnai. Ce Prince vaincu fut pris par mes troupes, et amené en ma présence. Enfin ... je retournai victorieux à Samarcande’: Langlès trans., p. 264.
[624] A great deal has been written about the date of Angora, but all authorities agree in putting it between July 20 and July 28, 1402. Cf. _Art de vérifier les Dates_, i. 193; Silvestre de Sacy, in _Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions_, vi. 488-95; Moranvillé, in _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, lv. 437-8. A few early western writers have given 1397 and 1403, while Petits de la Croix, in his French translation of Sherefeddin, is a decade too late in all his dates. The latter part of July 1402 is fixed by all contemporary authorities on this battle. Abu’l-Mahasin, in his history of the reign of the Egyptian sultan Barkok, states that the greater part of Bayezid’s army perished by thirst before his capture.
[625] On the nationality of the Tartars who betrayed Bayezid at Angora, see the latter part of the note of Bruun on the ‘White Tartars’ in the Hakluyt ed. of Schiltberger, pp. 114-17.
[626] From the account of the Dominican Friar, pp. 458-9, it seems clear that Bayezid was the aggressor until after Soleiman’s command had been cut to pieces.
[627] Sherefeddin, iv. 8-12; Dominican Friar, p. 458.
[628] Afterwards Mohammed I. Many western writers have confused him with his nickname of Kiritchelebi (Girigilibi in Rabbi Joseph, i. 257, and a variety of spellings in other early writers), and made him thus his own father, to account for the later Sultan Mohammed.
[629] In this battle I have used Sherefeddin, Arabshah, Dominican Friar, in _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, lv. 437-68, Schiltberger, Clavijo, and the invaluable letters in Marino Sanuto, Muratori, xxii. 794-7. The authorities for Angora and Timur are classified in the bibliography below.
[630] Sherefeddin, iv. 15, says the carnage in this battle was seven times greater than in any of Timur’s previous victories. The Dominican Friar, p. 459, puts the Ottoman losses at 40,000.
[631] Schiltberger, p. 21, says that he retreated to this hill with 1,000 horsemen. Hammer is in error in saying that Bayezid ‘resisted like a hero at the head of his _ten thousand_ janissaries with whom he had occupied the slope of a hill’: ii. 91. There were never as many as ten thousand janissaries enrolled in the Ottoman army until a century after Bayezid’s death. See above, p. 119. In oriental historians numbers are almost invariably exaggerated at least tenfold.
[632] Solak-zadé, p. 63. Sherefeddin and Arabshah bear witness to Bayezid’s personal courage.
[633] The Ottoman historians explain the capture of Bayezid by the fact that he was unhorsed. Some say that he was mounted on an inexperienced horse. A great deal was written about the battle of Angora at a much later date, but, as in describing the battles of Kossova and Nicopolis, I have limited myself to contemporary sources.
[634] Mustafa’s fate was never cleared up. Mohammed and Isa fled naked, according to the Dominican Friar, p. 450.
[635] I am unable to agree with Alberi, _Rel. Ven. Ambasc._, 3rd ser., vol. i, preface viii., ‘Secondo migliori testimonianze deve rigettarsi per falsa la tradizione’, and Bruun, Notes to Hakluyt ed. of Schiltberger, p. 21 _n._, ‘We are forced to conclude, after Hammer’s searching inquiries, that there is no truth whatever in the story of Bayezid having been confined by Timur in an iron cage’. Hammer’s arguments, ii. 96-101, do not seem to me at all convincing. From the philological point of view, they have been refuted by Weil, _Gesch. der Chalifen_, ii. 92. From the historical point of view, there is just as strong evidence for as against the litter with bars, which could hardly have been any different from a cage. If one argues that Timur did not subject his prisoner to this indignity, and advances that the cage was really nothing more than a closed litter, such as was used for ladies of the imperial harem, he is merely substituting one indignity for another. From the character of Bayezid, one would infer that the humiliation of being shut up like a lion in a cage would have been less than that of being put into a harem litter like a woman, for whom the conqueror had contempt rather than fear. There is no mention of the iron cage in Schiltberger, Clavijo, and the Dominican Friar. But their silence signifies nothing. They are excellent witnesses for the battle of Angora itself, but knew little or nothing of what happened in Asia Minor after Angora. One might just as well argue from Schiltberger’s silence that Timur did not capture Smyrna! Nor does Sherefeddin mention the humiliation of Bayezid, and the iron cage. But the story is given in Arabshah, p. 210, who must be reckoned with as a contemporary source. If, as de Salaberry, iv. 200-1, claims, the iron cage story was inserted in Arabshah by his Ottoman editor and translator, Nazmi-zadé, it only goes to show that the careful Ottoman students of his time believed the story. The Ottoman historians, who are _without exception_ too late to be regarded as sources, and who had reasons for making the degradation of the Ottoman sovereign as slight as possible, show their knowledge of the early and contemporary character of this record by trying to controvert it, and prove that Bayezid was carried on a litter rather than in a cage, e. g. Seaddedin, i. 230. That the common tradition among the Osmanlis, outside of the court chroniclers who were compelled to uphold at all costs the dignity of the house of Osman, was in favour of the cage story is proved conclusively by Ali Muhieddin, Migne ed., col. 597, who is earlier than Seadeddin, and by Evliya effendi, i. 29-30; ii. 21-22, who gives the story just as we find it in Arabshah and the western writers. Sagredo, who follows Spandugino, vigorously defends the cage story as opposed to the litter of the Ottoman court chroniclers, and says that Bayezid died from striking his head against the bars of his cage, pp. 25-6. In Lonicerus, fol. 12 vº, is a picture of the cage. It is mentioned by Guazzo, fol. 275 vº; Donato da Lezze, p. 10; Paolo Giovio; Geuffry, p. 283; Campana, fol. 8 vº; Egnatius, p. 30; Rabbi Joseph, i. 256; Sanuto, in Muratori, xxii. 791; Bonincontrius, col. 88; Formanti; and Timur’s early western biographer, Perondino, p. 31, who, fifty years before Seadeddin, wrote that Timur compelled Bayezid’s wife Despina to wait nude upon him and his guests at table. The story is also found in Ducas,