The Empire of Trebizond and the Pontos 9780860780625

Citation preview

Variorum Revised Editions and Reprints:

M.-M. ALEXANDRESCU-DERSCA La campagne de Timur en Anatolie (1402)

DENIS A. ZAKYTHINOS Le Despotat grec de Moree. Histoire politique Le Despotat grec de Moree. Vie et institutions

RUY GONZALES DE CLAVIJO The Spanish Embassy to Samarkand 1403-1406 ed. I.Sreznevsky. St. Petersburg 1881 In the Collected Studies Series:

ROBERT S. LOPEZ Byzantium and the World around it: Economic and Institutional Relations

DAVID JACOBY Societe et demographie a Byzance et en Romanie latine

FREDDY THIRIET Etudes sur la Romanie gréco-venitienne (Xe-XVe siécles)

NICOARA BELDICEANU Le monde ottoman des Balkans (1402-1566). Institutions, société, économie

ROBERT LEE WOLFF Studies in the Latin Empire of Constantinople

ELIY AHU ASHTOR Studies on the Levantine Trade in the Middle Ages

MARIUS CANARD L’expansion arabo-islamique et ses répercussions

CLAUDE CAHEN Turcobyzantina et Oriens Christianus

J.A.BOYLE The Mongol World Empire, 1206-1370

VLADIMIR MINORSKY The Turks, Iran and the Caucasus in the Middle Ages

HALIL INALCIK The Ottoman Empire: Conquest, Organization, Economy

The Empire of Trebizond and the Pontos

|

i

Fee cans Pe / Sets : ; ‘ 20 ee, ie io 7 a, . i . “ ‘ a. tf sie ae : Ly rm i = ” 4 y. “ea: in , ..4ae . +2my, Pin ~ e. . ,| tA -_ ice.

dg . TN.eetKetan “ip Sire. ; i5- AieGyppl Bien cee , . cee ee ie coe te ee «cere ym "e oa vee i -—- sss i RCallip asses eee oS oN ; .

- . wd emo heen ag , RECA...” -iyi:for . oe 7* cre: . Fhe’ : . Me poe af,

” ‘ . Maple ete ey ee ted Memes ,

fos vee Se , . ‘ os "1h . y eeAa NE Eh -ea-fee ne *q‘ Sh aa . bo.4 * 4wf , . Terns J {:laf Bene

mrs ; 2 ENE be : | awedXP. aes xs Re agi“.ne eree, “,Ae “g ¥ IIT,” -1G Ku-.; .7va on -otAe a) ° oa: : .co, ._. - Ae, .:ue.Pt Ps SRP 4 _ en, : y y fos ee...

A ee ee Ee. ees, be ’ Lie ra . a O t cy Aak a 7o

ie foe gf +* . on ¥ wo! *Ldey . % Ra te ‘4 aDo,’ Ye i ‘ , Ms a ; e. * GA : cn Ka

ay ea +ahwm .” :'' ‘sony “8 ® es, reae 4, ; aA el YY :,:, fa a2_—_ Be: O° 1 ‘4 ee 4“ths eySe _Aaa ie.Oe 4 pe ae

! BG 69 yeetig . 43eee ; “4 tos, irae ‘i2 Ne Bey 2BY Rhee oPSGA :. oe yf6 :“gta.. Sig wt ge 105 (RA. 5:TNS aaete irae Be |sSIGN Bay i): / Sn Be kc AG OR : eons ees:

fest‘hrs rrBice Ma\ _tee Jab 34 TC NRee aoeiE, 1 SEM ae Gis 48, cables Ny ASOR a4 ye phe Fag GLhar ves + pe mrss, pea ON Jey 7 wh ak ;rrr * be co pa Jee ad Aasery. tgs ; AA ye . oly ts +see, PTOcoe ane aa a. SS Pees,

el NAIR 6 OT aa MMM SVS

MMM Gt OP MAE nn, fay s. ee 2h, a Lat ae ers er ACG DEENA Vea ey ae Py. 6NGG 5 IN ari1iata,Ce Rg

Af? G8, a PO ye“8‘|; Ef: “LYGe ye’ i1aTRE tema 4 on Aeos ROS rr ee ig Bier 6 87>. Ben SA oe : .Be ed aeaan Poe alee 4+ Er . RO coTai+Og eee. "fs LE Ly VOLS ISL! 1 GOGO OOS Lhe sR a 9

Pe eg Mago OIG i RO ON |

.hliaEE LOPE, teeaaa Shsply ‘ GT EG RO a OeOs: TR OEE Sy CY POE EBD OTR RANE SOTByte se Se’ BAI DIG OE WO ERE TRS . ‘ ee . ‘ :IEE tee 4 eeEI 38OSE dee MOM 2TO Ne Tene baPras COUN Sage AVBE. ae .Fe "pee kag are ae v4he ee ee iS hoe Se g? vineEg gee ae)Ba it? we ie| Cz ANGE pate ghee yeNR OR "rae, i re. eaa AD TE ASA ee : . we BeFe eeate 940MR . Sots —vee 4anes Oe {;Se SOT Meta, Syperys Koni sON REET Ay

1 Sd ane EA A I, NS BoE ge he

See 0077) opea me a PO OeBe, * ‘ . PA ‘f. slid,A: y ys} SF é eCCLO. . LL oe" . er AR LSA,A: +oh aryNek . ceeeS ora‘oe ult Sa

PF EBD RIA 3 5 ‘ eae a Te te As ey Bg te

. eae Pro tA med fas i fe 4 vey Solana aOS HL Rs, (> noes wep — LTeae 4s ny ered Moye ae? AG os ad OB TR spax . roy hort erin “4 .ae : estLS AS BE os , . aeso‘ : '. , .’‘CO .7nerd (i& 7Leg . Aaa renan aMe ae“ihe eee ae teA,a. ape teksos fe oot HGR KeSe y tae 5ay be gS 2048 SEES S225a32

oe aDy 3> Oo SS ssg ies S3252 fas eo

Se Yass NNG se2

a.g5§sc .fond oS2528 C68 _— cyte 228 389 eae aBSUS 3S os egsy hs ee S25 28« 2% as ses eos no Foe S'S or O s 385 828322 5 Ok 23 Sz SERS eSOu eseg 2 Ss2 Su Ess 58825 og & 3.8 =O. 2 Oma. O P= «2S es 8OU 5LG£228 8 8 =oSHW 9 FOC y SUR pe £§sdss Frc ¥ -~fTEE EZ mS og & % Do

¢ any ~ ° = Se D6 ns aa & » cise Gs mt

a SO zEE5 aae% Gar y ES 3e8 S82 2553 oy 8

UW oo + = hs

Se ..2 Ssgdy eE28525 fay2D“vou 2.6% =s§5a S222 Ges 2525 pleas ep tg ees gee on.tEEG es Eo >SSS OO28% w e & SEO2O¢ Sas Tso n 8 SEEET ELSES ess Ho GOs 0 a SO 0 2855 6 ec fz QO.

eo sa re -

- @y e E@gmoueie§ SSeS hs aSES -_ yw 3 sg _~ gg iShER SESE g2iS Geese gtks=5. esssers

£2 igri sai gees seeddescg beLay eysculls ilies etm pee ee @

FP aac sesrem ecenOED SSS:Yao -c? fe wy eee_2Os esas ~ewo QO mOlSE ws Z sgh egts= s8Ne% gS 2222 Qsa Vea So eens ys Fase REGU ELVES SU 3BEEoS On~G23 coSMa nN mM saSE @ oRES SST eg ESAS To §&

Sa sce soe Fhe iss sgt cigcade tee sdeesies's no) EOEgous SR EQAS LE = OM EOxa 5s ie is "wed Sers 29 SS ize she ce esse : Soros EySR8 5854 Ctc geiseo w _] Am 2S (oes ave cTs3 ee ae Sscc ag Sar os Toe sdUc?" sus oT

Ss ee cree

B= § per gsaae sey at A

BES SOLES 8ser EEESSSA 2B SSRGEES ERI Se"ERS 533 no A oe sr Oe pDRtoDEE rf wa — a .2 UD aMw@es*> o = &8 Yu “-o gSOSEs K & a ns 2s ed SoSYS ~So7% ~ ane & nw ovr O Sec8 Es n ss) oO O Ten bam wD -_ ~O

: oe oe

— Aa =—=oHo ZU®LErsSssst .& Gros TH SSeS = OS& oO wea & A> © tn Ss) —_ Cc — CHoRE ve] ia,eee SQ a BAR ALE ene . EE CSaed ieEB t Paane—| ae! 2 eee Peo 38 24 +“oH

aw - . fom

ao Ke 8 - ERS EE See ES ESS ea ee a ri gegen sas Ss x Paes Lear iee 825 YY eptdas nw wn ~~ ”

STR ESOR Ss oae se8c6 8a 28egt enSES sane. eet oe MS 5n "SeeSERS bE Pare ~ ELEN Sgo esas seve “SS wo g SEgclcas* SOeaEe eSSg2 ESSESS obey E5828 SEE 532 >Sssseys jUsita =ESS 2)< oa 2)

Illa A BYZANTINE FAMILY: THE GABRADES, C.979-C.16 63 Introduction HE ebb of Arab influence in central and eastern Anatolia revealed a number of provincial dynasties, many of Armenian origin, from which the government in Constantinople never completely wrested local control. From the eleventh century these families helped transform and ‘feudalise’ the Byzantine government and ruling class, successfully competing for the throne itself... By the twelfth century birth had become more important than office in determining those of the highest influence

in the Empire. The prosopography of these families is therefore an important aspect of late Byzantine research, begun as early as 1680 with

Ducange’s great Familiae Augustae Byzantinae. Kecently the subject has been considerably advanced by Professor Donald Nicol’ and by Dr. D. I. Polemis,*® with studies of the Kantakouzenoi and the Doukai. Among lesser families the Gabras (IaBpas) is perhaps the most revealing

and distinctive. Some Gabrades have already been discussed: Meltopoulos’s study of the dukes of Chaldia* (Nos. 3-5) is the earliest, but is 1 See S. Vryonis, ‘Byzantium: the social basis of decline in the eleventh century’,

Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, ti (1959), p- 161. The following families

emerged by the end of the ninth century: Rentakios, Tessarakontopechys, Bryennios, Choirosphaktes, Monomachos, Phokas, Malienos, Doukas, Argyros, Skleros, Mousele, Kourtikes, Botaniates, Kamateros, Melissenos, Tzimiskes, Kourkouas and Melias. In

the tenth century there were added: Akropolites, Tornikes, Taronites, Kourtikios, Batatzes, Glabas, Gabras, Bourtzes, Komnenos, Diogenes, Dalassenos, Kekaumenos and Apokaukos. By c. 1100 there were added: Synadenos, Choumnos, Maniakes, Mouzalon, Raoul (Rallis), Palaiolologos, Branas, Sgouros, Petraliphas, Mouzakios, Angelos and Kantakouzenos.

2 Donald M. Nicol, The Byzantine family of Kantakouzenos (Dumbarton Oaks Studies xi, 1968). I am grateful to Professor Nicol for pointing out some fourteenthcentury Gabrades and to Dr. Sebastian Brock and Professor Wilfred Lambert for advice on the origin of the name Gabras.

3 Demetrios I. Polemis, The Doukai. A contribution to Byzantine prosopography

(London 1968).

4 I. Meliopoulos, ‘Trapezountiaka archaiologemata’, in Epeteris Hetairetas Byzantinon

Spoudon, VII (1930), pp. 70-8. See also B. A. Mystakides, ‘Trapezountiaka’, loc. cit., pp. 79-93. The polychrome flag, complete with crown, single-headed eagle and St. Eugenios, which Meliopoulos publishes as that of Constantine Gabras (No. 5) is pure fantasy, nor is there any evidence for his contention that the Gabrades issued coins bearing the single-headed eagle.

Hl

BYZANTINE FAMILY 165 unreliable; Professor Claude Cahen has examined the careers of most Gabrades in Seljuk service® and Vasiliev the Crimean family of Khovra.*® More Gabrades can be added and the time has come to assemble all known

members of the dynasty and to view it as a whole. The name Gabras is almost certainly not Greek, or even Pontic Greek,

in origin (Golubovich’s intriguing suggestion that it is derived from Kabeira, the old Pontic capital, must be ruled out; Pompey renamed it Diospolis and it was always called Neokaisareia from the first century A.D.).’. One must therefore look to the languages of the Byzantine borderlands, from which the Gabrades originated. It is not a Laz name, as Pachymeres appears to believe;* and despite the connections between the Gabrades and the Taronitai and Vasiliev’s contention that the family had an Armenian name, this convenient solution seems unlikely.’ Putting aside a (very remote) chance that there is a Persian background

to the name,’® two possibilities remain. First there is Fallmerayer’s opinion that the name is derived from the common Aramaic and Syriac formula “g-b-r’, indicating ‘hero’ or, simply, ‘man’.** Amantos suggested

that Gabras is a hypocoristicon of Gabriel’? (i.e. ‘man of God’), which

comes from the same root. A second explanation has not been, put 5 Claude Cahen, ‘Une famille byzantine au service des Seldjougides d’Asie Mineure’,

in Polychronion (Festschrift Franz Délger, Heidelberg 1966), pp. 145-9; ibid., PreOttoman Turkey (London 1968), pp. 90, 93, 97, 103, 108, II2, 210, 215. 6 Alexander Alexandrovich Vasiliev, The Goths in the Crimea (Monographs of the

Medieval Academy of America, XI, Cambridge, Mass., 1936), pp. 143, 153-8, 194-201, 246.

7P. G. Golubovich, Biblioteca-Biobibliografica della Terra Santa e dell’ Oriente

Francescano (Quaracchi 1913), II, pp. 298-9; David Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor to the end of the third century after Christ (Princeton 1950), II, p. 1071.

8 George Pachymeres in Corpus scriptorum historiae Byzantinae (ed. I. Bekker, Bonn 1835), I, p. 282. But, like other Byzantine chroniclers, Pachymeres seems to have used the term ‘Laz’ to indicate the inhabitants of the Empire of Trebizond, rather than in its strict ethnic sense (see ibid., I, p. 520 and Anthony Bryer, ‘Some notes on the Laz and Tzan; Part II’, in Bedi Kartlisa, revue de kartvélologie, XXIIIXXIV (1967), pp. 166-8). Gabras is not noted in Ladislav Zgusta, Kleinasiatische Personennamen (Prague 1964), nor is the entry in H. Moritz helpful (Die Zunamen bet den Byzantinischen Historikern und Chronisten [Progr. des k. Hum. Gymnasiums in

Lanschut fiir das Schuljahr 1896/7], I, p. 46). But it appears as the name of a

Bulgarian chieftain in c. 1018; cf.: Gyula Moravesik, Byzantinoturcica (Berlin 1958), II, p. 108.

9 Vasiliev, Goths, p. 153; but it is not in H. Adjarian, Dictionary of Armenian

personal names (in Armenian) (Erevan 1942).

Ppp. 165-74. .

10 Gabaruva (Gobryas in Xenophon, Ugbaru in cuneiform texts) was governor of Babylon in the time of Cyrus II; cf.: V. Scheil, ‘Le Gobryas de la Cyropédie et les textes cunéiformes’, in Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie Orientale, XI (1914), 11 J, P. Fallmerayer, Geschichte des Kaiserthums von Trapezunt (Munich 1827-

Hildesheim 1964), p. 19 ***; cf.: the strictures of E. Janssens in Tvébizonde en Colchide (Brussels 1969), p. 56, Nn. 3. 12K. I. Amantos, Scheseis Hellenon kai Tourkon (Athens 1955), p. 140, N. 5.

Ill 166

forward so far. It is that Gabras is derived from a series of terms which begins with the Arabic ‘kafiy’ (‘unbeliever’), Persian ‘gabrak’ (originally ‘Zoroastrian’), Kurdish ‘gebir’ or ‘gavir’ (‘Armenian’ or ‘Russian’), and ends with the modern Turkish ‘gavur’ (‘unbeliever’, ‘Christian’). The word has not always had its present pejorative overtone; it indicated a distinctive person (Armenian or Orthodox Christian, or akritic lord) in a Moslem environment.’® This fits in with what we know of the earliest Gabrades and seems the most plausible solution. Characteristically, the earliest Gabrades (Nos. x and 2) are found on the sidelines of great Anatolian risings against Constantinople. The areas associated with the first five Gabrades, and some later members, are distinct: the northern edge of the central and eastern Anatolian plateau, which runs through the themes of Chaldia, Koloneia, Armeniakon (later Turkoman Djanik) and Charsianon and includes the broad valleys of the upper Akampsis, Lykos, Iris and lower Halys rivers. This is Inner Pontos, once the heart of Mithradates’ state, which, unlike coastal Pontos, long resisted Hellenisation, giving it a peculiar social structure and outlook'* which seems to have lingered in the middle ages. It is an area of comparatively fertile valleys, wide ranches and upland pastures which fringes the heavily watered and forested Pontic coastlands. Its outlets to Greek coastal Pontos run through high passes to the ports of Sinope, Paurai, Amisos, Oinaion and Trebizond. Its interior defences depend

upon a_ string of formidable castles: Theodosioupolis, Paipertes,

Sebasteia, Cheriana,’® Koloneia,’® Taulara, Neokaisareia, Komana, Amaseia and Charsianon Kastron.’” At various times the Gabrades were 13 A. Bausani, s.v. ‘Gabr’ in The Encyclopaedia of Islam (London-Leiden 1965), II, XXXV1l1, Pp. 970.

14 ‘Tt is not surprising that inland Pontus, remote and mountain-girt as it was,

should have remained unaffected by Hellenism. In fact, save for the adjacent

Cappadocia, no portion of Asia Minor was so untouched by the influence of the West. Down to the time of the Roman conquest there prevailed the old Asianic system of

domain-land belonging to the king or to the nobles on whom he had probably bestowed it. Both king and nobles owned fortified strongholds which they used as residences, and around these were villages which served as economic centres ... In such a system cities, in the Greek sense of the word, were entirely lacking’: Magie, Roman Rule, I, pp. 179-80.

15 The fortified sites at Ulusiran (4 km. north of modern Siran, now called Erenkaya) and at Mumya Kale, near Norsun (now called Akbulak), 8 km. further north, would bear investigation as the site of Cheriana. Ulusiran appears to be the older settlement, but Mumya Kale is a larger Byzantine walled settlement of about 24 acres in extent. See the Gumiishane Il Yilli 1 1967 (Ankara 1968), pp. I3I-5. 16 See Hasan Tahsin Okutan, Sebinkarahisar ve civari (n.p. 1949), pp. 42-109. 17 For these castles, see references in Magie, Roman Rule; J. G. C. Anderson, ‘A Journey of exploration in Pontus’, Studia Pontica (Brussels 1903), I; and Franz and Eugéne Cumont, ‘Voyage d’exploration dans le Pont et la Petite Arménie’, Studia Pontica (Brussels 1906), II.

II]

BYZANTINE FAMILY 167 associated with, or controlled, all these valleys, passes, ports and strongholds. Based on the old theme of Chaldia, they erected what amounted to an independent province from the 1060s until after 1140 which coincided

with the first, Danishmendid, Turkoman settlement in the area, leaving the Greeks only Chaldia and the coast. The autonomy of the Gabrades is part of a pattern of local lordships which arose from the breakdown of security in eastern Anatolia, under Seljuk pressure, from the 1050s. But it was not until well into the twelfth century that the Seljuks were able to provide a substitute government. From the confusion arose, for example, the vast and ephemeral lordship

of the Armenian Philaretos Vahram. Frankish mercenary leaders in Byzantine service, turned rebel, were also finding the situation a happy hunting ground for their ambitions, even before the great imperial defeat at Manzikert in 1071. In 1069 Crispin, an Italian mercenary captain, set himself up in the massive fortress of Koloneia, which controls the Pontic

alum mines and had been the fief of the Kekaumenos family. On Crispin’s death in 1073 he was succeeded as ruler of the Lykos-lower Halys valleys by Roussell de Bailleul at Amaseia, the ancient Pontic castle which towers above the Halys. Crispin, at least, was popular with his subjects, for the area was already disaffected with the central government. Its mixed population had received a substantial influx of Armenian

refugees from the eastern borders throughout the eleventh century and

, there was a higher Armenian than Greek proportion until this century.

In r021 Basil II had annexed Vaspourakan and given its Artzruni rulers | the fief of Sebasteia; in 1064 Gagik, last Bagratid ruler of Kars, had been installed in Komana and Amaseia by the Byzantines. Among other indignities the Greeks complained that Gagik had tied their Metropolitan of Kaisareia up in a sack with his dog (undiplomatically called ‘Armen’) and that the Artzruni princes of Sebasteia were ‘worse than the Turks’ ;

Romanos IV Diogenes deposed them on the way to his own defeat at Manzikert in 107r. It is not surprising that the Frankish lordships south of the Pontic Alps were the prelude to successful Danishmendid infiltration by the ro8os, for the only evidence of Byzantine government in the | area for up to fifty years before was demands for troops and, occasionally, taxes.*°

Nor is it surprising that the lordship of the Gabrades, north of the Pontic Alps and in Chaldia, was the prelude to an independent Pontic Greek state which survived until 1461. There seem to be two reasons why the Gabrades held these lands. First their subjects were Greek, or rather Pontic Greek, and did not include the disaffected Armenian element 18 See J. Laurent, Byzance et les Turcs Seldjoucides dans l Asie Occidentale jusqu’ en 1081 (Paris-Nancy 1913), passim.

IT]

168

of the Lykos valley. Secondly the old Byzantine theme system survived

more or less intact in Chaldia as a local defence force. It is true that what were left of the earlier theme defences were severely used in the eleventh century. Constantine IX Monomachos (1042-55) was obliged to garrison the Pontic watch-towers, which overlook the Trebizond

caravan road, with Franks and Varangians.*® The themes were further denuded in 1057 when Nikephoros Katakalon Kekaumenos (a military

aristocrat who perhaps wrote the Strategikon, with its Machiavellian advice to castle-holders and local warlords on how to make good during rebellions against the central government, in the 1070s) raised the theme levies of Sebasteia, Koloneia and Chaldia to support Isaac Komnenos’ \rebellion.”° But the forces with which Theodore Gabras (No. 3) drove

|the Turks out of Trebizond in 1075 were undoubtedly local Chaldian ‘troops, following a native Pontic leader. The incident proved, as else‘where, that the Turks were not in a position to resist determined local opposition when they encountered it. That they were probably derived from the old theme levies, diverted to a local purpose, is suggested by the fact that the theme structure of Chaldia, complete with its banda, regular cavalry and castle guards, survived to defend the Empire of Trebizond up to 1461, four centuries after the theme system was largely a memory in other parts of the Byzantine world.?’ So far as Byzantine chroniclers were concerned, the Gabrades of the tenth to twelfth centuries were incorrigible provincial rebels, to be subdued by taking hostages, intermarriage with the imperial family, grant of official

titles or (ultimately) punitive expeditions. Local Pontic and Turkoman

sources present a different picture. Theodore Gabras (No. 3) was

canonised; the Danishmendids did much the same thing by remembering him asa legendary opponent. But local sources are of a different nature—

heroic poetry carried through oral tradition. This kind of material is always tricky to analyse and the authenticity of surviving Greek heroic poetry celebrating the Gabrades, even from Stavri, is so suspect that I have not used it at all.** But the Turkoman Melikdanishmendname can 19 Laurent, Byzance et les Turcs, p. 53. 20 Laurent, Byzance et les Turcs, p. 33; Cecaumem Strategicon et tncertt scriptores de officits vegus libellus (edd. B. Wassiliewsky and V. Jernstedt, St. Petersburg 1896-

Amsterdam 1965), pp. 36 ff. Cf.: G. Buckler, ‘Authorship of the Strategikon of

Cecaumenos’, in BZ, XXXVI (1936), pp. 7-26. 21 Anthony Bryer, The Society and Institutions of the Emjire of Trebizond (thesis, Oxford 1967), pp. 287-98, 351-87.

22 For the ‘Ballad of Gabras’ and songs about Constantine Gabras (No. 5), see

Demetrios K. Papadopoulos, ‘Poikila asmata tou choriou Stavrin’, in Archeion Pontou, XI (1941), pp. 29-30; ibid., ‘Asmata tou choriou Stavrin’, in AP, XIII (1948), p. 216; Antonios Gabras, ‘Asma palaion aphieromenon eis ton strategon Gabran’, in Pontiake Hestia, CVI-CVIII (1958), pp. 4935-40; G. A. Megas, ‘Palaia historika tragoudia tou

Hl

BYZANTINE FAMILY 169 be controlled to some extent.?* Although it cannot be used as a direct historical source, it offers, in epic terms, what is probably a realistic memory of the Danishmendid settlement south of the Pontic Alps in Koloneia and Djanik up to the middle years of the twelfth century. The ‘Gabrades’ remembered in the Melikdanishmendname are composite figures; no attempt has been made to relate them with particular historic Gabrades, but they merit inclusion here in a separate section. North-east, like many other parts, of Anatolia was not ‘conquered’ by a Seljuk army defeating a Byzantine army. Between c. 1072 and some date after 1106 the Pontos did not see either. But between those two dates the area was largely infiltrated and settled in a series of encounters between Turkoman groups and local Byzantinised leaders who encroached

on each others’ spheres of political authority (the control of the valley castles, which were taken and retaken piecemeal) and economic influence (the control of the passes and grazing lands).** Although rivals, the Gabrades and Danishmendids probably had more in common than they had with the Komnenoi of Constantinople or Seljuks of Konya. The separatist outlook of their Pontic Greek and Armenian subjects drew them Pontou’, in Laographia, VII (1958), pp. 373-82. But in two works of masterly literary

detection, Dr. Odysseus Lampsides has demonstrated that most of the ‘Ballad of Gabras’, as it now stands, is a combination of lines taken from Digents Akritas and from Constantine Manasses (in CSHB fed. I. Bekker, Bonn 1837]), assembled by Archimandrite Anthimos Gabras in 1896-1904: see ‘He Chronike Synopsis tou Manasse

kai hen ‘‘asma tou Gabra’’’, AP, XXII (1958), pp. 199-219; and ‘To akritikon epos kai to ‘‘asma tou Gabra’’’, in AP, XXIIT (1959), pp. 33-8. This modern tampering is unfortunate because there undoubtedly existed a genuine oral tradition concerning the Gabrades in the Pontos, which cannot now be used. The association of the medieval Gabrades of the ‘Ballad’ with Zigana (where there is a medieval watchtower and

staging post at Kalkandere, below the pass) and Atra, although locally believed (especially by the modern Gabrades of Atra), therefore seems highly dubious. There

is a spring called ‘Fountain of Gabras’ (‘“Bryse tou Gabra’) between Atra and Argyropolis. Although there had been a number there, I saw no Greek monument in Atra in 1967, but late and post-Byzantine churches survive in the area. The name

Atra (now called Edra) makes one wonder if it was not perhaps the see (‘hedva’) of the fourteenth-century Metropolitans of Chaldia, or maybe a bailiwick of the local landowning monastery of St. George, Choutoura. See G. Kandilaptes, ‘Geographikon kai historikon lexikon tes eparchias Chaldias’, in Pontiaka Phylla, XIII (1937), p. 19; I. P. Eleutheriades, Historikon Schediasma peri tes eparchias Chaldias (Athens 1903), pp. 64-5; and A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, ‘Trapezountiaka’, in Vizantijskiz Vremennik,

V (1898), p. 679. . . . .

23 Tréne Mélikoff, La geste de Melik Danismend, I (Paris, 1960); ibid., s.v. ‘Danishmendids’, in EI (Leiden-London 1961), II, xxiv, pp. 110-1. Cf.: Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, p. 82: ‘an intricate blend of genuine memories and legendary versions (which

has) unfortunately been accepted as authentic by Ottoman historiographers and,

following them, even by modern authors’. 24 Greek ‘parcharia’, Armenian ‘leri’, Turkish ‘yayla’; cf.: X. de Planhol, ‘A travers

les chaines pontiques. Plantations cétiéres et vie montagnarde’, in Bulletin de l’ Association de Géographes Francais, CCCXI-CCCXII (1963), pp. 2-12; and Anthony Bryer, ‘Rural Society in the Empire of Trebizond’, in AP, XXVIII (1966), pp. 152-60.

Ill 170

together. Theodore Gabras (No. 3) may have been a martyr to the infidel, but in Turkoman heroic poetry he is a gallant, if tenacious, opponent, while his daughter apostatised and joined the Melik. Danishmend’s son may have been acclaimed ‘Ghazi’, wielder of the holy sword of Islam, but he was allied with Gregory Gabras (No. 4) and the official titles of his dynasty, always inscribed in Greek on its coins, ran ‘Grand Melik of All Romania and the East’, a foretaste of those of the Grand Komnenoi, ‘Roman’ emperors of ‘All the East’. Bahramshah, successor to ibn Mangudjak, the ally of Constantine Gabras (No. 5), even issued coins bearing the bust of what appears to be a Byzantine military saint or emperor’® and disputed the inheritance of the estates of Hasan Gabras

(No. ro), the Seljuk vizir, near Erzindjan. In all probability the lands of St. Theodore Gabras (No. 3) passed within a century of his martyrdom to a Muslim Gabras and to an emir of Erzindjan, through normal family

inheritance. | From the mid-1160s Konya and Constantinople moved independently

against the troublesome Danishmendids and Gabrades. Despite the efforts of Manuel I Komnenos, the Seljuks took Neokalisareia in 1175 and exterminated the Danishmend dynasty in 1178; they reached the sea at Amisos soon after.*® Further east the Komnenoi reincorporated Chaldia into their empire from about 1165. In some respects the entry of the first Grand Komnenos into Chaldia in 1204 may be regarded as a local continuation of a dynastic rivalry which had begun with Alexios I Komnenos and Theodore Gabras (No. 3) a century before. It 1s significant that the Grand Komnenoi adopted and energetically promoted St. Eugenios as their patron, rather than St. Theodore Gabras who, as the real founder

of late medieval Pontic separatism, would have been much more appropriate. The Grand Komnenos Alexios III even abandoned the

monastery of St. Theodore Gabras to the Venetian quarter in Trebizond

in 1364; there appears to have been another Gabras monastery in fourteenth-century Constantinople.?’ But in Chaldia the family seems to

have been crushed by the Komnenoi and, with one notable exception (No. 15), no important Gabras is found in the Empire of Trebizond (1204-1461).

25 Examples of the coins of Ghazi Giimtishtegin and Bahramshah in the P. D.

Whitting Collection, Barber Institute, University of Birmingham. 26 Niketas Choniates in CSHB (ed. I. Bekker, Bonn 1835), p. 689. Cf.: P. Wittek, ‘Von der Byzantinischen zur Tiirkischen Toponymie’, in Byzantion, X (1935), Pp. 41-5 and Charles M. Brand, Byzantium confronts the West, 1180-1204 (Cambridge, Mass.,

Tr OF, rothaps, a monastery founded by a Gabras; it is mentioned by John VI Kantakouzenos in CSHB (ed. L. Schopen, Bonn 1831), II, p. 141. Not in R. Janin, La géographie ecclésiastique de empire Byzantin (Paris 1953), I, ii.

IT]

BYZANTINE FAMILY 171 After the simultaneous collapse of the Gabrades and their Danishmendid rivals, three opportunities were open to the Gabrades: to save their lands south of the Pontic Alps and some of their influence by joining their new Seljuk masters in Konya; to save some of their influence with the Komnenoi

(derived from the marriage alliances of Nos. 4 and 7, which may account for the names of Nos. 18 and 19), but not, it seems, their estates north of the Pontic Alps, by joining their new masters in Constantinople;

or to launch into the Byzantine province most closely linked to their former lands and now free of Constantinople—the Crimea. Of the Gabrades who chose the Seljuk solution, Cahen observes: ‘il y

aurait eu une branche de la famille qui aurait délibérément, et non au hasard d’une circonstance occasionelle, choisi, pour conserver sa position

en Asie Mineure, de jouer le jeu turc’.** Five Gabrades (Nos. 6, 9-12) served under the Seljuk sultans from the 1140s. At least one (No. 12) retained his Christian faith. In Byzantium Manuel I Komnenos employed

at least two Gabrades (Nos. 7 and 8). Members of the family were naturally suited as envoys between sultan, emperor and pope. But in Constantinople, after 1204, and in Konya, after the late thirteenth-century Seljuk decline, both branches of the family lost their influence with that

of their new masters. There are a number of fourteenth-century Byzantine Gabrades (Nos. 17-33), but the dynasty was no longer coherent,

with distinctive characteristics. Some were peasants, who had perhaps adopted the name of their lords (Nos. 20-28), and none reached the highest’ posts. The most influential was Michael Gabras (No. 30), who ranked after the fifth office in the hierarchy of the Great Church, but in the civil list N. Gabras Komnenos (No. 19) was 59th in order of precedence

and John Gabras Kabellarios (No. 32) stood 72nd.”° One branch of the family reappeared in Patriarchal service in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Nos. 41 and 42) and another in Crete. The most distinguished member of the scattered Gabrades of fourteenth-

century Byzantium was Michael Gabras (No. 30), one of the famous group of savants which included Choumnos, Gregoras and Planoudes. But he is the least known of all late Byzantine major literary figures. A study of his 454 surviving, but largely unpublished, letters has long been recognised as one of the desiderata of late Byzantine studies,°’ but it must be said that their style is undeniably daunting. 28 Cahen, Polychronion, p. 149. 29 The pseudo-Kodinos, Traité des Offices (ed. J. Verpeaux, Paris 1966), pp. 318, 345-6. Although Verpeaux states that the civil index and list ‘ne sont pas des témoins

de la hiérarchie 4 la cour de Trébizonde’ (p. 343), he does not mention that they are included in Cod. Marc. Gr. 608 immediately after the unique version of Panaretos and in the same hand, which calls for further investigation. 30 Cf.: S. P. Lambros, ‘Byzantinische Desiderata’, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, I (1892), p. 189.

HI 172

Evidence for the Gabrades who took the Crimean solution rests upon the identification (strongly argued by Vasiliev and others) of the Russianised name Khovra with Gabras. I have accepted the identification, which has never seriously been questioned, but have not included all putative Crimean ‘Gabrades’. The Tauric Chersonnese had probably formed part of Manuel I Komnenos’ empire, but had certainly seceded from Byzantium by the r190s. From 1204 until after 1223 (in which year the Crimean tribute ship to Trebizond was seized by the Armenian Seljuk governor of Sinope** and the peninsula received its first Tatar attack),°? part of the Crimea was a dependent of Trebizond. Thereafter Tatar pressure became stronger from the north and the Genoese founded their colonies along the south-eastern coast from 1274. In the midfourteenth century we first hear of an independent Greek principality, based on the great fortress of Theodoro-Mangup in the north-east. In the 1390s there comes evidence that these Greek princes of Gotthia bear the name Khovra, or Gabras.°*° As an explanation for the Crimean Gabrades, Braun and Vasiliev agree in speculating that a branch of the family may have established themselves in the Crimea as early as the twelfth century. In 1890 Braun suggested that one of Manuel I Komnenos’ servants, such as Michael Gabras (No. 7), could have been appointed toparch of Gotthia, adding that ‘Perhaps the future will bring some new material which may help to solve this question’.** In 1935 Vasiliev proposed that the disappearance of Constantine Gabras (No. 5) from our sources after c. II40 “may be explained by the fact that he was sent into exile after the occupation of Trebizond by Byzantium; since the Crimea was the usual place of exile for dangerous political criminals, he was exiled there ... Gabras undoubtedly brought to the Crimea the innate tendency of his family to struggle against Byzantium’.*°

The hypotheses of Braun and Vasiliev are dubious. They make no 31 John (Joseph) Lazaropoulos in Fontes historiae imperit Trapezuntini (ed. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, St. Petersburg 1897-Amsterdam 1965), I, pp. 116-8. Cf.: Claude Cahen, ‘Le commerce anatolien au début du XlIlIle siécle’, Mélanges Louis Halphen (Paris 1951), p. 95. 32 Maria G. Nystazopoulou, He en Taurike Chersoneso polis Sougdaia (Athens 1965), p. 119, entry 8. 33 G. I. Bratianu, Recherches sur le commerce Génois dans la Mer Noire au XIIlIe siécle (Paris 1929), pp. 197-250; Vasiliev, Goths, pp. 182-8, 198-200; N. Bdanescu, ‘Contribution a l’histoire de la Seigneurie de Théodoro-Mangoup en Crimée’, in BZ,

AXXV (1935), P- 37- . 34 FB. A. Braun, Die letzten Schicksale der Krimgoten (St. Petersburg 1890), pp. 44-5;

cited in Vasiliev, Goths, p. 153.

35 Vasiliev, Goths, p. 157. There is no evidence for the notion that it was No. 34 who was driven out of the Pontos by the Grand Komnenos Manuel III.

Il

BYZANTINE FAMILY 173 attempt to explain away the two centuries of silence in our sources between Michael Gabras (No. 7) or Constantine Gabras (No. 5) and the first named Khovra (No. 34). Ruling families do not go underground for two centuries, even in the late medieval Crimea where sources are

not unplentful. But new material, for which Braun hoped, may be provided in the person of N. Ghadras (No. 15), archon of Sinope during its brief recapture by the Grand Komnenos Manuel I in the late 1250s and early 1260s, and by an understanding of the relationship between the Crimea and Sinope. Even today communications with Sinope are largely maritime and the roads into the Paphlagonian mountain hinterland are abominable.*® The port is over 100 km. closer to the Crimean trading

stations than it is to either Constantinople or Trebizond. Indeed the Grand Komnenoi may have regarded not only the Crimea, but the Crimea

and Sinope combined, as the ‘Perateia’ (‘Lands Beyond [the sea]’) of their title.” Late medieval links between Sinope and the grain ports of Caffa and Sougdaia were close and, as the Seljuks found in the thirteenth century and the Isfendiyaroghlu emirs thereafter, Sinope makes an excellent base for raiding the Crimea and its shipping. So N. Ghadras

(No. 15) may represent a branch of the family which, driven from

Djanik by the Seljuks, still maintained ties with Trapezuntine Chaldia, but was forced onwards to a natural refuge in the Crimea. Jhe same sort of grazing economy that existed in Inner Djanik could be followed around Theodoro-Mangup. N. Ghadras may therefore provide the hitherto missing link between the Anatolian Gabrades and Crimean Khovra and between Djanik and Gotthia. Itis no more than a hypothesis, but is at least more plausible than those of Braun and Vasiliev. From Djanik to the Crimea the Gabrades were but following the flight of the aged Mithradates VI Eupator, King of Pontos, in 64 B.c., and for much the same reasons.

In 1426 Maria (No. 40), one of the last of the ruling Khovra, married David, last Grand Komnenos, who surrendered Trebizond to Mehmet I]

in 1461. Alexander, last prince of Gotthia, lost Theodoro-Mangup to the sultan in 1475.°° The name survived as Gavrasov or Gavradov among the Greeks of the Sea of Azov, and as Gabras in Trapezuntine Chaldia, 36 See W. Leaf, ‘The Commerce of Sinope’, in Journal of Hellenic Studies, XXXVI (1916), pp. 1-15; and W. Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant au Moyen Age (Leipzig

1885 /6-Amsterdam 1967), I, pp. 550 ff.; pp. 359 f., 372 f. 37 Chrysanthos Philippides, Metropolitan of Trebizond, ‘He ekklesia Trapezountos'’,

in AP, IV-V (1933), Pp- 94.

38 Vasiliev, Goths, pp. 244-68. Franz Babinger improbably confuses Alexander with

the incestuous Grand Komnenos Alexander, brother of David, making Theodoro-

Mangup the last refuge of the Grand Komnenoi—see Mahomet II le Conquévant et son

temps (Paris 1954), pp. 256, 261, 419. Cf.: Pero Tafur, Travels and Adventures,

1435-1439 (ed. M. Letts, London 1926), p. 130.

II] 174

whence members of the family have emigrated to Jerusalem and Buenos Aires, until this century.*®

Brief biographies of 43 Gabrades follow. It is possible that further Gabrades can be added with the publication of more late Byzantine cartularies and of the appropriate volume of V. Laurent’s Corpus des sceaux de lempire Byzantin.*® An attempt has been made to sort out the identities of the Gabrades as dukes of Chaldia (Nos. 3-5), but other solutions are arguable and the identity of Gregory Gabras (No. 4) with Gregory Taronites, although long accepted, cannot be proved beyond doubt. Nostemma can be attempted and the fourteenth-century Gabrades are particularly disparate. JI am doubtful of the existence of a Theodore (II) Gabras, noted by Bees, and have not included him.*?

Nos. 1-2. The early Gabrades, c. 979—c. 1040 (rt) CONSTANTINE (1) GABRAS. Anatolian rebel warlord, probably with relations with the emir of Mosul. Supported Bardas (Vrdat)

Skleros against Basil II. Killed in 979, either at Amorion or at Sarabinai in the theme of Charsianon, probably in single combat with Bardas Phokas, duke of the themes of Chaldia-Koloneia.*?

(2) MICHAEL (I) GABRAS. Plotted with the patrikios Gregory Taronites and Theodosios Mesanyktes against the Grand Domestic Constantine, brother of Michael IV the Paphlagonian. Arrested and blinded in ro4o.*° 39 Sabbas Ioannides, Historia kai statistike Trapezountos (Constantinople 1870), p. 42; Kandilaptes, loc. cit.; Vasiliev, Coths, p. 158. 40 The eleventh- or twelfth-century seal of an otherwise unknown Nikephoros Gabras is noted in V. Laurent, Les bulles métriques dans la sigillographie Byzantine (Athens 1932), No. 653, p. 221 (Coll. Shaw). 41 N. A. Bees, s.v. ‘Gabras’ in the Eleutheroudakis Egkyklopaidikon Lexikon (Athens 1927), III, p. 667, lists a Theodore (II) Gabras, independent archon of Amisos after

1204, but cites no source. I have been unable to trace this Gabras and suspect that

he may have emerged from a confusion in a passage in Akropolites between Theodore

(of Philadelphia) and Sabas of Sampson. However, since Bees’ article, it has been pointed out that the Sampson of the passage refers not to Amisos (Samsun), but to Priene. See G. de Jerphanion, ‘Sampson et Amisos, une ville 4 déplacer de neuf cents kilométres’, in Orientalia Christiana Periodica, I (1935), pp. 257 ff.; and P. Orgels, ‘Sabas Asinédos, dynaste de Sampson’, in B, X (1935), pp. 67-80.

42 George Kedrenos (= John Skylitzes) in CSHB (ed. I. Bekker, Bonn 1839), II, PP. 379, 426, 430-1. Cf.: N. Adontz, Etudes Ayvméno-Byzantines (Lisbon 1965), pp. 298-9; and Gustave Schlumberger, L’épopée Byzantine a la fin du dixiéme siécle (Paris 1896), I, p. 406; P. M. Tarchnichvili, ‘Le soulévement de Bardas Skléros’, in BK, AVII-XVIII (1964), pp. 95-7. There could be a confusion in Kedrenos-Skylitzes between the deaths of Skleros and Gabras. 43 Kedrenos-Skylitzes in CSHB, II, p. 531; cf.: Adontz, Etudes, p. 244.

II]

BYZANTINE FAMILY 175 Nos. 3-5. Dukes of the theme of Chaldia, c. 1067—c. 1140 (3) (SAINT) THEODORE GABRAS, or GAURAS. Sebastos, patrikios,

‘megalomartyr’ and independent duke of Chaldia. Native of Chaldia. Married (i) Eirene (? a Taronitissa) before 1067, who died before rog1; (ii) a high-born Alan, cousin of the wife of his intimate, the Sebastokrator Isaac Komnenos. Anna Komnene notes that he was a consistently successful local military leader, but ‘violent’

and ‘energetic’ in character. After recapturing Trebizond from the Turks in 1075 (their occupation had lasted no more than three years),

he. retired to Constantinople, but Alexios I Komnenos appointed him duke of Chaldia in an attempt to rid the capital of him; instead he ‘alotted (Chaldia) to himself as if it were his own property and was irresistible’. There he defended Koloneia and Neokaisareia against the emir Danishmend, Trebizond against the Georgians and recaptured Paipertes from the Turks. In irogz he attempted to kidnap his son (No. 4), then hostage of Alexios I, from Constantinople.

He died fighting the Turks at Theodosioupolis in r0o98. A hero of Pontic Greek and Turkoman poetry, he was recognised as a martyr

in the twelfth century and as a saint by the fourteenth. In the Orthodox calendar his feast day is on 2 October.**

44 Anna Komnene in CSHB (ed. L. Schopen, Bonn 1878), I, pp. 417-8; II, p. 99 (= The Alexiad of the princess Anna Comnena [tr. E. A. S. Dawes, London 19281967], pp. 210-3, 284); John Zonaras in CSHB (ed. T. B-Wobst, Bonn 1897), III, p. 739;

the imperial letter of May rogr in Franz Ddlger, Regesten der Kaiseruvkunden des Ostrémisclien Reiches von 565-7453 (Munich-Berlin 1925), II, p. 40, No. 1161; John

(Joseph) Lazaropoulos in FHIT, I, pp. 59, 119; for the Sinai MS. of 1067 with portraits of Eirene and Theodore as toparch, see Vasiliev, Goths, pp. 154-5; for the inscription on the reliquary of his skull, in Cod. Marc. Gr. 524, see S. P. Lambros, ‘Ho Markianos kodix, 524’, in Neos Hellenomnemon, VIII (1911), p. 17; for his surviving ducal seal, see G. Schlumberger, Sigillographie de Vl Empire Byzantin (Paris 1884-Turin 1963), p. 665; for his monastery in the eastern suburb of Trebizond, see D. A. Zakythinos, Le chrysobulle d’ Alexis III Comnéne, empereur de Trébizonde, en faveur des Véntitiens

(Paris 1932), pp. 28, 34, 78-9 and Anthony Bryer, ‘The littoral of the Empire of

Trebizond in two fourteenth-century portolano maps’, in AP, XXIV (1961), pp. 112,

115-6; and for the synaxarion of St. Theodore, see Francois Halkin, Bibhotheca Hagiographica Graeca (Subsidia Hagiographica 8a, Brussels 1957), II, p. 275 and A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, ‘Symbolai eis ten historian Trapezountos’, in VV, XII (1905), pp. 132-7. Cf.: Adontz, Etudes, pp. 247-8; H. Ahrweiler, Byzance et la Mer (Paris 1966), p. 188; Israel Basileades, ‘Dyo historikoi stathmoi, 1461 kai 1916’, in Hot Komnenoi, V (Trebizond 1916), pp. 7-8; L. Bréhier, Le monde Byzantin (Paris 1948), II, p. 306; F. Chalandon, Les Comnéne (Paris 1912-New York n.d.), I, pp. 12, 146; II, p. 37; Fallmerayer, Tvapezunt, pp. 18-9; W. Fischer, ‘Trapezus im 11 und 12 Jahrhundert’, in Mitteilung des Instituts fiiy Osterreichische Geschichtsforschung, X (Innsbruck 1889), pp. 177-207; Janssens, Tvébizonde, pp. 56-8; Laurent, Byzance ct les Turcs, p. 67; William Miller, Trebizond, the last Greek empire [of the Byzantine eva| (London 1926-ed. A. C. Bandy, Chicago 1969), pp. 12-13, 67, where Theodore

the duke and Theodore the martyr are regarded as distinct; and Chrysanthos Philippides, in AP, IV-V (1933), pp. 56 and 456-7.

Hl 176

(4) GREGORY (I) GABRAS, or GAURAS, ?alias TARONITES. Son

of No. 3 and Eirene ?Taronitissa. Brought up as a hostage in Constantinople by Alexios I Komnenos. Betrothed, when very

young, to the daughter of the Sebastokrator Isaac Komnenos, but on his father’s second marriage the engagement was broken off through the Alan consanguinity of the wives of Isaac and Theodore (No. 3). Later married Maria Komnene, daughter of Alexios I, when she was aged six. Abortively kidnapped by his father to Karambis in rogi. Restored to Constantinople, but arrested for plotting against his father-in-law and for the theft of the Holy Nail and imprisoned in Philippopolis. If this Gregory Gabras can be identified with Gregory Taronites, as Vasiliey and Cahen argue strongly from inconsistencies in the text of Anna Komnene (although Adontz is unable to reconcile the proposition with the present dating of the letters of Theophylact of Ochrida, which have their own inconsistencies), then part of the remainder of Gregory’s career as Taronites can be established. In c. 1103 he was appointed duke of Chaldia (Trebizond and Tebenna) to replace the apparently ineffectual Dabetenos, successor to No. 3. But Anna Komnene notes that Gregory ‘had long been hatching rebellion (and) disclosed his secret on his way to Trebizond’.

His activities thereafter convinced Alexios I that Gregory ‘was heading towards complete madness’. Theophylact of Ochrida suggests that he helped negotiate the ransom of Bohemund of Antioch, imprisoned in Neokaisareia by the emir Danishmend in 1100-3 (after Raymond of St.-Gilles and a Lombard crusade, bent on freeing Bohemund, came to grief near Amaseia in IIo1, the survivors escaping through Paurai). Gregory allied himself with the emir Danishmend and established himself in the massive theme castle

of Koloneia by 1106. But he was captured by his relative John Komnenos, paraded with indignities through Constantinople, and imprisoned in the tower of Anemas. Although (in Anna Komnene’s view) still restless and unrepentant, he was released, pardoned and

reinstated in his honours after some years and before 1118. We do not know if he was reinstated in Chaldia.*°

45 Anna Komnene in CSHB, I, pp. 417-8; II, pp. 161-4 (= tr. Dawes, pp. 211-2, 315-6); Zonaras in CSHB, III, p. 739; Theophylact of Ochrida in Patvologia Graeca (ed. J.-P. Migne, Paris n.d.), CX XVI, letter xxvi, coll. 409-19; letter xxxvil, coll. 438-9;

Dédlger, Regesten, II, p. 48, No. 1222 of c. 1105. Cf.: N. Adontz, ‘L’archevéque

Théophylacte et le Taronite’, in B, XI (1936), pp. 577-86; Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, p. 90; Chalandon, Comnéne, I, pp. 146, 241-2; II, pp. 2, 20, 37, 152, 175-6; Mélikoff, Melikdanishmendname, p. 119; Vasiliev, Goths, p. 155; Rodolphe Guilland, Recherches sur les Institutions Byzantines (Berlin-Amsterdam 1967), I, pp. 121, 243.

WI BYZANTINE FAMILY 177 (5) CONSTANTINE (II) GABRAS. Son, brother or (according to the unreliable synaxarion of St. Theodore Gabras) nephew of No. 3. Began his career as a resourceful general of Alexios I Komnenos, campaigning against Bohemund of Antioch and routing Melikshah

before Philadelphia in 1112. Duke of Chaldia from before 1119 until after 1140, becoming virtually independent from c. 1126. During his early career Anna Komnene characterised him as ‘conceited’, ‘discontented’ and ‘fire-breathing’. As duke of Chaldia all Byzantine sources agree that he ruled ‘tyranically’ (.e. illegally). In 1119-1120 ibn Mangudjak, founder of the dynasty of Erzindjan,

sought refuge with him against Balak of Melitene and the Ghazi Gimiishtegin, son of the emir Danishmend. Gitimiishtegin defeated ibn Mangudjak and Constantine; 5,000 Greeks were killed or taken prisoner and Constantine was ransomed for 30,000 dinars. It was probably after this defeat that Neokaisareia was finally lost to the Danishmendids, although its earliest mosque was not built until 1180.

In 1130 the rebel Sebastokrator Isaac Komnenos (who also sought refuge with the Ghazi Giimiishtegin) negotiated with Constantine.

In 1139-1140 John IJ Komnenos led an abortive expedition to reconquer Djanik and restore Chaldia to his empire, but was unable to take Neokaisareia. During the campaign, John Komnenos (the ‘chelebt’), son of the Sebastokrator Isaac Komnenos, defected to

the Turks. He married ‘Kamero’, daughter of the Seljuk sultan Masud and son-in-law of Giimiishtegin; the Ottomans were later to

claim descent from the alliance. The date of Constantine's death, after the failure of John II’s expedition against him, is unknown.

By the mid-rr60s Chaldia was again part of the empire and Nikephoros Palaiologos its new duke.*°

46 Anna Komnene in CSHB, II, pp. 208-9, 265, 268-9, 283, 329 (= tr. Dawes, pp. 339, 368, 370, 377, 401) for his early career; Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Abd al-Kanm (Izzal-din Abu al-Hasan) (= ibn al-Athir) in Recueil des historiens des croisades : Historiens orientaux (Paris 1872), I, p. 341, and Michael the Syrian, Chronique (ed. and tr. J. B. Chabot, Paris 1899-1910), III, pp. 205, 230, 248, for the events of 1119, which Miller (Trebizond, pp. 12-3) and Janssens (Trébizonde, p 58) ascribe to the career of Gregory Taronites; Niketas Choniates in CSHB (ed. I. Bekker, Bonn 1835),

Pp. 45, the Synopsis Chronike in Mesaionike Bibliotheke (ed. K. N. Sathas, Venice-Paris 1894), VII, p. 205 and Ephraim the Monk in CSHB (ed. A. Maius, Bonn 1840), p. 168,

ll. 3959-3964, for John’s expedition against Constantine in 1139-1140. Cf.: Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, p. 93; ibid., La Syrie du nord a V’époque des crotsades et la principauté franque da’ Antioche (Paris 1940), pp. 354, 366; ibid., Polychyronion, p. 146;

Chalandon, Comnéne, I, p. 265; II, pp. 37, 45-6, 81-4, 176-9; Mélikoff, Melkdanishmendname, pp. 123-4, 134; L. Petit, ‘Monodie de Théodore Prodrome sur Etienne Skylitzes, métropolitain de Trébizonde’, in Bulletin de l'Institut archéologique Russe a Constantinople, VIII (1902-3), pp. 1-14 (on the obstacles to ecclesiastical relations between Constantinople and Trebizond during Constantine’s reign, on which see, how-

ever, E. Kurtz, in BZ, XIII [1904], p. 536); Steven Runciman, A History of the

Crusades (Cambridge 1957), II, pp. 138, 219; and Vasiliev, Goths, pp. 155-6.

III 178

The ‘Gabrades’ of the Melikdanishmendname The Meltkdanishmendname is a Turkoman Ghazi epic romance which describes the Danishmendid conquest and settlement of Djanik (the lower Halys-Iris-Lykos valleys and west Pontic littoral in former Armeniakon)}.*’ It is recounted in terms of the exploits of the emir Danishmend, historically

the rival of Nos. 3 and 4, who died in 1104. The epic was not put together until c. 1245 and the surviving version dates only from c. 1360,

so it cannot be used for matters of historical fact. Some later twelfthcentury incidents seem to have crept into it, and there is even the figure of Kiraklis of Trebizond (evidently kyr Alexios, first Grand Komnenos, 1204-1222).** Mélikoff argues that Theodore Gabras (No. 3) is the leading element in the composite figure of the Christian hero SHAH-I SHATTAT,*

whose daughter EFROMIYA (?Eumorphia)*® is an important character as an Amazon Christian bride, in the tradition of Byzantine, Armenian

and Turkish heroic poetry. Efromiya turns Turkoman and joins the emir. It might be noted that, besides being the area associated with the first five Gabrades, the Pontos is also the classical home of the Amazons. It was from the Pontos that Maria Komnene (Seldjan Hatun),

sister of the Grand Komnenos Alexios III, came to marry Fahrettin Kutlubey of the Turkoman Ak-koyunlu in 1352, an event described in amazonian terms in the Oghuz ballad cycle of Dede Korkut and laconically confirmed in a Trapezuntine Greek chronicle. Perhaps it was also known to Arif Ali, the final editor of the Melskdantshmendname in c. 1360.°*

The Melikdanishmendname is not a normal historical source. With

the possible exception of Shah-i Shattat, none of the Gabrades who appear

in it can be said to have historical existence; they are only symbols of Pontic resistance. Nevertheless, as symbols, they provide an essential background to the careers of the historical Gabrades (Nos. 3-5) in their 47 On Djanik and the Chepni Turkomans, whose thirteenth-century settlement may also be reflected in the Melikdanishmendname, see Bryer in BK, XXI-XXII (1966), pp. 191-2; XXITI-XXIV (1967), pp. 161-8. 48 Mélikoff, Melikdanishmendname, p. 133. 49 Mélikoff, Melikdanishmendname, pp. 203-4, 214-22, 435-6. 50 Mélikoff, Melikdanishmendname, pp. 80-1, I10, 117, 133, 137-8.

51S. A. Nikolaides, ‘Amazones kai Pontos’, AP, XXVI (1964), pp. 250-6; Dede

Korkut, Oguznamelevi (ed. K. M. Fahrettin, Istanbul 1952), pp. 117-8; Il Kitab-1 Dede Qorqut (Studi e Testi, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, No. 159, ed. E. Rossi, Rome 1952), pp. 31-3, 180-93, 219; David of Sassoun (tr. A. K. Shalian, Athens, Ohio, 1964), Pp. 323-4; Michael Panaretos, Peri ton Megalon Komnenon (ed. O. Lampsides, Athens 1958), in ff. 294b-295a, 297a. Cf.: H. Grégoire, ‘L’epopée Byzantine et ses rapports avec l’epopée turque et l’epopée romane’, in Bulletin de l’Académie royale Belique (Classe des Lettres), XVII (1931), pp. 463-93; S. P. Kynakides, ‘Eléments historiques Byzantins dans le roman épique turque de Sayyid Battal’, in B, XI (1936), pp. 563-70

and J. Mélikoff, ‘Géorgiens, Turcomans et Trébizonde: Notes sur le livre de Dede Korkut’, in BA, XVII-XVIII (1964), pp. 18-28.

Il

BYZANTINE FAMILY 179 struggle with the Turkomans. It is most significant that neither the Seljuks nor Constantinople enter the encounter; in popular memory it was correctly recounted as a conflict between Danishmendids and the native peoples of the Pontos only. The emir hero Melikdanishmend moves north and east towards the sea. In the epic, the steep castle of Neokaisareia is the main point of contention between him and the Greeks. Historically Danishmend probably made it his stronghold soon after the death of Theodore Gabras (No. 3) in 1098; the emir held Bohemund of Antioch prisoner there in 1100-3, but the fortress, on a spur of the Bulghar Dagh,°? remained a Greek objective throughout the twelfth century. Among other Christian foes in the epic is METR(OP)ID (.e. a Greek Metropolitan bishop),°* the sultan of Djanik. Metropid has four sons, NIKOLA (I), KOSTA (_.e. Constantine), GAVRAS and MIHAIL. Early on Melikdanishmend kills Nikola (I) and Kosta at Sebasteia and Mihail at Dokiya (now Tokat, the fortress on the peak west of Komana). But Gavras is more formidable, taking refuge first in Charsianon and then with his father Metropid, who summons the Trapezuntine and Armenian forces to Charsianon. Melikdanishmend kills Metropid, but, bady wounded, Gavras continues

the struggle from Neokaisareia. The apostate amazon Efromiya, attractively disguised as a monk, lures Gavras and manages to capture the strategic monastery of St. Gregory Thaumatourgos of Neokaisareia (‘Sematurgos’, the Wonderworker, evangelist and patron of the city). Gavras is finally slain, but, after some hesitation over their faith, his sons YORGI (i.e. George) and NIKOLA (IJ) continue the struggle until they too are killed by the Danishmendid Turkomans.** Nos. 6-13. Gabrades in Seljuk and Byzantine service, c. 1146—c. 1256 (6) N. GABRAS. ‘Turkish satrap’. Of Byzantine origin but brought up in the Sultanate of Rum and fought against the Byzantines with the

52 Mélikoff, Melikdanishmendname, pp. 157-9, raises a number of topographical , problems. Reference to Ashikpashazade, Vom Hirtenzeit zur Hohen Pforte (GrazVienna-Cologne 1959), p. 225, indicates that this Bulghar Dagh is probably the Balabandagh, part of the Pontic Alps or Paryadres. There is in fact no castle at Hargiimbed and one wonders if the fortresses of Mesudiye or of the nearby Sisorta Kale (‘Castle in

the Mist’) were not intended in the epic. There is no castle within sight of the Niksar-Akkus-Unye road until ‘Orgia’ (Caleoglu Kale)—Golkéy Kailise Kale, 50 km.

south of Ordu, is an Ottoman Derebey stronghold. North of Taulara and near Hamidiye, at the headwaters of the Melanthios river up which John II seems to have marched from Kotyora (Ordu), is the site of Kinte, where the Byzantine army camped

in 1139-1140, but no fortifications seem to survive there today (cf.: Chalandon,

Comnéne, II, pp. 177-8). 53 Local defence against Turkish marauder often fell, perforce, upon the Metropolitans; cf.: the success of Niketas of Chonai in 1176 (Niketas Choniates in CSHB, pp. 254-7). 54 Mélikoff, Melikdanishmendname, pp. 198-9, 423-52.

I] 180

Seljuks. Captured from near Konya by Manuel I Komnenos and decapitated in 1146.°° His son could be either No. 9 or Io. (7) MICHAEL (II) GABRAS. Pansebastos sebastos, strategos. Second husband of Eudokia Komnene, daughter of the Sebastokrator Andronikos Komnenos and celebrated mistress of her cousin Andronikos I Komnenos.*® Duke of Sirmion on the Danube under

Manuel I Komnenos, where he was defeated by Denis, comes palatinus of Stephen III of Hungary, in 1166. Member of the council which condemned the doctrines of John Eirenikos, abbot of Batala,

in Constantinople on Ir February 1170. In 1175 Manuel I sent him to Djanik with the troops of Trebizond and Oinaion, but he abandoned Amaseia to the Seljuk Sultan Kilidj Arslan II. Kinnamos states that he was a ‘most skilful’ general, but his somewhat chequered career included a spell under arrest after the Amaseia incident.*’

(8) CONSTANTINE (III) GABRAS. Possibly son of No. 5 Sent by Manuel I Komnenos to negotiate with Kilidj Arslan II in 1162-3. Betrayed the emperor; ‘traitor’ (Niketas Choniates).°°

(9) N. GAVRAS. Emir. Brought up in Byzantium. Defected to Kilidj Arslan II, becoming a leading councillor at the Seljuk court. Twice the sultan’s ambassador to Manuel I Komnenos during the Myriokephalon negotiations of 1175-6.°° He, or his son, is probably identical with No. Io. 55 John Kinnamos in CSHB (ed. A. Meineke, Bonn 1836), p. 56; Niketas Choniates in CSHB, p. 72. Cf.: Cahen, Polychronion, p. 147 (‘on peut supposer qu’il fut racheté’); and Chalandon, Comnéne, II, p. 256 (‘il faut peut-étre identifier avec le duc [1i.e. No. 5] de Trébizonde’). 56 Andronikos I Komnenos, grandfather of the first Grand Komnenos Alexios, later took service as a freebooter under Mehmet ibn Saltuk of Erzurum, for whom he held

a castle near Koloneia, on the Chaldian border, in 1173-1176/7. But Nikephoros Palaiologos, duke of Chaldia and successor to No. 5, kidnapped his cousin and most

famous mistress, Theodora Komnene, ex-Queen of Jerusalem. Andronikos then crossed

the border and held the Byzantine Pontos in fief, with Oinaion as his capital, from 1180-2. He became emperor in 1183 and was lynched two years later. The founda-

tions of his castle at Oinaion are substantial. See O. Jurewicz, Andronikos I. Komnenos (Amsterdam 1970), p. 79; and Charles Diehl, ‘Les romanesques aventures d’Andronic Comnéne’, in Figures Byzantines (Paris 1948), II, pp. 86-133. 57 Kinnamos in CSHB, pp. 226, 238-9, 258, 293, 296, 299; Niketas Choniates in CSHB, pp. 135-40, 229; Synopsis Chronike in MB, VII, pp. 258, 264, 270; and L. Petit, ‘Documents inédits sur le concile de 1166 et ses derniers adversaires’, in VV, XI (1904), p. 490. Cf.: Cahen, Polychronion, p. 147; Chalandon, Comnéne, II, pp. 2-3, 14-5, 23-30, 213, 219, 481, 502-6, 652; Miller, Tvebizond, p. 13; A. B. Urbansky, Byzantium and the Danube frontier (New York 1968), p. I04. 58 Niketas Choniates in CSHB, p. 159. Cf.: Chalandon, Comnéue, II, pp. 467, 678 (‘sans doute fils du’ No. 5). 59 Kinnamos in CSHB, p. 299; Niketas Choniates in CSHB, pp. 245-8; Synopsis

Chronike in MB, VII, pp. 291-2. Cf.: Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, p. 103; and Chalandon, Comnéne, II, pp. 504-5, 512.

Ill

BYZANTINE FAMILY 181 (to) IKHTIYAR AD-DIN HASAN B. GHAFRAS or IKSTIYAR AL-DIN HASAN IBN GAVRAS. Vizir to Sultan Kilidj Arslan II, on whose behalf he negotiated with Saladin in 1180 and conveyed official Seljuk congratulations on the capture of Jerusalem in 1188. Regarded as a wise statesman and noted for the splendour of his

robes and personal jewelry. Ousted from office on the death of Kilidj Arslan II in 1192, he retired to his estates near Erzindjan

but was murdered by Turkomans on the way. Bahramshah, Mangudjakid emir of Erzindjan, claimed inheritance of the estates.®°

Hasan or his son is probably identical with No. 11. (11) N. GHWARAS (sc. GHAWRAS). Accused of poisoning Kilidj Arslan II and his son and successor Kaykhusraw in 1192.°! (12) GIOVANNI (i.e. JOHN [I]) DE GABRA. Christian noble in Seljuk service. Envoy of Sultan Kaykubad I to Europe to discuss the relief of the Holy Land in 1234. Met Pope Gregory IX on 20 March : 1235 and went on to see Emperor Frederick IJ. Returned to Konya in 1236.° (13) MIKHAIL (i.e. MICHAEL [JII]) BAR GAVRAS. Physician at Melitene; ff. 1256.°° The presence of Gabrades at Melitene could perhaps be traced to the prisoners taken from the army of No. 5 in IIIQ. Nos. 14-10. Gabrades in the Empwe of Trebizond, c. 1204—c. 1345 (14) N. GABRAS. Founder of the monastery of the ‘megalomartyr’ St. George in Cheriana.** Could also be identical with any of Nos. 3-5.

(15) N. GHADRAS. Archon of recaptured Sinope for the Grand Komnenos Manuel I, from 1254 (or 1258 or 1259) until 1265 (or 1267 or 1208), when he was killed on the Pervane’s recapture of the port. Converted mosques into churches during his governor-

ship.*° |

60 Muhammad ibn Muhammad Imad al-Din (Al-Isbaham) (= Abu Shama) in RHC, HO (Paris 1898), IV, p. 347; Michael the Syrian, Chronique, III, p. 388. Cf.: Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, p. 210 and ibid., Polychronion, p. 147. 61 Cahen, Polychronion, p. 148, citing the Seldjukname, on which see P. Melioransky in VV, I (1894), p. 621.

62 Golubovich, BBB, II, pp. 298-9. Cf.: Anthony Bryer, ‘Trebizond and Rome’,

in AP, XXVI (1964), pp. 291-3.

63 Mar Grighor Maphrian (= Abu al-Faradj) called Bar Hebraeus, Chronicon

Ecclesiasticum (ed. and tr. J. B. Abbeloos and T. J. Lamy, Loranii 1872-7), II, p. 718. 64 John (Joseph) Lazaropoulos in FHIT, I, p. 86. 65 Ibn Shaddad in C. Cahen, ‘Quelques textes négligés concernant les Turcomans de Rim au moment de l’invasion Mongole’, in B, XIV (1939), p. 138; and Nystazopoulou, Sougdaia, p. 120, entry 17. Cf.: M. Nystazopoulou, ‘La derniére reconquéte de Sinope

par les Grecs de Trébizonde’, Revue des Etudes Byzantines, XXII (1964), pp. 241-9; Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, p. 284; and (on the problem of the pervane’s medrese in Sinope, which is dated A.H. 661-1263 a.D., apparently during the Greek occupation), see Anthony Bryer, ‘The church of Hagia Sophia in Trebizond’, Apollo, KC (1969), Pp. 273:

II] 182

(16) GEORGE (III) GABRAS, GAUBAS or GAURAS. Fl. 1344/5. Smallholder in the bandon of Matzouka, south of Trebizond. Sold land to the monastery of St. John the Forerunner, Bazelon, on Mt. Zaboulon. Found in association with local government officials. A member of his family was captured by the (?Chepni) Turkomans.°* Nos. 17-33. Gabrades in the Empire of Constantinople, c. 1299—c. 1350

(17) N. GABRAS. Mentioned in a letter of Maximos Planoudes to John Phakrases, c. 1299.°’ Could be identical with Nos. 29 or 30. (18) MANUEL DOUKAS KOMNENOS GAURAS. Benefactor of an unknown monastery at Mystra in 1300/1.°° (19) N. GABRAS KOMNENOS. Krites tou Phossatou (‘Judge of the Army’) and ‘slayer of the barbarians’; mentioned by Manuel Philes (c. 1275-c. I345).°°

(20) DEMETRIOS GABRAS (or GAURAS) CHRITO(U)S. Parotkos of the monastery of Xeropotamou, Mt. Athos, with a holding in the chorion of Kontogrikou, katepanikion of Rebenikeia, c. 1300. His family includes his sister (21) K ... ; his son (22) GEORGE (I) (who could be identical with No. 25); another son (23) M...; and his daughter (24) KALE.” (25) GEORGE (II) GABRAS. Paroitkos of the monastery of Xeropotamou, Mt. Athos, with a very modest holding in the chorion of Kontogrikou, katepanikion of Akros or Rebenikela, c. 1315-1320. He could be identical with No. 22, son of No. 20. The family of George (II) include his brother (26) N. (perhaps identical with No. 23); his sister (27) ANNA; and his daughter (28) MARIA (I).” (29) JOHN (II) GABRAS. Brother of No. 30, whom he predeceased; Nikephoros Choumnos addressed a letter to both brothers. An antPalamite theologian, he was congratulated by Gregory Akyndinos 66 MS. 36, ff. 43-6, 66-7, 69-70, 91-3, of the former Constantinople Hellenikos Philologikos Syllogos, now in the library of the Ttirk Tarih Kurumu, in Ankara. Cf.: the edition of the inferior cartulary of Bazelon, Vazelonskie akty—Actes de Bazélon (ed. F. J. Uspenskij and V. V. Beneshevich, Leningrad 1927), acts nos. 66, 6, 99, 102. , 61 Maxim monachi Planoudis epistulae (ed. M. Treu, Bratislava 1890-Amsterdam 1960), p. 16, no. ITX, 1. 51 and p. 303. Cf.: Nicol, Kantakouzenoi, p. 234. 68 A. Boeckh and J. Franz, Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum (Berlin 1877), IV,

Pp. 350, no. 8763. Cf.: Polemis, Doukat, p. 120. 69 Manuelis Philae Carmina (ed. E. Miller, Paris 1855-Amsterdam 1967), I, p. 293, 70” facques Bompaire, Actes de Xéropotamou (Archives de 1’Athos, III, Paris 1964), acts nos. 18A, 1. 8; 18B, II. 2-3. 71 Bompaire, Xévopotamou, act no. 18D ili, 1. 28.

II]

BYZANTINE FAMILY 183 for a work refuting Gregory Palamas, c. 1343. Author of a surviving but unpublished homily on The Presentation of the Mother of God in the Temple.” (30) MICHAEL (IV) GABRAS. Sakelliou of the Great Church of Constantinople. Brother of No. 29. The most prolific of all Byzantine letter writers; Cod. Marc. Gr. 446 contains the surviving first volume of his letters, totalling 454, of which only four appear to have been published. His correspondents included Joseph Bryennios, Nikephoros Choumnos, John Glykys, Nikephoros Gregoras, Gregory of Dyrrachion, Joseph ‘Rakendytes’ the Philosopher, Michael Kaloerdas,

John VI Kantakouzenos, George Lakapenos, Mathew of Ephesos, Theodore Moschampar, Alexios Doukas Philanthropenos, Maximos

Planoudes and Nikephoros Xanthopoulos. They appear to have been written during the period 1305-1341. Lost works by Michael Gabras, mentioned in the letters, include a Funeral Oration on the son of an Emperor (?1.e. Michael IX Palaiologos, son of Andronikos II); a Treatise on Dreams; an Elogy on the Emperor (?i.e. Andron-

ikos II Palaiologos); a Threnos; and a book of Prayers. He died before 1346.”°

(31) N. GABRAS. Pyvonoiaros in the katepanikion of Kalamaria. Died 72, N. A. Bees, ‘Ioseph Kalothetes kai anagraphe ergon autou’, in BZ, XVII (1908), p. 88; J. E. Boissonade, Anecdota graeca (Paris 1830-Hildesheim 1962), II, pp. 238, 255, 296; ibid., Anecdota nova (Paris 1844), pp. 35-6; Patriarch Philotheos Kokkinos’ Life of Patriarch Isidore I, ed. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus in Zapiski, LXXVI (1905), pp. 107-8; ibid., Hierosolymitike Bibliotheke (St. Petersburg 1891-7/Paris 1963), I, p. 397 (MS. with fragments by Gabras); II, pp. 209, 212 (MS. of Gabras’ homily on the Presentation); R. Guilland, Correspondance de Nicéphore Gvrégovas (Paris 1927), p. 273; H.-G. Beck, Ki-che und Theologische Literatur im Byzantinischen Reich (Munich 1959), pp. 721-2; Metropolitan Athenagoras, ‘Katalogos ton cheirographon

tes en Chalke Mones tes Panagias’, FEBS, XI (1935), p. 153 (MS. of Gabras’ homily on the Presentation) and I. Sevéenko, ‘Nicolaus Cabasilas’ Correspondence’, in BZ, XLVII

(1954), PP. 51-2. | oo . . |

73 A. M. Zanetti, Graeca D. Marci Bibliotheca codicum manu scriptorum per titulos digesta (Venice 1740), I, pp. 62, 239-42; N. B. Tomadakes, Ho loseph Bryennios kai he Krite kata to r4oo (Athens 1947), p. 20; J. Verpeaux, Nicéphore Choumnos, homme ad’ état et humaniste Byzantin (Paris 1959), pp. 44 n. 5, 63, 70, 103; Guilland, Grégovas, PP. 270-4, 333-5 (where two letters are published); M. Treu, ‘Der Philosoph Joseph’, in BZ, VIII (18a9), pp. 50-2; Nicol, Kantakouzenot, pp. 96-7; Georgi Lacapent et Andronici

Zaridae epistulae xxx cum epimerismis Lacapent, accedunt duae epistulae Michaélis Gabrae ad Lacapenum (ed. S. Lindstam, Collectio scriptorum veterum Upsaliensis, Gothoburg 1924), pp. 184-9, 203-6 (where two letters are published) and L. Voltz, ‘Die Shriftstellerei des Georgios Lakapenos’, in BZ, II (1893), pp. 224-5; M. Treu,

Matthaios, Metropolit von Ephesos (Potsdam r1goI), p. 20, 1. 15; S. P. Lambros, “Archoteleiai epistolon’, in NE, XII (1915), pp. 430-2; Polemis, Doukai, p. 169, no. 171; G. I. Theocharides, ‘Demetrios Doukas Kabasilas kai alla prosopographika ex anekdotou chrysoboullou tou Kantakouzenou’, in Hellenika, XVII (1962), p. 23; Guilland, Recherches, I, p. 256. I understand that Dr. Gerasimos E. Pentogalos is to publish Cod. Marc. Gr. 446, letter 288 (to ‘Rakendytes’).

Il 184

before 1347. Theocharides’ identification of this Macedonian landowner with the savant No. 30 is improbable.”* (32) JOHN (ITI) GABRAS KABALLARIOS. Hetaireiarches at Serres, fl. 1348.".

(33) N. GABRAS. In service of Mathew Kantakouzenos, whom he inadvertently betrayed in Thrace in 1356.”°

Nos. 34-40. The Khovra of the Greek principality of Theodoro-Manguh in the Crimea, c. 139I—c. 1458 (34) STEPAN VASILYEVICH KHOVRA, KHOVRIN, KHOMRA or

KOMRA. Prince of the Crimean Gotthia. His name implies a father called BASIL. Emigrated to Moscow in 1391 or 1403.

Took the cowl under the name SIMON.”’

(35) ALEXIS (I). Son of No. 34. Prince of the Crimean Gotthia, 1403-1444 (1445 or 1447)."°

(36) GRIGORY (1.e. GREGORY [II}) KHOVRA. Son of No. 34, with whom he emigrated to Moscow, where he founded a monastery in honour of his father, called the Simonov.’”®

(37) JOHN (IV). Probably son of No. 35. Married Maria, an Asanina.

Prince of the Crimean Gotthia, c. 1444-6. Possibly retired to

Trebizond. °°

(38) ALEXIS (II), the ‘authentopoulos’. Son of No. 37. Died young in Trebizond in 1446-7. John Eugenikos composed his surviving epitaph.*?

(39) OLOBEI or OLUBEI. Son of No. 35. Prince of the Crimean Gotthia, c. 1447- ?1458.*?

(40) MARIA (IJ). Daughter of No. 35. Furst wife of David, last Grand Komnenos of Trebizond, whom she married in 1426.*° 74 N. Oikonomidés, Actes de Dionysiou (Archives de 1’Athos, IV, Paris 1968), pp. 44-6, act no. 2, 11. 36, 38; Theochandes in Hellentka, XVII (1962), pp. 18-9. 75 Paul Lemerle, Actes de Kutlumus (Archives de 1’Athos, II, Paris 1946), pp. 92-3, act no. 21. 76 Nicol, Kantakouzenot, p. 116. 77 Vasiliev, Goths, pp. 198-201, 246. 78 Vasiliev, Goths, pp. IgI-231. 79 Vasiliev, Goths, p. 199. 80 Vasiliev, Goths, pp. 195-8, 213, 222-3, 282.

81S. P. Lambros, Palaiologeia kai Peloponnesiaka (Athens 1912), I, pp. 155-7; E.

Legrand, ‘Ioannou tou Eugenikou epitaphion to Authentopoulo’, in Deltion tes historikes

kai ethnologikes hetairias tes Hellados, J (1883), pp. 455-8; and Vasiliev, Goths, pp. -8, 282.

20 Vasiliev, Goths, pp. 219-37, 246, 282. 83 Panaretos (ed. Lampsides), f. 312a; O. Lampsides, ‘Ho gamos Dabid tou Megalou Komnenou kata to chronikon tou Panaretou’, in Athena, LVII (1953), pp. 365-8; and Vasiliev, Goths, pp. 198, 214, 282.

Il

BYZANTINE FAMILY 185 Nos. 41-3. Gabrades in the Tourkokratia, c. 1555—c. 1653 (41) MICHAEL (V), or MOZALOS, GABRAS. Member of a committee which negotiated a reduction of the peshkesh (fine paid to the Porte

for ratification of a patriarchal election) from 3,000 to 2,000 gold florins in the reign of Patriarch Joasaph II of Constantinople (15551565) .°*

(42) CYRIL GABRAS. Briefly Grand Skevophylax of the Great Church in March 1604, during the reign of Patriarch Raphael II of Constantinople (1603-7).°°

(43) N. GABRAS of Skaros castle, Thera (Santorini), some of whose land passed into the hands of the monastery of St. Nicholas before 16 May 1653.°*°

Finally a group of Gabrades found in the Cretan province of Siteia should

be mentioned. The earliest so far noted is the priest CONSTANTINE (IV) GABRAS and dates only from 1497,*”’ but Gabrades of some substance seem to have been particularly numerous in the late sixteenth century when

they had connections with the famous Cornaro family, which was in turn associated with a Sitelan village called Trapezonda.** The possibility that this village was founded by Trapezuntines, perhaps in the early fifteenth century, has been discussed more than once, but the supporting evidence so far advanced is rather dubious.*® But that there was emigration from the Pontos to Crete is shown by the parentage of George ‘of 84 The Perilepsis Patriarchikon Eggraphon (1538-1684), in MB, III, p. 547; the Historia Patriarchica in CSHB (ed. I. Bekker, Bonn 1849), p. 181. Cf.: M. Gedeon, Patnarchikot Pinakes (Constantinople n.d.), p. 512 and Steven Runciman, The Great Church in Captivity (Cambridge 1968), p. 200. 85 The Perilepsis Patriarchikon Eggraphon (1538-1684), in MB, III, p. 552.

86 Ph. Koukoules, ‘He en Thera hiera Mone tou hagiou Nikolaou’, in FEBS, VI

(1929), p. 69. 87 N. B. Tomadakes, ‘Hoi Orthodoxoi papades epi Enetokratias kai he cheirotonia

auton’, in Kretika Chronika, XIII (1959), p. 7o. I am grateful to Professor N. Panayotakis for drawing my attention to the Cretan Gabrades. 88 K. D. Mertzios, ‘Bitzentzos Kornaros—Erotokritos’, in KCh, XVIII (1963), pp. 155-242; the same’s ‘Kretika symbolaia ton chronon tes Enetokratias’, in KCh, XIX (1965), pp. 116-121; N. Stavrinides, ‘Anekdota eggrapha tes Tourkokratias en Krete’,

in KCh, I (1947), p. 114; and S. G. Spanakes, ‘He diatheke tou Andrea Kornarou (1611)’, in KCh, IX (1955), p. 400. 89 The evidence consists of a relief of a single-headed eagle (a common heraldic motif which cannot securely be related to Trebizond), found at Trapezonda, and a misunder-

standing, based on Noiret’s text, of a petition of 1414 by 80 Armenian families to Trebizond to emigrate to Crete, to indicate 880 (?Greek) families. See M. Katapotes, ‘He ‘‘Trapezonda’’ Seteias’, in Myson, II (1933), pp. 140-1; Chrysanthos Philippides in AP, IV-V (1933), p- 312; D. P. Kalogeropoulos, ‘Ho monokephalos aetos tes Seteias’, in Chronika tou Pontou, II (1945), p. 354; Hippolyte Noiret, Documents inédits pour serviy a4 UV histoire de la domination vénitienne en Créte de 1380 a 1485 (Paris 1892), p- 225; and a better reading in F. Thiriet, Régestes des délibévations du Sénat de Venise concernant la Romanie, II (Paris 1959), no. 1516, p. 120.

Hl 186

Trebizond’, born in Candia in 1396,°° and by a petition of 80 Armenian refugee families of Trebizond to settle in Venetian Negroponte or Candia

in 1414.°° The Cretan Gabrades, of whom one of the most recent was MANASES GABRAS, abbot of Arkadi (1808-1815),°? cannot be proved

beyond doubt to have emigrated from the original home of the family in the Pontos, but it remains a strong possibility.

Dumbarton Oaks. 90 N. B. Tomadakes, ‘Symbole eis ten meleton ton xenon epoikeson en Krete’, in Epeteris Hetaiveias Kretikon Spoudon, II (1939), p. 14. ®1 Thiriet, loc. cit. There is no evidence that the Senate agreed to send them to, or that they arrived at, either destination. 92 N. B. Drandakes, ‘Apodeiktika parakatathekes hieron skeuon kai amphion tou 1841’, in KCh, II (1948), p. 212.

INDEXES

A. Gabrades Alexis (I) (No. 35), p. 184. John (III) Kabellarios (No. 32), pp. 171, Alexis (II) (No. 38), p. 184. 184. Anna (No. 27), pp. 171, 182. John (IV) (No. 37), p. 184.

Anthimos, n. 22. K... (No. 21), pp. 171, 182. Antonios, n. 22. Kale (No. 24), pp. 171, 182.

Basil, p. 184. Kosta, p. 179. Constantine (I) (No. 1), p. 174. M... (No. 23), pp. 171, 182. Constantine (II) (No. 5), pp. 170, 172-3, Manases, p. 186.

177-8, 180; nn. 22, 55, 56. Manuel Doukas Komnenos (No. 18), pp. Constantine (III) (No. 8), pp. 171, 180. I7I, 182.

Constantine (IV), p. 185. Maria (I) (No. 28), pp. 171, 182. Cyril (No. 42), pp. 171, 185. Maria (II) (No. 40), pp. 173, 184.

Demetrios Chritous (No. 20), pp. 171, 182. Metropid, p. 179.

Efromiya, p. 178. Michael (I) (No. 2), p. 174. Gavras, p. 179. Michael (II) (No. 7), pp. 171-3, =80.

George (I) (No. 22), pp. 171, 182. Michae: (III) (No. 13), p. 181. George (II) (No. 25), pp. 171, 182. Michael (IV) (No. 30), pp. 171, 182-4.

George (III) (No. 16), p. 182. Michael (V) (No. 41), pp. 171, 185.

Giovanni (No. 12), p. 181. Mihail, p. 179.

Gregory (I) (No. 4), pp. 170-1, 174-6, 178, Mikhail (No. 13), p. 181.

181. Mozalos (No. 41), p. 185.

Gregory (II) (No. 36), p. 184. N. (No. 6), pp. 171, 179-180; (No. 9), Grigory (No. 36), p. 184. pp. 171, 180; (No. 14), p. 781; (No. 17), Hasan (No. 10), pp. 170-1, 180-1. pp. 171, 182; (No. 26), pp. 171, 182; John (I) (No. 12), pp. 171, 181. (No. 31), pp. 183-4; (No. 33), p. 184;

John (II) (No. 29), pp. 182-3. (No. 43), p. 185.

IT]

BYZANTINE FAMILY 187

182. Simon, p. 184. ,

N. Gabras Komnenos (No. 19), pp. 171, Shah-i Shattat, p. 178.

N. Ghadras (No. 15), pp. 173, 181. Stepan Vasilyevich (No. 34), p. 184; n.

N. Ghwaras (No. 11), pp. 171, 181. 35.

Nikephoros, n. 40. Theodore, St. (No. 3), pp. 168, 170, 175-9,

Nikola (I), p. 179. 181. Nikola (II), p. 179. ‘Theodore (II)’, p. 174; n. 41. Olobei (No. 39), p. 184. Yorgi, p. 179.

B. Modern names of areas and places associated with the Gabrades The village and site of Gavraz (= Kizilkavraz), 15 km. e. of Sebasteia (pp. 166-8, 179, = Sivas), may be related to the Gabrades. In ANATOLIA, the Akampsis (p. 166) = the Coroh; Amaseia (pp. 166-7, 176, 180) = Amasya; Amisos (pp. 166, 170; n. 41) = Samsun; Amorion (p. 174) = Hamza Hacci; Argyropolis (n. 22) = Ciimiishane; Charsianon (pp. 166, 174, 179) = Harsoniye; the district of Cheriana (p. 181) = Siran; the monastery of St. George, Choutoura (n. 22) = Hudra; the Halys (pp. 166-7, 178) = the Kizil Irmak; the Iris (pp. 166, 178) = the

Yesil Irmak; St. John the Forerunner, Bazelon (p. 182) = Ayana; Karambis (p.

176) = Kerembe Burunu; Kinte (n. 52) = Kundu; Koloneia (pp. 166-8, 174-6; n. 56) = Sebinkarahisar; Komana (pp. 166-7, 179) is by Eudokia = Dokiya = Tokat; Kotyora (n. 52) = Ordu; the Lykos (pp. 166-8, 178) = the Kelkit Cay; Matzouka (p. 182) = Macka; the Melanthios (n. 52) = the Melet Irmak; Melitene (pp. 177, 181) = Malatya; Neokaisareia (pp. 166, 170, 175-7, 179; n. 52) = Niksar; Oinaion (pp. 166, 180; nn. 52,

56) = Unye; Paipertes (pp. 166, 175) = Bayburt; Paurai (pp. 166, 176) = Bafra; Philadelphia (p. 177; n. 41) = Alasehir; Sarabinai (p. 174) = ‘Basilika therma’ = Terziii Hamam; Sinope (pp. 166, 172-3, 181; n. 65) = Sinop; Stavri (p. 168; n. 22) = Istavri; Taulara (p. 166; n. 52) = Koyuluhisar; Theodosioupolis (pp. 166, 175; n. 56) = Erzurum; and Trebizond (passim) = Trapezous = Trabzon. In GREECE all the names mentioned have been retained. In the BALKANS, Philippopolis (p. 176) = Plovdiv and Sirmion (p. 180) = Sremska

Mitrovica.

In the CRIMEA, Caffa (p. 173) = Feodosiya; Sougdaia (p. 173) = Sudak; and Theodoro-Mangup (pp. 172-3, 184) = a site near Inkerman.

IIIb

A Byzantine Family: the Gabrades An Additional Note In 1971 Anthony Bryer examined the Byzantine family of Gabras,

referring to 64 Gabrades, of whom he gave brief biographies of 43.1 Since then, he, Sterios Fassoulakis and D. M. Nicol have noted further Gabrades and two distinguished works have appeared: Dr. Georgios Fatouros’ fine critical edition of the 462 letters of Michael Gabras, the fourteenth-century letter-writer, and Dr. Stavros Kourousis’ notable study of one of his correspondents, Manuel Gabalas (Mathew of Ephesos).

Their findings on Michael Gabras and his immediate family need not therefore be repeated here. Our additions emphasise, rather than alter,

the pattern already established of the career of this Anatolian (and

perhaps Pontic) family. Among earlier Gabrades, No. 1A may provide startling evidence for the lengths to which the family took what Vasiliev calls its “innate tendency ... to struggle against Byzantium”.» Among later Gabrades, we trace further emigrations and ramifications of the family in the empires of Nicaea, Trebizond and Constantinople, in the Aegean islands and (especially) in Macedonia, bringing the total number of Gabrades to 107. Brief biographies of 31 additional Gabrades, inserted in a summary framework of Bryer’s original list {as nos. 1A, 11A, 12A, 12B, etc.) follow.

Nos. 1—2. The early Gabrades, c. 979—c. 1040 1 CONSTANTINE GABRAS, d. 979. Anatolia

1A N. GABRAS. In 1018 Elemagos (Elinagos Phrantzes) of Belograd (Berat), last unconquered Bulgarian warlord, made his submission to Basil II at Stagoi in Thessaly. The emperor proceeded to Athens, where he gave thanks in the church of the Theotokos (the Parthenon) before entering the Golden Gate of Constantinople in triumph early in 1019. At this point Michael of Diabolis {Devol) adds to Kedrenos-Skylitzes the information that Elemagos and a Gabras (our sole reference to the latter), both archontes and patrikioi, conspired in Thessaloniki to revive the last embers of Bulgarian resistance, that their plot was discovered, 1 A Byzantine Family: the Gabrades, c. 979 —c. 1653. In: Byzantina-Metabyzantina

= University of Birmingham Hist. Journ. XII (1970—1971) Ne 2, 164—187. The Gabras monastery mentioned on p. 170 and n. 27 was probably at Didymoteichos,

not Constantinople, suggesting a Gabras there before 1341 — see Joannis Cantacuzeni Historiae, Bonn, II, pp. 140—141; but cf. A. A. Vasiliev, The Goths in the Crimea, Cambridge, Mass. 1936, p. 157 and n. 5 (defective reference). Eumorphia was suggested to represent the EFROMIYA of the Melikdanishmendname on p. 178; Euphronia or Euphemia would do as well. On p. 167 the Halys is confused with the Iris-Lykos. 2 St. I. Kourousis, Mavouna TaBadac eita Matdbatoc Mnteomohityns “Eqéoov (1271/2—

1355/60), I. Athens 1972. G. Fatouros, Die Briefe des Michael Gabras (ca. 1290—nach 1350) {= Wiener Byz. Studien, X/1—2), Wien 1973. 3 Vasiliev, Goths, p. 157.

IT]

39

that Gabras fled to his own lands where he was arrested and blinded, and that Elemagos was restored to his dignities after torture. Bryer followed Moravcsik’s assumption that this Gabras was, like Elemagos, a Bulgarian leader and that the name simply coincided with that of the

Anatolian Gabrades. But he cannot otherwise trace Gabras as a Bulgarian

name and the plot is in keeping with those of the first five Gabrades,

incorrigible rebels against Constantinople. If Constantine Gabras (no. 1) was capable of plotting with the Arabs and supporting Bardas Skleros against Basil II in 979, this Gabras was surely capable of plotting with the Bulgarians and supporting Elemagos against Basil II in 1018—1019,

perhaps helping to explain the plot, arrest and blinding of Michael Gabras (no. 3) in 1040. That this Gabras was punished more severely than Elemagos (and that he had lands to flee to} may confirm that he was a Byzantine, not a Bulgarian, traitor. For an Anatolian Gabras

to take up the Bulgarian cause at its most hopeless, in the hour of Basil’s triumph, would be quixotic, but characteristic, for the early Gabrades

were as persistent rebels against the central government as they were doomed. The possibility that this Gabras of 1018—1019 was, in fact, a member of our Anatolian family (perhaps a general of Basil II left behind at Thessaloniki by the emperor on his way from Athens to the capital) is a very real one. 2 MICHAEL GABRAS, d. ?1040. Anatolia

Nos. 3—5. Dukes of the theme oj Chaldia, c. 1067—c. 1140

3 (SAINT) THEODORE GABRAS, imperial gambros,> d. 1098. Tre-

bizond

4 GREGORY GABRAS, ?alias TARONITES, d. ? after 1118. Trebizond 5 CONSTANTINE GABRAS, d. after 1140. Trebizond

Nos. 6—13. Gabrades in Seljuk and Byzantine service, c. 1146—c.1256 6 N. GABRAS, d. 1146. Konya 7 MICHAEL GABRAS, imperial gambros,° d. after 1175. Constantinople 8 CONSTANTINE GABRAS, fl. 1162—1163. Constantinople-Konya 9 N. GABRAS, fl. 1175—1176. Constantinople-Konya 10 HASAN GAVRAS, d. 1192. Konya-Erzincan 1i1 N. GHWARAS, fl. 1192. Konya 11A IANNAKIOS (or IOANNIKIOS) GABRAS. Pansebastos sebastos, fl. 1216. Mentioned in a dtayvwotixy woc—tc of 24 March, indiction 5, which

records two other documents (modotatts February, indiction 4, modEtc €yyoaqos) in which he carried out instructions to investigate a dispute between the inhabitants of Sampson (Mount Mykale, Samsun Dag) and 4B. Prokié, Die Zusdtze in der Handschrift des Johannes Skylitzes, codex Vindobonensis hist. graec. LXXIV. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des sogennanten westbulgarischen Reiches. Miinchen 1906, pp. 35, 48, Ne 55; Scylitzes — Cedrenus, Bonn, II, p. 475 (= PG CXXII, col. 208); S. Runciman, A History of the First Bulgarian Empire. London nero 2085 . 165, n. 8.Gy. Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica, II. Berlin 1958, p. 108; Bryer, Gabrades,

i: 5 L. Stiernon, Notes de titulature et de prosopographie byzantines, Sébaste et gambros. Rev. des Et. Byz. XXIII (1965) p. 228 (Ne 3, Theodore Gabras}; p. 235 (Ne 7 Michael Gabras). There is a (poor) reproduction of the Gabras MS portraits of 1067 in MS Sinai Petrop. 291, in: V. BeneSevic, Monumenta Sinaitica, I. Petropoli 1925, pl. 37 and p. 52. The inscription beside Eirene gives a Pontic form of the name. Although the feminine seems normally to have been Gabraina (cf. 33G) Eirene is here called Gabraba. There are further examples in the Acts of Vazelon.

II]

40

the monastery of St. Paul on Mount Latros (Latmos, Bes Parmak) over the proasteion of Alexandreion.®

11B GREGORIOS GABRAS. Meyaiteniqavadtatog, uevyakentpavéatatos,

fl. 1220—1230. Proistamenos of the village ef Boda, near Prilep, in Mace-

donia; saved a distraught lady from drowning herself in a river when

pursued by the husband she had deserted.’

11C STEPHANOS GABRAS. Pansebastos sebastos, fl. 1220—1230. Father-in-law of Leon Moschopoulos, pansebastos sebastos, whose divorce proceedings were settled at Ochrida by Demetrios Chomatianos. By that time Stephanos was dead. He seems to have been a relative {? a nephew) of Gregorios Gabras (no. 11B), since Gregorios gave evidence on behalf

of his daughter at the divorce court.

12 GIOVANNI DE GABRA, fl. 1234—1236. Konya 12A JOHN GABRAS. Sold land, with his kinsman the priest John Polites,. to the monastery of the Theotokos ,,tHj¢ xexroviowévyc’‘, near Miletos, in September 1236.9

12B CONSTANTINE GABRAS, Protopapas of the metropolis of Miletos

(Palatia, Balat), fl. 1250. First witness of a deed of sale of land by Manuel Palaiologos and his family to the nearby monastery of the Theotokos ,,tjs xexroviouevyns“, dated February 1250.18

13 MIKHAIL BAR GAVRAS, fl. 1256. Melitene (Malatya) Nos. 14—16 B. Gabrades in the Empire of Trebizond, c. 1204—c. 1432

14 N. GABRAS. Cheriana (Siran-Ulusiran ) 15 N. GHADRAS, d. ?1265. Trebizond-Sinope 154 ANDRONIKOS GAURAS. Smallholder, with his family, in the chorion (later bandon) of Palaiomatzouka (Hamsik6y) in the bandon of Matzouka (Macka) in the ? thirteenth century.4 16 GEORGE GABRAS, fl. 1344—1345. Matzouka (Macka) 164A KOSMAS “... & tot évddEou nat doxatouv yévouc tov TaBbodsav".

Possibly polemarch of the bandon of Matzouka (Macka) in 1378.12 6 F. Miklosich — J. Miiller, Acta et diplomatica Graeca medii aevi sacra et profana {quoted below as MM}, IV. Vindobonae 1871, pp. 290—295, the first document of this monastery; F. Délger, Regesten III, Ne 1696; G. de Jerphanion, Sampson et Amisos, une ville ad déplacer de neuf cents kilométres. Or. Christ. Per. I (1935) 257; P. Orgels, Sabas Asidénos, dynaste de Sampsén. Byzantion X (1935) 67—80; Héléne Ahrweiler, L’histoire et la géographie de la région de Smyrne entre les deux occupations turques (1081—1317), particuliérement au XxXIIIeé siécle. Travaux et Mémoires I] (1965) 6, 13;

- G. E. Bean, Aegean Turkey. An archaeological guide. London 1967, pp. 252—254, 257—258; Bryer, Gabrades, p. 174, Ne 41.

~7 Demetrios Chomatianos, Opera, ed. J. B. Pitra, Analecta Sacra et Classica Spicilegio Solesmensi Parata, VI. Paris—Rome 1891, Ne 23 (De divortio}, cols. 99—100 (especially 99, lines 25—26). 8 Demetrios Chomatianos, ed. Pitra, Ne 134 (De contractibus ex vi dissertatio), cols.

537—540 (especially 539, lines 2—3, 15). 9 MM, VI, p. 187, Ne 68. (Presumably not the same person as Ne 12.) 10 MM, VI, p. 163, Ne 50 (of 1213; the document cited is of 1250) and p. 192, Ne 71; Ahrweiler, Travaux et Mémoires I (1965) p. 61, Ne 280; Bean, Aegean Turkey, p. 219. 11 MS 36, f. 46r of the former Constantinople “EAAnvixdc gtihodoyixog ovAAoyos, now in the library of the Tiirk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara; cf. Ba3enoncKkue axTot — Actes de Bazelon, edd. F. J. Uspenskij and V. V. BeneSevi¢, Leningrad 1927, act Ne 105. N. M.

Panagiotakis and A. A. M. Bryer are preparing a text of and commentary on the

Leningrad and Ankara MSS of the Acts of Vazelon.

12 Archimandrite Panaretos (Topalidis), ‘O [lovtoc ava tovc aidvac. Drama 1927, p. 70,

citing (among other curious and probably unreliable information on the Gabrades)

a document of the hieromonk Nyphon of Vazelon in 1378 which we cannot now trace. Topalidis, the author of a history of the monastery of Vazelon, had access to docu-

IT]

4] 16B THEODORE GABRAS, fl. before 1432; smallholder, without heirs,

in Diokaine in the chorion (formerly bandon) of Gemora (Yomra) in the bandon of Gemorosyrmion (Yomra-Siirmene). His gonikeion was

a property of the monastery of the Pantokrator of the Lighthouse,

Trebizond, in 1432.15 |

Nos. 17—33K. Gabrades in the Empire of Constantinople, c. 1263—c. 1399

17 N. GABRAS, fl. 1299. ? Constantinople 17A MICHAEL GABRAS, fl. c. 1263; paroikos in the proasteion called Temenion on Leros; mentioned with his wife (17B) EUDOKIA [GABRA (INA)], in a document (ovytAAtades axoxatactatixov yoduua), dated May,

indiction 6,14 17C€ CHRISTOPHOROS GAURAS, Pansebastos sebastos; d. 1264/5 as the

monk CHARITON; origins unknown. 17D N. GABRAS, fl. in Constantinople before the end of the thirteenth century; mentioned in the typikon of the monastery of Constantine Lips (Fenerisamesciti) as former owner of some buildings in the city which he sold to Theodora, wife of Michael VIII Palaiologos and re-foundress of the monastery.16

17E N. GABRAS, fl. before the end of the thirteenth century; mentioned in a letter of Gregory of Cyprus, Patriarch of Constantinople (1283—1289).1”

18 MANUEL DOUKAS KOMNENOS GAURAS, fl. 1300/1. Mistra

19 N. GABRAS KOMNENOS, fl. early fourteenth century. ? Con-

stantinople. 19A DEMETRIOS GABRAS, and family, fl. 1300. Rentina 19B MICHAEL GABRAS, fl. 1300; son of Demetrios; a paroikos of the

Monastery of Esphigmenou in the village of Brasta in the katepanikion

of Rentina to the east of Thessalonica; husband of Eirene, with a daughter called Maria.

19C PHILOTHEOS GABRAS, fl. 1300; brother of Michael and son of

Demetrios; a paroikos of the same monastery in the same village;

husband of Kale, with a son Basil and a daughter Maria. 19D BASIL GABRAS, fl. 1300; a paroikos of Esphigmenou at Brasta; father-in-law of one Demetrios. 19E N. GABRAS, fl. 1300; a paroikos of the Monastery of Esphigmenou in the katepanikion of Stephaniana (metochion of St George) in the theme of Thessalonica; son-in-law of one Manuel Koutzoubelis, husband of Maria, father of John and Theodora.18 ments now lost; nevertheless the tone of this entry is more fulsome than those in the known Acts of Vazelon and this Kosmas Gabras is otherwise unrecorded. His existence is therefore not certain. 13 VY. Laurent, Deux chrysobulles inédits des empereurs de Trébizonde Alexis IV— Jean IV et David II. ’Apyetov Tlovtov XVIII (1953) 264. 14 MM, VI, pp. 214—216, No 87.

15 R. Devreesse, Codices Vaticani Graeci, II. Vatican City 1937, p. 54; the notice (cod. 364, f. 294) bears the date 2nd March, indiction 8, A. M. 6772. The editor dates it to A.D. 1265, but 1264 would be better. 16 H. Delehaye, Deux typica byzantins de l’époque des Paléologues, Bruxelles 1921,

p. 131, 45; R. Janin, La géographie ecclésiastique de l’empire Byzantin, part 1, Tome III, 2nd ed., Paris 1969, pp. 307—310. 17 §. Eustratiadis in "ExxAno.taotuxosg Pagoc IV (1909) 107, Ne ,cv’.

18 J. Lefort, Actes d’Esphigménou. (= Archives de l’Athos VI) Paris 1973, Ne 8,

lines 57—60, pp. 70—71; lines 15—16, p. 68.

Ii] 42 20—24. Family of DEMETRIOS GABRAS CHRITO(U})S, fl. 1300. Rebe- — nikeia.

25—28. Family of GEORGE GABRAS, fl. 1315—1320. Rebenikeia 29—30. Family of JOHN and MICHAL GABRAS, early fourteenth century savants. Constantinople.19 30A DEMETRIOS GAURAS, fl. 1320 in Serres; mentioned in the first part (tagadotiw0ov yoduua, 6 May, indiction 3) of a compound document as a witness, and in the following part (xoatyjetov, most probably of the same year) as a landowner.2 30B ICHYS GABRAS, fl. c. 1326 in Berrhoia; mentioned in the will of

the skouterios Theodore Sarantenos as the previous owner of one of

his estates.21

31 N. GABRAS, d. before 1347. Kalamaria 32 JOHN GABRAS KABALLARIOS, fl. 1348. Serres

33 N. GABRAS, fl. 1356. ? Thrace 334. THEODORE GABRAS, fl. 1357, in Constantinople; signatory of a patriarchal document.” 33B MICHAEL GABRAS, fl. 1357, in Constantinople.”

33C ALEXIOS GABRAS, fl. fourteenth century, in ? Constantinople; Cod. Vat. Gr. 28, f. 254v contains an epigram esis “AdéEvov tov TaBody, where he is called the ucioat.*4 33D JOHN GA(B)RAS ?MELITINIOTES, fl. fourteenth century in ?Con-

Stantinople, but cf. no. 16; — epi tou kanikleiou in a monocondylon in Cod. Vat. Gr. 266, f. 1r.2°

33E N. GABRAS, fl. ? fourteenth century; of unknown origin; noticed simply as ho gabras.*® 33F JOHN GABRAS, fl. 1375 in Berrhoia, when he failed to claim, with

his mother-in-law ARIANITISSA, the metochion of St. John the Prodromos and Baptist, called Petra, from the monastery of Batopedion, Mount Athos, on the grounds of hereditary right.2’ 33G JOHN GABRAS, captive, and his wife (33H) MARIA AGIOPETRE-

TISSA GABRAINA, subjects of patriarchal arbitration in December 1399.28

19 See now Kourousis, Gabalas, pp. 3—98 and Fatouros, Gabras, 1, pp. 45—46,

231—232; St. Fassoulakis, The Byzantine Family of Raoul-Ral(l)es, Athens 1973, p. 35, and G. E. Pentogalos, Ot iateimts yvmoets "Iwone tod Paxevdttyn xat h oyetiny avexdoty extatoAn tod Mizand Tapoa. “EAdnvixy Etatoeia “Istogiac tio tateimiic (1970) 5—12. Up to four personae may lurk under Ne 29 (John Gabras). 20“... ano thy AovxoBixerav xvootv Anuntotouv tot Tovod, ...”; W. Regel—E. Kurtz— B. Korablev, Actes de Zographou (= Actes de l’Athos, IV}, Bu3. Bpem. XIII (1907),

IInoaotnpa 1, p. 44, Ne 19; the editors date the document to 1321 but as one of the following parts of it (ibid., p. 45) bears the date A. M. 6829, indiction 4, the first

part could be dated to A. D. 1320. For Loukobikeia see G. I. Theocharidis, Katenavixia

tHc Muxedoviag: Suupodn eic ty Srorxyntixjy totootay xat yewyoagiav tic Maxedoviag xara. TOUS 1LETA THY PQOayxoxoutiav yodvouc. In: Maxedovixd, TInodetnua 1, Thessaloniki 1954,

pp. 53 and 89.

21: G. I. Theocharidis, Mia diadyxyn xat pia dixn BuCavtivy: "Avéxdota Patonebiva Eyyoa-

pa tov IA’ atavog meet zo wovijc Tloodeéuov Béootac. In: Maxedovexa, Tlaodetnua 2, Thessaloniki 1962, pp. 17—28, esp. p. 21. 22 MM, I, p. 370. 23 MM, I, p. 371.

241. Mercati and P. F. de’Cavalieri, Codices Vaticani Graeci, I. Roma 1923, p. 26. 29 Ibid., p. 350; cf. Mercati, Notizie, p. 185, Ne 3 and p. 188, Ne 1. 26 Devreesse, Codices Vat. Graeci, II, p. 136; the notice is in cod. 421, f. 181.

- guheocharidis, in: Maxedovixa, TIlaodcetnia 2, pp. 42 and 51; see also pp. 39 and 28 MM, II, pp. 299—300, Ne 123.

I] 43

33H MATTHAIOS GABRAS, fl. end 14th century. Copyist of manuscript of three Tragedies of Sophocles.?9

33] CONSTANTINE GABRAS. ? 15th century. Priest and hymnographer.%

33K EIRENE GABRAINA, c. 1400; daughter-in-law of Michael Monem-

basiotes, mentioned in a patriarchal gramma.*

33L DEMETRIOS GAURAS [?], c. 1400, a witness (GAAa 51 magovtos xt ro Anuntotov tov Lavoot)s>

Nos. 34—40. The Khovra of the Greek principality of Theodore-Mangup in the Crimea, c. 1391—c. 1458 34—40 Family of STEPAN VASILYEVICH KHOVRA. Gotthia

Nos. 41—43. Selected Gabrades in the Tourkokratia, c. 1555—c. 1653 41 MICHAEL GABRAS, fl. 1555—1565. Constantinople

42 CYRIL GABRAS. Already noted as Grand Skevophylax of the

Great Church in March 1604. A N. GABRAS, probably identical, appears

as Grand Chartophylax of the Great Church in March 1606 in a patriarchal charter for the monastery of St. John the Prodromos on Mount Menoikion, Serres.%! |

43 N. GABRAS, fl. before 1653. Thera (Santorini) A group of Cretan Gabrades, the earliest in 1497, has already been

noted.°2 To these may be added GIORGIO GAURA, priest of the churches

of Christ, St. Anna and the Holy Spirit at Makryteichos, near Knossos, and GIOVANNI GAURA, priest of the church of St. Eirene at Spelia,

about 8 km. from Herakleion, both listed on 4th September 1548. The slight evidence that these Gabrades had originally emigrated direct from the Pontos to Crete has been discussed. The new evidence for Gabrades in the Miletos-Priene area in the period of the Nicaean empire (Nos. 11A and 12A} may hint at the origins of those in the Aegean — although mention of a sea-faring Gabras on Samos must be discounted

as a forgery.°4 Chios, in particular, provides a whole nest of later

Gabrades. The first of which we have mention is ANTONIO GRAVANO {or ANTONIOS GRABAS) who signed a letter to the dogs and government of Genoa on 30th January 1567. He is named in a Turkish document of 15th March of the same year (which survives in two Greek versions }

and is again mentioned in another Turkish document (which survives

22 Je. E. Granstrem, Karanoe epeweckux pykonuceli aenunepadcKkux xpaxunuw (Born. 6: Pykonucu XIV e.), Buz. Bpem. XXVIII (1968) 254. 30 Idem, Bu3. Bpem. XXXI (1971) 139 (? the same as the iegets TuBotc perkoyeaqos

of Cod. Mon. Metamorph. Meteor. 192. — N. A. Bees, Ta yeieoyeupa tHv Meté@oov, Athens 1967, Ne 192, 35). 302 MM, II, pp. 439—441, no. 608. 50b MM, II, p. 444, no. 610.

1960) 101.

31 Pp. N. Papageorgiou, Ai Séooat xal ta moodoteta ta mEQl tag Léooag zal H povy ‘Tmuvvou tod ITIoodeéuov. Byz. Zeitschr. III (1894) 275; not in A. Guillou, Les Archives de Saint-Tean-Prodrome sur le mont Ménécée, Paris 1955. 32 Bryer, Gabrades, p. 185; cf. Manousakas, Ilekoxovvnovwxa III—IV (1958—1959;

35 MS Harvard Riant 53, f. 10r; cf. Z. N. Tsirpanlis, Néa ovowyeta oyettxa ue tHV

EXXAHGLAGTLXY LotOOLa tis Bevetoxgatotpevns Keytnys (1380¢—170¢5 ai.) ano avexdota Bevetixd

eyvyouga. “EkAnvexd XX (1967} 42—106.

34 TIhovoAdytov TuBpod tot Sapiov: K. A. Sarafis Pitzipios, “EAAnvixdc attoxeatogrxdc Stékoc. Athens 1907; reviewed by Sp. P. Lambros, Néog ‘EAAnvonvjpwv IV (1907) 250.

I] 44

in an Italian version) of 7th May 1578.5 The Gabrades of Chios include PANTOLEON GABRAS (fl. 1611); DESPOINA GABRA (fl. 1612); BENE-

DETTO GRAVANO (fl. 1616); IOANNES GABRAS (fl. 1625) with his

wife or relative KLARA GABRA; MICHAEL GABRAS (fl. 1632); EMM(ANOUEL) GABRAS (fl. 1661—1663); and STEPHANOS GABRAS

(fl. 1728).5° Just before the massacre of Chios, the Chian MICHAEL GABRAS is mentioned as parish councillor of the church of St. John of the Chians in Constantinople in 1812 and 1820.%” Although the Gabrades might be associated with only one place name

in mainland Greece,*® there are a number in their earlier home in the Pontos which may be connected with them. Gavraz, near Sebasteia

(Sivas) has already been noted.’ In the Chaldian and Matzoukan

heartland of the Pontos, home of Nos. 3, 15, 15A, and 16, the family name survived and five place names, almost certainly associated with the family, were in use until 1922.49 To the west and about 5 km. s-s-e of Pontic Tripolis (Tirebolu) is Kavraz, near the Kavraz Dere, a western tributary of the Philabonites (Harsit) River; the name is unusual because it is virtually the only modern one which appears to be Greek in an area overrun by Cepni Turkomans in the fourteenth century.*! To the east of the smallholding of no. 16B, in the former Trapezuntine theme of Greater Lazia,42 an alternative name for Vice (Findikli), between Ardesen and Arhavi (Archabis) is Gavra.** So the Gabrades may unwittingly be remembered today in what may well have been in, or close to, their original homeland in the tenth century.

35 Ph. P. Argenti, Chius Vincta..., Cambridge 1941, pp. 113—117, Ne 47, pp. 208—220, Nos. 85—86 and pp. 220—226, Ne 87; see also pp. xciv, cxxxviii, cxl.

36 This group is recorded in a ‘Latin’ MS in Chios, mentioned by G. I. Zolotas,

Iotoopia tis Xtou..., I, Part 2. Athens 1923, pp. 314—315. Zolotas also identifies Gabras

with Dabras, a surname which has survived in the Basileonoikon village of Chios.

S. F. has some doubts as to Zolotas’ identifications of Gravano and Grabas with Gabras

(loc. cit.; see also HI, Part 1, Athens 1926, p. 96) but they are included because he

was unable to check the ‘Latin’ MS — probably of the Catholic minority of Chios.

37 G. P. Georgiadis, ‘O év Takata tegdc vadc tot dylou "Iwavvov tHv Xiwyv. Constantinople 1898, pp. 325—326. 38 Korousis, Gabalas, p. 88: t« TuBouxd in Macedonia. 33 Bryer, Gabrades, p. 187 Index B. 40 As a family in G. Zerzelidis, Oixoyéveiec tio "“Avw Matootxuc, “Agyetov THdévtov XXX (1971) 166, 179; [TaBo& ta Kidoxw: G. Kandilaptis, Aaoygagixa Kaddiac. “Aeyetov IIovtov XV (1950) 134; TaBod to neyo’: D. E. Oikonomidis, “Aoyvodnohic. “Agyeiov IaévtovIII (1931) 150; Popoato gaytv: D. K. Papadopoulos, “Aonuata Sicttya tot yootou Ztav-

oi zat tov méous. “Aoyetov Ilévtov VIII (1938) 142; tot TaBod 16 Srévev: G. Zerzelidis, Tomwvuruxo tiie “Avo Mar Covxac. “Soyeiov IIovtov XXIII (1959) 151. For a fifth, see Bryer, Gabrades, p. 168, Ne 22. 41 Miyani tod Tavaoétov, Teot tav Meyakwv Kouvynvay, ed. O. Lampsidis, Athens 1958, p. 79. 42 Laurent, “Aoyetov Tlévtov XVIII (1953) 265.

45 See the Turkish 1: 200,000 and 1: 500,000 maps; Vice as Gavra is only on the latter, which indicates a nearby ancient site.

Il 45

INDEX OF GABRADES Alexios, Alexis, nos. 33C, 35, 38 John, Ioannes, Iannikios, Giovanni,

Andronikos, no. 15A ios. L1A, 12, 12A, 29, 32, 33D, 33F,

Anna, no. 27 33G, 37, pp. 43—44 Antonios, p. 43 K...., no. 21 Basil, no. 19D Kale, no. 24 Benedetto, p. 44 Klara, p. 44 Christophoros, no. 17C Kosmas, no. 16A Constantine, Konstantinos, nos. 1, 5, 8, M...., no. 23

12B, 33] Manuel, no. 18

Cyril, Kyrillos, no. 42 Maria, nos. 28, 33H, 40 Demetrios, nos.19A, 20, 30A, 33L Mathaios, no. 33H Despoina, p. 44 Michael, Mikhail, nos. 2, 7, 13, 17A, 19B,

Eirene 33K, n. 5 30, 33B, 41, p. 44 Efromiya, p. 38, n. 1 N., nos. 1A, 6, 9, 11, 14, 15, 17, 17D, 17E, Emmanouel, Manuel, no. 18, p. 44 19, 19F, 26, 31, 33, 33E, 42, 43 Eudokia, no. 17B Olobei, no. 39

pn. 43 Phiotheos, no. 19C

George, Georgios, Giorgio, nos. 16, 22, 25, Panteleon, p. 44

Gregory, Gregorios, Grigory, nos. 4, 11B, stephanos, Stepan, nos. 11C, 34, p. 44

36 Theodore, Theodoros, nos. 3, 16B, 33A

Hasan, no. 10

IV

THE FATE OF GEORGE KOMNENOS RULER OF TREBIZOND (1266-1280) A famous entry in Vakhushti’s Georgian Royal Annals describes how the Kartlian king Dmitri II, tributary of the Ikkhan Argun of Persia, was brought and betrayed by one of his nobles to his overlord at the Mongol winter quarters on the Mugan steppes in 1289.1 This paper proposes that Dmitri’s father-in-law, George of Trebizond, may also have been a Mongol tributary and have met something of the same fate nine years earlier by being brought to near Tabriz, the summer capital of the Ikkhans, and betrayed by his nobles and family to Argun’s father, Abaga, and suggests motives for the conspiracy. But whereas Dmitri was executed and earned the epithet of “The Devoted’, George was probably remembered in Trebizond as an embarrassment, identified with hazardous alliances, and may

have escaped execution to return home as “The Vagabond’. | George Komnenos’ comparatively long reign (1266-80) coincided with major political upheavals in Anatolia, then dominated by the Mongols, with the careers of Michael VIII Palaiologos, the Mamluk Baybars and Charles of Anjou, with the Reunion of the Churches at Lyons and with the opening up of Mongol trade with the West. All these factors will be proposed as having contributed to George's fate, but his reign is the most obscure of all the rulers of Trebizond and George himself is a decidedly enigmatic figure. Discussion of it has hitherto been confined to two puzzling references in the Trapezuntine court chronicle of Michael Panaretos,

which was composed over a century later.2 Panaretos dates important imperial movements, such as the return of the Grand Komnenos John I] from Constantinople to Trebizond in 1283, in meticulous detail, suggesting

that he had access to some formal Annals.? But for other events in the 1 M. F. Brosset, Histoire de la Géorgie, depuis lAntiquité jusqu’au XIX€ siécle, 1 (St PB, 1849-50), pp. 602-7 (after Vakhushti); the same’s Les ruines d’Ani (St PB, 1860), 1, p. 172, and Matériaux pour servir a Vhistoire de la Géorgie depuis Il’an 1201 jusqu’en 1755, Mém. de PAcad. imp. des sc. de St PB, VI® série, v (3-4) (1841), p. 178.

I am grateful to Professor Michael Rogers and members of the Byzantine seminars in the Universities of London and Oxford for discussion of this paper. 2 Ed. Od. Lampsidis, Mtyana tod Tlavapétov, Ilepi tév Meyarwv Kouvyvey, [lovtraxat "Epevvat (= “Apyetov I[Iévtou, 22 [1958]), (Athens, 1958), pp. 10-12. 8 A possible source was the wallpaintings in the palace of Trebizond, described by Bessarion: “‘All round, on the walls, is painted the choir of the emperors, both those

who have ruled our land and their ancestors; also painted there are the dangers our city has undergone and those who in attacking it have done so to their own detriment.”

IV

The fate of George Komnenos, ruler of Trebizond 333

earlier part of his chronicle, of which he was not a personal witness, he seems to have followed a selective court tradition which chose to remember what was convenient. For example, there is no mention of the thirteenth-

century Seljuk Sultans or Mongol Ilkhans, let alone any suggestion that they may have been suzerains of Trebizond. Other events are left curiously

vague, such as the nature of the foundation of the empire of Trebizond itself. Panaretos could not omit the reign of George Komnenos altogether,

but, even a century later, there is the mark of evasiveness of an official

court communiqué on a ruler best forgotten in his reference to it. Panaretos ,

- describes events after the death of ‘‘The Expert General” and ‘Most Fortunate’ Grand Komnenos Manuel I (1238-1263) thus: ‘(The reign of Andronikos [II] the Grand Komnenos)4 And the lord Andronikos Komnenos, [Manuel’s]-son by the lady Anna Xylaloé the despoina, having been singled out and promoted by him, ruled for three years and died in 6774 [ = 1266]. And the lord George Komnenos, son of the lord Manuel by the lady Eirene Syrikaina, ruled for fourteen years. Then he was betrayed in the mountain of Taurezion (év t@ dpet tod TavpeCtov), through a conspiracy of the archontes, and was taken prisoner in the month of June [sc. 1280].

(The reign of John the Grand Komnenos)

| In the same year [Manuel’s] 2nd son, the lord John the Grand Komnenos, succeeded to the sceptre ... After one year ... he went to the City [of Constantinople] where he married the lady Eudokia Komnene Palaiologine the porphyrogennete .. .”’ (daughter of Michael VIII Palaiologos, before 11 December 1282).° “In April 6790 [ = 1282], David [IV (V) the Clever (1243-1293)], king of Iberia, invaded the marches of Trebizond, but returned empty-handed. On the twenty-fifth of April 6791 [ = 1283]. .., the lord John the Grand

Komnenos came back from Constantinople to Trebizond with the Palaiologine who was great with child, and the lord Alexios[IT] the Grand Komnenos was born in 6792 [i.e. between September and December 1283]. Then the lord George Komnenos, called the ‘Vagabond’ (IlAavov eAeyov), came and was captured, and after this attack occurred the reign and sudden flight of the lady Theodora Komnene, first daughter of the

lord Manuel the Grand Komnenos by Rousountana from Iberia. And “Kaloioannes’ Komnenos was restored to the throne and ruled everywhere

for eighteen years ... But during his reign the Turks seized Chalybia and

1282.

Ed. S. Lampros, Brnocaplwvoc *Eyxautov ele TpareCotvta (Athens, 1916), p. 47 (= Néog “EdAAnvouvjuev, 13 [1916], p. 189); cf. Cyril Mango, The Art of the Byzantine Empire, 312-1453 (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1972), p. 253.

4 The subtitles are inserted in the margins of Cod. Marc. Gr. 608, ff. 288a—b, in a different hand. § I; e. the date of Michael’s death, which Panaretos incorrectly gives as 20 December

X

IV 334

launched a great invasion [into Trebizond proper], so that all those places became uninhabited.’’6 An explanation to Panaretos’ seemingly inconsequential narrative lies in the answers to two questions: where was the mountain of Taurezion ?, and why was George Komnenos ‘betrayed’ there ? The answer to the first allows an insight to the second question. 1. WHERE WAS THE MOUNTAIN OF TAUREZION?

Noting Panaretos’ account of the loss of Chalybia to the Cepni Turkomans’ during the reign of John II (1280-1297), cited above, historians of

Trebizond have surmised that George was betrayed on an expedition against the Turkomans. With less conviction, some of the same historians have surmised that the mountain of Taurezion can be identified with the Tauros.® The suppositions are mutually contradictory for the Turkoman menace came from Canik and Chalybia (west of Trebizond from Amisos,

now Samsun, to Oinaion, now Unye) and Cheriana (north of Erzincan round modern Ulusiran), some hundreds of miles from the Tauros range.

But the identification has led to speculation that the extent, or influence, of the empire of Trebizond was particularly wide at this period. For example Dr Lampsidis maintains that “le pouvoir des Grands Comnénes...

dans cette région immense, allait au dela d’Erzigian [i.e. Erzincan] jusqu’au mont de Taurézion.’’® There may in fact have been a Trape6 Panaretos, ed. Lampsidis, pp. 625-638; ed. A. Gamarelidze, Mikhel Panaretosis Trapizonis Khronika, Masalebi sakharthvelosa da Kavkasiis istorlisathvis, 33 (Tblisi, 1960), pp. 177°-19*".

“The Cepni are Panaretos’ ‘TCamvideq? (ed. Lampsidis, pp. 681%, 791%). See

F,Simer, Osmanli devrinde Anadolu’da bazi Ucoklu Oguz boylarina mensup tesekkiller, Iktisat Fakitiltes1 Mecmuasi, 10 (Ankara, 1952), pp. 441-453; and A. Bryer, Some notes on the Laz and Tzan, Bedi Kartlisa, 21-2 (1966), pp. 191-2.

8 Panaretos, ed. Lampsidis, 116; Panaretos, ed. Gamarelidze, 55-6; J. P. Fallmerayer, Original-Fragmente, Chroniken, Inschnften und anderes Material zur Geschichte des Kaiserthums Trapezunt, K. Bay. Akad., Phil. u. Hist. Kl]., IV, 1 (1844), p- 75; the same’s Geschichte des Kaiserthums Trapezunt (Miinchen, 1827; Hildesheim, 1964), p. 133; Sabbas Ioannides, ‘Iotopia xal Ltatiatixyn Teamefodvtosg xal tig Tept auTHVY Nwoacg (CP, 1870), p. 76; G. Finlay, A History of Greece, 4 (Oxford, 1877),

p. 341; F. I. Uspensku, Ocherki iz Trapezuntskoi Imperu (Leningrad, 1929), p. 66; W. Miller, Trebizond. The last Greek Empire [of the Byzantine Era] (London, 1956; Chicago, 1969), p. 27; Chrysanthos (Philippides), ‘H ’ExxAnot« TpameCotvroc, “Apy. Ilovrov 4-5 (1933), pp. 334-9; E. Janssens, Trébizonde en Colchide (Bruxelles, 1969), pp. 85-6: “Au cours d’une expédition menée avec ces chevaliers hors des frontiéres de

Empire, [Georges] tomba aux mains des Turkménes ... On pense que [Tauresion] pourrait étre l’un ou Pautre contrefort des chaines du Taurus ou de l’Anti-Taurus ... c’est ’hypothése la plus vraisemblable en |’absence d’un autre exemple de cette dénomination dans toute la littérature byzantine.”’ ° OQ. Lampsidis, OU en sommes-nous de I’histoire des Grands Comnénes?, Actes du

- XIle Cong. Int. d’Et. Byz., 2 (Beograd, 1964), p. 166. Erzincan was in fact something

of a cultural noman’s land, for, as Ibn Battutah pointed out, it had an Armenian majority whose bishop enjoyed more than local influence. The position of Greek and

other Christians there is more confused. In 1314 three Roman Catholic missionaries

IV

The fate of George Komnenos, ruler of Trebizond 335

zuntine sphere of influence south of the Pontic Alps in 1222-1230, when Mugith al-Din Tugrilsah of Erzurum (the ‘Melik? of the Greek sources), seems to have been some sort of vassal of the Grand Komnenos,?!° but

soon after Trebizond was owing 200 lances in military service to the Seljuks,!4 who were in turn defeated by the Mongols at Kése Dag, near Cheriana, in 1243. By that date Saraf al-Din was governor in Erzincan. In fact, even if the empire of the Grand Komnenoi had once included fortresses such as Paipertes (Bayburt) in the south and Sber (Ispir) in the east — which is doubtful — it would have lost them long before 1243, while it is certain that Trebizond never claimed Koloneia (Sebinkarahisar) in the west.12 With such limited boundaries it is out of the question that George Komnenos was fighting on his own account in the distant Tauros in 1280. One solution to the matter is to find a Tauros nearer Trebizond than its

Cilician namesake. Ioannides (followed by Uspenskii) named a Tauros were martyred in Erzincan and in 1318/9 its Greek bishop (who was not subject to Trebizond) complained of the dire state of his establishment. However in 1342 comes the evidence of the only known Greek inscription from Erzincan, the epitaph of a Greek Ulu Hatun (1. e. senior wife of a Muslim ruler), who became a ‘presbyterissa’, presumably after her husband’s death, and died on 28 December 1342. So there is no evidence

for direct Trapezuntine influence in Erzincan at any time, and by the middle years of the fourteenth century it was, under Ahis Ayna Beg, definitely hostile to the empire.

See The Travels of Ibn Battutah, tr. H. A. R. Gibb, 2 (Cambridge, 1962), p. 437; . C. Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey (London, 1968), pp. 231, 286; P.G. Golubovich, Biblioteca Bio-Bibliografica della Terra Santa e dell’Oriente Francescano (Roma, 1906-13), 2, pp. 64-8, 544; 3, pp. 183-4; M. Bihl, De duabus epistolis fratrum minorum Tartariae Aquilonaris An. 1323, Arch. Franc. Hist., 16 (1923), p. 90; A. Bryer, Trebizond and Rome, ’Apy. Ilévrov 26 (1964), p. 296; F. Miklosich and J. Miller, Acta et Diplomata (Vindobonae, 1860-90), 1, p. 83; A. H. Wachter, Der Verfall des Griechentums in Kleinasien im, XIV. Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 1903), p. 8; F. Cumont, Inscription de l’époque des Comnénes de Trébizonde, Mélanges Pirenne 1 (Paris, 1926), pp. 67-72; Panaretos, ed. Lampsidis, 6815, 744. M. Izzedin, Notes sur les mariages princiers en Orient au Moyen Age, Journal Asiatique, 257 (1969), p. 151, by suggesting that this Ahis Ayna Beg married a daughter of Alexios ITI, 1s confusing him with Taharten. 10 Panaretos, ed. Lampsidis, 619; John (Joseph) Lazaropoulos, ed. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, Fontes Historiae Imperii Trapezuntini, 1 (St PB, 1897; Amsterdam, 1965), pp. 30-1, 76, 116-132; Bessarion, Enkomion,ed. Lampros, p. 50 (= Néog ‘EAA. 13 [1916], p. 192); Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, p. 125.

11 Item dominus de Trapesondes. CC. ei lances dabat ...‘‘: Simon de Saint-

Quentin, Histoire des Tartares, ed. J. Richard (Paris), 1965), p. 70. This would be a contingent of about 1,000 men. 12 On Bayburt, see S. Ballance, The Byzantine Churches of Trebizond, Anatolian Studies, 10 (1960), p. 167 and fig. 20; and D. Winfield and J. Wainwnight, Some By-

zantine Churches from the Pontus, Anatol. Stud. 12 (1962), p. 138. On Ispir see D. Winfield, A Note on the South-Eastern Borders of the Empire of Trebizond in the Thirteenth Century, Anatol. Stud. 12 (1962), pp. 163-172. On Koloneia, see H. T. Okutan, Sebinkarahisar ve Civari (Sebinkarahisar, 1948), pp. 73-96 and a forthcoming Dumbarton Oaks Study on the monuments and topography of the Pontos by A. Bryer and D. Winfield.

IV 336

mountain between the medieval monastery of Soumela and the later settlements of Santa.}* This sole nineteenth-century reference is puzzling,

for it is not confirmed in any medieval source or in a recent exhaustive study of the toponyms of Santa,!* nor have I been able to find the name used on the spot for the mountain which divides Soumela from the Santa

valley. Its modern name, Karakabanda§, is certainly the same as the Kampana of the medieval Greek sources and the ‘Cabanum?’ in the accounts of Edward I’s embassy (which camped on the mountain on 22 July 1292) and in the Genoese-Trapezuntine treaty of 26 October 1314.1°

Ioannides’ Tauros is therefore dubious. A final possibility is that Panaretos regarded the Tauros in the omnibus

and classicising sense in which the Trapezuntine Lazaropoulos, or the Byzantine Kritoboulos, were to use the name for almost all eastern Anato-

lian mountain ranges.!® This would allow the placing of the mountain anywhere that is historically convenient. But, unlike Lazaropoulos or Kritoboulos, Panaretos did not use such archaic or grandiose names in his

relentlessly unimaginative chronicle. He mentions the mountain of Taurezion which is, quite simply, not the same name as the Tauros.

Mer Chrysanthos Philippides and others have sought a Taurezion nearer Trebizond than the Tauros.1” Some hope hase been found in a fourteenth-century Antiochene bishopric of ‘Tavpeq or “Tavpetiov’, which was, perhaps, a suffragan of Theodosioupolis (Erzurum). In c. 1300 Gre-

gory Chioniades, the astronomer, told his patron, the Grand Komnenos Alexios II, that he was taking up the position of bishop ‘‘xata thy moAtw opt tod Tavpét’’.18 He travelled to his see from Trebizond. In 1375 Paul Tagaris, formerly self-styled Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem and later

a more-or-less genuine Latin Patriarch of Constantinople, was consecrated bishop of ‘TavpéCiov??® in the Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch. 13 Toannides, Trebizond, p. 245; F. Uspenskui and V. Beneshevich, Actes de Bazélon (Leningrad, 1927), p. xxx and s. v. ‘Kampana’.

14 EF, Athanasiades, Tomwvbuta tH¢ Lavtas, Apy. [lévtov, 29 (1969), p. 133-161. 15 Atti della Societa ligure di storia patria, 13 (1877-84), pp. 517, 589-669; G. Zerzelides, Tomwvuutxd tio “Ava MatCovxac, Apy. I[dvtov 23 (1959), p. 128; Bryer, AIT, 26 (1964), p. 301 Nn. S.

16 Lazaropoulos, ed. Papadpoulos-Kerameus, FHIT, pp. 5, 128; Kritoboulos, ed. V. Grecu (Bucarest, 1963), pp. 277-9. 17 Chrysanthos, Apy. [lévtov 4-5 (1933), 335-9. 18 Chioniades, ed. T. E. Evangelides, Avo Bu avtwa xelueva (Hermoupolis, 1910), p. 15; ed. J. B. Papadopoulos, Tpnyoptov Xrovuadou tod dctpovéuou érrotoaal (Thessalonike, 1929), pp. 43-4. Cf. D. Pingree, Gregory Chioniades and Palaiologan astronomy, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 18 (1965), p. 141; U. Lampsides, Georges Chrysococcis, le médecin, et son oeuvre, BZ, 38 (1938), pp. 312-322. 19 Miklosich-Miiller, AD 2, pp. 227-8; cf. D. M. Nicol, The Confessions of a bogus

| Patriarch: Paul Tagaris Palaiologos, Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem and Catholic Patriarch of Constantinople in the fourteenth century, Journ. Eccl. Hist., 21 (1970), p. 292 and n. 2.

IV

The fate of George Komnenos, ruler of Trebizond 337

He embarked from Trebizond for further adventures in the West the following year.?°

If, as seems probable, Chioniades’ see of Taurez can be indentified with Tagaris’ see of Taurezion, the name must be almost certainly the the same as Panaretos’ Taurezion. Our information so far is that Taurezion was an Antiochene diocese, that incorporated a city and a mountain and that a route to it led from Trebizond. Turning to the Antiochene Notitiae, curious problems of coincidence

| arise. The twelfth metropolis of sixth-century lists of the Patriarchate (and a tenth-century version based upon this earlier tradition) is Dara (Anastasioupolis, now Istilil) in Mesopotamia, which had three suffragans, including a Theodosioupolis (Raisana, now Ra’s al-‘Ain), which lay very close to Dara — the two are now divided by the Turkish-Syrian border.” A later Notitia substitutes a Theodosioupolis with seven bishoprics, one of which is called ‘TapotvtG«’? in Greek and *Taroza? in Latin.?? It has been

demonstrated that this Theodosioupolis is not the Mesopotamian city of the earlier lists but is the Anatolian stronghold of the same name — now Erzurum.?3 It has even been suggested that Anatolian Theodosioupolis became part of the Church of Antioch in the eleventh century through a confusion with its Mesopotamian (and then abandoned) namesake.*4 To

20 One might suspect that he picked the see of Taurezion up on his journey from Jerusalem to Trebizond and maybe never visited it. His only known action as Bishop of Taurezion, a hitherto unnoticed incident in the career of this presumptuous prelate, was revealed in October 1384 when a Joseph asked for confirmation of his consecration by the ,,irreverend‘‘ Tagaris as Bishop of Trapezuntine Limnia. Tagaris had almost certainly exceeded his canonical rights in the consecration, for Limnia lay within the Orthodox Patriarchate of Constantinople and not of Antioch, and its dependence upon the near defunct metropolis of Amaseia (Amasya), rather than that of Trebizond, meant

| that it was the direct concern of the Church of Constantinople. Because Limnia lay

within the empire, but not the Church, of Trebizond, there must always have been anomalies of consecration, to which the wayward Tagaris provided a solution which Bishop Joseph afterwards regretted. One might even doubt if the see of Limnia was active in 1375—6, for the Grand Komnenos Alexios III had to reassert his authority in the place in October 1379 and it was the capital of a Cepni Turkoman emirate from before 1386. See Miklosich-Miiller, AD 2, pp. 64-6 (cf. 1, pp. 69-71); and Panaretos, ed. Lampsidis, pp. 7911, 8013. Limnia lies at the mouth of the Iris( Yesil Irmak) but I was unable to find any traces of it among the delta marshes in 1971. See A. Bryer, The littoral of the Empire of Trebizond in two fourteenth-century portolano maps, ‘Apx. IIévtov 24 (1961), pp. 101-2. 21 G. Parthey, Hieroclis Synecdemus et notitiae Graecae episcopatuum (Berlin, 1866), p. 142; S. Vailhé, Une Notitia episcopatuum d’Antioche du Xe siécle, Echos d’Orient, 10 (1907), pp. 90, 96; the same’s La Notitia episcopatuum d’Antioche du

patriarche Anastase, VIe siécle, EO, 10 (1907), pp. 139, 145, 3603. |

22 H. Gelzer, Ungedruckte und wenig bekannte Bistiimerverzeichnisse der oriental1schen Kirche, BZ, 1 (1892), p. 249. 23 Gelzer, BZ, 1 (1892), pp. 268-9. 24S. Vailhé in The Catholic Encyclopaedia, 5 (New York, 1909), s. v. ‘Erzerum’.

IV 338

add to the confusion of coincidence, Dara(s) was in the later Middle Ages “co vov Tadoe@’, or “Acpasg to viv Acyéuevov Tavpec’’.25

So far, so good. It would seem that the fourteenth-century bishopric held by Chioniades and Tagaris was a suffragan of Anatolian Theodosioupolis whose name, like that of its sister city of Dara-Taures, mysteriously but helpfully coincided with Mesopotamiam counterparts. Hence it could be argued that George Komnenos was betrayed somewhere in the moun-

tains between Trapezuntine Chaldia and the plain of Theodosioupolis (Erzurum), or (as Chrysanthos suggests), the Byzantine ‘New Mesopotamia’.26 These regions are outside, but conveniently close to, the probable marches of George's state.

This solution, however convenient, must be rejected. There are no medieval or modern place names known to me which correspond to a bishopric, city or mountain of Taurezion in these parts and Taurezion is no more the same name as Taroutza than is the Tauros. Taroutza no doubt lay in Armenia: Peeters argued for Arué (i. e. ‘ta [’A]povtCa”) in Aragacotn;2’? Honigmann proposed, more convincingly, Taruk? in Shirak ;?8 an alternative spelling of the name ‘Tapovv’,2? makes one wonder if it was simply a variant of the famous ‘Taron’. Gelzer identified Taroutza with Tabriz,°° but, as will be shown, it hardly corresponds to Byzantine

and other medieval names for that city. The likelihood remains Honigmann’s identification. At all events, Taroutza was not Taurezion. ‘“Adoaus TO viv Acyéuevoy Taupéc”” was taken first by Honigmann to an

unhappy lodging in the Tauric Doros in the Crimea,?! then retrieved by Neugebauer (on astronomical evidence) for Mesopotamian Dara**— which, unfortunately, was in ruins in the fourteenth century — and finally sent by

Pingree (on more convincing astronomical grounds) to Tabriz.** It is fortunate that medieval astronomy can come to our aid, for one would be

hard put to it to link Dara with Tabriz on any other grounds. But, by elimination and on philological and historical grounds, I propose that Tabriz also becomes the only satisfactory candidate for Panaretos’ Taurezion. Tabriz is the Armenian ‘T’awrez? or ‘Davrez?.34 Polo (c. 1295) called it ‘Tauris’? — the usual Italian missionary name for it —, Pegolotti (c. 1340) 25 Parthey, Notitiae, pp. 312, 315; D. Pingree, Bull. de l’Acad. Roy. de Belgique, classe des lettres, 48 (1962), pp. 323-6. 26 Chrysanthos, Apy. Ilévtov, 4-5 (1933), p. 33427 KE. Honigmann, Die Ostgrenze des Byzantinischen Reiches (Bruxelles, 1935), . 217.

, 28 Honigmann, loc. cit.

*9 Honigmann, Ostgrenze, p. 214. _ 80 Gelzer, BZ, 1 (1892), p. 269. $1 Honigmann, Ostgrenze, p. 217. 32 OQ. Neugebauer, Bull. Ac. R. Belg. 44 (1958), pp. 496-7. 33 Pingree, Bull. Ac. R. Belg. 48 (1962), pp. 323-6andthesame, DOP, 18(1964), p. 141.

34 A. K.Sanjian, Colophons of Armenian Manuscripts, 1301-1480 (Cambridge,

Mass., 1969), pp. 399, 423.

35 The Book of Ser Marco Polo, edd. H. Yule and H. Cordier, 1 (London, 1929), p. 75.

IV

The fate of George Komnenos, ruler of Trebizond 339

“Torisi?,?®& Clavijo (1404) ‘Tauris’? and Barbaro (1471) ‘Thauris’.3® A Syrian bishop of ‘Taurezium’, in the Latin, is mentioned in 1277;%° among Byzantines it had been ‘TaBpéftow? to Kedrenos-Skylitzes?® and was ‘TaBpéCy” to Chalkokondyles*! and ‘TaBone’, or ‘TaBpeoCnv’ in a fifteenth-century itinerary.4? Like other Trapezuntine astronomers, Chioniades obtained his texts in Persia,43 which confirms the identity of his see of “TaBpeCov? with Tabriz. Tagaris’ experience of the same see shows that, as would be expected, Tabriz lay within the Patriarchate of Antioch. He was consecrated by a bishop of Tyre and Sidon, but there 1s no contemporary Antiochene Notitia to list its metropolis. Perhaps, like earlier Antiochene sees, it had a measure of autocephaly.

From the late thirteenth century, the political and economic strength of Trebizond depended upon Tabriz. The Trebizond-Tabriz caravan route of 32 days, which was opened up after the Mongol sack of Baghdad

in 1258, became one of the most well-beaten in the later Middle Ages. A high proportion of the Central Asian drugs and spices sold in the West

came over it. Tabriz attracted a number of European merchants and missionaries. The weights and monetary system of Trebizond and Tabriz appear to have been linked,** an as yet unpublished hoard of Trapezuntine aspers has been reported there and Marco Polo found in about 1295 that “It is a city in fact where merchants make large profits.”’4° Equally important is the fact that in George Komnenos’ time Tabriz, already the

largest city of the Ilkhanate, became the Mongol summer capital. The political and economic circumstances in which one would expect an active Orthodox bishopric of Tabriz were brief — between 1258 and the turn of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, ending with the increased persecu-

tion of Christians of all denominations during and after Timur’s reign, the break-up of his empire and the decline of the Trebizond-Tabriz route. The route was not revived on such a scale until the nineteenth century, 86 F. B. Pegolotti, La Pratica della Mercatura, ed. A. Evans (Cambridge, Mass., 1936; New York, 1970), pp. 26-31, 406.

8? R. G. Clavijo, Embassy to Tamerlane, 1403-1405, tr. G. Le Strange (London, 1928), pp. 151, 309.

88 J. Barbaro, Viaggi fatti da Vinetia ... (Vinegia, 1545), pp. 47-8 (= Travels to Tana and Persia, ed . Stanley of Alderley, London, 1873, pp. 82-3). 39 Gregory Bar Hebraeus, Chronicon Ecclesiasticum, edd. and trr. J. B. Abbeloos and J. Lamy (Loran, 1872-7), 3, P- 446. Cf. J. Dauvillier, Byzantins d’Asie Centrale et de l’Extréme Orient au Moyen Age, Rev. d’Et. Byz., 11 (1953), pp. 62-87.

40 Corpus Script. Hist. Byz. 2, p. 573.

41 Corpus Script. Hist. Byz. p. 167. 42 J. Ebersolt, Un itinéraire de Chypre en Perse d’aprés le Parisinus 1712, BZ, 15 (1906), pp. 223-6. 48 See n. 18. 44 Golubovich, Biblioteca, 2, p. 265; Pegolotti, ed. Evans, p. 31.

45 Polo, edd. Yule and Cordier, loc. cit.; cf. W. Heyd, Histoire du Commerce du Levant au Moyen-Age (Leipzig, 1885-6; Amsterdam 1967), 2, pp. 77-9, 110-1, 129 — 130, 506-7.

IV 340

century. : |

when 45,000 pack animals a year brought up to 40% of the annual exports of Persia from Tabriz to the P. & O. steamships in Trebizond and once

again Trapezuntine Greeks prospered, as they had in the fourteenth

Evidence will be cited below that it was to the IIkhan that George was betrayed by his archontes in June 1280 and that Abaga was then probably

in Tabriz, but the identification of Tabriz with the Taurezion on the mountain of which George was abandoned is already inescapable. It is equally inescapable, however, that there is no ‘mountain of Tabriz’. Tabriz lies in a plain. It is overlooked by the Kuh-i-Sahand of 3798 m.,

but the mountain lies about 50 km. south of the city and is not on the route from Trebizond. It may be that Alada&, on which the Ilkhans maintained an apparently still unlocated summer palace where the pervane may have met his death in 1277,%’ is intended. One cannot justify a reading of Panaretos as “‘év t@ dpiw tod TavoeCtov”’ (i. e. the boundary of

Tabriz between Mongol Persia and Anatolia); the sole manuscript of the

chronicler, Cod. Marc. Gr. (Fondo Antico) 608, f. 288b, presents few palaeographical problems and reads quite clearly ‘‘év t@ dpe. . .”” But the

notion of a border may be a clue. Then, as now, the Anatolian-Persian border was marked unmistakeably by Ararat (5287 m.) which overlooks the Trebizond-Tabriz route at “Sotto PArcanoe’ or at [gdir (Clavijo’s ‘Egida’)*® one week north-west of Tabriz. Any conspirator wishing to hand over George Komnenos to the I/khanate while judiciously wishing to avoid penetrating the lands of Tabriz too far, would naturally do it at the staging post below Ararat. It must be confessed that none of these solutions is entirely convincing.

Perhaps the answer will lie with the location of the IIkhan Abaga’s summer palace on Aladag, for, as will be seen, it was to the Ilkhan Abaga that George Komnenos was betrayed in the summer of 1280. Until then the matter must remain open. 2. WHY WAS GEORGE KOMNENOS BETRAYED ON THE MOUNTAIN OF TAU REZION?

What George was doing near Tabriz and his betrayal can partly be explained by an understanding of the internal politics of Trebizond and external pressures on the state, and partly by the information provided by 46 The anonymous ‘“‘Trebizond and the Persian Transit Trade’’, Royal Central Asian Journal 31 (1944), pp. 289-301; not consulted by Charles Issawi in The TabrizTrabzon Trade, 1830-1900: Rise and Decline of a Route, Int. Jour. of Middle East

Studies, 1 (1970), pp. 18-27; cf. A. Bryer, The Tourkokratia in the Pontos, NeoHellenika, 1 (1970), pp. 50-1.

47 C. d’Ohsson, Histoire des Mongols, depuis Tschinguiz-Khan jusqu’a Timour Bey ou Tamerlan (Amsterdam, 1852), 3, pp. 380, 396, 498; B. Spuler, Die Mongolen in Iran (Berlin, 1968), pp. 332-4. 48 Pegolotti, ed. Evans, p. 390; Clavijo, tr. Le Strange, p. 142.

, IV } The fate of George Komnenos, ruler of Trebizond 341

three recently published Armenian chronicles. Briefly, internal Trapezuntine politics depended upon a series of overlapping party interests among

the archontes. There were the local Greco-Laz ranchers and warlords, successors to the Gabrades and predecessors of the Ottoman Derebeys. There were those who, since 1204, had favoured closer Georgian links. There were those who favoured a rapprochement with Palaiologan Constantinople after 1261 (begun with John II’s marriage alliance of 1282). There were the court nobility and henchmen of the Grand Komnenoi. But,

although it was easy enough to depose a Grand Komnenos, it was impossible to remove the dynasty, for it was the simultaneous representative of Pontic separatism and of Trebizond’s pretentions as a, or even the,

legitimate Byzantine state.*? The name Komnenos was, after all, more | distinguished than Palaiologos and in the Pontos there was nothing to rival it; hence ‘Grand Komnenos’ became more than a name. In the 1270s Trebizond’s immediate neighbours, Sinope to the west and Georgian Samtzkhe-Meschia to the east, were both controlled by Muin al-Din Sulayman, from c. 1259-1277 the pervane of the Seljuk state under

the Ilkhans; Imereti, or Western Georgia, spasmodically a Mongol tributary, was also a potential threat. But the Grand Komnenoi always had to look further, for their power was also based upon the kommerkion receipts from the Tabriz route and from goods that came from Constan-

tinople and through the Straits. To keep his throne and preserve his empire any Grand Komnenos therefore had to consider the archontic parties, his immediate neighbours and the rulers of Tabriz and Con-

to have failed on all counts. stantinople. It was difficult enough at the best of times, but George seems In the 1270s the Ilkhans, rulers of Tabriz (and Seljuk Anatolia since 1243)

were opposed by the Mamluks of Egypt — and by their Georgian, Armenian and Kurdish tributaries when given half a chance. In Sicily Charles of Anjou was attempting to build an alliance against Michael VIII Palaiologos of Constantinople, which included the Mamluks. Michael included among his allies the [Ikhanate (his daughter married the I]khan Abaga in 1265)59 and the Papacy (after the Reunion of Lyons in 1274). 49 A point expressed very clearly by N.Gregoras, Corpus Script. Hist. Byz. 2, p. 679. The Veneto- Dobrudjan-Palaiologan discussions to replace the dynasty in 1376, the only ones of their kind, were abortive: see F. Thiriet, Régestes des Délibérations du Sénat de Venise concernant la Romanie, 1 (Paris, 1958), No. 576; R.-J. Loenertz, Chronicon Breve de Graecorum imperatoribus, ab anno 1341 ad annum 1453, e codice Vaticano graeco 162, ’Emet. ‘Et. BuG. 2m. 28 (1958), p. 208; N. Iorga, “‘La politique Vénitienne dans les eaux dela Mer Noire’’, Bull. dela Sect. Hist. de TAcad. Roumaine, 2 (1922), pp. 299-300; P. Mutaftiev, Dobrotit-Dobrotica et la DobrudZa, Rev. des Et. Slaves, 7 (1927), pp. 31-3. 50 DPD. J. Geanakoplos, Emperor Michael Palaeologus and the West, 1258-1282 (Cambridge, Mass., 1959), 101n., 220, 288-9. The alliance did not, however, inhibit Mamluk-Palaiologan contacts.

IV 342

Historians of Michael’s reign have overlooked Georgian evidence that he married one of his daughters to Trebizond’s immediate neighbour, David the Clever of Imereti, in 1267.54 For Abaga the years of the Egyptian war

of 1276-81 were particularly difficult, but the Mamluk threat which so obsessed the Ilkhans lessened immediately after its greatest triumph, the Egyptian defeat of the Mongol tributaries at Albistan in 1277, with the Mamluk withdrawel from Anatolia and Baybars’ death. By the time that the Sicilian Vespers put an end to Charles of Anjou’s ambitions in 1282, George’s apparent policy would have left Trebizond quite isolated. Considering Trebizond’s political and commercial position in the 1270s, one would expect George to have favoured the broad Papal-PalaiologanMongol-West Georgian (Imeretian) alliance, rather than the more distant

Mamluk-Angevin camp, which could do little to help him. Historically he may have had no choice, for the title of the rulers of Trebizond as emperor of the Romaioi made him automatically a rival of Michael VIII. As early as 1266—7 Charles of Anjou approached George through letters delivered by Provencal merchants in Trebizond.®* George's reply is not known, but his potential sympathies for Charles may have been compounded by the simultaneous Palaiologan — West Georgian (Imeretian) alliance, to which he could only reply with a more distant East Georgian (Kartlian) alliance in 1271.°% George’s new son-in-law could do little to help him and was himself murdered by an Ilkhan in 1289. By the time of the Reunion at Lyons in 1274 the lines were clearly drawn. There were even representatives of the Ilkhan present at the Council, but a Trapezun-

tine delegation was notably absent. In 1278 the protonotary Ogerius reported to Pope Nicholas III that George was a disturber of the Union which Michael VIII was fostering. It was not so much that Charles of Anjou had a quixotically loyal ally in Trebizond, as that while Michael was forcing his subjects into the Union, George was pushed by antiUnionist refugees from Constantinople into posing as champion of Ortho-

doxy and into seeking to replace the ‘heretical? Michael as emperor in Constantinople.®* This, George’s last known political position, may have had its attractions, but was an unwise game to play in eastern Anatolia in 1278, when Michael’s son-in-law the IIkhan was wreaking vengeance on 51 Brosset, Géorgie, 1, p. 579 and n. 3 (after Vakhushti); she was illegitimate. 52 G. del Giudice, Codice diplomatico del regno di Carlo I e II d’Angiod, 1 (Napoh, 1863), p. 219; Geanakoplos, Michael, p. 323 and n. 74; Bryer, ’Apy. Ilévtov 26 (1964), . 294.

, 53 Brosset, Géorgie, 1, pp. 590-1 (after Vakhushti). 54 J. Gay, Les registres de Nicholas III (Paris, 1898-1938), No. 384; Pachymeres, Corpus Script. Hist. Byz. 1, pp. 519-520; Gregoras, Corpus Script. Hist. Byz. 1, p.128; R.-J. Loenertz, Mémoire d’Ogier, protonotaire, pour Marco et Marchetto nonces de

Michel VIII Paléologue auprés du Pape Nicholas III. 1278 printemps-été, Or. Chr. Per., 31 (1965), pp. 374-408; and D. M. Nicol, The Byzantine Reaction to the Second Council of Lyons, 1274, Studies in Church History, 7 (Cambridge, 1971), pp. 129-130.

IV

The fate of George Komnenos, ruler of Trebizond 343

those of his tributaries who had failed to stop Charles of Anjou’s ally

| Baybars at Albistan the previous year. The dangers into which George's anti-Palaiologan, anti-Papal and potentially, if not actually, anti-Mongol policy had taken Trebizond are best illustrated by the first acts of his successor John II, after George’s deposition. John immediately went out of his way to ally himself by marriage with Michael Palaiologos, to surrender his claim to be emperor of the Romaioi,®® to welcome Italian merchants to Trebizond and (in 1291 seven years after it had ceased to be politically

useful to do so), to make Trebizond’s first contacts with the Papacy — significantly in connection with an alliance with the Hkhan against the Mamluks.®® This was a clear reversal of policy; the only feature which does not fit into the pattern is David the Clever’s invasion of Trebizond in

1282 while its ruler, John II, was away in Constantinople marrying David’s wife’s half-sister Eudokia Palaiologine.®? The medieval Caucasus cannot, however, be regarded as scrupulous. Otherwise the pattern is clear. The final understanding of it is partly provided by the evidence of three short Armenian sources of the Mongol period, which have not so far

been brought into discussion of George’s fate, and may partly be illu-

strated in the simplified genealogy on p. 344.°° :

Like Brosset-Vakhushti’s Georgian sources on which some sections of

the genealogy are based, the Armenian sources, are clearly of varying reliability. The Annals of Sebastian have annual entries from 1220-1300. The author was a contemporary witness of events in the period 1254-1298 _and includes independent material. The entry for the Armenian year 728 (= 1279) states that the Mongols “‘slew the emperor of Trebizond George, for [his] mother and sisters had delivered him to Abaga; they slew also the

atabeg of Lori.’’°®

The Annals of Bishop Stephen, now in the Matenadaran, Yerevan, has

annual entries from 1220-1290. The entry for the Armenian year 722 (= 1273) states that: ““The emperor of Tribizond gave his daughter in marriage to Ditopal”’ (i. e. a Georgian didebuli, or local ruler).®°

55 Pachymeres, CSHB, 1, pp. 520-4; Gregoras, CSHB, 1, p. 149. 56 Golubovich, Biblioteca, 2, pp. 473-5; Bryer, “Apy. Ilévtovu, 26 (1964), p. 295. 57 Panaretos, ed. Lampsidis, p. 6219-?9.

58 The entries marked (*) are taken solely from Brosset, Géorgie, 1, pp. 579-607, derived from Vakhushti’s eighteenth-century recension of the Georgian Annals. But it is clear that some of this useful information must be used with caution: Vakhushti’s evidence that Khoshak married Sadun Mankaberdeli is confused and the pervane’s wife’s claim to Samtskhe-Meschia seems arguable, while the notion that Rusudani, wife of Manuel I of Trebizond was daughter of Queen Rusudani is no more than the supposition of Brosset and others. (P) indicates Panaretos, ed, Lampsidis, pp. 61-4. (A) indicates Armyanskie istochniki o mongolach, ed. and tr. A. G. Galstyan (Moscow, 1962), p. 36. 69 Galstyan, op. cit., p. 29. 69 Galstyan, op. cit., p. 36.

| Hai——sef a1 TE og DES cee5S a . ER fej-= tome ae oF S222 a5 Zao a j as : Sig Pos 23 ' wM ESS -* 1 | ‘aoa 3an Ceaagmn r : = < ae ers : 7 tn | : 3 gad: age ——Z 2. lle -: : _ x ~ 1 APS: we Nee tale thd. ’ 7 ‘o 4 ae # 4 fal ae 4 r fi qs wale

= a osoo ny on PANS Fk a?sad flag ed ne 4 ne , , nian acer aie Ree BO” Rg we. ; My wre &. < } ae 9 . ry # -. # F . A. t at LY shi

eeeNE RR. ORF eet Sots vs aR . , att | Sy Oia Nae ge a Se a OEP TG wae | E a ae a re 2 et Bf a

. “i pos ‘. e: . PStal ’ oere . *Oey Ll 7 we toe?OR mes ge - a aEN . 4 lbw EA, $. . ge EN7 ‘eager Be S y0%:

, anr ot . .aZY . Oe €‘ :oe, ~4;4 ae AY a By Pi * “s h. .ft:arle « , ., ,: .< . ‘¢@ — 3ee a 4Y+ ff oe Sen a a4 2al 'y * me. te A , .een ae oe wo i Pom Lif me t eo : ve 7 : . . » AB. 1 RRS -» Sa oe im tr, ay 14yoDoe mo 2ep: ©* ; ; ’i :. .-¥ re .. iwf_ P* oe rd .pe‘a* 4- m 4 ‘ oa , * a. jai.d ° etoh. ... A

Poa Fe aN, geeoe a1tes ‘eae Sioa ee \*%oo 77pe. ecoual ae pty a mae be ce oe .‘

Poff ae ay a ode .Be ts,. ay ttoF aie ae ,eerye Haan ae,Ags 2 fem. fear .Oe Col a q- we peal AG.ie. ari 2a ar ph .VE al y eee ve wae ae .aa aan aSwvAS 1:“ ee ’ of1. Food onpaver Px ~ae * , -$ “ Nead te Ry a! vs. 7os . ‘ ‘. otoes ae .eee .'eet rate ’ , ate ye it. a , bs mn ia > = . Pon a a . ™~ an ‘ > Perens y, il rawe a 5ta i 8 ° oe eye ges Coe. | a Mae ee 7, Rs te Tan INS 2? :ae yOatvats poe ye ~e ‘EN ys wedied Ne ee i foae 2?ca Wy©cae rs rN N he a yt £& a ae . her, - - . , » AA ae ‘$e ; oe : Ee pit. my hoo

- , .. OR oh Bo a a

. by . osae:, ’ :oex oe poe 1 nm 3 .awi id roON. > eae J. ie : re: :we oe wy? a : . . .

ot B+ i. rs a ot, Home wat —_ at re oo. eal give ae

. o > a. ’ne, ¢. =~La vo 5 wy et—ms - =whe i, ;mo, . ae: ae vc.-pol .~a ~igPaar aemany AY onoN ,2 A cys,as: .‘,A 7ssas .Fo ; a ,a ——— tan!cat ".