Michal Polczynski, Georgetown University
Have you ever wondered what ten Ottoman merchants and travelers may have been carrying when they crossed the Ukrainian steppe in 1547? If yes, then have I got a document for you. (Also, we should probably get to know one another.)
In 1538 Sultan Süleymân annexed the Black Sea litoral fortress of Cânkermân/Özü and laid claim to all the lands between the Dniester and Dnieper Rivers deep into the Pontic Steppe. This caused immediate tension with the king of Poland-Lithuania, Zygmunt I, who also claimed ownership of those lands. After a failed attempt to demarcate a common border in 1542, further negotiations devolved into a mediation of unchecked violence in the new Ottoman/Polish-Lithuanian frontier zone. While the Ottoman sultan continued to support and profit from the enormous Black Sea slave trade, which saw the disappearance or death of some 2,000,000 individuals in Poland-Lithuania and Muscovy between 1500-1700, Zygmunt I’s frontier commanders immediately set about staging their own raids on Ottoman settlements in the frontier.[1]
Theft and its sister crime of abduction were the root causes of most acts of frontier violence. One common occurrence involved raiders from the Polish-Lithuanian side making their way into the disputed frontier zone of the Pontic Steppe and attempting to catch Ottoman travelers unawares as they journeyed between the Ottoman Black Sea ports of Akkermân, Câkermân, and Caffa, making off with goods, captives, and livestock. In this instance, on 12-20th April 1547 [21-29 Safer 954 H.], Süleymân sent a letter to Zygmunt I complaining of an attack on his subjects as they traveled from Akkermân to Caffa. The victims were attacked by the Polish-Lithuanian border commander Bernard Pretwicz at a place called “sihâkli” [صحاقلى].[2]A damage register compiled by Yüsuf bin İlyas, the kâdî of Akkermân, was sent along with the sultan’s letter.
The letter followed the typical practice of paraphrasing the contents of the register. However, there were discrepancies between the information contained within the sultan’s letter and the enclosed damage register. While the padişah mentioned specific items such as the copper pot [bakraç] stolen from one İsmail bin Hacı Satılmış, he didn't even bother mentioning three victims present in the register, perhaps choosing to focus on the more important individuals.
The register, in fact, describes the losses suffered by different individuals during what appears to have been three separate incidents.[3] These incidents were accorded their own entries. Thus, “(An individual by the) name of Sabânci Ahmed, a pious laborer, was on the road with his goods along with his brother and his brother’s wife, six horses, and other goods, (when he was fallen upon) and robbed.” Likewise, “Mustafa of Bursa was taken prisoner along with two slaves.” Greater detail was also furnished in both the damage register and the sultan’s accompanying letter in a related case concerning a group of seven heavily armed merchants accompanied by an akinci, all of whom were assaulted, the sultan claimed, by the notorious Polish-Lithuanian frontier commander Bernard Pretwicz, otherwise infamously known as the “terror tartarorum”.
Bernard Pretwicz
Hüseyin bin Boyacı Hacı
Slave Boys: 3; Slave Girls: 2; Furs: 2; Cloth: 1; Turban: 1; Horse Tack: 1; Quiver with bow and arrows: 1; Saddle: 1; Horses: 2
_________________________________________________________________________________
Akinçi
Slave Girls: 2; Horse: 1; Saddle and tack: 1; Sword: 1; Fur covering: 1; Akçe: 180
_________________________________________________________________________________
Mehmed
Akçe: 3,000; Other loot: 1,000 akçe; Red scarlet cloth jacket [dolama]: 1; Turban: 1; Sword: 1; Shirt: 1; Cape [kepenek]: 1; Silver chased sheath with a knife: 1; Horse: 1; Saddle: 1
_________________________________________________________________________________
Süleymân
Embroidered brocade kaftans: 3; Scarlet red cape [çüka]: 1; Arabian horse: 1; Saddle: 1; Turban: 1; Sword: 1; Damascus stone: 1; Cape [yapınc]: 1
_________________________________________________________________________________
Ismail bin Hacı Satılmış
Circassian slave boy: 1; Circassian slave girl: 1; Cloth worth 100 akçe; Akçe: 1060; Saddle: 1; Lathering musk: 1; Tobacco: 3; Fur: 1; Felt caps: 15; Cap [yapınc]: 1; Copper pot: 1
_________________________________________________________________________________
'Ali
Slave boy: 1; Slave girl: 2; Horse: 1; Saddle and tack: 1; Quiver with bow and arrows: 1; Sword: 1; Blue cloak: 1; Akçe: 400
_________________________________________________________________________________
El-Hac Isa
Akçe: 8,500; Silk lodre: 4; Bursa sashes: 8; Bunches of knives: 12; Foreign furs: 1; Cloak [ferace]: 1; Cotton twill borlu: 6; Cloth rolls: 10; Bow with arrows: 1; Knife: 1
_________________________________________________________________________________
Emîr Yüsuf
Akçe: 10,000; Arabian horse: 2; Moldavian horse: 1; Cloak [ferace] with fur mantle: 1; Cloak [şemle]: 1; Horse tack: 1; Arabian saddle: 1
The Ottoman damage register describing this incident provides a unique account of what Ottoman subjects chose to take with them on the dangerous paths of the Pontic Steppe during the middle of the sixteenth century. The travelers were evidently robbed of whatever valuables they carried, including eleven slaves in total and in some cases the horses that they were riding at the moment of the attack. Most of the victims appear to have been carrying some items and, indeed, people for the purpose trade; slave children [esîr gulâm, esîr cariye], felt caps [arakiye], tobacco [tönbeki], furs [kürk], lathering musk [misk köbük], various textiles, quantities of knives [bıçak deste], sashes from Bursa [Bursa kuşağı], and cash were all listed as losses. The tobacco in particular is worth mentioning, as its presence in this borderland testifies to the networks of circulation that spread New World crops so quickly around the world. In addition to carrying supplies to keep warm and smoke, the victims appear to have been well armed, and reported swords, knives, and bows as lost items. Arabian and Moldavian horses were taken, along with saddles [eyer], tack [oyân], turbans [dulbend], and a variety of outerwear [şemle, ferace, çüka, kaftān, gömlek, kepenek, dolama] that may been on the victims when they were robbed. The seven merchants and their accompanying akıncı were not taken captive and appear to have been left naked and horseless in the steppe.
Woodcut of Hungarian noblewomen, Polish rider, and Turkish captive, 17th cent.
While the travelers do not appear to have been immediately compensated for their losses, Süleymân eventually brought a powerful case against the Polish-Lithuanian frontier commander Bernard Pretwicz in 1550, accusing him of orchestrating years of violence against Ottoman subjects on the frontier. Pretwicz appeared in person before the Polish parliament and King Zygmunt II in August of that year in order to speak in defense of his actions. He blamed the Crimean Tatars and direct Ottoman subjects of the frontier for launching slave raids in the king’s lands and robbing and rustling from Polish-Lithuanian subjects in the frontier. This particular band of Ottoman subjects was not mentioned in the litany of violence that Pretwicz was pleased to claim responsibility for in the defense of the realm. It is easy to see, however, how this small group of armed Ottoman subjects accompanied traveling through the frontier was set upon by one of Pretwicz’s bands. And the record of the people and items confiscated testifies to why Pretwicz's bands engaged in the sort of work in the first place.
[1] This rather modest estimate
was proposed in: Kołodziejczyk,
Dariusz. "Slave hunting and slave redemption as a business enterprise: The
northern Black Sea region in the sixteenth to seventeenth centuries". Oriente Moderno. 86 (2006): 149.
[2]
For the original Ottoman document see: AGAD.AKW.dz.Turecki.68.105.
[3]
For the original Ottoman document, see: AGAD.MK.dz.Tatarski.60.57.61.
No comments:
Post a Comment