Byzantine Turks 2008

L'Europa dopo la caduta di Costantinopoli: 29 maggio
1453. Spoleto, 2008.
Rustam SHUKUROV
The Byzantine Turks: An Approach to the Study of Late

Byzantine Demography
The Turkic presence in the Byzantine Empire during the Palaiolo�

gan period has been attracting scholarly interest for a long time. There
can no longer be any doubt about the existence of Turkish settlers in
Late Byzantium. However, until now the Turks in Byzantine context
have been generally regarded as mercenary soldiers who stayed tempo�
rarily in the territory of the Empire; the subsequent fate of the Turks
who, in one way or another, settled in Byzantium has scarcely been
analysed. Until now we have had no comprehensive and generalising
study on the place of the Turks in the ethnic composition of Late By�
zantium: whether they constituted compact ethnic groups, where they
lived, what their religious and cultural affiliations were, etc.
The absence of general studies on the Byzantine Turks ��
is quite un�
derstandable since demographic and ethnic analysis comes up against
almost insurmountable difficulties of methodology. It is obvious that
the ethnic structure of the region was extremely complex: at least four

The present research was made possible with the support of the RGNF Foundation
(project no. 07-01-00547a). My special thanks are due to Dr. Oya Pancaroğlu (Boğaziçi Uni�
versity, Department of History, Istanbul) for her help in preparation of this piece for publica�
tion.

P. Charanis, The Formation of the Greek People, in The ‘Past’ in Medieval and Modern Greek
Culture, ed. Sp. Vryonis, Malibu, 1978, p. 97; P. Charanis, The Transfer of Population as a Po-
licy in the Byzantine Empire, in Comparative Studies in Society and History, vol. 3, no.2, p. 148ff; S.
Vryonis, Byzantine and Turkish Societies and Their Sources of Manpower, in Studies on Byzantium,
Seljuks, and Ottomans: Reprinted Studies [Byzantina kai Metabyzantina vol. 2] Malibu. Calif.,
1981, no. ��
III, p. 125-140; C. Asdracha, La région des Rhodopes aux XIIIe et XIVe siècles: étude
de géographie historique, Athens, 1976, p. 75–84.
74 Rustam SHUKUROV
large ethnic groups – that is Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbians, and Al�

banians – lived side by side there. The presence of west European,
Turkic, Armenian, Vlach, Gypsy and Jewish settlers made the virtual
ethnic map of the Byzantine territories even more complex and obscu�
re. Moreover, the turbulent political history of the Byzantine Empi�
re and neighbouring countries, frequent and drastic shifts of political
borders, rapid conquests and retreats put in motion large groups of
people who, as one may expect, were repeatedly rearranging pre-exi�
sting ethnic maps. From this point of view, surviving sources are often
insufficient for a credible reconstruction of ethnic changes in particular
areas of the Byzantine Empire at that time. We can produce so far only
a general and, what is most disappointing, mainly a static picture of
the region’s ethnic composition. At the present stage, only a synchro�
nic description can be given; developing a detailed diachronic analysis
of ethnic processes often proves to be unfeasible because of the insuffi�
ciency of the surviving sources.
The initial point of the present study is an onomastic research based on
personal and place names preserved in the contemporary sources. It is ono�
mastics that makes it possible to evaluate the ethnic features of a region
with relatively high precision. However, generally, it must be noted that
onomastic study still occupies a modest place in modern Byzantinistics,
compared, for example, with Classical and Medieval studies. Meanwhile,
�
See for instance a general survey with a helpful bibliographical section for Medieval
Europe: Personal Names Studies of Medieval Europe. Social Identity and Family Structures, ed. G.T.
Beech, M. Bourin, P. Chareille, Kalamazoo��
, 2002. ��
See also a recent study of Ancient
Greek anthroponymics: Greek��
Value as Evidence, ed. Simon Hornblow�
Personal��
��
Names��
��
. Their
��
er & Elaine Matthews, Oxford, 2000. For ��
studies of Byzantine onomastics see, for instan�
ce: A.E. ��
Laiou, Peasant Names in Fourteenth-century Macedonia, in Byzantine and Modern Greek
Studies, vol. 1, 1975, p. 71–95; A.E. Laiou, Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire. �� A Social
��
and Demographic Study, Princeton, 1977, see esp., Chapter IV “Names” ; J. Lefort, Anthropo-
nymie et société villageoise (Xe-XIVe siècle), in Hommes et richesses dans l’Empire byzantin. Tome II:
VIIIe-XVe siècle, éd. par V. Kravari, J. Lefort et C. Morrisson, Paris, 1991, p. 225–238; J.
Lefort, Toponymie et anthroponymie: le contact entre Grecs et Slaves en Macédoine, in Castrum
4, Frontière et peuplement dans le monde méditerranéen au Moyen Âge, éd. J.-M. Poisson,
Rome - Madrid, 1992, p. 161-171; F. Brunet, Sur l’ Hellénisaton des toponymes slaves en
Macedoine Byzantine, in Travaux et Mémoires, t. 9, 1985. p. 235–265 ; V. Kravari, L’hel-
lénisation des Slaves de Macédoine orientale, au témoignage des anthroponymes, in ΕΥΨΥΧΙΑ,
Mélanges offerts à Hélène Ahrweiler, vol. II, Paris, 1998, p. 387-397 ; D. �� Dželebdžić,
THE BYZANTINE TURKS 75
in some cases, onomastics is able to fill some gaps in the traditional
sources. Toponymics provides ample material about the distribu�
tion of the Franks in the Peloponnese. In the case of the Empire
of Trebizond, personal and place names are sometimes the only in�
dication of the factual ethnic diversity in the particular regions of
the Pontos.
In the present piece, an attempt will be made ��
to fill that gap at
least partially and to propose new ways of describing ethnic minorities
in the population of the Byzantine Empire��
. The
��
present study focu�
ses on the fate of the Byzantine Turkic groups under the Palaiologoi.
Geographically, it is limited to the Balkan territories of the Byzantine
Empire from Serres to Ochrid and the Vardar valley, including the
territories approximately matching the present Greek province of Ma�
cedonia and the Republic of Macedonia.�
Our task is facilitated by several recent studies. It is worth men�
tioning an article of the Russian scholar Piotr Zhavoronkov on the
Late Byzantine Turkic aristocracy, which analyzes mainly Byzantine
narrative sources. The study of Zoritsa Đoković is the first synthe-
Slavic Anthroponyms in the Judicial Decisions of the Demetrios Chomatenos, in Zbornik radova
Vizantiloshkog instituta, vol 43, 2006, p. 483–498 (in ��
Serbian��
) ; Z. Đoković, Étude de
l’anthroponymie slave dans les praktika du XIIe et XIIIe siècle, in Zbornik radova Vizantiloshkog
instituta, vol 43, 2006, p. 499–516 (in Serbian��
��
). ��
Additional relevant references see also
below.

H. & R. Kahane, The Western Impact on Byzantium: The Linguistic Evidence, in Dum-
barton Oaks Papers, vol. 36, 1982, p. 127–153; H. & R. Kahane, Italienische Ortsnamen in
Griechenland, Athen, 1940; H. & R. Kahane, Abendland und Byzanz, in : Reallexikon der
Byzantinistik, ed. ��
P. Wirth, Amsterdam 1970, S. 345–634 (Sprache); O. Markl, Ortsnamen
Griechenlands in frankischer Zeit, [Byzantina Vindobonensia, I], Graz, Köln, 1966; A. Bon, La
Morée franque: Recherches historiques, topographiques et archéologiques sur la principauté d'Achaia,
1204-1430, vol. 1, Paris, 1969.
�
R. ��
Shukurov, The Byzantine Turks of the Pontos, in Mésogeios, t. 6, 1999, p. 7–47.��
On the
Kartvelian minority in Trebizond see also: E. Zhordania, Etnicheskii sostav naselenia Ponta
v ��
X��
III–��
XV��
vv. Chast’ I: Lazy, in: Byzantinoslavica�, vol. 58, 1997, 125–139; E. Zhordania,
Etnicheskii sostav naselenia Ponta v ��
X��
III–��
XV��
vv. i nekotorye voprosy toponimiki Ponta.
Chast’ II: Chany, in: Byzantinoslavica�, vol. 60, 1999, p. 71–86; E. Zhordania, Kartvel’skoe
naselenie Ponta v XIII-XV vv. : dissertatsiia ... kandidata nauk: 07.00.03, Moscow, 2002.

P. Zhavoronkov, Tiurki v Vizantii (XIII–seredina XIV v.) ��
Chast’ 1: tiurkskaia aristokra-
tiia (The Turks in Byzantium (13th-mid-14th c.). Part 1: The Turkish aristocracy), in Vizantiiskii
vremennik, 2006, vol. 65, p. 168–169.
76 Rustam SHUKUROV
tic research analyzing the Late Byzantine anthroponymics of Eastern

Macedonia as a source for the ethnic history of the region. The most
valuable part of the latter study concerns Slavic names in Byzantine
documental sources. Zoritsa Đoković has made an attempt to describe
Albanian, Vlach and Turkic ethnic groups as well. However, the Turk�
ish section of the study appears to be relatively weak and incomplete,
which once again confirms the urgent necessity of the proper examina�
tion of Turkic elements in the Macedonian population.
However, before proceeding to the description of the Macedonian
Turks in the Palaiologan period, it is necessary to say a few words
about the basic principles of the proposed approach to the study of the
ethnic composition of the Byzantine population.
1. The Database of Personal Names
For the first stage of the research, I chose Byzantine personal and
place names containing roots of Oriental origin and gave them etymo�
logical interpretation. By “Oriental” I am referring conventionally to
names derived from Arabic, Persian and Turkic roots.
In the case of Oriental names, the most valuable and ample infor�
mation is provided by anthroponymics that constitutes the main bulk
of evidence underlying the present study. These names are preserved
in a great variety of sources of different genres: historiography, court
poetry, documentary sources, emperor’s chrysobulls, marginal notes
and obits, signatures of manuscripts’ copyists, etc. Collection of the
anthroponymic material and compilation of the database have been
considerably facilitated by Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit
that registered approximately 30,000 names of persons living in the
Palaiologan period as found in Greek sources.��
The initial list of the
Oriental names has been formed by means of the analysis of PLP’s

Z. Đoković, Stanovništvo istočne Makedonije u prvoj polovini XIV veka, in Zbornik radova
Vizantiloshkog instituta, ��
vol��
. 40, 2003, ��
p. 97–244.
�
Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit, ed. E. Trapp et al. Bd. 1–12, Wien,
1976–1995 (CD-Rome version: Wien, 2001) (hearafter – PLP).
data. ��
Later, by re-examining the primary sources, some additions and
corrections have been made to the PLP records including the recovery
of missed family links and the addition of individuals overseen in PLP.
In addition to PLP, which disregards the information in non-Greek
sources, the database has been supplemented by evidence from con�
temporary Persian, Turkish and west European sources that occasio�
nally mention individuals living in Byzantine lands. However, these
additions are not numerous.
Names of Oriental origin have been organized into a digital data�
base. The chosen personal names number around 470. I have included
in the database only those names the Oriental derivation of which are
irrefutable. Outside the database there remain a comparatively huge
number of non-Greek names of unknown origin. These unidentified
names may have been of Slavic, west European, Armenian, Turkic,
Albanian or other origin. However, the proper analysis of their lingui�
stic provenance is a matter for future investigations. The basic list of
Oriental names may thus increase in the course of further etymological
work; here I present preliminary results of the study.
The next stage of the research consists in placing the chosen names
into historical context, employing traditional methods of prosopo�
graphical study. Each entry of the database represents a prosopographi�
cal questionnaire containing the following rubrics: 1) Family name
or sobriquet; 2) Etymological interpretation; 3) Baptismal name; 4)
Occupation and social status; 5) Location; 6) Floruit; 7) Family links;
8) Primary sources; 9) Secondary sources.
From the names listed in PLP, Oriental names of the residents of
the Balkans, the Aegean and Ionian islands, Anatolia and the Black Sea
region, who were subjects of the Byzantine Empire, were extracted. It
must be stressed that the database does not include the names of fo�
reigners, subjects of Muslim states such as the Seljuq Sultanate, the
�
See also the already published and commented parts of the database: R. Shukurov, Ia-
goupy: tiurkskaia familiia na vizantiiskoi sluzhbe (Iagoupai: a Turkish Family in Byzantine Service),
in Vizantiiskie ocherki, Saint Petersburg, 2006, p. 205–229; R. Shukurov, Anatavly: tiurkskaia
familiia na vizantiiskoi sluzhbe (Anataulai: a Turkish Family in Byzantine Service),’ in Vizantiiskii
vremennik, vol. 66 (91), 2007, p. 193–207.
78 Rustam SHUKUROV
Ottomans, the Mamluk Sultanate, the Golden Horde, principalities of

western Anatolia, the states of Iran and the Near East, etc. Thus, the
database focuses exclusively on the Byzantine population.
These 470 or so Oriental names can be divided into three major
agglomerations by geographical criteria thus indicating the major
centers of “Oriental” presence in the Byzantine territories: a) Con�
stantinople and neighbouring areas including Thrace (56 names); 2)
the Empire of Trebizond (102); and, finally, 3) Macedonia from Ser�
res to Skopje and Kastoria (114). The remaining 180 or so names are
geographically linked to the northern and southwestern shores of the
Black Sea (52), the Aegean Sea (including Lemnos and Crete), Anato�
lia, Peloponnesus, Kephallenia, Thessaly, Epiros, Cyprus, and South
Italy. Some dozens of names at the present stage of research cannot be
identified geographically or their geographic affiliation is questiona�
ble. Here are given preliminary calculations that may be revised in the
result of further investigations; however, the general picture described
here and the numerical proportions between these groups will hardly
change.
2. Credibility of Anthroponymic Data
As it has been said, the present study explores the problem of the
Turkic population in one of the above-mentioned areas Macedonia
extending from Serres to Kastoria and Ochrid. Macedonia, a densely
populated province of late Byzantium, was the only Byzantine area
supplied with the demographic data sufficient for a rough statistical
approximation. Macedonia
��
is probably the most studied region of Late
Byzantium. The geography, economy and demographics of the region,
and, in particular, of its southern and southwestern parts (Chalkidike,
the lower flow of the Strymon) have been described in great detail.10
10 10�
See for instance: Fr. Dölger, Aus den Schatzkammern des heiligen Berges, München,
1948; Fr. Dölger, Sechs byzantinische Praktika des 14. Jahrhunderts für das Athoskloster Iberon,
München, 1949; G. Ostrogorsky, Pour l’histoire de la féodalité byzantine, Bruxelles, 1954,
p. 259–368 ; Khvostova K.V. Osobennosti agrarno-pravovykh otnoshenii v Pozdnei Vizantii
The basis for these studies ��
is the profuse documental material, whi�
ch is found in the acts of the monasteries of Mount Athos.11 Monastic
documents include imperial chrysobulls and private acts of donation,
deeds of purchase, court decisions on the disputes over��
contested��
lands,
delineations of lands etc. The most informative type of monastic
document, containing abundant anthroponymical data, is praktikon,
an inventory containing fiscal information on monastic possessions
and listing taxes and households of parokoi present on the land. Such
assessments took place in Macedonia in 1300–1301, 1316–1318,
1320–1321, 1338–1341 and, in addition, some sporadic assessments
occurred in some of the intervening years. After the middle of the
fourteenth century, there were no assessments, but they briefly reap�
peared in the beginning of the fifteenth century; the last known prak-
tikon dates to 1420.12
(��
XIV��
–��
XV��
vv.). Moscow, 1968; J. Lefort, Habitats fortifiés en Macédoine orientale au Moyen
Âge, in Habitats fortifiés et organisation de l'espace en Méditerranée médiévale, Lyon, 1983, p.
99–103; J. Lefort, Radolibos: population et paysage, in Travaux et Mémoires, vol. 9, 1985, p.
195-234 ; J. Lefort, Population and Landscape in Eastern Macedonia during the Middle Ages:
The Example of Radolibos, in Continuity and Change in Late Byzantine and Early Ottoman Society,
ed. A.
��
Bryer et H. Lowry, Birmingham-Washington, 1986, p. 11-21 ; J. Lefort, Population
et peuplement en Macédoine orientale, IXe–XVe siècle, in Hommes et richesses dans l’Empire byzantin,
vol. 2, Paris, 1991, p. 63-82; N. Kondov, Demographische Notizien über die Landbevölkerung
aus die Gebiet des Unteren Strymon in der erstern Halften des XIV Jahrhunderts, in Études balkani-
ques, t. 2-3, 1965, S. 201-172; N. Kondov Das Dorf Gradec. Die demographisch-wirtschaftliche
Gastalt eines Dorfes aus dem Gebiet des unteren Strymon von Anfang des 14. Jahrhunderts, in :
Études Balkaniques, t. 7, 1971, S. 31–55 ; t. 13, 1977, S. 71–91; P. Karlin-Hayter, Les
Catalans et les Villages de la Chalcidique, in Byzantion, vol. 52, 1982, p. 244-263 ; A.E. Laiou,
Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire ; D. Jacoby, Phénomènes de démographie rurale à
Byzance aux XIIIe et XIVe siècles, in Études rurales, vol. 5-6, 1962, p. 163-186; D. Jacoby, Fo-
reigners and the Urban Economy in Thessalonike, ca. 1150–ca. 1450, in Dumbarton Oaks Papers,
vol. 57, 2004, p. 85–132.
11 11�
French Byzantinists have been publishing the main bulk of the acts of the monasteries
of Mount Athos in the series: Archives de l'Athos (Paris, 1937–), founded by Gabriel Millet
et Paul Lemerle; so far 22 volumes have come out, although, of course, beyond the published
volumes there still remains a considerable number of formerly published and unpublished
monastic documents.
12 12�
Fr. Dölger, Sechs byzantinische Praktika, S. 5–31; I. E. Karayannopoulos & G.
Weiss, Quellenkunde zur Geschichte von Byzanz (324-1453), Bd. 1–2, Wiesbaden, 1982, Bd. 1,
S. 105–107; Laiou, Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire cit., p. 9–10.
80 Rustam SHUKUROV
The vast majority of Oriental names of Macedonia are contained

in monastic documents. However, the surviving monastic documen�
tation has one significant limitation for my purposes: it mostly deals
with monastic properties; only few documents concern laymen, which
survived only because these areas were incorporated into monastic
estates later.
The nature of primary sources defines the principal chronological,
demographic, and territorial limitations of the present study: the chro�
nological elucidation of the Macedonian population from the available
documents is very much irregular, as they are most detailed for the first
half of the fourteenth century (1), cover only a portion of existing indi�
viduals (2) and only concern those areas which were in the possession of
monasteries (3). Thus, a considerable portion of settlements and their
respective population remain outside the scope of the primary sources.
Other sources such as Imperial and Patriarchal documentation, histo�
riography, account books, marginal notes, etc. provide some additional
information which, however, is unable to improve the deficiency of the
main bulk of sources. Moreover, available sources scarcely reflect the
activity of merchants. Only a few documents such as account books
directly concern trade and provide us with a few names of merchants.
Hence, the low percentage of merchants in the database of Oriental
names is partly due to the inadequacy of sources.
The next important limitation of the research ensues from a rather
complex problem of the adequacy of anthroponymic material proper.
Apparently, the majority of Asian incomers registered in the databa�
se were first-generation Asian immigrants. In most cases, it seems,
the second generation of the newcomers, at least by their names, was
absolutely indistinguishable from the indigenous population, losing
even those scant indications of origin which their fathers’ names had.
Only a few noble families of the newcomers retained references to their
Asian lineage in the subsequent generations.
Furthermore, immigrants adopting Christianity had to change
their Muslim names to Christian ones. In the case of an individual of
low social standing, who had no family name, this meant that on adop�
ting Christianity and changing his first name to a standard Christian
one, he made his Asian roots absolutely untraceable for official records
and therefore for us. Consequently, one may assume that some purely
Christian Byzantine names might well be concealing Asian (as well as
any other) immigrants who, by their names, completely assimilated
to the Greek Christian majority. Only those Asian immigrants of low
social standing, who for some reason were nicknamed by an original
Turkic sobriquet, are traceable as this sobriquet had become an indi�
spensable element of their personal identification.
To sum up, some Asians changing their names to standard Greek
or Slavic ones, as well as second generation Asians switching to Greek
of Slavic names, had become persons of “concealed identity”.13
Judging by my database, the overall number of baptized Asians
exceeded 2.0 percent of the Byzantine population��
.��
However, these two
noted limitations lead us to suggest that only a lesser part of immi�
grants acquired such Turkic nicknames and, consequently, the real
number of Asian immigrants in the Byzantine lands was considerably
higher than the figures given by the present database. In this sense,
the database reflects only the tip of the iceberg the much larger part of
which is under the surface of the water. �
Although it is clear that in real life unrecognizable Asians conside�
rably outnumbered those whose names or biographic data reveal for us
their Asian origin, it is difficult to assess the numerical ratio between
known and unknown Asian immigrants from the standpoint of the
chosen methodology.
And the last but not the least observation: Indeed, a doubt is
always present that a foreign sobriquet was given to a person becau�
se of some reason other than his race. For instance, theoretically, it
is not impossible that a Greek could acquire, for whatever reason, a
Turkish, Slavic or Albanian nickname or sobriquet. However, such ca�
ses, being theoretically probable, are exceptionally rare. For instance,
Βαμβακοράβδης� “having a cotton rod” was the mocking sobriquet of
13 13�
A discussion of similar problems see in: Jacoby, Foreigners and the Urban Economy in
Thessalonike cit.,��
p. 86–87, 130.
82 Rustam SHUKUROV
the Emperor Alexios III.14 The name derives from ��

βάμβαξ��, ��
βαμβάκιον15
← dialectal Pers. ‫ ﭙﻧﺑﮏ‬pamba�k “cotton”;
��
it entered Greek in the eleventh
century at the latest and, seemingly, by the end of the twelfth century,
βάμβαξ� lost its foreign sound. Of course, this mocking nickname had
nothing to do with the ethnic origin of Alexios III, who undoubtedly
was considered to be of pure Greek blood. ��
In this and similar cases,
the foreign name is not an indication of ethnic origin but rather of
the dissemination of foreign linguistic elements in the spoken Greek
language.
However, in the majority of known cases foreign sobriquets
refer to the foreign origin of its holder. For instance, the mocking
sobriquet of the patriarch Germanos III was Μαρκούτζης, which
Pachymeres qualified as a Persian (i.e. Turkic) word. Further
on, he explains that this epithet of opprobrium was applied to
the patriarch because of his “Laz” origin. Germanos III was not
Laz but belonged to the renowned Gabras family, long ago Hel�
lenized Armenians or Syrians. 16 It is evident that the nickname
mocked the ethnic origin of Germanos III, though Constanti�
nopolitans were wrong identifying him as “Laz” and “Persian”.
In most cases, however, foreign sobriquets did reflect the ethnic
origin of its holder.
Traditionally, Ancient Greek culture recognized ethnic na�
mes and there usually was a certain link between the ethnic
origin and the origin of the name. 17 There is no evidence of any
radical change in this sense in the Byzantine time. One cannot
14 14�
Nicetas Choniates, Historia, ed. J.A. van Dieten, 2 vols, Berlin, New York, 1975,�
p. 453.1 app., 479.44 app.
15 15�
Lexikon zur byzantinischen Gräzität besonders des 9.–12. Jahrhunderts, ed. E. Trapp, Bd.
1–, Wien��
, 2001–, p. 262; Du Cange, Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae graecitatis, Lyon,
1688, col. 172–173.
16 16�
Georges Pachymérès, Relations Historiques, éd. A. Failler, vol. 1–5, Paris, 1984–
2000, vol. 2, IV, 13 (p. 367.24); S. Vryonis, Byzantine and Turkish Societies and Their Sour�
ces of Manpower, p. 140; M. Balivet Menteşe dit “Sâğlâm Bey” et Germain alias “Mârpûç”:
deux surnoms turcs dans la chronique byzantine de Georges Pachymère, in : Turcica, t. 25,
1993, p. 141–142.
17 17�
P.M. Fraser, Ethnics as Personal Names, in Greek��
��
Personal��
��
Names��
. ��
Their Value as Evidence,
p. 149–157.
exclude that some Oriental names of the database in fact belon�
ged to Greeks, Slavs, etc. and this may affect the accuracy of the
results. At the same time, to my mind, the majority of names
certainly reflect the ethnic affiliation of their holders and are an
effective tool for the reconstruction of the ethnic composition of
Late Byzantine population.
3. Oriental Names
From among a total of approximately 10,000 names relating to

Macedonia and registered in PLP, I have selected by means of etymo�
logical analysis 114 Oriental names, constituting about 1.1% of the
total number of names registered in PLP for that region. Sometimes
the sources contain information about blood relatives (parents, uncles,
brothers, children, grandchildren, etc.) of the holders of these 114 na�
mes. The overall number of the individuals covered by the selected
names is 168.
Among the holders of the Oriental names I conventionally distinguish
Qipchaq and Anatolian Turks. This division concerns the place of origin
of a name bearer or of his ancestors rather than linguistic provenance of
the name. From a linguistic perspective, the proposed division is not ac�
curate. However, especially because of the extremely complicated ethnic
composition of thirteenth- and fourteenth-century Anatolia, comprising
both Oghuz and Qipchaq elements, it would be hard to draw here any
linguistic watershed.18
Some Asians came to Macedonia from Dasht-i Qipchaq (the Sou�
th Russian steppes and the Crimea) as numerous names with the
18 18�
On Qipchaqs and Cumans see the condensed summary of P. Golden, Codex Cumanicus,
in Central Asian Monuments, ed. H.B. Paksoy, Istanbul, 1992, p. 33–63; some impression of eth�
no-linguistic composition of Turkic Anatolia in the twelfth–fourteenth centuries may be derived
from: F. Sümer, Oğuzlar (Türkmenler). Tarihleri, Boy teşkilatı, Destanları, Istanbul, 1992; F. Sümer,
Anadolu’da Moğollar, in Selçuklu araştırmaları dergisi, vol. 1, 1969, p. 1–147.
84 Rustam SHUKUROV
stem Cuman indicate: Κόµανος,19 Κοµάνα (fem.),20 Κοµανίτζης,21 and

Κοµάνκα (fem.).22 The Turkic names Γιάκσσα (← Tk. yakşı “good”)23
and Χαρατζᾶς (← Tk. karaca “dark, blackish”)24 might well have been
of Cuman origin.
What is curious in the names Κοµανίτζης and Κοµάνκα is that one
may distinguish the Slavic masculine suffix ~ицъ and Slavic feminine
suffix ~ка respectively, showing Slavic ethnic and linguistic influen�
ces.25
The Qipchaqs constituted one of the earliest layers of the Turkic
population in the Balkans. The settlements of Qipchaqs had been ap�
pearing here from the eleventh through the fifteenth century.26 There
were two massive waves of the Qipchaq immigration to the Balkans
in the first half of the thirteenth century. In 1237 a large group of
Cumans, who had been compelled to move westwards from Dasht-i
Qipchaq by the Mongols, invaded Bulgaria and then Thrace. In 1241
one more group of Cumans, who numbered at least 10,000, invaded
Bulgaria, Thrace and Macedonia on their way from Hungary. Around
1241/1242 John III Vatatzes brought the Balkan Cumans over by ne�
gotiations and gifts and enlisted them in the Byzantine army. Some
Cumans were transferred to Anatolia, to the Byzantine-Saljuq border,
while others were given lands for habitation in Thrace and Macedo�
nia.27 However, we do not know where exactly in Macedonia John III
19 19�
PLP, nos. 12004, 12005, 12006, 12007, 12008, 12011, 12012, 93832, 93833.
20 20�
PLP, nos. 11997– 11998.
21 21�
PLP, nos. 11999– 12002.
22 22�
PLP, nos. 93830–93831.
23 23�
PLP, no. 4155.
24 24�
PLP, no. 30614.
25 25�
For ample examples consult an old work: F. Miklosich, Die Bildung der Slavischen
Personen- und Ortsnamen, in Denkschriften der Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische
Klasse, Wien, 1860–1874 (repr. Heidelberg, 1927), S. 16.
26 26�
A.P. Kazhdan, Sotsial’nyi sostav gospodstvuiuscheo klassa Vizantii XI–XII v. Moscow,
1974, p. 215. See ��
now: I. Vásáry, Cumans and Tatars. Oriental Military in the Pre-Ottoman
Balkans, 1185–1365, Cambridge, 2005.
27 27�
Nicephori Gregorae byzantina historia, ed. L. Schopen, I. Bekker, vol. 1–2, Bonn,
1829–1830, vol. 1, II, ��
5 (��
p. 37); Georgii Acropolitae opera, ed. A. Heisenberg, P. Wirth,
vol. 1, Stuttgart, 1978, p. 53–54, 65; Pachymérès, Relations Historiques, vol. 1, I, 3 (p.
27.23); Vásáry, Cumans and Tatars cit., p. 64–68; Asdracha, La région des Rhodopes cit., p. 81;
Vatatzes distributed lands to them. The Cuman detachments of the
Byzantine army operating in the Balkans were referred to in the
sources for the next several decades. One more reference to a massi�
ve group of Cumans (around 2,000) in the Byzantine armed forces
relate to the 1320s: in 1327 Andronikos III, suspecting the Cuman
detachments of a lack of loyalty, ordered them to move to Lemnos,
Thasos and Lesbos.28
In the Byzantine Empire, Cumans were probably settled in colo�
nies.29 Although, undoubtedly, most Cumans still kept to a nomadic
way of life, some of them, as my list testifies, had adopted sedentary
life and become peasants.
Due to the fact that the Qipchaqs of the Northern Black Sea step�
pes were Islamized to a lesser extent as compared to Anatolian Turks,
in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, they as a rule bore purely
Turkic names and nicknames.
Seemingly, most of the standard Muslim names referred to the in�
comers from Anatolia: ᾿Αλιάζης (← Ar. ‫ اﻠﻳﺎس‬Ilyās Bibl. “Elijah”),30 Γαζῆς
(← Ar. ‫ ﻏﺎزى‬ghāzī “conqueror, hero, especially, combating infidels”,
passed to Tk. gazi through Persian mediation),31 Μαχµούτης (← Ar.
‫ ﻣﺣﻣود‬mah  mūd “praised”),32 Μουσταφάς (← Ar. ‫ ﻣﺻطﻔﻰ‬mustafā “cho�
sen, elect”),33 Μυσούρης (Ar. ‫ ﻣﻧﺻور‬mansūr “victor”),34 Σαλαχατηνός
(← Tk. salahaddin/salaheddin ← Ar. ‫اﻟدﻳن‬ ‫ﺻﻼح‬ alāh
s  al-dīn “righteou�
sness of religion”)35 etc.
M. Angold, A Byzantine Government in Exile, Oxford, 1975, p. 105, 18; M. Bartusis, On

the Problem of Smallholding Soldiers in Late Byzantium, in: Dumbarton Oaks Papers, vol. 44,
1990, p. 12; M. Bartusis, The Late Byzantine Army: Arms and Society, 1204–1453, Philadel�
phia, 1992, p. 26–27; A. Savvides, Οι� Κομάνοι�
�� (��
��
κουμάνοι��) και�
�� το�
�� Βυζάντιο�
�� (11
� ος–13ος αι��
��. Μ��
��
.��
Χ��
.),
in: Βυζαντινά, vol. 13, 1985, p. 949–953.
28 28�
Ioannis Cantacuzeni eximperatoris historiarum libri iv, ed. L. Schopen, vol. 1–3, Bonn,
1828–1832, vol. 1, p. 259; Asdracha, La région des Rhodopes cit.�� , p. 82.
29 29�
Bartusis, The Late Byzantine Army cit., p. 158–159.
30 30�
PLP, no. 654.
31 31�
PLP, nos. 3444, 3450, 3452, 93299;
32 32�
PLP, no. 17539.
33 33�
PLP, no. 94212.
34 34�
PLP, no. 19898.
35 35�
PLP, no. 24747.
86 Rustam SHUKUROV
The names Τοῦρκος,36 belonging to several individuals, and

Τουρκίτζη37 might have designated both Qipchaq and Oğuz Turks.
Τουρκόπουλος had several meanings being a designation of Turkic
troops, of Turkish captives and of the descendants of both former
groups; it was applied to Anatolian Turks mostly but not exclusively.38
The names Σαρακηνός39 and Σαρακηνόπουλος40 might well have belon�
ged to any of the newcomers from the Muslim Orient and in this case
most likely indicate Anatolian Turks as well.
Few individuals might well have been Asians of non-Turkish origin
as Δαµασκηνός41 (that is originated from Damascus) and Βαβυλωνίτης42
(that is originated from Baghdad). Βαρβαρηνός43 might have been one
of the Βαρβαρηνοί (← Ar. ethnic name barbar ?, however, the Berbers
call themselves amazigh)44, a company of mercenaries, who probably
came from North Africa and were in Byzantine service as light cavalry
troops. Barbarenoi were collective pronoia holders between ca. 1327
through the late 1340s in Kalamarian localities of Rousaiou, Leon�
taria, Patrikona, St. Mamas and possibly Barbarikion (see Map 2 and
also below).45
The name ᾿Αλανός (from ethnic name ᾿Αλανός, the Iranian tribe of
the Alans)46 refers probably to those 16,000 Alans who moved to the
Empire ca. 1301–1302 fleeing from the Golden Hord.47
The numerical expression of the ethnic affiliation of the names
36 36�
PLP, nos. 29186, 29190, 29191.
37 37�
PLP, no. 29169.
38 38�
Bartusis, The Late Byzantine Army cit., p. 61–62.
39 39�
PLP, nos. 24860–��
24864.
��
40 40�
PLP, no. 24856.
41 41�
PLP, no. 5043.
42 42�
PLP, no. 91416.
43 43�
PLP, no. 2166.
44 44�
PLP, no. 2165.
45 45�
N. Oikonomidès, À propos des armées des premiers Paléologues et des compagnies de sol-
dats, in Travaux et mémoires, t. 8 [Hommage à Monsieur Paul Lemerle], 1981, p. 360ff ; M. Bar-
tusis, The Late Byzantine Army, p. 201–202, see also Index; J. Lefort,Villages de Macédoine:
notices historiques et topographiques sur la Macédoine orientale au Moyen Âge. 1. La Chalcidique
occidentale, Paris, 1982, p. 92, 116, 139, 146.
46 46�
PLP, no. 546��
(before
��
1341).
47 47�
Georges Pachymérès, X, 16 (p. 336ff).
listed is represented in the following charts (percentage figures are
rounded off):
Table 1:
Origin Names Percentage

Anatolian 87 75%
Qipchaq 22 19%
Other 5 6%
Total 114 100%
The prevalence of Muslim names indicates the increasing role of

Anatolian Turkish influx in the Balkans. In particular, it might have
been a consequence of the massive emigration of Anatolian Turks,
both sedentary and nomadic, accompanying the Saljuq Sultan ‘Izz al-
Dīn Kay Kāwus II, (b. 1237–d. 1279/1280) who fled to the court
of Michael VIII Palaiologos (1259–1282) in 1261 and stayed in By�
zantium until 1264. The Sultan was followed by his courtiers, troops
loyal to him and nomadic Turks from Western Anatolia who did not
accept the Mongol domination. It seems that the move of ‘Izz al-Dīn
Kay Kāwus’ partisans to the Byzantine Empire continued for some
time after the settling of the Sultan there. Although we do not have
even rough figures for the numbers of the Turkish immigrants in the
beginning of the 1260s, it seems that they were numerous enough to
influence noticeably the ethnic situation in the Balkans.48 Civil wars
in the Empire in the fourteenth century and the growth of the Turkish
military presence in the Balkans entailed further repeating injections
of Anatolian settlers into the Macedonian population.
It is very probable that most Asians listed in the database or their
48 48�
P. Wittek, La descendance chrétienne de la dynastie Seldjouk en Macédoine // Échos d’Orient.
No. 176. 1934. P. 409–412 ; P. Wittek, Yazijioghlu ‘Ali on the Christian Turks of the Dobruja,
in BSOAS, vol. XIV/3, 1952, p. 639–668 ; P. Wittek, Les Gagaouzes = Les gens de Kaykaus, in
Rocznik Orientalistyczny, t. XVII, 1951–1952, p. 12–24 ; Charanis, The Transfer of Population
as a Policy in the Byzantine Empire cit., p. 150.
88 Rustam SHUKUROV
immediate ancestors were initially in the military service either as im�

migrants or as mercenaries hired by the government. In any case, the
available narrative sources for that time do not provide any other ex�
planation for the resettlement of Asians in the Byzantine territories.
Both Anatolian and Qipchaq troops performed the function of light
cavalry and light horse archers.49
4. Toponymic Evidence
The evidence of Macedonian place names matches well the data

given by personal names. However, often it is not clear when these pla�
ce names appeared. The Turkic toponymics may be divided into two
groups by origin. First, the group of Qipchaq place-names:
Kοµανίτζης, 1325-1338, northeast of Berroia, the place name deri�
ved from the former owner’s name.50
Kuman'ski Brod, 1300, location unidentified, near Skopje, in the
valley of the Vardar, mentioned in the documents of the monastery of
St. George Gorgo in the vicinity of Skopje;51
Kumanci Spanci, 1481, Western Macedonia, microtoponymics in
Spanci (today Phanos 20 km southeast of Phlorina);52
Kumaničevo, 1372–1375, the southern part of the valley of the
Vardar;53
Kumanova, 1467–1468, 23 km southeast of Skopje, contemporary
name Gumalevo;54
The second group of names is plausibly a vestige of the presence in
Macedonia of the Anatolian Turks:
Γαζῆς (← Ar. ghāzī see above), late thirteenth–early fourteenth cen�
49 49�
Bartusis, The Late Byzantine Army cit., p. 257–258, 330.
50 50�
V. Kravari, Villes et villages de Macédoine occidentale, Paris, 1989, p. 76-78 ; PLP, no.
11999.
51 51�
Ibid., p. 133.
52 52�
Ibidem
53 53�
Ibidem
54 54�
Ibid., p. 132.
tury?, a place near Rousaiou in Kalamaria, probably called after the
name of its former pronoiar; by 1327, it was occupied by a company of
Barbarenoi soldiers;55
Kουµουτζούλου, Kουµουντζούλου (? ← Τκ. kümcülü “having a buried
treasure”, where kümcü ← kümüncü “a buried treasure”56; cf. Ott. gömü
“a buried treasure”) 1301–mid-15th c., in Kalamaria near Neocho�
rakion;57
Μελίκι (← Ar. ‫ ﻣﻟﮏ‬malik “king”, passed to Tk. melik through Per�
sian mediation), the late thirteenth–early fourteenth century?, east of
Berroia, probably called after the name of its former pronoiar.58
The following place names could initially designate both Qipchaq
and Anatolian Turks:
Τουρκοχώριον/Tjurki Hor (“Turk��
i��
sh village”), 14th c.?, contemporary
Patris, 5 km north-northwest of Berroia in the foothills of Bermion;59
Τουρκοχώριον, ca. 1302, probably near Gabriane in Kalamaria.
Its localization is not clear; Lefort localizes it west of Thessalonike,60
however a document of the Laura monastery (chrysoboullon sigillion of
Andronikos II Palaiologos) referred to it together with Gabriane (τὴν
Γαβρίανην καὶ τὸ Τουρκοχώριον); it is important that the chrysobull con�
cerns the region of Kalamaria exclusively, mentioning no places out�
side the region.61 Τουρκοχώριον has been localized in Kalamaria also
by the editors of the Acts of Lavra.62 I join the editors of the Acts in
localizing it somewhere near Gabriane.
55 55�
Actes de Docheiariou. Texte, éd. N. Oikonomidès, Paris, 1984, no. 18.13 (p. 142), p.
140; J. Lefort,Villages de Macédoine, p. 139.
56 56�
G. Clauson, An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish, Oxford,
1972, p. 722.
57 57�
Lefort,Villages de Macédoine cit., p. 83–84.
58
G. Chionides,῾Ιστορία� τῆς�
�� Βεροίας��
��, τῆς�
�� πόλεως�
�� καὶ�
�� περιοχῆς,
�� Thessalonike, 1970, p. 103,
161; G. Theocharides, Μία� διαθήκη� �� κα��
��ì μία�
��
δίκη� Βυζαντινή��
��. ᾽Ανέκδοτα�
�� Βατοπεδινὰ�
�� ἔγγραφα,
��
Thessalonike, 1962, p. 68 (map).
59 59�
Kravari, Villes et villages de Macédoine occidentale cit., p. 91.
60 60�
Lefort, Villages de Macédoine cit., p. 61, 62 note 2, 110
61 61�
Actes de Lavra, ed. P. Lemerle, A. Guillou, N. Svoronos, D. Papachryssanthou,
S. Çirkoviç, vol. 1–4, Paris, 1970–1982, vol. 2, no. 94.23 (p. 123).
62 62�
Actes de Lavra, vol. 4, p. 91-92, 98, 151, 156.
90 Rustam SHUKUROV
Finally, Βαρβαρίκιον, the fourteenth century, a microtoponymic in

the village of Krya Pegadia in Kalamaria,63 which, probably derived
its name from Βαρβαρηνοί soldiers (see above).
It is remarkable that the place names derived from “Cuman” are
mostly located in the northern and western parts of Macedonia, while
Anatolian Turkic place names are found exclusively in Macedonia’s
southern regions, and especially around Berroia and in Kalamaria. We
shall return to this observation later.
5. Peasants, Intellectuals and Aristocracy
Generally speaking, my list contains three types of personal names:

first names, sobriquets and family names. In most cases it is impossible
to distinguish sobriquets from family names. The Byzantine peasants
and middle classes were commonly identified either by a baptismal
name or by a sobriquet that was usually a professional name or a nick�
name indicating a specific feature of character or physical appearance.
Common people often were identified by their family relations (like
“father of”, “son-in-law of”, etc.). A name might also have been the
combination of a baptismal name and other means of identification
like a nickname. In most cases, nicknames existed within a single ge�
neration. The term “family name” in its proper sense should not be
applied to the material under discussion for its substantial ambiguity
in the Byzantine context. However, there is one essential exception:
aristocratic families with high social status did possess a kind of fami�
ly name. The second names of aristocracy were a sort of patronymic,
that is an ancestor’s name (or names) used as a common identifier for a
group of relatives. The possession of a patronymic by itself was a clear
indication of high status and noble ancestry.64 Under the aristocracy
63 63�
Actes de Lavra, vol. 2, no. 108.485 (p. 202), vol. 4, p. 98 ; Lefort, Villages de Macédoine
cit., p. 90.
64 64�
On nicknames and patronyms in Byzantine anthroponymics see, for instance: A.P.
Kazhdan, Ob aristokratizatsii vizantiiskogo obschestva VIII–XII vv. (On Aristocratisation of By-
zantine Society in the Eighth-Twelfth Centuries), in Zbornik radova Vizantoloshkog instituta, vol. 11,
here I mean, on the one hand, high-ranking military and civilian offi�
cials, and, on the other hand, the holders of patronyms, which conti�
nued existing through several generations.
The persons included in my list belonged to different strata of By�
zantine social hierarchy and were of different property status. Here
follow some numerical expressions of the social standing of the holders
of Oriental names (percentage figures are rounded off):
Table 2: Social Standing
Status Names Percentage

Aristocracy and Pronoiars 36 32%
Clerics, Monks and Intellectuals 6 5%
Merchants 3 3%
Small-holders and Paroikoi 64 56%
A major part of the owners of Oriental names were engaged in what

may be called the material sphere of life: in administration, warfare
and rural economy. The percentage of clerics, monks and intellectuals
is rather low. This social affiliation of the newcomers is quite expecta�
ble. For a newcomer it was easier to find a social niche for himself in
ordinary affairs, rather than in intellectual activity which presupposes
deep immersion into the local culture. Outward adoption of Christia�
nity was not sufficient here. The predominance of aristocracy and pro-
noiars probably indicates that many of the newcomers were or initially
had been soldiers, most likely mercenaries. The practice of allotting
1968, p. 47–53; Laiou, Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire. A Social and Demographic
Study, p. 118–120; E. Patlagean, Les débuts d’une aristocratie byzantine et le témoignage de l’his-
toriographie : système des noms et liens de parenté aux IXe–Xe siècles, in The Byzantine Aristocracy (XI
to XIII Centuries), ed. M. Angold, Oxford, 1984, p. 23–41; J.-Cl. Cheynet, �� Du prénom au
patronyme: les étrangers à Byzance (Xe–XIIe siècles), in Studies in Byzantine Sigillography, ed. N.
Oikonomidès, Washington, 1987, p. 57–66.
92 Rustam SHUKUROV
to mercenaries pronoia as payment for their service was widespread in

Byzantium at the end of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.65
The percentage of small-holding peasants and paroikoi (56%) is
rather high and considerably differs from the general figures of PLP:
PLP, for instance, lists only 17% paroikoi from the total number of
Byzantine residents, while the present database contains 31% paroikoi.
It may be an indication of the fact that the Turkic settlers filled up
mostly the lower classes of the society.
The peasants and paroikoi of my list might also have been either
Qipchaq and Anatolian émigrés accompanying their compatriots who
were enlisted as mercenaries, or the second generation of immigrants
settled on the lands.
The database includes the patronyms of at least five noble families:
᾿Αναταυλᾶς (← Tk. aynadawla ← Ar. ‘Ayn al-Dawla, Ar. honorary ti�
tle “the Source of Power”, “the Eye of the State”),66 ᾿Ιαγούπης (← Ar.
Yacqūb Biblical “Jacob”),67 Μασγιδᾶς (← Gk. μασγίδιον ← Ar. masjīd
“mosque”),68 Μελίκης (←Ar. malik “king”, see also above),69 Σουλτᾶνος
(← Ar. sultān “sovereign, king”).70 Some of these noble families have
already been described in the scholarly literature.
It is curious that, under certain conditions, Asian family names could
become quite prestigious in Byzantine society, and their holders might
have preserved them for many generations.
Only in one case do we know a family’s ancestor: as V. Laurent has
shown, the progenitor of the Melikai was probably Melik Constantine,
the youngest son of the Saljuq sultan ‘Izz al-Dīn Kay Kāwus.71 Some of
the children of the Sultan, at least three of them (two sons and a dau�
65 65�
Bartusis, On the Problem of Smallholding Soldiers cit., p. 1–126; Bartusis, The Late
Byzantine Army cit.��
, p. 157–190.
66 66�
PLP, nos. 868–871.
67 67�
PLP, nos. 7816, 7822, 7824, 92055.
68 68�
PLP, nos. 17216– 17224, 94096, 94097.
69 69�
PLP, nos. 17784, 17787.
70 70�
PLP, nos. 26334–26340.
71 71�
V. Laurent, Une famille turque au service de Byzance : les Mélikès, in Byzantinische Zeits-
chrift, 1956, Bd. 49, S. 349–368.
ghter), settled in the Empire. In this case, the family name is a direct
reference to the royal blood of the family’s ancestor.
The question of the origin of the Soultanoi family is rather com�
plicated. The earliest known member of the family of the Soultanoi,
᾿Αθανάσιος Σουλτάνος, is mentioned in two acts of Vatopedi monastery
and appears to be the founder of the Byzantine lineage.72 He had a dau�
ghter, Eudokia, who, around 1279, married Theodoros Sarantinos, a
high-ranking Byzantine official. The wife of Athanasios Soultanos was
a noble lady whose family name included the most renowned aristocra�
tic patronyms of the Empire: Doukaina Angelina Komnene. It means
that Athanasios himself must have belonged to the highest aristocratic
strata of the Empire, thanks to his noble lineage. G. Theocharides first
suggested that he was a brother or a son of ‘Izz al-Dīn Kay Kāwus II
and had married an unknown sister of Michael Palaiologos.73 E. Zacha�
riadou later identified Athanasios Soultanos as one of the sons of ‘Izz
al-Dīn Kay Kāwus II who remained in Byzantium after the escape of
his father.74 This hypothesis has been accepted as proven by G. Chioni�
des.75 But the editors of PLP have questioned this identification. The
editors of the acts of Vatopedi referred to Zachariadou’s identification
but have withheld judgement on it.
Reasons to doubt this identification are rather serious. If Athana�
sios Soultanos’ daughter Eudokia reached marriageable age (at least
12 years old) and was married at the latest by 1279, it means that she
was born not later than 1267 but most likely much earlier since it was
exceptionally rare for Byzantine girls to be married at that young age.
In such a case, Athanasios was born no later than 1250-1251 to reach
reproductive age (16-17 years) by the time of the birth of his daughter.
In such a case, he could not have been the son of ‘Izz al-Dīn Kay Kāwus
72 72�
Actes de Vatopedi, éd. J. Bompaire, J. Lefort, V. Kravari, Ch. Giros, Paris, 2001,
vol. 1, no. 62, p. 334, 336.71–72; no. ��
64, p. 344–361.
73 73�
Theocharides, Μία� διαθήκη�
�� κα��
��ì μία�
��
δίκη� Βυζαντινή
�� cit.��
, p. 55 note 6.
74 74�
E. Zachariadou, Οἱ� ��
χριστιανο��ì ��
ἀπόγονοι� ��
τοῦ� ��
᾽Ιζζεδ��
ì��ν� ��
Καικαοὺς� ��
Β��’ ��
στὴ� ��
Βέροια, in
Μακεδονικ�ά, 1964–1965, vol. 6, p. 62–74.
75 75�
G. Chionides, ῾Ιστορία� τῆς�� Βεροίας��
��, τῆς�
�� πόλεως�
�� καὶ�
�� περιοχῆς.
�� Thessalonike, 1970. p.
115–117.
94 Rustam SHUKUROV
II for the latter was born in 1237 (or 1235), and in 1250-1251 he was
only 13-14 (or 15–16). At the same time, it is known that the eldest
son of ‘Izz al-Dīn was Mas‘ūd. Therefore, the identification of Athana�
sios Soultanos as a son of ‘Izz al-Dīn Kay Kāwus II is chronologically
impossible. However, we do not yet have any plausible hypothesis to
explain Athanasios family name and his high position in the social
hierarchy of Byzantine society. It is most likely that, judging by his
family name and status, he was a member of the Saljuqid ruling house
and came to Byzantium with ‘Izz al-Dīn Kay Kāwus II. However, the
question of the degree of his kinship to the latter remains open76.
Nothing is known about the Asian progenitor of the Anataulai,
however it is obvious that he must have been quite a prominent per�
son. The honorary title (laqab) ‘ayn al-dawla was well-known at the
courts of Muslim rulers. Since the ninth century, laqabs with the com�
ponent dawla belonged to highest Muslim court officials and military
commanders, as well as to supreme rulers (viziers, sultans).77 In the
Saljuqid period, according to the Saljuqid great vizier Nizām al-Mulk,
“…the titles dīn, islām suit four grades of persons: first are rulers, se�
cond are viziers, third are ‘ulamā, fourth are amīrs, who are constantly
engaged in holy war and contribute to the victory of Islam.”78 Howe�
ver, since the twelfth century, the prestige of the titles with the com�
ponent dawla had been declining.79 Hence, the Muslim progenitor of
the Byzantine family of the Anataulai probably was a senior military
officer, or perhaps even a governor. Very likely, he originated from
Anatolia as the titles with the element dawla do not seem to have been
76 76�
More details see: R. Shukurov, Semeistvo ‘Izz al-Dina Kay Kawusa II v Vizantii (The
Family of ‘Izz al-Din Kay Kawus II in Byzantium), in VV. 2008. T. 67 (92) (forthcoming).
77 77�
C.A. Bosworth, Lakab, in The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition, Leiden, 2004. Vol.
5. P. 621b,
�� 622b.
��
78 78�
See the entry “Laqab” in: Dehkhodâ Aliakbar, Loghatnâme (Dictionary), CD Version,
Tehran, 2000; I have at hand only a Russian edition of Nizam al-Mulk’s book, Nizam al-
Mulk, Kniga ob upravlenii gosudarstvom, transl. B.N. Zakhoder, Dushanbe, 1998, p. 127.
79 79�
C.A. Bosworth, Lakab, p. ��
623a.
widespread in the Golden Horde. It is also probable that he came to
the Balkans with the Saljuq sultan ‘Izz al-Dīn Kay Kāwus II.80
As to the Iagoupai, here again it is difficult to judge the status of
the family’s progenitor, because the name was very common in the
Muslim world and could belong to both commoners and noble per�
sons. However, as the descendants of the Byzantine Iagoupai jealously
preserved the patronym for the next eight generations, their Muslim
progenitor must have been a person of prominence and rank. By kee�
ping their patronym, descendants appealed to the glory and nobility
of their ancestor. It is not impossible that the Turkic ancestor belonged
to the ruling family of the emirate of Germiyan, a Turkmen state with
the capital in Kütahya. Some considerations in favour of this sugge�
stion have been published elsewhere.81
In conclusion, it must be noted that the exceedingly high percen�
tage of aristocracy in the database (about ¼) is hardly justifiable and
can be explained by the nature of the available sources. Despite the
high percentage of aristocracy in the list, of course, aristocrats were si�
gnificantly fewer when compared with the middle and lower classes.
6. The Nucleus Areas of the Turkic Ethnic Presence in By�

zantine Macedonia
Quite remarkable is the fact that if one places the holders of Orien�
tal names on the geographical map, it becomes obvious that their di�
stribution in Macedonia was not at all even. The places of residence
marked on the map outline rather compact areas. It is quite remarka�
ble that the names marked on the map aggregate into several con�
glomerations. These regions represent the nucleus areas of the Turkic
ethic presence in Macedonia: the lower Strymon, Serres, Berroia and
Lake Joannitsa (swamps), the valleys of the rivers Vardar and Strymon,
80 80�
R. Shukurov, Anatavly: tiurkskaia familiia na vizantiiskoi sluzhbe (Anataulai: a Turkish
Family in Byzantine Service).
81 81�
R. Shukurov, Iagoupy: tiurkskaia familiia na vizantiiskoi sluzhbe (Iagoupai: a Turkish
Family in Byzantine Service).
96 Rustam SHUKUROV
Thessalonike, Kalamaria in the Chalkidike, and finally Hierissos and

Lake Bolbe. A brief description of the most remarkable regions will be
given below.
6.1. The lower Strymon and Serres (Map 1)
Although we have no reliable statistical figures, this seems to have

been one of the most populated areas of Late Byzantium. The concen�
tration of Turkic settlers appears to be one of the highest in Macedo�
nia: 30% of Oriental names are located there. These Asians constitute
about 1.7% of the total number of the names registered in PLP for
the regions of Strymon and Serres. Both Qipchaq and Anatolian inco�
mers are represented there with some preponderance of the latter: the
ratio between Qipchaq and Anatolian Turks is 1:2. The localities with
Oriental settlers are marked on Map 1.
Among Qipchaq names should be noted Κόµανος (Radolibos, Lai�
min),82 Κοµανίτζης (Radolibos),83 Κοµάνα (Melitziani);84 probably to the
same group belongs Καζανία (Loukobikeia).85
The names of ᾿Αβραµπάκης (Serres),86 Κατζάριος (Melitziani),87
Μασγιδᾶς (Serres, Kotzakion, St. Prodromos, Malouka),88 Μελίκης
(Kamenikeia),89 Σουλιµᾶς (Doxompus),90 Τουρµπασᾶς (Radolibus) be�
longed to Anatolian Turks.91 In the historical work of Yazıcı-oğlu Ali
82 82�
PLP, nos. 12004, 12005, 12007
83 83�
PLP, nos. 12000–12002.
84 84�
PLP, no. 11997. ᾿Αβραµπάκης ← Ar. ‫ اﺑراﻫﻳم‬ibrāhīm “Abraham” + Tk. bek “ruler, chief�
tain etc.” (G. Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica, Bd. 2, Leiden, 1983, S. 54).
85 85�
PLP, no. 10116;
��
likely Kazania is the fem. form of Kazanes (← Tk. kazan “cauldron”).
86 86�
PLP, no. 60.
��
87 87�
PLP, no. 11492. Κατζάριος� ← Tk. kaçar/qajar “moving swiftly, fleeing”, from the Tur
kmen tribal name Qajar (see: Sulejman Efendi, Čagataj-Osmanisches Wörterbuch, bearbeitet
von I. Kúnos, Budapest, 1902, S. 112)?
88 88�
PLP, no. 17216, 17219, 17221, 17222, 94097.
89 89�
PLP, no. 17787.
��
90 90�
PLP, nos. 26329–26330. Seemingly Σουλι�� ᾶς� ← Ar. Sulaymān “Solomon” (G. Mora�
µ��
vcsik, Bd. 2, S. 286).
91 91�
πασᾶς� ← Tk. turum or turun “resembling a stallion” (see: G. Clau�
PLP, no. 29194, Τουρ��
µ��
son, An Etymological Dictionary, p. 549; Sulejman Efendi, Čagataj-Osmanisches Wörterbuch, S. 197)
+ Tk. pasha “leader, commander” (← Per. pāshā contracted form of ‫ �ﭘﺎدﺷﺎه‬pādshāh “king”)?
the names of two members of the aristocratic family of the Σουλτάνοι
Δηµήτριος and Μιχαήλ (dīmitri sultān, mīkhū sultān) are found; these
were residents of Zichna after 1387 and had blood links with the Ly�
zikoi family (Λυζικοί).92
Σαρακηνός (Melitziani, Eunouchou, Serres)93 and Σαρακηνόπουλος
(Chrysoupolis)94 were most probably of Anatolian Turkic origin as well.
Δαµασκηνός (Drama)95 might well have been an Asian of non-Tu�
rkic origin; Βαρβαρηνός (Prinarion/Aeidarokastron),96 probably, was
one of the Barbarenoi soldiers (see also above).
In connection with the resettlement of the Turks, a remarkable
feature can be observed: it is not impossible that Turkic rural settlers
were kept far from the main centres of the region such as the cities of
Serres, Zichna and Drama and settled closer to the sea.
The Lower Strymon is known as a region where Byzantine mer�
cenaries were settled as was the case of the Prosalentai, Imperial navy
rowers who were assigned land in the area east of the mouth of the
Strymon.97 It is interesting to note that paroikos Γεώργιος Βαρβαρηνός
who, as noted above, might have been a member of the Barbarenoi
soldier company, lived in the coastal location of Prinarion close to the
mouth of the Strymon. It is not impossible that the Turkic mercenaries
and Barbarenoi were assigned lands for their service in that region.
6.2. Kalamaria in Western Chalkidike (Map 2).
Kalamaria represents a rather high level of the concentration of

Oriental names, approximately 16% of the total Oriental names for
Macedonia. Oriental residents constitute as little as 1% of the number
of the persons referred to by PLP for Kalamaria.
92 92�
Wittek, Yazijioghlu Ali cit.��
��
, p. 650–651; P. Wittek, Les gagaouzes, 19ff. ��
Probably,
the progenitor of the Lyzikoi was Slav: Z. Đoković, Stanovništvo istočne Makedonije, p. 202.
93 93�
PLP, nos. 24860, 24861, 24863, 24864;
94 94�
PLP, no. 24856.
95 95�
PLP, no. 5043.
96 96�
PLP, no. 2166.
97 97�
Bartusis, The Late Byzantine Army cit.��
, p. 48–49.
98 Rustam SHUKUROV
The Qipchaq presence in Kalamaria is attested by the names Κόµανος

(Belona, Panagia)98 and Κοµάνα (Stomion).99 Anatolian Turks are more
numerous: ᾿Αναταυλᾶς (Portarea),100 ᾽Ιαούπης (Sarantarea)101, ᾿Ιαγούπης
(St. Paramonos),102 Μασοῦρος (Paschalia)�.103 The names Τοῦρκος (Hagia
Trias, Aphetos, Kato Bolbos),104 Τουρκίτζη (Drymosita),105 Τουρκόπουλος
(Pinsson)106 are equally applicable to Qipchaq and Anatolian Turks.
Anthroponymic data is supported here by the local Oriental pla�
ce names that are of both Qipchaq and Oghuz origin: Τουρκοχώριον,
Kουµουτζούλου, Γαζῆς, and Βαρβαρίκιον (see also above). These places
belong to the same area where the Oriental settlers were located. As
it is seen from the map, the Turkic settlers occupied the southwestern
part of Kalamaria closer to coastal areas. We see here, probably, the
same logic as in the case of the Lower Strymon: the Byzantine authori�
ties intentionally kept Turkic settlers away from Thessalonike, the city
being second in importance to Constantinople.
6.3. Berroia and Lake Joannitsa (Map 3)
This area divides into two sub-areas: the first one centres on Berroia
and the second one gravitates towards marches and swamps of Joannit�
sa. The high level of the concentration of Turkic names is represented
by the region of Berroia. This area was probably occupied by both
Qipchaq and Anatolian Turks. The place name Kοµανίτζης, being a de�
rivation form the name of a landowner and located northeast of Berroia
(see above), indicates the presence of Qipchaqs here. It is curious that
an Asian, the paroikos Νικόλαος Τοῦρκος, was a resident of Kοµανίτζης
98 98�
PLP, nos. 93833, 12012.
99 99�
PLP, no. 11998.
100 100�
PLP, nos. 869, 871.
101 101�
PLP, no. 7816.
102 102�
PLP, no. 7824.
103 103�
PLP, no. 17232.
104 104�
PLP, nos. 29186, 29190.
105 105�
PLP, no. 29169.
106 106�
PLP, no. 29182.
in 1338.107 If it is not a coincidence, this instance demonstrates that
the sobriquet Τοῦρκος was probably applicable to Cumans.
However, most of the Oriental residents were probably incomers
from Anatolia. Some members of the family of the sultan ‘Izz al-Dīn
Kay Kāwus II were settled by Byzantine authorities in the region of
Berroia: his mother Προδουλία (?, in a Persian source bardūliya), pos�
sibly his wife, sister, daughter and his son Constantine Melik were
residents of Berroia.108 It is not impossible that other Asian residents of
Berroia (Μυσούρης,109 Μελίκ110 and ᾿Αστραπύρης Μελίκης111) were Ana�
tolian Turks or their descendants. The local villages of Τουρκοχώριον
and Μελίκι most likely obtained their names from Turks of Anatolian
descent.
In the region of Berroia and the swamps near Lake Joannitsa,
there were lands belonging to the family of the Soultanoi who were
very likely linked with the Saljuq ruling house (see above): Θεοδώρα
Μονοµαχίνα Σουλτανίνα (Berroia),112 Ξένη Παλαιολογίνα Σουλτανίνα
(Nesion, Resaine),113 ᾿Αθανάσιος Σουλτάνος (Κομανίτζη),114 ᾿Αλέξιος
Σουλτάνος Παλαιολόγος (Nesion),115 ∆ηµήτριος Σουλτάνος Παλαιολόγος
(Resaine),116 Σουλτάνος Παλαιολόγος (Berroia).117 It is worth noting
that ᾿Αθανάσιος Σουλτάνος, being undoubtedly of Anatolian Turkish
blood, possessed land in Κομανίτζη, a location named after its former
Cuman owner. If this place belonged initially to a Slavicized Cuman,
107 107�
PLP, no. 29191.
108 108�
P. Wittek, La descendance chrétienne de la dynastie Seldjouk en Macédoine cit.; Wit-
tek, Yazijioghlu ‘Ali on the Christian Turks of the Dobruja cit.; P. Wittek, Les Gagaouzes =
Les gens de Kaykaus; E. Zachariadou, Οἱ χριστιανο�� ì ἀπόγονοι��
��
τοῦ��
��
᾽Ιζζεδ��
��
ì��
ν��
Καικαοὺς�
��
Β��
��’ στὴ�
��
Βέροια��
. More details on the family of the sultan ‘Izz
��
al-Dīn Kay Kāwus II see also: R. Shuku-
rov, Semeistvo ‘Izz al-Dina Kay Kawusa v Vizantii (The Family of ‘Izz al-Din Kay Kawus in
Byzantium).
109 109�
PLP, no. 19898.
110 110�
PLP, nos. 17784 and 92662.
111 111�
PLP, no. 1597.
112 112�
PLP, no. 26335.
113 113�
PLP, no. 26336.
114 114�
PLP, no. 26337.
115 115�
PLP, no. 26338.
116 116�
PLP, no. 26340.
117 117�
PLP, no. 26341.
100 Rustam SHUKUROV
and then was transferred to an Anatolian Turk, one may see here cer�
tain continuity: one may wonder whether traditionally this area was
intended for allotting Turkic migrants with arable land?
Near Lake Jannitsa were located the lands of the aristocratic fami�
ly of the Lyzikoi who apparently had blood links with the Soultanoi��;�
Berrhoia was the native land of Γεώργιος Λυζικός.118
The Oriental names for that area make up 15% of the list of Orien�
tal names for Macedonia, and 10% of the total number of region’s re�
sidents in PLP. It is the highest percentage of Asian settlers among all
the Macedonian regions. Of course, it is quite possible that it was that
area and especially the localities adjoining the swamps near Lake Jan�
nitsa that were extensively used for the resettling of Turkic incomers.
However, the high percentage of Asians here may also be explained by
the fact that the most frequently mentioned Oriental names in the area
belonged to renowned aristocratic families (the Soultanoi, Melikai, Ly�
zikoi) who were mentioned disproportionately frequently as compared
with common people.
6.4. The Vardar valley, Skopje, the Strumiza (Map 4)
The Asians in this area, it seems, were predominantly Qipchaqs.

The toponymics in the neighbourhood of Skopje and the Vardar river
imply exclusively Cumans: Kuman'ski Brod near Skopje, in the valley
of the Vardar; Kumaničevo in the southern part of the valley of the Var�
dar; Kumanova southeast of Skopje (for these place names see above).
The Asians of Palaiokastron in the Strumiza region were of Qipchaq
descent as well: Κόµανος (Strumitza/Palaiokastron),119 Κοµάνκα (Stru-
mitza/Palaiokastron),120 and very likely Τουρκόπουλος (Strumitza/Pa�
laiokastron).121
However, there could have been one important exception. In the
tenth century, the Vardar valley was most likely resettled by Hungarian
118 118�
PLP, no. 15196.
119 119�
PLP, no. 93832.
120 120�
PLP, nos. 93830–93831.
121 121�
PLP, no. 29178.
mercenaries who were enlisted in a special detachment of the Imperial
bodyguards called Τούρκοι Βαρδαριώται.122 As late as the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries, Byzantine narrative sources still referred to the
detachment of the palace guard recruited from the Vardariot Turks.123
If one takes into consideration the available information about the eth�
nic composition of the region, it would seem improbable that, in the
fourteenth century, the Vardariot guards were still ethnically Hun�
garian or were the descendants of the initial Hungarian settlers. One
may suggest, judging by the discussed onomastics of the region, that,
in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the Vardariotai ethnically
were either Qipchaq or Anatolian Turks who replaced the Hungarians
but retained the traditional denomination of Τούρκοι Βαρδαριώται. It
is also not impossible that the notion “Τούρκοι Βαρδαριώται”, by that
time, had purely territorial meaning and implied a group of settlers
of mixed origin, who traditionally were enlisted into the palace guard
detachment.124 The Vardariotai seem to have occupied the Lower Var�
dar closer to Thessalonike, however, now it is impossible to give an
exact location.125
There exists an argument in favour of the Anatolian origin of the
fourteenth- century Vardariot Turks. In the fourteenth century, Pseu�
do-Kodinos relates that, during the Christmas celebrations, the Var�
dariotai acclaimed the Emperor “in the tongue of their ancient ho�
122 122�
R. Janin, Les Turcs Vardariotes, in Écho d’Orient, t. 29, 1930, p. 437–449; S. Kyriaki-
des, ��
Η��
��
αχριδώ��
��
καί��
��
η��
��
επισκοπή��
��
της� ��
οι��
��
Τούρκοι��
�� in Επιστημονικές��
Βαρδαριώται��, ��
Επετηρίδες� ��
Φιλοσοφικής�
Σχολής� ��
Πανεπιστημίου� ��
Θεσσαλονίκης, vol. 3, 1939, p. 513–520; V. Laurent, ‘Ὁ� ��
Βαρδαριωτῶν� ��
ἤτοι�
Τούρκων��. Perses,
�� Turcs
��
asiatiques ou Turcs hongrois? in Сборникъ� въ�� паметъ��
��
на�
�� проф��
��. ��
Петъръ�
Никовъ, Sofia, 1940, p. 275–288; G.I. Konidares, Η πρώτη μνεία της επισκοπής Βαρδαριοτών
Τούρκων υπό τον Θεσσαλονίκης, in Θεολογία, vol. 23, 1952, p. 87–94, 236–238; G. Moravcsik,
Byzantinoturcica, Bd. 1. Leiden, 1983, S. 87, 322; R. Guilland, Recherches sur les institutions
byzantines, Berlin; Amsterdam, 1967, t. 1, p. 304 ; N. Oikonomidès, Vardariotes—W.l.nd.
r—V.n.nd.r: Hongrois installés dans la vallée du Vardar en 934," in Südost-Forschungen, 1973,
Bd. 32, p. 1–8 (repr.: Idem, Documents et études sur les institutions de Byzance (VIIe-XVe s.), [Va-
riorum Reprints], London, 1976); A. Kazhdan, Vardariotai, in Oxford Dictionary of Byzan-
tium, Oxford, 1991, p. 2153.
123 123�
Acropolites, p. 131.26–28; Pachymérès, IV, 29 (t. 2, p. 417.3).
124
Janin, Les Turcs Vardariotes cit., p. 447.
125
Charanis, The Transfer of Population as a Policy in the Byzantine Empire cit., p. 148;
Vryonis, Byzantine and Turkish Societies and Their Sources of Manpower cit., p. 138
102 Rustam SHUKUROV
meland, that is in Persian” (κατὰ� ��

τὴν��
��
πάλαι��
��
πάτριον��
��
καὶ��
��
τούτων��
��
φωνήν��,
ἤ��
τοι��
��
περσιστί). Elsewhere Pseudo-Kodinos associates the Vardariot
126
Turks with “Persia” again noting that they wore “Persian headgear,
��
φόρεμα��, ��
called aggouroton” (περσικὸν�� ἀγγουρωτὸν� ��
ὀνομαζόμενον).127 Final�
ly, Pseudo-Kodinos explains that “long ago they were Persians by race;
the Emperor [space for a name left vacant], relocating them from there
[i.e. “Persia” – Author], settled them at the Vardar river; this is why
they are called Vardariotai.”128
Byzantine literature of the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries nor�
mally employed the terms “Persians” and “Persian language” in re�
ference to the subjects of the Saljuqs of Anatolia and their Turkish
language. One may find the relevant references, which are abundant,
in Moravcsik’s Byzantinoturcica.129 This appears to have been not sim�
ply an “archaizing” gesture of Byzantine authors but rather a common
delusion that the Saljuqs were Persian and spoke Persian. It suffices
to say that John Tzetzes, in his well-known passage on greetings in
foreign languages, identified a Turkish phrase as Persian.130
One can suggest that John III Vatatzes (1221–1254), Theodore II
Laskaris (1254–1258) or more likely Michael VIII131 may have been
implied in the Psedo-Kodinos for the emperor who relocated “the
Persians” from their homeland, and that Τούρκοι Βαρδαριώται of the
fourteenth century were, at least partly, the descendants of the Saljuq
immigrants resettling in the Vardar valley in the second half of the
thirteenth century; these were the Anatolian Turks from whom the
Vardariots inherited their “Persian tongue”.132 As we have seen, Ana�
126 126�
Pseudo-Kodinos, Traité des offices, introduc., texte et traduc. par J. Verpeaux, Paris,
1966, p. 210.7–8.
127 127�
Ibid., p. 181.26–28.
128 128�
Ibid., p. 182.6–10.
129 129�
Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica cit., Bd. 2, S. 252ff.
130 130�
E. Hunger, Zum Epilog des Johannes Tzetzes, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, Bd. 46, 1953,
S. 302–307.
131 131�
But surely not Theophilos, as Janin and Moravcsik has suggested: Janin, Les Turcs
Vardariotes cit., p. 440–445; G. Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica, Bd. 2, S. 322.
132 132�
It is not impossible that the first layers of Anatolian Turkish element had appeared at the
Vardar as early as the twelfth century as Laurent has suggested (V. Laurent, ‘�� Ὁ��
��
Βαρδαριωτῶν�
ἤτοι��
Τούρκων��
��, p. ��
285–286��).
tolian Turks were in the majority in the neighbouring areas of Mace�
donia due to the population transfers of the second half of the thir�
teenth century. If so, Vardariot guards might well have pronounced
their acclamations at the Imperial court in one of the Anatolian Turkic
dialects or in Persian, which was common at the Saljuqid court.133
6.5. Other Localities

Single Oriental names are found in different regions of Western
and Central Macedonia: Pelagonia (᾿Ισάχας ← Ar. ‫ اﺳﺣﺎق‬Ishāq Bibl.
Isaac),134 Kastoria (Σαρακηνός),135 Grebena (Σαρτζάπεϊς),136 Pelagonia
(᾿Ισάχας).137
Some Oriental population probably lived between Hierissos and
Lake Bolbe (Map 2), a mountainous area: Δαµασκὼ (from Damascus?),138
Αλανός,139 Μουσταφάς (Anatolian Turk?),140 Κόµανος,141
Γιάκσσα (Qipchaq),142 Σάρσστζα ← Tk. sarsac “starling”, cf. Ott.
sığırcık (Qipchaq).143 It should be noted that two documents
record ��
in the region of Hierissos two paroikoi ��
with the nickname
Αἰγύπτιος, which indicates the presence of the Gypsies in the area.144
Oriental names in Hierissos constitute as little as 0.2% of the total
names for the region registered in PLP. Here again we have the com�
133 133�
On the use of the Persian language in Anatolia at the time of Saljuqs see: C. Hillen-
brand, Ravandi, the Seljuk Court at Konya and the Persianisation of Anatolian Cities, in Méso-
geios, vol. 25–26, 2005, p. 157–169; A. Ateş, Hicri VI–VIII. (XII–XIV.) asırlarda Anadolu’da
Farsça eserler, in: Türkiyat Mecmuası, vol. VII–VIII/2,
�� 1945,
�� p.
��
94–135.
134 134�
PLP, no. 92115.
135 135�
PLP, no. 24862.
136 136�
PLP, no. 24942.
137 137�
PLP, no. 92115.
138 138�
PLP, no. 5047.
139 139�
PLP, no. 546.
140 140�
PLP, no. 94212.
141 141�
PLP, no. 12008.
142 142�
PLP, no. 4155; name’s etymology see above.
143 143�
PLP, no. 24941;
��
for the Qipchaq word consult: ��
Sulejman Efendi. ��
Čagataj-Osmanisches
Wörterbuch, S. 167.
144 144�
PLP, nos. 438, 91095. G.C. Soulis, The Gypsies in the Byzantine Empire and the Balkans
in the Late Middle Ages, in: Dumbarton Oaks Papers, vol. 15, 1961, p. 148ff; Z. Đoković,
Stanovništvo istočne Makedonije cit., p. 177.
104 Rustam SHUKUROV
bination of Qipchaq and Anatolian names. The most interesting is

the name Αλανός possibly indicating that some Alan immigrants after
1301–1302 were resettled in the area of Hierissos.�
Some Oriental names are reported for the largest urban centres of the
region. 21 names (1% of the total names registered in PLP) are referred
to for Thessalonike. A considerable portion of their holders belonged
to aristocratic families and civic and military officials like the sebastos
Γεώργιος ᾿Αναταυλᾶς,145 the protohierakarios ᾿Ιαγούπης,146 the οἰκεῖος of
the Emperor and συγκλητικὸς ἄρχων Θεόδωρος ᾿Ιαγούπης (∆ιαγούπης),147
the δοῦλος of the Emperor ᾿Αλέξιος Κοµνηνὸς Μασγιδᾶς148 etc. It is not
surprising because Thessalonike was second to Constantinople as an
urban and administrative centre, and the concentration of officials and
the elite there is understandable. The low percentage of Orientals is ra�
ther remarkable, supporting our suggestion regarding the intentional
keeping of the Turks away from the main urban centres by the autho�
rities. This idea is possibly supported by the case of Serres where one
finds as few as 4 Orientals, 2 of whom belonged to the elite, such as the
kephale Μιχαὴλ ᾿Αβραµπάκης149 and Εἰρήνη ∆ούκαινα Μασγίδαινα.150
The figures for undoubtedly Qipchaq settlers are lower again than tho�
se for the immigrants from Anatolia. It seems that the Byzantine authorities
deliberately mixed up various groups of incomers in the same territories. Eve�
rywhere (with the exception of the area of Skopje and Strumitza) Qipchaqs and
Anatolian Turks lived side by side. As a rule, it is not possible to point to any
geographical area which would be populated by representatives of only one
of those groups. If this was the result of a conscious policy of the Byzantine
authorities, it would be in complete agreement with the Byzantine tradition
of assimilation of foreign newcomers.151
145 145�
PLP, no. 872.
146 146�
PLP, no. 92055.
147 147�
PLP, no. 7822.
148 148�
PLP, no. 17220.
149 149�
PLP, no. 60.
150 150�
PLP, no. 17216.
151 151�
Charanis, The Transfer of Population as a Policy in the Byzantine Empire cit. H. Ditten,
Ethnische Ferschiebungen zwischen der Balkanhalbinsel und Kleinasien von Ende des 6. bis zur zweiten
Berlin, 1993.
Hälfte des 9. Jahrhunderts,��
The prevalence of the Anatolian Turks indicates that the scale of
their migration to the Balkans was considerable, although narrative
sources scarcely give sufficient data to reconstruct the history of this
relocation. Their settlement in the Macedonian regions started not
earlier than the twelfth century, but most likely the main body of the
Anatolian immigrants had appeared in the second half of the thir�
teenth century, especially due to the coming of the sultan ‘Izz al-Dīn
Kay Kāwus with his retinue, troops, and, probably, with some of his
sedentary and nomadic subjects.
7. A Note on Chronology of the Names
The dates of the names discussed here cover the range from 1261
to the mid-fifteenth century. However, they are distributed rather ir�
regularly across this period of time: 8% of the names fall in the period
1261–1299, 56% are registered for 1300–1348, 17.5% for 1350–
1399, and 18.5% for 1400–mid-15th century. Thus, more than one
half of the selected names date to the time between 1300 and 1346.
Moreover, the case of Qipchaq names in Macedonia is even more
telling. Qipchaq
��
names are found in the sources from 1300 to 1445;
however, as many as 87% of Qipchaq names date to 1300–1348, and
only a few are seen after 1348. Generally speaking, this is in keeping
with the information of the narrative source about the waves of the Cu�
man resettlements in Macedonia (see above). However, such an abrupt
reduction in the number of Cuman names seems somewhat puzzling.
At the same time, different regions give different pictures. For
��
in�
stance, Constantinople provides a completely different picture where
Oriental names are distributed in the following way: 31% for 1263–
1291, 25% for 1300–1334, 22% for 1352–1396, and finally 22% for
1401–1475. Is it possible that the figures for Macedonia reveal some
specific tendency in demographic evolution in the region?
One of the reasons for this irregularity could be the nature of the
main sources for Macedonian demography, namely the acts of the
Athos monasteries containing the most detailed information just for
the fourteenth century (see above).
However, there could be one more explanation. I suggest that the
106 Rustam SHUKUROV
dramatic decrease in the number of Asians after the mid-fourteenth

century may in fact reflect the impact of the Black Death. Tides of the
plague having flooded the region several times since 1347 brought
about a grave demographic crisis.152 It seems that the Black Death
changed to an extent the pre-existing ethnic structure of the region
sweeping away the Asians. The Asians suffered from the plague on
equal grounds as other ethnic groups, however, as the pandemic sub�
sided, the Greek and Slavic populations recovered, while Asians, hav�
ing no replenishment from the outside, did not.
The sharp decrease in the number of Asians after the mid-four�
teenth century may also imply that the height of both Anatolian and
Qipchaq migrations to Macedonia occurred from the end of the thir�
teenth centuries through the first decades of the fourteenth century
and tapered off by the mid-fourteenth century.
New waves of population transfers from Anatolia and Dasht-i
Qipchaq to the Balkans would once more increase due to the Ottoman
conquests from the last decades of the fourteenth century onwards.
However, it was a new phase in the Turkification of the Balkans.
8. Christianization
It appears that the overwhelming majority of the holders of

Oriental names were Christians. This is clearly indicated by the
fact that Oriental names play the role of family names or sobriquets
and in most cases are associated with Christian first names. 51% of
names are accompanied with baptismal proper names which une�
quivocally indicate religious affiliation. Among those who are na�
med only by their Oriental nickname (remaining 49%), the majo�
rity can be identified as Christians on the basis of their occupation
or family links (82%). There are two Ottoman Muslims only who
152 152�
J. Lefort, Rural Economy and Social Relations in the Countryside, in Dumbarton Oaks
Papers, vol. 47, 1993, p. 104–106; J. Lefort, Population et peuplement en Macédoine orientale,
IXe–XVe siècle, in Hommes et richesses dans l’Empire byzantin, vol. 2, Paris, 1991, p. 69–71 ; The
Economic History of Byzantium: From the Seventh through the Fifteenth Century, ed. Angeliki
E. Laiou, vol. 1, [Dumbarton Oaks Studies, vol. 39], Washington, 2002, p. 48–49.
probably settled in the region during the first Ottoman occupation
in 1386–1403, one Jew, and six persons whose religious affiliation
is indefinable.
In other words, the overwhelming majority of immigrants from
both Dasht-i Qipchaq and Muslim Anatolia had adopted Christianity.
Undoubtedly, this was the result of deliberate state policy towards
the immigrants settling in the Empire as subjects of the Palaiologan
emperors.153
Despite the rapid decline and deterioration of economic and
social conditions, the Byzantine social system still preserved its
assimilative power. According to traditional Byzantine legislation,
all subjects of the Empire had to confess Orthodox Christianity,
the state religion of the Empire. Traditionally, the first step in the
naturalisation of newcomers consisted in their adoption of the By�
zantine state religion.154
The present case of the Macedonian Asians shows that the
Byzantines were still successful in naturalising immigrants.
This is quite a valuable observation, because contradictory evi�
dence is provided by other parts of the Byzantine world. For
instance, the analogous Pontic anthroponymic material provides
grounds to assume that, in the beginning of the fifteenth centu�
ry, some Asian newcomers in the Empire of Trebizond retained
their Muslim faith. They had purely Muslim names as subjects
of the Emperor and remained as Muslims. Moreover, possibly
some of the recently baptized Asians continued to confess Islam
secretly. 155 To my knowledge, there is no such evidence in the
Palaiologan Empire. The anthroponymic material discussed
153 153�
Asdracha, La région des Rhodopes cit., p. 76f ; Bartusis, The Late Byzantine Army.
p. 27, 62, 197, 244, 374.
154 154�
Vryonis, Byzantine and Turkish Societies and Their Sources of Manpower, p. 131ff; S.
Reinert, The Muslim Presence in Constantinople, 9th-15th Centuries: Some Preliminary Obser-
vations, in Studies on the Internal Diaspora of the Byzantine Empire, ed. H. Ahrweiler, A.E.
Laiou, Washington, 1998, p. 125–150.
155 155�
Shukurov, The Byzantine Turks cit.; R. Shukurov, Crypto-Muslims of Anatolia, in
Anthropology, Archeology and Heritage in the Balkans and Anatolia or the Life and Times of F.W.
Hasluck (1878-1920)., 2 vols, ed. David Shankland, Istanbul, 2004, vol. 2, p. 135–158.
108 Rustam SHUKUROV
here proves the contrary: the Palaiologan authorities succeeded

in the Christianization of the Oriental migrants.
9. Conclusion
Late Byzantine onomastics clearly shows the physical presence of

the Turks in the Byzantine Empire who settled there as the subjects
of the Palaiologoi. The height of the influx of both Anatolian and
Qipchaq Turks took place at the end of the thirteenth century and
the first decades of the fourteenth century. The Black Death possibly
affected the Asian settlers dramatically and their numbers decreased
abruptly in the second half of the fourteenth century.
Most of the Byzantine Turks were either immigrants or former and
current mercenaries and the members of their families. Most of them
belonged to the lower classes of society. Ethnically, most of the regis�
��
tered��
Turkic incomers originated from Anatolia. Cumans outnumbe�
red the Anatolian Turks probably only in northwestern Macedonia.
Throughout Macedonia, Anatolian and Qipchaq elements were inter�
mixed and usually it is impossible to distinguish any ethnically homo�
genous area populated exclusively by any single Turkic sub-ethnos. At
the same time, it appears that Turkic immigrants of both provenance
were supposed to live in particular areas of the countryside, ��
rather dis�
tant from the main strategic urban centres.
The existence of compact areas of Turkic resettlement is, in itself,
a rather positive indication in favour of the reliability of the chosen
method, especially because evidence from the narrative sources provide
some supporting explanations for the concentration of Turks in these
particular regions.
It is important to note that the assimilative aspect of Byzantine
civilisation remained operative up to the very end of the Empire: ha�
ving settled in the Empire, the Turks usually adopted Christianity and
assimilated to the local economic habits and culture.
R. SHUKUROV TAV. I
Map 1 - The Lower Strymon, Serres, Zichna, Drama.

TAV. II
Map 2 - Chalkidike.
R. SHUKUROV
R. SHUKUROV
Map 3 - Berroia and Lake Joannitsa.

TAV. III
TAV. IV R. SHUKUROV
Map 4 - Skopje and the valley of the Vardar.

Byzantine Turks 2008

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Byzantine Turks 2008

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

L'Europa dopo la caduta di Costantinopoli: 29 maggio

1453. Spoleto, 2008.

The Byzantine Turks: An Approach to the Study of Late

The Turkic presence in the Byzantine Empire during the Palaiolo�

large ethnic groups – that is Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbians, and Al�

tic research analyzing the Late Byzantine anthroponymics of Eastern

1. The Database of Personal Names

Ottomans, the Mamluk Sultanate, the Golden Horde, principalities of

2. Credibility of Anthroponymic Data

The vast majority of Oriental names of Macedonia are contained

the Emperor Alexios III.14 The name derives from ��������

From among a total of approximately 10,000 names relating to

stem Cuman indicate: Κόµανος,19 Κοµάνα (fem.),20 Κοµανίτζης,21 and

M. Angold, A Byzantine Government in Exile, Oxford, 1975, p. 105, 18; M. Bartusis, On

The names Τοῦρκος,36 belonging to several individuals, and

Origin Names Percentage

The prevalence of Muslim names indicates the increasing role of

immediate ancestors were initially in the military service either as im�

The evidence of Macedonian place names matches well the data

Finally, Βαρβαρίκιον, the fourteenth century, a microtoponymic in

5. Peasants, Intellectuals and Aristocracy

Generally speaking, my list contains three types of personal names:

Table 2: Social Standing

Status Names Percentage

A major part of the owners of Oriental names were engaged in what

to mercenaries pronoia as payment for their service was widespread in

6. The Nucleus Areas of the Turkic Ethnic Presence in By�

Thessalonike, Kalamaria in the Chalkidike, and finally Hierissos and

6.1. The lower Strymon and Serres (Map 1)

Although we have no reliable statistical figures, this seems to have

6.2. Kalamaria in Western Chalkidike (Map 2).

Kalamaria represents a rather high level of the concentration of

The Qipchaq presence in Kalamaria is attested by the names Κόµανος

6.3. Berroia and Lake Joannitsa (Map 3)

6.4. The Vardar valley, Skopje, the Strumiza (Map 4)

The Asians in this area, it seems, were predominantly Qipchaqs.

meland, that is in Persian” (κατὰ� ������������������������������������

6.5. Other Localities

bination of Qipchaq and Anatolian names. The most interesting is

7. A Note on Chronology of the Names

dramatic decrease in the number of Asians after the mid-fourteenth

It appears that the overwhelming majority of the holders of

here proves the contrary: the Palaiologan authorities succeeded

Late Byzantine onomastics clearly shows the physical presence of

Map 1 - The Lower Strymon, Serres, Zichna, Drama.

Map 3 - Berroia and Lake Joannitsa.

Map 4 - Skopje and the valley of the Vardar.

You might also like

the Emperor Alexios III.14 The name derives from ��

meland, that is in Persian” (κατὰ� ��