Medieval Anatolia (Seljuk, Mongol)

This article examines the merchant and commodity networks of Trebizond as well as routes at the regional, interregional, and international levels that connected the city to Constantinople, the rest the Black Sea, Armenia, the Near East and the Caucuses in the early Middle Ages. After a brief survey of the commercial history of Trebizond from the late antique period to the eleventh century, the economy of the Pontic region and its commercial exchanges with various regions are investigated in detail. The available evidence shows that the list of commodities exchanged between Pontos and its neighbours were longer, and the networks of merchants and routes were more complex than assumed thus far. Trebizond's advantage as a port town for landlocked territories to its south and east (especially the large Iranian and Iraqi markets at the end of the Silk/Spice Route), as well as its close ties with Constantinople and the rest of the Black Sea, established the Pontic capital as a vital emporium. Benefiting from the increasing economic development in Byzantium and its neighbours, the prosperity of the Pontic region and is main city Trebizond is most visible in the period from the mid-ninth to the mid-eleventh centuries.

"In his recent book „The Collapse of the Eastern Mediterranean“ (Cambridge 2012), Ronnie Ellenblum argues that a series of climatic disasters in the 11th cent. led to the decline of polities in the Near East and prepared the ground for both the advance of the Seljuks and of the Crusaders into the region. Focused on the Byzantine case during the „Comnenian period“, this paper will critically review this hypothesis on the basis of both textual and natural scientific evidence and propose a more nuanced picture of the interplay between society, climate and environment in the Eastern Mediterranean from the 11th to the 13th century. As will become clear, neither the complexity of natural phenomena nor the complexity of medieval societies should be reduced to mere linear lines of causation.
This research was made possible with support of the Alexander S. Onassis Public Benefit-Foundation during a stay at the Institute for Historical Research of the National Hellenic Research Foundation in Athens.
The following pages provide a first short overview over some material to be presented and discussed in this lecture.
Contact: Johannes.Preiser-Kapeller@oeaw.ac.at
"

Sanat Tarihi Dergisi Cilt/Volume: XXI, Sayı/Number:1 Nisan / April 2012, 11-37 EĞİRDİR KALESİ ÜZERİNE BAZI GÖZLEMLER-I Z.Kenan BİLİCİ * Özet Eğirdir kent merkezindeki kalenin ilk inşaatının Lidyalılar dönemine kadar indiği iddia edilmekle birlikte, bunu doğrulama imkânı yoktur. Buna karşılık, şimdiki kent meydanına bakan sur çizgisinin güney kanadı üzerinde, dışa taşkın olarak inşa edilmiş biri beşgen planlı diğeri ise silindirik iki burcun inşaat tarzları kadar, sur inşaatındaki taş-tuğla almaşık duvar ve kaset tekniklerine bakılarak, bugünkü kale kalıntısının, Orta Bizans çağının bir ürünü olduğu söylenebilir. Günümüze ulaşabilen bazı sur duvarlarının topoğrafya ile olan ilişkisine bakılırsa, eski kent, hiç kuşku yok ki, gölün içinde ve etrafı sur duvarlarıyla çevrili bir Ortaçağ ada-yerleşmesi idi. Bu bağlamda, Eğirdir gölünün güney-batı sahillerinde ve geçmişte İç Anadolu ile Akdeniz arasında uzanan yol güzergâhına hakim bir ada ya da bir su-şatosu gibi tahayyül edilebilecek Bizans çağı Akrōtērion (Akrīdūr)'unun, Komnenoslar döneminde ve 12.yüzyıl ortalarında inşa edilmiş bir Castron olduğu ileri sürülebilir. Ne var ki, eski Bizans kalesini oluşturan sur çizgisi ile Ortaçağ kent strüktürünü bir bütün halinde ortaya çıkartmak ve özellikle yerleşmenin kuzey-doğu ucunda yer alması muhtemel Hamidoğlu Beyliği Sarayı'nın (Felekâbâd) lokalizasyonunu yapabilmek için, şimdiki yerleşme alanını oluşturan konut stoku arasında sistemli kazı ve sondajlara ihtiyaç vardır. Günümüze bir kısmı ulaşabilmiş duvarlar ile burç inşaatlarına bakılarak, eski yerleşmeyi ana karadan ayıran sur çizgisi üzerindeki kale kalıntısının özgün haline ilişkin bazı tesbitler yapma imkânı yine de bulunulabilir. Mevcut duruma bakılırsa, Bizans çağında, bir ada yerleşmesinden ibaret olan kale-kenti anakara ile irtibatlandıran kapının, şimdiki yer ve konumunda değil, aksine, silindirik burç ile kuzeyindeki poligonal planlı diğer burç arasında ve bugün moloztaş örgülü sağır bir kütle halinde gördüğümüz duvarın ortasında yer aldığı anlaşılmaktadır.
Abstract
Some Observations on Eğirdir Castle
Although the castle in the city center of Egirdir claimed that to have been built by the Lydians, it is not possible to verify. However, on the south wing of the present wall-line of fortification overlooking the town square, was built as a flood out both a cylindrical and a pentagon shaped towers not only construction styles, but also alternating brick wall technique is no doubt a product of the Middle Byzantine era. There is no doubt, the old town in the Byzantine period, was an medieval island surrounded by the fortifications in the Egirdir Lake. In this context, as a water-castle on the south-west shores of the Egirdir Lake and on the military and trade road between Central Anatolia and the Mediterranean coast, Akrōtērion (Akrīdūr) built in the mid-12th century by Comnenian dynasty and could be argued that a Castron. However, not only to the wall-line of the old Byzantine fortress and forming urban structure as a whole, but also particular is likely to take place in north-eastern end of the settlement is a Palace of the Hamidoğlu Emirate (Felekâbâd) to be able to localize in the current settlement area creates the systematic excavations between the housing stock are necessary.
Unlike today, it is understood that the main-gate of the castle-city that connects to the mainland in the Byzantine Era, were among the cylindrical and the polygonal towers. No doubt, the city input or outputs, provided by a wood bridge construction to act as a kind of ditch water channel that separates the old settlement from the mainland of a wood construction, consisting perhaps of a suspension bridge gets go-been provided. The input and outputs to the city probably been provided by a wooden bridge on the water channel such as a moat that separates the old settlement and the mainland. The main-gate have been canceled during the Ottoman rule of the city and a new one was opened on the cylindrical tower.

A 12th-13th-century A.D. ceramic assemblage from Alexander’s Hill at Sagalassos in southwestern Turkey provides new evidence for the typo-chronological study of Byzantine pottery. A functional analysis of the assemblage, along with textual and iconographic evidence, archaeozoological and palynological analyses, and chemical analysis of cooking-pot residues, contributes to the reconstruction of diet and cooking practices in Anatolia. While baked fish, vegetables, pulses, and bread are usually regarded as the staples of Byzantine peasant cuisine, diners at Sagalassos were enjoying beef stews before the Fourth Crusade, when the technique of stewing meat was allegedly introduced to the eastern Mediterranean from the West.

Alanya Castle, whose foundations date back to Hellenistic times, is considered as a medieval fortress built by the Anatolian Seljuks and is considered one of the symbols of Alanya today. It was used as the winter capital during the Seljuk period and its name was changed to Alaiye as Kalonoros, referring to the name of the conqueror, Alaeddin Keykubad. The city was surrounded by the walls we saw today, with the orders of the Conqueror and was supported with various towers, especially the Red tower and as a port city with its shipyard, it became the window of the Anatolian Seljuks to the Mediterranean.
Today, when we examine the walls and gates of Alanya Castle, which consists of gray stone blocks and plasters, we see that they are not composed of gray stone blocks and plasters. Plastered and painted decorations that have remained in small remnants due to natural wear and human damage, must have been adorned in a spectacular way during the period of Anatolian Seljuks. The walls and gates of Alanya Castle, where zigzag, checkerboard, shield, animal and various geometric ornaments are applied, reflects the aesthetic taste and iconographic understanding of the period. When we compare these decorations, which are mostly concentrated in the periphery of doors and bastions, to other structures and various works of art, we will have a more accurate result.

Öz: Köklü bir tarihe sahip olan Antalya, bir liman kenti olarak kurulduğu andan günümüze kadar önemini ko-rumuştur. Konumu itibariyle sahip olduğu önemden ötürü de tarih boyunca pek çok gücün hâkimiyeti altına girmiştir. Bu minvalde, Türkiye Selçukluları da Antalya vasıtasıyla Akdeniz havzasında sürdürülen uluslararası ticarete müdahil olabilmek için Antalya'yı fetih girişi-minde bulunmuşlardır. Bu sebeple belirli dönemlerde Antalya'ya giden yol üzerinde bulunan yerleşim-ticaret merkezlerini ele geçiren Türkiye Selçukluları, II. Kılıç Arslan zamanında ilk kez Antalya'yı kuşatmışlardır. An-cak bu ilk kuşatma fetihle sonuçlanmamıştır. Antalya'nın Türkiye Selçukluları tarafından fethi daha sonraki dö-nemde gerçekleşmiştir. Şehrin Türkiye Selçuklu hâkimi-yetine girişi adı geçen sultanın oğlu ve halefi olan I. Gıya-seddin Keyhüsrev'in ikinci saltanatı sırasında-1207 yı-lında kuşatma, abluka ve fetih olmak üzere-üç aşamalı olarak gerçekleşmiştir. Antalya'nın fethiyle birlikte Tür-kiye Selçukluları Akdeniz kıyısında bir liman şehrine sa-hip olmuş, devletin siyasi ve ekonomik olarak yükselişi hızlanarak devam etmiştir. Bu çalışmada Antalya'nın Türkiye Selçukluları tarafından fethinin ayrıntıları ortaya koyulacak ve bu durumun sonuçları Selçuklu tarihi öze-linde değerlendirilecektir. Abstract: With a very long history, Antalya has since its foundation as a port city maintained its importance. Its importance due to its position, is shown by the fact it has been dominated of many powers throughout history. The Seljuks of Turkey attempted to conquer the city through which they would become involve in the international trade in the Mediterranean basin. Over time , capturing the centers along the road to Antalya, the Seljuks of Turkey, surrounded the city itself for the first time in the reign of Sultan Kilij Arslan II. However, this first Seljuk siege did not result in conquest. It was subsequently was captured by the Seljuks as a result of three distinct phases: surrounding, blockade and the conquest in 1207 during the second reign of Ghiyath al-Din Kaykhusraw I, the son and successor of Sultan Kilij Arslan II. With the conquest of the city the Seljuk Sul-tanate obtained a port city on the Mediterranean coast, which accelerated the economic and political rise of the Seljuk state. This study concerns the detail of the conquest of Antalya by the Seljuks, and evaluates the consequences and results of this conquest in respect to Seljuk history. Anahtar Kelimeler: Antalya • I. Gıyaseddin Keyhüsrev • Türkiye Selçukluları • Rumlar • Latinler

SUMMARY
Mustafayev Sh.M. From the Seljuks to the Ottomans. Ethno-political processes in the Turkic milieu of Asia Minor in the 11-15 centuries.

The monograph analyzes the complex ethno-political processes in Asia Minor on a broad chronological background since the time of the conquest of the region by the Oghuz-Turkmen tribes in the 11 century up to the final establishment of the Ottoman political hegemony at the end of the 15 century. It attempts to trace the stages of the ethnic history of the Turkish people in the Middle Ages, and to establish the connection between its ethnic integration and political changes in Anatolia. The book examines the formation of the Turkic ethnic milieu in Anatolia in the Seljuk period, its subsequent evolution following the collapse of the Seljuk Sultanate in Asia Minor under impingements of the Mongols, the fragmentation of political power in Anatolia and the establishment of a number of principalities, as well as the fierce struggle for leadership in the region between the new entities, and the gradual rise of the Ottoman State. It also assesses the impact of historical events on the dynamics of the Turkic ethnic consciousness and identity.
The book introduces a number of milestones in the evolution of Turkic ethnic milieu of Asia Minor. Seljuk conquest of the Middle East in the 11 century paved the way for the gradual formation of a Turkic ethnic milieu in a large geographical area from the Caspian coast in the east to the Aegean Sea coast in the west. In the second half of the 12 – early 13 centuries there was relative political integrity of this area, when a large part of Anatolia was united under the Seljuk Sultanate in Asia Minor. This fragile stability was breached in result of Mongol conquest in the mid-13 century. However, the political domination of the Mongols in Asia Minor lasted until the early 14 century. Last Seljuk sultans, vassals of Ilkhanid court in Azerbaijan, lost their power over Anatolia, as well as the legitimacy in the eyes of their subjects, particularly bellicose Turkmen tribes who settled in “uj” zone or the border with Byzantium. The Ilkhanid control over Asia Minor also gradually weakened, which opened the way for the appearance of new power centers on the scene. Thus the era of political fragmentation in Turkey’s medieval history began.
By the beginning of the 14 century the whole territory of Anatolia disintegrated into smaller state formations – principalities. New Turkic emirates were competing with each other for the military and political leadership and mission of the “gatherer” of the Anatolian lands or fragments of the Seljuk Sultanate. At the same time, in the public mind of Turkic Anatolia it was a replacement of cultural ideals of Seljuk era, inspired by the influence of Persian literature and art, by other values caused by new political realities. This was manifested in the growth of interest of political elites in the Anatolian emirates to the national language, the birth and rapid development of Turkish literature in Asia Minor, the start of translation activity in the courts of the rulers, the growth of the number of manuscripts in Turkish, etc.
Two main political centers or poles, which can be roughly described as “Western” and “Eastern”, gradually stood out in the course of the confrontation within the Turkic milieu in Asia Minor. The Western pole has always been associated with the Ottoman Empire, while the Eastern pole, which was opposing the Ottomans, was represented by traditional Turkic principalities in Asia Minor (Karaman principality, State of Kadi Burhan ad-Din Ahmed, Aqqoyunlu State) successively replacing each other. The question of which of them would be able to take on the mission of “heir” of the Seljuk Sultanate and accomplish the task of unification of Asia Minor under its own rule had crucial significance for the whole history of the Turkic Anatolia. In other words, there was a question about the guiding direction line of new centralization of Asia Minor – from west to east or vice versa? Thus, the struggle between the two poles determined all further historical evolution of the Turkic milieu of Asia Minor. The final victory of the Western or the Ottoman pole promoted further political consolidation and integration of the Turkic ethnic and cultural milieu of Asia Minor around the Ottoman Empire.


В книге на широком хронологическом фоне анализируются сложные этнополитические процессы в Малой Азии со времени завоевания региона в XI столетии огузо-туркменскими племенами и до окончательного установления османской политической гегемонии в конце XV в. На основе обширного круга источников делается попытка проследить различные этапы этнической истории турецкого народа, установить органическую связь процессов этнической интеграции с политическими изменениями в Анатолии. Выявляются особенности формирования в Анатолии тюркской этнической среды в сельджукский период, ее последующей эволюции после распада централизованного Сельджукского государства Малой Азии под ударами монголов, дробления политической власти в Анатолии и образования ряда эмиратов (бейликов); исследуются отношения и ожесточенная борьба за лидерство в регионе между этими государственными образованиями и постепенное возвышение Османского государства, оценивается влияние исторических событий на динамику развития тюркского этнического сознания и идентичности.

This collection of thirteen essays addresses the intellectual, religious and literary culture of medieval Anatolia and the early Ottoman realm of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, focusing on texts written in Arabic, Persian and Old Anatolian Turkish as case studies. The introductory chapter surveys the beylik (Turkish principalities) period and the emergence of Anatolian Turkish as a vernacular literary language in the fourteenth century. The subsequent chapters present a wide range of topics, ranging from proto-Bektashi poetry and the Vefa'iyye to the emergence of the Ottoman scholarly system. These scholarly essays aim not only to move beyond Köprülü’s nationalist paradigm of Anatolian cultural life with new approaches, but also to provide background for further research and point to new avenues of inquiry in this relatively neglected field of study.
The volume may be purchased through the Ergon Publisher's website: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/en/orientalistik/istanbuler-texte-und-studien/band-34.php

This article focuses on the Yeşil Complex in Bursa, Turkey, built in 1419-24. Even though it is one of the major Ottoman monuments of the early fifteenth century, the complex-a mosque-zāviye, madrasa, mausoleum, and kitchen-has not been viewed in the broader context of its time, when complex dynamics forced the Ottoman sultan to reposition his struggling empire between Anatolia, Timurid Central Asia, and the Balkans. Whereas early Ottoman architecture, from the emergence of the principality until the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, has been reevaluated in recent years, the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries are only gradually receiving increased scholarly attention. The Ottoman sultan Bayezid I, defeated by the Mongol conqueror Timur, was led into captivity after the battle of Ankara in 1402, and his son Mehmed Çelebi eventually emerged victorious from a civil war with his brothers. In 1413 he came to the throne as Mehmed I, ruling as sultan of the Ottoman Empire until his death in 1421. The Yeşil Complex was a focus of Mehmed I's patronage. I argue that the elaborate tile decoration of the mosque and mausoleum created a deliberate dialogue with both the Anatolian heritage of Seljuk architecture and the broader Persianate culture of post-Mongol Iran and Central Asia. With their varied techniques, color schemes, and visual references, the tiles signal the extent to which Ottoman visual culture in the early fifteenth century mirrored the constant renegotiation of power, rule, and representation that involved the sultan, his historians, and his builders.

Castles constitute the most abundant group of Byzantine remains in Anatolia, and offer historians and archaeologists the opportunity to more fully understand both Byzantine settlement patterns and defensive systems through the ages. However, due to their inaccessibility, lack of distinctive construction techniques, and an absence of
evidence for secure dating these monuments have often been neglected by Byzantinists. At the same time, historical sources of the eleventh and twelfth centuries make it clear that the Komnenian emperors Alexios, John, and Manuel all
engaged in extensive fortification activities. This thesis seeks to critically unite the historical and archaeological evidence for Komnenian fortifications, with the goal of further understanding the Komnenian defensive strategy and evaluating its results. Following a historical overview of Turkish settlement in Anatolia and the Byzantine response, forty Komnenian castles are surveyed, half of them historically attested and the other half assigned to the period based on historical likelihood and, where possible, stylistic similarities with known Komnenian fortifications. The conclusion argues that while the Komneni were generally successful in dealing with the Selçuks diplomatically, they were unable to solve the problem of the nomadic Türkmen,
against whom their fortification program was overwhelmingly directed.

Note to the reader

A full English translation is provided at the end of the article.

Cet article est consacré à une église rupestre (Bezirana kilise-si), dédiée à la Théotokos, récemment redécouverte dans la vallée d'Ihlara (Cappadoce). Les peintures de la fin du XIII e ou du début du XIV e siècle, d'une qualité exceptionnelle, suggèrent que le ktètôr, dont l'identité nous échappe, était de haut rang, riche et cultivé. Elles prouvent le maintien dans la région de liens étroits avec Byzance et la mobilité des artistes, et elles fournissent un nouveau témoignage sur la diversité culturelle de l'Anatolie seldjoukide. Mots-clés: Cappadoce, peinture paléologue, Melismos, saints militaires, motifs décoratifs, inscriptions, interactions artis-tiques en Anatolie seldjoukide This article deals with a rock-cut church (Bezirana kilisesi), dedicated to the Theotokos, recently rediscovered in the Ihlara valley (Cappadocia). The paintings from the very end of the 13 th century or the beginning of the 14 th , of exceptional quality, indicate that the patron of the church, whose identity is unknown , was a high-ranking, wealthy and literate individual. They bear witness to the maintenance of close links with Byz-antium in this region, as well as to the mobility of artists, and bring new testimony on the cultural diversity of Seljuk Ana-tolia.

The roots of the formation of a post-Mongol political theology that situated Muslim emperors and sultans at the center of an Islamic cosmos are found in the Ilkhanid court in late thirteenth- and early fourteenth-century Iran. This article investigates the case of the short-lived rebellion (1322–1323) of the Mongol governor of Rūm (Anatolia) and Mahdi-claimant Temürtash (d. 1327). It demonstrates how the discourse of religious reform was recruited to translate and support the claims of non-Chinggisid commanders to the transfer of God’s favor, thus oppos- ing the Chinggisids’ heaven-derived exceptionalism. Exploring affinities with the Timurid appropriation of the mujaddid tradition a century later, the article argues that Temürtash’s rebellion signaled the early stages of the dispersion of a new political language that freed Muslim kingship from the restrictive genealogical and juridical Sunni models of authority.

Research concerning the cultural and artistic life of medieval Rūm has made welcome advances in recent years. However, much of this research analyses architecture, and scholarship is yet to fully address the production of illuminated Islamic manuscripts in the later medieval period – material which is often rich in visual and historical detail. This article seeks to partially address this gap by discussing one illuminated manuscript: a copy of the Persian-language 'Anīs al-Qulūb' by Burhān al-Dīn al-Anawī that was almost certainly produced in early fourteenth-century Konya. The article outlines the codicological and aesthetic aspects of the manuscript and analyses these findings in relation to other illuminated manuscripts from late medieval Konya. It demonstrates that, despite its relative neglect in Islamic art survey texts, illuminated manuscript production in Konya was a highly-developed art form with its own local conventions and links to other production centres of the Islamic arts of the book.

Anatolia was home to a large number of polities in the medieval period. Given its location at the geographical and chronological juncture between Byzantines and the Ottomans, its story tends to be read through the Seljuk experience. This obscures the multiple experiences and spaces of Anatolia under the Byzantine empire, Turko-Muslim dynasties contemporary to the Seljuks, the Mongol Ilkhanids, and the various beyliks of eastern and western Anatolia.

In thirteenth-century Anatolia, different confessions of Christian and Muslim followers coexisted within a variety of people of diverse cultural backgrounds, including Greek, Turkmen and Persian. Politically, this multicultural and multireligious environment was accompanied by the raise of several semi-nomadic Turkmen warlords that controlled different regions of the peninsula under the nominal rule of the Seljuq Dynasty of Rum. In this historical context, Anatolia witnessed a burst of literary activity in manuscript form favoured by the economic patronage of the ruling classes. In one of the surviving manuscripts of the period held at the Suleymaniye Library in Istanbul, there is a unique munshaʼat (compilation of letters) written in Persian by a medical doctor of possible Iranian origin appointed in the second half of the thirteenth century to the regions of Kastamonu in north Western Anatolia. By looking at this rare compilation of letters, this paper reconstructs the little-known networks that existed among the members of a Persianised elite in Mongol dominated Anatolia arguing that these letters can offer a novel insight into the cultural life of the region.

This thesis focuses on the political backdrop to the battle of Tell Bashir in 1108. This battle marks an interesting change of alliances wherein Frankish and Turkish armies fought on both sides of the battle only a decade after the First Crusade had arrived in Syria. Historians have relied heavily on western sources to explain the odd political divisions and the ramifications for the crusader states. The result is a mess, few things are asserted strongly, and the narrative that does come through is deeply problematic. Ibn al-Athir, a thirteenth century Arab chronicler, gives a thoroughly different account from either the Latin sources or those maintained by modern historians. 
Following the battle of Harran (1104), Count Baldwin II of Edessa had been left imprisoned in Mosul while a series of intra-Turkish wars ravaged the region. Baldwin II’s release at the hands of Jawuli Saqao—the then Emir of Mosul—came at the price of giving assistance to Jawuli who was making an attempt to overthrow Sultan Muhammad in favor of an oft forgotten Saljuq prince, Baktash ibn Tutush. An alliance between Tancred, the prince of Antioch, and Ridwan ibn Tutush, the Prince of Aleppo, resisted Jawuli, leading to the battle of Tell Bashir. This battle was about imperial Saljuq politics, and the crusader lords of Antioch and Edessa were aligned on opposite sides for reasons separate from their personal conflicts. This is a major departure from traditional views that hold that the battle was fought to determine which crusader lord was to rule Edessa.

This present work is a study of Seljuk caravanserais in the vicinity of Denizli with a special focus on local socio-economic and historical factors. A first objective is to examine the suggestions, based on formalistic features such as architectural plans, about the functions of the caravanserais. A new approach, local contextualization, is attempted in order to investigate further functional aspects of Han-abad and Akhan.
The activities of a local family who took part in Seljuk high bureaucracy and the local economy give significant clues about the purpose and design of the caravanserais. A second objective is the analysis of the architectural features and ornamentation programs in order to evaluate the influences of local factors.

Baiju’s career encapsulates the tensions arising between the military and the administration during the rapid expansion of the Mongol imperial domains. The ad hoc predatory behavior of military commanders often clashed with the aims of Mongol civilian administrators in charge of implementing bureaucratic rule over subjugated sedentary populations and restoring sedentary agricultural lands and cities following the initial trauma of conquest often through violent means. Baiju was the rapacious and implacable Mongol commander par excellence, hated and feared by local populations, Christian or Muslim, implementing the Mongol military strategy of terror as an effective way to subjugate sedentary populations. Baiju is primarily known as the conqueror of Anatolia. In 1243 he rendered the Seljuks of Anatolia, the Cilician kingdom of Armenia, and Mosul under the rule of Sultan Badr al-Dīn Luʾluʾ (r. 1233-59) as tributary states, and in 1256 he placed Seljuk Anatolia under Hülegü’s direct authority with a second military campaign. In addition to being the twice-conqueror of Anatolia, Baiju likewise conducted raids and campaigns throughout neighboring regions, going as far as Baghdad. Together with his superior, the first Mongol commander-in-chief of the western territories, Chormaqan, Baiju was largely responsible for imposing Mongol rule in the western regions of the empire.

Available: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/std/issue/31704/326689
--- This article aims to draw attention to the problem related with the location of Gevher Nesibe’ Dār al-shifā, built in 1205-6 as a part of Çifte Medrese at Kayseri. There is a controversy among scholars about its location in Çifte Medrese. First of all, the reasons behind the opinions about the location are analyzed and evaluated.

Most of the publications about Gevher Nesibe’ Dār al-shifā have been accepted that it was located in the western side of Çifte Medrese without question. Most of them examined the dar’al-shifas as a madrasa and the differences in architectural features and functions between madrasas and dar’al-shifas are not properly investigated. It is also assumed that Çifte Medrese has only one patron, whereas, the roles of Gevher Nesibe and Sultan Gıyaseddin I. Keyhusraw in the building process and architectural formation of Çifte Medrese are not precisely considered. Furthermore, unsuitable placement of the building inscription on the portal of the western side of Çifte Medrese is totally ignored.

As a result of the analyses and assessment in this article, the following facts are found: It has been revealed that building inscription is placed incompatibly and has disproportionate dimensions for the portal in the western side of Çifte Medrese. The eastern and western parts of Çifte Medrese vary in dimensions and numbers of spaces. The spaces of the eastern part of Çifte Medrese are suitable for a dar’al-shifa because of its bigger spaces. It has been determined that, from the architectural aspects, Çifte Medrese’ western side must be Gıyasiye for its monumentality and complexity. There are spaces that open to entrance iwan only at the eastern side of Çifte Medrese and they had functioned for the patients of dar’al-shifa.

Finally, it has been concluded that Gevher Nesibe’ Dār al-shifā could be originally located on the eastern side when the Gıyasiye is on the western side of Çifte Medrese.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Özet:
Bu çalışma, 13. yüzyılın başlarında 1205-6 yıllarında Kayseri'de inşa edilen ve Çifte Medrese bünyesinde yer alan Gevher Nesibe Darüşşifası'nın konumuyla ilgili soruna dikkat çekmek amacını taşımaktadır. Gevher Nesibe Darüşşifası'nın, Çifte Medrese'nin hangi kanadında yer aldığı konusunda, çeşitli tarihlere ait yayınlarda farklı görüşler bulunmaktadır. Öncelikle bu farklı görüşlerin dayanaklarının tespiti, analizi ve değerlendirmesi yapılmıştır. Birçok yayında Gevher Nesibe Darüşşifası'nın Çifte Medrese'nin batı kanadında yer aldığı sorgulamaksızın kabul edilmiştir. Darüşşifa (hastane) ve tıp medresesinden oluştuğu kabul edilen Çifte Medrese'nin " hangi kanadı darüşşifa, hangi kanadı medresedir? " sorusu yeterince detaylı tartışılmamıştır. Darüşşifalar incelenirken plan şeması olarak medreseler arasında değerlendirilmiş ve bu nedenle darüşşifa ile medrese arasında işlevden kaynaklanabilecek farklılıkların değerlendirilmesi yeterince yapılamamıştır. Ayrıca, bazı yayınlarda Çifte Medrese'nin tek bir banisi olduğu düşüncesi ön plana çıkmış, birbirine bitişik Gıyasiye ve Şifaiye olarak adlandırılan iki yapının mimari şekillenişi tam olarak anlaşılamamıştır. Çifte Medrese'nin inşası sürecinde Gevher Nesibe ve Sultan I. Gıyaseddin Keyhüsrev'in oynadıkları tarihi rolün ne olabileceği dikkatlerden kaçmıştır. Bununla birlikte Çifte Medrese'nin batı kanadındaki özgün taçkapı üzerinde uyumsuz konumda duran kitabe yeterince sorgulanmamıştır. Bu çalışma sonucunda Çifte Medrese'nin doğu kanadının Darüşşifa veya Şifaiye, batı kanadının ise Gıyasiye Medresesi olduğu ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu sonuca, Çifte Medrese'nin batı kanadındaki taçkapının üzerindeki inşa kitabesinin bu taçkapıya ait olmamasına ve inşa kitabesinin günümüze ulaşamayan Çifte Medrese'nin doğu kanadındaki özgün taçkapıya ait olması olasılığına, Gevher Nesibe'nin türbesinin konumuna, Çifte Medrese'nin doğu ve batı kanatlarındaki mekânların genişlik ve sayılarının farklılığına, her iki yapıdan hangisinin mimari özellikleri açısından bir sultan yapısı olan Gıyasiye olarak adlandırılmaya uygun olduğuna ve doğu kanattaki yapının giriş eyvanına açılan mekânların varlığına ve işlevselliklerine yönelik analizlerle ulaşılmıştır.

Öz
Türkiye Selçuklu Devleti adına 17 Eylül 1176 yılında zaferle sonuçlanan Myriokephalon Savaşı’nın Türk tarihinde büyük bir yeri ve önemi vardır. Zira Bizans’ın Anadolu’ya yeniden hâkim olma arzusu bu başarısız girişimle son bulmuştur. Yarımadanın artık bir Türk yurdu haline geldiğini kabullenmek zorunda kalan Bizans idarecileri, mevcut arazileri korumak dışında böylesi bir mücadeleye bir daha girişme imkânı bulamamışlardır. XII. asrın son çeyreğinde de yarımadanın büyük kısmı Türkiye Selçuklu Devleti idaresinde birleşmiştir. 841 yıl önce yaşanan bu savaş hakkında Türk-İslâm kaynakları önemli ölçüde suskundur. Ancak birçoğu hadisenin çağdaşı bazı Doğu (Bizans, Süryani ve Ermeni) ve Batı kronikleri sayesinde hakkında hayli bilgimiz vardır. Bu Ortaçağ kronikleri, savaşın cereyanı, yeri ve sonrası gelişmelere değinmeleri dikkate alınarak değerlendirilmişlerdir. Konu hakkında yayınlanmış uluslararası ve ulusal araştırmalar da vardır ve bir bölümü savaşın yerini tespite yöneliktir.

Abstract
The Myriokephalon Battle which ended with victory in the year 1176 on 17th of September in behalf of the Turkey Seljuk State, has a big place and importance in Turkish history. Because, the desire of Byzantium to possess Anatolia again came to an end with this unsuccessful attempt. The Byzantium administrators whom had to concede that the peninsula became a Turkish homeland, didn’t find opportunity to undertake such a campaign again, except to protect the existing lands. In the last quarter of XIIth century most part of the peninsula united under Turkey Seljuk State rule as well. The Turkish-Muslim sources make no mention of the battle significantly, which eventuated 841 years ago. But we have considerable knowledge about the event through some East (Byzantium, Assyrian and Armenian) and West chronicles, most of which are contemporary of the event. These Medieval chronicles has been utilized considering as if they mention the eventuating of the battle, it’s venue and the developments that took place afterwards. There are local and foreign researches published on the subject and some of them are intended to find the location of the war.

This study shows the perception that the inhabitants of Anatolia may have in the second half of the Middle Ages, of the various territories that divide the peninsula. The perception is also examined that Muslim Anatolians have non-Muslims in the region. These geographical, human and political perceptions are manifested in an atmosphere of close intercultural exchanges both in Anatolian languages and in institutions, art, etc. this osmosis builds a "Roman-Rum" identity that developed largely in the Seljuk period and will continue throughout the classical Ottoman era.

Cette étude montre la perception que peuvent avoir les habitants de l’Anatolie dans la deuxième moitié du Moyen-Âge, des divers territoires qui morcèlent la péninsule. On examine aussi à la suite la perception que les Anatoliens musulmans ont des non-musulmans de la région. Ces perceptions géographique, humaine et politique se manifestent dans une ambiance d’étroits échanges interculturels tant dans les langues anatoliennes que dans les institutions, l’art, etc. cette osmose construit une identité « romaine – rûm » qui se développe largement à l’époque seldjoukide et se perpétuera pendant toute l’époque ottomane classique.

This article traces the role of female patrons of architecture in thirteenth- and early fourteenth-century Anatolia. At the center stands Māhbarī Khātūn, the mother of the Seljuk Sultan Ghiyāth al-Dīn Kaykhusraw II (R 1237-46). During the rule of her son, Māhbarī Khātūn was active as a patron of architecture, building most notably the Huand Hatun complex in Kayseri in 1238, and several caravanserais. The foundation inscriptions of these monuments, and the funerary inscription on Māhbarī Khātūn’s cenotaph in the Huand Hatun mausoleum present the founder both as the mother of the sultan, and as a pious Muslim woman. The insistence on Māhbarī Khātūn’s position as the sultan’s mother points to her activity in a later stage of life, after the dead of her husband, ‘Alā’ al-Dīn Kayqubād (R 1220-37), when her status was akin to that of the valide sultan in later Ottoman practice. This article compares Māhbarī Khātūn to other known female patrons, active in Anatolia during Seljuk and Ilkhanid rule, who are mostly recorded in their foundation inscriptions. Thus, the importance of these inscriptions as sources to trace patrons who are marginal in the chronicles and hagiographies of the time, as is the case for female members of the Seljuk court, clearly emerges.