Lane, George

English

SOAS Research Online

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studieshttp://journals.cambridge.org/BSOAdditional services for Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies:Email alerts: Click hereSubscriptions: Click hereCommercial reprints: Click hereTerms of use : Click hereISTVÁN VÁSÁRY: Cumans and Tatars: Oriental Military in the Pre­Ottoman Balkans, 1185–1365. xvi, 230 pp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. £48.GEORGE LANEBulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies / Volume 69 / Issue 01 / February 2006, pp 154 ­ 157DOI: 10.1017/S0041977X06280078, Published online: 20 April 2006Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0041977X06280078How to cite this article:GEORGE LANE (2006). Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 69, pp 154­157 doi:10.1017/S0041977X06280078Request Permissions : Click hereDownloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/BSO, IP address: 212.219.238.14 on 30 Oct 2012154 REVIEWSWhile Georgian kings began looking to the Christian power to their northas a potential ally against their threatening Muslim neighbours from the latesixteenth century, it is only in 1699 that Armenians first appealed to Russia tofree their homeland. Armenians had originally sought the help of princes ofwestern Europe, and it is on the advice of one of these, the Palatine Elector,that they petitioned the Russian Tsar. The Palatine Elector’s advice waspertinently based on the geographical proximity of Russia to the Caucasus.The first Armenian petition to the tsars would be followed by many othersthroughout the eighteenth century. Indeed, the history of relations between theArmenians of Transcaucasia and the Russian Empire during that period ismostly one of Armenians hoping for a Russian invasion that would free East-ern Armenia from the oppression of the Persian shahs and local khans. Thesehopes would be repeatedly dashed as Russia either intervened in the wronglocation, as with Peter’s invasion of Gilan and Mazandaran, or did not inter-vene at all—even though in some cases Russia was the party that had initiatedcontact and had approached the Georgians and Armenians with promises ofsupport.Whatever the particular beginning and development of each episode, allhad similar endings, with Armenians and Georgians abandoned to their ownfate, at the mercy of Muslim neighbours retaliating against them for theirco-operation with Russia. By the time Russia would finally cross the Cauca-sian barrier and annex the region, Eastern Armenia would be devastated,with large swathes of its territory emptied of its Armenian population, eithercompletely deserted or partly repopulated with Turkic or Kurdish elements.That Armenians persisted in appealing to Russian support despite multipleabandonments is a testament to their desperate situation and perhaps to theirpolitical naivety, in their failure to understand that Russia, like other states,would first and foremost pursue its own interests rather than rush to the helpof its Christian brethren.It is often said that history repeats itself. Sections of this volume dealingwith hostilities in Karabagh between the Armenian meliks and Turkic khanscarry many parallels with the struggles in the region in 1918–20 and 1988–94.Indeed, in addition to serving the needs of historians of the period, this studywill be of much help to all those interested in the modern-day conflict overKarabagh.Armenians and Russia, 1626–1796 is an indispensable tool for all studentsof the past and present of Armenia and the entire Caucasus. It can only beregretted that a number of misspellings and grammatical errors managed toslip into the published text. In spite of these mistakes, however, Bournoutianshould be commended for the publication of this volume, which is a consider-able accomplishment in itself.HOVANN H. SIMONIANISTVÁN VÁSÁRY:Cumans and Tatars: Oriental Military in the Pre-Ottoman Balkans,1185–1365.xvi, 230 pp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. £48.The Cumans, the Pechenegs, the Qipchaq Turks if not the same people theycertainly shared the same homeland known variously as the Dasht-i-Qipchaq,155REVIEWSCumania, Pole Poloveckoe, Valania, the Pontic steppes, or the Eurasiansteppes. They were nomadic warriors whose impact and influence has oftenbeen overshadowed and obscured by their neighbours and the tumultuousevents which periodically engulfed the whole Balkan region. If there is onecomplaint about this most welcome and very thorough study of these so oftenoverlooked people it is that their possible, very tangible, link to the founding ofthe Ottoman Empire has not been explored or even acknowledged in anymeaningful way.Vásáry’s study concentrates on the relationship between the nomadic tribesand the settled peoples of the Balkans and Bulgaria in particular. His is thefirst extensive examination of the early medieval period of this region. Hisstudy charts the formation of the second Bulgarian Empire from 1185 andfollows the infiltration of the Cuman elite into the Balkan polities with theknowledge and approval of the ruling circles of the Qipchaq Khanate or Ulusof Jochi [Golden Horde].Between 1185 and the 1330s the Cumans’ decisive role saw the founding ofthree successive Bulgarian dynasties. Without the Cumans’ unwavering aid it isdoubtful whether the second Bulgarian Empire could have stood, though fiercearguments over the ethnic composition of the resulting state and the role of theVlakhs and Bulgars in the re-establishment of the empire are ongoing. Bulgar-ians tend to play down the role of the Romanian Vlakhs while some Roma-nians would claim that the empire was the first Romanian state in history.Vásáry dismisses both stands as anachronistic while pointing out that bothdisgruntled groups lived harmoniously under the domination of the Byzantinesagainst whom they jointly revolted in 1185. Both groups had long wanted toend the Byzantine oppression but it was not until the military might of theCumans was added to the equation that an uprising became feasible. Accord-ing to Vásáry the Bulgars furnished the revolt with an ideology, the trans-human pastoralist Vlakhs contributed energy and impetus while, decisively,the Cumans provided the arms and warriors.Vásáry’s monograph traces the Cumans’ advance from their westernmostwanderings in the Balkans at the end of the twelfth century to the middle ofthe fourteenth century; the year 1185 was the turning point in Cuman andBalkan history. The Cumans played a crucial role in the history of this periodthough with the advent of the Mongols and the central role the Cumans orQipchaqs assumed in the early Mongol Empire and in particular the QipchaqKhanate [Golden Horde], their central place in the history books was assured.Vásáry concludes his history in the mid-fourteenth century for clearly statedreasons. He sees Berdibek Khan’s death in 1359 and the subsequent anarchythat embroiled the Qipchaq Khanate (Golden Horde) as signalling the end ofthe Tatar period in the Balkans. These events contrast with the Ottomanadvance into Eastern Europe in the second half of the fourteenth century andfall beyond the scope of his study and therefore form a historical boundary forhis work.Cumans and Tatars establishes that there was a strong Turkish presencein the Balkans long before the arrival of the Ottomans and that the variousRomanian and Bulgarian dynasties owed much to the influence and involve-ment of Turkic Cumans and Tatars. One of Vásáry’s stated aims is to dispelthe ‘rosy clouds of nostalgia that hang over the mediaeval golden age ofthe pre-Ottoman Balkans’ (p. 167) through which nationalist historians areinclined to view the era. However, Vásáry, a former Hungarian ambassadorto Turkey and currently a professor of Turkic and Central Asian studies atLoránd Eötvös University in Budapest himself betrays a passive sympathy156 REVIEWSfor Hungarian influence in the area which he certainly does not extend toRomania and Bulgaria.Vásáry employs an impressive array of source material and is able to con-sult material written in obscure languages from problematic texts. He reliesheavily on Byzantine Greek accounts for the main narratives simply becausethey are by far the most plentiful and easily accessible as well as often being‘complete’. The opening chapter contains short biographical sketches of fiveprincipal Byzantine historians, a useful and thoughtful addition. The problembesetting all historians of nomadic peoples, namely the lack of primary sourcematerial written by the tribal people themselves, is softened in the present workby the availability of material from Turkish, Arabic, Latin, Slavic, Hungarianand other medieval writers. The detailed consultation of primary source mate-rial allows for a strong sense of narrative, while Vásáry’s linguistic knowledgeof Turkish dialects and the relevant nomenclature strengthens his underlyingarguments. His attention to detail enables the author to produce some read-able and compelling narrative and vividly descriptive quotations with which toembellish this absorbing monograph.It is unfortunate that the links with the Ottomans through the collapse ofthe Khanate of Nogai have not been explored in Vásáry’s work. The Ottomanscholar, Colin Heywood threw light into the ‘Black Hole’ of the origins ofthe Ottoman Empire with his research into the conflicts within the QipchaqKhanate (Golden Horde) at the end of the thirteenth century. Heywood sug-gested that the death of the Mongol prince, Nogai Khan, who had designson the ‘throne’ of the Qipchaq Khanate, followed by the movements of consid-erable numbers of displaced people from the Pontic steppe and the lands westof the Black Sea might well have been connected with the sudden appearanceof a small but militarily ambitious tribe in western Anatolia. Vásáry plots theevents following, firstly, the appearance of Tuda-Mengü, the new ruler of theQipchaq Khanate, in 1280, secondly, the enthronement of the puppet kingGeorge Terter I (1280–92) in Bulgaria and thirdly, the accession of the Byzan-tine king Andronicus II (1282–1328), and duly notes Nogai’s role as king-maker and as a prime ‘mover and shaker’ behind the scenes. He recognizes theestablishment of an independent khanate by Nogai, legitimized by the khan’sstatus as a Chinggisid prince and emphasized by the  minting in Saqchï of cop-per and silver coins struck in Nogai and his son Ch eke’s names. Vásáry managesto pick through the details of Nogai’s complex family ties and the internecineblood bath in the 1290s which saw the clan effaced not only from the courtsof the Qipchaq Khanate but eventually also from those of Bulgaria. In theauthor’s words ‘The Balkanic lands, especially Bulgaria ... was liberated fromdirect Tatar menace.’ [sic.] (p. 96)A horror Tatarorum stalks much of the research of this confused period ofPontic and west Anatolian history and Vásáry does not investigate the leadswhich Heywood has so enticingly sown into the historical web of the region.Instead he echoes the weary discredited myths of the Ottomans as garhzis, andOsman as the valiant Muslim warrior.This failing aside however, Vásáry’s work has much to commend it andit will doubtless become the standard textbook for the study of the easternBalkans in the pre-Ottoman period. Though it will stoke controversy for itsdepiction of the crucial role of the Turks in the affairs of Bulgaria andRomania, it is convincing in its analysis and its evidence is compelling. Itis unfortunate that better maps were not provided to illustrate the topographyand physical geography. Such maps could have re-enforced the physical rela-tionships between nomads and the settled communities. But taken as a whole157REVIEWSsuch failings are dwarfed by the book’s achievements. Vásáry has produced anessential historical textbook, one unlikely to be superseded in the near future.GEORGE LANESOUTH ASIAROBERT ELGOOD:Hindu Arms and Ritual, Arms and Armour from India 1400–1865.312 pp. 342 figures. Delft: Eburon Academic Publishers, 2004. £55.This splendidly produced, generously illustrated and somewhat eccentricallyorganized volume is a landmark publication. Readers will be grateful to theauthor for gathering together all possible information pertaining to a vastarray of little studied, but splendidly decorated weapons from Vijayanagaraand the successor states of south India now widely dispersed in Indian, Euro-pean and American collections. They should also appreciate his attempt tolocate these objects within a specifically defined cultural and religious context.While other scholars specializing in arms and armour have tended to focuson north India under the Mughals and Rajputs, Elgood concentrates on theDeccan and south India, a region that has been unduly neglected in spite of thelarge numbers of surviving weapons and the miscellany of historical sources,including accounts of the European travellers.The astonishing technical virtuosity of chiselled steel implements from thelate Vijayanagara period is immediately apparent from the elephant goad(aDkusaa) illustrated on the cover of the book and the dagger (katDarr) shown inFigure 1.3. Among the most artistic metallic objects ever produced in southIndia, they are surely to be ranked with the finest bronze figurines of the re-gion. Yet the aesthetic assurance of these and other such examples of the southIndian metalworker places them far beyond the realm of mere artefacts ofwarfare. Indeed, as the author takes pains to demonstrate in the various chap-ters, goads, daggers, swords, spears and axes of this type were all charged withmagical powers so as to safeguard those who used them. As a means of ensur-ing cosmic protection these weapons came to be beautifully fashioned andrichly embellished with a whole host of auspicious motifs. These included lions,serpents, peacocks, parrots and fantastic beasts (yalis), which were often com-bined into intricate and imaginative compositions.The core of the book is a detailed description of no fewer than 600 indi-vidual specimens of arms and armour, which the author groups according totype and function. Thus we find separate chapters on the goad, sword, dagger,axe and mace, several categories of which are further subdivided accordingto their royal or religious context. Elgood presents photographs with extendedcaptions giving technical details of manufacture, use and decoration—datathat has almost never been made available before. At the same time the authoris concerned with underlying purpose and meaning. As a result, catalogue-like chapters focusing on specific groups of weapons, especially those fromthe Tanjore Armoury (mostly divided between the Government Museum inChennai and the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York), alternate withshort essays. Here the author offers discussions on subjects as diverse as anoverview of warfare in Vijayanagara times, the role of weapons in the rituals ofsouth Indian courts, the sacrificial axes employed in the worship of Hindu

Review of Istvan Vasary, 'Cumans and Tatars: Oriental Military in the Pre-Ottoman Balkans'

https://soas-repository.worktribe.com/file/340333/1/Lane_review_2006_b.pdf

Review of Istvan Vasary, 'Cumans and Tatars: Oriental Military in the Pre-Ottoman Balkans'

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

SOAS Research Online