No More Learning



## p. 666 (#708) ############################################

666
Venetian versus Genoese influence
The Serbs had now developed into a formidable nation. Orkhān
sent 6000 Ottomans against Stephen Dušan. The Turks defeated the
Serbs, but then recrossed into Asia with their booty. Two years
later, in 1349, Orkhăn sent 20,000 of his horsemen against the Serbs,
who were attacking Salonica. Matthew, the youngest son of Can-
tacuzene, was with the Ottomans. In 1352 the Tsar of Bulgaria
united with Stephen Dušan to support the young Emperor Palaeologus,
who was now quarrelling with his father-in-law. Much of the fighting
centred about Demotika, in the neighbourhood of which in the same
year Sulaiman, the son of Orkhān, defeated the Serbs. Orkhān himself
refused to assist in attacking his brother-in-law.
In these later years also, the struggle between the Genoese and the
Venetians disturbed the Empire and assisted in furthering the advance
of the Ottomans. On more than one occasion the Venetian fleet had
successfully resisted the Turk; for the fleet of the republic, like that of
Genoa, often made its appearance in the Aegean, and penetrated even to
the Euxine to protect the trade of its subjects. As the two States were
at this time almost constantly at war, it was practically inevitable that
in the civil war raging during the time of Cantacuzene one or both of
them should be invited to take sides. The Genoese were already estab-
lished in Galata, and they had strongly fortified it with walls which may
still be traced. In 1353 fourteen Venetian galleys fought at the
entrance to the Bosphorus against the combined Greek and Genoese
fleets, and their passage through the Straits was intercepted. In the
following year Cantacuzene had to take a decided line between the two
powers. He refused to ally himself with the Venetians, who had sent a
fleet to invite him so to do, probably because of his unwillingness to give
offence to Orkhān. His conduct, however, was of so dubious a character
that the Genoese declared war against him. The Venetians and the fleet
of the King of Aragon went to his assistance. Fighting took place once
more in the Bosphorus, and the Genoese persuaded Orkhān to come to
their aid. Thereupon Cantacuzene was compelled to come to terms
with the Genoese; he granted them an extension of territory beyond
the then existing walls of Galata, doubling in fact its area, and sur-
rendered to them the important towns of Heraclea and Selymbria
(Silivri) on the north shore of the Marmora. Cantacuzene, however,
had fallen into disfavour with the citizens of his capital, who sus-
pected that he was prepared to hand over Constantinople itself to Orkhān.
It was when he proposed to place the fortress of Cyclobium around the
Golden Gate in Orkhān's possession, for so went the rumour, that the
old Emperor resigned, and assuming the habit of a monk retired to a
monastery at Mangana; but a different version is given a century later
by Phrantzes.
Orkhān now assumed an attitude of open hostility to the Empire.
The year 1356 marks an epoch in the progress of the Ottoman Turks.


## p. 667 (#709) ############################################

The Ottomans in Europe
667
They and other Turkish tribes had frequently found themselves in Thrace,
either to help one of the parties in the civil war, or to assist the Empire
to repel Serb or Bulgar or Tartar invaders. But now Sulaimān, the son of
Orkhān, succeeded in crossing the Straits simply with the intention of
conquering new territory. A boat was ferried across the north end of the
Dardanelles, a Greek peasant was captured who assisted the Turks in
making rafts united by bullocks' hides, and on each raft forty horsemen
were ferried across to Tzympe, possibly at the foot of the hill on which
the castle of Sestos stands. In three nights thirty thousand men were
transported to the European shore, either in boats or, as seems more
likely, on a bridge supported on inflated skins. This was the real entry
of the Turks into Europe.
Shortly afterwards the Ottoman army, now under the command of
Murād, the second surviving son of Orkhān, took possession of three of the
most important towns in Thrace, Chorlu on the direct line to Hadrianople,
Epibatus, and Pyrgus? . In 1357 the Ottomans pushed on to Hadrianople,
which they captured and held as their European capital until Con-
stantinople fell into their hands. The capture was made by Sulaimān,
who, however, died shortly afterwards. A few weeks later Demotika,
which had had various fortunes during half a century and which was near
the Bulgarian frontier, fell into the hands of the Ottomans. To have
obtained possession of Hadrianople and of Demotika, and to be able to
hold them, was the greatest Ottoman advance yet made in Europe.
An incident occurred in the last year of Orkhān's life which is in-
structive as shewing how much influence the fear of his power had in the
Empire. His son Khalil, by Theodora the daughter of Cantacuzene, was
taken prisoner by pirates, probably Turks under the Emir of Magnesia,
and sent to Phocaea at the head of the Gulf of Smyrna. The Emperor,
with whom Matthew the son of Cantacuzene was associated, went him-
self with a fleet to capture the city, but returned without having
accomplished his object. After some weeks spent in the capital, Orkhān
insisted that he should return to set Khalil free. The request was in the
nature of a command, and was obeyed. The Palaeologus met his fleet
returning. Negotiations went on, but for a while without effect. Finally
in 1359 Khalil was ransomed by the Emperor, brought to the capital,
made governor of Bithynia, and took up his quarters at Nicaea. Previous
to his arrival the Emperor had agreed with Orkhān to give his ten-year-
old daughter to Khalil. The agreement was made at Chalcedon; the
betrothal was celebrated at Constantinople with great pomp and amid
the rejoicing of the people, who believed that by the marriage and the
signature of a treaty of perpetual peace they would have rest.
Orkhān died a few months afterwards at Brūsa in 1359, two months
i Cantemir makes this statement, though there is nothing to shew whether he
means the Bulgarian Burgas, or a place of the same name about fifteen miles west
of Constantinople but not on the coast.
CH. XXI.


## p. 668 (#710) ############################################

668
Murād I
after the death of his son Sulaiman. He had consolidated the realm
over which Osmān had ruled, and had largely extended it. The Turkish
writers claim that he had captured nearly every place between the
Dardanelles and the Black Sea, including the shores of the gulfs of
Gemlik and Izmid. The claim is exaggerated, for though he had
harassed all the neighbourhood he had not taken possession of it. If,
instead of speaking of his taking possession of these places, it is said
that he claimed sovereign rights from the Dardanelles to the Black
Sea, the statement would be correct. On the European side also he had
acquired many places in Thrace and, most important of all, had cap-
tured Hadrianople, which was to serve as the chief centre of attack on
the Empire by his successors.
MURĀD I (1359–1389).
The thirty years' reign of Sultan Murād marks a great advance of
Ottoman power. On his accession, the Ottomans were already the most
powerful division of the Turks in Asia Minor. With two or three
exceptions, such as Karamania, little attention had to be given to the
Turks in the rear, that is, to the south and east of the territory the
Ottomans occupied. The greater body was constantly attracting to
itself members of the smaller bodies.
The attention of Murād was devoted at the beginning of his reign
mainly to the development of the important territory his people had
already acquired, extending from the north of the Aegean eastward to
Ineboli on the Black Sea. This territory, though for the most part con-
quered in the sense that it paid tribute and contained no population
able to revolt, was ill-organised, and it was the business of the new
sultan to complete its organisation for the purpose of government. But
the great object of Murād's life was to make a still further advance into
Europe. Indeed the remark may be made once for all that the Ottomans
were never prosperous except when they were pushing forward to obtain
new territory. Times of peace always shewed the worst side of the race.
Inferior in civilisation and intelligence to the races they conquered, they
resented their inferiority and became oppressors. Religion at this early
stage of their history was not a powerful element in their character, but as
they had adopted Islām the difference in religion between the conquerors
and conquered tended to become more and more the distinguishing
mark between them, with results which became increasingly important
as time went on. Various Greek writers note the commencement of a
religious persecution by Murād, and attribute it to the influence of a mufti.
The Sultan is said to have promised to the 'Ulama one-fifth of the spoils
of war.
We have seen that the predecessor of Murād had effected a landing
in Thrace, had overrun the country, and claimed sovereignty over several


## p. 669 (#711) ############################################

European policy of the Ottomans
669
towns. Murād's object was to make such sovereignty real and permanent,
and to obtain effectual possession of further territory, and especially of
important centres like Hadrianople and Salonica. We have seen that
the first of these cities had been taken by his father, but its occupation
had been only temporary. The explanation is that, numerous as the
hordes of the Ottoman Turks were, they had not sufficient men to hold
the cities they conquered.
They were now destined to meet much more formidable enemies than
the Greek Emperor. The great Slav nations, Bulgars and Serbs, were
strong, and were indeed at the height of their power. They too had
taken advantage of the weakness of the Empire, and had strengthened
their already powerful kingdoms. The chief struggles of Murād were to
be with them, aided as they were by the Magyars and the Roumanians
of Wallachia.
Meantime the advance of the Ottomans had aroused some of the
nations of the West. England and France were too much occupied with
the Hundred Years' War to take an active part in opposing the common
enemy of Christendom. But the Pope, who was perhaps the strongest
Power in western Europe, had long seen the advance of the Muslims,
and accordingly did his utmost to rouse Christian nations to check that
advance.
The Greek Empire at this time was in the midst of civil war.
Though the fullest account we have of its condition is that written by
the Emperor Cantacuzene himself, the picture presented is one of
hopeless incompetence. Nor was Asia Minor unmolested. The Mam-
lūks had invaded Cilicia, and had captured Tarsus, Adana, and other
cities. In the following year Attalia was taken by the King of Cyprus
with the aid of the Knights of Rhodes. Murād did not trouble himself
with the capture of Asiatic territory. The Ottomans were constant to
their purpose of extending their conquests in Europe. The rival parties
in the Empire were ready to buy their services. Sulaimān, the brother
of Murād, had taken Hadrianople. Cantacuzene, after remonstrances
based on appeals to the treaties made by Orkhān, was compelled to pay
10,000 crowns to Sulaimān on his promise to abandon his conquests in
Thrace and return to Asia. Nevertheless, on the death of Sulaimān, Murād
again took possession of Hadrianople. Probably, however, it was not
held in permanence until 1366, six years after its occupation by Murād.
In the same way and in the same year Gallipoli, which several times
was occupied for a short time by the Ottomans, was taken from them
by the Count of Savoy and given back to the Emperor within a year
of its capture. The Emperor tried to induce the Serbs to join with him
to expel the Turks, but this effort failed. After Murād had taken Demo-
tika in 1361, he drove the Serbs out of Seres, and then attacked various
claimants to both the Serbian and Bulgarian thrones.
In 1363 Murād was obliged to give his attention to Asia Minor.
CH. XXI.


## p. 670 (#712) ############################################

670
Defeat of the Serbs on the Maritza, 1371
So strong was he that he was able, before crossing into Asia, to obtain
a treaty from the Emperor that he would not attempt to retake any of
the places captured in Thrace, but would send aid to him across the
Bosphorus. Returning the same year from his Asiatic territory, Murād
made an agreement with the Genoese to transport 60,000 of his followers
into Thrace. Proceeding to Hadrianople, we find him attacking and
defeating an army composed of Serbs, Bulgarians, and Magyars. Three
years later, in 1366, the South Serbs made an effort to capture Hadria-
nople. Their army of 50,000 men was, however, defeated? To have
accomplished this result the number of the Turks in Europe must
certainly have been great. Other evidence is to the same effect. Ducas,
writing three-quarters of a century later, states his belief that there
were more Turks between the Dardanelles and the Danube than in Asia
Minor itself. He describes how the Turks from Cappadocia, Lycia,
and Caria had crossed into Europe to pillage and ruin the lands of the
Christians. A hundred thousand had laid waste the country as far as
Dalmatia. Notwithstanding the defeat of the Serbs just mentioned,
they again attacked the Turks. In September 1371 Vukašin, King of
South Serbia, with an army of 70,000 men, made a desperate stand near
the banks of the river Maritza. In this battle the rout of the South
Serbs was complete. Two sons of the king were drowned in the river,
and Vukašin himself was killed in flight. The kingdom of the South
Serbs had perished.
It is noteworthy that in the battle of the Maritza the Greeks took
no part. It may be said that the impotency of the Empire reached its
highest point two years later, in 1373, when Murād was formally recog-
nised as his suzerain by the Emperor, who promised to render him military
service, and consented to surrender his son Manuel as a hostage.
John V, the Greek Emperor, was meantime seeking aid from western
Europe. In 1366 the Pope, in reply to his request for aid, pressed for
the Union of the two Churches as a condition precedent, and urged
him to take part in a crusade headed by Louis, King of Hungary.
Urban V in the following year wrote to the Latin princes to facilitate
of John and to assist him in raising means to oppose the
Turks. In 1369 John visited Venice and thence went to Rome, where
he formally professed the Roman faith. Upon such profession he was
allowed to collect troops. Meantime the Pope urged Louis and the
Voivode of Wallachia to join in attacking the Turks. John went to
France, but his mission failed, and he found himself in money difficulties
when in 1370 he returned to Venice. A new Pope, Gregory XI, preached
once more a crusade with the object of driving the Turks back into Asia,
and tried to obtain soldiers for Louis. The effort met with little success,
i The most complete study of this campaign yet made is by S. Novakovič,
Die Serben und Turken in XIV und XV Jahrhundert, chs. vi and vii.
2 Cf. supra, Chapter xviii, p. 555.
the voyage


## p. 671 (#713) ############################################

Subservience of the Empire to Murād
671
and in 1374 the Pope reproached Louis for his inactivity, ignoring
the fact that the task assigned to him was beyond his means. The
Union of the Churches had not been completed, and though the Knights
of Rhodes were urged to attack the Turks and to send seven hundred
knights to attack them in Greece, and although a papal fleet was building,
these preparations resulted in very little. In reference to the proposed
Union one thing was clear, that, whatever the Emperor and his great
nobles were prepared to do in the matter, the majority of his subjects
would have none of it? .
An incident in 1374 is significant of the relations between the chief
actors, Murād the Sultan and John Palaeologus the Emperor. In 1373
John had associated his younger son Manuel with him as Emperor.
Both father and son loyally fulfilled their obligations to Murād, and
joined him in a campaign in Asia. The elder son, Andronicus, was on
friendly terms with Sauji, the son of Murād. These two, who were
about the same age, joined in a conspiracy to dethrone their fathers.
When Murād and John returned from Asia Minor, they found the
army of the rebellious sons in great force on the Maritza near Demotika.
The most powerful element in the rebel army was Turkish. A bold appeal
made in person to them by Murād caused large defections. Though both
the rebel sons resisted, Demotika was captured. The inhabitants were
treated with exceptional cruelty, which revolted Turks as well as Chris-
tians. The garrison was drowned in the Maritza; fathers were forced
to cut the throats of their sons. The Sultan and the Emperor, say
the chroniclers, had agreed to punish the chief rebels. Sauji was
blinded.
The disastrous war between members of the imperial family, a war
without a single redeeming feature, continued. The chief combatants
were the rival sons of John-Manuel and Andronicus—the latter of whom
gained possession of Constantinople in 1376, having entered it by the
Pege Gate. He imprisoned John, his father, and his two brothers in the
tower of Anemas. He had promised the Genoese the island of Tenedos
in return for their aid. But the Venetians were in possession, and strongly
opposed the attempt of Andronicus and the Genoese fleet to displace
them. Amid these family disputes the Turks were steadily gaining
ground. The one city in Asia Minor which remained faithful to the
Empire was Philadelphia. In 1379, when John V was restored, the Turks,
possibly at the instigation of Bāyazīd who later became Sultan, stipu-
lated that the annual tribute paid by the Empire should be 30,000 gold
bezants, that 12,000 fighting men should be supplied to the Sultan, and
that Philadelphia should be surrendered. The bargain was the harder
1 Cf. supra, Chapter xix, pp. 617-18.
2 Chalcoudyles, 1. p. 44, Phrantzes, 1. Ducas, 1. 12, says that Murād blinded his
son and called on John to blind Andronicus, but though some formality of blinding
was gone through by pouring vinegar upon the eyes, it was not effective.
CH. XXI.


## p. 672 (#714) ############################################

672
Advance of the Turks: Kossovo, 1389
because the Emperor had to send his own troops to compel his subjects
to open their gates to the enemy.
The Turks were now waging war in southern Greece and the
Archipelago with great energy and success. Even Patmos had to be
surrendered to them in 1381 in order to effect the ransom of the Grand
Master of Rhodes. Islands and towns were being appropriated by Turks
or Genoese without troubling about the consent of the Emperor. Scio
or Chios, however, was given on a long lease by him to a company of
Genoese who took the name of Giustiniani. In 1384 Apollonia on the
Black Sea was occupied by Murād after he had killed the villagers. Two
years later Murād sent two of his generals to take possession of several
of the flourishing towns north of the Aegean. Gumaljina, Kavala, Seres,
and others farther afield into Macedonia as far as Monastir, fell into
Turkish hands.
As we near the end of Murād's reign, the increasing impotency of the
Greek Empire becomes more manifest. Almost every year shews also an
increase in numbers of the subjects who had come under Ottoman rule,
and the wide-spread character of Ottoman conquest. The Muslim flood,
which though not exclusively was mainly Ottoman, had spread all over
the Balkan Peninsula. Turks were in Greece, and were holding their own
in parts of Epirus. West of Thrace the most important city on the coast
which had not been captured by the Turks was Salonica. After a siege
lasting four years, it was captured for Murād in 1387.
The growth and development of the Bulgars and Serbs during the
early part of the fourteenth century forms one of the leading features in
the history of Eastern Europe. Their progress was checked by the
Ottoman Turks. The Serbs had been so entirely defeated as to accept
vassalage at Murād's hands. In 1381 their king was ordered to send 2000
men against the Emir of Karamania (Qaramān). On the return of this
detachment the discontent at their subjection to Murād was so great
that King Lazar revolted. He was defeated and thereupon set to
work to organise an alliance against Murād. In 1389 the decisive battle
was fought on the plains of Kossovo; Lazar was taken prisoner, and the
triumph of the Ottomans was complete. As the battle on the Maritza
had broken the power of the South Serbs and of the eastern Bulgarians
in 1371, so did this battle on the plains of Kossovo in 1389 destroy that
of the northern Serbians and the western Bulgarians!
During or immediately before the battle, there occurred a dramatic
incident. A young Serb named Miloš ran towards the Turkish army,
and, when they would have stopped him, declared that he wanted to see
their Sultan in order that he might shew him how he could profit by the
fight. Murād signed to him to come near, and the young fellow did so,
drew a dagger which he had hidden, and plunged it into the heart of
1 Cf. supra, Chapter xviii, pp. 557–58.


## p. 673 (#715) ############################################

Causes of Murād's success
673
לל
the Sultan. He was at once cut down by the guards. Lazar, the captive
king, was hewn in pieces.
Murād was the son of a Christian woman, who in Turkish is known
as Nīlüfer, the lotus flower. She was seized by Orkhān on the day of
her espousal to a Greek husband, and became the first wife of her captor.
It is a question which has been discussed', whether the influence of the
mother had any effect in moulding the character of her distinguished son.
Murād seems to have possessed traits quite unlike those of his father
or grandfather: a singular independence, a keen intelligence, a curious
love of pleasure and of luxury, and at the same time a tendency towards
cruelty which was without parallel in his ancestors. In his youth he was
not allowed to take part in public affairs, and was overshadowed by his
brother Sulaimān. It is claimed for Murād that he was inexorably just,
and that he caused his “beloved son Sauji to be executed for rebellion. '
Von Hammer believes that he had long been jealous of him, but the
better opinion would appear to be that Bāyazīd intrigued to have his
brother condemned. When this elder brother came to the throne, he put
another brother named Ya'qūb to death so as to have no rival.
The reign of Murād is the most brilliant period of the advance of
the Ottomans. It lasted thirty years, during which conquest on the
lines laid down by his two predecessors extended the area of Ottoman
territory on a larger scale than ever, its especial feature being the defeat
of the Serbians and Bulgarians with their allies in the two crowning
victories of the Maritza in 1371 and Kossovo in 1389. On Murād's assas-
sination it looked as if the Balkan peninsula was already under Ottoman
sway. They had overrun Greece, had penetrated into Herzegovina, and
had captured Niš, the position which commands the passes leading from
Thrace into Serbia. The success of Murād was due to four causes, the
impotence of the Greek Empire, the organisation of the Ottoman army,
the constant increase of that army by an unending stream of Muslims
from Asia Minor, and the disorganised condition of the races occupying
the Balkan peninsula. We have already spoken of the impotence of the
Empire. Murād and his brothers had developed the organisation of the
Ottoman army, had improved its discipline, and had perfected a system of
tactics which endured for many generations. It was already distinguished
for its mobility, due in great part to the nomad character of a Turkish
army. We may reject the stories of Turkish writers that the Christian
armies were encumbered with women and with superfluous baggage
due to their love of luxury, but, in comparison with the simple require-
ments of an army of nomads, it was natural and probably correct on
the part of the Turks to regard the impedimenta of the other armies as
excessive and largely useless. The constant stream of Asiatic immigrants
is attested by many writers, Muslim and Christian. Moreover, the
1
By Halil Ganem, Les Sultans ottomans, p. 64.
C. MED. H. VOL. IV. CH. XXI.
43


## p. 674 (#716) ############################################

674
Bāyazīd the Thunderbolt
great horde from central Asia under the leadership of Tīmūr was already
on the march, and had driven other Turks before it to the west; to them
were due the constant accretions to the Ottoman army. The disorganised
condition of the races once occupying the Balkan peninsula aided the
advance of the Ottomans. The Slavs, as we have seen, were divided.
There were Bulgars, Serbs, and inhabitants of Dalmatia; there were
also Albanians, Wallachs of Macedonia, and Greeks. In the Ottoman
army there was the tie of a common language. Patriotism, that is love
of country, did not exist, but its place was taken by a common religion.
Among the Christians whom they attacked, though there was unity of
religion, patriotism was far from forming a bond of union.
The reign of Murād is important, not merely because of his successes
in the Balkan peninsula, but because it was the beginning of an Ottoman
settlement in Europe. It is true that the army still marched as a dis-
ciplined Asiatic horde, but the soldiers wherever they took possession of
territory had lands, or chiftliks, granted to them according to their
valour and the Sultan's will. Liable as they were at all times to con-
tinuous military service, they were always ready on the conclusion of
peace to return to their lands, their flocks and herds. The occupation
of Hadrianople caused that city soon to be the centre from which further
Ottoman conquests were made—so that, while nominally Brúsa remained
the capital of the race, Hadrianople soon became a more important city
and the real centre of Ottoman rule.
BĀYAZĪD (1389-1403). WARS OF SUCCESSION (1403-1413).
On the assassination of Murād, Bāyazīd succeeded to the Ottoman
throne. He was popular with the army because already renowned for his
successes as a soldier. He is known as Yilderim, or the Thunderbolt, a
title conferred upon him on account of the rapidity of his movements in
warfare. Regarded simply as a man, he was the most despicable of Ottoman
Sultans who had as yet been girded with the sword of Osmān. He alter-
nated periods of wonderful activity with others of wild debauch. He was
reckless of human life and delighted in cruelty. Had he possessed the
statesmanlike ability of either of his predecessors he might have made
an end of the Greek Empire. As it was, he would probably have done
so if he had not encountered an opponent even more powerful and
ruthless than himself.
Immediately after the victory of Kossovo he led his troops in quick
succession against the Bulgars, the Serbs, the Wallachs, and the Alba-
nians, reducing them to submission. He compelled Stephen, the son of
Lazar, to acknowledge him as suzerain, and to give him his sister
Maria in marriage. To such an extremity was the lingering Empire of
Trebizond reduced that its Emperor Manuel in 1390 was compelled to
contribute a large subsidy to aid Bāyazīd in a campaign against his


## p. 675 (#717) ############################################

Western crusade against the Turks
675
father-in-law, the Emir of Germiyān or Phrygia, and to bring a hundred
knights to aid in the campaign. Bāyazīd had in the meantime strengthened
his fleet, which overran the islands in the Aegean as far as Euboea and
the Piraeus. Sixty of his ships burnt the chief town of the island of Chios.
A swift campaign in Asia Minor made him complete master of Phrygia
and of Bithynia. Then he turned his attention to Constantinople. The
Emperor proposed to strengthen the landward walls and to rebuild the
famous towers at the Golden Gate. Bāyazīd objected and threatened to
put out the eyes of the Emperor's son Manuel, who was with him as a
hostage, unless the new buildings were demolished. The old Emperor
John had to yield, and the surrender helped to kill him. The towers
were shortly afterwards, on the death of Bāyazīd, rebuilt. Simultaneously
Bāyazīd demanded payment of tribute, a recognition of the Emperor's
vassalage to him, and the establishment of capitulations by which a
Muslim cadi should be named in the capital to have jurisdiction over
Ottoman subjects. He appears to have waged during 1392 and 1393 a
war of extermination throughout Thrace, the subjects of the Empire
being either taken captive or killed.
The advance of the Turks was now well known in western Europe,
but the efforts made to resist it were spasmodic and shewed little power
of coherence between the Christian States. Those who were nearest to
the Balkan peninsula naturally were the most alarmed. Venice in 1391
decided to aid Durazzo in opposing Turkish progress. In the following
year its senate treated with the King of Hungary for common action.
Ten thousand Serbs from Illyria joined Theodore Palaeologus of Mistra,
in his attempt to expel the Turks from Achaia. Theodore himself in
1394 was compelled by Bāyazīd to cede Argos. The Sultan later sent his
general, Ya'qūb, into the Morea with 50,000 men, who penetrated as
far as Methone and Coronea, captured Argos which Theodore had not
surrendered, and carried off or killed 30,000 prisoners. The Emperor
Manuel, whose rule hardly extended beyond the walls of Constantinople,
made a series of appeals to the Western princes. Sigismund, King of
Hungary and brother of the Emperor of the West, was the first to
respond. He attacked the Turks at Little Nicopolis in 1393, and defeated
them. This encouraged the Western powers to come to his aid. The
Pope Boniface IX preached a new crusade in 1394, and in 1996 the
Duke of Burgundy, at the head of 1000 knights and 9000 soldiers
(French, English, and Italian), arrived in Hungary and joined Sigismund.
German knights also came in considerable numbers. The Christian
armies defeated the Turks in Hungary, and gained the victory in several
engagements. The Emperor Manuel was secretly preparing to join them.
Then the allies prepared to strike a decisive blow. They gathered on the
banks of the Danube an army of at least 52,000 and possibly 100,000
men, and encamped at Nicopolis. The élite of several nations were
present, but those of the highest rank were the French knights. When
(I.
43—2


## p. 676 (#718) ############################################

676
Victory of Bāyazīd at Nicopolis, 1396
they heard of the approach of the enemy, they refused to listen to the
prudent counsels of the Hungarians and, with the contempt which so
often characterised the Western knights for the Turkish foe, they joined
battle confident of success.
Bāyazīd, as soon as he had learned the presence of the combined Chris-
tian armies, marched through Philippopolis, crossed the Balkans, made
for the Danube, and then waited for attack. In the battle which ensued
(1396), Europe received its first lesson on the prowess of the Turks and
especially of the Janissaries. The French with rash daring broke through
the line of their enemies, cut down all who resisted them, and rushed on
triumphantly to the very rearguard of the Turks, many of whom either
retreated or sought refuge in flight. When the French knights saw that
the Turks ran, they followed, and filled the battlefield with dead and
dying. But they made the old military blunder, and it led to the old
result. The archers, who always constituted the most effective Turkish
arm, employed the stratagem of running away in order to throw their
pursuers into disorder. Then they turned and made a stand. As they did
so, the Janissaries, Christians in origin, from many Christian nations, as
Ducas bewails, came out of the place where they had been concealed, and
surprised and cut to pieces Frenchmen, Italians, and Hungarians. The
pursuers were soon the pursued. The Turks chased them to the Danube,
into which many of the fugitives threw themselves. The defeat was
complete. Sigismund saved himself in a small boat, with which he crossed
the river, and found his way, after long wandering, to Constantinople.
The Duke of Burgundy and twenty-four nobles who were captured were
sent to Brūsa to be held for ransom. The remaining Burgundians, to
the number of 300, who escaped massacre and refused to save their lives
by abjuring Christianity, had their throats cut or were clubbed to death
by order of the Sultan and in the presence of their compatriots? .
The battle of Nicopolis gave back to Bāyazīd almost at once all that
the allies had been able to take from him. The defeat of Sigismund, with
his band of French, German, and Italian knights, spread dismay among
their countrymen and the princes of the West.
Bāyazīd, having retaken all the positions which the allied Christians
had captured from him, hastened back to the Bosphorus, his design being
to conquer Constantinople. For this purpose, having strengthened his
position at Izmid and probably at the strong fortification still remaining
at G eh, he immediately gave orders for the construction of a for-
tress at what is now known as Anatolia-Hisār. The fort was about six
miles from the capital on the Asiatic side and at the mouth of a small
river now known as the Sweet Waters of Asia. The arrival in March 1397
of the great French soldier Boucicaut in the capital probably influenced
the design of the Sultan; for although he had defeated the Christian
allies at Nicopolis and had made all preparations for the capture of Con-
1 Cf. supra, Chapter xvili, p. 561.


## p. 677 (#719) ############################################

Boucicaut at Constantinople
677
stantinople, and although the Emperor had been summoned to surrender
it, a demand to which he had not replied, the grand vizier represented to
him that its siege would unite all Christian Europe against him, and the
project was therefore delayed. The construction of Anatolia-Hisār, which
was to serve as his basis of attack, was however pushed on and completed'.
A few months later in 1397, the Sultan endeavoured to accomplish his
object by persuading John, the nephew of the Emperor Manuel, to claim
the throne, promising that if he did so he would aid him in return by the
cession of Silivri. John refused, and when Bāyazīd made further pro-
posals Manuel took a step which suggests patriotism and which Godefroy,
the biographer of Boucicaut, attributes to his wise intervention. Manuel
agreed to admit John into the city, to associate him on the throne, and
then to leave for western Europe to bring the aid so greatly needed
(1398). Boucicaut arrived in the following year at the head of 1400
men-at-arms and with a well-manned fleet. At Tenedos he was joined by
Genoese and Venetian ships, and became admiral-in-chief. He met near
Gallipoli a Turkish fleet of seventeen galleys and defeated them. Then
he pushed on to the Bosphorus, and arrived in the Golden Horn just in
time to prevent Galata being captured by the Turks. The Emperor
appointed him Grand Constable. The French knights under him fought
the Turks whenever they could find them, from Izmid to Anatolia-Hisār,
defeated them in many skirmishes, and sent many Turkish prisoners to
Constantinople. But their numbers were too few to have much permanent
value. They harassed Bāyazīd's army at Izmid, but failed to capture
the city. They burnt a few Turkish villages ; but after a year's fighting
Boucicaut left for France in order to obtain more volunteers. He left in
Constantinople Chateaumorant with 100 knights and their esquires and
servants to assist in defending the city.
The Turks were now spread throughout the Balkan peninsula and
claimed to rule over almost all Asia Minor. Western Europe was alarmed
at their progress and many attempts were made to resist it. Had their
forces been capable of united action under a great general like Boucicaut,
they might have succeeded in effecting a check. But while that general
was fighting on the shores of the Marmora, destroying many Turkish
encampments and greatly harassing the enemy, he was only hopeful of
success if he could obtain a larger contingent of French knights. While
others, as we have seen, were fighting the battle of civilisation in the
Morea, the Knights of Rhodes had captured Budrun, the ancient Hali-
carnassus, and had already made themselves a strong power in the
Aegean and Levant; but they were themselves a cause of weakness to
the Empire. Theodore of Mistra, the brother of Manuel, had ceded
Corinth to them, but they attempted to obtain other concessions, and
1 Leunclavius says that the Sultan desisted only on condition that a quarter in
the city should be given to the Turks. Chalcondyles says he withdrew because he
had had no success. Ducas speaks of the resistance of the citizens as obstinate.
CH, XXI.


## p. 678 (#720) ############################################

6. 78
Danger of Constantinople
Bāyazīd tempted Theodore with the promise of peace if he would give
his aid to expel the Knights. While Bulgarians, Serbs, and Albanians
were ready for resistance whenever a favourable opportunity occurred,
there was little solidarity between them in their efforts to resist the
invaders. Bāyazīd, a ruthless invader with forces ever increasing, was
ready everywhere to employ his genius for warfare and the great mobile
army whose interest was to follow him; and the result was that the
efforts of his disunited enemies hardly impeded his progress.
Boucicaut persuaded the Emperor Manuel to offer to become the
vassal of Charles VI of France; and the Venetians, Genoese, and the
Knights of Rhodes consented to his doing homage. Venetians and Genoese
in the Bosphorus agreed to join forces and work for the defence of the city.
The Emperor Manuel and Boucicaut left together for Venice and France.
Charles received both with great honours, and consented to send 1200
soldiers and to pay them for a year. In order to avoid the responsibility
of giving Manuel the protection of a suzerain, he seems to have refused to
accept him as his vassal. Manuel went in 1400 from Paris to England,
where Henry IV received him with great honour but gave no assistance.
In 1402 he returned to Venice by way of Germany.
In the same year Bāyazīd summoned John to surrender the capital.
During three years it had been nearly isolated by the Turks, but now it
was threatened by assault. Bāyazīd swore " by God and the prophet”
that if John refused he would not leave in the city a soul alive. The
Emperor gave a dignified refusal. Chateaumorant, who had been in
charge of the defence for nearly three years, waited to be attacked.
At this time, remarks Ducas, the Empire was circumscribed by the
walls of Constantinople, for even Silivri was in the hands of the Turks.
Bāyazīd had gained a firm hold of Gallipoli, and thus commanded the
Dardanelles. The long tradition of the Roman Empire seemed on the
eve of coming to an end. No soldier of conspicuous ability had been
produced for upwards of half a century, none capable of inflicting a
sufficient defeat, or series of defeats, on the Turks to break or seriously
check their power. The Empire had fought on for three generations
against an ever-increasing number of Muslims, but without confidence
and almost without hope. It was now deficient both in men and in money.
The often-promised aid from the West had so far proved of little avail.
The power of Serbia had been almost destroyed. Bulgaria had perished.
From Dalmatia to the Morea the enemy was triumphant. The men of
Macedonia had everywhere fallen before Bāyazīd's armies. Constantinople
was between the hammer and the anvil. Asia Minor, on the one side,
was now nearly all under Turkish rule; Europe, on the other, contained
many Turks as there were in Asia Minor itself.
Bāyazīd passed in safety between his two capitals, one at Brūsa, the
other at Hadrianople, and repeated his proud boasts of what he would
do beyond the limits of the Empire. It seemed as if, with his over-
ás


## p. 679 (#721) ############################################

The appearance of Tīmūr
679
לל
whelming force, he had only to succeed once more in a task which, in
comparison with what he and his predecessors had done, was easy, and his
success would be complete. He would occupy the throne of Constantine,
would achieve that which had been the desire of the Arab followers of
Mahomet, and for which they had sacrificed hundreds of thousands of
lives, and would win for himself and his followers the reward of heaven
promised to those who should take part in the capture of New Rome.
The road to the Elder Rome would be open, and he repeated the boast
that he would feed his horse on the altar of St Peter.
When he had sent his insolent message in 1402 to John VII, the answer
was: “Tell your master we are weak, but that in our weakness we trust
in God, who can give us strength and can put down the mightiest from
their seats. Let your master do what he likes. ” Thereupon Bāyazīd had
laid siege to Constantinople.
Suddenly in the blackness of darkness with which the fortunes of the
city were surrounded there came a ray of light. All thought of the
siege was abandoned for the time, and Constantinople breathed again
freely. What had happened was that Tīmūr the Lame, “the Scourge
of God," had challenged, or rather ordered, Bāyazīd to return to the
Greeks all the cities and territories he had captured. The order of
the Asiatic barbarian, given to another ferocious barbarian like Bāyazid,
drove him to fury. The man who gave it was, however, accustomed to
be obeyed.
Tīmūr, or Tamerlane, was a Musulman and a Turk? His nomad
troops advanced in well-organised armies, under generals who seem to
have had intelligence everywhere of the enemy's country and great
military skill. After conquering Persia, Tīmūr turned westward. In
1386 he appeared at Tiflis, which he subsequently captured, at the head
of an enormous host estimated at 800,000 men. At Erzinjān he put all
the Turks sent there by Bāyazid to the sword.
Bayazid seems from the first to have been alarmed, and went himself
to Erzinjān in 1394, but returned to Europe without making any
attempt to resist the invader, probably believing that Tīmūr had no
intention of coming farther west. He soon learned his mistake. Tīmūr
was not merely as great and cruel a barbarian but as ambitious as
Bāyazid himself. In 1395, while the Sultan was in the Balkan peninsula,
Tīmūr summoned the large and populous city of Sīwās to surrender. The
inhabitants twice refused. Meantime, he had undermined the wall. On
their second refusal, his host stormed and captured the city. A hundred
and twenty thousand captives were massacred. One of Bāyazīd's sons
was made prisoner and put to death. A large number of prisoners were
buried alive, being covered over in a pit with planks instead of earth so
as to prolong their torture. Bāyazīd was relieved when he heard that
? Cf. supra, Chapter xx, pp. 650-51.
CH. XXI.


## p. 680 (#722) ############################################

680
Capture of Aleppo and Baghdad by Tīmūr
from Sīwās, which had been the strongest place in his empire, the ever
victorious army
had
gone
towards Syria.
Tīmūr directed his huge host towards Aleppo, the then frontier
city of the Sultan of Egypt, his object being to punish the Sultan for
his breach of faith in imprisoning his ambassador and loading him with
irons. On his march to that city, he spread desolation everywhere,
capturing or receiving the submission of Malatīyah, 'Ain Tāb, and other
important towns. At Aleppo the army of the Egyptian Sultan resisted.