Pechenegs in Byzantine Army

THE STEPPE LANDS

AND THE WORLD BEYOND THEM Studies in honor of Victor Spinei on his 70th birthday

Suported by grant CNCSIS PN II-RU 343/2010

Redactor: Dana Lungu Cover: Manuela Oboroceanu Editorial assistant: Anda-Elena Maleon Front cover illustration: “Portolan chart by Angelino Dulcert (1339)”, Sea Charts of the Early Explorers, 13th to 17th Century, ed. Michel Mollat du Jourdin, Monique de La Ronciére, Marie-Madeleine Azard, Isabelle Raynaud-Nguyen, Marie-Antoinette Vannereau, Fribourg, Thames and Hudson, 1984, pl. no. 7. ISBN 978-973-703-933-0 © Editura Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza”, 2013 700109 – Iași, Str. Pinului, nr. 1 A, tel./fax: (0232)314947 http://www.editura.uaic.ro e-mail: [email protected]

THE STEPPE LANDS AND THE WORLD BEYOND THEM

Studies in honor of Victor Spinei

on his 70th birthday

editors Florin Curta, Bogdan-Petru Maleon

EDITURA UNIVERSITĂȚII „ALEXANDRU IOAN CUZA” IAȘI – 2013

Descrierea CIP a Bibliotecii Naţionale a României The Steppe Lands and the World Beyond Them : Studies in Honor of Victor Spinei on his 70th Birthday / ed. by Florin Curta and Bogdan-Petru Maleon - Iaşi : Editura Universităţii “Al. I. Cuza”, 2013 Bibliogr. ISBN 978-973-703-933-0 I. Curta, Florin (ed.) II. Maleon, Bogdan-Petru (ed.) 94(498) Spinei,V. 929 Spinei,V.

CONTENTS

Victor Spinei and the research on the Eurasian steppe lands ............................. 9 Victor Spinei’s opus: a complete list of works .................................................. 13

Early nomads

Michel Kazanski, The land of the Antes according to Jordanes and Procopius ....................................................................................................... 35

Peter Golden, Some notes on the Avars and Rouran ........................................ 43

Li Jinxiu, A study of the Xiyu Tuji 西域圖記 ................................................... 67

István Zimonyi, The chapter of the Jayhānī – tradition on the Pechenegs ....... 99 Adrian Ioniță, Observaţii asupra mormintelor cu depunere de cai sau

părţi de cai în spaţiul cuprins între Dunărea de Jos, Carpaţi şi Nistru, în secolele X-XIII ......................................................................................... 115

Mykola Melnyk, On the issue of the authenticity of the names of Pecheneg rulers in the Nikonian chronicle .................................................. 151

Nomads in the Balkans and in Central Europe

Aleksander Paroń,“Facta est christiana lex, in pessimo et crudelissimo populo.” Bruno of Querfurt among the Pechenegs ...................................... 161

Marek Meško, Pecheneg groups in the Balkans (ca. 1053-1091) according to the Byzantine sources ............................................................. 179

Alexandru Madgearu, The Pechenegs in the Byzantine army ......................... 207 Jonathan Shepard, Mingling with northern barbarians: advantages and

perils ............................................................................................................ 219 Alexandar Nikolov, “Ethnos Skythikon”: the Uzes in the Balkans

(facts and interpretations) ........................................................................... 235 Uwe Fiedler, Zur Suche nach dem archäologischen Niederschlag von

Petschenegen, Uzen und Kumanen in den Gebieten südlich der unteren Donau .......................................................................................................... 249

Ioto Valeriev, New Byzantine, tenth-to eleventh-century lead seals from Bulgaria ....................................................................................................... 287

Francesco Dall'Aglio, The interaction between nomadic and sedentary peoples on the Lower Danube: the Cumans and the “Second Bulgarian Empire” ....................................................................................................... 299

The Mongols and the aftermath of the Mongol invasion of 1241

Christopher P. Atwood, The Uyghur stone: archaeological revelations

in the Mongol Empire .................................................................................. 315 Antti Ruotsala, Roger Bacon and the imperial Mongols of the thirteenth

century ......................................................................................................... 345 Christian Gastgeber, John of Plano Carpini and William of Rubruck. Re-

reading their treatises about the Mongols from a sociolinguistic point of view .......................................................................................................... 355

Charles J. Halperin, “No one knew who they were”: Rus’ interaction with the Mongols .......................................................................................... 377

Georgi Atanasov, Le maître (αύφέντού – dominus) de Drăstăr Terter et le beg Tatar Kutlu-Buga pendant les années 70 - 80 du XIV siècle ............ 389

Alexander Rubel, Alexander kam nur bis zur chinesischen Mauer. Der Alexanderroman und seine Reise nach Asien im Mittelalter ....................... 399

Medieval archaeology within and outside the steppe lands

Silviu Oța, Cercei decoraţi cu muluri de granule pe pandantiv (secolele XII-XIV) ........................................................................................ 409

Dumitru Țeicu, The beginnings of the church architecture in the medieval Banat: rotundas ............................................................................ 437

Ionel Cândea, Some remarks on new ornamental disks, stove tiles, and tripods from the medieval town of Brăila (14th-16th centuries) .................... 455

Lia Bătrîna, Adrian Bătrîna, Gheorghe Sion, Reşedinţa feudală de la Giuleşti (com. Boroaia) ................................................................................469

Early urban life between steppe empires and Byzantium

Virgil Ciocîltan, Cluj şi Galaţi: sugestii etimologice ...................................... 523 Laurențiu Rădvan, Contribuții la istoria unui vechi oraș al Moldovei:

Bârlad .......................................................................................................... 543

Liviu Pilat, Iaşii şi drumul comercial moldovenesc ......................................... 563 Emil Lupu, Drum, oraș și hotar între Țara Moldovei și Țara

Românească ................................................................................................. 569 Sergiu Musteață, Chişinăul şi arheologia urbană .......................................... 599

The world outside the steppe lands during the Middle Ages

and the early modern period

Alexandru-Florin Platon, Représentation et politique : l’hypostase corporelle de l’État dans l’Empire Byzantin .............................................. 617

Warren Treadgold, The lost Secret History of Nicetas the Paphlagonian ...... 645 Ovidiu Cristea, Un gest al lui Manuel I Comnenul la Zemun (1165) ............. 677 Alexandru Simon, Walachians, Arpadians, and Assenids: the implications

of a lost charter ............................................................................................. 689 Matei Cazacu, Marche frontalière ou État dans l’État? l’Olténie aux

XIVe-XVe siècles ........................................................................................... 697 Arno Mentzel-Reuters, Der Kreuzzug des Deutschen Ordens zum Dnjestr

(1497). Protokoll einer Katastrophe ............................................................ 743 Ioan-Aurel Pop, Un text latin din 1531, despre raporturile moldo-polone, de la

arhivele de stat din Milano .............................................................................. 761 Iurie Stamati, Les Slaves et la genèse des Roumains et de leurs États

selon la tradition historiographique russe, de la chronique Voskresenskaia à Lev Berg .......................................................................... 779

Abbreviations .................................................................................................. 795

THE PECHENEGS IN THE BYZANTINE ARMY

Alexandru Madgearu The Pechenegs became an asset for the Byzantine policy of divide et

impera among the northern barbarians after their arrival in Atelkuz in 889. At the same time, however, they were a potential threat for the theme of Cherson. Their military capability was soon demonstrated in the invasion launched together with the Magyars into Bulgaria and the Byzantine Empire (934).1 To neutralize them, one needed to stir hostility between the Pechenegs and the Rus’, even if the latter were also a danger for the empire (they attacked Constantinople in 941).2 Prince Igor was therefore led to conclude a treaty with Byzantium in 944 or 945. Among other clauses, he promised to defend the theme of Cherson against the Pechenegs.3 After the

1 Theophanes Continuatus, Chronographia, edited by Immanuel Bekker (Bonn,

1838), pp. 422-23; Maçoudi, Les prairies d’or, edited and translated by C. Barbier de Meynard and Pavet de Courteille, vol. 2 (Paris, 1863), pp. 59-64; Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum edited by Hans Thurn (Berlin, 1973), p. 228; French translation by Bernard Flusin (Paris, 2003), p. 192; Petre Diaconu, Les Petchénègues au Bas-Danube (Bucharest, 1970), pp. 17-9; Nicholas Oikonomides, “Vardariotes - W.l.nd.r - V.n.nd.r, Hongrois installés dans la vallée du Vardar en 934,” SOF 32 (1973): 1-3; Ferenc Makk, Ungarische Aussenpolitik (896-1196) (Herne, 1999), p. 12; Paul Stephenson, Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier: A Political Study of the Northern Balkans, 900-1204 (Cambridge, 2000), p. 40; Florin Curta, Southeastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 500-1250 (Cambridge, 2006), p. 188; Victor Spinei, The Great Migrations in the East and South East of Europe from the Ninth to the Thirteenth Century (Amsterdam, 2006), pp. 109 and 168; Victor Spinei, The Romanians and the Turkic Nomads North of the Danube Delta from the Tenth to the Mid-Thirteenth Century (Leiden, 2009), p. 92.

2The Russian Primary Chronicle. Laurentian Text, translated by Samuel Hazzard Cross and Olgerd P. Sherbowitz-Wetzor (Cambridge, Mass., 1973), p. 72; Thomas Noonan, “Byzantium and the Khazars: a special relationship?” in Byzantine Diplomacy. Papers from the Twenty-fourth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Cambridge, March 1990, edited by Jonathan Shepard and Simon Franklin (Aldershot, 1992), pp. 115-16; Constantine Zuckerman, “On the date of the Khazars’ conversion to Judaism and the chronology of the kings of the Rus Oleg and Igor. A study of the anonymous Khazar Letter from the Genizah of Cairo,” REB 53 (1995): 256-257 and 264-65; Simon Franklin and Jonathan Shepard, The Emergence of Rus. 750-1200 (London/New York, 1996), pp. 113-17; Thomas Noonan, “The Khazar-Byzantine world of the Crimea in the early Middle Ages: the religious dimension,” AEMA 10 (1998-1999): 210-11.

3 Russian Primary Chronicle, pp. 73-7; Diaconu, Les Petchénègues, 20; Frank Wozniak, “Byzantium, the Pechenegs and the Rus’: the limitations of a great power’s influence on its clients in the 10th century Eurasian steppe”, AEMA 4 (1984): 307; George L. Huxley, “Steppe-peoples in Konstantinos Porphyrogennetos,” JÖB 34 (1984): 85-6; Spinei, Great Migrations, 170 and 174; Spinei, Romanians, 92-93; D. Gordyienko, “The Byzantine-

208 Alexandru Madgearu

treaty with Igor, the Byzantine Empire tried to maintain a balance between the Rus’ and the Pechenegs. Later on, when the Rus’ invaded Bulgaria in 968, Emperor Nicephorus Phokas asked the Pechenegs to attack the Rus’ homeland.4 This action had no repercussions on the development of the conflict, but the Pechenegs played an important role after the victory against Svyatoslav in the summer of 971. John Tzimiskes closed an alliance with them to prevent further Rus’ attacks on the Danube region. Svyatoslav was killed by the Pechenegs in an ambush near the Dnieper rapids on his way back to Kiev.5

After this period when the Pechenegs were from time to time allies of the Byzantine Empire came another during which they turned into outright enemies. This change may be dated to 1017, when they were summoned by the revived Bulgarian state to attack the empire.6 They did not cross the Danube then, but ten years later the first Pecheneg raid ever recorded devastated the themes of Bulgaria and Dristra.7 In 1032 another wave of attacks caused destructions in many fortresses along the frontier and in the interior of the theme of Dristra. This state of affairs lasted until

Bulgarian confrontation in the first half of the 10th century and Kyivan Rus’,” BS 70 (2012), nos. 1-2: 165.

4 Russian Primary Chronicle, pp. 87-88; A. D. Stokes, “The Balkan campaigns of Svyatoslav Igorevich,” Slavonic and East European Review 40 (1962): 480; Wozniak, “Byzantium,” 310; Franklin and Shepard, Emergence, 147.

5 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum ed. Thurn, p. 310; transl. Flusin, p. 259; Russian Primary Chronicle, p. 90; Zonaras, Epitomae historiarum XVII 3-4, edited by Theodor Büttner-Wobst, vol. 3 (Bonn, 1897), pp. 535 and 536; Vasilka Tăpkova-Zaimova, “L’administration byzantine au Bas-Danube (fin du Xe-XIe s.). Tentative d’une mise au point,” EB 9 (1973), no. 3: 91; Omeljan Pritsak, “The Pečenegs. A case of social and economic transformation,” AEMA 1 (1975): 232; Stephenson, Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier, p. 53; Elisabeth Malamut, “L’image byzantine des Petchénègues,” BZ 88 (1995), no. 1: 116; Spinei, Great Migrations, 176.

6 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, ed. Thurn, pp. 350-59; transl. Flusin, pp. 293-99; Zonaras, Epitomae historiarum XVII 8, pp. 564-67; Ion Barnea and Ştefan Ştefănescu, Din istoria Dobrogei, vol. 3 (Bucharest, 1971), 93; Ivan Iordanov, “The Byzantine administration in Dobrudja (10th-12th century) according to sphragistic data,” Dobrudzha 12 (1995): 210; Catherine Holmes, Basil II and the Governance of Empire (976-1025) (Oxford, 2005), pp. 415 and 418; Paul Meinrad Strässle, Krieg und Kriegführung in Byzanz: die Kriege Kaiser Basileios II. gegen die Bulgaren (976-1019) (Cologne, 2006), pp. 334 and 410; Ivan Bozhilov, “L’administration byzantine en Bulgarie (1018-1186). Le cas de Paristrion-Paradounavon (Paradounavis),” Byzantio kai Boulgarioi (1018-1185), edited by Katerina Nikolaou and Kostas G. Tsiknakes (Athens, 2008), p. 95.

7 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, ed. Thurn, p. 373; transl. Flusin, p. 309; Zonaras, Epitomae historiarum XVII, 10.2, p. 571; Diaconu, Les Petchénègues, 40-42; Barnea and Ştefănescu, Din istoria Dobrogei, 123; Gheorghe Mănucu-Adameşteanu, “Les invasions des Petchénègues au Bas Danube (1027-1048),” EBPB 4 (2001): 88-91; Spinei, Romanians, 107.

The Pechenegs in the Byzantine army 209

1036.8 The frontier was already weak, because the military expenditures decreased after 1025, and the protection granted to the small estates owned by stratiotai was removed. This encouraged the conversion of the military obligations into cash payments used mostly for civilian expenditures, although the army was turning into one based not on locally recruited troops, but on tagmata of professional soldiers, paid in cash.9 In order to put a stop to those raids, a peace treaty was concluded with the Pechenegs in 1036. The peaceful relations implied trade across the Danube, a policy initiated by Emperor Michael IV’s minister, John Orphanotrophous, as Paul Stephenson has demonstrated.10 The relations between the Pechenegs and the Byzantines were peaceful by the time Katakalon Kekaumenos was appointed katepano of Dristra in 1042 (a fact that, according to Skylitzes, a certain Pecheneg called Koulinos would later remember this11).

The peace ended when a large number of Pechenegs moved from their lands north of the Danube into the empire. The main reason for this course of events was the rivalry between two Pecheneg chieftains, Kegen and Tyrach. Kegen found refuge in the theme of Dristra in 1045, together with 20,000 people. The Pecheneg refugees first settled into a marshy area (most likely Balta Ialomiţei or Borcea), and then moved into the empire. Kegen was eager to enroll his men in the Byzantine army, and the katepano Michael decided to send him to the emperor in Constantinople. There Kegen was baptized as John, and granted the title of patrikios, thus becoming an imperial ally (symmachos). Furthermore, Kegen’s Pechenegs were baptized in the waters of the Danube, received lands, as well as three unidentified fortifications in the theme of Dristra.12

8 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum ed. Thurn, pp. 385, 397, and 399; transl. Flusin,

pp. 319, 328, and 330-331; Michael Glykas, Annales, edited by Immanuel Bekker (Bonn, 1836), p. 584 (the attack is dated to 1032 or 1033); Zonaras, Epitomae historiarum XVII 12 and 14, pp. 579, 589, and 590; Diaconu, Les Petchénègues, 43-9; Malamut, “L’image byzantine,” 118; Stephenson, Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier, 81; Curta, Southeastern Europe, 293-94; Spinei, Great Migrations, 187; Spinei, Romanians, 107; Alexandru Madgearu, Byzantine Military Organization on the Danube, 10th-12th Centuries (Leiden/Boston, 2013), pp. 117-18.

9 Warren Treadgold, Byzantium and its Army. 284-1081 (Stanford, 1995), p. 285; Jean-Claude Cheynet, “Le gouvernement des marges de l’Empire byzantin,” in Le Pouvoir au Moyen Âge. Idéologies, pratiques, représentations (Séminaire de l’équipe de recherches Sociétés, idéologies et croyances au Moyen âge), edited by C. Carozzi and H. Taviani-Carozzi (Aix-en-Provence, 2005), p. 109.

10 Stephenson, Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier, 80-3 and 114. See also Angold, The Byzantine Empire, 1025-1204. A Political History (London, 1984), pp. 1-11; John Haldon, Warfare, State and Society in the Byzantine World, 565-1204 (London, 1999), p. 91.

11 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, ed. Thurn, p. 469; transl. Flusin, p. 387. 12 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, ed. Thurn, pp. 456-57; transl. Flusin, p. 378;

Attaleiates, Historia, edited by Inmaculada Pérez Martín (Madrid, 2002), p. 24; Zonaras,


How are we to conceptualize the position acquired by those Pechenegs within the Byzantine defense system? First of all, it is clear that the purpose of their settlement was twofold: to prevent further Pecheneg incursions, and to provide a shield against their rivals beyond the Danube, given the hostility between Kegen and Tyrach. But none of those initial goals seems to have been fulfilled, as Kegen decided to use his new position of power against Tyrach, without any consultation with emperor. He attacked his rival across the Danube in 1047 and his action eventually caused a mass migration of Pechenegs into the empire. Another factor that contributed to this population movement was the pressure of the Uzes from the east, who in turn had been driven away by the Cumans. The Pechenegs crossing of the Danube could not be stopped by the fleet sent from Constantinople, as the river had frozen. Sources indicate that 800,000 Pechenegs made the crossing, a number which is evidently exaggerated.13 So, after two years, the attempt to contain the Pecheneg invasions with forces provided by other Pechenegs turned out to be a major failure, which moreover put the border provinces under an even greater threat. Michael Attaleiates was right to express mistrust in this attempt to change the nature of the Pechenegs by assimilation and integration.14

When Constantine IX received Kegen with honors, such a turn of event must have been unthinkable. The emperor’s plan was to insert those excellent brave warriors into an existing structure, which had been depleted as a result of previous Pecheneg invasions. This was meant to be a solution

Epitomae historiarum XVII 26, pp. 641-42; C. Necşulescu, “Ipoteza formaţiunilor politice române la Dunăre în sec. XI,” RIR 7 (1937), nos. 1-2: 125-27; Eugen Stănescu, “La crise du Bas-Danube byzantin au cours de la séconde moitié du XIe siècle,” Zbornik radovi Vizantološkog Instituta 9 (1966): 51; Diaconu, Les Petchénègues, 51-61; Barnea and Ştefănescu, Din istoria Dobrogei, 126; Angold, Byzantine Empire, 15; Malamut, “L’image byzantine,” 119-23; Stephenson, Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier, 90-91; Mănucu-Adameşteanu,”Les invasions,” 98-9; Teodora Krumova, “Pecheneg chieftains in the Byzantine administration in the theme of Paristrion in the eleventh century,” Annual of Medieval Studies at the CEU 11 (2005): 210-12; Curta, Southeastern Europe, 296; Spinei, Great Migrations, 188 and 190; Spinei, Romanians, 108-09.

13 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, ed. Thurn, pp. 458-59 and 465-73; transl. Flusin, pp. 379-80; Attaleiates, Historia, pp. 24-7; Zonaras, Epitomae historiarum XVII 26, 642-44); Necşulescu, “Ipoteza,” 127-28; Stănescu,”La crise,” 52; Diaconu, Les Petchénègues, 62-5; Barnea and Ştefănescu, Din istoria Dobrogei, 127-29; Stephenson, Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier, 90-1; Krumova, “Pecheneg chieftains,” 211-12; Curta, Southeastern Europe, 296 and 306; Spinei, Great Migrations, 190-92; Oliver Jens Schmitt, “Die Petschenegen auf dem Balkan von 1046 bis 1072,” in Pontos Euxeinos. Beiträge zur Archäologie und Geschichte des antiken Schwarzmeer- und Balkanraume. Manfred Opermann zum 65. Geburtstag, edited by Sven Conrad et al. (Langenweissbach, 2006), pp. 479-80; Spinei, Romanians, 108-10.

14 As observed by L. R. Cresci, “Michele Attaliata e gli ‘ethnè’ scitici,” Nea Rhome 1 (2004): 203-5.


for the defense in the short term, and even for putting the land under exploitation, if, in the long term, the Pechenegs would become sedentary. There is indeed proof that the Pechenegs became a kind of stratiotai who owed military service in exchange for land. Two seals with the inscription Ioánnes magìstros kaì árchon Patzinakìas (one from Silistra, the other preserved in a private collection in Munich) most certainly have belonged to Kegen.15 They point to a moment in the Pecheneg chieftain’s career later than 1045, as the title of magistros was higher than that of patrikios. The term Patzinakia indicates an autonomous Pecheneg district located somewhere in the Danube region. That territory remained under imperial control, for the title of archon was only given to rulers of autonomous regions on the periphery. It is obvious that the Pechenegs from that territory could operate within the Empire only as stratiotai.

Barbarians such as Carpi and Goths have been settled in the Danube region as early as the 3rd and 4th centuries. As a matter of fact, there are striking parallels between the Pecheneg settlement and that of the Goths in 376.16 Much like the Gothic foederati, the Pechenegs quickly turned into enemies causing much trouble over the following decade. Relying on such unreliable barbarians for the defense of the theme of Dristra must have been a truly desperate measure at a time of scarce resources. Granting fortresses to autonomous allies has already been done by Constantine IX in the theme of Armeniakon (northern Asia Minor), a region in which several estates and fortifications had been granted to Norman mercenaries, who, like the Pechenegs, were regarded as symmachoi, and who would later rise in rebellion against the imperial authorities.17 The imperial power was no more able to maintain the entire system of fortifications, and preferred instead to grant them to various warlords who had the capability and the interest to take care of them, even though, at least theoretically, the emperor was still

15 Ivan Iordanov, “Sceau d’archonte de PATZINAKIA du XIe siècle,” EB 28

(1992), no. 2: 79-82; Ivan Iordanov, Corpus of the Byzantine Seals from Bulgaria, vol. 1 (Sofia, 2003), pp. 138-42, no. 59. 1; Corpus of the Byzantine Seals from Bulgaria, vol. 2 (Sofia, 2006), pp. 201-06, no. 307; Corpus of the Byzantine Seals from Bulgaria, vol. 3 (Sofia, 2009), pp. 465-66, no. 1380; Spinei, Great Migrations, 191; Spinei, Romanians, 109.

16 Vasilka Tăpkova-Zaimova, “Les Mixobarbaroi et la situation politique et éthnique au Bas-Danube pendant la seconde moitié du XIe s.,” in Actes du XIVe Congrès International des Études Byzantines, Bucarest 6-12 septembre 1971, edited by Mihai Berza and Eugen Stănescu, vol. 2 (Bucharest, 1975), pp. 617-18; Schmitt, “Die Petschenegen,” 477.

17 Paul Magdalino, “The Byzantine army and the land: from stratiotikon ktema to military pronoia,” in To empoleo Byzantio (9-12 a.), edited by K. Tsiknakis (Athens, 1997), pp. 27-9.


in charge of those forts.18 This practice of “leasing out” elements of the frontier defense began with the Pechenegs on the Danube.

The sedentarization of the Pechenegs is illustrated especially by the cemetery excavated in Odărci (535 graves), which was established on the site of a fortress they had destroyed in 1032-1036. Many graves present clear Pecheneg features (horse bones or leaf-shaped pendants); trepanation was observed on 53 skulls, and the individuals in questions must have been Pechenegs. Some graves are certainly Christian.19 More Pecheneg graves are known from Pliska (43) and Preslav (20), and have been recognized as such on the basis of grave goods such as horse gear and belt fittings.20 Pendants of Pecheneg origin were found at Dristra and in forts such as Păcuiul lui Soare, Garvăn, Isaccea, Nufăru, Mahmudia, and even at Varna. Other such objects are known from graves in the countryside (Istria, Târguşor, Valea Dacilor, Vălnari). The memory of this population was preserved by two place names, Pecineaga and Peceneaga, in the Constanţa and Tulcea counties, respectively.21

The process continued with the settlement of the Pechenegs who have entered the empire with the second wave. A large number of Tyrach’s men died of disease, but the survivors were settled in the region between Niš and Sofia. Tyrach and some of his men were baptized and received positions in the Byzantine army, much like Kegen. Those measures were intended to pacify the region and to turn the Pechenegs into a reliable and sedentary population.22 A seal found in Vetren confirms the integration of

18 Nicholas Oikonomides, “The donations of castles in the last quarter of the

eleventh century,” in Polychronion. Festschrift Franz Dölger zum 75. Geburstag, edited by Peter Wirth (Heidelberg, 1966), pp. 413-17.

19 Liudmila Doncheva-Petkova, “Zur ethnischen Zugehörigkeit einiger Nekropolen des 11. Jahrhunderts in Bulgarien,” in Post-Roman Towns, Trade and Settlement in Europe and Byzantium, edited by Joachim Henning, vol. 2 (Berlin/New York, 2007), pp. 644-58.

20 Liudmila Doncheva-Petkova, “Pliska i pechenezite,” Pliska-Preslav 9 (2003): 244-58; Tonka Mikchailova, “Kăsnonomadski grobove v Dvortsoviia tsentăr na Pliska,” Pliska-Preslav 9 (2003): 259-66; Krumova, “Pecheneg chieftains,” 215-16; Schmitt, “Die Petschenegen,” 482; Doncheva-Petkova, “Zur ethnischen Zugehörigkeit,” 657.

21 Alexandru Madgearu, “The periphery against the centre: the case of Paradunavon,” Zbornik radovi Vizantološkog Instituta 40 (2003): 52-5; Spinei, Great Migrations, 200.

22 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, ed. Thurn, pp. 458-59 and 465-73; transl. Flusin, pp. 379-80; Attaleiates, Historia, pp. 24-7; Zonaras, Epitomae historiarum XVII 26, pp. 642-44; Necşulescu, “Ipoteza,”127-28; Stănescu,”La crise,” 52; Diaconu, Les Petchénègues, 62-5; Barnea and Ştefănescu, Din istoria Dobrogei, 127-29; Stephenson, Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier, 90-1; Krumova, “Pecheneg chieftains,” 211-12; Rosina Kostova, “’Bypassing Anchialos’: the west Black Sea coast in naval campaigns (11th to 12th c.) (I),” in Tangra. Sbornik v chest na 70-godishninata na akad. Vasil Giuzelev, edited by Miliiana Kaimakamova et al. (Sofia, 2006), pp. 589-90; Curta, Southeastern Europe, 296 and


Tyrach into the Byzantine military structures as protospatharios and eparch.23After a while, Tyrach’s Pechenegs rose in rebellion when sent against the Seljuks in 1049. For four years until 1053, they ravaged Thrace and Macedonia, and reached even such a remote region as the valley of the Morava. According to his vita written at some point before 1133, Bishop Lietbert of Cambrai encountered heathen “Scythian” brigands in that region in 1054. Those were most likely Pechenegs.24 The geographical phrase the author of the vita used – desertum Bulgariae – was commonly used by Western sources for the region between Braničevo and Niš, the equivalent of silva Bulgariae or Bulgarorum.25

Some Pechenegs established their base of operations in a region rich in grazing fields, woods and water called Hekaton Bounoi, which was located to the north and to the east from Preslav. Sent there to open negotiations with the rebels, Kegen was killed. Following the battle at Preslav, in which the duke of Bulgaria, Basil Monachos was killed, Emperor Constantine IX concluded another peace for thirty years. The Pechenegs were again treated as symmachoi.26

Such a status results, among other things, from the fact that the Pechenegs settled in the empire acted as allies in the wars against Hungary. When Belgrade was briefly occupied by Hungarian troops in 1059, this appears to have been in retaliation for the Byzantines encouraging the Pechenegs to raid across the southern border of his kingdom, when a new wave of Pechenegs arrived from the north, pushed by the Uzi. In 1071, the Pechenegs raided the region around Sirmium, apparently encouraged to do 306; Spinei, Great Migrations, 190-92; Schmitt, “Die Petschenegen,” 479-80; Spinei, Romanians, 108-10.

23 Spinei, Great Migrations, 191. 24 Aleksandar Uzelac, “Skitski razbojnitsi i bugarskoj pustinji: pogled jednog

khodochasnika na Pomoravlje srednjom XI veka,” Istorijski Časopis 59 (2010): 62-3. 25 Stelian Brezeanu, “Blachi’ and ‘Getae’ on the Lower Danube in the early

thirteenth century,” RESEE 19 (1981), no. 3: 597. 26 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, ed. Thurn, pp. 465-75; transl. Flusin, pp. 384-

92; Attaleiates, Historia, pp. 28-33; Kekaumenos, Strategikon, edited and translated by M. D. Spadaro (Alexandria, 1998), pp. 96-9 and 100-01; Zonaras, Epitomae historiarum XVII 26, p. 644; Armenia and the Crusades, Tenth to Twelfth Centuries. The Chronicle of Matthew of Edessa, translated by A. E. Dostourian (Lanham, 1993), p. 80; Necşulescu, “Ipoteza,”129; Diaconu, Les Petchénègues, 62-5 and 73-6; Barnea and Ştefănescu, Din istoria Dobrogei, 127-28; Alexander P. Kazhdan, “Once more about the “alleged” Russo-Byzantine treaty (ca. 1047) and the Pecheneg crossing of the Danube,” JÖB 26 (1977): 65-77, 65-77 (who clarified the date at which Kegen’s Pechenegs were settled); Angold, Byzantine Empire, 15-7; Malamut, “L’image byzantine,” 119-28; Stephenson, Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier, 91-2; Mănucu-Adameşteanu,”Les invasions,” 100-05; Curta, Southeastern Europe, 297; Spinei, Great Migrations, 194-97; Schmitt, “Die Petschenegen,” 484-85; Iordanov, Corpus, vol. 3, p. 393. For Hekaton Bounoi see: Diaconu, Les Petchénègues, 66-9 and 73-6; Madgearu, “The periphery,” 51-2; Schmitt, “Die Petschenegen,” 482.


so by the Byzantine commander of Belgrade, dux Nicota (Niketas). This man was most likely the commander of the Sirmium province, and not just the strategos of Belgrade.27 It is highly probable that the Pechenegs involved in these actions against Hungary were those settled between Niš and Sofia.

An account of the first crusade (1096) mentions Pechenegs in Byzantine military service under the command of the duke of the Bulgarian theme. They are said to have attacked the crusaders near Belgrade. These Pincenariis qui Bulgariam inhabitabant apparently had as their mission to monitor the traffic on the Sava and the Danube rivers from their small boats (naviculas).28 Besides this testimony of Albert of Aachen, there is another by Odo de Deogilo, concerning the same journey through the theme of Bulgaria, which appears to have been defended by Pechenegs and Cumans.29 The presence of the Pechenegs in Belgrade is attested archaeologically by finds of clay cauldrons from a late 11th-century occupation layer.30 The Norman crusaders led by Bohemond, who entered in the Byzantine Empire at Dyrrachion, after having crossed the sea from Italy, were also attacked on Via Egnatia by the Pechenegs (Pincenati), as recorded by Peter Tudebode, by the continuator of his account of the First Crusade, as well as by Raymond de Aguilers. A bishop was captured by the Pechenegs at Pelagonia, and later on other Pechenegs organized an ambush in a mountain pass (angusta via).31 At the crossing of the Vardar River, the

27 Attaleiates, Historia, pp. 51-2; Skylitzes Continuatus, edited by E. Th. Tsolakis

(Thessaloniki, 1968), pp. 106-07; Glykas, Annales, p. 602; Zonaras, Epitomae historiarum XVIII 6, p. 671; Scriptores Rerum Hungaricarum tempore ducum regumque stirpis Arpadianae gestarum, edited by E. Szentpétery, vol. 1 (Budapest, 1937), pp. 373, 374, and 377; John Kinnamos, Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus, translated by Ch. M. Brand (New York, 1976), p. 171; Tadeusz Wasilewski, “Le thème byzantin de Sirmium-Serbie au XIe et XIIe siècles,” Zbornik radovi Vizantološkog Instituta 8 (1964), no. 2: 478-81; Jonathan Shepard, “Byzantium and the steppe-nomads: the Hungarian dimension,” in Byzanz und Ostmitteleuropa, 950-1453. Beiträge zu einer table-ronde des XIX Internationalen Congress of Byzantine Studies, Copenhagen 1996, edited by Günter Prinzing and Maciej Salamon (Wiesbaden, 1999), pp. 67 and 69; Spinei, Great Migrations, 187.

28 Albert of Aachen, Historia Ierosolimitana. History of the Journey to Jerusalem, edited and translated by Susan B. Edgington (Oxford, 2007), pp. 18-19.

29 Odo de Deogilo, Liber de via Sancti Sepulchri, edited by Georg Waitz, MGH Scriptores 26 (Hannover, 1882), p. 65: “Quo facto, pauci Franci, qui supervenerant, remanserunt. Quos cum alios sequi monerent cogerent, nec impetrarent, immensam multitudinem Pincenatorum et Cumanorum ad eos debellandos miserunt; qui etiam in desertis Bogariae per insidias de nostris plurimos occiderunt.”

30 Gordana Marjanović-Vujović, “Archeological proving the presence of the Pechenegs in Beograd town,” Balcanoslavica 3 (1974): 183-88.

31 Recueil des historiens des croisades. Historiens occidentaux, vol. 3 (Paris, 1866), pp. 19-20, 178-79, and 236-37; Aneta Ilieva and Mitko Delev, “Sclavonia and beyond: the gate to a different world in the perception of crusaders (c. 1104-c. 1208)”, in


crusaders were met by an army corps which included Turks and Pechenegs (Pincenates).32 Ekkehardt of Aura, in the account of the failed expedition of 1101, mentions also the Pechenegs (Pincinatos) as soldiers (militum) of Emperor Alexios I. They escorted the crusaders along their journey to prevent robberies.33 According to Albert of Aachen, the Pechenegs were also involved in the defense of Adrianople, when the crusaders attempted to take the city.34 Those reports indicate that Alexios I organized a tagma of Pechenegs, most likely in the aftermath of the battle at Lebounion (1091), as some of the survivors had been settled in the region of the Vardar River.35

The Pecheneg settlers in the region between Niš and Sofia constituted another military force for skirmishing and road defense until the very end of the Byzantine administration in that part of the Balkans. When, in the summer of 1189, the participants in the Third Crusade moved along the way between these cities, they were attacked by many people, among whom some were Pincenates: “Having crossed the Danube, the emperor arrived at the farther mountain passes of Bulgaria. Huns and Alans, Bulgarians and Patzinaks rushed suddenly out from ambushes on to the Lord’s people. These people have become confident bandits because of the inaccessibility and difficult terrain of their regions.”36 This story was written down in 1222 on the basis of an eye-witness account; it is also the last mention of Pechenegs in the Empire. The “Bulgaria” mentioned in this account is obviously the Byzantine theme by the same name, not the Asenid state. Skirmishes in the mountain passes are also mentioned for this

From Clermont to Jerusalem. The Crusades and Crusader Societies 1095-1500. Seelected Proceedings of the International Medieval Congress, University of Leeds, 10–13 July 1995, edited by Alan V. Murray (Turnhout, 2008), pp. 168-69; Spinei, Great Migrations, 211; Spinei, Romanians, 123.

32 Recueil, 746 (Robert the Monk, Historia Hierosolimitana). 33 Ekkehard of Aura, Chronica, edited by Georg Waitz, MGH Scriptores 6

(Hannover, 1849), p. 220; Spinei, Great Migrations, 211-13. 34 Albert of Aachen, III 35 (ed. Edgington, pp. 626-27); Spinei, Great Migrations,

213. 35 Diaconu, Les Petchénègues, 131-33; Spinei, Great Migrations, 209; Spinei,

Romanians, 120. 36 Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, edited by William Stubbs

(London, 1864), p. 45 (I. 21): “Danubio transito cum ad ulteriores Bulgariae fauces deventum esset, Hunni et Alani, Bulgares et Pincenates in populum Domini subito ex insidiis irruunt; quos ad facinus inaccessibilis locorum asperitas fidentius incitabat”; English translation from Helen J. Nicholson, Chronicle of the Third Crusade. A Translation of the Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi (Aldershot, 2005), p. 56. See also Spinei, Great Migrations, 213-14.


particular expedition by Ansbertus, according to whom ambushes had been set up at the specific orders of Emperor Isaac II Comnenus.37

While the “good” Pechenegs settled in the western parts of the Danube provinces seem to have remained loyal servants of the Byzantine emperors, others supported or even initiated rebellions. Their military talents were clearly appreciated by other rebels such as the inhabitants of Dristra, who in 1072 accepted as their leader a Pecheneg chieftain named Tatrys or Tatós, most likely a ruler of the Pecheneg autonomous district created in 1053 by Emperor Constantine IX in 1053. According to Attaleiates, the inhabitants of Dristra turned over to Tatós the control of the frontier.38 The Pechenegs from Patzinakia thus played a key role not only at the onset, but also in the course of the mutiny, which began as a protest against the lack of protection and interest from the central government, and ended in secession. From allies of the Empire, the Pechenegs thus quickly turned into enemies, much like like those who were still living north of the Danube and who also joined the rebellion.39 However, not all Pechenegs turned against the Byzantine emperor. During the secession, a new military structure was established in Mesembria, led by a katepano. Its purpose was the defense of the imperial territory against the rebels, and one of its commanders was Valatzertes. This is undoubtedly one and the same person as Valtzar, Kegen’s son, who had entered the Byzantine military service much like as his father.40 It is quite possible that the Byzantines used to their advantage the rivalries between various Pecheneg clans and tribes. Since Kegen had been murdered by rival Pechenegs from Hekaton Bounoi, it is not unlikely that Valatzertes was appointed as commander in Mesembria in order to take revenge on his father’s assassins.

Of a somewhat greater fame is another commander of Pecheneg origin, named Argyros Karatzas, who is believed to be founder of a family that still exists in various Balkan countries – the Karadja (Romanian Caragea) family. Argyros’s military achievements and his loyalty to the emperor turned him into one of the most important and trusted dignitaries of Alexios I: as commander of the mercenaries (ethnikoi) he fought at Dristra in 1087 against the Pechenegs ruled by Tatós. After a while he was appointed duke of Philippopolis, and in 1095 he was again commander of

37 Ansbertus, Historia de expeditione Friderici imperatoris, ed. A. Chroust, MGH

SRG, Nova Series 5 (Berlin, 1928), p. 35. 38 Skylitzes Continuatus, p. 166; Attaleiates, Historia, p. 150; Zonaras, Epitoma

historiarum XVIII. 7, p. 713. 39 Stănescu,”La crise,” 60-1; Nicolae S. Tanaşoca, “Les mixobarbares et les

formations politiques paristriennes du XIe siècle,” RRH 12 (1973), no. 1: 80. 40 Skylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, ed. Thurn, p. 465; transl. Flusin, p. 385; Spinei,

Great Migrations, 198-99; Iordanov, Corpus, vol. 3, p. 456, no. 1346.


the mercenaries. His name is certainly Turkic, and Anna Comnena was certain about his barbarian origin. Karadja appears to have been a clan name, which appears in some place names in Romania, particularly in those areas otherwise known for toponyms of Pecheneg or Cuman origin.41

By contrast, whether or not Michael Monastras or Manastras was of Pecheneg or Cuman origin remains unclear. He was commander of the mercenaries under Alexios I, following Argyros Karatzas. He also fought against the Pechenegs at Lebounion and against the Cumans in 1095. In 1103 he was appointed dux of Cilicia. Anna Comnena calls him a “mixobarbarian,” which may imply that he was born in Paradunavon.42 Be as it may, he seems to have present in the region, since five of his seals have found in Bulgaria.43 His namesake Manastras was the Cuman chief who supposedly killed Joannitsa Kaloyan in 1207.44 The Pecheneg garrison attested in 1108 in Mamistra (Mopsuestia, Cilicia) may have been sent there under his command. The mission of those Pechenegs was to assist Baldwin of Edessa against Tancred of Antioch.45

Judging from these three examples, it appears that Emperor Alexios I appointed baptized Pecheneg or Cuman chiefs to fight against the Pechenegs under the command of rival chiefs. It was the lesson the Byzantine learned from the events of 1045-1047: one could certainly exploit such rivalries, but only when Pecheneg commanders were integrated into the regular military structure of the Byzantine army, either at the central or at the regional level. When at the command of large numbers of exclusively Pecheneg troops, like Kegen and Tatós, they were completely unreliable. Both leaders took matters in their own hands, even though they were formally under imperial orders, precisely because they had large number of Pechenegs at their disposal.

Pecheneg warriors who settled with their families on imperial soil in 1045, 1047, 1059, and 1091 were recruited for the local defense. First,

41 Anna Comnena, The Alexiad, translated by E. R. A. Sewter (London, 2003), pp. 224, 262, 306 (VII. 3. 6; VIII. 7. 4; X. 4. 10); C. I. Karadja, “Karadja - nume peceneg în toponimia românească,” RI 29 (1943), nos. 1-6: 87-92; Vitalien Laurent, “Argyros Karatzas, protokuropalates şi duce de Philippopoli,” RevIst 29 (1943), nos. 7-12: 203-10; Gyula Moravcsik, BT, vol. 2 (Berlin, 1958), p. 153; B. Skoulatos, Les personnages byzantins de l’Alexiade. Analyse prosopographique et synthèse (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1980), pp. 27-8; Stephenson, Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier, 109; Curta, Southeastern Europe, p. 300; Iordanov, Corpus, vol. 2, pp. 188-90 (nos. 283-86).

42 Anna Comnena, Alexiad, pp. 240, 257, 299, 306, 338-340, 359, 365, 371, 445, 455 (VII. 9. 7; VII. 10. 2; VIII. 5.5; X. 2. 7; X. 4. 10; XI. 2. 7-10; XI. 9. 4; XI. 11. 5; XII. 2. 1; XIV. 3. 1; XIV. 5. 7); Moravcsik, BT, vol. 2, p. 192; Skoulatos, Les personnages, 213-15.

43 Iordanov, Corpus, vol. 2, pp. 269-271 (nos. 415-19). 44 Spinei, Great Migrations, 421-22. 45 Matthew of Edessa, III 39 (ed. Dostourian, p. 201); Spinei, Great Migrations,

214.


Patzinakia appeared, an autonomous district in Paradunavon, somewhere to the south from Dristra. Next, Pechenegs were settled in more distant areas, and were used mainly for the defense of the roads in the Morava and Vardar regions. In some cases, Pecheneg troops were dispatched to the eastern front against the Seljuks, not only in 1049, but also in 1071. There were Pecheneg troops on the battle field at Mantzikert, who deserted in the midst of the military confrontation.46 Pecheneg troops were apparently reliable mostly in auxiliary missions, such as those in which they were involved, as a kind of military police, during the first three crusades.

46 Matthew of Edessa, II, 57 (ed. Dostourian, p. 135); Spinei 2006, 198.

Documents

Pechenegs in Byzantine Army