Doğu Karadeniz’de Moğol Hâkimiyeti

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 3, 605 - 608, 28.11.2017

İlhan Aslan

Öz

 Before the Mongols established a rule around the Eastern Black Sea
region, this are had staged a power struggle between the Anatolian Seljuks and Trebizond
Byzantium. As a result to that, the are a was divided between the Anatolian
Seljuk and Trebizond Pontic states. Also, Trebizond Pontos became a client state
to Anatolian Seljuks. Starting of the Mongol rule in the Eastern Black Sea Region
occurs after the Battle of Kösedağ in 1243. Around this time, Alaeddin Keykubad
I was on Anatolian Seljuk throne. The Mongolian treat that started during his
time reached a maximum with the invasion of Erzurum and Erzincan during Giyaseddin
Keyhüsrev II’s tenure. After this battle the Anatolian Seljuks and the Trebizond
Pontics both came under the souzerainty of Mongols. No information is found regarding
the deal between the Trebizond Pontics and the Mongols. But the information provided
by the Latin traveller Rubruck provids regarding a Trebizond Governor named Guido
paying taxes to Mongols is a proof of this fact. It is observed that the Mongols
who ruled the area were in relation mostly to Anatolian Seljuks. That Dokuz
Khatun, the spouse of Ilkhan Hulagu was Christian helped Mongols establish good
relations with Trebizond Pontics. Sacking of Bayburt, İspir, Aras Valley,
Erzurum, Şavşat and Artvin happened as the result of such good relations. But
such good relations didn’t last long. The continuous changing of power around the
Eastern Black Sea region caused changes in the policies of Mongols. It also makes
among the leading reasons that the Turkmens fleeing from the Mongolian invasion
had prevented the establishment of a certain souvereignty around the region. In
addition to that, the sacking of the region from the Fortuna stream, Çoruh
river, Artvin, Borçka, Şaşat, Ardanuç, Yusufeli, all the way to Torul by the Orthodox
Kipchaks headed by the Pope Sargis, weakened the power of Trebizond Pontics.
Such details set basis to the alliance between the Anatolian Seljuks and the Mongols.
Hence the Mongol Khan Abaka provided support to Anatolian Seljuks against the Trebizond
Pontic swho set a campaign on Sinop. As a result of that, the city returned back
to Anatolian Seljuk control. But the alliance between the Mongols and the Anatolian
Seljuks did not last very long. Invitation of Mongols to Anatolia by the Anatolian
Seljuk vizier Muiniddin Pervane Süleyman, and the invasion of Elbistan by the Mongols
broket he Seljuk-Mongol alliance. Abaka Khan held Vizier Muiniddin Pervane
responcible and had him killed. As the Mongols faced a Mamluk threat from the south,
they couldn’t pay much attention to Eastern Black Sea region. The influence of
the Mongols, who were not too much interested in the coastal cities, decreased around
the Eastern Black Sea region, by the beginning of 14th century. Abaka Khan’s preparation
to a campaign in 1280 on the Mamluks is a proof of this fact. Thus the Mongols didn’t
haveany further campaing towards the Eastern Black Sea region from that date
on. But, it might be said that the Mongols kept an eye on Trebizond. Trebizond
is an important location for being a sea port. The in fromation provided by the
Ilkahanate historian Rashid-al-Dîn about this matter is important.
Rashid-al-Dîn shared the information about the Byzantian province sand the northern
gulfs that Mawlana Kutb-al-Dîn Shirazi had obtained from the maps, with the Mongols.
Though the Mongols headed south, they were naturally intersted in affairs around
Eastern Black Sea. This papers tudies the policies of the Mongols regarding the
Eastern Black Sea region. The Mongolian invasion was not influencive only around
the Central and Eastern Anatolia. An other geography that the Mongols were influencive
was Eastern Black Sea. But the sources do not include sufficient information regarding
the affects of the Mongols on Black Sea. Therefore the studies on the region offer
many difficulties. This paper tries to comment the infromation obtained from the
sources of the era and the research works, and thus to provide information regarding
the Mongol influence around the Eastern Black Sea. It also aims to politically,
economically, and socially examine the history of theregion, as much as the help
the sources provide. Hence, the history of the region in the mentioned centuries
has been evaluated from all aspects. Thus, the influences of theMongol rule are
the Eastern Black Sea region have been elucidated.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Doğu Karadeniz, Moğollar, Türkiye Selçuklu Devleti

Kaynakça

• AHMED B. MAHMUD (1977). Selçuk-nâme, Haz. Erdoğan Merçil, C. II, İstanbul: Tercüman 1001 Temel Eser.
• ALAEDDİN ATA MELİK CÜVEYNÎ (1999). Tarih-i Cihangüşa, çev Mürsel Öztürk, Ankara: TC. Kültür Bakanlığı Yay.
• BREHIER, L. (1977). The Life and Death of Byzantium (Europe in the Middle Ages, selected studies), Trans. M. Vaughan, New York: North-Holland.
• BREYER, A. A. M. (1975). Greeks and Türkmens: The Pontic Exception, Dumbarton Oaks Paper, 29: s. 113-149.
• BREYER, A. A. M. (1994). The Grand Komnenos and Great Khan at Karakorum in 1246, Res Orientales V, Itinéraites d’Orient Hommages a Claude Cahen: s. 257-261.
• BROSSET, M. F. (1849). Histoire de la Géorgie, C. I, Saint-Petersbourg: Imprimerie de l’Académie Imperiale des Sciences.
• FALLMERAYER, J. P. (2011). Trabzon İmparatorluğunun Tarihi, çev. Ahmet Cevat Eren, Haz. Celalettin Yavuz-İsmail Hacı Fettahoğlu, Not. İbrahim Tellioğlu, Ankara: TTK Yay.
• FİNLAY, G. (1851). The History of Greece and the Empire of Trebizond, London: Blackwood and Sons.
• GALSTYAN, A. G. (2005). Ermeni Kaynaklarına Göre Moğollar, çev. İlyas Kamalov, İstanbul: Yeditepe Yay.
• GEORGIOS AKROPOLİTES (2008). Vekayinâme, çev. Bilge Umar, İstanbul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yay.
• GREGORY ABÛ’L-FARAC (BAR HEBRAEUS) (1999). Abû’l-Farac Tarihi, çev. Ömer Rıza Doğrul, C. II, Ankara: TTK Yay.
• İBN BİBİ (1996). el-Evamirü’l-Ala’iye fi’l-Umuri’l-Ala’iye, çev. Mürsel Öztürk, C. I, Ankara: TC. Kültür Bakanlığı Yay.
• JANSSENS, E. (1969). Trebizonde en Colchide, Bruxelles: Presses Universitaires de Bruxelles.
• KARPOV, S. P. (2007). İstoriya Trapezundskoy İmperii, Saint-Petersburg: Aletevya.
• KAYMAZ, N. (2009), II. Gıyâseddin Keyhüsrev ve Devri, Ankara.
• KEÇİŞ, M. (2013). Trabzon Rum İmparatorluğu ve Türkler (1204-1404), Ankara: TTK Yay.
• KERÎMÜDDİN MAHMUD-I AKSARAYÎ (2000). Müsâmeretü’l-Ahbâr, çev. Mürsel Öztürk, Ankara: TTK Yay.
• MÜNECCİMBAŞI AHMED B. LÜTFULLAH (2017). Câmiu’d-Düvel, Haz. Ali Öngül, C. II, İstanbul: Kabalcı Yay.
• MÜVERRİH VARDAN (2017). Türk Fetihleri Tarihi (889-1269), çev. Hrant D. Andreasyan, Haz. İlhan Aslan, İstanbul: Post Yay.
• REŞİDÜDDİN FAZLULLAH (2013). Câmiu’t-Tevârih, çev. İsmail Aka-Mehmet Ersan-Ahmed Hesamipour Khelejani, Ankara: TTK Yay.
• RUKNU’D-DÎN EL-MANSÛrÎ EL-DEVÂDÂR EL-HATALÎ BAYBARS (2000). Baybars Tarihi, çev. Şerefüddin Yaltkaya, Ankara: TTK Yay.
• SPULER, B. (2011). İran Moğolları, çev. Cemal Köprülü, Ankara: TTK Yay.
• SÜMER, F. (1970). Anadolu’da Moğollar, Selçuklu Araştırmaları Dergisi, I: s. 1-147.
• SÜMER, F. (1999). Oğuzlar (Türkmenler) Tarihleri-Boy Teşkilatı Destanları, İstanbul: TDAV Yay.
• TARÎH-İ AL-İ SELÇUK, (ANONİM SELÇUKNÂME) (2014). çev. Halil İbrahim Gök-Fahrettin Coşguner, Ankara: Atıf Yay.
• TELLİOĞLU, İ. (2015). Tarih Boyunca Karadeniz, Trabzon: Serander Yay.
• TOGAN, Z. V. (1981). Umumî Türk Tarihine Giriş, İstanbul: Enderun Kitabevi.
• WILHELM VON RUBRUCK (2012). Moğolların Büyük Hanına Seyahat, çev. Ergin Ayan, İstanbul: Ayışığı Yay.
• WINFIELD, D. (1962). A Note on the South-Eastern Borders of the Empire of Trebizond in the Thirteenth Century, Anatolian Studies, XII: s. 163-172.