CC BY
36УДК 94(478) - 94 (560) DOI:10.22378/kio.2020.2.52-67
"Halil Pasha's Border" and "the two hours"
Sergean Osman
(Babes-Bolyai University Cluj-Napoca)
Abstract: Tatars and Romanians, during the last century of the Crimean Khanate, included times of collaboration, but also times of dissension, major incidents (captivities, wintering's, crossings of territories inhabited by Romanians), as well as minor reprehensible events, caused by the Tatars and the Moldavians. The latter kind, ranging from defendants accused of various thefts, rapes, smugglings, beatings, harassments, transgressions, crimes, etc. are detailed in Constantin Mavrocordatos' Chronicle. This precious source shows that both in Moldova and in the Crimean Khanate there were institutions that controlled such types of daily disputes.
More particular situations, such as the killing of a Tatar in Moldova or the killing of a Moldavian in the Khanate, fell under the jurisdiction of the sovereign of the place where that case had occurred and, usually, an amiable solution was found. An eloquent example of this is the command issued on November 26th-December 5th 1726 / evail rebi ul-ahir 1139, addressed to the Moldavian prince, Grigore Ghica (1726-1733), to solve the discords between the Tatars of Budjak and Moldavians, discords which had been caused by crimes and border passing; the intended solution was to name an apt and trustworthy boyar who would negotiate the misunderstandings with the emissary of the Crimean Khan - Mengli Giray (1724-1730) [3, p. 282].
However, other major events, such as the ones caused by the Tatars' intrusions over the Moldavian borders, territorial invasions which have known various flux and reflux phases - they all deserve closer investigations.
Keywords: Tatars, Khanate, Budjak, Romanians, Moldova, relations, Constantin Mavrocordato's Chronicle, border.
For citation: Sergean Osman. "Halil Pasha's Border" and "the two hours" Krymskoe istoricheskoe obozrenie=Crimean Historical Review. 2020, no. 2, pp. 52-67. D0I:10.22378/kio.2020.2.52-67
Romanian historiography contains some valuable contributions to the problem of Moldova's South-Eastern territory. Taking from Dimitrie Cantemir's Descriptio
Moldaviae ("Description of Moldova"), one of the most precious sources in knowing the Moldavians' political and social life, and continuing with Nicolae Iorga's ample study on Kiliya and Bilhorod-Dnistrobskyi [31], which presents a rich documentary material on the political, economic and ethnic history of these two towns and of the enclosing territory, we should like to consider some more recent contributions: professor Tasin Gemil analysed and conducted in-depth investigations into the role of the Crimean Tatars as main agents in the political and military affairs of the Ottoman Empire in Eastern Europe [23, p. 69]; he reset a complex matter of the land of Halil Pasha [22] on new coordinates, risen from new sources in the Archives of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers (Basbakanlik Osmanli Arsivi - Istanbul).
The particular aspects of the history of South-Eastern Moldova were also tackled by foreign authors, such as N. Beldiceanu, M. Cazacu, J.L. Bacque-Grammont [4] and H. Inalcik [30], historians who tangentially approached the question of the Porte's annexation of various Moldavian territories, including of Budjak. The evolution of the administrative and ethno-demographic situation left to the Dniester is discussed, but not from a new perspective, by Ion Chirtoaga [13].
At the end of the 1550s, the Nogais on the droughty Volga, recently subdued to the Russians, defeated the resistance of the Cossacks on the Don River and passed over on the territory ruled over by the Khan. In the winter of 1558-1559, they took part in a Tatar military campaign against Russia. But due to the drought which had descended on the Crimea, too, the Nogais and the Crimeans moved between the Prut and the Dniester. This event is described also in the Firman of the magnificent Sultan (1520-1566), dated April 1560, addressed to the prince of Moldova:
The hunger, which infests the Nogai Tatars, forced them to leave their lands and go to the Crimea, and not having found food they reached the citadels of Kiliya, Akkerman and Bender, going as far as the border of Moldova, when they continue to steal cattle. Give order that the Tatar cohort stay in one place only, so that it may return to its ancient living places [26, p. 27].
Beginning with 1563, in the Crimea, there will be a large number of Nogaic Tatar establishers coming from the Volga. Dimitrie Cantemir writes that, in 1568, he surrendered to the Nogaic Tatars [9, p. 38]. A similar information is mentioned by an anonymous Hungarian, who discloses the temporary character of the Nogais' establishment in the region. That year, the new prince of Moldova, Bogdan Lapu§neanu (1568-1572), confronted with serious internal problems, sought support in other places:
"Vazand voievodul Bogdan ca nobilii acestei tari trag unii incoace, altii incolo, a trimis dupa tatari in ajutor si au venit 11 000... care au ajuns pana la pamantul tarii Moldovei" [10, p. 392-393].
Worried about the Nogais' intentions, the young prince sent united forces
from the lands of Eastern Moldova to counteract and keep the country's territorial integrity.
"Vazand ca acestia vin sa se aseze acolo, le-a pus in vedere sa se intoarca acasa. Locuitorii tarii... randuisera mai dinainte pentru apararea ei niste teritorii (anume Iasi, Lapusna, Orhei, Soroca, Tigheci). Tatarii trimitand 7000 din ai lor pentru distrugerea tarii, au pustiit 34 de sate, dar moldovenii, venind asupra lor, i-au infrant asa de rau... incat abia unul a fugit de acolo" [10, p. 394].
Allegedly, the great Khan would have said that there had never been in his country more qualified people in battle as those who went to the ground in that place [10, p. 394]. According to the anonymous Hungarian, the (Nogai) Tatars only tried to settle in the plain Southern to the area between the Prut and the Dniester, a plain which belonged to Moldova and which was not yet called Budjak. The lands left of the Prut began concentrating their military forces in order to cast away the nomad danger. Among these people, there might have been the Nogais on the Volga, also, as mentioned by Cantemir; in 1563, this people had settled on the West of the Don River and were allies of the Crimean Tatars. Given the sources of the time, we could conclude that the Tatars' first attempt to settle in Budjak was not successful.
Towards the end of the 16th century, the conditions created by the Porte's engagement in military actions against the Holy League, the internal fights within the Polish state and the rivalry for occupying the Moldavian throne, would have determined the intensification of the Turkish-Tatar expansion in Moldova and left of the Dniester. In 1595, Khan Gazi Giray (1588-1596) conquers some Moldavian villages based at Ciorbuciu, eliminating the existing parcalabi (governors). Miron Costin writes in Letopisetul Tarii Moldovei ("The Chronicles of Wallachia") that Ieremia Movila had given the Khan seven villages in 1595 [15, p. 251].
After this event, the pressure of the Nogai Tatars of the Mansur clan, led by the nobleman Cantemir, became evermore obvious. They were temporarily within the precinct occupied by the Porte and by the Crimean Khanate (near Ciorbuciu), from whence they would cross sometimes close to Bilhorod-Dnistrowskyj, which they had started calling Budjak [12, p. 203].
Beginning with the second half of 17th century, the political conjecture in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe was essentially impacted by the open assertion of Russia's growing power [24, p. 150]. Russia's gradual ascension to the rank of grand European power and the reinvigoration of the Ottoman power, on the one hand, the sensitive diminution of Poland's international position and Sweden's ascension in North-Eastern Europe, as well as the rise of a new poser in Northwestern Europe - Brandenburg-Prussia, on the other hand - this all influenced a new kind of international relations in Eastern Central Europe, during the second half of 17th century [11, p. 9]. In the beginning, Russia sought to eliminate the
power and influence of Poland in Eastern Europe, and afterwards the full attack on the Ottomans. Given the geopolitical position, the Crimean Khanate was the first element which understood, since before it had become obvious, the danger posed by the developing tsarist power [24, p. 150-151]. The 1660 Oliva Peace seemed to revive Poland's relations with the Ottoman Empire and with the Crimean Khanate. Shortly after the peace signing, the Crimean Khan, Mehmed Giray (1654-1666), rushed to advert the Polish king, Jan Kazimir, to the danger posed by Russia's undisguised projects, which were damaging to the interests of Poland and to those of the Tatars, asking him to rush the military preparations in order to counteract; these preparations included Sweden. The new elements that intervened in the Eastern Europe relations, after the signing of the peace immediately and directly reflected on the political and juridical statute of Moldova and Wallachia. The almost total assimilation of the Polish forces by the war with Russia, on one hand, and the Russian advancement towards the West being stopped by the Tatar-Polish coalition, on the other hand, created in the area a "power vacuum" which literally stripped Wallachia and Moldova of the external element of their support in front of the intensified Ottoman domination [23, p. 72].
Since the beginning of 17th century, the Tatars appeared in the Bessarabia steppe, settled until a certain point, until a more energetic complaint, expressed by the Polish side, until a more insightful perseverance and one bearing more gifts on behalf of the Moldavian princes who were fearing the vicinity. Welcome to settle south of the Danube, without a clear authorisation, the Tatars were solemnly drawn out of their new country in such circumstances. However, the Tatars from Budjak got along with those who were commanded to draw them off, and they knew how to make of the evacuation a rather formal satisfaction. In fact, those who were sent away, too, would easily come back by simply crossing the Dniester from the Bialograd plains. The fertility of the new settlings drew them in. N. Iorga asserted that Bessarabia had accomplished this miracle; it had turned the eternal riders and the exclusive shepherds into inhabitants of villages and into ploughmen [32, p. 216].
For two centuries, the Tatars had formed the main mass of Southern Bessarabia's population, changing its geographic name, modifying the region's entire appearance, completely orientalising it [6, p. 127]. Their glorious period dates to the first half of 17th century, with the rise to power of the nobleman Cantemir, who according to Constantin the Captain behaved like a small sovereign, with ambitions of independence, beyond the Khan's orders and those of the Ottoman Sultan. The Turks had confirmed him governor of the Danube entrances. The Moldavian and Polish endeavours to draw out the Tatars had proved futile.
With the rising tax to the Porte, in 1608, Constantin Movila got back seven Moldavian villages, which had been given to the Khan by Ieremia Movila. The respective villages had been transformed into Turkish voivodeship, rented to the
Nogais, in 1666 [27, p. 233]. The same year, Khan Mehmed Giray (1654-1666) was removed because he had become inconvenient for the Nogais in Budjak:
the Khan villages, recovered by the Tatars, I don't know how and when, were removed from under the Khan's administration and turned into a Turkish voivodate, rented to the Nogai. The latter were not in terms with the Crimeans and thought of creating a league with the Cossacks, who were by now reconciled with the Turks, to help them occupy some Turkish strongholds on the border with Moldova, in the spring of 1666 [28, p. 236].
As such, there is the Official Document (hoget) containing the Nogai Tatars' commitment to the el-Haci Halil aga (local administrator), commissioned by the Ottoman Porte with settling them in an area within the historical territory of Moldova, later known as the "border of Halil": in the gathering of the Sharia law, held before el-Hadj Halil aga, who is one of the local administrators of the High Porte, Adil Mirza and Tohta <Mirza>, and Ku^uk Mirza, as well as other obedient attendants of the clan, the sons of Or-Mehmed, of Nogai origin - who had before accepted the subordination, and, by the great command over the entire universe, it was settled over the barren lands from Bilhorod-Dnistrowskyj and Kiliya and Ismail and Bender - amply declared:
They accepted the submission as other raya and so they would work the barren land they were given, they would not trespass other people's fields and neither would they trespass the lands within the borders of Moldova and Wallachia. Every year, they would pay to the kingdom's treasury ten thousand leonine talers <annually>, as they had promised to do before [23, p. 322-323].
In November 1666, Sultan Mehmed 4th issued a command addressed to the beylerbeyi of Silistra, the kadi of Bilhorod-Dnistrowskyj and the local governor in Budjak not to allow the Crimean Khan and his governors to chime in the problem of the Tatars from Budjak, who had passed under the direct dependency of the Ottoman Porte:
[.] from now on, <no one> from Crimea, be they Khan, or Sultan, or Cossacks, is to banish them from the lands where they settled and bring them to Crimea, on the other side of the Dniester, saying: you are Tatar people, and the Tatars belong to us [23, p. 328].
The settlement of the juridical regime ofthe Nogai people in Budjak, by creating the so-called "border of Halil Pasha", represented, in fact, a powerful measure of the Sublime Porte against Moldova and Poland, but mostly against the Crimean Khanate. This decision was part of a series of authoritarian acts adopted by the Koprulu great Viziers, and which was meant to establish a new international role of the Sublime Porte, as a fundamental factor of the European political system. Therefore, between 1658 and 1660, the Ottoman forces conquered the towns of Ineu, Lugoj, Caransebe? and Oradea, forcing the Principality of Transylvania
to accept a more severe political and juridical regime than the previous one, regarding the relations with the Porte [20]. In 1666, the Crimean Khanate was forced to adopt a similar measure, with the transformation of Budjak into the Sublime Porte's political and military factor of pressure. Nevertheless, in 1672, with the occupation of Podolia, the Ottomans tried to impose their control again over the entire Northern-pontic region, which was already under threat by Russia's ascension [24, p. 196].
Poland was very concerned with the problem of Budjak, both as a result of Moldova's demands, but especially due to the concern caused by the presence of Nogai Tatars in the region. As such, article 6 of the Ottoman-Polish treaty, from October 24th 1698, stipulated for the immediate withdrawal of the Tatars within the boundaries fixed in 1666 [21, p. 149-152]; a stipulation which was surely due to the Polish' expressed request. The peace treaty from Karlowitz (1699) would force Tatars to leave all territories which belonged to the Moldavian Principality.
A Turkish act published by Gemil Tasin [23, p. 447-450], a document sent from Edirne by Sultan Mustafa 2nd, on June 29th-July 8th 1699/ evail muharrem 1111, a command addressed to the vali of Oceakov/ Ozi, Yusuf Pascha, the vaivode of Moldova, to Antioh Cantemir and to a kadi, contains the order of allowing the raya established in the ciftlik of the Nogai Tatars settled on Moldavian lands, as well as in the kisla of the Tatar princes (Sultan kislalarina), to return in the villages belonging to the vakaf founded by Osman 2nd, in the land of Isaccea. We don't know if this solicitation and tempting retrieval had any consequences among the Nogais, as well, because the latter were rather repugnant to silently complying with the tasks gone under for the Khan in the Crimea and the Sultan in Istanbul, whose authority they formally acknowledged in as far as they were ensured easy sources of survival.
The relocation of the Tatars, especially of the Nogais, and their expulsion from the lands of Moldova and the region adjacent to the border with Poland, was a techy problem, which generated troubles. In July of the same year, from Iasi (Yassy), the prince of Moldova was informing the castellan of Vilna of the Tatars' insurgence [1, p. 139-140], a communication which he had surely sent to Istanbul, as well. Since the spring of that year, the Padishah had commanded Khan Devlet Giray (16991702) to take measures over his half-brother, Gazi Giray, who had invaded Poland, breaking the treaty of Karlowitz, and to give back the loot and the slaves. In the summer, more precisely on August 8th-17th 1699/ evasit safer 1111, Mustafa again addressed the Khan urging him to command that the Polish taken captives by the Nogais be released, and to punish the heads of the Tatars [19, p. 564].
The French ambassador Castagneres, who had ties with the Vizier of the former Khan (Selim Giray, father of Devlet Giray), having returned from Edirne, on April 27th, to the same administrative post (dregatorie) under the authority of the new Khan, well-informed on the inside of the Tatar world diplomacy, revealed
to his king the soft spot in the Turkish-Polish treaty: "L'article le plus difficile dans l'exécution du traité avec la Pologne est celui où il est dit que les Tatares du Budjac qui se sont établis dans une partie de la Moldavie, doivent se retirer dans leur ancien pays" [29, p. 347]. Three days after, the same diplomat, through a dispatch, announced the headquarters that the Ottoman authorities would call back from Moldova all the Nogais, and that those in Budjak would maintain their old borders of Bessarabia, marked on the Moldavian side through a deep ditch, which is still visible today [29, p. 348].
The problem of the Nogai presence and the material damages produced by them in Moldova was not solved as desired by voivode Antioh Cantemir. All measures adopted by the Ottoman Porte to stop the Nogais, including transferring to Crimea the heads of the Nogai aggressors, failed. As a result of Antioh Cantemir's frequent complaints, the more recent one dating back a few months before his relegation, the central authority commanded in the summer of 1700 to the sancak bey of Oceakov/ Ozi to adopt, without any further delay, repressive measures against the Nogais who had violated the borderline and had caused losses to the Moldavians [18, p. 420].
The Nogai Tatars took advantage of the circumstances created by the Russian-Turkish war of 1710-1711, in order to gain the legality of their spread beyond the borders of Halil Pasha. In September 1711, the Nogais had gained the approval of the Porte to use the territory from West to North of the "borders of Halil Pasha". However, they had to evacuate all areas where they had penetrated until then, beyond the "two hours".
This land, called "the two hours", was approximately 1500 square km. At the beginning, there was the juridical regime of "the land of Moldova", and the Tatars were forced to pay taxes to the prince or to the local boyars. Undoubtedly, the autochthonous inhabitants were not happy with this forced occupation of their territories, moreover because the Tatars had earlier on crossed the "two hours". According to the official Ottoman documents of 1721, written after the measures taken that same year by prince Mihail Racovità, the Nogai Tatars had spread over the borders of the "two hours" on distances reaching up to "8-10 hours" [21, p. 152]. Although Mihail Racovità had gotten the Sultan's order forcing the Tatars to limit themselves to the "two hours", practically the measure was not respected. The Tatar expansion had long crossed the "two hours", reaching the West, near the Prut. The expansion of this territorial spread to the detriment of Moldova was of 32 hours length and 2 hours latitude [21, p. 152].
As the Moldavian population, pushed close to the borders of Halil Pasha and huddled in the neighbouring forests, only expected the end of this feud in order to get back to the settlings abandoned after 1711, the Tatars were told that those places were to serve the inhabitants of Moldova, and the raya of Moldova was to settle there [36, p. 314]. Under the circumstances, the Tatars had less demands:
„Because those places we choose to let our beasts graze are baren of inhabitants this time around, on those grounds we choose to be allowed to graze for a while, and we will not touch the lands that serve the inhabitants of Moldova, we only want to pasture where the rulers and the zaptiye of the Moldavian borders show us; and we won't trespass, and if we are told that the inhabitants of Moldova need us to, we shall immediately leave with our beasts"
(Original)
"De vreme ce acele parti de loc pre care poftim noi sa ne pasunam dobitoacele, se afla desarte de aceasta data de locuitori, pre acele parti de loc poftim noi sa ni se dea voie de pa§unat o sama de vreme, iara in partile ce or fi trebuitoare pentru locuitorii Moldovei sa nu ne atingem, ce numai sa pa§unam in partile unde ne vor arata ispravnicii si zapcii marginelor Moldovei; iara peste voia lor sa nu avem a calca aiurele, si despre care ne-ar arata ei ca este de trebuinta locuitorilor Moldovei indata, fara nici o intarziere sa avem sa ne ridicam dobitoacele".
Therefore, at the outer border of the "two hours", which was completely given in dominion to the Tatars, and whose nobility settled villages populated with regular Tatars and with captives of different nationalities (Moldavians, Russians, Polish), there is an area of mixed Tatar-Moldavian occupation <s.n.>, with Moldavian villages and Tatar pastoral shelters in the surrounding valleys [36, p. 311].
An anonymous chronicle of Moldova narrates that the Crimean Tatars were in conflict with Khan Kaplan Giray; the former had claimed the change of the Khan to the Porte. Khan Kara Devlet Giray (1716-1717) was enthroned, and he was given command to give part of the Tatar army to the Moldavian prince, Mihai Racovita [16, p. 77]. The Khan's son, who had been sent to Budjak as a Nureddin, informed the Moldavian prince of his arrival as serasker, asking him about Moldova's situation and of the country's foes. He also proposed the support of the Tatar army if in need. The Turkish-Austrian war brought the Austrians and the Hungarian soldiers on Moldavian territory, with the view to extend the Austrian rule, which had begun in Bucharest with the capture of the Wallachian prince, Nicholas Mavrocordatos. At the Sultan's suggestion, the Moldavian prince got the Tatars' help in order to banish the Austrian armies, who had occupied the borough of Neamt and the surroundings [16, p. 78]. Attacked by the Tatars, the Austrians gave up laying siege to Cetatuia and crossed the bridge over the stew between the monasteries of Cetatuia and Frumosa. Also upon the Turks' advice, Prince Mihai Racovita ransomed Ferentz, the Austrian captain, from Cantemir-Mirza, the captain of the Tatar army. After hitting him, the prince handed him over to Ali Aga, who decapitated him in front of the gate of Curtea Domneasca, to stand as example for others, so that they would never trespass Moldova again [16, p. 82]. The Tatars' habit of looting and taking into captivity the provinces or
the raya they would pass through or where they were sent by the kingdom, in this case, was confirmed this time around, as well. The boroughs of Neamt and Casin were hacked and, despite the Ottoman command to free the slaves, the Tatars did not obey one per cent [17, p. 211].
Mihai Racovita received the Tatar armies, mainly of Nogai Tatars, but feared the possible damages the Nogais might cause; in a speech in front of the mirzak he said:
«Men, my friends, you have come here to serve the kingdom and to banish the enemies of the emperor's land, but without asking me how big an army I want, you came so many, but I don't need you all and neither can I provide you with food, without causing bad to the raya. On the other hand, it's impossible that such a big crowd doesn't loot the imperial raya, as Cantemir mirza has done recently. Therefore, if you wish to help me and banish the enemies of the kingdom you must give me written proof that you will only go against the enemies that you will take as many captives among them as possible, but that you won't hack the imperial raya, <Moldova> [17, p. 213].
The mirzak of the Orumbetoglu and the Oracoglu families signed a document and handed it over to the prince. The document contained the Nogais' promise that they will go against the enemies, but that they will not hack the raya [17, p. 213]. The Chronicle of Ghiculescu narrates that the Tatars did not hold their promise and, on their way to Hungary, they ran towards the lands of Ocna, Suceava, Bacau, Neamt, and hacked some forty thousand souls [17, p. 215]. After this joint victory, the Moldavian prince wrote to the Sultan saying that mirza Cantemir had taken captive many Moldavians and produced many damages. The Sultan sent a Firman to force the Tatars to free the captives.
The Nogai Tatars affected by these restrictive measures taken by Mihai Racovita (1715-1726) through a petition (arzuhal) addressed to the divan, asked that they not be banished from the Moldavian lands, arguing, in the support of their claims, the mission held by the Nogais during the Moldavians' rise in 1711 [34, p. 92-93]. On January 20th-29th 1721/ evahir rebi ul-evvel 1133, after the complaints from Moldova, Sultan Ahmed 3rd commanded the vali from Oceakov/ Ozi to return and settle back to the "border of Halil Pasha" (Halil-Pasa yurdu) the Nogai Tatars and other peoples settled on Moldavian territory, arguing that the "border of Halil Pasha" is the place which was given to them mainly for their settlement, and the ciflik established by them in Moldova be destroyed and the place be ruled, as before, by the Moldavian people. This document cancelled the border book (sinur-name), which the heads of the Nogais had managed to register in the chancellery of the Otoman revenue office, during 1714 [38, p. 140-145].
It was only in 1728 that the Moldavian prince, Grigore Ghica 2nd (1726-1733) would have succeeded, with the help of the Crimean Khan Mengli Giray, to banish
the Nogais not only from the territories occupied in an abusive manner, but also from the "two hours". The event is narrated not only in the complaints of the Nogai Tatars to Mengli Giray, but also in Copia zapisului tatarilor Nogai ("The Copy of the Document of the Nogai Tatars"), where the latter revendicated their right to remain within the boundaries of the "two hours", compelled to pay the usual taxes to the Moldavians. At the same time, the Tatars won the right to use the barren lands near the "two hours", bearing the obligation to pay the legal taxes:
This document was issued in 1141 <1729> because the almighty and our lord Khan Mengli Giray sent the emperor a complaint, a grievance, so that we were given a place to stay and our cattle to graze on Moldavian land. According to his lordship's complaint and according to the news of the Moldavian prince, we were allowed, by imperial document, a land in Moldova which is thirty two hours long and two hours wide, a place which belonged to Moldova from the beginning, and where Moldavians always found food and settlement. Upon imperial order, the almighty Khan, together with the august Pasha, the keeper of Bender measured and bordered that place, and decided that the ones living on that Moldavian piece of land, thirty-two hours long and two hours wide, would also pay rent for it, aside from the regular taxes given for signatures. We accepted this, and so we accepted that the Nogais who will inhabit this place would pay the taxes and all the rights upon the area.
Meanwhile, these areas that we demand are not inhabited. We ask that upon those lands we are allowed to let our cattle graze for some time, and we won't touch the regions which serve the raya of Moldova; we will let our cattle graze only on those grounds which the leaders of this border of Moldova show us, and we won't trespass without their will, and if they show us that those lands serve the Moldavians, then we will immediately take our cattle away. Besides this, we promise to give the almighty prince twice the tribute, which is the annual tax for the cattle. If we do not respect the covenants or if we break either of them and trespass, then his highness ought to banish us [17, p. 305-309].
Constantin Mavrocordatos judicially regulated the situation of the Moldavians' lands from the area inhabited by the Tatars. In Asezamantul tarei Moldovei ("Moldova's Endowment"), from March 1743, the following was stipulated:
Whoever brings before the Divan documents proving their estate, within the land two hours wide and thirty-two hours long, where the Tatars live, having decided to own the estate, will get the entire income on the practice [7, p. 447-452].
Having failed to specify the quantum and the manner of collecting the tax (alim and usur), which was acquitted by the Tatars to the holders of the "Moldavian estates", as well as the appeal to the "old tradition", gave way to abuses and acerbic disputes between the unruly Tatars and the claiming Moldavians. On December 11th 1740, the chancellery of the Moldavian prince recorded the procedure which was
to be followed by the kalem of Bah?esaray in order to solve the misunderstandings caused and fought by the Crimean Khan's subordinates:
His Highness the Kahn was given <by the prince> to the hetman two yarliks, one in Oraolu and one in Orumtbetolu, and those yarliks wrote that taxes were to be paid for the mares, for the cows, for the sheep, for the hay, and for all needs; but for the hay, unfortunately, 5 para were to be paid by the nobility and by the Tatars [33, p. 405; 14, p. 300].
The tax, or the tax for the cattle (the tax for the cattle of foreigners in Moldova was known as kunica - old Polish for ransom - or Polish kunica, kunica was also the tax paid by the Turkish people from the Turkish fortresses bordering the Romanian Principalities - serhat <n.t.>) taken from the Tatars' cattle herding within "the two hours" land was of six coins for "horse, mare, cow". In 1769, the tax and the usur (Turkish term for tax paid by the Tatars in Moldova for the lands' products <n. t.>) were registered in the Moldavian treasury for a total of 8.600 lei, while the Polish kunica had produced an income of 9.250 lei [35, p. 466].
The Tatars' presence continued after 1775, as well, when with all of his endeavours, prince Grigore Ghica (1774-1777) gained from the consequences of the Russian-Turkish war (1768-1774) in order to regain the Northern territory of the "two hours". Upon those lands was the new department of the Surveyors [14, p. 315]. Nevertheless, the Tatar expansion until 1730 was not limited to this region; it had by far exceeded the border of "the two hours", reaching the West, until the Prut. They got the demands on these territories, beyond the "two hours", because: We will only have borders for our beasts' herding [...] we demanded to be allowed to graze with our beasts for some time only for our beasts and shepherds to graze on some parts of Moldova which we come from, as those parts are not inhabited by the Moldavian raya and are empty [36, p. 310].
Considering the Tatars' initial demands in 1711 to unconditionally occupy and completely command the entire region until the Prut, then the very territorial relations between Moldova and the Tatars, fixed in 1730, seem to us a sign of an attenuation in the intensity of the Tatar expansion towards the Moldavian lands. In the centennial fight between the steppe with pastoral and nomad populations and the wood of sedentary populations, the latter won. After losing wide territories, there are important displacements within the Tatar population towards the Caucasus and Turkey; generally, there is an agglomeration of the Tatars towards the South during 18th century. These phenomena also occurred later on between the Dniester and the Prut. In 1759, the Budjak side of the Edisan tribe was displaced on the other side of the Dniester, thus considerably reducing the number and the density of Tatars in the Budjak region.
Chronicler Ioan Canta refers to the establishment of the border of the two hours during the chancellery of Theodor Callimachi and his participation in this
delimitation, as follows: he was present in those circumstances regarding the Tatars' settlement on the land 2 hours wide and 32 hours long, which was given to the Tatars during the settlement of the tax and the alym, which the Tatars had to pay [37; 8, p. 169]. Theodor Callimachi's (August 1758 - May 1761) successor and son, voivode Grigore Callimachi (May 1761 - March 1764) respected territorial democracy and the tricky problem of paying the usur (tax paid in cereals <n.t.>). On October 20th 1761, from Iasi, the prince of Moldova gave a letter to boyar Simion Maciu, authorising him to take his usur on the Chirea, his estate, motivating that:
I write that having proven that the estates are rightfully theirs and that they are outside the land of the two hours, I took pity on them and I allowed them to take the usur from that land [25, p. 77].
The same voivode, on December 1st 1761, having reached the conclusion that "usurgii ce au cumparat usorul au hogeat la aceste cinci mosii boieresti sa nu ia usurul, si ei peste hogetul ce au la mana lor au indraznit de au luat usurul di pe aceasta mosie Geambai", decides to announce: "ca rau si far de cale au luat usurul". As such, the prince commands that the usur taken from the Tatars be given back, and the Tatars give back what they took away from the son of Neculai Farmuta [5, p. 28].
The Turkish documents of 1761 and 1762 show that the Nogai Tatars did not respect the agreement with Moldova, nor did they clear their financial obligations owed to the Ottoman revenue authority. By a command issued on November 28th-December 7th 1761/ evail cemazi ul-evvel 1175, after a report (takrir) written by the deputy kadi of Bender (Tighina), naib Huseyin, a report which shows that the Nogai Tatars were behind with the total of 47.920 ak?e of the wheat tax, and that because of them neither the voivode of Moldova could fulfil his financial obligations, orders the kadi of Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi/ Ak Kerman to investigate and to report on the situation of the villages situated on the border with Moldova, and to investigate and report on the judicial statute of the Nogais settled on those lands [2, p. 121]. The Nogais' infringements continued, and probably due to the complaints of the Moldavians who were affected by this, on March 16th-25th 1762/ evahir saban 1175, the Great Vizier once again commanded the kadi of Ak Kerman to examine and solve the territorial disputes caused around Bender, on the border between the Moldavian territory and that of the Ottoman Empire [2, p. 122].
In 1766, the Porte forbade the Tatars to allow their herds to graze "over the border", that is over the Northern and Western border of "the two hours", which in fact were still being controlled by the Tatars, until 1768.
During the Russian occupation of 1768-1774, after looting for the last time the lands of Lapusna and Orhei, the Tatars drew off towards inner and Southern Budjak, from where they would never return to the North of the border of Halil Pasha. A great part of them passed over to Dobruja; then, right
during the war, the Russians moved 12.000 Nogais to Kuban and Crimea, which were occupied at the time also by the Russians. After the peace of Ku^uk Kainargi, the group of Tatars from Budjak was weakened and considerably reduced in their numbers. The contingents of nomads who stayed in Budjak were incapable of occupying such a vast territory. The independence of the Crimean Tatars after the attack turned useless any future immigration over the Dniester. Ever fewer, the Tatars of Budjak receded from the Northern part of "the two hours".
In 1775, Grigore Al. Ghica managed to obtain this portion from the Porte, called Hotarniceni, and regained full control over Moldova. The remaining Tatars were eventually quartered South to the land of Halil Pasha. Left without ethnic and political support from their conationals, submitted to the Russians, they no longer had any wish to return to the land of Hotarniceni. The period of expansion of the Tatars in Budjak had forever ended, but after 1775, they continued to maintain the territory west of the "two hours", until 1807. Russia's expansion compelled the Tatars to leave Budjak for good, finding refuge mainly in Dobruja.
After 1812, there was no Tatar left in Budjak. Russia tried to colonise instead Orthodox populations from the Balkans, including Christian Turks - the Gagauz people.
The territory North of "the two hours" - Hotarniceni - given back to Moldavian administration, went through measurements and rearrangements [36, p. 314]. The 1775 research on the record, together with the topographic map, allowed for the territorial evaluation of this region and later on for its re-colonisation with Moldavian elements.
REFERENCES
1. Arhivele Na^ionale Istorice Centrale. Polonia microfilm collection, roll 8.
2. Arhivele Na^ionale Istorice Centrale. Turkey microfilm collection, roll 4.
3. Arhivele Na^ionale Istorice Centrale. Turkey microfilm collection, role 79.
4. Beldiceanu N., Cazacu M., Bacque-Grammont J.L. Recherches sur les ottomans et la Moldavie ponto-danubienne entre 1484-1520. Bulletin of the school of Oriental and African studies, t. XLV, 1982, part 1, p. 48-66.
5. Buletinul Comisiei Istorice a Romaniei, t. VII, 1928.
6. Bratescu C. Valuri, Hotare si transee basarabene. Revista istorica, year IV, 1918, nr. 11-12.
7. Bratianu Gh. I. Doua veacuri de la reforma lui Constantin Mavrocordat. 17461946. Analele Academiei Romane. Memoriile Sec^iunii Istorice, 1947, seria III, t. XXIX, pp. 447-452.
8. Canta I. Letopisetul Tarii Moldovei de la a doua si pana la a patra domnie a lui Constantin Mavrocordat Voevod (1741-1769), ed. Aurora Ilies, Ioana Zmeu, Bucuresti, 1987.
9. Cantemir D. Descrierea Moldovei. Chisinâu, 1992.
10. Câlâtori strâini despre Jârile Române, ed. Maria Holban, M.M. Alexandres-cu-Dersca Bulgaru, Paul Cernovodeanu, vol. II. Bucureçti, 1970.
11. Ciobanu V. Românii în politica est-central europenâ 1648-1711. Iasi, 1997.
12. Chirtoagâ I. Sud-estul Moldovei si stanga Nistrului (1484-1699). Bucureçti, 1999.
13. Chirtoagâ I. Evolutia situatiei administrative si etno demografice în stânga Nistrului (secolele XIV-XVIII). In honorem Gheorghe Gonta. Tara Moldovei în con-textul civilizatiei europene, Chisinâu, 2005, p. 405-421.
14. Condica lui Constantin Mavrocordat, ed. Constantin Istrati, vol. I, Iasi, 1985.
15. Costin M. Letopisetul Târii Moldovei de la Aron Vodâ încoace, ed. P. Panai-tescu. Bucuresti, 1944.
16. Cronica Anonimâ a Moldovei 1661-1729 (Pseudo Amiras), Studiu si editie criticâ de Dan Simionescu. Bucureçti, 1975.
17. Cronica Ghiculeçtilor. Istoria Moldovei între 1695-1754, ed. Nestor Camari-ano, Ariadna Camariano-Cioran, 1965.
18. Desaive D. Deux inventaires d'archives ottomanes et leur contribution à l'historire de Crimée. Cahiers du Monde russe et Soviétique, t. XV, 1975, nos. 3-4.
19. Desaive D. Le Khanat de Crimée dqns les Archives ottomanes. Correspondance entre les khans de Crimée et padishahs ottomans dans les registres de nâme-i humâyûn. Cahiers du Monde russe et Soviétique, t. XIII, 1972, nr. 4.
20. Gemil T. Capitulatiile Transilvaniei de la jumâtatea sec al XVII-lea. Anuarul Institutului de Istorie çi Arheologie A.D. Xenopol - Iaçi, 1986, t. XXIII, nr. 2, p. 717-721.
21. Gemil T. L'evolution des limites de l'habitat des tatars nogai au sud-est de Moldavie. Revue Roumaine d'Histoire, t. XXV, 1996, nr. 3-4, Bucureçti, p. 149-152.
22. Gemil T. Relatiile româno-otomane-tâtare si problema „Hotarului lui Halil Pasa". Politicâ, diplomatie si râzboi. Profesorului Gheorghe Buzatu la 70 de ani, ed. S. Liviu Damean, Marusia Cîrstea, 2009, pp. 93-100.
23. Gemil T. Relatiile Jârilor Române cu Poarta Otomanâ în documentele turceçti (1601-1712). Bucureçti, 1984.
24. Gemil T. Jârile Române în contextul politic international, (1621-1672). Bu-cureçti, 1979.
25. Ghibânescu Gh. Ispisoace si zapise, vol. VI, part II. Iasi, 1920.
26. Guboglu M. Catalogul documentelor turcesti, vol II. Bucuresti, 1965.
27. Hammer-Purgstall J. von. Histoire de l'Empire Ottoman depuis son origine jusqu'a nos jours, transl. J. J. Hellert, Paris, 1837-1841, vol 11.
28. Hurmuzaki Documente privitoare la istoria românilor, vol. IX (1751-1796), Bucuresti, 1899.
29. Hurmuzaki E de. Documente, Suppl. I, vol. I (1518-1780), ed. par Gr. G. Tscilescu et A. I. Odobescu.
30. Inalcik H. Imperiul Otoman, Epoca clasicâ (1300-1600). Bucuresti, 1996.
31. Iorga N. Studii istorice asupra Chiliei si Cetâtii Albe. Bucuresti, 1899.
32. Iorga N. Studii istorice despre Chilia si Cetatea Albä. Bucuresti, 1900.
33. Iorga N. Studii si documente cu privire la istoria romînilor, vol. VI, partea II. Cärti domnesti, zapise si rävase. Bucuresti, 1904.
34. Maxim M. Bräila 1711. Noi documente otomane. Bräila, 2011.
35. Mihordea V. Väcäritul, dare temporarä. Studii: revistä de istorie, t. XXI, 1968, nr. 3.
36. Nästase Gh. I. «Hotarul lui Halil paça» si «Cele 2 ceasuri». Bucuresti, 1932.
37. Pseudo-Enache Kogälniceanu. Letopisetul Tärii Moldovei de la domnia întâi si pânâ la a patra domnie a lui Constantin Mavrocordat Voevod (1733-1774). Bucu-reçti, 1987.
38. Veliman V. Relatiile româno-otomane 1711-1821. Documente turcesti. Bucuresti, 1984.
About the author: Sergean Osman - Ph. D. (Philosophy), Babes-Bolyai University (400084, Klausenburg (Cluj-Napoca), Strada Mihail Kogalniceanu,1, Romania); osergean@gmail.com.
«Граница Халила паши» и «два часа»
Сержан Осман
(Университет Бабеш-Боляй)
Аннотация. Татары и румыны в период последнего века существования Крымского ханства временами сотрудничали, временами имели разногласия, происходили крупные инциденты (совершались пленения, похолодание отношений, пересечения границ территорий, заселённых румынами), а также незначительные, но предосудительные события, совершаемые татарами и молдаванами. Представители последних обвинялись в кражах, насилиях, контрабанде, избиении, травле, различных нарушениях и преступлениях, детально описанных в Хронике Constantin Mavrocordatos. Ценный источник указывает, что и в Молдавии, и в Крымском ханстве были учреждения, занимавшиеся контролем происходящих такого рода рутинных беспорядков.
В серьёзных ситуациях, как, например, убийство татарина в Молдавии или убийство молдаванина в Ханстве, подпадало под юрисдикцию правителя той местности, где имел место инцидент, и тогда находилось приемлемое разрешение вопроса. Таким красноречивым примером является
приказ, изданный 26 ноября - 5 декабря 1726 года evâil-rebi ul-âhir 1139, адресованный молдаванскому принцу Grigore Ghica (1726-1733 гг.) с целью разрешения разногласий между татарами Буджака и молдаванами, разногласий, причиной которых были преступления и пересечение границы; желаемое разрешение этого вопроса заключалось в том, чтобы найти подходящего боярина, которому можно доверять и который взял бы на себя ведение переговоров о случившимся недоразумении с эмиссаром Крымского ханства - Менгли Гераем (1724-1730 гг.) [3, с. 282]. Однако другие важные события, причинённые вторжением татар на молдавские границы, захват территорий, имевшие различные попеременные фазы, - всё это нуждалось в более тесном расследовании.
Ключевые слова: татары, ханство, Буджак, румыны, молдаване, отношения, Хроника Constantin Mavrocordato, граница.
Для цитирования: Sergean Osman. "Halil Pasha's Border" and "the two hours" // Крымское историческое обозрение. 2020. № 2. С. 52-67. DOI:10.22378/kio.2020.2.52-67
Сведения об авторе: Сержан Осман - Ph. D. (Философия), Университет Бабеш-Боляй (400084, ул. Михаилу Когэлничану, 1, г. Клуж-Напока, Румыния); osergean@gmail.com
