Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros143Tolerance as a political toolA Christian Khan of the Golden Ho...

Tolerance as a political tool

A Christian Khan of the Golden Horde? ‘Coktoganus’ and the geopolitics of the Golden Horde at the time of its Islamisation

Un khan chrétien de la Horde d’Or? ‘Coktoganus’ et la géopolitique de la Horde d’Or à l’heure de son islamisation
Thomas Tanase
p. vol. 143

Résumés

Résumé : Un khan chrétien de la Horde d’Or? ‘Coktoganus’ et la géopolitique de la Horde d’Or à l’heure de son islamisation. Au temps du khan Özbek, les Franciscains gardaient précieusement, dans une église à côté de la ville de Saraï, les reliques d’un important personnage qu’ils appelaient « Coktoganus », parfois désigné comme un khan, et qu’ils considéraient comme un saint faiseur de miracles. Et pourtant, les sources étant quelque peu confuses, il est difficile d’identifier ce personnage. Toutefois, en réexaminant la question de l’identité de ce Coktoganus, on peut examiner, à travers les sources franciscaines, les luttes qui ont suivi la mort de Toqta et la victoire d’un khan musulman, Özbek. Plus largement, cela permet aussi d’obtenir un aperçu de la manière dont les Franciscains étaient engagés dans la géopolitique de la Horde d’Or, et d’apprécier leur connaissance du terrain ou des attitudes mongoles. À partir de là, il n’y a plus de raison de considérer que la conversion de ce Coktoganus n’aurait pas été réelle, et que son culte par les Franciscains n’aurait été qu’une question de malentendu.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1The De conformitate vitae beati Francisci ad vitam Domini Iesu, written by Bartholomew of Pisa around 1390, is one of the major works of Franciscan mediaeval history. For obvious reasons, the book does not forget to mention the important Franciscan convent in the city of Saray, on the banks of the Volga: the presence of Franciscans in Mongol lands was an evident sign of the special vocation of the Order, which was destined to spread the Gospel to the far end of the world. In their house at Saray, the Franciscan brothers exhibited the holy relics of an important “Tartar” character, known as Coktoganus, who had converted to Western Christianity at some point between the last years of Khan Toqta (1291-1312) and Özbek’s accession to power in 1313. Bartholomew of Pisa gives a personal testimony of how these relics could work miracles:

In this place lies Cathogonti, brother of the emperor of Tartars, who had been converted to the faith by our brothers, gave many ornaments to this place and glows with miracles. And the Pisan brother saw at his tomb a Saracen woman set free from an evil spirit (Bartholomew of Pisa, 1906: 557).

2Even after the disappearance of the Franciscans in the region after the 15th c., the memory of this Coktoganus was never completely forgotten. He is proudly mentioned by Franciscan historians such as Mark of Lisbon (2001: 186v) in the 16th c. or Luke Wadding (1733: 1310, §12, 176) in the 17th c. His conversion was rediscovered and celebrated by Franciscan scholars at the beginning of the 20th c., including Golubovich (1919: 170-177), who gave this Mongol saint a place of honour in his monumental Biblioteca della Terra Santa e dell’Oriente francescano. According to Golubovich, it was clear that this Coktoganus could be none other than « Toktai khanus », that is Khan Toqta himself, who was in all likelihood converted by the Franciscans shortly before his death. However, as stated by Pelliot (1949: 71), even if one would accept Coktoganus as a plausible transcription for Toqta (because the form Toktogha is attested, while the erroneous « Toktai khanus » should be discarded), « the names involved are inconclusive, and facts as we know them conflicting ». The latter is indeed the case. Toqta waged war against the Genoese settlements in Crimea in 1307. If Coktoganus and Toqta really are one and the same person, he would have converted to Western Christianity while at the same time ordering the arrest of any Westerner found in his lands. It was because of Toqta’s policy and actions that the Genoese colony of Caffa (with its Franciscan house) was burned and destroyed.

3Scholars specialised in Mongol history, who have examined Coktoganus’s identity with the help of Arabic and Persian sources, agree that the identification of Coktoganus with Toqta is quite uncertain (although some maintain this position for lack of a better solution). They consider it most likely that the Franciscans misinterpreted a common practice of Mongol leaders, who tended to accept religious figures of any belief provided that they fulfilled their prayers in the service of the khan (Toqta is unanimously described by Muslim sources as an ‘idol-worshipper’). Coktoganus may even have gone as far as being baptized, and the Franciscan brothers may have interpreted such a favourable attitude as a full and exclusive religious conversion to Franciscan beliefs. However, it would not have been understood in the same way by a Mongol prince. This is the reading adopted by DeWeese (1994: 98-99) and even Jackson (2005: 272-273, 278) in his brilliant reference work The Mongols and the West. However, it is well known, and perfectly illustrated by Jackson, that the first generation of travellers to Mongol lands, such as John of Plano Carpini and William of Rubruck, were perfectly able to understand the attitudes of Mongol rulers in spite of encountering a totally unknown world. In fact, they explicitly warned their contemporaries against the veracity of religious promises made by the khans. Nonetheless, when assessing the Christian mission in the Golden Horde as a whole, Jackson writes of a « fail to grasp » Mongol attitudes and « wishful thinking ». All in all, exceptions aside, the Franciscans were the proponents of a faith that was too exclusive, too distant to be really able to enter Mongol mindsets.

4Jackson is one of the historians that placed the Mongol expansion in a global context. It is because of him and other historians that the Mongol empire is no longer simply seen as a predatory nomad power, but as a world phenomenon that enabled the exchange of ideas and goods from one side of Eurasia to the other. This refreshing vision contributed to the rise of a broader perspective that questioned the idea that the West, driven only by internal forces, would have discovered progress and reason in modern times, and bestowed these ‘blessings’ upon the rest of the world. Nobody would dare today to characterise the Mongols, or any other people for that matter, as cruel, irrational beings that were unable to observe, confront, and make sense of the world. It is equally true that when it comes to the Mediaeval West (especially in its religious dimension), it is sometimes hard to lose old habits of seeing mediaeval people as (mis)taking their fancies for reality, intrinsically credulous, and prone to inventing stories. This tendency has been shaped by two centuries of condescending characterisations of mediaeval people and their beliefs, and Enlightenment’s fight against ‘superstition’ and ‘feudality’. This mindset is all the more difficult to shed because some of the major scholars in the field have made such assertions themselves. For example, Le Goff (1980: 191) asserted in a reference work that « medieval men did not know how to look but were always ready to listen and believe all they were told ». They could not develop real geographical knowledge, but only fanciful descriptions (Le Goff, 1980: 191). The current tendency to read western sources as structures for ‘imagining’ identities or attempts to track down the birth of an orientalism akin to racism (see for instance Akbari, 2009; Phillips, 2014) will not change the habit of being overcautious and slightly contemptuous when considering western descriptions of other societies. Indeed, most mediaeval historians are quite far removed from such attitudes and assertions in their day-to-day work. Any analyses of medieval travellers or travel writing is likely to fly in the face of Le Goff’s statement, even if few would dare to openly contradict such a significant authority.

5In this perspective, it seems quite natural to think that in the case of Coktoganus we are dealing with the construction of a sainthood that was based on misunderstanding and credulity. However, if one takes a closer look, these Franciscan documents contain invaluable information about the victory of Özbek and Islam in the Golden Horde. This paper will discuss the issue of Coktoganus’s identity; an issue that, as we will see, has (probably) recently been partly resolved by DeWeese. More broadly, it will try to give a glimpse of how much the Franciscans were involved in the Horde’s geopolitics, a subject that has already been discussed at length elsewhere (Tanase, 2013: 375-543). While largely concurring with most of Jackson’s detailed conclusions, this contribution suggests however that Franciscans were more than able to understand the Mongol attitudes and were not necessarily prone to « wishful thinking ». It contends, on that basis, that there is no reason to think that Coktoganus’ conversion to Western Christianity was not genuine.

Coktoganus in Franciscan sources: a review

6It is in the beginning of the 1320s that the first mentions of Coktoganus appear. In 1321, pope John XXII, based in Avignon, writes a letter of exhortation for the Mongol prince Abuscanus (Abushqa), who is presented as the son « clarae memoriae Cotogani regis » (i.e. a formula that implies that Coktoganus had died a Christian). In this official diplomatic letter, the pope calls Coktoganus a king, which is worth noticing, even if, as Hautala (2014a: 90) points out, the title ‘king’ is not the same as that of ‘emperor’, which the pope uses for Özbek (Acta Ioannis XXII, 1952: 103-105). There is no supporting information that enables a precise identification of this Abuscanus. However, it is clear that the pope had great expectations for this prince, to whom he wrote a supplementary letter a few months later (Acta Ioannis XXII, 1952: 113-114). These letters were a reaction to news brought to the papal court by the bishop of Caffa, the Franciscan brother Jerome (Tanase, 2010: 136-138). Several documents attest that Franciscan settlements in the Golden Horde were blooming again after Özbek had restored stability and authorised Westerners to resettle in the Horde, beginning with the Genoese in Caffa. For example, a letter written in 1320 by brother Johanca explained how the Franciscans spread from their Crimean bases and advanced up to the Bashkir peoples and the Western Siberian regions (Bihl and Moule, 1924: 67-69).

7 While their bishop resided in the West, the Franciscans of Crimea held a general assembly in Caffa in 1323 and decided to write to their brethren in the West to tell of their accomplishments and ask for their support. It is from this important letter that much of our knowledge of Coktoganus derives:

the recently deceased emperor died a Christian, leaving behind him three Christian sons. Two of them apostatized in order to have one of them elected as his successor, a fact God did not allow. But while they have been executed by his successor, the third brother, still firmly and steadily Christian, remains, with the help of God, in excellent terms with this successor, and is expected to become the next emperor…The cause and the reason of the death of the two sons of the emperor is that they conspired against the election of the present one; and, moreover, that they have been inconstant, as they have abandoned the faith of Christ out of ambition for the imperial honour, granted by pagans. These people hold in high esteem the fact of being constant, even if they are heathen, and that everyone sticks to the faith of his parents… (Bihl and Moule, 1923 : 111; Hautala, 2016: 339).

8The term « imperator » used in the letter leaves no room for doubt: the letter concerns a khan that had converted to Western Christianity and recently passed away. It explains that the current khan was himself favourable to Western Christians « licet paganus », and that the brothers hoped to convert him. A Christian Golden Horde could have joined a great crusade that could have crushed the Muslim opposition between two fronts (Bihl and Moule, 1923: 109). Clearly, the Christian khan has to be Coktoganus (as we will see later on, the mention of his three sons is confirmed by other documents). In 1323, the current khan can be none other than Özbek. It is striking that no names are provided in the letter, and even though its general narrative can be followed, its details remain quite blurred. From what we know of Mongol habits, it is unlikely that the two sons of Coktoganus would have been executed because they were apostates. They must have defied Özbek, and sensed that their Christianity had become a hindrance. The letter places the death of Coktoganus before 1313, as he is presented as Özbek’s predecessor. Significantly, the Franciscan letter still calls Özbek a heathen, while Western missionary sources and pontifical letters made a common distinction between paganii (heathen) and saracenii (Muslims). The word saracenii is also used in this 1323 letter when it speaks in favor of an alliance with Özbek against the Muslims. The qualification of Özbek as a heathen was most likely intended to present the situation in a more favourable light. The Franciscans of Caffa knew what the victory of Özbek implied, but may have preferred to soften their account as much as possible by not providing any names and by not lingering on geopolitical details. In any case, knowledge of Coktoganus spread. A list of rulers converted by Franciscan missions, probably written at the beginning of the 1320s (Golubovich, 1913: 73; Hautala, 2016: 339-340), already proudly mentions the name « Coktoganus ». However, he is only referred to as « a son of an emperor », not as an emperor or king. The list also gives the names of several relatives that were converted and baptised with him: his mother, queen Thodothelia, his wife Kerley, his sons Georges, Curamas, and Abusca (three sons indeed, one of them Abushqa), along with several princes of his court, such as Tholethemur, Gassur and Petra, son of Caramis (i.e. probably again Curamas, which would make Petra a grandson of Coktoganus). This list is extremely important because it belies the idea of a prince who simply upheld traditional Mongol attitudes and was erroneously considered Christian, even after being baptised. The mention of a whole list of converted characters, including both Coktoganus’s relatives and some of his followers, gives the impression that this conversion involved a whole faction that had chosen to adopt the variety of Christianity brought by the Franciscan friars (linked with the Genoese and the West), while at the same moment a Muslim faction was on the rise around Özbek. The same manuscript contains another list, which registers the various Franciscan houses around the world. This list also speaks of the « filius imperatoris », Coktoganus, who was buried in the « convent of St. John ».

9The convent of St. John appears in a later and almost official chronicle written around 1360 (Chronicle of the Twenty-Four Generals, 1897: 456). The author, Arnauld of Sarrant, writes that the « Lord John, emperor of the Tartars » was educated and converted by the Franciscans. When he died, he was buried, according to Mongol custom, outside the city of Saray, at a distance of three miles, where a distinct house had been built under the name of Saint-John. This account indicates that some Mongol traditions were retained at the time, as was usually the case with first-generation Mongol converts. Nevertheless, Coktoganus had adopted a new Christian name at his baptism, John, and moreover had been buried in a Franciscan house that was dedicated to his patron saint and obviously built around his grave (its foundations may even have been laid previously, in anticipation of receiving Coktoganus’s remains). This underlines once again the significance of his religious choices: Coktoganus had given the control of his remains and his memory to the Franciscans. Because of the turmoil in the Golden Horde after Özbek’s reign, the location of the convent of St. John became unsafe. Around the year 1348, the Franciscans transferred Coktoganus’s body from his tomb outside Saray, where it was in danger of being robbed, to their house inside the city. According to the Chronicle, it is on this occasion that the Franciscans discovered that his body, « cum vestibus et pulvinari de serico » was incorrupt, a clear sign of holiness, which was also recounted a few years later by Bartholomew of Pisa, who, however, calls Coktoganus the « brother of a khan ». Perhaps there was some confusion with the remains of a brother of Coktoganus, which were kept next to those of Coktoganus, if we believe a catalogue of Franciscan saints that was written around the same time as Bartholomew’s text (Golubovich, 1919: 170). However, the mention in this catalogue of a brother otherwise unknown in the sources seems rather to have its origin in Bartholomew’s text. As this catalogue has the Chronicle of the Generals as his main source, and mentions the uncorrupted body of « the blessed brother John », found « cum habitu », the mention of a brother could then just be an attempt to reconcile the Chronicle of the Generals with a hasty reading of Bartholomew, even if both Bartholomew and the Chronicle speak of only one single character. Hence, it may be prudent to discard the idea of a brother buried with Coktoganus, which is only mentioned in the latter source, which seems quite confused.

Is Coktoganus khan Toqta?

10After this review, it is easy to understand why Golubovich thought that Coktoganus had to be Toqta. The Franciscan tradition broadly referred to Coktoganus as a khan, and as far as we know, the only khan who directly preceded Özbek was Toqta. However, it is also clear that the Franciscan tradition is inconsistent and pluriform, referring to Coktoganus as an imperator as well as a son or a brother of a khan. There can be little doubt that Coktoganus was an important individual, very close to power, but his exact status remains uncertain. There is another problem with Golubovich’s identification. Latin sources frequently mention Toqta, but none of them ever uses a transliteration that would approximate Coktoganus: they all use variants of the form « Toctai » (Pelliot, 1949: 68). Also, absolutely no Latin author, from Marco Polo to William Adam, mentions a Christian conversion of Toqta. This cannot be explained from a lack of knowledge as Christian Westerners had been directly engaged in the wars of Toqta.

11In the 1280s, the growth of the Genoese settlement in Caffa helped the Franciscans to establish a regular community in the Golden Horde. This community already appears to have been well developed by 1287, when the custodian of Gazaria wrote a letter to the West (Balard, 1978: 114-118; Richard, 1998: 88-91; Tanase, 2005: 290-292). At this time, the Franciscans were supported by Nogay, one of whose spouses, Yaylaq, had been publicly baptised by the brothers. Nogay had already converted to Islam at the time of Khan Berke, when he had begun his rise to power (Amitai-Preiss, 1995: 79-90). He had also married an illegitimate daughter of the Byzantine emperor Michael VIII. Nogay was not in a position to become a khan himself, but he had become the real holder of power within the Golden Horde, capable of appointing khans obedient to his cause (the Franciscan letter of 1287 called Nogay an « imperator » and Russian sources referred to him as a « tsar »). Nogay had previously been a strong supporter of the alliance with the Mamluks, but in 1287 he was building a more and more western-focused, autonomous principality within the Horde, oriented towards the Balkans and Hungary. He also established relations with the great enemies of the Genoese, the Venetians. The support of the Franciscans, who praised Nogay in the West, especially at the papal court, was useful in theory, even if this policy ultimately proved to be a failure. In Hungary especially, during the troubled years of Ladislas IV and the subsequent wars between his would-be heirs, the popes constantly intervened to eradicate any steppe influence in spite of Nogay’s attempts to establish relations with the West (Berend, 2001: 171-189; Tanase, 2013: 387-411). The last of Nogay’s failures was his appointment of Toqta as a puppet khan in 1290, as Toqta turned against him and defeated him in an internecine war in which Westerners were once again involved. One of Nogay’s grandsons was executed by the Genoese in Caffa, where he had arrived to ask for tribute. Nogay devastated the Crimea in retaliation, but was unable to take Caffa. It is hard to avoid the impression that this action had something to do with the links between Nogay and the Venetians, while Genoa and Venice had just fought a war that ended in 1299 (Brătianu, 1929: 282-283; Balard, 1978: 58; Ciocîltan, 2012: 160-163). Nogay, who had won the first battles against Toqta, was finally defeated in 1299 and lost his life.

12All of this was perfectly known in the West as shown by the work of Marco Polo. The Prologue of the Book of Wonders recounts how Marco Polo, captured by the Genoese, met Rustichello of Pisa, with whom he composed a book in 1298. The Book of Wonders’ last pages are dedicated to the war between Toqta and Nogay, which Marco Polo describes as a chivalry contest. It seems that when Marco Polo returned to Venice after the peace of 1299 and his collaboration with Rusticello probably ended, the book was not entirely completed and polished. Without wanting to delve into a complex issue here, this could be the reason why the great majority of the different versions of the Book of Wonders end so abruptly, ending with the initial victory of Nogay over Toqta. Many of these versions may well have brushed aside a conclusion that had remained much too sketchy. A rarer, extended version, probably written much later under the dictation of Marco Polo himself, adds a few lines about Nogay’s final defeat (Moule and Pelliot, 1938: 483-489; Richard, 2007; Gadrat, 2015: 218-220; Tanase, 2016: 446-453). It is striking to see how Marco Polo’s book finishes with this account of a contemporary event, of which he was obviously informed after he returned to Venice after his captivity and not during his travels. It is a clear testimony of how fast news travelled.

13Toqta’s policies had coherence. After eliminating Nogay to reunify the Golden Horde, the next step was to attack the Genoese. The Genoese had built an autonomous principality around Caffa that could defy the khans. Genoese colonies had also become a major trading hub for slaves that were captured in the Golden Horde and sent to Egypt. This trade was all the more strategic because the Mamluks themselves were slaves originating from these regions. For this reason, Toqta’s attack against Genoa in 1307 can also be interpreted as an act of hostility against the Mamluks, whose alliance had not yielded many advantages for the Golden Horde in their conflict with the Ilkhans of Persia (Ciocîltan, 2012: 164-173). In 1304, Toqta had established a general peace with other Mongol leaders, including Ilkhan Öljeitu. Even if short-lived, this peace completed Toqta’s general aims. After the failures of Nogay’s policies, Toqta seems to have aimed at re-establishing the rule of the khans in Saray. He accepted, at least temporarily, the deadlock with the Ilkhans and stopped the drain of manpower caused by the slave trade in order to curb Genoese pretensions and put pressure on the Mamluks.

14It is no surprise then that Muslim sources also contain a lot of information about Toqta. However, what they state is quite different from Western accounts. For example, Rashīd al-Dīn gives the name of Toqta’s mother, Öljei, a name that does not match with the Thodothelia of the Franciscan sources (Pelliot, 1949: 67; Boyle, 1971: 109, 124). Mamluk chronicles mention Toqta’s children, but the names they provide, Il-Basar and Tuqal Buqa, again do not match those of the Franciscan sources (it is possible to find faint references to a third son) (DeWeese, 1994: 108). Al-Nuwayrī and al-Birzālī state that Il-Basar had converted to Islam (even though he could not understand recitations of the Quran in Arabic), and that Toqta had chosen him as his heir (Tiesenhausen, 1884: 162, 174; Pelliot 1949: 71-72). The Genoese sources also mention Il-Basar as he played a role in the 1307 war (Continuazione, 1874: 500). However, Il-Basar died in 1307-1308, before Toqta, and as far as Mamluk sources are concerned Toqta had no surviving son in 1312. If these accounts are accepted, it is possible to postulate the existence of a Muslim faction around Toqta, linked with Il-Basar. Nonetheless, Toqta died an « idol-worshipper », and if we take into account his actions against the slave trade destined for Egypt, Toqta does not seem to have been particularly favourable to Islam. The Muslim faction may have grown in influence during the last years of his reign, but Toqta’s confrontation with the Genoese and Egypt reveals this influence was still limited.

15Without going into details, it is clear that the victory of the Muslim faction was far from easy. Mamluk sources write about the strong opposition that Özbek faced and mention the decisive actions of Amīr Qutluq-Temür and Özbek’s stepmother, Bayalun Khatun. They also mention the bloody repression of a rebellion led by traditionalist Mongols who opposed Muslim rule (Tiesenhausen, 1884: 323; DeWeese, 1994: 118). The account of Özbek’s execution of the two sons of Coktoganus also fits within this context. It is within this framework that DeWeese (1994) recognised an important clue in the Shu‘ab-i panjgāna, a genealogical list added to Rashīd al-Dīn’s Compendium of Chronicles, as to Coktoganus’s identity. The list mentions one of Toqta’s brothers, Kutukan (a form very close to Coktoganus), and gives the names of his three sons: Kurmas, Kurkiz, and Abushqa (with a fourth son, Naymtay). These clearly correspond with the Curamas, Georgius, and Abusca of the Franciscan list (DeWeese, 1994: 98-99; Hautala, 2016: 340; see also the ‘Qoduqai’ in Boyle, 1971: 109). Surprisingly, DeWeese (1994: 98-99) maintains the traditional identification of Toqta with Coktoganus. In his view Kutukan would be Bartholomew of Pisa’s « Cathogonti frater imperatoris », as Cathogonti and Coktoganus would be two different names. However, it is clear that we are here dealing with multiple forms of a unique name, which is very common in Western sources (e.g. « Cotoganus » in John XXII’s letters, « Cathoganti » in other manuscripts of the De Conformitate). Bartholomew’s « Cathogenti », who worked miracles, clearly corresponds with the « imperator Tartarorum » of the Chronicle of the Generals, as both sources speak of a single, unique character working miracles. However, it is due to this remark by DeWeese that other researchers have been able to identify Coktoganus with Kutukan, the ninth son of Khan Möngke-Temür and a younger brother of Toqta (Tanase, 2013: 413-416; Hautala, 2014b: 85-87). As Richard (1998: 157) hypothesised, Coktoganus must be a close relative of Toqta.

The Franciscans and the politics of the Horde

16The question remains how we should interpret the title of emperor, which is occasionally given to Coktoganus in the sources, particularly in the letter of 1323, which was composed soon after the events in question occurred. This title could just be an exaggeration, with no other cause than the high birth of Kutukan. However, it is possible to find traces of a khan rivalling Özbek in Qāshānī’s account written in Persian (DeWeese, 1994: 107-111), a wholly different source that was composed even closer to the events in question (probably shortly after 1316). This account is quite different from the Mamluk sources. According to Qāshānī, Toqta chose his eldest son, Bayan, as his heir. His second son, Mum.k.qiyay, purportedly rebelled against this decision, and was defeated and forced to flee. When Toqta died shortly after, a party of amīrs rebelled (led by Qutluq-Temür) and was crushed. Özbek had « more than a hundred princes and sons of Tokhta » executed (DeWeese, 1994: 107-111). This account changes our perspective: Qutluq-Temür is presented as an adversary (before switching sides?), and allegedly there is a surviving son of Toqta in 1312, although it is not clear which one (but Qāshānī's account seems to imply that Bayan was still alive before being executed by Özbek). Al-Aharī, another Persian author, writing around 1360, provided a similar narrative and states that Toqta’s son, Il-Basar, was still alive in 1312 and murdered by Özbek (DeWeese, 1994: 115).

17If we follow this narrative, a son of Toqta must still have been alive in 1312, and he must have claimed the title of khan before being killed by Özbek. Tukal Buqa, Toqta’s second son, would be the most likely candidate. This scenario would explain why Tukal Buqa is occasionally mentioned in the sources, before suddenly disappearing, as for instance in al-Nuwayrī (Tiesenhausen, 1884: 161). However, it must be acknowledged that the account of Qāshānī cannot give us any certainty, as it is obviously muddled. It is hard to believe that Qutluq-Temür would have been an opponent of Özbek (there must be some misunderstanding here). Qāshānī is also clearly mixing up the two brothers. In both Mamluk and Genoese sources, Il-Basar was Toqta’s legitimate heir, which would make him the Bayan of Qāshānī. However, Il-Basar was already dead in 1312 and cannot have opposed Özbek. Hence, Qāshānī’s Bayan seems to refer to the second brother, Tukal Buqa. However, this interpretation (as in Tanase, 2013: 416) is not entirely convincing either as in casu Il-Basar would have to be the rebellious son. This does not match what we know otherwise. Yet, the fact remains that Qāshānī’s account of a contest between Özbek and a son of Toqta cannot be easily discarded. Qāshānī wrote his narrative close to the events in question, and his account also has a faint echo in Mamluk sources, which report both the existence of a second son and a troubled context. Seen in this light, the title imperator, sometimes given to Coktoganus/ Kutukan by the Franciscan sources, could be more justified than is usually thought. One can even wonder if Kutukan/Coktoganus, who was Toqta’s brother according to Rashīd al-Dīn, could not have been conflated to some extent with Tukal Buqa, the son of Toqta. The two figures are very close, and both seem to have claimed the title khan after Toqta’s demise. What’s more, the son could have been mistaken for a brother in the Shu‘ab-i panjgāna, as he was already an adult in 1299, when he took part in the war against Nogay. He could have had three sons old enough to defy Özbek after 1312, even if the available time window seems somewhat short. Or maybe it is Kutukan, who would have first contended with Il-Basar and later with Özbek, as mentioned by Qāshānī. In that case, Qāshānī’s Bayan executed in 1312, instead of being a son, would be a brother of Toqta. Such confusions can happen in the sources, especially in the case of contested successions. For instance, Muslim sources tend to omit discussions of Ulaghchi, the Christian son of Sartaq, who was eliminated by Berke. They often mention that Sartaq died without an heir, even if, on closer examination of the texts, one can find mentions of Ulaghchi, who is sometimes referred to just a few lines later, in blatant contradiction, as an heir or as a ruling khan, or sometimes as a brother of Sartaq (e.g. Rashīd al-Dīn as in Boyle, 1971: 108, 122; Pelliot, 1949: 35-44).

18It should be noted that even if the later Franciscan cult of Kutukan resembled the cult of a martyr, it was never presented as such in the Franciscan sources. This implies that Kutukan had not been executed by Özbek, and that his (hi)story cannot be the one provided by Qāshānī. Nevertheless, Kutukan could have claimed the title khan shortly after the death of Toqta, especially in such a troubled context, even if he never actually became a ruling khan and died, possibly of natural causes, around the time of Özbek’s ascend to power. Kutukan’s claim would have been based largely on his familial legitimacy; his being a Western Christian is unlikely to have been of any help. The presence of Western Christianity in the Horde was only marginal and clearly linked to a foreign party, against which Toqta had just waged a war; that would have been reason enough for the defection of Kutukan’s two sons. This may explain why the letter of 1323 could have presented Kutukan as the khan ‘preceding’ Özbek, even if other Franciscan sources would present him as the son of a khan or the brother of a khan. This could also explain why Persian sources would remember the existence of a rival, more or less to be conflated with a hypothetical surviving son of Toqta, and incorporate what would have seemed to be a more logical ending in their accounts, the execution of this rival (along with hundreds of opponents and Toqta’s sons in Qāshānī’s account; see e.g. the romanticised story of Il-Basar’s assassination in al-Aharī). As for the Mamluk sources, they tend to omit this Christian contender altogether, and focus instead on the deeds of the Muslim faction, which had first supported Il-Basar and then Özbek, who is presented as the natural heir and had to crush what would be described as a rebellion against Özbek’s Islamisation policies.

19Özbek resumed the traditional policy of the Mongol khans. The Genoese were allowed to re-establish in Caffa, whence the Franciscan missions bloomed again. After crisis years under Toqta, Özbek resumed sending embassies to the Mamluks. It is in this context that an interesting character appears, Segurano Salvaygo. This Genoese merchant served as an intermediary between the Golden Horde and the Mamluks, while he traded slaves on ships flying the Mamluk flag (in this way he escaped the ban on the slave trade to Egypt that the papacy wanted to impose on Christian powers). However, bishop Jerome, who was at odds with the Genoese authorities partly because he tried to hinder the slave trade in Caffa, had to travel to Avignon to seek help (Tanase, 2010: 136, 149-150), while the Dominican William Adam denounced this sort of slave trade altogether in his treatise on the crusade (Kedar, 1976; Ciocîltan, 2012: 176-178, 190). Özbek’s adoption of Islam had a political aspect, which was linked with his broader policy towards Egypt. However, because the Genoese were important actors in his policies also, Özbek would never try to entirely Islamise the Horde, making his reign a golden period for the Franciscan missions. Nevertheless, Özbek was ultimately confronted with the same problems as his predecessors. The re-establishment of diplomatic ties with the Mamluks yielded no tangible results and the Genoese quickly became very powerful once again. Disappointed with the results, Özbek had Salvaygo executed in 1322/1323.

20After his demise in 1341, Özbek was briefly succeeded by a non-Muslim son, Tinibek, who tried to establish links with the papacy through the Franciscans. He sent Elias of Hungary, a brother close to him, to Avignon, but Tinibek’s reign was short lived. He did not receive any support from the West because the papacy preferred to support the expanding Polish and Hungarian kingdoms. Tinibek was eliminated in a revolt that brought his Muslim brother, Janibek, to power (Tanase, 2013: 502-507). Under Janibek, the Islamisation of the Golden Horde was much more comprehensive. In retrospect, it is possible to appreciate the importance of Özbek’s conversion to Islam. Even if Özbek at first remained loyal to Mongol political practices and allowed other religious faiths to prosper, his conversion ultimately lead to the victory of a Muslim faction, which had its power base in an important and significant Muslim population. As was the case with other Mongol powers in Persia and Central Asia, the adoption and establishment of Muslim power inserted Özbek in a network of Muslim traders and preachers, and connected him with a large space from Egypt to Central Asia. Although at first glance Islamisation may have seemed reversible under a different khan, these thorough Mongol-Muslim entanglements ultimately proved decisive.

21The Franciscans of the Horde, who were linked to a wider Italian presence, also took part in this great geopolitical game. It is clear from their thick network of relations that the Franciscans were familiar with the Mongols and their attitudes. Hence, the idea that they would have misunderstood the Mongols, or proceeded on the basis of wishful thinking, should be discarded. Of course, this does not mean that the Franciscans of the Horde did not deliberately present very sanguine reports of their achievements to obtain support in the West. Nevertheless, documents from the 1320s indicate that Franciscans followed Mongol camps or even adopted a nomadic way of life, which is quite a remarkable feat. As the Codex Cumanicus testifies, they were living in communities where Qipchaq Turkic, Persian, Latin, Italian, and German could be spoken side-by-side. They were part of the daily encounter between Western traders, Greeks, Armenians, Turks, and Mongols.

22The miracles around the relics of Coktoganus even suggest that the Franciscan efforts to Christianise the Golden Horde did not fail due to an inability to adapt to the mental universe of the Mongols, who were first and foremost expecting wondrous achievements because of their belief in what Jackson (2005: 276) calls « the salience of magic ». It is certainly true, as Jackson has pointed out, that Western Christianity was undergoing a process of rationalisation at the level of its Universities, with the development of scholastics. However, the reality of Western Christianity was much more diverse and the practices and teachings of missionaries could be very different from scholastic principles. In the end, the Franciscans were the Order of Saint Francis, the saint who received stigmata. Also, in theory Islam would have been just as exclusive and remote as Western Christianity, but in practice it was nevertheless able to gain a foothold in Mongol societies. In spite of Franciscan miracles and efforts, the truth remains, as Jackson (2005) has argued, that the Franciscans were too remote from Mongol society, not in the sense that they were unable to connect with Mongols but rather in the sense that Islam, at this time, had already established a long and multi-secular history of contact with central Asia whereas Western Christianity had not. Even if Franciscans could occasionally convert khans, a few conversions, important though they were, could not counterbalance the extensive networks, practices and power webs – whose interactions lie at the heart of the study of geopolitics – that Muslims had established in the area. The sudden death of Kutukan paved the way for Özbek and a decisive victory of Islam in the Golden Horde. Seen in this light, it is no wonder that the Franciscans would end up treating Kutukan almost as a martyr. In the ecclesiastical tradition, a martyr is the founder of a church. Through his conversion and his death, Kutukan had been something of a royal founder of an embryonic Western Christianity on the shores of the Crimea and the Volga Region.

BARTHOLOMEW OF PISA, 1906, De conformitate vitae beati Francisci ad vitam Domini Iesu, Annalecta Franciscana IV, Florence, Collegio di S. Bonaventura.

TIESENHAUSEN (Tizengauzen) Vladimir, 1884, Sbornik materialov, otnosiashchikhia k istorii Zolotoi Ordy I, Saint Petersburg, Akademiia nauk.

JACKSON Peter, 2005, The Mongols and the West, Harlow, Pearson Longman.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

References

Primary Sources

Acta Ioannis XXII (1317-1334), 1952, A. Tăutu (ed.), Vatican, Pontificia Commissio ad redigendum codicem iuris canonici orientalis, Fontes, Series III, vol. VII, tom. II.

Boyle John Andrew (trans.), 1971, The successors of Gengis Khan : translated from the Persian of Rashid al-Din, New-York, Columbia University Press.

Chronicle of the Twenty-Four Generals of the Order of Friars Minors (Chronica XXIV Generalium Ordinis Minorum), 1897, Analecta Franciscana, III, Florence, Collegio di S. Bonaventura.

Continuazione della Cronaca di Jacopo da Varagine dal 1297 al 1332, 1874, Atti della societa ligura di storia patria, 10, ed. V. Promis, p. 493-512.

GOLUBOVICH Girolamo, 1913, Biblioteca bio-bibliografica della Terra Santa e dell’Oriente francescano, vol. II, Florence, Collegio di S. Bonaventura.

—, 1919, Biblioteca bio-bibliografica della Terra Santa e dell’Oriente francescano, vol. III, Florence, Collegio di S. Bonaventura.

MARK OF LISBON 2001, Crónicas da Ordem dos Frades Menores, Segunda Parte, Porto, Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto.

WADDING Lucas, José Maria da Fonseca (ed.),1733, Annales Minorum VI, Roma.

Studies

AKBARI Suzanne Conklin, 2009, Idols in the East: European Representations of Islam and the Orient, 1100-1450, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press.

AMITAI-PREISS Reuven, 1995, Mongols and Mamluks: The Mamluk-Ilkhanid War, 1260-1281, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

BALARD Michel, 1978, La Romanie génoise (XIIe-début du XVe), Rome, Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome.

BEREND Nora, 2001, At the Gate of Christendom: Jews, Muslims and ‘Pagans’ in Medieval Hungary, c. 1000-c. 1300, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

BIHL Michael and MOULE Arthur Christopher, 1923, « De duabus epistolis Fratrum Minorum Tartariae Aquilonaris », Archivum franciscanum historicum 16, p. 89-112.

, 1924, « Tria nova documenta de missionibus Fratrum Minorum Tartariae Aquilonaris », Archivum franciscanum historicum 17, p. 55-71.

BRATIANU Gheorghe, 1929, Recherches sur le commerce génois dans la mer Noire au XIIIe siècle, Paris, Geuthner.

CIOCILTAN Virgil, 2012, The Mongols and the Black Sea Trade in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries, Leiden, Brill.

DE WEESE Devin, 1994, Islamization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde, University Park, Penn State University Press.

GADRAT Christine, 2015, Lire Marco Polo au Moyen Âge: Traduction, diffusion et réception du Devisement du Monde, Turnhout, Brepols.

HAUTALA Roman 2014a, « Dva pisma frantsiskantsev iz Kryma 1323 goda », Zolotoordynskaiaa Tsivilizatsiia 7, p. 87-110.

, 2014b, « Pisma frantsiskantsev iz Zolotoi Ordy : sbedeniia latinskikh istochnikov o religioznoi politike khana Uzbeka (1312/13-1341) », Rossica Antiqua 1/9, p. 63-103.

, 2016, « Latin sources on the religious situation in the Golden Horde in the early reign of Uzbek khan », Golden Horde Review 4/2, p. 336-345.

KEDAR Benjamin Zeev, 1976, « Segurano-Sakran Salvaygo : un mercante genovese al servizio dei sultani mamalucchi c. 1303-1322 », in Cipolla, Carlo M. and Lopez Roberto S. (ed.), Fatti e idee di storia economica nei secoli XII-XX. Studi dedicati a Franco Borlandi, Bologna,Il Mulino, p. 75-91.

LE GOFF Jacques, 1980, Time, Work, and Culture in the Middle Ages, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.

MOULE Arthur Christopher and PELLIOT, Paul, 1938, Marco Polo: The Description of the World, London, George Routledge and Sons.

PELLIOT Paul, 1949, Notes sur l’histoire de la Horde d’Or (Œuvres posthumes, 2), ed. L. Hambis, Paris, A. Maisonneuve.

PHILLIPS Kim, 2014, Before Orientalism: Asian Peoples and Cultures in European Travel Writing, 1245-1510, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press.

RICHARD Jean, 1998, La Papauté et les missions d’Orient au Moyen Âge, Rome, Éditions de l’École française de Rome.

—, 2007, « Marco Polo et les Tartares du Ponant. Sur les chapitres oubliés du Devisement du monde », Comptes-rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 151(4), p. 1489-1504.

TANASE Thomas, 2005, « Le "khan" Nogaï et la géopolitique de la mer Noire en 1287 à travers un document missionnaire: la lettre de Ladislas, custode de Gazarie », Annuario dell'Istituto romeno di cultura e ricerca umanistica di Venezia 6-7, 267-303.

—, 2010, « Frère Jérôme de Catalogne, premier évêque de Caffa, et l'Orient franciscain », in Coulon, Damien, Picard, Christophe and Valérian, Dominique (eds), Espaces et réseaux en Méditerranée: VIe-XVIe siècle, vol. II, Paris, éditions Bouchène, p. 127-165.

, 2013, “Jusqu’aux limites du monde”. La papauté et la mission franciscaine, de l’Asie de Marco Polo à l’Amérique de Christophe Colomb, Rome, Éditions de l’École française de Rome.

—, 2016, Marco Polo, Paris, Éditions Ellipses.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Thomas Tanase, « A Christian Khan of the Golden Horde? ‘Coktoganus’ and the geopolitics of the Golden Horde at the time of its Islamisation »Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée, 143 | 2018, vol. 143.

Référence électronique

Thomas Tanase, « A Christian Khan of the Golden Horde? ‘Coktoganus’ and the geopolitics of the Golden Horde at the time of its Islamisation »Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée [En ligne], 143 | 2018, mis en ligne le 12 octobre 2018, consulté le 19 mars 2024. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/remmm/10685 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/remmm.10685

Haut de page

Auteur

Thomas Tanase

UMR 8167, Orient et Méditerranée

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Search OpenEdition Search

You will be redirected to OpenEdition Search