[Armagan]

88. Gregoras, i, pp. 254, 1. 2-255, 1. 14:

89. Ib., pp. 255, 1. 14—256, 1. 3:

Ib., pp.; 257, 1. 11-258, 1.8: Michael IX’s defeat. Here we read (p. 257, 11. 14-17) that the Turks have their women with them. Ib., p. 258, 11. 11-14: Khalil’s triumph
.
90. Ib., p. 265, 11. 15—18:

91. Ib., pp. 267, 1. 23-268, 1. 14. The action starts with a measure to prevent Khalil from getting reinforcements from Anatolia:

92. Ib., pp. 268, 1. 15-269, 1. 23: Only those are spared who fall into the hands of the Genoese of Galata who, commanded by their podesta, are present with their ships as allies of the emperor: (p. 269, 1. 21)

93. Pachymeres, ii, pp. 523, 1. 18-524, 1. 2:

94. Ib., p. 574, 1. 5 ; see above, p. 657, n. 2.
95. Ib., p. 590, 1. 10 seq.:
96. And their Turks, whose presence in the Catalan camp Pachymeres had mentioned before the battle of Aproi, p. 550, 1. 2:
97. Ib., p. 590, 11. 11-14.
98. Ib., p. 591, 1. 17.
99. 1 Ib., p. 591, 11. 1-7:

100. Ib., pp. 591, 1. 12 ; 608, 1. 18 ; 612, 1. 16.
101. Ib., p. 612, 11. 11-13.
102. Ib., p. 612, 11. 13-16.
103. Ib., pp. 612, 1. 18-613, 1.7.
104. Ib., pp. 631, 1. 13-632, 1.17.
105. Ib., p. 632, 1. 11: . For the variants of the name (probably the most correct form), , etc., see G. Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica, ii, s.v. . in Aqsarayi, ed. O. Turan, passim (see index), is obviously the same name though not denoting the same person.
106. Ib., p. 633, 11. 2-16.
107. C. Jirecek, Staat und Gesellschaft im Mittelalterlichen Serbien, i, Vienna, 1912 (Denkschriften Ak, d. W. Wien, lvi), p. 78 seq.
108. Ib., p. 631, 1. 13: , shows that the bride was already in Pegai.
109. Ib., pp. 601, 1. 11—603, 1. 11:

110. G. Ostrogorsky, Geschichte des byzantinischen Staates, München, 1940, p. 354.
111. He appears in the sources occasionally as Ya’qub Eje Bey.
112. etc. (see above, p. 641, n. 2), p. 19, n. **. Balaschev seems to have been afraid of his derivation since he chose to hide it in a note. In support of it he quotes toponyms of the Dobruja where an original k has changed into g, e.g. , which appears in a document of 1320 as (for this he quotes, p. 15, Miklosich-Müller, Acta Patr., i, p. 95). Indeed, it is the ‘Gelaghra’ (Evliya, ii, p. 133) and even ‘Gülgrad’ (Hajji Khalfa; Hammer, Rumeli und Bosna, p. 27) of the Ottomans and the ‘Gelare’ (Mutafciev, op. cit., p. 37, n.) of to-day. As to the transition ay > ā (> a) instead of ay > ī, which would be the normal (Kowalski, Les Turcs et la langue turque de la Bulgarie du Nord-Est, p. 19) it is sufficiently explained by the influence of the back vowels which follow. 113. E.g. I had to abstain from dealing with the Gadjal of the Deli-Orman, the neighbours of the Gagauz to whom linguistically they are so closely related that they must be of the same origin; they are distinct from the Gagauz only in that they are Muslims — though Muslims of a very unorthodox kind.