#31753
Armagan
Anahtar yönetici

88. Gregoras, i, pp. 254, 1. 2-255, 1. 14:
663d.jpg

89. Ib., pp. 255, 1. 14—256, 1. 3:
664b.jpg
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
664c.jpg.

90. Ib., p. 265, 11. 15—18:
664d.jpg

91. Ib., pp. 267, 1. 23-268, 1. 14. The action starts with a measure to prevent Khalil from getting reinforcements from Anatolia:
664e.jpg

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)
664f.jpg

93. Pachymeres, ii, pp. 523, 1. 18-524, 1. 2:
664g.jpg

94. Ib., p. 574, 1. 5 ; see above, p. 657, n. 2.
95. Ib., p. 590, 1. 10 seq.: 664h.jpg
96. And their Turks, whose presence in the Catalan camp Pachymeres had mentioned before the battle of Aproi, p. 550, 1. 2: 664i.jpg
97. Ib., p. 590, 11. 11-14.
98. Ib., p. 591, 1. 17.
99. 1 Ib., p. 591, 11. 1-7:
664j.jpg

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: 665b.jpg. For the variants of the name 665c.jpg (probably the most correct form), 665d.jpg, etc., see G. Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica, ii, s.v. 665e.jpg. 665f.jpg 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: 665g.jpg, shows that the bride was already in Pegai.
109. Ib., pp. 601, 1. 11—603, 1. 11:
666a.jpg

110. G. Ostrogorsky, Geschichte des byzantinischen Staates, München, 1940, p. 354.
111. He appears in the sources occasionally as Ya’qub Eje Bey.
112. 668a.jpg 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. 668b.jpg, which appears in a document of 1320 as 668c.jpg (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.