Grigor Boykov
Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski", CRSA - Center for Regional Studies and Analyses, Research Fellow (R2)
Grigor Boykov, Ph.D. in Ottoman history (2013, Bilkent University), is an assistant professor at the University of Vienna (Institute for East European History). Previously he taught at the University of Sofia, Central European University, and was a researcher at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. His research attempts to merge well-established approaches in history writing with the constantly evolving tools and methods in Digital Humanities, such as spatial and network analysis.
Supervisors: Halil İnalcık
Supervisors: Halil İnalcık
less
InterestsView All (47)
Uploads
Books by Grigor Boykov
Камен Станев, Бележки за поселищната система между северната периферия на Родопите и р. Марица в края на XII – XIV в. .....7
Димо Чешмеджиев, Гробът на патриарх Евтимий в Бачковския манастир ......42
Иван Дуков, Няколко специфични погребални практики от средновековната епоха в Асеновград и региона в светлината на теренни археологически проучвания 2005 – 2013 г. ......62
Григор Бойков, Неосъществените градове в района на Асеновград през османския период: Поповица/Ислямлъ и Конуш Хисаръ .......75
Христо Христозов, Демографско и урбанистично развитие на Асеновград през XV – XVII в. (Истанимака, Анбелианош и Бей кьой) ......105
Дамян Борисов, Войнуците в Истанимака (Асеновград) през XVI в. .....157
Видин Сукарев, Османски документи от фондовете на Регионален исторически музей – Пловдив за Станимака и региона ......195
Мина Христемова, Две лица на властта в Асеновград през XIX в. – местно самоуправление и Михалаки Гюмюшгердан ......206
Никола Филипов, Конвенцията за размяна на малцинствата и отражението ѝ в Станимака ......221
Владимир Балчев, Асеновградският край в старите географски карти от 1450 г. до края на XIX в. .......235
Росен Малчев, Историко-географската област Източен Рупчос в контекста на културното пространство на Бачковския манастир ......249
Константин Рангочев, Сакралната топонимия в Източен Рупчос I .....267
Светла Москова, Малки открития за късното средновековно изкуство в Асеновград .....279
Документално приложение
Документ № 1. Откъс от типика на Бачковския манастир ....300
Документ № 2. Фрагмент от т. нар. „История на кръстоносците” ......300
Документ № 3. Фрагмент от „История на похода на император Фридрих І”.....301
Документ № 4. Откъси от „Превземането на Константинопол” .....301
Документ № 5. Откъс от „Житие на Стефан Лазаревич”.......302
Документ № 6. Фрагмент от проверовъчен (йоклама) регистър ......304
Документ № 7. Фрагмент от подробен (муфассал) регистър ......306
Документ № 8. Фрагмент от съкратен (иджмал) регистър .......310
Документ № 9. Фрагмент от подробен (муфассал) регистър .......312
Документ № 10. Фрагмент от войнушки регистър .....318
Документ № 11. Фрагмент от подробен регистър на джелепкешани .....320
Документ № 12. Фрагмент от подробен (муфассал) регистър .....322
Документ № 13. Откъс от пътеписа на Евлия Челеби ......328
Документ № 14. Заповед за строеж на църква в Станимака .......329
Документ № 15. Заповед за построения мост в Станимака .....330
Документ № 16. Заповед за поправка на църква в Станимака ....330
Документ № 17. Откъс от дневника на Пол Люка .....331
Документ № 18. Фрагмент от т. нар. Хилендарска кондика ......332
Използвани съкращения .......333
Papers by Grigor Boykov
The Holy Monastery of Zograf, part of the monastic community on Mount Athos, is naturally linked to the processes that influenced the entire peninsula throughout the Ottoman period. The monastery keeps a substantial Ottoman archival collection (with approximately 800 documents stretching from the fifteenth to the early twentieth century), which illuminate different aspects of its history under Ottoman rule. It bespeaks of the fact that the Monastery of Zograf, along with the other Athonite monasteries, adapted rather successfully to the new conditions, skillfully and efficiently using the mechanisms of the Ottoman legal practice and economic system in its efforts to legitimize and secure its very existence and economic backing. The vast variety of Ottoman documents kept at Zograf also testify to the active role of its brotherhood in negotiating with the Ottoman authorities in all levels of the bureaucratic structures. The current study briefly presents the specificities of the collection of Ottoman documents kept in the monastic archive and pays special attention to the fifteenth-century material, offering a glimpse of the range of problems it addresses. Illustrative for the whole collection of Ottoman documents in the Monastery of Zograf, the presented documents elucidate matters dealing with the general status of Mount Athos within the Ottoman Empire, the privileges granted to the monastery by the Ottoman sultans, integration of the monastic properties into the Ottoman land regime, taxation of the monastic landed estates, extension of the monastic possessions by way of buying or donating and bequeathing on the part of the congregation, and last but not least – securing proprietorship over disputed lands.
Key words: Mount Athos, Zographou Monastery, monasticism, Ottoman Empire, Ottoman archival documents, privileges, taxation, landholdings, donation, land disputes
Камен Станев, Бележки за поселищната система между северната периферия на Родопите и р. Марица в края на XII – XIV в. .....7
Димо Чешмеджиев, Гробът на патриарх Евтимий в Бачковския манастир ......42
Иван Дуков, Няколко специфични погребални практики от средновековната епоха в Асеновград и региона в светлината на теренни археологически проучвания 2005 – 2013 г. ......62
Григор Бойков, Неосъществените градове в района на Асеновград през османския период: Поповица/Ислямлъ и Конуш Хисаръ .......75
Христо Христозов, Демографско и урбанистично развитие на Асеновград през XV – XVII в. (Истанимака, Анбелианош и Бей кьой) ......105
Дамян Борисов, Войнуците в Истанимака (Асеновград) през XVI в. .....157
Видин Сукарев, Османски документи от фондовете на Регионален исторически музей – Пловдив за Станимака и региона ......195
Мина Христемова, Две лица на властта в Асеновград през XIX в. – местно самоуправление и Михалаки Гюмюшгердан ......206
Никола Филипов, Конвенцията за размяна на малцинствата и отражението ѝ в Станимака ......221
Владимир Балчев, Асеновградският край в старите географски карти от 1450 г. до края на XIX в. .......235
Росен Малчев, Историко-географската област Източен Рупчос в контекста на културното пространство на Бачковския манастир ......249
Константин Рангочев, Сакралната топонимия в Източен Рупчос I .....267
Светла Москова, Малки открития за късното средновековно изкуство в Асеновград .....279
Документално приложение
Документ № 1. Откъс от типика на Бачковския манастир ....300
Документ № 2. Фрагмент от т. нар. „История на кръстоносците” ......300
Документ № 3. Фрагмент от „История на похода на император Фридрих І”.....301
Документ № 4. Откъси от „Превземането на Константинопол” .....301
Документ № 5. Откъс от „Житие на Стефан Лазаревич”.......302
Документ № 6. Фрагмент от проверовъчен (йоклама) регистър ......304
Документ № 7. Фрагмент от подробен (муфассал) регистър ......306
Документ № 8. Фрагмент от съкратен (иджмал) регистър .......310
Документ № 9. Фрагмент от подробен (муфассал) регистър .......312
Документ № 10. Фрагмент от войнушки регистър .....318
Документ № 11. Фрагмент от подробен регистър на джелепкешани .....320
Документ № 12. Фрагмент от подробен (муфассал) регистър .....322
Документ № 13. Откъс от пътеписа на Евлия Челеби ......328
Документ № 14. Заповед за строеж на църква в Станимака .......329
Документ № 15. Заповед за построения мост в Станимака .....330
Документ № 16. Заповед за поправка на църква в Станимака ....330
Документ № 17. Откъс от дневника на Пол Люка .....331
Документ № 18. Фрагмент от т. нар. Хилендарска кондика ......332
Използвани съкращения .......333
The Holy Monastery of Zograf, part of the monastic community on Mount Athos, is naturally linked to the processes that influenced the entire peninsula throughout the Ottoman period. The monastery keeps a substantial Ottoman archival collection (with approximately 800 documents stretching from the fifteenth to the early twentieth century), which illuminate different aspects of its history under Ottoman rule. It bespeaks of the fact that the Monastery of Zograf, along with the other Athonite monasteries, adapted rather successfully to the new conditions, skillfully and efficiently using the mechanisms of the Ottoman legal practice and economic system in its efforts to legitimize and secure its very existence and economic backing. The vast variety of Ottoman documents kept at Zograf also testify to the active role of its brotherhood in negotiating with the Ottoman authorities in all levels of the bureaucratic structures. The current study briefly presents the specificities of the collection of Ottoman documents kept in the monastic archive and pays special attention to the fifteenth-century material, offering a glimpse of the range of problems it addresses. Illustrative for the whole collection of Ottoman documents in the Monastery of Zograf, the presented documents elucidate matters dealing with the general status of Mount Athos within the Ottoman Empire, the privileges granted to the monastery by the Ottoman sultans, integration of the monastic properties into the Ottoman land regime, taxation of the monastic landed estates, extension of the monastic possessions by way of buying or donating and bequeathing on the part of the congregation, and last but not least – securing proprietorship over disputed lands.
Key words: Mount Athos, Zographou Monastery, monasticism, Ottoman Empire, Ottoman archival documents, privileges, taxation, landholdings, donation, land disputes
Keywords: Ottoman Balkans, urbanism, urban morphology, architectural patronage, historical demography, Filibe (Plovdiv), Tatar Pazarcık (Pazardzik), Karlova, Konuş
The geodataset is created and curated by Dr. Grigor Boykov, Institute for East European History, University of Vienna. For contacts: [email protected]
Sources:
A variety of primary sources contributed to the creation of the dataset. Except for 30-Meter SRTM DEM, several historical plans of the city were harvested for features: Plan of Plovdiv and its surroundings by A. Jägerschmid, 1828 (National Library "Ivan Vazov," Plovdiv. Kp II 60); City plan of Plovdiv by Lejean, 1867. (Guillaume Lejean, "Voyage en Bulgarie," Le Tour du monde, nouveau journal des voyages 26 (1873): 113–70); City plan of Plovdiv by Heinrich Kiepert, 1876. (Crop from Heinrich Kiepert, Karte des Sandjak Filibe (Philippopolis) aufgenommen nach Anordnung des dortigen Provinzial-Gouverneurs Mehemmed-Nusret-Pascha.); City plan of Plovdiv by Ferdinand v. Hochstetter, 1869. (Ferdinand von Hochstetter, "Reise durch Rumelien im Sommer 1869. 5. Philippopel," Mitteilungen der K. und K. Geographischen Gesellschaft in Wien 14 (1871): 65–80); City plan of Plovdiv by G. Ilinskij, 1878. (National Library "Ivan Vazov," Plovdiv. РЦ ІV 62); City plan of Plovdiv by Joseph Schnitter, 1891. Various Ottoman archival and narrative sources also contributed to creating the dataset. For detailed information about the source base of the dataset, please refer to the relevant section in Boykov's monograph.
The geodataset consists of 33 layers. A brief information on each of the layers is provided below. For further information, please refer to the book.
The gazetteer is formatted as a CSV spreadsheet with seven columns. For each toponym, it provides the following information:
longitude
latitude
Name
Indicates the toponym as it appears on the map
Description
Indicates the settlement's modern name using the original spelling and alphabet of its respective country.
AltName
Indicates settlements indicated on the map with more than one name
Type
Indicates the category of the toponym assigned by Boykov: arsenal; barracks; bath; bridge; chapel; church; customs office; factory; fishery; fishing weir; fortress; han; hospital; institute; karaul; lighthouse; lithography; mandra; melting house; metochion; military depot; military station; military supply spot; mill; mine; mine_quicksilver; mine_ salt; monastery; ore deposits; paddy field; palace; pasture; port; quarantine; residence; road tunnel; ruins; ruins. fortress; saltworks; school; settlement; settlement_chiftlik; settlement_huts; sheepfold; stud; summer pasture; tabiya; teke; tower; train station; villa; water spring; watermill; winery; winter pasture
Country
Indicates the modern state in which the toponym falls: Bulgaria (BG); Greece (GRE); Kosovo (KOS); N. Macedonia (MK); Romania (RO); Serbia (SER); Turkey (TR)
The gazetteer is available in the format of a CSV spreadsheet with 6 columns. It provides the following information for all of the toponyms:
longitude
latitude
Name
Indicates the toponym as it appears on the map
Description
Indicates the modern name of the settlement in the original spelling and alphabet of the belongingcountry
AltName
Indicates settlements indicated on the map with more than one name
Type
Indicates the category of the toponym assigned by Boykov: bath; bridge; chapel; fortress; fulling-mill; han; monastery; mosque; ore deposits; ruins; settlement; settlement_chiftlik; settlement_huts; sheepfold; spring; stud; teke; tower; villa; watermill; winery; winter pasture.
The gazetteer is a work in progress and your feedback is highly appreciated. Please do not hesitate to contact at [email protected] and [email protected]
The gazetteer is available in the format of a spreadsheet with 15 columns. It provides the following information for all of the 16.296 enlisted populated places:
longitude
latitude
register_date_in_Hicri (calendar)
doc_type (mufassal or icmal population registers)
NFS.d. register_number (as in the archival fond)
project (acronym)
toponym_modern (current toponym in various languages depending on the location of the populated place today). For 797 populated places, toponym_modern is entered as ‘vanished.’ These populated places are all geolocated with coordinates by using georeferenced historical maps. However, no current settlements could be identified in their locations.
toponym Ottoman in NFS.d. (typed as accurately as possible in Arabic script copying from the Ottoman population registers)
toponym transcribed (original handwritten Ottoman to Latin script, as a principle, following the Redhouse lexicon) from NFS.d.
kaza (the Ottoman administrative unit on the sub-district level as stated) in NFS.d.
kaza_1848_1264 and liva_1848_1264 correspondences of enlisted kaza information in NFS.d. registers according to the official Ottoman yearbook dating to 1848 (1264 in Hicri):
Salname-i Devlet-i Aliye-i Osmaniye. 2nd edition. Istanbul: Darü’t-Tıbaatü’l-Amire, 1264.
(Unique) populated place id (number)
As well as two additional administrative levels, divan and nahiye for the limited number of populated places.
This paper seeks to present reliable data on the general population figures of fifteenth-, sixteenth- and to seventeenth-century Ottoman Bulgaria. Based on the statistical analyses of data derived from more than 250 Ottoman tax registers (tahrirs, cizye, avarız, etc.), it will hopefully demonstrate the degree of achievable accuracy in population estimates in the period and can possibly offer the necessary quantitative basis for further demographic studies of the entire Ottoman Balkans. After presenting the backbone of Bulgaria’s demographics in the Early Modern Period the paper will focus on the importance of internal migration in the process. It will argue that a constant flow of Christian migrants from densely populated western parts to the scarily inhabited eastern ones throughout the sixteenth a constant flow of Christian migrants from changed the population balance in the area. Moreover, in the course of the cold seventeenth century this migratory process was intensified to such extent that while some parts of the country (especially the highlands in the west) shrunk other regions had a sensitive population growth. Finally, the paper will argue that only large scale studies that have large territorial and long temporal reach have the potential to examine the demographic processes in their complexity.
The Balkan Peninsula in the fifteenth century was a large zone of contact/fracture between the then worlds of Christendom (Greek Orthodox or Catholic) and Islam, brought by the emerging Ottoman Empire. With all due skepticism to such a large generalization one can fairly safely assert that throughout the fifteenth century the greater part of the region constituted a large, but very fluid frontier zone that was shaped by or at least was under the strong influence of the frontier lords in Ottoman service. The Ottoman frontier nobility was not only largely responsible for the military success and territorial expansion of the Ottoman state in the fifteenth century, but also its members proved to be successful in managing and administering the territories under their control and showed a great interest in architectural patronage.
This paper aims at offering general assessment of the architectural program of the frontier lords in the Balkans and to define and accentuate on the type of buildings that focused a great deal of their patronage. This was a multifunctional building type with a floor plan of a reversed “T” (it served simultaneously as mosque, guesthouse and soup-kitchen), which originated in the frontier milieu of fourteenth-century Ottoman Bithynia. Discussing the functionality of the T-type buildings and examining their spread in the Balkans the paper argues that they not only constituted a key mechanism for expending urban tissue in a relatively orderly manner, but also the buildings embodied a claim for legitimacy over the territories, which the fifteenth-century Ottoman frontier nobility controlled and ruled semi-autonomously.
Based on the analysis of standing architectural monuments, Ottoman archival sources (evkaf muhasebe records and tahrir registers), and early historic maps, the study will focus on the formation of Ottoman-time urban grain. It will argue that the T-type zaviye/imarets played a key role as “colonizers” of urban space and clearly defined the main axes of development, thus to a great extend determining the subsequent formation of street pattern in Edirne.
The scholarship to date examined in detail the rich architectural heritage of early Ottoman Edirne mostly from artistic and architectural perspective, but paid little attention to the changes of city’s physical form. The very few academic publications, which study the spatial transformation of the city in the Ottoman era, failed to comprehend the key role of the T-type zaviye/imarets in the process of structural change and did not elucidate the existence of a normative pattern, which dominated the transformation of the Ottoman cities in Anatolia and the Balkans.
Students of Ottoman architectural history have underlined the important role played by the T-shaped imaret/zaviyes in spatial hierarchy of the cities in Anatolia and the Balkans. However, the scholarship to date that naturally focused primarily, if not exclusively, on the standing examples of these buildings falls short in providing a fully satisfactory explanation of the importance of the imaret/zaviyes. This shortcoming derives from the fact that a large number of T-shaped buildings that once constituted a key element of the Ottoman urban fabric are no longer extant. This paper aims at collecting and examining evidence for such buildings in Anatolia and the Balkans that is based on results from archeological excavations and from what is called by an increasing number of scholars “documentary archeology”. Providing a dozen of examples the paper argues that the overall picture of any study of Ottoman urban morphology can only be complete if the large number of nonextant T-shaped imaret/zaviyes in Anatolia and especially in the Balkans are also taken into scholarly consideration.
Based on evidence derived from the Ottoman archival material, mostly tapu tahrir registers and accounting records of the pious foundation (evkaf muhasebe), established by the patron, the paper will elaborate on the value of Şihabeddin Paşa’s patronage for the urban development and social history of one of the most esteemed cities of the Ottoman Empire’s European possessions.
This paper establishes a link between the changes in urban planning undertaken by the Ottomans in Anatolia and the Balkans, pointing to the existence of a common model, demonstrated by a detailed survey of the extant fourteenth and fifteenth-century buildings in three major cities in the Balkans – Edirne, Filibe and Üsküb. It further elaborates not only on the specific locations of the “T-shaped” buildings, but also speculates on the question of their exact functions. Furthermore, the paper argues that the imaret/zaviyes proved to be one of the most preferred building types patronized by the Balkan March Lords (akıncı uc beyis) who imitated the concept set by the early gazi Sultans when largely rebuilding existing settlements or creating towns on their own in the Balkans.
This paper examines the transfer of Ottoman “urban planning tradition” from Asia Minor to the Balkans focusing on the transformation of the Byzantino-Slavic city of Philipopolis (mod. Plovdiv), the metropolis of Upper Thrace, into the primary seat of Ottoman power in the area, which was renamed to Filibe. Based on unpublished archival sources and little known late 19th - early 20th c. photographs of no longer standing Ottoman monuments, the paper will elaborate on the connection between the population growth of the 15th and 16th centuries and the reshaping of urban space driven by the Ottoman ruling elite, which took place simultaneously.
The functioning power networks of the medieval Balkan elites confronted a similar system of hierarchical networks of dependencies, initiated and led by the Ottoman dynasty. Following its own strategic agenda the established power networks in the Balkans either bitterly opposed and resisted the advance of the Ottoman polity or intermingled with the power networks presided by the Ottoman rulers. Ironically, not so rarely the conquerors of a given Balkan region, who in the mind frame of dominant historiographic tradition can be portrayed as the “Ottoman invaders”, appear to have originated from the local nobility thus being foreign to the conquered lands no more than those who resisted the “invasion”. In light of this, it seems little surprising that Balkan elites and their dependent power networks intermixed quite successfully with those networks that originated in Late Medieval Bithynia and carried the Ottoman banner into the Balkans. The complex mixture of mighty families of Anatolian or Balkan elites on Ottoman service, who had at their disposal substantial revenues and significant military contingents shaped entirely the history of the early Ottoman Balkans. Until the mid-sixteenth century, when the Ottoman central power gradually managed to replace the power networks of these elite families, they not only held big landed estates as private property, administered large parts of the Balkans, initiated close interaction with neighboring Christian rulers, shaped the Ottoman relationships with foreign powers by channeling the communication, but were also decisively involved in the enthronement of virtually every Ottoman ruler until Suleyman I (1521-1566), which reflected the political bids for power voiced by the noble families in the Ottoman Balkans and their clientelistic networks, manifested by patronage over religiously non-conformist groups’ literary, and architectural traditions.
Evolving around these considerations the workshop seeks to move away from the state- and religion-centered approach to the early Ottoman Balkans and invites for a more thorough examination of the complex web of political and personal relationships that extend beyond the local Balkan or imperial Ottoman boundaries tangled in a complex interplay of different relations between states, empires, elites and individuals with varying interests and agendas. In light of that, it suggests a thematic focus on the following intertwined themes:
Dynamics of power relations in a trans-imperial and regional context
- motives for joining a power network
- alliance building and collaboration within and outside the Ottoman domains
- alienation and factional politics within and outside the Ottoman domains
- political coalitions of Balkan elite families in Christian and Muslim context
- dynastic factionalism and the formation of networks
- power networks in times of dynastic struggles and political instability
- servants, agents and elite slaves as part of the power networks
Notables and their elite households
- royal and non-royal courts within and outside the palace
- extended households, kinship ties and clients
- military-administrative households and their clientelistic networks
- military contingents and manpower
- social groups manning the retinues
- exchange and mobility of soldiery
- trans-imperial and regional household relations
Regional lordships, large domains, and land tenure
- power bases and regional lordships: motives for reuse of seats of power and/or for establishing new ones
- spatial patterns of regional Balkan lordships
- hereditary rule over territories before and after the Ottoman conquest of the Balkans
- military fiefs, hereditary and tenancy rights
- pious foundations and landed estates
Patronage of the Balkan Christian and Muslim elites
- architectural patronage legitimizing local power and political authority
- literary patronage
- patronage over religious groups
- patronage over spiritual leaders
- patronage over shrines and other places of worship
The functioning power networks of the medieval Balkan elites confronted a similar system of hierarchical networks of dependencies, initiated and led by the Ottoman dynasty. Following its own strategic agenda the established power networks in the Balkans either bitterly opposed and resisted the advance of the Ottoman polity or intermingled with the power networks presided by the Ottoman rulers. Ironically, not so rarely the conquerors of a given Balkan region, who in the mind frame of dominant historiographic tradition can be portrayed as the “Ottoman invaders”, appear to have originated from the local nobility thus being foreign to the conquered lands no more than those who resisted the “invasion”. In light of this, it seems little surprising that Balkan elites and their dependent power networks intermixed quite successfully with those networks that originated in Late Medieval Bithynia and carried the Ottoman banner into the Balkans. The complex mixture of mighty families of Anatolian or Balkan elites on Ottoman service, who had at their disposal substantial revenues and significant military contingents shaped entirely the history of the early Ottoman Balkans. Until the mid-sixteenth century, when the Ottoman central power gradually managed to replace the power networks of these elite families, they not only held big landed estates as private property, administered large parts of the Balkans, initiated close interaction with neighboring Christian rulers, shaped the Ottoman relationships with foreign powers by channeling the communication, but were also decisively involved in the enthronement of virtually every Ottoman ruler until Suleyman I (1521-1566), which reflected the political bids for power voiced by the noble families in the Ottoman Balkans and their clientelistic networks, manifested by patronage over religiously non-conformist groups’ literary, and architectural traditions.