Cities, like people, have their own destinies. On the territory of the Crimea there were at one time many states and cities that played a significant role in history. Some of them have always remained in the memory of generations: Chersonesos (Korsun), Feodosia (Kafa), Pantikapey (Kerch). Others, having lived a long and interesting life, were undeservedly forgotten. Mangup also belongs to such cities. This small feudal principality had direct ties with Byzantium, was in close relations with Russia, fought for the south - bank lands with Genoese merchants and participated in the intricacies of the international diplomacy carried out by the Grand Duke of All Russia Ivan III, the Polish King Casimir IV Jagiellonchik and the Crimean Khan Mengli-Giray.
The Mangupa plateau (500 m above sea level) is located in the second ridge of the Crimean Mountains and acts as four steep spurs, the height of which reaches 40 meters. And in the south lie the lands that were a bone of contention between the Genoese and the inhabitants of Mangup. Convenient geographical location, favorable natural conditions of Mangup (fertile land and good water sources) have long attracted the local population. It is not by chance that coins and fragments of pottery dating back to the first centuries of our era were found here during excavations. There is little data on the ethnic composition of the early medieval population of Mangup. Most likely, it consisted of Sarmatians and Alans who converted to Christianity, among which the Taurians and Scythians were previously assimilated. At a later time, the population of Mangup was mainly composed of Greeks. In addition, Karaites and Tatars who converted to Orthodoxy lived here.
Descriptions of Mangup by travelers date back to the XVI century. The first of them visited Mangup was the Ambassador of the Polish King Stefan Batory Martin Broniewski . He describes the so - called "cave cities" - Inkerman, Chufut-Kale, Mangup, as he saw them in the 70s of the XVI century. In the 18th and first half of the 19th centuries, P. Pallas 2 and Dubois de Montpray 3 visited here, leaving behind drawings of Mangup, an accurate description of him and travel notes. In the 19th century, Mangup was studied by P. Koeppen, 4 a great expert on Crimean antiquities, and A. L. Berthier-Delagard, whose works were devoted to "cave cities" .5 A military engineer by profession, he is much more famous in our time as a numismatist and archaeologist, a man of many interests, the largest researcher of the history and archeology of the Crimea. Finally, in the middle of the 19th century, the first attempts were made to study Mangup archaeologically. In 1853, A. S. Uvarov conducted minor excavations, made measurements, plans and drawings. 6 In 1890, F. Brown inherited the Mangup Basilica, and then continued his study in 1912 - 1913 by R. H. Leper 7 .
What was known about Mangup at the end of the 19th century? Mangup (Mangup-Kale, Maikop, Mangut, Man-Kermen) is the ruins of an ancient fortress near Bakhchisarai. It was assumed that it originated in the sixth century and was, if not the capital of Gothia, then at least the seat of the bishop of the local diocese. In the 13th century, when the Tatars conquered the Crimea, the Goths held on only to Mangup. From the inscriptions discovered during excavations, the names of some local princes became known. From the Russian chronicles we learned about the connections of Ivan III with these princes. But it was only during the Soviet era that systematic research of this curious archaeological and historical monument began to be carried out. In 1938-1939, under the leadership of M. A. Tikhanova and A. L. Yakobson, excavations of two of the largest archaeological sites in the world began.-
1 M. Bronevsky. Description of Tartary. "Notes" of the Odessa Society of History and Antiquities (hereinafter ZOOID). Collection. Vol. VI. 1867.
2 p. Pallas. Travel to the Crimea. Ibid., vol. XII. 1881.
3 D. de Montpereux. Voyage autou du Caucase... P. 1839 - 1843.
4 P. Keppen. On the antiquities of the southern coast of the Crimea and the Tauride Mountains. St. Petersburg, 1837.
5 A. L. Berthier-Delagard. Calamita and Feodoro. Izvestiya Tavricheskoi uchenoi archivnoy komissii, vol. 55, 1918. A study of some perplexing issues of the Middle Ages in Taurida. Ibid., issue 57, 1920; his. The remains of ancient structures in the vicinity of Sevastopol and the cave cities of the Crimea. ZOOID, vol. XIV, 1886.
6 A. S. Uvarov. Collection of small works, T. Sh. M. 1910.
7 R. H. Leper. Archaeological research in Mangup in 1912. Izvestiya Gosudarstvennoy Rossiiskoi arkheologicheskoi komissii, no. 47, 1913, pp. 73-79, 146 - 154.
page 205
logical objects of the Christian basilica and Prince Alexey's palace. Due to further study of sources on the history of Mangup and newly obtained archaeological data, a number of adjustments were made to such poorly understood and rather confusing problems as the formation of the Mangup principality and its localization.
There are two points of view in the historical literature on the formation of the Principality of Mangup, which in Byzantine sources from the XIII century to the XV century is referred to as the principality of Feodoro. Some scholars believe that Feodoro as a state with its capital on Mangupa was formed in the VI century, and its rise is associated with the rule of the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I, who sought to strengthen his power in the Crimea by building defensive walls. At the same time , they rely on the only written source for the history of the Crimea at that time - the treatise of the Byzantine historian Procopius of Caesarea "On Buildings"9, which describes the "long walls" that were supposed to prevent the invasion of nomads in the northern regions of the Byzantine Empire. Procopius reports that these walls were built on the territory of the country of Dori, which then existed in the Crimea. It was this remark that was the main reason for the confusion of questions about the localization of the Gothic country of Dori and the formation of the principality of Mangup. A number of scientists (such as V. G. Vasilevsky, A. A. Vasiliev, N. I. Repnikov, and currently - A. L. Yakobson, M. A. Tikhanova 10 ) the concepts of "Feodoro" and" Dori " were combined. In contrast, as early as 1837, P. Koeppen suggested that Justinian's" long walls " were built in the area of the southern coast of Crimea .11 Currently, this point of view is held by E. V. Weimarn, O. I. Dombrovsky and E. I. Solomonik12. E. V. Weimarn believes that the" cave cities " of the Crimea, including Mangup, were not part of the Tauric limes; that the existence of the latter is generally controversial, since there are no direct references to it. Therefore, he argues that the emergence of "cave cities" should be considered in the light of local socio-economic phenomena and political events that took place in the late Antique and early Medieval times, and the rise of Mangup as a state is associated with the death of the nearby Eski-Kermen during the invasion of the Crimea by the Khazars in the VIII-IX centuries. I. Solomonik based on the analysis of the texts of Procopius of Caesarea and archaeological data came to the conclusion that the country of Dori was located on the southern coast of the Crimea. Thus, they distinguish between Feodoro-Mangup and Dori.
For further study of Mangup, it was necessary to re-study it. In this regard, since 1967, a joint expedition of the Bakhchisarai Historical and Archaeological Museum, the Simferopol Pedagogical Institute and the Crimean Department of the Institute of Archeology of the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR has begun excavations of some monuments that were not fully studied at the time, primarily the great Mangup Basilica. A detachment of the Crimean Archaeological Expedition of the Ural University began cleaning the palace of Prince Alexey. The full development of these two important archaeological sites will allow us to establish the original date of their construction, determine the construction periods and thus solve many still unclear questions.
And what is currently fairly well known about Mangup? In the V-VI centuries, on one of the capes of the Teshkli-Burun plateau, there was, apparently, a small citadel, near which in the VIII-IX centuries a city appeared and its defensive structures grew.-
8 F. I. Uspensky. History of the Byzantine Empire, vol. III, Moscow, 1948, p. 800.
9 Procopius of Caesarea. About buildings. "Bulletin of Ancient History", 1939, N 4.
10 V. G. Vasilyevsky. Proceedings. Vol. II, issue 2, 1912, p. 372; A. A. Vasiliev. Goths in the Crimea. Izvestia of the Russian Academy of history of material culture. Vol. 1. 1921, p. 46; N. I. Repnikov. Eski-Kermen in the light of archaeological exploration. 1928-1929. Izvestiya Gosudarstvennoi Akademii istorii material'noi kul'tury [Proceedings of the State Academy of History of Material Culture], Vol. XII, 1932, p. 138; A. L. Yakobson. About the early medieval fortress walls of Mangup. "Brief reports" of the Institute of the History of Material Culture. Issue XXIX, 1949, p. 12; M. A. Tikhanova. Doros-Feodoro in the history of medieval Crimea. "Materials and research on the archeology of the USSR". No. 34, 1953, p. 324.
11 P. Keppen. Op. ed., p. 61.
12 E. V. Weimarn. "Cave cities" of the Crimea in the light of archaeological research in 1954-1955 "Soviet Archeology", 1958, N 1, p. 71; O. I. Dombrovsky, E. I. Solomonik. About localization of the Dory country. "Archaeological research of the medieval Crimea". Kiev, 1968, pp. 11-45.
page 206
The period of Mangup's existence from the VI century to the XII century, which is not reflected in written sources and is still poorly represented by archaeological material, remains poorly studied. The first written evidence of the existence of the principality of Feodoro, which was dependent on the Trebizond Empire, dates back to the 13th century.13 This empire, which broke away from Byzantium after the 4th Crusade, extended its influence to the former Byzantine possessions in the Crimea. Crimean feudal lords submitted to Trebizond and annually sent taxes to his emperors. Natives of Trebizond, representatives of the noble Gavras family became the lords of Mangup and the founders of the principality of Feodoro, which soon had to face such a strong enemy as the hordes of Nogai. Despite the fact that Mangup is dependent on the Crimean Khanate, it still managed to avoid the ruin that befell Eski-Kermen, Chufut-Kale and Chersonesos. The XIV century is the time of the establishment of the principality. The inscription on the construction of the towers of the upper city mentions the name of Prince Huytani and indicates the date 6870 (that is, 1361-1362). Complex relations develop between the principality of Feodoro and the consulate of Soldaya ,a Genoese colony on the Crimean coast with a center in Cafes. The Genoese sought to extend their influence to the Black and Azov Seas. In 1350. they forbade Byzantine merchant ships to sail on these seas, enter the Don and appear in Chersonesos, and under the treaty of 1380-1381, concluded between the Tatars and Genoa, all the south-bank lands of the Mangup principality were considered Genoese.
XV century - the time of the highest flourishing of the Mangup principality. Its territory is expanding. In the west, it was joined by the lands that previously belonged to Chersonesus - the entire Heraclea Peninsula; in the south, Alushta became part of the principality; in the northeast, it bordered Kyrk-Or (Chufut-Kale)14 . In the same century, extensive construction was carried out. In 1427, the residence of the Mangup princes was moved from the citadel to the palace built next to the large Christian basilica of Constantine and Elena. The palace and basilica were the center of the city. Adjacent to them were craft and commercial districts. The influence of Mangup on the southern coast of the Crimea is evidenced by an inscription on a stone slab discovered during excavations of the basilica in Partenity, near Alushta. It defines the role of the principality as a church center 15 and mentions the name of Prince Alexey, who provided significant support and assistance in the restoration of the Parthenite Basilica.
The remains of monuments from that period that have survived to this day combine the features of local traditions and the influence of early Byzantine architecture. The latter also affected painting: the influence of Roman iconography is felt in the frescoes. In the 70s of the XV century, an alliance with the Genoese opened the door for the penetration of Italian culture and art into the South-Western Crimea, although some of their elements penetrated here as early as the XV - XIV centuries. One of the most remarkable frescoes not only on Mangup, but also on the entire territory of the South-Western Crimea is the painting of the cave temple. It clearly combines the artistic techniques of Byzantine iconography and the Western Renaissance. But both were reinterpreted by local artists, which is confirmed by the faces in the frescoes, most likely drawn from nature, as well as the selection of colors, the overall composition and manner of writing .16
The 15th century is also characterized by fairly extensive international relations of the Mangup Principality. During the reign of Alexius (1426-1434), the struggle between the Genoese and the Feodorites reached a climax. To strengthen the borders in the west, at the mouth of the Chernaya River, Prince Alexey restores the fortress of Kalamita and strengthens its defenses. It was established as a settlement in the sixth century, 17 and then became known as the port through which all local trade operations passed. The importance of Calamity especially increased in the XIV-XV centuries.,
13 " Essays on the history of the USSR. XIV-XV centuries", Moscow, 1953, p. 442.
14 Seciriyasky village. Essays on the history of Sourozh. Simferopol. 1955. p. 54; E. V. Weimarn. On two obscure issues of the Middle Ages in the Southwestern Crimea. "Archaeological research of the medieval Crimea, p. 81.
15 D. Strukov. Ancient monuments of Christianity in Taurida, Moscow, 1876, p. 39.
16 O. I. Dombrovsky. Frescoes of the medieval Crimea. Kiev, 1966, p. 89.
17 E. I. Solomonik. Session on the results of archaeological research in the Crimea. "Bulletin of Ancient History", 1954, N 4, p. 289.
page 207
when Chersonesos ceased to play the role of the main shopping center of the South-Western Crimea. If earlier Chersonesus was a point through which the trade of Crimea with Byzantium and Asia Minor went, then in the XIV - XV centuries. intensive trade was established between the Crimean Khanate, the consulate of Soldaya and the principality of Feodoro, that is, inside the peninsula itself. Goods were exported in the east of the Crimea through Kafa, and in the west - through Kalamita. Therefore, Alexey saw the strengthening of Kalamita as a guarantee of the growth of the power of his principality.
The Genoese also did not want to give up their positions. Therefore, not far from Kalamita, in the area of modern Balaklava, they are rebuilding the Cembalo fortress. In 1433, during a period of fierce fighting between the Genoese and the Feodorites, the latter expelled the former from Cembalo. In response, in 1434, the Genoese captured Calamita, burned it, and returned it to the prince in this form. Separate clashes continued until the 50s of the XV century. In 1453, after the capture of Constantinople by the Turks, there was an immediate threat of the capture of the Crimea by the Turkish army. This circumstance pushed into the background the internecine struggle of Theodorites and Genoese. During the reign of Prince Alexey the Younger (1434-1456), relations between them somewhat stabilized, and in the 70s of the XV century. even almost friendly contacts developed. Prince Isaac of Mangup (1471-1475) visited Kafu and probably concluded some kind of peace agreement there. By the second half of the century, Mangup's diplomatic relations with the Crimean Khanate, with Moldavia, whose ruler was married to the eldest daughter of the Mangup Prince Isaac, and with Russia were being established.
It is known from Russian documents of the 15th century that Mangup was known in Moscow. The principality of Mangup was the closest neighbor of the Crimean Khanate, and Ivan III was interested in strengthening ties with the latter, who then sought to attract it as an ally to fight the Kazan Khanate. This made Crimea one of the nodes of the" eastern policy " of the Russian state .18 Ivan III was going to be related to the Mangup princes, marrying his son to the youngest daughter of Isaac. In 1474, preliminary negotiations were held between the Russian ambassador Beklemishev and Isaac, and in 1475, the boyar Alexey Starkov, sent to Khan Mengli-Giray, was supposed to visit Mangup, giving gifts to the prince and a special "wake" to the princess. But the boyar failed to fulfill his mission, since by the time he arrived in the Crimea, Mangup was already taken by the Turks. In the same XV century, Mangup's ties with Trebizond were still maintained. The daughter of Prince Alexey the Elder, Elena was married to the Trebizond Emperor David. She witnessed the capture of the mentioned empire by the Turks and " buried her husband and children with her own hands. She herself died in rags, in a hut. " 19
From the middle of the 15th century, the Turks launched periodic attacks on the shores of the Northern Black Sea coast. Their first attack on the Crimea took place in 1447, a second "visit" of the fleet took place in 1454, after which the consulate of Soldaya was forced to pay an annual tribute. On the way back from Kafa, the Turkish fleet devastated the coast of the Southern Crimea. In 1475, the Crimea was conquered by the Turks. Earlier this year, Prince Isaac of Mangup died. His heir, Alexander, was in Moldavia at the time. After learning of his father's death, he landed with 300 soldiers on the southern coast of the Crimea, on the third day arrived at Mangup, killed his brother and seized the throne. 20 This happened on the eve of the capture of Kafa by the Turks. In July 1475, the Turkish army approached Mangup, but met with desperate resistance from the local population. After withstanding five assaults, Mangup fell four months later. In December, the Turks broke into the city, then committed it to fire and destruction. The princely family and the surviving population were enslaved. Mangup became the main fortress of the Turks in the Crimea. Its rebuilt citadel was the residence of the Pasha, and the castle was a Turkish garrison until the XVIII century.
Remarkable architectural monuments were destroyed: the early Christian basilica of Helena and Constantine, the cave temple with paintings, the palace of Prince Alexey, and defensive structures. Mangup ceased to exist as a handicraft center, famous for its potters, craftsmen, etc.-
18 K. V. Basilevich. Foreign policy of the Russian centralized state (the second half of the XV century). Moscow, 1952, p. 169.
19 F. I. Uspensky. Op. ed., p. 800.
20 A. L. Berthier-Delagard. Calamita and Theodoro, p. 37.
page 208
botany of iron and bone. Stone-cutting and construction art has withered. With the Turkish conquest, the history of Mangup actually ended. Until the end of the XVIII century, the Karaite population lived there, mainly engaged in the leather craft. From that time on the plateau, the ruins of Kenassa - a prayer house and tombstones of the Karaite cemetery-have been preserved. At the end of the XVIII century. Mangup is completely empty. After the annexation of Crimea to Russia, Karaites were given the right to settle in more convenient places, and the last inhabitants left Mangup.
In general, Mangup is still poorly understood. Its systematic research is actually just beginning. It is necessary to study the fortifications, determine the time of their existence, find out the original date of construction of the basilica (this will add new data to the question of the time of the spread of Christianity in the South-Western Crimea), excavate residential areas of the city and its economic complexes (as a result, information will be obtained about the economy of Mangup, The history of Mangup is the history not only of the city, but also of the whole territory. Without studying it, quite a few questions of the history of the Crimea of the VI-XV centuries remain unclear.
page 209
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2014-2025, LIBRARY.RS is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Keeping the heritage of Serbia |