2 Imber, C., ‘The Ottoman dynastic myth’, Turcica 19 (1987) 16–17, 20CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Idem, ‘Canon and apocrypha in early Ottoman history,’ in C. Heywood and C. Imber (eds.), Studies in Ottoman History in Honour of Professor V.L. Ménage (Istanbul 1994) 117, 127-28. Imber, C., The Ottoman Empire: 1300-1650: The Structure of Power (Basingstoke and New York 2002) 122-23Google Scholar.

3 On the question of Ertoğrul’ s historical reality: Lindner, R.-P., Nomads and Ottomans in Medieval Anatolia (Bloomington IN 1983) 21 Google Scholar. Idem, Explorations in Ottoman Prehistory (Ann Arbor MI 2007) 16-18.

4 Other Byzantine authors also describe the Ottoman Turks as Achaemenids, but in these instances the attribution is due to the usual Byzantine literary habit of describing contemporary peoples in antiquarian terms. Kritoboulos goes further than that in attributing an actual Achaemenid ancestry to the Osmanli house (not the Turks in general). The subject is discussed in Moustakas, K., ‘Byzantine “visions” of the Ottoman Empire: theories of Ottoman legitimacy by Byzantine scholars after the fall of Constantinople’, in Lymberopoulou, A. (ed.), Images of the Byzantine World: Visions, Messages and Meanings. Studies Presented to Leslie Brubaker (Aldershot 2011) 223 Google Scholar.

5 Pseudo-Sphrantzes, , Macarie Melissenos Cronica 1258-1481, ed. Grecu, V., George Sphrantzes, Memorii 1401-1477: In Annexa (Bucharest 1966) 212-14Google Scholar.

6 When the emperor saw a distinguished Latin mercenary on foot, he ordered that his nephew’s mount be given to him.

7 Pseudo-Sphrantzes 208-10.

8 Choniates, Niketas, Historia, ed. Van Dieten, J.-L., CFHB 11 (Berlin and New York 1975) 35–37 Google Scholar.

9 Some scornful verses by Theodore Prodromos mentioning the ‘wild branch of a noble tree’ and the ‘thorn among flowers’ are interpreted as referring to him. See Magdalino, P., The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180) (Cambridge 1993) 423, 465CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Choniates, ed. Van Dieten, 53.

11 Sphrantzes, George, Annales, ed. Bekker, I., CSHB (Bonn 1838) 71 Google Scholar.

12 Pseudo-Sphrantzes, 210-12.

13 Chalandon, F., Les Comnène. Jean 11 Comnène (118-1143) et Manuel I Comnène (1143-1180) (Paris 1912) 18, 179, 254Google Scholar. Barzos, N., H γενεαλογία των Κομνηνών, I (Thessalonike 1984) 241-44, 480-85Google Scholar (he is number 84 in Barzos’ list of the many members of the wider Comnenian family). Cahen, C., La Turquie pre-ottomane (Paris 1988) 28-9, 30, 34, 169Google Scholar, includes brief commentary on him as one among other Byzantine notables who joined the Seljuks and rose to high position. A similar comment about John (unnamed and simply described as a cousin of Manuel I) is to be found in Angold, M., The Byzantine Empire 1025-1204. A Political History, 2nd ed. (London and New York 1997) 221 Google Scholar.

14 Barzos, Γενεαλογία, II, 504-501.

15 Tomadakis, N. B., Δούκα - Κριτοβούλου - Σφραντζή - Χαλκοκονδύλη, Περί Αλώσεως της Κωνσταντινου-πόλεως (1453). Συναγωγή κειμένωνμετά προλόγου και βιογραφικώνμελετημάτων (Athens 1953) 147 Google Scholar, recognizes the work of Niketas Choniates as the source of Pseudo-Sphrantzes’ account on the supposed Byzantine origin of the Osmanlis. Further, he cites the History of Nikephoros Gregoras (Bonn ed., I, 94) as another source on the same subject. However, Gregoras does not give an account of the origins of the Ottoman house, while the passage referred to by Tomadakis concerns the supposed crypto-christianity of the Seljuk sultan Izeddin Kaykavus II and is quite irrelevant to the Ottomans.

16 Pseudo-Sphrantzes, 212 (author’s emphasis).

17 Barzos, Γενεαλογία, II, 504-505.

18 Several versions of the so-called ‘Chronicle of 1570’, including its printed version, the Βιβλίον Ιστορικόν by Pseudo-Dorotheos, are strongly influenced by Paolo Giovio’s Commentario della cose dei Turchi. Zachariadou, E.A., ‘Mia ιταλική πηγή του Ψευδο-Δωροθέου για την ιστορία των Οθωμανών’, Πελοποννησιακά 5 (1962) 46–59 Google Scholar. Moreover, the early 17th-century Greek chronicle of the Ottoman sultans of Barb. Gr. 111 (or ‘Zoras chronicle’) is much based on Francesco Sansovino’s Annali Turcheschi. Zachariadou, E.A., To Χρονικό των ΤούρκωνΣουλτάνων (τουΒαρβερινούελλην. Κώδικα 111) και το ιταλικό τουπρότνπο (Thessalonike 1960) 8, 27-52Google Scholar.

19 Sansovino, M. F., Annali Turcheschi overo Vite de Principi della Casa Othomana, 2nd ed. (Venice 1573)Google Scholar.

20 These are the incident of the horse, the prince’s desertion to the Turks, his conversion to Islam, his betrothal to a daughter of the Sultan. ‘ … [the sultan] fatosi Turco tolse per moglia una sua figliuola …’. Sansovino, Annali Turcheschi, 1-2.

21 See below, p. 90.

22 ‘…che gli furono consegnate per conto della sua dote, hebhe un luogo detto Othomazich, che i discedenti ď ¡sac presero il cognome d’ Othomano’. Sansovino, Annali Turcheschi, 1-2.

23 Duel stories as such represent another stereotype. Cf. David versus Goliath.

24 Sansovino, Annali Turcheschi, 2.

25 Sansovino gives a third account of Osmanli genealogy also, one that had Osman descending from Duzalpe of the Oguzi tribe, who was the father of Oguzalpe and grandfather of Ortugulo, Sansovino, Annali Turcheschi, 2-3. This is a variation of a true Turkish genealogy, an alternative account of some Turkish writers about Ertoğrul’s father, with the line of descent from Oğuz. More precisely, Enveri and Karamanh Mehmed had Ertoğrul as the son of Gündüz Alp, instead of Süleyman Şah (in contrast to most other Turkish writers). See Imber, Dynastic Myth, 19. Surprisingly, Sansovino attributes this genealogical version to ‘the Greeks’: ‘La terza opinione e de Greci’, ibid., 2. In fact, the only Greek text among Sansovino’s listed sources is the one by Laonikos Chalkokondyles, who actually gives the Osmanlis this particular genealogy, making Ertoğrul the son of Ογουζάλπης and grandson of Ιονδουζάλτνης (influenced in his turn by Turkish sources, most probably by Enveri), Laonikos Chalkokondyles, Demonstrationes Historiarum, ed. Darkó, E., I (Budapest 1922) 9–10 Google Scholar. This is, therefore, the version of Chalkokondyles and not of the ‘Greeks’ in general; in fact it is originally Turkish. On Chalkokondyles’ use of Enveri: Kaldellis, A., A New Herdotos Laonikos Chalkokondyles on the Ottoman Empire, the Fall of Byzantium, and the Emergence of the West (Washington, D.C. 2015) 130-33Google Scholar.

26 Theodoro Spandugnino, Patritio Constantinopolitano, Dela Origine deli Imperatori Ottomani …, ed. Sathas, C. N., Documents inédits relatifs à l’ histoire de la Grèce au Moyen-Âge, IX (Paris 1890) 138-39Google Scholar. Nicol, D. M., Theodore Spandounes On the Origin of the Ottoman Emperors, translation and commentary (Cambridge 1997) 9–11 Google Scholar.

27 The presence of Alaeddin Kaykubad I in the genealogical accounts of the Ottoman house and the avowal that the alleged first Osmanli rose in prominence by serving mat sultan and receiving from him the authority to rule a region, can all be interpreted mainly as a construct that served both the legitimization of Ottoman expansion in Anatolia and of Ottoman rule over the Anatolian Turks: Imber, Ottoman Empire, 22. Moreover, it can be further interpreted as an idealizing discourse in more general terms, aiming to establish a symbolic link between the Ottoman house and the sultan who was acknowledged in his day, as well as later, as the greatest and most glorified of the sultans of Rum. On Alaeddin’s later reputation: Lindner, Explorations in Ottoman Prehistory, 3. A parallel can be observed in the idealized family stories of 11th-century Byzantine emperors, more precisely Constantine X Doukas (1059-67) and Nikephoros III Botaneiates (1078-81), whose forefathers were supposed to be closely associated with Constantine the Great, having followed him from Old Rome and received positions of high dignity in the new capital: Attaleiates, Michael, Historia, ed. Martín, I. Pérez (Madrid 2002) 158–160, 162Google Scholar. Bryennios, Nikephoros, Histoire, ed. Gautier, P., CFHB 9 (Brussels 1975) 9 Google Scholar.

28 Spandugnino, 139. Nicol, Theodore Spandounes, 11.

29 Sphrantzes, George, Cronaca, ed. Maisano, R., CFHB 29 (Rome 1990) 67 Google Scholar*.

30 Chasiotes, J. K., Μακάριος, Θεόδωρος και Νικηφόρος: οι Μελισσηνοί (Μελισσουργοί) (16^ος -17⁰¹ m.) (Thessalonike 1960) 172-3Google Scholar.

31 Sansovino was a popular and much read writer, whose major work, the Historia Universalie dell’ Origine et Imperio de Turchi, knew seven editions between 1565 and the mid-17th century. The Annali Turcheschi too are known to have influenced Greek historiography, as is shown by die chronicle of Barb. Gr. 111, large sections of which are a simple paraphrase of the Annali Turcheschi: Zachariadou, Χρονικό Τονρκων Σουλτάνων 8, 27-52.

32 Philippides, M. and Han, W. K.ák, The Siege and Pall of Constantinople in 1453. Historiography, Topography, and Military Studies (Farnham and Burlington VT, 2011) 19–20, 51, 148, 151Google Scholar.

33 Among the later writers who recited the story of the Comnenian ancestry, Johannes Leunclavius was the first who properly noticed and acknowledged its indebtedness to Niketas Choniates: J. Leunclavius, Pandectes Históriáé Turcicae, MPG 159, col. 725.

34 However, in narrating his second version of Osmanli genealogy, which had Osman’s great grandfather as a Turk, he placed his actions and rise after the reign of Izeddin Kaykavus II (1246-61): Pseudo-Sphrantzes, 212. His use of Izeddin in this story may be attributable to his lack of knowledge of other Seljuk sultans. About Izeddin he was informed by the History of Nikephoros Gregoras, a source he has been proven to have used.

35 e.g. the anonymous Tevarih-i Al-i Osman [‘Anonymous Giese’J, Aşikpaşazade, Oruç, Neşri.

36 He introduces himself as Theodoro Spandugnino Cantacusino patritio Constantinopolitano, which is later acknowledged by Sansovino, who describes him as gentilhuomo di Constantinopoli.

37 Even though Mesih Paşa had been dead since 1501, Spandounes could still have had some contact with people from his court entourage.

38 Nicol, Theodore Spandounes vii-xviii. Lowry, H. W., The Nature of the Early Ottoman State (Albany NY 2003) 65–66, 81, 119, 122-23Google Scholar.

39 ‘Havendo io con ogni diligentia et sollecitudine fatto cercare li hystoriographì de Turchi che frettano delle origine dela potentissima casa de Ottomani, trovò per quanto ho potuto intendere, quella esser discesa di Tartaria da pecorari della natione de Ogus’: Spandugnino 138.

40 ‘Theodora Spandugino, gentilhuomo di Constantinopoli, il quale dicendo di haver cercato tutte le Historie Turchesche’: Sansovino, Annali Turcheschi, 2.

41 ‘Vero è che lo invittissimo et vincitor di Constantinopoli sultam Mehemeth Ottomano non voleva per niente la casata loro esser discesa da pecorari venuti di Tartaria, come li hystoriographi Turchi dicono, ma dicea la casa loro esser discesa dallo imperator de Constantinopoli Comgnino … Sultam Mahemet voleva che questo Ottomano, di cui qui sotto mention faremo et delle cose per lui et successori suoi fatte, descendesse da questo Isach’: Spandugnino, 139. In Nicol’s translation we read: ‘shepherds and peasants’, which is not in line with the proper text of Spandounes who describes Mehmed’s alleged ancestors simply as ‘pecorari’, mentioning nothing that can be translated as ‘peasants’.

42 Lowry, H. W., Hersekzãde Ahmed Paşa: An Ottoman Statesman’s Career & Pious Endowments (Istanbul 2011) 8–9 Google Scholar. These texts include the chronicle of Aşikpaşazade, an anonymous Tevarib-i Al-i Osman, and Ali Yazıcıoğlu’s Selcukname.

43 In Spandounes’ recording of this story, most of the events about the renegade prince are very close to Choniates’ descriptions. Only the identification of the persons involved is incorrect. See above, pp. 90-91.

44 Namely, his radical inclination and his willingness to act against established norms and traditions.

45 On the life, career and scholarly work of George Amoiroutzes: Tomadakis, N. B., Έτούρκευσεν о Γεώργιος Αμιρούτζης;’ EEBS 18 (1948) 99–143 Google Scholar. On his family relation, and his association in general, with Mahmud Paşa: Stavrides, T., The Sultan of Vezirs. The Life and Times of the Ottoman Grand Vezir Mahmud Pasha Angelovi’c (1453-1474) [The Ottoman Empire and its Heritage, 24] (Leiden 2001) 78–81, 86-90Google Scholar.

46 Moustakas, K., ‘Byzantine “visions” of the Ottoman Empire: theories of Ottoman legitimacy by Byzantine scholars after the fall of Constantinople’, in Lymberopoulou, A. (ed.), Images of the Byzantine World (Aldershot 2011) 219-22Google Scholar.

47 Gibons, H. A., The Foundation of the Ottoman Empire: A History of the Osmanlis Up To the Death of Bayezid I(1300-1403) (London 1916) 265 Google Scholar. Georgiadis, G.-Arnakis, Oi πρώτοι Οθωμανοί. Συμβολή στο πρό-βλημα της πτώσης του Ελληνισμού της Μικράς Ασίας (1282-1337) (Athens 2008) [1947] 38, 41Google Scholar. Imber, C., ‘Ideals and legitimation in early Ottoman history’, in Kunt, M. and Woodhead, C. (eds.), Süleyman the Magnificent and His Age. The Ottoman Empire in the Early Modern World (New York 1995) 138 (n. 1)Google Scholar. A similar opinion has allegedly been expressed by Irene Beldiceanu-Steinherr in a private communication cited by Barzos, Γενεαλογία 504 (n. 1).

48 Sultan Mehmed II’s descriptions as βασιλεύς or kayser (the turkicised form of caesar) in official documents are notably rare. In his Greek-language documents, that were addressed to western powers, he was normally self-styled as ‘grand master’ and ‘grand emir’ (μέγας αυθέντης and μέγας αμηράς). Miklosich, F. and Müller, I. (eds.), Acta et Diplomata Graeca Medii Aevi. Sacra et Profana (Vienna 1865) III 286, 287, 290, 293, 295, 298, 299, 301, 302, 306Google Scholar. Lampros, S. P., “H έλληνική ώς έπίσημος γλώσσα των σουλτάνων’, Νέος ‘Ελληνομνήμων 5 (1908) 66, 67Google Scholar. More generally, the Ottoman sultans only rarely presented themselves as successors to the ‘Roman’ emperors before the mid 16th century. Thereafter they did so more often in response to their conflict with the Hapsburgs: Imber, Ottoman Empire 125.

49 Imber, Canon and Apocrypha 128, 136-7.

50 Lowry, The Nature, 117-19.

51 Doukas, , Istoria Turco-Bizantina (1341-1462), ed. Grecu, V. (Bucharest 1958) 171 Google Scholar. On Bayezid Paşa’s career and background: Doukas, 141-43, 165-67.

52 Lowry, Hersekzāde Ahmed Paşa 3,14-15. He served five times as grand vizier between 1497 and 1516.

53 Sphrantzes has him and his brother Hass Murad Paşa as the sons of Thomas Gides Palaiologos (George Sphrantzes, ed. Malsano, 192), who should not be confused with the despot Thomas Palaiologos. Thomas Gides was a more distant relation of the wider Palaiologan family.

54 Wittek, P., The Rise of the Ottoman Empire (London 1938) 9 Google Scholar.

55 Nicol, Theodore Spandounes, 79-80 (n. 1).