Travels to Tana and Persia

by Giosofat Barbaro; Ambrogio Contarini

A NARRATIVE OF ITALIAN TRAVELS IN PERSIA.

The close of the fifteenth century is an epoch in the history of the East, and especially of Persia, of which but little is known. The blast of Timour’s invasion had swept over that historic land and left it desolate. These four Accounts of Travels by Europeans are, therefore, especially interesting in a geographical and historical point of view, and will, with the books of Barbaro and Contarini, which are in Ramusio’s collection, complete the series of Italian voyages about that period. In order clearly to understand the facts brought forward, it will be necessary to glance at the motives of policy which started the embassies, and the historical changes which influenced their results.

In Eastern Europe the Byzantine empire had, after a long and gradual decline, at length crumbled into ruins beneath the power of the Ottomans, which threatened to be as great a scourge to Europe as that of Timur (or Tamerlane) had been to Asia, while the stability and vitality of their empire offered a great contrast to the ephemeral character of Timur’s dominion. Singly, the powers of Christendom could in vain hope to withstand their terrible foe; and Venice, the Great Republic, then rich and flourishing, with a far-sighted policy, endeavoured to induce all the Christian princes to make common cause against the Ottoman Turks.

Hungary and Poland were engaged in continuous warfare with the Musulmans; but the petty jealousies, which no danger, however imminent, could lull, caused the other powers to look coldly on the proposed alliance. Venice, in her need, then cast her eyes to the East, where she found a new dynasty firmly established in the ancient kingdom of Persia, the inveterate foe of the house of Othman. That country, after the death of Timour, had been nominally subject to his descendants, though two rival Toorkoman tribes had established principalities in Azerbigan and Diarbekr. These were the Kara Koinlu, and Ak-koinlu, or the Black and White Sheep, between whom a deadly feud existed; the former were the first to rise to power, under their chief, Kara Mahomed; while his son, the famous Kara Yusuf, threw off the yoke of the descendants of Timour in 1410. Secunder, the son of Kara Yusuf, waged war with Shah Rokh; and, after his death, his brother Jehan Shah, in 1437, not only overran Irak, Fars, and Kerman, but in 1457 besieged and pillaged Herat. The Kara Koinlus kept the throne until 1486.

Kara Koinlu Rulers.

In that year the chief of the rival tribe of the Ak-koinloos, named Uzun Hassan, who had established himself at Diarbekr, succeeded in defeating Jehan Shah in a battle in which the latter fell. The Ak-koinloos were now masters of Persia, and Uzun Hassan carried his victorious arms against Sultan Abouseyd, the reigning prince of the house of Timour, who also fell before him.

Malcolm’s account of the reign of Uzun Hassan is very meagre. He was the chief of the Ak-koinlu, or Turks, of the tribe of White Sheep, and established a powerful principality at Diarbekr. He defeated and killed Jehan Shah and his son Hassan Aly, whom he had taken prisoner, with all his family. The dynasty which Uzun Hassan founded is termed Bâyenderee; the family date their rise from the reign of Timour, who made them grants of land in Armenia and Mesopotamia. Hassan, after defeating his rival, engaged in a war with Sultan Abouseyd. He owed his triumph to his skill and activity in a predatory warfare, and at last having taken his enemy prisoner, made himself master of a great part of the dominions of the house of Timour. Malcolm says: “Uzun Hassan, after making himself master of Persia, turned his arms in the direction of Turkey; but his career was arrested by the superior genius of the Turkish emperor, Mahomet II; he suffered a signal defeat, which terminated his schemes of ambition. He died after a reign of eleven years, at the age of seventy. All authors agree in ascribing valour and wisdom to this prince. We are told by an European ambassador, who resided at his court, that he was a tall thin man, of a very open countenance, and that his army amounted to fifty thousand horse, a great proportion of which were of very indifferent quality.” He adds that this ambassador was an envoy from Venice, sent by that Republic to solicit the aid of Uzun Hassan against the Ottoman. The personage alluded to by Malcolm must have been M. Josafat Barbaro, the successor of M. Caterino Zeno.

Uzun Hassan had already been in collision with the Turks, having, when ruler of Diarbekr, undertaken to defend Calo Johannes of the noble house of the Comneni, one of the last of the Christian emperors of Trebizond, against Mahomet II. This alliance had been cemented by his marriage with the beautiful princess Despina, daughter of Calo Johannes, in which manner he was connected with some of the princely families of Venice, so that the way for an embassy was easily paved. The Venetians might hope much from the ambitious and turbulent character of the Persian prince; and in this they were not disappointed, as it needed but little persuasion to induce the hitherto almost invincible soldier to take up arms against his hereditary foe. Worn out by a state of anarchy, rival chiefs and tribes struggling for power before the land had fully risen again after the blast of foreign conquest had passed over it, the ancient glory of Persia had paled before the brighter light of its rival; but the old hatred still remained, with the will, if not the power, to oppose the Turkish arms. An embassy to Uzun Hassan being determined on, the difficult task of sending an envoy still remained. The duty would be a hazardous one, as any one proceeding from Venice to Persia would have to run the gauntlet of the Turks. The sister of Queen Despina had married Nicolo Crespo, the Duke of the Archipelago, whose four daughters were in turn wedded to four of the merchant princes of Venice, one of whom was M. Caterino Zeno, a man of courage and talent. He, of all others, appeared the fittest to undertake this honourable but perilous mission, and the patriotism of Zeno induced him to overlook the dangers he would run in traversing hostile and almost unknown regions before reaching his destination. He was rewarded for his courage by arriving safely in the presence of the king, though not without meeting serious obstacles in his journey through Caramania.

Zeno was well received by the monarch; and, being supported in his arguments by his aunt, the Queen Despina, succeeded in inducing Uzun Hassan to take up arms against the Turk.

In 1472 the Persians marched into the Turkish dominions and ravaged them, but a flying column under Mustafà, the second son of Mahomet II, routed a force of Persians under one of Uzun Hassan’s generals. In the following year the Grand Turk invaded Persia with an immense army, but met with a severe check while endeavouring to cross the Euphrates near Malatia, and was forced to retreat. Uzun Hassan, however, following up his success too rashly, was routed by the Turks at Tabeada. M. Caterino Zeno was then sent as ambassador from Uzun Hassan to various Christian princes, among others to Poland and Hungary, to incite them to take up arms against the Ottoman. M. Josafat Barbaro and Ambrogio Contarini were sent from Venice to take his place at the Persian Court; but no arguments could again induce the Persian monarch to meet the Turks in the field.

The account of Zeno’s Travels in Ramusio’s collection was prepared from Zeno’s letters, as the editor was never able to get possession of a copy of Zeno’s book. For this reason the geographical details in these Travels are not so explicit as in the others, and Ramusio has in his book put Zeno’s narrative after several others, although in date he was the first. It is supplemented by a sketch of Persian history subsequent to M. Caterino’s embassy, taken from other sources. MM. Barbaro and Contarini succeeded Zeno. The account of their travels will form a separate work.

The second author in this collection is a M. Giovan Maria Angiolello, who was in the service of the Turks, and present in their campaign against the Persians. He describes, shortly, the rise of Uzun Hassan, and gives a full description of the Turkish invasion from the Turkish point of view, and the details of the march. Unghermaumet’s rebellion against his father Uzun Hassan is also mentioned by him as well as by Zeno. After the death of Uzun Hassan and his son Yakoob, Persia fell into a state of anarchy caused by the civil wars between various members of the dominant Akkoinloo family; from this the country rose at length, through the process of a revolution, almost without a parallel in the history of the world. Not only was there a change in the dynasty and form of government, but the empire was revived in a native Persian family, and an end was put to the long foreign domination. More than all, the very religion of the people was essentially altered: a fact which, by widening the gulf which separated them from their surrounding enemies, consolidated the empire and created a nationality. The family which now rose on the ruins of the Ak-koinlu power traced their descent from Ali, the son-in-law of the Prophet, through Mussa, the Seventh Imaum:—

The chiefs of this family were regarded by the Persians as saints, and when Sheikh Hyder, a son-in-law of Uzun Hassan, rose in arms against Rustan, King of Persia, he was joined by great numbers. This insurrection was, however, ineffectual, and it was reserved for Sheikh Hyder’s son, afterwards Shah Ismail Sofi, to overthrow the fast decaying power of the Ak-koinlus, which was still further weakened by the struggle for the throne between two brothers named Alwung Beg and Morad Khan. The victorious career of Ismail is treated of by Angiolello, as also his wars with the Uzbegs under Sheibani Khan, and the Turks under Selim I, the former of whom were routed at the great battle of Merv Shah Jehan in 1514; but from the latter Ismail sustained a defeat in the plains of Chalderan, near Khoi, which left Tauris at the mercy of Selim. Angiolello, leaving Persian history, gives a full and animated account of Selim’s expedition against Egypt, which resulted in the conquest by the Turks of that great country and the deaths of the two last Soldans, Khafur el Ghouri and Tomant Bey.

The Third Book of Travels from Ramusio is that of an unnamed author trading from Damascus and Aleppo to Persia, where he remained upwards of eight years, from 1511 to 1520; so that he also was an eye-witness of the glory of Shah Ismail. The style of this latter is more involved; but while his historical facts correspond, his description of the towns and country is more detailed, as is but natural, from his occupation, which was more suited than that of an ambassador for gaining geographical information. He opens his narrative by describing, with a good deal of minuteness, the route from Aleppo to Tauris, finishing with an account of that city and of the historical events that took place during his stay.

There is a long gap between these two latter writers and Vincentio d’Alessandri, an envoy from Venice in 1571 to the Court of Shah Tahmasp, the son and successor of Shah Ismail Sofi, who had died in 1524. This writer is mentioned by Knolles in his General History of the Turks, from whom the following account of the intermediate history is also taken. In the year 1534 Solyman was persuaded by Ibrahim Pasha to make war on Persia, stirred up against the new Shiah religion which had been introduced by Shah Ismail Sofi. The purpose of Ibrahim was also furthered by a Persian named Ulemas, brother-in-law of the King Tahmasp, who had revolted from him,[164] fearing to be called to account for his extortion. After making preparations, Solyman sent Ibrahim and Ulemas with an army into Syria, and in the spring they advanced, without resistance, as far as Tauris. Tahmasp, the Persian monarch, was then absent, engaged in a war with Kezienbassa, Prince of the Corasine Hyrcanians; but, hearing of the taking of his capital, returned in haste for the defence of his empire. Solyman, on reports reaching him of the successes of his generals, crossed the Euphrates at Malatia, and joined them at Tauris. Tahmasp, not daring to join battle with Solyman, retreated to the mountains above Sultania, where the Turkish army, endeavouring to follow him, was greatly distressed, and forced to retreat from the inclemency of the weather. Solyman now retired to Mesopotamia, where he took Bagdad and added the provinces of Babylonia and Mesopotamia to the Turkish empire. In the following year, 1535, Solyman again entered Tauris and ransacked it; but, finding that nothing was to be done against Tahmasp, withdrew to his own dominions greatly harassed on his journey by Persian cavalry, who at last surprised and routed his army near Betilis, under the command of Delimenthes. This last reverse was the occasion of the fall of the great Pasha Ibrahim, the friend and counsellor of Solyman, by whose orders he was murdered. Ulemas was afterwards made Governor of Bosina. In 1549 the cause of Ercases Imirza, Prince of Shirvan and brother of Shah Tahmasp, was espoused by Solyman against Tahmasp; but, in a tedious war, except the capture of Van by the Turks, nothing of any importance took place, as the Persian monarch, pursuing his usual tactics, acted on the defensive, and retreated to the mountains. Discord being sown between Solyman and Ercases Imirza, the latter fled to Chaldea, where he was treacherously delivered into the hands of Tahmasp, who caused him to be murdered in prison. Bajazet, the son of Solyman, after his rebellion in 1556, fled for safety to the Court of Tahmasp, who received him with favour at first; but his mind becoming embittered against him, he caused his followers to be dispersed and slain, and Bajazet himself to be cast into prison. Solyman used all the means in his power to have Bajazet delivered into his hands, but Tahmasp would not consent; but afterwards, in consideration of a large sum of money, agreed to allow him to be made away with.[165] Bajazet accordingly was strangled, with his four sons. On the accession of Selim II, Tahmasp sent ambassadors to Constantinople to ratify a peace between them, which was concluded in the year 1568. About Vincentio d’Alessandri Knolles says, A.D. 1571:—

“Whilest these things were in doing, the Venetians, the more to entangle the Turke, thought it good to make proofe, if they might by any means stirre up Tamas, the Persian king, to take up armes against him; who, as hee was a prince of great power, so did hee exceedingly hate the Turks, as well for the difference between the Persians and them about matters of their vaine superstition, as for the manifold injuries he had oftentimes sustained. There was one Vincent Alexander, one of the secretaries for the State, who, having escaped out of prison at Constantinople, was but a little before come to Venice, a warie wise man, and of great experience, who, for his dexteritie of wit and skilfulnesse in the Turkish language, was thought of all others most fit to take in hand so great a matter. He having received letters and instructions from the Senat, and furnished with all things necessarie, travelling through Germanie, Polonia, and the forrests of Mæsia, in Turkish attire, came to Moneastron, a port towne upon the side of the Euxine or Black Sea, at the mouth of the great river Boristhenes, where he embarked himself for Trapezond, but was by a contrarie wind driven to Sinope, a citie of great trafficke; from whence he travelled, by rough and broken ways, to Cutay, keeping still upon the left hand because he would not fall upon any part of the Turk’s armie (which was then marching towards Cyprus through all those countries); neverthelesse, he fell upon a part thereof, from which he with great danger rid himselfe, beinge taken for a Turke, and by blind and troublesome wayes, through rockes and forrests, arrived at length at Erzirum, a strong citie of the Turks, then upon the frontiers of the Turk’s dominions toward the Georgians. This journey of Alexander’s was not kept so secret, but that it was vented at Constantinople by a spie, who, under the colour of friendship haunting the Venetian embassadour’s house at Pera, had got certaine knowledge of the going of Alexander in Persia. Whereupon, certaine courrours were sent out with all speed to beset the three straight passages into Persia, whereby it was supposed he must of necessitie passe, with certaine notes also of the favour of the man, of his stature, and other marks wherby he was best to be knowne. But he in so dangerous a countrie doubting all things, and fearing such a matter, leaving his companie behind him, with incredible celeritie posted from Erzirum to Tauris, and was a great way gone before the Turk’s courrours came into those quarters; who, yet hearing of him, followed after as far as they durst, but could not overtake him. Alexander, comming to Tauris, understood that the court lay at Casbin, about twelve days’ journey farther up into the country. Comming thither the 14th of August of this year, 1571, he chanced to meet with certaine English marchants, with whom he had beene before acquainted; by whose helpe he not only got to speak with Ayder Tamas, the king’s third sonne, but learned of them also the manners and fashions of the Persian court, and how to beare himselfe therein. The Persians, by reason of the intolerable heate, doe most of their business at that time of the yeare by night. Wherefore, Alexander, about midnight brought in to Aider, declared unto him the cause of his comming: and the next night admitted into the speech of his aged father, delivered his letters of credence, and in the name of the Senat, declared unto him, with what perfidious dealing Selymus, the Turkish emperor, was about to take away Cyprus from the Venetians, with what greedinesse and pride he had set upon the Christians, and that discharged of that warre, he would of all likelyhood set upon the Persians; having the selfesame quarrell unto the Persians that he had unto the Venetians, that is, an ardent and insatiable desire of soveraignetie; a sufficient cause for the greedie Turke to repute every king, the richer that he was, the more his enemie. After that, setting foorth to the full the prowesse of the Christians, the wonderfull preparation they had made, both at sea and land, he persuaded the king, with all his power, to invade the Turke, now altogether busied in the warres of Cyprus; and to recover againe such parts of his kingdom as Solyman, the father of Selymus, had taken from him. Warres, he said, were more happily managed abroad than at home; that, sithence he alone (the Christian princes all then at quiet) had withstood the Turk’s whole force and power, he needed not now to doubt of his most prosperous successe, the Christian princes now joyning with him. That he was much unmindful of his former losses and wrongs, if he thought he enjoyed an assured peace, which he should find to be nothing els but a deferring of war unto more cruell times; and that the Turke, if he should overrun Cyprus, would forthwith turne his victorious arms upon him. The end of one warre was (as he said) but the beginning of another; and that the Turkish empire could never stay in one state; and that he would observe not the Turke’s words, but his deeds; and how that the Othoman emperours, according to the oportunitie of the times, used by turnes sometimes force, sometimes deceit, as best served their purposes. That no princes had at all times, by dissembled peace and uncertaine leagues, more deluded some, untill they had oppressed others. He wished also, that at length this his cunning dealing might appeare unto the world; and that princes would thinke, that being combined together, they might more easily overcome the Turke, than being seperated, defend their owne; that in former times, sometimes will, sometimes occasion, was wanting to them to unite their forces; and that, therefore, they should now combine themselves for their common good against the common enemie; that it conserned no lesse the Persians than the Christians, to have the power of the Turke abated; and that this taking up of armes should be for the good of the Persian king, howsoever things should fall out; if well, he should then recover what he had before lost, with much more that was the Turke’s; if otherwise, yet by voluntarie entering into armes, to countenance himselfe, and to give the Turks occasion to think that he feared him not, which was (as he said) the only way to preserve their common safetie, which would be unto all the confederat princes easie enough, if they themselves made it not more difficult than the power of the enemie. The speech of the embassadour was willingly heard; whereunto the king answered, that he would consider thereupon what he had to doe; and, in the meanwhile, a faire house was appointed for the embassadour and his followers, and bountifull allowance appointed for the king’s charge. He was also many times sumptuously feasted by the noblemen whom he still requested to be mediatours unto the king, to take that honourable warre in hand. The king had at that time a sonne called Ismael, a man of great spirit, whom he then kept in durance, for that he, with too much insolencie, made roades into the frontiers of the Turke’s dominions, to the disturbance of the leagues his father had before made with the late Turkish emperor, Solyman: unto him, Alexander having accesse, was of him courteously heard, who, fretting and languishing for verie griefe of revenge upon the Turkes, wished that either the king, his father, had his mind, or he himselfe the power of a king, and said, That if ever it were his good fortune to obtaine, he would indeed shew what he then in mind thought. But of him more shall be said hereafter. Whilest this matter went more slowly forward in the Persian court than the embassadour would have had it, newes was brought unto the court of the great victorie which the Christians had much about that time obtained of the Turkes at sea; upon which occasion the embassadour solicited the king more earnestly than before, to make himselfe partaker of the victorie of the Christians by entring into confederation with them, and by taking up of armes, rather than to hold uncertain friendship with the Turkes in their miseries, by whom he had been so often wronged. This he said, was the only time for the Persian king to recover his former glorie, the like offer whereof would neither often chance, neither long stay; and that if he suffered so fit an opportunitie to slip away, he should afterwards in vaine wish for the same, when it were so late. This so wholsome counsell was well heard, but prevailed nothing to stir up the aged king, who, then troubled with rebellion in Media, or wearie of the former warres he had had with the Turke, and glad of such peace as he had then with him, answered the embassadour: That, for as much as the Christian princes had made a perpetuall league amongst themselves, he would for two yeares expect the event, and afterward, as occasion served, so to resolve upon peace or warre. This improvident resolution of the king brought afterward unprofitable and too late repentance unto the whole Persian kingdome, when, as within a few yeares after, all the calamities which the Senat had by their embassadour (as true prophets) foretold, redounded unto the great shaking thereof. For the Cyprian warre once ended, and peace concluded with the Venetians, Amurath, the sonne of Selymus, succeeding his father in the Turkish empire, invading the Persian king, tooke from him the great country of Media, now called Silvan, with a great part of Armenia the Great, and the regall citie of Tauris, as shall be here after in due place declared. At which time the Persian, who now refused to take up armes or join in league with the Christian princes, repented that he had not before hearkened unto the wholsome counsell of the Venetians; and, taught by his owne harmes, wished in vaine that the Christian princes would againe take up armes and joyne with him against the Turke.”

In the year 1576 troubles arose in the Persian kingdom consequent on the death of Tahmasp, which were taken advantage of by Sultan Murad III. Tahmasp had eleven sons; Mahomed Khodabendeh, who suffered from a weakness in his eyes; Ismael, a turbulent warrior, confined in the fortress of Cahaca, between Tauris and Casbin; Hyder, the third, with a powerful party in the State; and the others, Mahmoud, Solyman, Mustafa, Emanguli, Alichar, Ahmed, Abrahim, and Ismael the younger.

Before his death he appointed Ismael his successor, to the great discontent of Hyder, who, being in the palace, caused himself to be crowned; but Ismael’s friends being strong he was imprisoned in his palace and soon after murdered. Ismael, on ascending the throne, caused his eight younger brothers to be murdered, and greatly oppressed the country;[166] he himself, after a year’s reign, met with his fate, being murdered by his sister. The Persian chiefs raised Mahomed Khodabendeh to the throne, who, in endeavouring to avenge his brothers’ deaths, caused great discord in the kingdom, of which Murad determined to take advantage, inducing the Georgians under Levent Ogli and the people of Shirvan to revolt. After a few years, however, the incapable Mahomet was dethroned by the Persian nobles to make way for his son Abbas. This prince, perhaps the best ruler Persia had had for many centuries, began to reign in 1585, and is known to history as Shah Abbas the Great.