[(2.)] “Salonikch.”—Schiltberger may have touched at Salonica when upon his voyage to Egypt, referred to in chap, xxvi, note 4—performed, in all probability, on board of an Italian vessel from Caffa, upon which occasion he passed the island of Imbros, described in chap. 58. There is no evidence whatever that he went to Salonica after his return from Asia to Constantinople, nor is it at all probable that he stopped there when being carried away into slavery after the battle of Nicopolis, notwithstanding that the town belonged to the Turks and not to the Greeks (Zinkeisen, Gesch. d. O. R., i, 287). Bajazet would scarcely have selected so circuitous a route for sending captives to Broussa.
There are good reasons for surmising that the voyage was performed in a Venetian vessel which touched at Salonica. This town, given up in 1403 by Souleiman, son of Bajazet, to the Greeks, was by them sold, in 1423, to the Venetians, who would undoubtedly have taken all necessary measures for putting it into a state of defence and supplying it with provisions, including salted fish from the Sea of Azoff. Another reason for the supposition that Schiltberger’s journey into Egypt could not have taken place earlier than 1423, is to be found in the fact that, from Egypt he passed over into Arabia, on a pilgrimage to the holy places of the Mahomedans, having, as it would seem, turned Mussulman through compulsion; and if he has avoided all reference to the journey, it was out of a natural desire not to be reminded of the painful circumstance of his apostacy.—Bruun.
[(3.)] “from whose grave oil flows.”—Hammer observes that Schiltberger confirms the story told of St. Demetrius, and not of St. Theodora, as erroneously related in Anagnosta’s De Thessalonicensi excidio narratio, the fact being, that the tomb of St. Theodora was close to that of St. Demetrius, from whose foot flowed the oil which was collected annually, and distributed to all believers (Pout. Rouss. loud., 47). Professor Grigorovitch tells us that the well is still shewn beneath the floor of the church, but he was unable to certify that the miracle continued to be operated!—Bruun.
[(4.)] “Asia.”—Fallmerayer and Hammer maintain that Schiltberger was mistaken in saying that the city in which was the tomb of St. John, was called Asia, the correct name being Ephesus, known to the Turks as Aisulugh, and as Ἅγιος Θεολόγος to the Byzantines, who thus styled St. John. The author’s learned countrymen might, however, have admitted in his justification the evidence of Codinus (Urb. nom. imm., 316), to the effect that the ancient name of the eparchiate of Ephesus was Ἀσία ἡ Ἔφεσος. Schiltberger may have learnt the ancient name from the monks, who would have employed it in those days.—Bruun.
(4A.) The church at Ephesus, erected over the tomb of St. John the Evangelist, was enlarged by Justinian, and afterwards turned into a mosque (Ibn Batouta). Here, also, as at the grave of St. Demetrius at Salonica, the mortal remains were invested with miraculous powders, for a peculiar kind of dust, in substance like flour, and compared by St. George of Tours to manna, worked its way out of the sepulchre, and being taken about, effected many marvellous cures (Baillet, Vie des Saints, viii, 624).—Ed.
[(5.)] “Saint Nicholas was bishop there.”—St. Nicholas, the patron of Russia, was bishop of Myra in Lycia, which the author confounds with Ismir, the Turkish name for Smyrna. De Lannoy (Voy. et Ambass., 4) commits a similar error in quoting Lisemiere, together with Feule la vielle for Fogliavecchia, and Porspic for porto di Spiga.
Smyrna, a possession of the knights of Rhodes, was taken by Timour towards the close of the year 1402 (Hammer, Hist. de l’E. O., ii, 116), upon which occasion Schiltberger must have visited it, without, however, having been afforded the opportunity of seeing the picturesque valley where Fellows, in 1838 (Travels and Researches in Asia Minor, etc.), discovered the imposing ruins of Myra, or Demir, so called by the Turks. It is recorded that in 1087, the relics of St. Nicholas were removed to Bari, and the church in which they were originally laid having fallen to ruins, a small chapel was erected on the site. The restoration of the sacred edifice, completed in 1874 at a cost of 10,000 roubles, was commenced on the initiative of M. Mouravieff.—Bruun.
[(6.)] “Maganasa”.—Magnesia was styled “ad Sipylum”, to distinguish it from Magnesia “ad Mæandrum”, the remains of which have been discovered near a village called Aïneh-bazar, distant sixteen miles from Ephesus. The former, the Manissa of the Turks, near the Hermus at the foot of Mount Sipylus, has ever been a city noted for its extent, commerce, and population.—Bruun.
[(7.)] “Donguslu”.—Denizly, a densely populated town in the time of Hadjy Khalpha, was no longer included in the district of Saroukhan, but was added to that of Koutahieh. Near this place, pleasantly situated in a rich and well-watered plain, are the ruins of Laodicea, one of the Seven Churches to which St. John addressed his Revelations.—Bruun.
[(8.)] “Wegureisari.”—This town, which occupies the site of the ancient Gangra, is the principal in the district. In the days of Hadjy Khalpha, it contained a fortress and an imperial residence, which must have been in existence in Schiltberger’s time, and accounts for his addition of the word saraï—palace—to Kiankary, and thus converting the name to “Wegureisari”.—Bruun.