É. Apor (ed.): Codex Cumanicus. Ed. by Géza Kuun with a Prolegomena to the Codex Cumanicus by Lajos Ligeti. (Budapest Oriental Reprints, Ser. B 1.)
L. Ligeti: Prolegomena to the Codex Cumanicus
12 J.. LIGETI dates are congruent. Tlie Latin translation of this text dates from July 28tli, 1383; its Genoan dialectal variant was most likely written in this same year. The document of 1387 fared badly, as Kuun had no time to copy (and edit) the whole text. Acting upon the advice of A. Vámbéry, < ié/.a Kuun explored the muterial of the Genoan archives, which had also been in Paris for a t ime during Napoleon's reign, searching for documents in Uighur script, but he found none. It is worth noting that the use of the Italian language did not figure among the privileges of the Genoans. Its dialectal properties are striking, e.g. consoro (consul) and Sorchat (Solchat). Hammer edited the Italian texts of two contracts signed with the Venetians (op. cit.. pp. 517 — 522). One was endorsed by Janibek (1340 1357), dating: Dado in Gulistan sette cento quarant otto in lo mese de Ramadan die venti dol. in lo anno de porcho. The year 1347 was indeed the year of the pig 1 am afraid Ba/.in was too rash in his judgment, asserting that the Comans had no knowledge of the animal cycle of 12 years. It is true that the Codex provides no trace of the animal cycle, but this is simply because the author of the Codex staited out from Latin, and not vice versa. In those days the calendar of the animal cycle was known by the Mongols, Turks, and even the Persians. The month name l'amadan in the Persian column of the Codex denotes August, not February. The other diploma comes from Herdibek (1357—1359), dated 1358. In Italian: Dado in Lordo in Accuba (read Acluba) alii otto di della luna in mese de Siwal, eorando lo anno de Can anni sette cento cinquanta nove. 1 356 was the year of the dog; the Venetian Can also means «dog». The month Rival corresponds to September, as is recorded in the corrected Persian calendar of the Codex Cumanicus. The correspondence is also confirmed by informations from known concordances. Gulistan was a place famous for its mint; of. Spuler, Die Goldene Horde, p. 544. Spuler (op. cit., p. 99 sqq) misspelled the name of Janibek as Jambek. On the correct főim, Jani. bek, see Pelliot, Notes sur l'Histoire de la Horde d'Or, Paris 1949, pp. 98- 101. it is lead Janibek by B. IX Grekov-A. Ju. Jakubovskij, Zolotaja Orda i ee padenie, M.-L. 1950, p. 451. Heyd (H intuire du commerce du Levant II, p. 181) refers to a decree forbidding the Genoan citizens to spend the winter in Tana or to buy houses there. He also touches upon a diploma dating from 1332, the year of the monkey (the correspondence is faultless), which peimitted the Venetians to build a residential area there. This date falls in the early reign of Özbeg (1312—1340), the predecessor of Janibek. The question is, how does this diploma compare with the documents of similar content dating from 1333 (the year of the hen)? The documents of 1342 and 1357, which renewed the diploma of 1332. show that the Genoans were banned from Tana. From about 1322 on Venetian galleys from Trape/.unt regularly put in at this port. Later Venetian trade agencies were set up iu the town, and all this was done in agreement with the Tatar lords of the city. Delegations of this character are often mentioned between 1293 and 1303. Heyd gives a lengthy account of the Venetians' settlement and arrangements in Tana, as well as of their traile and other relations with the Muslim leaders in the area. Difficulties gradually arose villi their Tatar overlords, and these were aggravated by the Genoans living on other parts of Tana. Eventually bloody clashes took place between the Tatars, Venetians and Genoans, resulting in the expulsion of the Venetians from Tana for a while. Only in 1347 did they once again obtain permission from Janibek to settle in the town (on this diploma see above). Heyd (1 L p. 198, note) points out that tlie month of the date is incorrect. He thinks that the 22nd day of Ramadan corresponds to December 26th, and not to February. Modern concordances also confirm his position, but far-reaching conclusions cannot be drawn from this divergence, since the date of February is found in the short Latin introduction, and not in the Italian translation. On the diplomas of the khans of the Golden Horde concerning the privileges of the Franciscans, from the time of Müngka-Tcimür (1267— 1280), see J. Richard, La Papuaté et les missions d'Orient, p. 92. sqq.
