154 chapter four
between the capitals on the Nile and the Volga.37 It is also well-known
that the Genoese were involved in this trade, as attested for instance by
documents notarised at pera in 1281.38 however, it cannot be established
for certain whether the republic’s ships were already bringing slaves from
the crimea to alexandria in the second half of the thirteenth century, as
they would the following century:39 either they still refrained from a trade
which was condemned by the christian authorities,40 or they took part so
circumspectly that this escaped contemporary notice.41
even if they did not act as intermediaries in this particular strategic
trade between the Golden horde and egypt, the Genoese could only
profit from the restructuring of Black Sea commerce in 1261. Soldaia had
abandoned its traditional partner at Sinope and turned to constantinople
instead, and this development put wind in the sails of the Genoese mer-
chants who dominated the Straits.42
having become the most important actors in the new patterns of trade
in the Black Sea, the Genoese settled in the crimea, probably around the
same time that they consolidated their presence in pera:43 confident that
they dominated the crimea, in 1269 they were persuaded to allow the
Venetians to trade there alongside them, on the condition that the latter
did not go on to tana.44
37 pachymeres/Bekker, I, pp. 174–179; Gregoras/Schopen, I, pp. 101 ff., claims that one
or two such ships passed through the Bosphorus each year; cf. heyd, Histoire, II, pp. 24,
555–556, Brătianu, Recherches, p. 207, Schmid, Beziehungen, p. 124, canard, “Le traité.” the
first Mamluk sultans bought around 8,000 slaves annually, after which purchases fell to
around 200–300 (ashtor, History, p. 282).
38 See Verlinden, “traite,” based on documents published in Brătianu, Actes.
39 cf. heyd, Histoire, II, pp. 36 ff., 557 ff.; Verlinden, “colonie,” idem, “esclavage,” idem,
“Venezia;” see also below, chapters 4.2.3, 4.2.4.
40 pachymeres/Bekker, I, pp. 174–179, writes at length about the slave trade and deplores
the emperor’s decision to allow free transit of slaves to egypt, where they swell the ranks of
the Mamluk army and thus contribute to attacks on christians in palestine and cilicia; on
the papacy’s attempts to put an end to the trade, cf. heyd, Histoire, II, pp. 35 ff. the Geno-
ese showed themselves to be ‘bad christians’ from at least the second half of the thirteenth
century, when they broke the papal embargo and shipped prohibited goods from cilician
armenia to egypt: wood, iron and tin (otten-froux, “aïas,” pp. 161–162).
41 In the Byzantine-Mamluk treaty of 1281 there is a clause allowing the “people” of
Soldaia and its “inhabitants” to ship slaves through the Straits, but also granting the same
permission to “those coming from” the town (canard, “Le traité,” pp. 673–674, 680), so
that canard, “un traité,” p. 210 note 1, wonders whether the Genoese are included here;
Balard, Romanie, I, pp. 117, 118 note 82, notes the question but dismisses it, on no very
strong grounds.
42 See above, chapter 4.1.3, and canard, “un traité,” p. 211.
43 Balard, Romanie, I, p. 113; this was in 1270 at the latest.
44 papacostea, “tana,” pp. 202–203, idem, “Gênes,” pp. 221–222.