the golden horde and the black sea 179
Like the original privilege granted in the preceding century,142 this
second act of foundation, at the beginning of Özbek’s reign, is not pre-
served, nor is it referred to in even the vaguest terms in subsequent trea-
ties between the Jochids and the Genoese, as would ordinarily happen.143
however strange it may seem, a number of indications support the idea
that there never was a treaty en bonne et due forme, concluded in the early
fourteenth century and subsequently lost, that set down the conditions
under which the Genoese settled anew in caffa.144
have visited the markets of the Golden horde after 1308, protected by the Mamluk Sultan
(as Segurano Salvaigo was); the idea rests on Kedar, “Segurano,” pp. 82–83, who supposes
that the Genoese could have traded under the Mamluk flag and that toqta still consid-
ered the Sultan a “major ally,” which must be mistaken given the downturn in relations
that year. curiously, Kedar goes on to advance a convincing explanation; when, in an act
of supreme hypocrisy, Genoa’s leaders imposed an embargo in March 1316 on their own
subjects who transported slaves from the Northern Black Sea to egypt (Sauli, “Imposicio,”
columns 371–376, forcheri, Navi, p. 18, Soranzo, Papato, p. 476), some of those affected
took to sailing under the false flag. It should be noted that pope John XXII’s thunderous
attacks on these sins and the sinners who commit them also date from 1317, and that
he also attacked the conniving Genoese citizens and leaders, mentioning the use of false
flags as an example of their guilt; on this topic see Sanudo/Bongars, II, pp. 27–28, Bou-
taric, Notices, p. 200, Mas Latrie, Histoire, II, pp. 119–120, Verlinden, “Venezia,” pp. 605–606,
Labib, Handelsgeschichte, p. 65; although it cannot be shown that the Genoese were in
caffa between 1308 to 1313, nor indeed elsewhere in the crimea or on the steppe, they are
recorded at tana in 1311, when the notary riccobono palmieri was working there (Balard,
Romanie, I, p. 152 note 130).
142 Despite the continuing efforts by specialists to unravel the riddle, the origins of
Genoese caffa are shrouded in mystery even today (see a survey of the problem and of the
various hypotheses in Balard, Romanie, I, pp. 114–118, and here in chapter 4.2.1).
143 cf. ciocîltan, “restauraţia,” idem, “reichspolitik,” and chapter 4.2.7.
144 Many gaps in the historical record are rightly blamed on the ravages of time,
which make so many traces of the past vanish, including written evidence. however, in
the current case this more general explanation runs into some difficulties. Such gaps are
suspiciously frequent in the Genoese archives, especially when compared to the much
better-kept Venetian treaties with the Mongols which have been preserved without excep-
tion (cf. Nystazopoulou-pélékidis, Venise). the contrast may be easily explained by the
known difference in how these two states were constituted and ran their affairs: the first
was as lax as may be, while the second was rigorously centralist, including when it came
to preserving official documents. practically no documents survive from the Golden horde
itself, so that this very fragmentary archive is of no help in the current case, while in
contrast the Mamluk chancery’s very ample documentation does not support the deduc-
tion: “Zwar legen uns hinsichtlich Genuas keine Verträge, wie in der ersten hälfte des 14.
Jahrhunderts zwischen Venedig und Ägypten geschlossen vor, doch darf uns diese tat-
sache nicht ohne weiters den Schluß ziehen lassen, daß die Beziehungen zwischen den
beiden Staaten weniger eng gewesen seien” (Labib, Handelsgeschichte, p. 76). It would
follow that the Genoese in egypt did not act under a written agreement with the Sultan,
even though they had their own fondaco in alexandria at the time (ibid., p. 75, Balard,
“escales,” p. 247 note 11). By analogy, this situation suggests that Özbek’s consent for the
Genoese to return to caffa may have been a verbal agreement; cf. the identical situations