270 chapter four
suzerain presence which was nevertheless enough to protect the Bulgar-
ian state and his own interests. the most eloquent proof for continuity
here is an argumentum e silentio: not one source mentions any tartar
attack on the Bulgarians during Özbek’s reign, while his repeated raids
on Byzantium in 1319, 1323, 1328, 1332 and 1337 were widely reported in
contemporary sources.519
this being the case, there can be no doubt that when magnates in the
carpathian-Balkan region planned and directed their major foreign policy
initiatives, they were governed by the tartars and their projects were, if
not dictated, then at the very least supervised by the khan on the Volga.
one of the farthest-reaching changes on the political map of the region
could not have taken place without the suzerain’s assent, this being the
unification of the Bulgarian states under the sceptre of Michael Shish-
man (1323–1333): “at this time, the leadership of the Moesians [= Bulgar-
ians] passed after their sovereign terter 520 had died without issue to the
ruler of Vidin, Michael, [.. .] they proclaimed him tsar and entrusted to
him tarnovo, where the royal residence is, and the rest of the country
as well.”521
an even more transparent instance is that the khan took this occasion
to adjust the Bulgarian state’s Northern border. the tsar’s domain had
grown considerably to the West when the Despotate of Vidin was rein-
corporated, but by contrast it shrank significantly in the North: according
to Nicephoros Gregoras, a contemporary, “Michael Shishman was given
lordship over the Bulgarians this side of the Danube,”522 thus on the right
bank. the Byzantine scholar thus evidently felt the need to specify this, to
mark a change in circumstances since his remark would otherwise have
been superfluous. his implication that Bulgaria no longer ruled in Bujak
after 1323 is confirmed by the silence of all other sources on the subject,
with the exception of portolan maps—which are notorious for picking
up and perpetuating anachronistic information, this being practically a
besetting malady for this category of sources.523
It is of the first importance for a clear understanding of the political
context in eastern and South-eastern europe during this period that the
519 Kantakouzenos/FHDR, III, pp. 482–485, Gregoras/ibid., pp. 510–513, pavlov, “Mon-
golotatari,” p. 119.
520 George II terter (1322–1323).
521 Kantakouzenos/FHDR, II, pp. 482–483.
522 Gregoras/Schopen, I, p. 391, Spinei, Moldova, p. 173.
523 cf. the cartographical material cited in Spinei, Moldova, p. 172.