Why Fortify?ย  A Short Introduction to Four Byzantine Fortifications in the Maeander Valley

I chose these four fortresses as representations of the observable differences between Byzantine fortified sites.  Not all fortifications were made equal.  Differences lie not only in the choice of how walls and towers are constructed, but also in the placement of these fortified sites in the landscape.  Careful analysis of these features can reveal the underlying assumptions and motivations of the builders.  I have chosen among these four fortifications a military base, a refuge, a center for agricultural exploitation, and a fortified residence within the Maeander River valley.

The Locations of the Fortresses, made by author in QGIS.

Kadฤฑkalesi[1]

Kadฤฑkalesi is a great example of a military fortress likely built and used by the Byzantine armed forces.  The entrances, not just the main one but the two postern entrances too, had a bent gate, which denies an attacker a good view inside the fortress (see Figure 2).  The towers project from the walls and include a larger circular tower which is more resilient to projectiles than a square tower.  Throughout the entire circuit of walls, platforms known as battlements were built for soldiers to be able to view the landscape.  The walls were caped with crenulations, which provided coverage for those soldiers from fire from below (see Figure 3).  This fortress was found on a small hill above a road, about 50 meters above sea level.  On the one hand, this elevation gave the soldiers good visibility of the surrounding countryside, but, on the other, it was low enough that the soldiers could quickly do something about a threat (see Figure 2). 

The Bent Gate of Kadฤฑkalesi, photo by author.
The Battlements of Kadฤฑkalesi, photo by author.

Fฤฑndฤฑklฤฑ Kalesi[2]

Fฤฑndฤฑklฤฑ Kalesi was a large fortress on the top of a mountain, enclosing an area of seven hectares at an elevation higher than 600 meters above sea level.ย  Like Kadฤฑkalesi, the walls were built with military concerns in mind; a series of towers and periodic battlements defend the portions of wall spanning the gaps between rocks, while a double gate fortifies the most vulnerable part of the fortress in the southeast.ย  The size of the fortress was partly determined by geology; the walls follow the edges of a massive rock outcropping.ย  Unlike Kadฤฑkalesi, however, the fortress was isolated from the Byzantine roads that cross the mountain and unable to serve in the policing of routes.ย  I agree with scholars who see Fฤฑndฤฑklฤฑ Kalesi as a refuge for times of invasion with only a small permanent peacetime population.[3] ย This was a fortress, not of lords or soldiers, but of farmers and shepherds, who needed its great size to house flocks of sheep and its isolated location to keep just far enough away from any potential raiders that this โ€˜bluff in stoneโ€™ may appear like a formidable military fortress.ย 

View North from Inside Fฤฑndฤฑklฤฑ Kalesi, photo by author.

Mersinet ฤฐskelesi[4]

The impressive fortress found on the southern coast of Lake Bafa appears to be a military fort like Kadฤฑkalesi.  The use of blind arches to support the battlements even shows an improvement over the thick walls of Kadฤฑkalesi.  However, I argue that military effectiveness was not the main concern of this fortress.  The defining element of the fortress is a great tower bisected by the enceinte wall.  However, there is no communication between the walls and the tower; anyone stationed in the tower could not advance into the battlements in response to a threat.  Second, the tower does not protrude from the wall, which decreased its visibility and potential range of fire.  While Mersinet ฤฐskelesiโ€™s position does provide a good view of the eastern half of Lake Bafa, nearby hills could provide a better view.  Instead, this fortress has more in common with the isolated towers found around Lake Bafa and in the wider Maeander Valley.  Mersinet ฤฐskelesi is an isolated tower with an increased budget.  I suspect that this fortress and the other towers have something to do with the exploitation of agricultural estates as these towers lie at the edge of the most plentiful area of farmable land adjacent to Lake Bafa, even if this fortress is usually interpreted as a fortified monastery[5] or military base.[6] 

View of Tower of Mersinet ฤฐskelesi from Lake Bafa, photo by author.
Central Tower of Mersinet ฤฐskelesi from inside the Fortress, photo by author.

The Monastery of Stylos[7]

The final fortress is the monastery of Stylos.  Its walls aided the defense of a community which resided in isolated places like a type of fortified residence.  However, this monastery was never intended to operate like a military fortress.  For instance, the battlements were limited to walls located at known entrances on the north and south side.  They were only interested in watching visitors who intended to use a proper gate and not in observing the wider region.  Nor was it a refuge.  While the monastery was deep in its mountain like Fฤฑndฤฑklฤฑ Kalesi, Stylos is near a branch of an ancient road network, which gives the monastery a greater ability to interact with others on and off the mountain.  Finally, the division of interior fortification betrays a uniquely monastic concern: the proper veneration of the founder of the monastery.  The inner bastion of the monastery contains the hermitage of Saint Paul the Younger cut in a tower of rock and decorated with a painted program of religious images (see Figures 6 and 7).  I suspect the fortification of the hermitage likely served to encourage the veneration of their founder and to connect that founder with the builder of the walls, likely Christodoulos of Latros who would go on to found the Monastery of Saint John the Theologian on Patmos.  Whatever the purpose of the inner gate was, it is hard to imagine it served the defense of the monastery. 

The Inner Gate of Stylos Leading to the Hermitage, photo by author.
View of the Hermitage of Saint Paul the Younger, photo by author.

Tyler Wolford, PhD
Byzantine Studies Postdoctoral Fellowship
Medieval Institute
University of Notre Dame


[1] Wolfgang Mรผller-Wiener, โ€œMittelalterliche Befestigungen im sรผdlichen Jonien,โ€ IstMitt 11 (1961): 19-23.

[2] Hans Lohmann et al., Survey in der Mykale 1, Bonn: Rudolf Habelt, 2014-2017, II.510-513 (MYK 65).

[3] Jesko Fildhuth, Das byzantinische Priene, Berlin: DAI, 2017, 96-98; for an opposing view see Lohmann et al., Survey in der Mykale, I.284-290.

[4] Mรผller-Wiener, โ€œMittelalterliche Befestigungen,โ€ 17-19.

[5] Urs Peschlow, โ€œLatmos,โ€ Reallexikon zur byzantinischen Kunst 5 (1995): 695-696.  

[6] Mรผller-Wiener, โ€œMittelalterliche Befestigungen,โ€ 18-19.

[7] Theodor Wiegand, Der Latmos, Milet III.1, Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1913, 61-72.

The โ€œSinfulโ€ Soldiers of the Early Ottoman Military Structure: ฮฟฮน แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฯ‰ฮปฯŒฮน

This short research blog focuses on the development of the word แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰ โ€œto sinโ€ from the advent of Christianity to the late Byzantine era. The word, แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰, is widely used in the Bible as it appears forty-three times. To wordโ€™s primary meaning in the Bible was to โ€œerr and sinโ€; however, from time to time, it was also used to signify the action of offending. แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰ occurs in many different forms in the New Testament as we see it in aorist first-person singular active form แผญฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฟฮฝโ€ eight times, second-person singular indicative middle six times, and second-person indicative active plural form three times.[1] I will trace the different nuances in the meaning of this word in the subsequent periods, especially in the late Byzantine period. My argument is that as several Greek and non-Greek sources indicate, the word แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰ began having a military connotation in this period as it was applied to the Christian military units who had cooperated with the enemy forces, especially the Turks.

Inscription, in The Collection of Ancient Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum

        In Homeric times, แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰ had no religious connotation. The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament suggests that, initially, the word was used to convey the action of โ€œmissingโ€ i.e failure to follow rules and signify a moral deficit or immoral physical undertaking. [2] However, in the later periods (c. 400 BCE), we begin seeing a shift from legal to religious use since แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰ made its way to the Book of Kings in the old testament, meaning โ€œto rebelโ€ against the god and his order in the earth.[3] From a theological standpoint, rebelling against the will of God means to err from the true path and therefore to sin. In this way, those who had intentionally deviated from moral or religious standards came to be defined as ฮฑฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฯ‰ฮปฯŒฯ‚ โ€œthe sinful oneโ€ in the later Christian religious texts.[4]

Early Christian symbols on an Egyptian textile, the Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland, Ohio.

        แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰ is mostly used to signify the action of โ€œsinโ€ and neglecting the commands of God with an exception of โ€œoffendingโ€ in the New Testament.[5] In the Book of Romans, for instance, we see the following structure: โ€œฮณแฝฐฯ แผ€ฮฝฯŒฮผฯ‰ฯ‚ แผฅฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฟฮฝ แผ€ฮฝฯŒฮผฯ‰ฯ‚ ฮบฮฑแฝถโ€ which means โ€œIndeed without law I sinned without law also[โ€ฆ]โ€.[6] Here, แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰ was used in the aorist, active, and indicative form. In another example, this time from the Book of Corinthians, the word is used in such a construction: โ€œฮฟแฝ•ฯ„ฯ‰ฯ‚ ฮดแฝฒ แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฮฟฮฝฯ„ฮตฯ‚ ฮตแผฐฯ‚ ฯ„ฮฟแฝบฯ‚โ€ meaning โ€œthus moreover sinning against those [โ€ฆ]โ€ in the participle, present, active form.[7] Besides the action of sinning, แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰ seems to be used in a different meaning, โ€œto offendโ€, in the Book of Apostles although a minor disagreement exists between various interpreters. Regarding the following phase: โ€œฮšฮฑฮฏฯƒฮฑฯฮฌ ฯ„ฮน แผฅฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฟฮฝ[โ€ฆ]โ€ while New American Standard Bible renders the word as โ€œcommittingโ€, the King James version translate the term as โ€œoffendingโ€. However, the new international version disagrees with these suggestions, interpreting the whole phrase as โ€œCaesar [in] anything sinned [โ€ฆ]โ€.[8]

Nicolle, David. Armies of the Ottoman Turks 1300-1774. London: Osprey, 1983.

        Besides its use in legal and religious spheres, towards the late Byzantine period, we begin seeing the word, แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰, or its variants in Greek and Turkish texts in the military context. With the Turkish advance towards western Asia Minor and the Balkans in the later 13th and early 14th centuries, the local Greek-speaking people began adjusting to the newly established political reality in their respective territories by means of cooperating with their new rulers. A significant portion of the Greek population in these regions had converted to Islam, while others participated in the Ottoman military system as auxiliary units. As the later Byzantine writer Pachymeres states in his ฮ™ฯƒฯ„ฮฟฯฮฏฮฑ, the Greeks from Anatolia, โ€œแผฯ€ฮนฮผฮนฮพฮฌฮฝฯ„ฯ‰ฮฝ ฮบฮฑแฝถ แฟฌฯ‰ฮผฮฑรญฯ‰ฮฝ แผฮพ แผ€ฮฝฮฑฯ„ฮฟฮปแฟ†ฯ‚โ€, had occasionally joined the Turkish forces to raid the Byzantine territories in the hopes of acquiring material gain.[9] Besides Pachymeres, Doukas also refers to these Greek collaborators in his historical work, calling them โ€œฮผฮนฮพฮฟฮฒฮฑฯฮฒฮฑฯฮฟฮนโ€ meaning half-Greek and half-Turks.[10] Although these authors shunned using the word, แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฯ‰ฮปฯŒฯ‚, several Turkish authors borrow this term from their Greek correspondents. An early Ottoman called AลŸฤฑkpaลŸazade reports that the founder of the Ottoman principality, Osman Gazi, had a โ€œmartolosโ€ ( ู…ุงุฑุชู„ูˆุณ) by the name of Artun who acted as a spy in the Byzantine territories for the Ottomans.[11] After the Ottoman conquests in the Balkans, as the land surveys indicate, the Ottomans had given landed estates to several Christian military units who were also called โ€œmartolosโ€.[12]

Greek Armatolos by Carl Haag (1820โ€“1915).

         Lastly, after the mid-fourteenth century, the Ottomans also formed provincial forces in mainland Greece named โ€œarmatolosโ€ which had a clear phonetic resemblance with the word โ€œamartolosโ€. Although several scholars argued that this term had derived from a medieval loan word from Latin arma โ€œweaponโ€ via Greek ฮฑฯฮผฮฑฯ„ฮฟฮปฯŒฯ‚ it is also within the boundaries of possibility that the development of that word might have originated from ฮฑฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฯ‰ฮปฯŒฯ‚ since the use of the latter preceded the former. During the Greek War of Independence (1821-1828), these ฮฑฯฮผฮฑฯ„ฮฟฮปฯŒฯ‚ units had actively participated in military encounters against the Ottoman forces as we are able to trace their role in Greek folk songs: โ€œฯƒฯ…ฮปฮปฮฟฮณฮนฯƒฯ„ฮตฮฏฯ„ฮต ฯ„ฮฟ ฮบฮฑฮปฮฌ, /ฯŒฯ„ฮน (: ฮณฮนฮฑฯ„ฮฏ) ฯƒฮฑฯ‚ ฮบฮฑฮฏฮผฮต ฯ„ฮฑ ฯ‡ฯ‰ฯฮนฮฌยท / ฮณฯฮฎฮณฮฟฯฮฑ ฯ„โ€™ ฮฑฯฮผฮฑฯ„ฮฟฮปฮฏฮบฮน,/ ฮฟฯ„โ€™ ฮตฯฯ‡ฯŒฮผฮฑฯƒฯ„ฮต ฯƒฮฑฮฝ ฮปฯฮบฮฟฮนโ€ โ€œThink well, / that [why] we burn your villages; / quickly the armatoliki, / that we come like wolvesโ€.[13]

        In sum, แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰ had no religious implications during Homeric times as it was used to convey the idea of โ€œmissingโ€ (i.e. โ€œmissing the markโ€). However, in the later periods, it started appearing in the Bible as the word began to signify the act of transgression against the word of God. In the late Byzantine period, however, a derivation of this word,  แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฯ‰ฮปฯŒฯ‚, was used for Christians who cooperated with the enemy forces since it was thought that they rebelled against God by aligning themselves with the non-Christian adversaries. 


[1] Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. Search for word: แผฮผฮฑฯฯ„ฮฌฮฝฯ‰.

[2]Danker, Frederick W. et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Exeter: Eerdmans, 1974) 44.

[3] Ibid. 43.

[4] Oxford Classical Greek Dictionary, ed. James Morwood and John Taylor, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002)

[5] Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Exeter: William Eerdmen Publishing, 1985. 49.

[6] www.biblegateway.com, Romans 2:12-16.

[7] www.biblegateway.com, Corinthians 8-12.

[8] www.biblegateway.com, Acts 25:8.

[9] George Pachymeres, Relations Historiques, ed. Albert Failler, 5 vols (Paris, 1984โ€“2000) 4:643.18.

[10] Doukas, Decline and Fall of Byzantium to the Ottoman Turks by Doukas, ed. Harry Magouilas. Detroit, 1975. 33.

[11] AลŸฤฑkpaลŸazade, OsmanoฤŸullarฤฑโ€™nฤฑn Tarihi ed. Kemal Yavuz and Yekta Saraรง. ฤฐstanbul: MAS Matbaacฤฑlฤฑk, 2003. 324.

[12] Suret-i Defter-i Sancak-ฤฑ Tirhala, ed. Melek Delilbasi and Muzaffer Arikan, (Ankara: TTK, 2001) 296-334.

[13] Demetrius Petropoulos, ฮตฮปฮปฮทฮฝฮนฮบฮฑ ฮดฮทฮผฮฟฯ„ฮนฮบฮฑ ฯ„ฯฮฑฮณฮฟฯ…ฮดฮนฮฑ Vol1 (Greek Popular Songs), (Athens: ฮ’ฮฑฯƒฮนฮบฮท ฮฒฮนฮฒฮปฮนฮฟฮธฮทฮบฮท, 1958): 3-65.