independently verify this. As presented, the simple out most to critical readers, and unfortunately cast assertion that pearl acquisition is the only possible a pall on the better­documented claims and evi­ reason a Sogdian might have been traveling in dence that surround them. Oman lacks persuasive power. Without the pri­ Overall, this is a thoroughly researched book that mary source making explicit that this was the rea­ is well­written and persuasively argued. Although son, the support the example was supposed to lend sometimes the examples provided do not function Allsen’s claim collapses. Examples like this are effectively to support the claims they are linked to, sprinkled throughout the book, and attentive read­ these instances are rare. This is a book that should ers will no doubt notice them. Most of Allsen’s ex­ be read and cited by diverse scholars with a wide amples are much stronger, and examples like the variety of interests and disciplinary backgrounds one above are decidedly in the minority. But the for many years to come. weak examples are also the ones that tend to stand ­ Samuel Rumschlag ——— Roman Hautala. Crusaders, Missionaries and pear in the anthology without cross­referencing Eurasian Nomads in the 13th ‐ 14th Centuries: them; it is up to the reader to realize that they are A Century of Interaction. Ed. Victor Spinei. readily available by turning the page. The articles Bucureşti: Editoru Academiei Romăne, Brăila: are organized in two numbered “parts.” In the Editura Istros a Muzueului Brăilei “Carol I” “Table of Contents,” the articles are numbered but 2017. 477 pp. the numbers do not appear on the title pages of the his anthology reprints seventeen published article. A full­page color photograph of the author Tand prints two unpublished articles by Roman introduces the volume (5). Hautala of the University of Oulu (Finland) and The anthology begins with an introduction by Vic­ the Marjani Institute of the History of Tatarstan of tor Spinei, the distinguished Romanian specialist the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of on the history of nomads in the Balkans and the Tatarstan. Hautala’s research focuses on “Latin editor of the volume and the series in which it ap­ sources known only to a narrow circle of re­ pears. Spinei’s introduction appears in both Eng­ searchers of Catholic missionary activity in the lish, “A Medievalist with a Sense of Vocation: medieval East” (245). He makes a convincing case Roman Hautala” (11­14) (translated by Adrian that “the accuracy of the Latin sources is not infe­ Poruciuc) and Russian, “Medievist po priznaniiu: rior to the reliability of the Mamluk and Persian Roman Khautala” (15­18). Roman Hautala was born sources” (433­34). Many of these sources were writ­ in Petrozavodsk, capital of the Republic of Karelia ten by missionaries from inside the Jochid ulus, in the Russian Federation, and educated primarily and thus have an advantage over the Asian sources in Finland and Italy (University of Siena, from written from abroad. Collectively the articles in which he received his Ph.D.). In addition to teach­ this anthology enlarge the source base upon which ing, he is an editor, especially for English­language the history of the Jochid ulus can be written, or, in works, of journals in St. Petersburg and Kazan. some cases, demonstrate that previous historical In discussing individual chapters, I have tried to views should be revised. Hautala thus make a sig­ avoid repeating conclusions already adduced from nificant contribution to our knowledge of nomads previous chapters. in the western Eurasian steppe. Part I, “Crusaders and Missionaries,” contains The published articles appeared between 2014 and eleven articles. Chapter 1, “The Teutonic Knights’ 2017. Eleven articles are in English, eight in Russ­ Military Confrontation with the Cumans during ian (each of which has an English­language sum­ their Stay in Transylvania (1211­1225)” (21­37), ex­ mary). Hautala has made no effort to standardize amines the mixed experiences of the Teutonic terminology, but specialists are accustomed to Knights in Hungary. King Andrew II invited them such variety. In addition, he cites articles that ap­ Copyright © 2019 Charles J. Halperin The Silk Road 17 (2019): 101–108 101 Copyright © 2019 The Silk Road House to settle in Burzenland, through which Cumans conversion and sedentarization of the Cumans. entered Transylvania to raid. Under the Teutonic The Cumans’ nomadic life­style made adherence Knights’ protection, it began to recover, but ten­ to the year­long liturgical calendar difficult. So did sions between the Knights and the king over intru­ the presence of Orthodox Vlachs in the region. sions into royal estates, illegal movement of There were also jurisdictional disputes between Hungarians and Szekelys back into the region, the the Cuman bishop and the bishop of Transylvania construction of forbidden stone castles instead of and the archbishop of Esztergom, and fiscal com­ wood, and the minting of coins by the Knights led petition between the hierarchs and the crown. eventually to forcible expulsion. The pope, patron Chapter 4, “Svedeniia o zavolzhskikh mad’iarakh v of the Knights, blamed Hungarian politics. This ar­ latinskikh istochnikakh XIII­XV vekov” (95­124), ticle sets the stage for one of the themes of the an­ addresses the Latin sources concerned with “find­ thology, namely, the connection between the ing” the Trans­Volga Magyars living in “Great Hun­ countries of Eastern or East­Central Europe— gary,” putatively the Hungary, Poland, and Hungarian Urheimat (praro­ Lithuania—and the nomads dina). The Dominican Julian of the steppe. composed a “Letter about Chapter 2, “Gramoty venger­ the way of life of the Tatars” skogo korolia Andreia II, pre­ and a brother Ricardus tran­ dostavelnnye tevtonskim scribed Julian’s account of rytsariam v Transil’vanii: his mission to Grand Bulgar latinskie teksty, perevody i and Great Hungary. The kommentarii” (39­65), con­ Mongols seem to have de­ tains Latin texts and fully an­ ported the Trans­Volga Mag­ notated Russian translations yars, because there are no of four royal charters issued further references to Great by Andrew II dealing with Hungary in the fourteenth the Teutonic Knights’ settle­ century, although the ment in Transylvania. The Mozhars in the Kasimov letters are printed not from Khanate may be their de­ the lost originals but from scendants. Hautala pru­ papal epistles which quoted dently avoids walking into them verbatim. Hautala re­ the briar patch of the ethnic jects arguments against the relationship between the authenticity of the fourth let­ Magyars and the Bashkirs. ter. A theme that shows up Chapter 5, “Zapis’ brata here—Hungarian preten­ Rikardusa ob otkrytii Velikoi sions to the East Slavic prin­ Vengrii (nachalo 1236 goda)” cipalities of Galicia and Volynia (129­45), is devoted only to the text by Ricardus, for —reappears later in the anthology. which Hautala supplies an annotated Russian Chapter 3, “Information of the Latin Sources about translation. Several passing observations in the the Relations between the Kingdom of Hungary text resonate with material in other chapters. The and the Cumans on the Eve of the Invasion of Batu friars posed as merchants; the close connection in 1241" (67­93), deals with efforts at first by the between Italian merchants and the Catholic mis­ Dominicans (Order of Preachers ) and later the sionaries is discussed below. Ricardus records that Franciscan (Minorites) to convert the Cumans in Julian and his party were treated most hospitably Hungary. In 1228 the Pope established a Cuman by Muslims; by the fourteenth century under the bishopric, probably in the territory formerly occu­ Mongols, Muslims were not always as welcoming. pied by the Teutonic Knights. The friars and the A unnamed Mongol envoy of undisclosed ethnicity pope were too optimistic about the prospects for supposedly spoke Hungarian, Russian, Cuman, 102 Teutonic (German?), Saracen (Arabic?) and Tartar minated advocates of other religions and Islam (Turkic or Mongol?); Hautala does not comment had been spread universally. Clearly Uzbek’s on the plausibility of so polyglot an envoy at this change of confession did not induce him to ban or time. Nor does he comment on the mistaken and even restrict Catholic missionaries in the Jochid optimistic expectation that Rus’ Prince Yurii ulus. Modern studies declare that Uzbek made Vsevolodovich was expected to join the Catholic Islam the “state religion” of the Jochid ulus, an Church. The theme of papal attempts to convince error that this reviewer has certainly committed, Rus’ princes to abandon the Byzantine Church also but the Mongols had no concept of a “state reli­ recurs below. gion.” Islam did significantly increase in the cities Chapter 6, “Pis’mo Ladislava, frantsikanskogo kus­ of the Jochid ulus, but not among the nomadic todiia Gazarii (Kaffa, 10 aprelia 1287 goda)” (145­ majority of the population. Hautala comments 51), pertains to a fascinating incident of that the friars felt safer among the nomads than in socio­religious interaction between Catholics and the more Islamicized cities, as the actions of the Muslims. Father Ladislaus was a Franciscan custo­ Muslims in Solkhat just discussed indicate. Never­ dian in Gazaria (the North Black Sea coast). Mus­ theless, the nomadic Mongols clung fervently to lims in Solkhat in 1286 demolished a church in the religion of their ancestors, which seems here to order to silence its bell. The Franciscans com­ mean the traditional steppe “paganism,” not Islam. plained to Khan Tula­Buga and Nogai,1 who dis­ Of course, the Franciscans much exaggerated their patched representatives, backed up by troops, to success, both quantitatively, as a percentage of the punish the offenders severely, to compensate the population, and qualitatively, claiming converts Franciscans for their losses, and to authorize them among the Chinggisid elite.