Vol. 146, No. 4 · Research article Finding the tomb of Suleiman the Magnificent in Szigetvár, Hungary: DIE ERDE historical, geophysical and Journal of the Geographical Society archeological investigations of Berlin Norbert Pap1, Máté Kitanics1, Péter Gyenizse2, Erika Hancz3, Zita Bognár2, Tamás Tóth4 and Zoltán Hámori4 1 Institute of Geography, University of Pécs, Ifjúság útja 6, 7624 Pécs, Hungary, [email protected], [email protected] 2 Department of Cartography and Geoinformatics, University of Pécs, Ifjúság útja 6, 7624 Pécs, Hungary, [email protected], bognarzi@ gamma.ttk.pte.hu 3 Department of Archeology, University of Pécs, Rókus útja 2, 7624 Pécs, Hungary, [email protected] 4 Geomega Ltd, Mester útja 5, Budapest, Hungary, [email protected], [email protected] Manuscript submitted: 15 June 2015 / Accepted for publication: 3 November 2015 / Published online: 17 December 2015 Abstract Exploration in search of the tomb of Sultan Suleiman I and the buildings around it in the vicinity of Szigetvár, Baranya county, southern Hungary, has been going on for some one hundred years and on a number of sites (on the banks of Almás stream, at St. Mary’s Church in Turbék). On the basis of newly discovered documents and map representations, the authors have carried out a reinterpretation of earlier known sources and have abstracted from these information appropriate for a renewed geographical identification of the site of the tomb. The results have been construed in a reconstructed end-17th-century landscape using geoinformation methods. Identification of the Ottoman settlement at Turbék, which can be associated with the construction of the Sultan’s türbe (tomb), was made possible through the collection of finds on the surface of the archaeo- logical site at the Turbék vineyard, the increased intensity of finds and through geophysical examination. The little town was a unique settlement in occupied Hungary, standing between 1574 and 1692 as a symbol of the Islamic conquest of the region. Zusammenfassung Untersuchungen auf der Suche nach der „Türbe“, dem Grabmal, des Sultans Süleyman I. und der umgeben­ den Gebäude sind seit ungefähr einhundert Jahren in der Umgebung von Szigetvár, Komitat Baranya, Süd­ ungarn, im Gange, an mehreren Standorten (am Ufer des Almás­Baches, an der Marienkirche in Turbék). Auf der Grundlage neu entdeckter Dokumente und Karten haben die Autoren eine Neuinterpretation der früher Grabmals gewonnen. Die Ergebnisse werden als mit Hilfe eines Geographischen Informationssystems rekon­ bekannten Quellen vorgenommen und daraus Informationen für eine neue Identifizierung des Standorts des­ nischen Siedlung von Turbék, die mit dem Bau der „Türbe“ in Verbindung gebracht werden kann, wurde durch struierte Landschaftssituation des ausgehenden 17. Jahrhunderts präsentiert. Die Identifizierung der osma­ mende Intensität der Funde sowie durch geophysikalische Untersuchungen ermöglicht. Die kleine Stadt war alsFunde Siedlung an der einzigartig Oberfläche im der besetzten archäologischen Ungarn undAusgrabungsstätte kann als ein Symbol am Weinberg der islamischen von Turbék, Eroberung durch derdie Regionzuneh zwischen 1574 und 1692 gelten. Keywords Pap, Norbert, MátéHungary, Kitanics, Ottoman, Péter Gyenizse, Suleiman Erika Hancz, the Magnificent, Zita Bognár, Tamás historical Tóth and geography, Zoltán Hámori landscape 2015: Finding reconstruction the tomb of Suleiman . – DIE ERDE 146 (4): 289­303 the Magnificent in Szigetvár, Hungary: historical, geophysical and archeological investigations DOI: 10.12854/erde­146­22 DIE ERDE · Vol. 146 · 4/2015 289 Finding the tomb of Suleiman the Magnificent in Szigetvár, Hungary 1. Introduction emerged. From the beginning there was much support for Turbek’s catholic church of St. Mary, Sultan Suleiman I died in Hungary in his tent during the which in 1913 received a memorial plaque to the Siege of Szigetvár (1566) and, according to legend, his in­ one­time sultan’s tomb, worded in Hungarian and ternal organs were buried there. His successor, Selim II, Ottoman Turkish. A number of historians and ar­ decreed that a türbe (Ottoman mausoleum) be erected chaeologists believed this to be the probable site as a shrine over the place where he died. In 1692 or 93 (Németh 1903; Hal 1939; Kováts 1971; Gőzsy 2012; the tomb and surrounding buildings (teqe, mosque, mili­ Szabó 2014). Researchers supporting the theory tary barack, palisade) were demolished during the de­ called upon the legitimizing role of folk tradition, liberation war. In the eighteenth century memory of the certain archaeological anomalies (the secondary settlement was lost, local tradition and research up until placement of Turkish building materials) and the now marking several places as the site of the tomb. supposed ordering of the siege camp (including the sultan’s camp). In 2009, Hancz and Elcil (2012) In the course of some 110 years of exploration, carried out an archaeological control excavation possible sites and two main standpoints have here, but found no traces of Ottoman remnants. Fig. 1 Sketch of Szigetvár and its surroundings in 1689 (drawn by Anguissola) 290 DIE ERDE · Vol. 146 · 4/2015 Finding the tomb of Suleiman the Magnificent in Szigetvár, Hungary According to another view the shrine was built on 2.2. Landscape reconstruction the bank of the Almás stream, which local folk tra­ dition also has as the place of the sultan’s death, at During our research we used Geographical Informa­ Pesti 1982). Not far from this latter tion System (GIS) techniques. The fundamental goal stands the Hungarian­Turkish Friendship Park at the was to model the relief, the hydrography and the “TurkishSztrácsova cemetery”, Well ( created in 1994 on the occasion land use of the 16th­17th century landscape around of the 500th anniversary of Suleiman’s birth. A memo­ ­ rial türbe was also erected here as a symbolic tomb temporary sources, which are related to the siege of of the ruler. Molnár (1965) also placed the site along SzigetvárSzigetvár. andWith to the Suleiman’s help of death,the GIS burial model and the tomb, con the Almás stream, on the basis of site “F” on the 1689 could be interpreted more precisely. map by Leandro Anguissola (“F: Orth wo der Türkische Kaiser Solimanus ist gestorben / The place where the Contemporary descriptions show that the sultan’s Turkish Emperor Solimanus died”) (Fig. 1). tent was raised on at least two sites during the siege. On the spot of the second a türbe was erected after The authors argue that due to the confusions of folk tra­ the sultan’s death. The sites of the tent are not known ditions and the scarcity and contradictions of historical exactly, but there are several hints at the physical en­ sources, and also because of remembrance political con­ vironment of the tent and the türbe, e.g. lake shore, siderations, research activities have been unresolved and hill, oak forest, lime forest, shrub, vineyard, garden, misguided. The geographical environment of the türbe, ­ its changing nature, the underlying geography­related chives and the contemporary descriptions involved information in the sources have not been considered so referencesmaize field toand lakes, names swamps, of some forests, roads pastures,etc. The ar­ far, during the interpretation thereof. The discovery of able lands, vineyards and orchards in the examined additional sources and the application of new examina­ area, but we could not digitise these forms of land tion methods (map­based inspection, geoinformation use on maps with adequate precision, as the sources modelling and geophysical examinations) are necessary did not contain any spatial dimension and no maps or to achieve a successful localisation. The authors argue well­detailed descriptions had remained. GIS model­ that there is a new, third site, that is located beyond ling was the solution. To reconstruct land use in the the Almás stream and St. Mary’s Church, in the eastern 16­17th century we used the Land Change Modeller direction, on the top of the Turbék­Zsibót vineyard. It (LCM) module of the Idrisi software. This GIS module is in the vicinity of the location where the fragment of calculates the trend and rate of land use change from “an Ottoman public building” was already uncovered in two known land use maps (e.g. for the 18th and the 1971 (Kováts 1972) but was later registered as merely a 20th century) and extrapolates for a third date (e.g. “Turkish ruin” or watchtower (Pesti 1982). “modelling”, as the results depend on the input data andthe 17ththe mathematical century). We model have thatto emphasize was used. the word 2. Methods 2.1. Historical written sources the relief. Szigetvár lies on the southern margin of the ZselicThe first Hills, step in ofthe the South analyses­Zselic, was a region the examination where broad of ­ hill ridges covered with loess and streams running in ume of written sources was discovered in Hungarian, broad valleys formed along deep faultlines are typical. TurkishDuring theand course other ofarchives, the research, in Hungarian, a significant German, vol Today most of the area is under large­scale agricul­ Latin and Turkish language, e.g. from the 18th and ture. There are various soil types in the South­Zselic: the 20th century which include geography­related on the hills: Ramann brown forest soil, chernozem brown forest soil, lessivated brown forest soil and in Archives {Ankara}; Bibliothèque Nationale de France information (Office of the Prime Minister Ottoman térkép 1987, Kapronczay 1965, Lehmann 1971, Lovász Hungarian