Kotyan Sutojevic (Hungarian: Kötöny; d. 1241, Pest) was a Cuman khan from the Terter dynasty (Terter-oba, Durut), which gave the famous khans Sokal and Bolush, who led the first Kuman (Cuman) campaigns against the Russian principalities. In the historical literature there are various transcriptions of his name (Köten, Kutan, Kuthen, Kuthens, Kotyan, Kotjan, Koteny, Kötöny, Kuethan, Kuten, Khoten).
Biography
In 1205, after the death of Prince Roman Mstislavich of Galicia, Kotyan, together with his brother Somogur, participated in the campaign of Prince Rurik Rostislavich and the Olgovichs to Galich and was almost captured. In 1223, after the Tatar invasion of the Cumans, Kotyan came to Galich to his son-in-law, Prince Mstislav Mstislavich, and asked him and all Russian princes to help him against the Mongols (see Battle on the Kalka River).
In 1225 Mstislav brought Kotyan, going to go to the Poles, who were in alliance with Daniel Romanovich, and in 1228 Kotyan helped Grand Duke of Kiev Vladimir Rurikovich against Daniel. However, later Kotyan’s Cumans helped already Daniel — against Hungary.
New appearance of Mongols in Cumans steppes was preceded by incident with murder on hunting of son Kotyan Mangush by Toksobitch Akkubul. Kotyan conducted a successful campaign against the Toksobichs, after which they turned to the Mongols for help.
In 1237, defeated by Batyi’s Mongols, Kotyan fled with 40 thousand tribesmen to Hungary,[1] where King Bela IV graciously accepted him as a subject and gave them land for settlement. In return for granting Kotyan and his people Hungarian subjection, — the Kipchaks, previously combining Eastern Christianity with the worship of the supreme Turkic deity Tengri, adopted Catholicism. Officially from historical sources it is known that Kotyan was baptized according to the Latin rite in 1239. One of Kotyan’s daughters, known as Elizabeth of Kuman, was engaged (and later married) to the son of Béla IV, who later became Stefan (Istvan) V of Hungary.
However, the Hungarian aristocracy, remembering the former fickleness of Khan Kotyan, treated the Kipchaks with great distrust. On the eve of the Mongol invasion of Hungary, noblemen conspirators killed Kotyan and his sons in Pest (suspecting, probably without reason, that Kotyan might defect to Batu). After the death of their favorite ruler, most of the Kipchaks (Kumans, Kuns) renounced Catholicism and went into subjection to the Bulgarian tsar Koloman. A part of Polovtsians (including Elizabeth Kumanskaya) has remained in Hungary.
Known descendants
Daughter — in christening Elizabeth (1239?-1290?), queen of Hungary.
Daughter — in christening Maria, wife of Galician prince Mstislav Udatny (Udaly), grandmother of Alexander Nevsky.
Daughter — wife of the regent of the Latin Empire, the Frenchman Narjot de Toucy (Narjot de Toucy).
KHAN KOTIAN AND HIS FAMILY
One of the most interesting personages of the medieval era is Khan Kotyan Sutoyevich. A number of publications in scientific literature have been devoted to this ruler. In particular, these are the publications of A. Golovko, S. Polgar, L. Baloga. The report of the Ukrainian researcher A. Golovko analyzed the relations of Kotyan with Galicia-Volyn Rus [Golovko 2007: Golovko 2006]. L. Balogh investigated the question of the time of Kotyan’s resettlement to Hungary [balogh 2001]. The general analysis of foreign policy activity Kotyan and concerning Russia and concerning Hungary there is in article S. Polgár [Polgár 1999]. The source base of the given researcher consists of Ipatiev and Novgorod First annals, Arabian chronicles an-Nuwayri and Ibn Khaldun, and also Latin language chronicles Rogery, Janos Turotsi, Alberik, from monastery of Three Sources. Dubnicense and Illustrated Chronicle [Ipatiev Chronicle 1962; Novgorod First Chronicle of the older and younger editions 1950; Rogerii 1892; Johanis de Thwrocz 1776; Albrici 1874; Tizengausen 1884, 541-542; Chronicon pictum 1883; Chronicon Dubnicense 1883]. In this paper we are interested not only in Kotian’s accomplishments and life path, but also in his relatives. First of all we are interested in his pagan relatives. The problem of Kotyan’s relatives is one of the little-studied issues. An important aspect of the theme is the Christianization of Kotyan’s kin.
For the first time Kotyan Sutoyevich has appeared in history in 1205 when Rurik from Smolensk dynasty Rostislavich has made attempt to occupy Galich. Khan Kotyan was an ally of this dynasty. This khan belonged to the Durut tribe. Somogur was mentioned together with him. In 1211. Kotyan helped the Chernigov Olgovichs in their attempt to seize the Galician throne. Kotyan also supported Mstislav Udatny of the Rostislavich dynasty. The alliance was cemented by a dynastic union. Mstislav married the daughter of Kotyan which has been at christening named Maria. About descendants from this marriage is unknown. In 1223 Kotyan has addressed for the help to the son-in-law [Golovko 2007, 81-82; Golovko 2006, 259, 272; Novgorod first annals of the senior and younger izvods 1950, 62, 265; Tizengausen 1884, 541]. In Ipatiev annals there is data that prince acted as the ally of Kypchaks in war against Mongols [Ipatiev annals 1962, 742]. And nowhere it is specified that Kotyan has accepted Orthodoxy. Most likely, he remained a pagan before and after 1223. He was forced to change from paganism to Christianity by his emigration to Hungary in 1239.
Kotyan’s possessions were located in Podnestrovie. The Galician boyars were Kotyan’s enemies, because the Kipchaks of the Durut tribe raided their lands. In addition, they were afraid that Mstislav Udatny would use the help of the Kipchaks to assert his power. The Galician boyars deposed Mstislav Udatny on the grounds that the prince wanted to outbid them by inviting the Kipchaks. Prince Mstislav Udatny’s alliance with Kotyan was one of the strongest in Eastern Europe. Only when he was neutralized could the boyars no longer fear Kotyan. The Galician boyars were not particularly afraid of the Kipchaks brought by the Chernigov Olgovichs in the fight against Danil and Vasilk Romanovichs. In 1235 Kotyan fought on the side of Mikhail of Chernigov and Izyaslav of Smolensk against the Romanoviches. It should be noted that five years before that Kotyan was an ally of Danilo Romanovich in the struggle with the Hungarian king Koloman, whom the Hungarian king Aydras (Endre) II wanted to make the ruler of Galicia. Kotyan helped Danil Romanovich and fought against the Hungarians and the Kypchak chief of the Kunun tribe allied to them Bortz (in the Slavonic source he is called Begovars). The constant alliance with Princes of Russia, except for cases of the union with Smolensk Rostislavichs, it had no [Ipatiev annals 1962, 747-751, 753-754, 761; Golovko 2007, 82; Polgár 1999, 99; Golovko 2006, 302-303; Pletneva 1990, 169].
The migration of the Kipchaks of the Durut tribe to Hungary was recorded by a number of Latin sources. Apart from the time of migration, interesting aspects should be mentioned. Khan Kotyan was called regem (i.e. king) of the Kumans by Albric [Albrici 1874, 946]. Rogerii also referred to Kotian as king of the Cumans («Kuthen Cumanorum geh») [Rogerii 1892, 549; Magister Rogerii 2012, 18-19]. Kotian’s high status is also mentioned in the Arab chronicles. An-Nuwayri and Ibn Khaldun described one of the episodes of the struggle for dominance between the Kipchak khans. Kotyan’s son Mangush was hunting, but he was met by Akkubul (possibly the pagan name of Yuri Konchakovitch) of the Toksoba tribe and killed him. A long war followed. The Toksoba led the Donez Kipchaks, and the confrontation of the Durut with the Toksoba once again shows the power of the Durut chiefdom. Rogerius noted that Kotyan had three battles with the Mongols. In two battles he defeated them, but was defeated the third time. At the same time, we know from the Arabic chronicles that the Toksoba asked for help from the Mongols against Kotian. This means that Kotyan was a great commander [Tizengausen 1884. 541-542; Kumekov 1990; Magister Rogery 2012, 18]. One of the common stereotypes is that the wife of the Hungarian queen Istvan, named Erzsébet, was Kotjan’s daughter. This thesis starting with P. Golubovsky and ending with S. Pletneva has been repeated many times. However, it is not supported by the data of Hungarian sources. Erzsébet was called «filia imperatoris Cumanonim». The emperor in this context is no more than a tribal leader, because it is known that her father was not Kotyan of the Durut tribe, but Seyhan, who in another document was titled as dux and belonged to the Kipchak tribe Chertan (Shortan) [bererd 2001, 261-263; Paloczi-Horvath 1989, 53. 77-78; Vasary 2005, 99, 102-10Z].
Regarding the stay of Kotyan in Hungary, this khan in the late 30s of the XIII century accepted Catholic Christianity. Rogery noted the success of the preaching of Christianity among the Kipchaks. Kotyan and his tribe were to accept Catholic Christianity in 1239 during the migration to Hungary [balogh 2001, 53-61; Polgár 1999. 101]. The Hungarian barons feared the loss of their privileges. Kotjan’s opponents spread the news that the Kipchaks had devastated Hungary and committed many atrocities. Rogéry was convinced of Kotjan’s innocence, and perhaps this Kipchak khan was quite adhering to the precepts of the new religion. A Catholic clergyman could not say anything bad about him. A crowd of Hungarians and Germans demanded the extradition of Kotjan. King Bela was in indecision and asked Kotjan to come to him. Kotjan was afraid of reprisals and took refuge with some of his men in the palace. Kotyan and his men defended themselves in the palace for some time, until the superior forces of the Germans and Hungarians massacred him. These events forced many Kipchaks to flee to Bulgaria [Osipyan 2005, 9; Paloczi-Horvath 1989, 50-51; Golubovsky 1889, 12; Rogerii 1892, 556; Magister Rogerii 2012, 19-26, 33-35]. The Kipchaks ravaged Hungarian settlements and killed Hungarian peasants in revenge for Kotjan. Leaving the Arpad possessions, the Kipchaks forced the Danube in the province of Marchia (Srem) and devastated Villa Franca near the town of Senmarton [Rogerii 1892, 557; Vasary 2005, 65; Magister Rogerii 2012. 35].
The etymology of the name Kotyan has several explanations. According to N. Baskakov several etymologies of the name Kotyan are possible. According to the first of them the name was derived from Turkic kütah/kütak (short, small). According to the second the name came from Turkic kötek/kötak (chump, stump). According to the third name Kotyan came from Turkic kötan/köten (intestine). The first hypothesis is prioritized. In Hungarian, the name Kotyan is spelled Kötöny. In Latin sources the name was written as Kuthen [Baskakov 1985, 86; Magister Rogerii 2012, 18-19; Rogerii 1892, 549; Albriei 1874, 946]. Among the relatives of Kuthen noted in the annals, the name Somogur was also mentioned, and his father Sutoi was indirectly mentioned. The etymology of the name Somogur is obvious and comes from the Turkic word samur (sable). As for the name Sutoy, it is derived from Turkic süt (milk). The name is formed from the word süt and the affix of likeness -dej/daj. The word Süttej in translation means similar to milk, whitest [Baskakov 1962, 33-39].
Most members of the Kotyan family moved to Bulgaria. I. Vashari supported the hypothesis of P. Pavlov that the father of George Terter was a relative of Kotyan and after the execution of the latter fled to Bulgaria. In general the name of dynasty Terterovich originated from the Slavic variant of the name of tribe Durut-oba — tertrobichi (from Turk, dört or tört — four). Also to a sort Kotyan belonged Aldimir (Oldamur in the Hungarian sources, Elitimir in the Byzantium sources). This Kipchak migrated to Bogaria from Hungary after 1280 or 1282, that is immediately after defeat of pagan Kipchaks in battle with armies of Hungarian barons on lake Hod. [Pavlov 2000; Vasary 2005, 66; Pavlov 2009, 400; Chronicon Pictum 1883, 226; Johanis de Thwrocz 1776. 188; Chronicon Dubnicense 1884. 106-107]. George became Bulgarian tsar in 1280. [Vasary 2005. &?] The late appearance of Aldimir in Bulgaria can be explained only by the defeat in the battle near Lake Hod. Aldimir wanted revenge, and he was one of those who led the Dzhuchid army into Hungary in 1285. [Pavlov 2000; Pavlov 2009, 400].
Regarding the etymology of the name Aldimir, the researchers adhered to different points of view. P. Pavlov proposed the etymology al (red) + Temir (iron) = hot iron. Й. Zaimov proposed a hypothesis according to which the etymology is as follows: Al or El (hand) + Demir (iron), i.e. Aldimir is an iron hand. V. Stoyanov proposed another name — Aydemir. Au (moon) + demir (iron), i.e. lunar iron. L. Rashonyi proposed the etymology el-temiri — iron power, i.e. to rule the state with an iron hand. N. Illiev suggested the variant «to wear iron», i.e. to be a warrior. Interestingly, the iron hand in Turkish demirel | Pavlov 2000; Stoyanow 2001; Iliev 2013, 100-101; Pavlov 2000; Pavlov 2009. 400].
О. Pritsak considered the Terterovics as a dynasty of Kipchak origin. Kotyan’s descendants and relatives found a new home in Bulgaria and gradually Christianized there [Pritsak 2008, 46]. The ethnonym Durut denoted «the union of four (dórt, tört) tribes» or clans [Tizengausen 1884, 541; Ipatievskaya 1962, 641; Golden 1997, 112]. P. Golden refers the Duruts to the so-called «wild Kipchaks» [Golden 1979/1980, 307; Golden 1997, 112]. V. Bushakov compares Durut with oikonyms Dürte and Iski-Dürte in Nasyvsky kadylyk of Karasubazar kaimykanstvo of the Crimean Khanate. This ethnonym can also be compared with the genus Tertoul of the tribe Argyn of the Middle Juz of Kazakhs, the genus Tortul of the tribes Naiman and Kerey of the same Middle Juz, the genera Tartuli and Turt-ool in Uzbeks, ethnoikonim Dortlar and hydronim Terterchay in Azerbaijan [Bushakov 1991, 136-137]. Duruts are recorded in Hungary in the ethnonym Törtel. One of the murderers of King László IV Kun had the name Tűrtél (Tártul, Turtule, Törté!) [baski 2006, 50-51].
In Arabic sources the Durut and Kunun tribes are named separately and their identification is impossible [Tizengausen 1884, 541; Golden 1997, 114]. Later Arab authors knew about the Qumangu tribe (Qumngu, Qumaniu), but did not know the Duruts [Markwart 2002; Kumekov 1990, 124- 125]. Ibn Khaldun mentioned the tribe Kunun in the list of Kipchak tribes (the form of the name of the tribe in V. Tizengausen). Al-Nuwayri mentioned the tribe of Kotyans. Ibn Dukmak mentioned the ethnonym in the form of Kutn. The spelling of these ethnonyms is somewhat different and therefore it is impossible to identify Kunun and Kotyan [Tizengausen 1884, 541; Kumekov 1993]. The reading of the ethnonym as kenen is accepted by J. Markwart and C. d’Osson. Another reading of the ethnonym is kunun by P. Pellio and W. Tizengausen [Golden 1997, 114; Kumekov 1993]. The legendary ancestor of all Kazakhs is Kotan. In Crimea there are oikonyms Bek-Kutan and Bek-Kotan-Konrat. Kutan-aul is recorded in Dagestan. In Surkhandarya district there is the oikonym Bey-Kotan. The Bashkirs have a similar ethnonym in the form «bikatin» [Bushakov 1991, 137-138]. B. Kumekov believes that Kotyan is not a tribe of the Kidans, but a form of a male name among the Turks [Kumekov 1993]. Kotyan or Kutn of Arab sources is logical to compare with the chronicle Kitan-opa, a clan within the «Lukomor Kipchaks» [Golden 1997, 113] [Golden 1997, 113].
Tertrobichi or Durut were one of the tribes included in the coalition of rulers, organized by Konchak against invasion of Igor Svyatoslavich [Ipatievskaya 1962, 641]. In the chronicle an-Nuwayri it is mentioned about a long-standing enmity between Durut and Toksoba. Probably, the ancestor of Kotyan Sutoi migrated from the steppes between the Don and the Dnieper to the region of the Transnistrian steppes at the end of the XII century. The migrations were a sign of disobedience and, probably, from the end of the XII century and until the middle of the XIII century the enmity between Durut and Toksoba continued. It ended only in the middle of the XIII century, when the Toksoba made an alliance with the Mongols against the Durut, and the Kotyan tribe was forced to emigrate first to Hungary and then to Bulgaria [Tizengausen 1884, 540-541].
O. Pritzak’s assumption that the Durut tribe dominated among the Kipchaks before the migration of the Kai tribe does not seem convincing. V. Stoyanov believes that Tugorkan (Tugor Khan) belonged to the Durut tribe. However, there is no evidence that the Tertrobichi were mentioned earlier than the events of 1185. With the Durut tribe can be associated the Terterovich dynasty in Bulgaria, which is represented by George Terter, Todor Svetoslav and George II Terter. The symbol of the Tarterovich dynasty was a bull [Stoyanov 2013, 52; Pritsak 1973, 112- 118].
Kotyan played a significant role in the history of Central-Eastern Europe for a long time. As a ruler of pagan Kipchaks he was an ally of many princes of Russia. Special relations at it had only with a sort Smolensk Rostislavich. Kotyan probably whole seriously has taken to new religion (Catholic Christianity) in 1239-1241 and became Catholic. Descendants and relatives of Kotyan became not Catholics in Hungary, and orthodox in Bulgaria. Queen Erzsébet was not related to Kotjan.