History/Tarih P.1
Village history part 1. Köy Tarihi birinci bölüm
Türkce çevriler, İngilizce yazılan bölümden sonra devam eder
The origins of Lurucina seem to be clouded in mystery. Stories and the legendary fable of the beautiful Lorenzia have been in existence for generations. No one really knows the truth, neither do I consider myself a leading expert on the subject. One thing is certain however, with 650 towns and villages on the Island, and a history going back to possibly the 12-13 century AD Lurucina itself is only important to the people who originated from the village. One fact remains however that Lurucinali’s do feel they have a unique and diverse background that makes them feel special. The ability to converse in Turkish, Greek and English was, and still is a source of pride. One thing is certain, no matter what part of the world they have settled in, the people of our village have shown themselves to be adaptable, entrepreneurial and determined to succeed, and yet the love and yearning for their village is greater than ever. In-spite of the passage of time people will talk about the good old days when everyone was back home and happy. Naturally nostalgia and the yearning for their beloved relatives long gone play a massive part in these thoughts. That was a time when poverty and simplicity went side by side. The unity of the family groups gave a strength of belonging, and the ridicule of other Cypriots of our unique local culture Known as Linobambaki’s (cotton woollies) cemented the bond to a level that was rare even by Cypriot standards.
My aim is to refresh and urge younger and older generations alike to take another look at our past in order to carry it forward to future generations. The reality is, the last fifty years has seen an exodus that has decimated this unique and beautiful village’s population to less then when the British took over in 1878. Politics, poverty and modern travel have all played a part. But one thing is certain the vast majority ( regardless of whether they live in the UK, USA, Australia, Turkey, Canada or any other part of the world) who were born in Lurucina will always have their heart beating in the valley of Lorenzia.
According to the maps of the Venetian period Lurucina was named Lorthing. In the 1540s however it was registered as Lorichina in the Contrada di Visconta (District of Visconta) which seems to indicate a Lusignan origin possibly 12-13 centuries AD. The Venetian census from the early 1500s may indicate that most of the inhabitants were Orthodox Greeks and a small number of Latins. The surrounding villages like Damalia, Aya Zorzi, Aya Marina and Malloura had some Latin communities. The most detailed record of these villages was for Malloura. The records for 1565 recorded 81 adult freedmen (Francomates may have been freedmen, but legally they were still servants of their Latin Lords). With women and children it had an estimated population of 196 (1). Malloura’s origins go back to the Roman period and the estimated population during Roman rule was between 188-258. Malloura was abandoned during the Arab-Byzantine period but re-settled during the Frankish Lusignan period. It was a thriving village and the people earned their living from cereals, vineyards, orchards and herding .[2]
Athienou was the first farming village in the valley. It was established in the 1st century BC when Cyprus became a Roman Province. To the north of Lurucina however is the oldest town of the area which is the Ancient Idalion, founded in the early period of Greek settlement over 3000 years ago.
The Venetian census of 1562 established that there were 246 villages belonging to the state and 567 belonging to the nobility and Church. [3] The peasant’s were simply tenants and owned no land. In order to understand the feudal system in Cyprus during Venetian rule a short explanation would help. The class difference in Cyprus played an important part in how the Island was ruled. The Paroiki/Parici and the Perperiarii classes in particular were downtrodden. The Paroiki (Parici) had to perform 2 days slave labour for the state and their Lords as part of their taxation. In addition they had to hand over anything between 20-66% of the crop they produced on their meagre land even though the land belonged to their Lords, who had absolute jurisdiction over the Parici. They were treated as mere slaves and could inflict any punishment they saw fit short of mutilation and death. The Perperiarii who were the second class had risen from the Parici and had become ”freemen”. Their name derived from the tax which they paid in gold coins called ”hyperpers”. Most of the civil servants and wealthy citizens of Nicosia were from the Perperiarii, this of course did not save them from the wrath of the ruling Venetian lords who looked down on the 2 classes. The third class Lefteri (eleutheroi) were also called Francomati. This class came mostly from the Parici who had become free by making a substantial payment to their lord, but still had to carry on paying 10-20% of their crops to the lord for setting them free. In addition they had to pay tribute to the King in return for privileges. Though nominally free they were still subject to the jurisdiction of the ordinary magistrates .[4]
The Cypriot population during the Venetian period like the Ottoman period showed some wild fluctuations during the 82 years of occupation. A quick glance at the following table is enough to show this fluctuation.
| (Parici. landless Serfs). | Francomati (Freed slaves). | Total | |
| End of the 15th century Parici | 47,185 | 77,066 | 124,251 |
| 1540 (F. Attar, M.L. III, 534) | 70,050 | 95,000 | 165,050 |
| 1562 ( B Sagredo, M.L. III,541) | 83,653 | 47,503 | 131,156. [5] |
As can be seen from the statistics, while the fortunes of the peasant class changed wildly, the actual population hardly increased in 82 years. Gilles Grivaud the French researcher also quoting from the book, has all helped our knowledge on the local history surrounding Lurucina. Their information gives us some informative details of the villages and populations around Lurucina in the last years of Venetian rule. The details may be from the 1562 or 1565 records.
the few villages mentioned.
Malloura 81
Athienou / Atirne 61
S Zorzi (Petrofan ? ) 1
Damidia / Damalia) 31
Lympia 88
Louroujina / Lorthina 186
Potamia 66
Dhali 158. [6]
Important note; The figures above may or may not include women and children. As can be seen in the first paragraph, Malloura may have had 81 ”Freedmen” but the estimated population was 196. If that was to apply to Lurucina than the estimated population would be in excess of 300-350. It’s unlikely however. In the absence of concrete archive evidence this is only speculative. It’s clear from the historic records that Lurucina was a decent size village for the period. The population was even larger than Athienou/Kiraci Koy and Dhali/Dali. The Ottoman census of 1572 of 24 households is not so detailed on the head count. A reasonable guess could be around 100-130 inhabitants. It does seem however that a drop in the population took place. If so, no doubt this would be the Latin element, and would explain why some families were transferred during the siege of Famagusta .[7] and of course some Ottoman settlers after the war. As many Latin homes were abandoned many of their homes were offered to new settlers or the soldiers who fought to capture the island.
Perhaps the most far reaching reform was the fact that the land or properties the peasants owned was that they were allowed to keep the land they owned on a perpetual lease basis with the right to pass the inheritance to their children. The Cizye for non Muslims obviously divided the status of the 2 religions but one advantage for the Christians was that they were not obligated to do national service with the result that they carried out their business and trade at a higher level than the Muslims who were often sent abroad to die and had less time to improve their family farms. Some Christians did no doubt find this not to their liking and some conversions to Islam were undertaken. This was mostly among the remaining Latin’s who found themselves facing the backlash from their Orthodox neighbors and their new Ottoman masters. Conversion was a way of saving their lives and provided some security in their daily lives. After a few years the persecution declined in some areas and like Athienou village the Latin’s were allowed to practice their faith, but were only permitted to work as hired muleteers. To this day Turkish Cypriots call Athienou by the name of ‘Kiraci koy’, which simply means the hirers or tenants.
One of the most interesting records which gives us an opportunity to make some comparisons with the village under the Venetians is the first tax valuation carried out on Lurucina ( Named Lorthina at the time ) by the Ottomans in 1572. This is because of Halil Inalcik’s research in 1969 of his Ottoman policy and administration in Cyprus after the conquest. [8]
The following information is on page 21 table 2.
Population Ispenje
Households 24 Adult males 27
Batchelors 3 Total tax 810
Widows 0
Tithes
Wheat 900
Barley 1,050
Flax –
Cotton –
Fruits 975
Olives 55
Two
Beehives 10
Cocoons –
Garden produce –
Sheep-tax 20
Pig-tax 40
Fines & other dues 95
From properties without heirs etc 75
Rural guardianship –
Mills –
Tavern
Total; 4,030.
The Jizye (Military exemption tax) for Lurucina was about 26-27% of the total tax paid by the Christians in the first Ottoman census. The burden of having to work at least 2 days a week for their Venetian Lords was reduced to one day; this must have been a great relief for the people of Lurucina as the extra day gave them the opportunity to concentrate on their own crops. Another advantage soon became apparent, as the landless peasants were allowed to keep the land they worked on a ”perpetual lease,” with the right to pass on their holdings to their sons, this in effect turned the peasants into land owners. Title deed registrations did not come into effect however until the mid 1800s. A sworn testimony by at least 2 witnesses and the local Imam or priest was sufficient to prove ownership of land.
Lurucina’s tax liability for 1572. [9].
Jizye Total of all taxes percentage of tax average tax burden
collected in kind per adult male
1,620 5,704 54 210
Judging from the above taxpayers population we can come to a rough estimate that the women were in equal numbers and perhaps half the population may have been children. Some disabled, or old men were of course exempt. With Turkish settlers still not in large numbers a fair guess for 1572 would be that the people were predominantly Christian. By 1643 the tax census showed that 41 households were Christian. [10] At the time of editing this information the figures for the Muslim population has not been found. All we can say is that the ” Iskan defteri” ( Settlement Book ) Republic of Turkey Prime ministerial Archives , Kamil Kepeci Defter ( Book ) No 2551, listed Lurucina as having received some settlers in 1572. More details on this are given further down on this page.
Once the conquest of the island by the Ottomans was over the tax system was overhauled, which helped ease the burden of taxation. The list below gives some idea of the relief to the poorer classes in particular .[11]
Venetian Period Ottoman period
2 days forced labour One day a week forced labour
60,80 or 90 akche 30 akche from each tax as ispenje tax
Taken as fixed taxes
5 akche per head as salt tax Abolished
60 akche for each mule born Abolished
25 akche for each cow Abolished
Giving birth
1 akche for each sheep yearly Abolished
1 akche for each lamb Abolished
One third share of the crop
In the vineyards Abolished
One and a half akche for
Every donum of land Abolished
25 akche for each mare born Abolished
Not applicable A new tax of 60, 80, 100 akche according to the family’s wealth, was introduced for non Muslims. This was called the Cizye. (this tax made the Christians exempt from national service)
The situation in Cyprus before the Ottoman conquest was one of total domination and persecution by the Latin Venetians against the majority of Orthodox Christians who were predominantly Greek speaking. The entry of the Ottomans gave control to the Orthodox Church. This move was the death knell for the Latin community. Many either fled the island, were massacred or converted to Islam in order to avoid persecution. So the immediate question for us is, was Lurucina Latin, Orthodox, or were settlers brought in from Turkey??? A conclusive answer in the absence of written archive information makes it difficult to know the facts with any precision, therefore most of our knowledge on the history of Lurucina is inconclusive. A massive effort is now in progress to acquire and translate the old Ottoman census archives in order to broaden our knowledge. The results can be seen on the Ottoman archive pages. In time this will be expanded as much more information is in the process of being translated. In the meantime all we can say is that looking at some of the remains (what little there is) of the Religious sites and names of the fields and hills may give us a clue, if at all. The first and obvious question would be to ask if the fable of Lorenzia has any foundations in fact. Sadly as appealing as the story is, no evidence has ever been provided. In the book “Names and locations of Cyprus lost in the depths of 2500 years of history” by Dr Ata Atun the name starts with Lorthing then changes to Looretzena onto Louroujina and now Akincilar. [12] How and when the story of Lorenzia came about is a mystery that has persisted for generations. Sadly we may never know the truth. The 1831 census has also proven the story to be a myth as not a single well existed in the village at the time .[13] Just to remind people the start of the story was that Lorenzia used the well to draw water for her family and flock of sheep.
The Latin community, although smaller than the Orthodox Greeks owned large tracts of land around Ay Sozomenoz, Bodamya and Lorthina (Lurucina) Aya Marina was in fact a Latin Church. In 1643 there were 13 households registered in the village of Aya Marina. After a devastating earthquake in August of 1735 the surviving inhabitants moved to the village of Limbya which was originally called Olympia, no doubt the numbers of Latin’s were much less then the Orthodox population, and in time many converted to either Islam or Christianity
According to M de Cesnola who went to Cyprus during Ottoman rule the vast majority of “Linobambaki” were originally Latin’s, who converted to save their lives, but secretly practiced the Christian faith. [14] Some historians among them Sir Harry Luke,and Rupert Gunnis concluded this to be the result. What they did not mention however is the fact that from the mid 1700s to early 1800s a new wave of Turkish families came to the village which completely changed the ethnic makeup of the village. [15] The census evidence of the period confirms that the vast majority of today’s genetic roots date not to the 16th century but to this particular migration.
There were of course other Churches in the area. Aya Philidhitiosa near the old Larnaca Nicosia road is one. And let’s not forget that in-spite of a smaller population the Greek Churches of Ay Andronicos (built in 1831) , Panayia and Ay Epiphanios were until the 1950s very active. St Epiphanios went through some restoration in 1864 which seemed to have spoiled the interior. One unanswered question remains on the Byzantine Church of St Catherine which according to R. Gunnis was close to the main Larnaca road 2 miles from the village. [16] In 1935 it was still standing and yet many old timers from Lurucina have no knowledge of its existence. Strangely many maps of the area do not include St. Catherine. Why? There was of course an Ay Katerina in Bodamya, but how could an historian with the calibre of Rupert Gunnis mistake one for the other, if at all, and most important of all he clearly states that the Church 2 miles from Lurucina. In fact the location Gunnis describes sounds very much like the location of Aya Marina. The Mosque itself is not as old as most Churches, the existing mosque was built in the late 1800s or early parts of the 1900s, but the minaret was added in the 1930s. The central position of the mosque may give us a clue that some families may have settled in the early parts of Ottoman rule. Strangely however, the Tahura family ( Ismail Ali ‘Gicco’ for example) who owned the properties adjacent to the mosque allegedly only came to the village from Turkey around the late 1700s to early parts of the 1800s. The question is who owned the land prior to the purchase by Mustafa Sari Tahura? The 1882 maps of Lord Kitchener prepared soon after the British took over Cyprus in 1878 does in fact show that the mosque was in existence. It may not be the same building, but a smaller building that was used as a mosque. [17] More research needs to be done to establish this.
Ancestors of the Galaba’s, Pekri’s, Lao’s, Mavri’s and Kavaz were settled in the area between the Mosque, the small stream that ran through the village and the old Turkish Cemetery. Does that mean that they were older inhabitants of Lurucina? The Mehmet Katri family tree has been established as being one of the oldest and certainly largest family trees of Lurucina. The Ottoman translations from the 1878 census have shown this to be a fact. The Arabic Siliono’s who came in the late 1700s settled on the suburbs of the village, this in itself can give us some clue which families may have settled in our village in chronological order. But another strange thing is that the vast majority of the family trees recorded go back 9/10 generations. No doubt the smaller Greek community lived in the village long before the arrival of the Turks, there is some record on this site of those families, but not much on the enigmatic and elusive Latin community which is reputed to have founded the village. More research needs to be carried out however before we can verify any details with a degree of certainty. As the Greek population of Lurucina has been added to our records, it confirms that they were in much smaller numbers, or at least from the mid 1700s on-wards. The Christian population in the 1643 census which registered 41 households prove that at that time the Greek population was larger than in the 1831 census [18] It would be a good guess that many either left the island due to pestilence, drought and malaria that hit Cyprus hard in the mid 1700s [19] some may have moved to the nearest village Limbya/Olympia. This paved the way for newcomers, namely our families. Aya Marina who registered 13 households in 1643 was also abandoned soon after due to the same reasons and possibly an earthquake which reduced the village to rubble. Most of the inhabitants also moved to Limbya
There is one bit of information that may help us in future research and that is the Mevkufat Defter written in 1572, it records lists a total 0f 1689 families being transferred to Cyprus from various parts of Anatolia. [20] The question is, who and where were they settled?? Perhaps one day we may find the documents that may give us that information
I would however like to share the following as some debate on this subject is needed, others may of course come to a different conclusion.
There are some old timers who have suspicions that some of our people were originally Maronite’s, and point to the Church of Aya Marina as evidence. I think we can safely dismiss that assumption on the basis that in August of 1596 and March of 1597 ( only 24-25 years after the Ottoman conquest) Girolamo Dandini, S.J., Professor of Theology at Perugia in Italy went to Cyprus. His mission was to investigate the condition of the Maronite community in Lebanon. but the report he left us on the Maronites of Cyprus included the names of 19 settlements and makes no mention of Lurucina at all. Hagia Marina is however listed. [21]
The following section is from a book by Guita G Huorani and a few other writers including Palmieri. The section that is of most interest is the sections referring to the conversions in Lurucina in the year 1636. The claim by Palmieri in 1905 [22] seems to contradict the report by Jerome Dandini when he visited Cyprus in 1596 and named all the remaining 19 Maronite villages on the Island which does not include Lurucina. If we can discover the missing period before the 10/11 generations of families recorded on this site then perhaps we can complete the history of ALL THE FAMILIES OF OUR VILLAGE. In the meantime our search continues.
BY GUITA G HOURANI
The Cypriot Maronites under Ottoman Domination (1571-1878)
”Known in general as dhimmis or infidels, like other Christians, the Maronite’s were also called Suryani under the Ottomans (Jennings 1993: 132, 148-149). The Ottoman domination of Cyprus brought on the demise of the Maronite colony on the island. As their villages became depopulated through death, enslavement and migration, the Maronite population became almost extinct and, because of persecution and taxation, their bishops and archbishops became non-resident.
While the Greeks did nothing during the Ottoman invasion, the Cypriot Maronites stood beside the Latins in their defense and saw the invasion of the island ruin their settlements. Soon after total Ottoman control over the island, the Ottomans recalled the allegiance of the Maronites to the Latin’s. Similarly, the Greeks remembered the oppression of the Catholic’s, and since most of the Catholic’s who had stayed on the island were Maronites, it was they who suffered retaliation. Together, the Ottoman’s and the Greek Orthodox inflicted the worst treatment on ‘this unfortunate community’ (Palmieri 1905: col. 2462; Cirilli 1898: 14-15). In 1572 the Maronite’s had 33 villages and their Bishop resided in the Monastery of Dali in the district of Carpasie (Palmieri 1905: col. 2462) .
During Ottoman rule, 14 Cypriot Maronite villages became extinct. By 1596, about 25 years after the Ottoman conquest of Cyprus, the total number of Maronite villages had been reduced to 19 (ibid. 1905: col. 2462, Dib 1971: 177). The Ottomans, after annexing Cyprus, imposed increasingly high taxation on the Maronite’s, accused them of treason, ravaged their harvests and abducted their wives and children into slavery (Cirilli 1898: 20). Many Maronite’s had died during the defence of the island, many more were either massacred or taken as slaves, many others dispersed throughout the island to escape persecution, and those who remained in their villages found themselves in a pitiable condition (Cirilli 1898: 14-15). Consequently, a group fled to Lebanon, another group accompanied the Venetian’s to Malta (Dib 1971: 177) and those who stayed behind “had to submit, in addition to the yoke of the conqueror, to that of the Greeks, which was no less troublesome” (ibid. 1971: 177). This treatment was the main reason why appointed Maronite clergy to Cyprus no longer resided on the island and preferred to stay in Lebanon. These atrocities were the most direct cause of the reduction in the Cypriot Maronite population and subsequently in the number of their villages. During this period, the Bishops who served the Maronite’s were Bishop Youssef (+1588) and Bishop Youhanna (1588-1596) (Daleel 1980: 108). While the Ottomans ruled, the Greeks, who had gained a bit of advantage for a while, began their retaliation against the Catholics –– which meant the Maronite’s, who were the only Catholics left on the island (Palmieri 1905: col. 2464). The vengeance of the Greeks began with the confiscation of the Maronite churches and was magnified by their accusation that the Maronite clergy was working for the return of Venetian rule to Cyprus and was plotting against the Ottoman Empire before the Sublime Porte in Istanbul. Consequently, the Ottomans inflicted their anger on the Maronites. They killed, exiled, imprisoned and enslaved many. They obliged many others to embrace the Greek Orthodox rite and to obey the Greek hierarchy. This persecution caused a considerable number of Christian’s, including a good number of Maronite’s, to adopt Islam as a survival mechanism (Cirilli 1898: 11, 21; Palmieri 1905: col. 2468).
By 1636, the situation had become intolerable and the conversions to Islam began. “Since not everyone could stand the pressures of the new situation, those unable to resist converted to Islam and became Crypto-Christian’s, mostly Armenians, Maronites and Albanians in the northern mountain range and along the north coast, particularly at Tellyria, Kambyli, Ayia Marina Skillouras, Platani and Kornokepos” (Jennings 1993: 367). The Maronites who adopted Islam were centred in Louroujina in the District of Nicosia and were called Linobambaci — a composite Greek word that means men of linen and cotton (Palmieri 1905: col. 2468). However, these Maronite who had converted in despair did not fully denounce their Christian faith. They kept some beliefs and rituals, hoping to denounce their ‘conversion’ when the Ottomans left. For example, they baptized and confirmed their children according to Christian tradition, but administered circumcision in conformity with Islamic practices. They also gave their children two names, one Christian and one Muslim (Hackett 1901: 535; Palmieri 1905: cols. 2464, 2468).
Father Célestin de Nunzio de Casalnuovo, a Franciscan from the Holy Land, worked for 33 years on returning the Linobambaci to their Christian religion. Some communities responded and asked him to establish schools in their villages. He obliged by opening two schools. But the Greek hierarchy continued to agitate the Muslim fanatics, who began attacking the Linobambaci and their agriculture fields. The Linobambaci, fearing for themselves, withdrew their religious aspirations and the whole re-conversion operation was halted (Palmieri 1905: col. 2468)”.
The following from Excerpta Cypria seems to contradict Palmieri’s claim above that Lurucina had a Maronite community. As stated earlier Reverend Jérôme Dandini traveled to Cyprus to assess the condition of the Maronite community. Sir Francis George Hill who may have written one of the most comprehensive history of Cyprus claimed that ”Palmieri is almost certainly wrong in deriving them (the Linobambaki) from the Catholic Maronites. [23]
”Reverend Jérôme Dandini, the Envoy of Pope Clement VII, visited the Maronite’s of the island during his papal mission to the Maronites of Lebanon in 1596. Dandini stated the following.
”The Cypriot Maronites were all under the authority of the Maronite Patriarch whose See was in Lebanon. He also declared that at times there was at least one priest for each parish and that sometimes there were eight, like in Metoschi. He named the 19 Maronite villages left in Cyprus: Metoschi, Fludi, Santa Marina, Asomatos, Gambili, Karpasia, Kormakitis, Trimitia, Casapisani, Vono, Cibo, Ieri, Crusicida, Cesalauriso, Sotto Kruscida, Attalu, Cleipirio, Piscopia, Gastria. However, when he visited Cyprus in 1596, he learned that there were not many Maronite clergy left, that many Maronite’s had either fled or apostatized and that there were only ten parishes, the most important being Saint Marina, Cormakiti and Asomatos. He found the Maronites in a miserable situation (Dandini 1656: 23). Noting the poverty of the Maronite people, the lack of priests to serve their communities and the sad state of their parishes, Dandini recommended that the Maronite Patriarch send a bishop to serve the Maronites of Cyprus. In 1598, Father Moïse Anaisi of Akura was designated bishop and he stayed until 1614. He was followed by Girgis Maroun al Hidnani (1614-1634), who was a visiting bishop residing in Lebanon; Elias al Hidnani, who visited the Island at the request of the Patriarch in 1652”. [24]
In the Mevkufat Defter written in 1572, it lists a total 0f 1689 families being transferred to Cyprus from various parts of Anatolia. The policy of settlement increased and gathered pace. In his excellent research listed below, Mustafa Hasim Altan lists a total 5720 families
According to the research done by Mustafa Hasim Altan, an expert in Ottoman writing and a book published in 4 volumes in the TRNC in 2001, he translated the order given by Sultan Selim from the original archives documents at the Republic of Turkey Prime Ministerial State Archives ; Istanbul Ottoman Archives ; Muhimme Defteri ( Muhimme Book) XIX , Page 334-335 . Copy of which is also at TRNC National Archive ; Ref : 728-2531 , Box No 28.
Further information of settlements are sourced from ” Iskan defteri” ( Settlement Book ) Republic of Turkey Prime ministerial Archives , Kamil Kepeci Defter ( Book ) No 2551.
With the arrival of Ottoman’s on the island a great exodus occurred among the Venetian’s. In the preliminary searches it was discovered that 76 villages in the areas of Mesaoria and Mazoto alone were completely abandoned. Hence it became vital that these villages and areas had to be repopulated. Sultan Selim the 2nd’s decree on 21 September 1572 ordered that one out of ten families of the areas selected to be transferred and settled in Cyprus have to be looked at in this light. [25]
Some of the main areas that Turkish people were transferred from were
Iceli, Taseli, Manavgat, Mut, Alanya, Silindi, Burhanlar, Avsar, Maras, Mugla, Cankir, Divrigi, Kayseri, Corum, Tarsus, Bolu, Bursa, Karaman, Bozok, Ulukisla, Akdag, Bor, Ilgin, Shakil, Aksehir, Nigde, Beysehir, Urgu, Develihisar, Kochisar, Seydisehir, Aksaray, Silifke. 5720 families from the regions of central Turkey were eventually transferred.
On arrival some were placed into the villages vacated by Venetians. Some of those villages included Lurijina ( Akyndzhilar) Ay Sozomeno (Arpalyk) , Aytotoro (Bozdağ) , Kalohoryo (Chamlyköy) , Elye ( Doğancı ) , Kocchina (Erenkoy) , Tremetusha (Uzun Mese ) , Aybifan (Esenda) , Amadyez (Günedyez) (Gun) Diabodame (Ikidere), Trahona (Kizilbash-Gelibolu), Xerovuono (Kurutepe), Margi (Kuchukkoy), Vroisha (Yağmuralan), Limniti (Yeshilyrmak), Šillura, Yilmazkoy, Fota (Dağeri, Piğleri) Trapeza (Teknecik) ,Templos ((Zeytinlik) , Prastyo ( Baf -Yuval) , Artemis ( Ardam), Aisimyo (Avtepe), Ovgoroz (Ergazi), Ayharida ( Ergenekon) , Konetra ( Gonendere ), Sinde ( Inönü ), Kritya ( Kutulus ) ( Kutulus ), Avila ( Köliv ), Av Korovya (Kuruova), Livatya (Sazlıköy), Ipsillat (Sutlüce), Evretu (Dereboyu), Melandra (Beşiktepe), Istinjo (Kushluca), Ayastad (Zeybekköy), Klavia (Alanichi), Aplanda, Pergama (Beyarmudue), Petröfünde (Köfünde) (Gechitkale), Mennoya (Otuken), Pile, Goshshi (Three Martyrs), Dzhelya (Lightning), Pitargu (Akkargy), Aksilu (Aksu), Ayyani (Aydin), Anatyu (Gormeli), Antrolik (Gundogdu), Pelatusa (-Karagya, Kavagi) (Kavagi). [26]
It must be noted that not all the families transferred from Turkey were Muslim’s , although vast majority were Muslim , some were Christian’s. After the initial settlements , some Christian’s were allowed to return to the villages that they had vacated . Apart from the villages mentioned above there were villages that were either set up by the soldiers that had taken part in the conquest , or came to settle from Turkey. Just to mention a few as this is outside the scope of this site, Mara, Lefke , Gaziveren , Beyköy, Ortaköy , Airda , Mora , Gönyeli , Marata (Muratağa), Sandallar etc.
As is commonly known some Christian’s had converted to Islam during the Ottoman time for various reasons. How many if any had converted in Lurucina is something we may never know. Though the evidence points to some number of Turkish being transferred to our village just after 1572. In addition a few Latin families that had converted to Islam were also transferred to Lurucina during the siege of Famagusta in 1571. The possibility that there were some other conversions from Christianity may have taken place and should not be ruled out. It seems clear however that most of today’s family trees date from the above mentioned second wave of migrants during the 1700s. There are of course some families that have yet to be identified by their place of origin. In the meantime our search continues.
[1] The Great Map by Leonida Attar. Written by Francesca Cavazzana Romanelli and Gilles Grivaud. Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation. 2006.
[2] The Archeology of Past and Present in the Malloura Valley”, edited by Derek Counts, F. Nick Kardulias and Michael Toumazou, 2012.
[3] Halil Inalcik. Ottoman Politics and Administration in Cyprus after the Conquest. 1969 page 10.
[4] Halil Inalcik. Ottoman Politics and Administration in Cyprus after the Conquest. 1969 page 17.
[5] Halil Inalcik. Ottoman Politics and Administration in Cyprus after the Conquest. 1969 page 15.
[6] The Archaeology of Past and Present in the Malloura Valley, edited by Derek Counts, P. Nick Kardulias and Michael Toumazou, 2012.
[7] Nazim Beratli in personal correspondence.
[8] Ahmet Gazioglu Turks in Cyprus page 181. & table II page 21 of Halil Inalcik, Ottoman politics and administration in Cyprus after the conquest.
[9] Halil Inalcik page 22, table 3. Ottoman politics and administration in Cyprus after the conquest.
[10] Studies in History, International Journal of History. 2012. Page 136.
[11] Halil Inalcik page 22, table 3. Ottoman policy and administration in Cyprus after the conquest.
[12] Names and places of Cyprus lost in the depths of 2500 years of history, by Dr. Ata Atun.
[13] General Directorate of State Archives of the Republic of Turkey. 1831-3 Ottoman Population Archives. Archives of the National Estatales of the Republic of Turkey. 1831 Censo automano de 145. “Cyprus under Ottoman Administration, Population-Land Distribution”
[14] The first family records of Lurucina, by Ibrahim Tahsildar (Tahsildar was a tax collector who kept records of all the families of Lurucina.
[15] The Centuries-Long Struggle for Existence of the Raiders (Lurucina) Turks Por Hasan Yücelen ‘Mudaho’.
[16] Ruppert Gunnis. Historical Cyprus 1936. Pages 329-330.
[17] Lord Kitchener’s Maps. Section 10, drawn up in 1882 and published in 1885.
[18] Studies in History, International Journal of History 2012 Page 136.
[19] Excerpta Cypria 1908. Cyprian. Page 355.
[20] The Turks in Cyprus by Ahmet Gazioglu, 1990. Page 77.
[21] Extract from Cypria. 1908. Page 181.
[22] Palmieri 1905: col. 2462; Cirilli 1898: 14-15.
[23] George’s Hill. The Story of Cyprus page 305. 1952
[24] Excerpt from Cypria 1908. Page 181-184.
[25] The Turks in Cyprus by Ahmet Gazioglu, 1990. Page 74.
[26]The Turks in Cyprus by Ahmet Gazioglu, 1990. Pages 91-92.
Turkish Section of History
Luricina has a mysterious past. The legendary stories of the beautiful Lorenzia have been known for a long time. However, no one knows the exact truth. I do not consider myself an expert on the subject. The truth is that Luricina has 650 villages and towns on our island, and its history probably dates back to the 12th and 13th centuries. The Luricina people believe that their multicultural past makes them more special than other peoples of the region. The fact that they can speak Turkish, Greek and English has always been a source of pride for them. No matter where they settle in the world, the Luricina villagers have always been people who can easily adapt to where they are, who are prone to trade and determined. Their longing for their villages, wherever they are, has never diminished, on the contrary, it has increased. Despite the passage of time, the villagers always remember the happy days when they were in their villages. Their relatives, whom they lost long ago, naturally remain in their minds as part of their nostalgic memories. Those were the years when simple life and poverty reigned together. The strength of family ties was an element that increased belonging. In addition, the derogatory attitudes of other Cypriots towards their local culture known as ‘Linobambaki’ (linen and cotton) led them to embrace each other with a loyalty that exceeded Cypriot standards.
My aim in doing this study was to refresh this information about our village for the younger generations and the elderly and to ensure that our history is passed on to future generations. The sad truth is that the migrations that have been going on for 50 years have reduced the population of this beautiful, unique village terribly and brought it below the population of the British colonial period in 1878. Politics, poverty and modern travel have played a role in this bad situation. However, there is one certain fact. The hearts of the vast majority of Luricinas who now live in England, America, Australia, Turkey, Canada or other countries of the world will always beat in the Lorenzia Valley.
On maps from the Venetian period, Luricina is called Lorthing. In the 1540s, it was recorded as Lorichina in the province of Visconta. This shows that its origin probably dates back to the Lusignan period of the 12th-13th centuries. In the census conducted during the Venetian period in the early 1500s, we see that most of the villagers were Orthodox Greeks, while a small portion were Latin communities. The neighboring villages of Damalia, Aya Zorzi, Aya Marina, and Malloura also contained a small number of Latin villagers. The most detailed census information among these villages belongs to the village of Malloura.
According to records from 1565, there were 81 adults who had been freed from slavery in the village of Malloura. The so-called ‘francomates’, born from the marriage of a serf woman, that is, a female farm worker, to a freed man, were free, but still servants of the Latin Lords. Including women and children, the population of the village of Malloura was around 196. [1]
The origin of Malloura dates back to the Roman period. At that time, the population of the village was around 188 to 258. The village, which was abandoned during the Arab-Byzantine period, was returned during the Lusignan period. At that time, the village was quite wealthy and the villagers earned their living from activities such as grain, vineyards, orchards and shepherding. [2]
The first village in the region to engage in agriculture was Athienou. The village was founded in the 1st century BC as a province of the Roman Empire. To the north of Luricina is the oldest village in the region, Idalion. It was founded some 3,000 years ago, during the early days of Hellenic rule.
According to the 1562 Census during the Venetian period, there were 246 villages belonging to the state and 567 villages belonging to noble families and the Church in Cyprus. [3] The peasants were tenants with no land. A brief explanation will be useful for a better understanding of the feudal system during the Venetian period. Class differences played an important role in the administration of the island. The Paroiki / Parici and Perperiarii classes constituted the lowest classes. Members of the Paroiki (Parici) class had to work as slaves of the Lords for two days a week as part of their taxes. In addition, they had to give 20 to 66 percent of the crops obtained from the fields they worked to the Lords who had complete control over them. Members of this class were treated as slaves and could be given any punishment they wanted except the death penalty. The Perperarii, who were separated from the Parici and formed the second class, were able to become free (freed from slavery). The name Perperarii was given to the gold coins called “hyperper” which these people paid as taxes. The Perperiarii class made up most of the state employees and the wealthy of Nicosia. However, this did not protect them from the harshness of the Venetian Lords who looked down on both classes. The third class, the Lefteri (Eleutheroi), were also known as the Francomati. This class came from the Parici class who could be free by paying large allowances to their lords. However, this class was also obliged to give 10-20% of their crops to the lords who deposed them. They also had to pay taxes to the King for the privileges granted to them. The Lefteri (Francomati) class was free but was dominated by ordinary judges. [4]
During the 82-year Venetian period, as in the Ottoman period, there were extreme changes in the population of Cyprus. The table below exemplifies these changes.
The following statistics and sources are taken from Halil İnalcık’s books ‘Ottoman Politics and Administration in Cyprus After the Conquest’ and ‘Historical Studies, International History Journal’.
(Parici. Landless peasants). Francomati (Freed slaves). Total
Paris at the end of the 15th century 47,185 77,066 124,251
1540 (F. Attar, M.L. III, 534) 70,050 95,000 165,050
1562 (B Sagredo, ML III,541) 83,653 47,503 131,156. [5]
As can be seen from these statistics, despite the extreme changes in the population of the peasant class, the island’s population has not increased much in 82 years. The book “The Archaeology of the Malloura Valley Past and Present”, edited by the French researcher Gilles Grivaud, Derek Counts, P. Nick Kardulias and Michael Toumazou, has highlighted and contributed to the development of our knowledge of the history of the Luricina region. These authors and researchers give us descriptive information about Luricina and the surrounding villages and their populations at the end of the Venetian period. The details they give are probably taken from the records of 1562 or 1565.
Some of the mentioned villages:
Malloura 81, Francomates (For more information on Malloura see the excavation maps and historical archive materials on page 1)
Athienou / Atirne 61
S Zorzi (Petrofan ? ) 1
Damidia / Damalia) 31
Lympia 88
Louroujina / Lorthina 186
Potamia 66
Produce 158. [6]
An important note: The figures above may not include women and children. As you can see in the first paragraph, there were 81 free (Francomate) people living in Malloura. However, the population of the village was around 196. If we assume that this situation is also valid for Luricina, it can be understood that the population of the village was 300-350. However, this is not very likely. In the absence of sufficient archival evidence, we can only speculate.
From the above information we understand that Luricina was a large village for its time. Its population was larger than Athienou (Tenant Village) and Dhali (Dali). The Ottoman census of 1572 does not provide detailed information on the 27 family units. A reasonable estimate can assume that the population was around 100-130. This is evidence of a decrease in the population. As an explanation, it is definitely possible to accept a Latin element. It is also possible that some families were transferred to Luricina and other regions during the conquest, and that there were Ottoman settlers after the war. [7]
As Latin families left their homes, these homes were given to new settlers and victorious soldiers. Perhaps the most important reform of the Ottoman order was that peasants were allowed to own their land and assets under a permanent lease system and to pass them on to their children as inheritance. The tax levied on the non-Muslim population naturally highlighted the differences between the two religions. However, Christians gained a great advantage by being exempted from military service. Muslims, who were often sent to their deaths in wars, could not spend time developing their family lands, while Christians, since they did not have military service problems, were able to focus on trade and other businesses and were more successful than Muslims. Nevertheless, some Christians were unhappy with the current situation and turned to Islam. Most of them were Latins and chose this path to protect themselves from the reactions of their other Orthodox neighbors and the new Ottoman owners of the island. By converting to Islam, they aimed to save their lives and be safer in their daily lives. After a few years, the discriminatory attitudes faced by Latins decreased. In some neighboring villages, such as Athienou, they were allowed to practice their religion. However, they were only forced to work in hard labor. Even today, Turkish Cypriots know the village of Athineou as “Kiracıköy”.
The tax assessment records made by the Ottomans on Luricina (then known as “Lorthina”) in 1572 are interesting in that they show the situation of the village during the time of the Venetians. The source of this information is the research conducted by Halil İnalcık (Ottoman Administration and Politics after the Conquest in Cyprus, page 21, table 2). [8]
Population Ispenje
Number of Houses 24 Adult males 27
Bekar 3 Total tax 810
Go 0
Tax
Wheat 900
Arpa 1,050
Chain –
Cotton –
Fruit 975
Olive 55
Dues
Beehives 10
Cocoons –
Garden crops –
Sheep tax 20
Pig tax 40
Fines and other dues 95
Property without heirs and other 75
Rural guardianship –
Mills –
Total 4,030
The origin of this information given by Ahmet Gazioğlu is taken from Halil İnalcık’s research. On page 182 of the research, the total of taxes collected according to goods and crops is given.
According to the first Ottoman census, the military exemption tax collected from Christians was 26-27 percent of the total tax they paid. The two days they worked for the Venetian Lords were reduced to one day. This was a great relief for the Luricina peasants. They gained an additional day to spend on their own grain. Another advantage was that the landless peasants were given the land they worked on on a perpetual basis. In addition, these lands could be inherited by their male children. This practice allowed peasants to own land. However, the practice of tapu began in the mid-1800s. The testimony of two people and, in addition, the Imam or Priest was sufficient to prove land ownership.
Tax liability of Lurucina in 1572
Jizye All taxes The percentage of tax collected is the percentage of tax collected by an adult male
tax liability 1,620 5,704 54 210. [9]
When we look at the taxpaying population above, it can be estimated that the female population was equal and that children constituted half of the population. Some disabled and elderly men were naturally exempt from military service. Since the Turkish population had not yet reached large numbers in 1572, we can assume that the majority of the population was Christian. In the 1643 census, it is seen that the number of houses with Christian population was 41. [10] When this information was collected, we could not yet reach the number of Muslim population at that time. However, we can say the following. The information obtained from the “Settlement Book” (Kamil Kepeci, book number 2551) from the Archives of the Turkish Prime Ministry indicates that some settled population was transferred to Luricina in 1572. More information on this subject is provided below.
After the conquest of the island by the Ottomans, the tax system was reorganized and the tax burden imposed on the people was eased. The table below shows how the tax burden, especially of the less wealthy, was eased. [11]
Venetian Period Ottoman Period
Two days of forced labor One day of forced labor
60, 80 or 90 akçe (currency) 30 akçe ispenje tax (Christians)
Fixed Tax Amount
5 silver coins per person salt tax has been abolished
60 silver coins for each newborn mule Removed
25 silver coins for each cow Removed
25 silver coins for each mare Removed
From birth
1 silver coin per year for each sheep Removed
1 silver coin for each lamb Removed
One-third of the Grain Removed
Areas of Affiliation
1.5 silver coins for each acre of land Removed
A new tax system was structured for the non-Muslim population and a tax of 60, 80 or 100 akçe was imposed on them according to the family’s income. This tax was called jizya, and by paying it, the non-Muslim population was exempted from military service.
Before the conquest of Cyprus by the Ottomans, the island was dominated by the oppressive and discriminatory rule of the Venetians over the majority Orthodox Christian population, most of whom spoke Greek. With the arrival of the Ottomans, control was transferred to the Orthodox Church. This was a disastrous situation for the Latin population. Many fled the island. Some were massacred, while others found salvation in converting to Islam. The primary question for us is whether Luricina was Latin or Orthodox, or whether the population was made up of immigrants from Türkiye.
In the absence of written archive information, it is very difficult to give a definitive answer to this question. Therefore, our knowledge on Luricina remains inconclusive. At present, tremendous efforts are being made to scan the Ottoman archives and improve our knowledge. With the translation of new archive materials, we will be able to obtain more information in the future. Until then, the few religious remains and the names given to the fields and hills may give us a clue. In this context, the first question we should ask is whether there is any truth to the Florenzia/Lorenzia story. Unfortunately, no definitive evidence has been found on this subject, no matter how attractive it is. In Dr. Ata Atun’s book “The Names and Places of Cyprus in the Depth of 2500 Years of History”, the name Luricina begins with Lorthing. This later changes to Loorezena and Louroujina, and finally to Akıncılar. [12]
How and when Lorenzia’s story came about is a mysterious event that has remained unsolved for generations. Perhaps we will never know the truth. The 1831 Census also revealed the mythological nature of this story, because there is no evidence in this census that there was a well in the village. [13] As a reminder, readers are told at the beginning of the story that Lorenzia drew water for her family and cattle from a well in the village.
Although the Latin community was smaller than the Orthodox Greeks, they owned large areas of land around Ay Sozomenos, Potamia and Lorthina (Luricina). The church of Aya Marina was originally a Latin church. According to the Cizye register numbered 8428, dated 1643, which included the tax census applied to the Christian population, there were 13 households (family units) in the village of Aya Marina. After a severe earthquake in August 1735, the village population moved to the village originally called Limbya. At that time, the Latin population was undoubtedly far below the Orthodox population. Over time, most Latins became either Muslim or Christian.
According to M de Cesnola, who visited Cyprus during the Ottoman period, the majority of the “Linobambaki” were Latins who converted to Islam to save their lives, but secretly practiced Christianity. Later, some historians, including Sir Harry Luke and Rupert Gunnis, confirmed this. [14] However, what these historians do not emphasize is that the Turkish families who came to the village between the mid-1700s and the early 1800s completely changed the ethnic structure of the village. [15] Data obtained from the censuses conducted at that time show that the village’s current genetic structure was formed mostly during this period, not in the 16th century.
There were of course other churches in the area. The Agia Philidhitiosa on the Old Larnaca-Nicosia road is one of them. It should not be forgotten that the Greek church of Agia Andronicos, built in 1831, and the churches of Panayi and Agia Epiphanios, which were also quite active until the 1950s, considering their relatively small population. According to Rupert Gunnis, some renovations had been made to the Church of St. Epiphanios, but these restorations had damaged its interior. There are unanswered questions about the Byzantine Church of St. Catherine, which Rupert Gunnis says is 2 miles from the village and on the main Larnaca road. [16] This church still existed in 1935, but the village elders had no knowledge of its existence. Strangely, many area maps do not show the Church of St. Catherine. Why? There was also a Church of Agia Catherine in the village of Bodamya. But it is unthinkable that a historian in the position of Rupert Gunnis would make the mistake of confusing these churches. Moreover, Gunnis states that the church is 2 miles away from Luricina. In fact, it can be concluded that the place Gunnis indicates is Aya Marina.
The mosque in the village is not as old as most churches. The current mosque was built in the late 1800s or early 1900s, and its minaret was added in the 1930s. The central location of the mosque suggests that some families settled in the village at the beginning of the Ottoman period. However, it is strange that the owners of the lands next to the mosque, the Tahura family (for example Ismail Ali ‘Gicco’), came to the village from Türkiye in the late 1700s or early 1800s. The question is who owned these lands before Mustafa Sari Tahura bought them. After the British took over Cyprus in 1878, the 1882 Lord Kitchener maps show that the mosque existed, [17] although it may not be the same building, a smaller building is seen used as a mosque. More research is needed to prove this fact.
The ancestors of Galaba, Pekri, Laos, Mavri and Kavaz settled in the area between the mosque and the stream flowing through the village and the old Turkish cemetery. Does this prove that they were the old notables of Luricina? It has been proven that the Mehmet Katri family tree is one of the oldest and largest family trees in Luricina. Translations of the Ottoman census of 1878 show this to be true. The Arab Siliono family, who settled in the vicinity of the village in the 1700s, may provide clues as to which families settled in the village in chronological order. However, another strange thing is that the recorded family trees go back 9/10 generations. There was undoubtedly a small Greek population in the village long before the arrival of the Turks. However, the site does not provide any information on these Greek families or the Latin communities that are said to have founded the village. More research is needed to verify the details and reach definitive information. As the existence of the Greek community is added to the records, we learn that they were fewer in number from the mid-1700s onwards. The 41 households recorded in the 1643 census indicate that the Greek population was greater in those years than in the 1831 census. [18] It is a correct assumption that the Greek population left the island in the mid-1700s due to reasons such as plague, drought and malaria. [19] Some of them may have settled in the nearby village of Limbya/Olympia. This situation paved the way for new families, namely our families, to settle in the village. Aya Marina, which had 13 households, also left in 1643 for the same reasons as above and because of the earthquake that destroyed the village, and many of them settled in the village of Limbya.
The ‘Mevkufat Defter’, written in 1572 and which will shed light on future research, contains the records of 1689 families transferred from various parts of Anatolia to Cyprus. [20] The question that needs to be asked is who they were and in which regions they settled. Perhaps in the future we will be able to access documents containing this information.
I would like to share my thoughts below in order to stimulate discussion on the subject. Others may come to different conclusions. Some of our elders have doubts about the Maronite origin of some of our villagers. The church of Agia Marina is also cited as evidence. I can claim that this assumption is not true. For the following reason; in August 1596 and March 1597, just 14-15 years after the Ottoman conquest, Girolamo Dandini, Professor of Religious Sciences of Perugia, visited the island. His mission was to investigate the living conditions of the Maronite community of Lebanon. His report on the Maronite community of Cyprus lists 19 settlements of the Maronite community living on the island. The report does not mention Luricina at all. Agia Marina is included in this list. [21]
The following section is taken from books by authors including Guita G Huorani and Palmieri. The most interesting section is the section on the religious changes that took place in Luricina in 1636. Palmieri’s claim in 1905 contradicts the report written by Jerome Dandini during his visit to Cyprus in 1596, in which he showed that Luricina was not among the 19 Maronite villages. [22] If we could uncover the missing time that shows the history of the families recorded on this site, 10/11 generations back, we could perhaps complete the history of all the families of our village.
Cypriot Maronites under Ottoman Rule (1571 -1878)
Maronites, like other Christians, were described as ‘Infidels’ and were also known as ‘Syriacs’ during the Ottoman period (Jennings 1993: 132, 148-149). Ottoman rule caused the Maronite community on the island to melt away. The villages were depopulated by death, captivity and migration, and the Maronites almost disappeared. Their priests and archbishops lost their local status due to the oppression, discrimination and taxes imposed on them.
The Greek population of the island remained neutral during the Ottoman conquest, while the Maronite population fought alongside the Latins against the Ottomans. For this reason, their settlements were razed to the ground. The Maronites’ unity with the Latins was punished when the island came under complete Ottoman rule. Similarly, the Greek community, remembering the persecution they had suffered at the hands of the Catholics during the Venetian period, sought revenge on the remaining Catholics, since most of them were Maronites. The Ottomans and the Greeks together treated this unfortunate community, the Maronites, very cruelly. (Palmieri 1905: article 2462, Cirilli 1898: pages 14-15). In 1572, the Maronites had 33 villages and their bishop resided in the Dali Monastery in the province of Carpasie (Palmieri 1905: article 2462).
During the Ottoman period, 14 Maronite villages were destroyed. By 1596, 25 years after the Ottoman conquest of the island, the number of Maronite villages had fallen to 19 (same source 1905: article 2462, Dib 1971: page 177). The Ottomans imposed very high taxes on the Maronite population, accused them of treason, pillaged their grain, kidnapped their wives and children and subjected them to slavery (Cirili 1898: page 20). Many Maronites lost their lives during the defense of the island. Many were later massacred, taken as prisoners, and some scattered throughout the island to escape persecution. The Maronites who preferred to remain in their villages were in a pitiful condition (Cirili 1898: pages 14-15). One group fled to Lebanon, another group followed the Venetians and took refuge on the island of Malta (same source 1971: page 177). The rest were forced to submit not only to the Ottomans but also to the Greeks. The treatment of them explains why the Maronite clergy (religious leaders) preferred to live in Lebanon rather than Cyprus. The massacres committed against the Maronites were a direct result of the decrease in their population and also the number of their villages. The spiritual leaders of the Maronites during this period were Bishop Youssef (1588 and after) and Bishop Youhanna (1588-1596) (Daleel 1980: page 108).
The Greeks, who gained some advantages during the Ottoman rule, began to take revenge against the Catholics. Since the only Catholic community left on the island was the Maronites, the Greeks’ revenge was directed at them (Palmieri 1905: article 2464). The revenge began with the seizure of the Maronite churches. As a justification, they used the claim that the Maronite spiritual leaders were plotting against the Ottomans so that the Venetians would return to the island. Thereupon, the Ottoman administration launched an attack on the Maronite community. Many Maronites were massacred, imprisoned or sentenced to slavery. Many were forced to submit to the yoke of the Greek Orthodox church. This persecution caused many Christians, including the Maronites, to convert to Islam as a way of salvation (Cirili 1898: pages 11,21; Palmieri 1905? Article 2468).
In 1636, the process of Islamization accelerated as a result of increasing pressures. “People who could not tolerate the excessive pressures created by the new order became Muslims by hiding their true beliefs. Most of them were Armenian, Maronite and Albanian communities living in the northern mountainous areas and the northern coast, especially in the villages of Tellyria, Kambili, Ayia Marina Skyllouras, Platani, and Kornekepos” (Jennings 1993: page 367). Maronites who converted to Islam were centered in Louroujina, which is a part of the Nicosia province. They were given the derogatory nickname “Linobambaki” (a Greek word meaning linen and cotton (Palmieri 1905? Article 2468). Although these Maronites seemed to have accepted Islam, they did not completely abandon Christianity. They still held on to some of their beliefs. When the Ottomans left the island, they had the hope of returning to their religion. For example, they baptized their children according to Christian traditions, but on the other hand, they did not accept Islam. They circumcised their boys according to their religion and also gave their children a Christian and a Muslim name (Hackett 1901: page 535; Palmieri 1905? Articles 2464, 2468).
Coming from the Holy Land and belonging to the Franciscan sect, Father Celestin de Casalnuovo spent 33 years trying to convert the Linobambaki back to Christianity. Some communities responded positively and asked him to establish schools for them. In response to this request, he opened two schools for them. However, the Greek hierarchy provoked Muslim fanatics and attacked the Linobambaki and plundered their agricultural lands. Fearing for their lives, the Linobambaki gave up their religious aspirations and the desire to return to their old religion (Palmieri 1905? Article 2468).
The following passage from his book Excerpta Cypria (Cyprus Excerpts) contradicts Palmieri’s claim that there was a Maronite community in Luricina. Sir Francis George Hill is one of the historians who has written the most comprehensive history of Cyprus. Palmieri certainly writes that he did. [23]
Pope Clement VII’s Representative, Father Jerome Dandini, visited the Maronites of Lebanon and visited the Maronite community on the island. Dandini states that the Maronites of Cyprus are under the administration of the Maronite Patriarch whose Papacy is in Lebanon. Dandini also writes that each region sometimes has 1 priest, and sometimes 8 priests, as in Metoschi. Dandini mentions 19 Maronite villages in Cyprus, the following names: Metoschi, Fludi, Santa Marina, (Aya Marina) Asomatos, Gambili, Karpasia, Kormakitis, Trimitia, Casapisani, Vono, Cibo, Ieri, Crusicida, Cesalauriso, Sotto Kruscida, Attalu, Cleipirio, Piscopia, Gastria. However, when he visited the island in 1596, he wrote that there were not many Maronite priests left on the island, some had fled the island, some had been forced to change their religion, and that there were only 10 Maronite sites left on the island, the most important of which were Saint Marina, (Aya Marina) Cormakiti and Asomatos. Dandini added that the situation of the Maronites was very bad. Noting the poverty of the Maronites, the absence of a religious leader and the poverty of their regions, Dandini suggested that the Maronite Patriarch should send a Bishop to the island. Following this suggestion, the Akura priest Moise Anaisi was appointed Bishop in 1598 and held this post until 1614. He was followed by Girgis al Hidnani, who was in Lebanon as a visiting Bishop (1614 – 1634) (Elias al Hidnani visited Cyprus in 1652 at the request of the Patriarch). [24]
The Mevkufat Register, written in 1572, states that a total of 1689 families from various parts of Anatolia were transferred to Cyprus. This transfer practice continued at an accelerated pace. Mustafa Haşim Altan’s excellent research, detailed below, lists a total of 5720 families. Mustafa Haşim Altan, an expert on the Ottoman alphabet, translated the original decree of Sultan Selim, which is kept in the State Archives of the Prime Ministry of the Republic of Turkey, in his research and in the book published in 2001 in 4 volumes. Other sources; Istanbul Ottoman Archives; Muhimme Register XIX, PAGES 334-335 (a copy is also available in the TRNC National Archives; Document 728 – 2531, box number 28).
Additional information on settlement areas was taken from the “Settlement Book” and Kamil Kepeci Book Number 2551, kept in the Prime Ministry Archives of the Republic of Turkey.
With the arrival of the Ottomans on the island, the mass migration of the Venetians from the island began. Early research shows that 76 villages in the Mesaoria and Mazoto regions alone were completely evacuated. [25] The repopulation of these regions was of vital importance. Sultan Selim’s decree dated 21 September 1572 ordered that 1 in every 10 families to be sent to the island from various regions of Türkiye be examined in light of this fact.
The main regions where the population moved from Türkiye came from are; İçeli, Taşeli, Manavgat, Mut, Alanya, Silindi, Burhanlar, Avşar, Maraş, Muğla, Çankır, Divriği, Kayseri, Çorum, Tarsus, Bolu, Bursa, Karaman, Bozök, Ulukışla, Akdağ, Bor, Ilgın, Şhakıl, Akşehir, Niğde, Beyşehir, Ürgü, Develihisar, Koçhisar, Seydişehir, Aksaray, Silifke. 5720 families from Central Anatolia were eventually transferred to Cyprus. Some of these families were settled in villages evacuated by the Venetians when they arrived in Cyprus. These villages included the following;
Lurijina ( Sowers) Ay Sozomeno (Barley) , Aitotoro (Bozdag) , Kalohoryo (Chamlykoy) , Ele ( Doganji ) , Koccina (Erenkoy) , Tremetusha (Uzun Mese ) , Aybifan (Esendag) , Amadyez (Günebanda) (Iyabokanda) , Trahona (Kizilbash-Gelibolu) , Kserovuono (Kurutepe) , Margi (Kuchukkoy) , Vroisha (Yağmuralan) , Limniti (Yeshilyrmak) ,Shillura ,Yilmazkoy) , Fota (Dagyolu) , Pileri (Trake) (Trek) ,Templos ((Zeytinlik) , Prastyo ( Baf -Yuval) , Artemis ( Ardam), Aisimyo (Avtepe), Ovgoroz (Ergazi), Ayharida ( Ergenekon) , Konetra ( Gonendere), Sinde (Inönü), Kritya ( Kilitkaya), Kukla ( Kopryuluš), Avrugalida ( Kurova ), Korugalova , Livatya (Sazlıköy) , Ipsillat (Sutlüce), Evretu (Dereboyu), Melandra (Besiktepe) , Istinjö (Kuşluca), Ayastad (Zeybekköy), Klavya (Alaniči), Aplanda , Pergama (Beyarmudu) , Petrofan (Esendag) , Geçienka (Gečienka) , Mennoya (Otuken), Pile, Goshshi (Three Martyrs), Dzhelya (Lightning), Pitargu (Akkargy), Aksilu (Aksu), Ayyani (Aydin), Anatyu (Gormeli), Antrolik (Gundogdu), Pelatusa (Kara-agach), Avakyorgi (Kavak). [26]
It should be noted that not all of the population transferred from Türkiye to Cyprus were Muslim. Some were Christians. Some Christians who left their villages after the initial settlement were allowed to return to their villages. Apart from the villages named above, some new villages were founded by soldiers who took part in the conquest or by the population that came from Türkiye later.
Although not the subject of this site, some of these new villages were; Mara, Lefke, Gaziveren, Beyköy, Ortaköy, Airda, Mora, Gönyeli, Marata (Murataga), Sandallar, etc.
As is known, during the Ottoman period, some Christians converted to Islam for various reasons. We may never know how many of the people living in Luricina changed their religion and became Muslims. However, evidence suggests that some Turks came to our village in 1572. It is also known that some Latin converts were transferred to Luricina during the conquest of Famagusta in 1571. The possibility that there were other Christians who abandoned Christianity in the region cannot be ruled out. The obvious fact is that most of the family trees today are made up of the second wave immigrants mentioned above from the 1700s. Some families have not yet identified their origins. Our research will continue.
[1] the great map of Leonida Attar. Written by Francesca Cavazzana Romanelli & Gilles Grivaud.The Bank of Cyprus Cultural foundation. 2006.
[2] The Archaeology of Past and Present in the Malloura Valley,” edited by Derek Counts, P. Nick Kardulias, and Michael Toumazou, 2012.
[3] Halil Inalcik. Ottoman policy and administration in Cyprus after the conquest. 1969 page 10.
[4] Halil Inalcik. Ottoman policy and administration in Cyprus after the conquest. 1969 page 17.
[5] Halil Inalcik. Ottoman policy and administration in Cyprus after the conquest. 1969 page 15.
[6] The Archaeology of Past and Present in the Malloura Valley, edited by Derek Counts, P. Nick Kardulias, and Michael Toumazou, 2012.
[7] Nazim Beratli in a personal correspondence.
[8] Ahmet Gazioglu Turks in Cyprus page 181. & table II page 21 of Halil Inalcik, Ottoman policy and administration in Cyprus after the conquest.
[9] Halil Inalcik page 22, table 3. Ottoman policy and administration in Cyprus after the conquest.
[10] History Studies, International Journal of History. 2012. Page 136.
[11] Halil Inalcik page 22, table 3. Ottoman policy and administration in Cyprus after the conquest.
[12] Names & locations of Cyprus lost in the depths of 2500 of history, by Dr Ata Atun.
[13] 1643 Tarihli/History 8428 Cizye defteri, which was the tax census of Christian subjects.
[14] Early family records of Lurucina, by Ibrahim Tahsildar (Tahsildar was a tax collector who kept records of all the families in Lurucina.
[15] The Centuries-Long Struggle for Existence of the Raiders (Lurucina) Turks By Hasan Yücelen ‘Mudaho’.
[16] Ruppert Gunnis. Historic Cyprus 1936. Pages 329-330.
[17] Maps of Lord Kitchener. Section 10, drawn in 1882, and published in 1885.
[18] History Studies, International Journal of History 2012 Page 136.
[19] Excerpts from Cypria 1908. Cyprian. Page 355.
[20] The Turks in Cyprus by Ahmet Gazioglu, 1990.Page 77.
[21] Excerpts from Cypria. 1908. Page 181.
[22] Palmieri 1905: col. 2462; Cirilli 1898: 14-15.
[23] George Hill. The history of Cyprus page 305. 1952
[24] Excerpts from Cypria 1908. Page 181-184.
[25] The Turks in Cyprus by Ahmet Gazioglu, 1990.Page 74.
[26] The Turks in Cyprus by Ahmet Gazioglu, 1990. Pages 91-92.
THE HISTORY OF LURICIA WILL CONTINUE WITH THE SECOND PART
0 Comments