589

. Medieval Setlements
in the Gabrovo Region
The medieval city by the present-day town
of Sevlievo is among the most interesting
archaeological sites from the high Middle
Ages (12
th
-14
th
c.) in modern Bulgaria. Unfor-
tunately, it is poorly known by researchers
and science due to the lack of publications of
the regular archaeological excavations which
have been carried out there for more than
thirty years. The revealed defensive, residen-
tial and religious architecture makes it one
of the best preserved and interesting medi-
eval cities. However, the reconstruction of
its building history is diicult because of the
lack of precise stratigraphy. Yet, the revealed
fortiication system, buildings and walls, as
well as the two large necropolises nearby
with numerous inds and items, allow a new
evaluation of the urban-planning, organiza-
tion of habitation and clariication of the pe-
riods in the development of the city, as well
as its fate.
The medieval city by present-day Sevlievo,
similar to other medieval fortresses and forti-
ied setlements above the modern Sevlievs-
ko plain, was built on the site of an earlier
late-antique fortress situated on a naturally
protected hill popularly known among the
locals as Dzhivizli Bunar or Kaleto (Fig.
1). From the late-antique fortiication, sec-
tions of its eastern defensive wall and a big
church basilica have been studied. In terms
of its type and structure, it can be identiied
as a fortiied setlement from the 5
th
-6
th
c.
the most common type of setlement during
the Early Byzantine Age.
In the second half of the 10
th
the irst half
of the 11
th
c. in the Central Balkan Mountains
(Stara planina, Haemus mons) and across the
hilly areas above Sevlievsko plain, early me-
SEVLIEVO
The Medieval City
Venelin Barakov
590
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
dieval setlements developed by the villages
of Batoshevo (the locality Gradat), Kramolin
(the locality Gradat), and Zdravkovets (the
locality Dzhivizli Bunar). They are all located
in the present-day region of Gabrovo.
The population built its houses using the
semi-destroyed walls of the late-antique for-
tiications. The defensive facilities were not
restored by the new population. However,
the natural protection of the sites of the ear-
lier late-antique fortresses was valued as well
as the means of easier and more eicient de-
fense, and the inaccessibility which is an es-
sential point for obtaining as much security as
possible from sudden atacks by the late no-
mads (Pechenegs) or Hungarians.
The borders and the area of these early me-
dieval setlements cannot be determined be-
cause the material traces left by them were de-
stroyed by the later fortiication and residen-
tial buildings from the following age that of
the high Middle Ages. In this respect, the ex-
cavations of the medieval city in the locality
Dzhivizli Bunar by the city of Sevlievo pro-
vides important information. The researcher
of the site for many years Simeon Simeonov
refers the earliest building stage of the de-
fensive facilities of the city
to the beginning of the 10
th

c. Unfortunately, at the mo-
ment there is no preliminary
publication about the medi-
eval city in which the stra-
tigraphy of this interesting
monument can be presented,
and the building stages of the
fortiication constructions es-
tablished. The discovery of
early medieval materials can-
not be a criterion for referring
the start of construction of
the medieval fortress to the
10
th
c. Only new excavations
of sections of the defensive
wall and a complex analysis
of the discovered archaeolog-
ical materials can bring some
clarity to this issue in the future. So far this
thesis remains unconirmed.
. The Setlement in the Locality Dzhivizli
Bunar (Kaleto)
History and Building Activity
The early medieval setlement that pre-
cedes the development of the medieval town
in the locality Dzhivizli Bunar by present-
day Sevlievo was not planned in advance;
it lies on the southern slope of the hill, on a
few terraces, with pronounced displacement
from north to south. The scarce archaeologi-
cal data about it are: a few ground levels
from dwellings semi-dugouts and the pot-
tery material intact and fragmented vessels
from the 10
th
-11
th
c. (, . 2007:17).
A few production facilities which can be
interpreted as kilns for everyday use were
discovered in the vicinity of the dwellings.
The potery is represented by pots made on
the wheel with indented undulating and/or
linear decoration. The mouths are proiled
and curved outwards; beneath the mouths,
some pots are decorated with small concave
holes.
Fig. 1. The medieval city by Sevlievo (plan after Simeon Simeonov)
591
S E V L I E V O
Much more information about the extent
of habitation at the setlement, and the size
of its population is provided by the necropo-
lises around churches No 2 and No 3, and the
churches themselves.
The churches are single-nave, with semi-
rounded ap ses a manner in the building of
temples referring their construction to the end
of the 10
th
-11
th
c. (Figs 2 and 3). The churches
are at the same time parish and cemetery the
liturgy is held there and the necropolises of
the setlement lie around them. The numerous
inds from the graves adornments, crosses-
encolpia, etc. conirm that the setlement was
formed in the 10
th
c. and gradually developed
during Byzantine rule in the 11
th
-12
th
c. The
churches and the necropolises continued to
function as late as the irst half of the 13
th
c.
when the setlement was reduced to ashes by
the Tartars.
A new stage in the setlement development
and its construction came in the 12
th
c. It is re-
lated to the reign and reforms of the dynasty
of the Komnenes in the Byzantine Empire, and
to some new trends in the Bulgarian society.
The stabilization of the Empire from a politi-
cal and economical perspective was relected
in the relations in society, which became more
and more strictly hierarchal and militarized.
The role of the oicial aristocracy grew as it
was received donations of lands from the Em-
peror in exchange for its service in the army.
The so called Pronoia as a form of possession
obtained for services rendered to the central
authority developed. This Byzantine model
spread across all borders of the Empire in-
cluding the lands it ruled which were inhab-
ited by a Bulgarian population. From among
these people a social order slowly started to
develop, called by Prof. Ivan Bozhilov the
new Bulgarian nobility. This aristocracy,
grounded on its family or oicial properties,
began raising fortresses which became the
expression of its power and status over the
population subordinate to it. The Bulgarian
nobility gradually gained power which found
Fig. 2. Church No 3 at the eastern quarter of the lower town (photo by Venelin Barakov)
592
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
Fig. 3. Early Byzantine basilica and church No 2 at the western quarter (photo by Venelin Barakov)
Fig. 4. The citadel of the city. View from south (photo by Venelin Barakov)
593
S E V L I E V O
Fig. 5. The eastern gate and the tower in front of it (photo by Venelin Barakov)
Fig. 6. The eastern defensive wall and the citadel (photo by Venelin Barakov)
594
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
its manifestation in the restoration of the Bul-
garian state organization at the end of the
12
th
c. (after almost two centuries of Byzantine
occupation of these lands).
In the area of the present-day Sevlievsko
Plain and its environs such processes can also
be traced. In the second half or the end of the
12
th
c. the early medieval setlements by the
aforementioned hills in the locality Dzhivizli
Bunar by the town of Sevlievo, the locality
Gradat by the village of Kramolin, and the
locality Vitata Stena by the village of Zdravk-
ovets, were provided with a fortiication sys-
tem covering the entire inhabited area (the
setlements share identical measurements
and their approximate area is about 50 de-
cares). On the highest areas of the hills inde-
pendent fortiications were raised with their
own function as citadels. They are a manifes-
tation of diferentiation among the classes of
society of the setlements and testify to the
promotion of a class which became the new
Bulgarian nobility, whose power rested on its
oicial functions given to it by the ruler or the
central authority. This aristocracy undertook
the direction and government of the setle-
ments, and took care of their fortiication and
security. The new class of population was
charged with administrative and military
functions. A material and architectural mani-
festation of the social processes is the devel-
opment of fortresses on the highest parts of
the hills citadels or residences of the local
governors of setlements. The activity of no-
bility as well as the administrative status of
the setlement, predominating as a fortiied
centre over a particular territory or district,
gave impetus to its development. It increased
its population and gradually evolved into a
medieval city.
Fig. 7. The western gate of the citadel (photo by Venelin Barakov)
595
S E V L I E V O
1
The props are wooden beams. The props system is a construction of wooden beams joined together.
In the second half or the end of the 12
th
c. the
setlement in the locality Dzhivizli Bunar was
provided with a new defensive wall replac-
ing the early Byzantine one and surrounding
the inhabited area on all sides (Fig. 1). At the
highest spot of the fortress a citadel with an
independent fortiication was raised. It covers
an area of about 15 decares (Fig. 4). The build-
ing technique of the defensive wall of the cita-
del is of quarry stones, roughly polished on
the exterior and the interior face of the main
wall, with a illing of stones and bricks in opus
implectum inside (, . 2007:1314).
The stones were joined with white mortar. The
thickness of the wall is 1.80 m. In the masonry
the so called props system is used; in it the
props remain hidden in the inside of the wall.
1

This building technique points to the general
dating of the defensive wall of the citadel in
the 12
th
the beginning of the 13
th
c. Access to
it was through three gates the eastern (main
entrance), eastern (secondary) and western. In
the east was the main entrance of the citadel.
The eastern gate has three construction stages
(Fig. 5). Originally it was two-leaved (the two
pilasters for the folding doors are preserved),
shaped like a passage inside the wall, paved
with slabs. During a later construction stage
the entrance was narrowed and the gate itself
was designed as an elaborate complex with an
L-shaped wall atached to it, over the earlier
Early Byzantine wall. Thus a new entrance
and a passage with stone steps were designed.
Their possible reconstruction allows the sup-
Fig. 8. The boyar church inside the citadel (photo by Venelin Barakov)
596
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
position that at the entrance there was a tower
above the gate. During the last construction
stage a new tower was built east of the gate,
and the gate itself was walled up (,
. 2007:1617, 2022).
The dating of all this reconstruction is dif-
icult due to the lack of publications about the
stratigraphy of the site. Their interpretation
is possible only with a review of the overall
analysis of the archaeological materials that
have remained. The traces of ire at the gate
and the tower, as well as the building lead to
the conclusion that the main entrance of the
citadel of the town was fortiied for a relative-
ly short time. The reasons for that are of po-
litical and military nature: an external threat
from an enemy, threatening the security of
the city.
Another small gate connecting the citadel
with the lower town was revealed forty me-
ters south of the main entrance. Its design is
simple, and there is an opinion that this gate
connected the citadel with the spring, which
was located in the lower town. The total
length of the eastern defensive wall of the cit-
adel along with the two gates is 106 m (Fig. 6).
The northern defensive wall of the citadel
is 141 m long. At some points its foundation
coincides with that of the Early Byzantine
one. At the south-western corner, where the
northern wall connects with the western one,
was the other gate of the citadel (the western
gate); it connected the citadel with the earlier
setlement. The gate belongs to the simpliied
type without pilasters (Fig. 7). Next to the
gate a large square tower, constructively at-
tached to the defensive wall that protected
its entrance, was built. A military building
for the garrison is located behind the tower.
South of the gate the western defensive wall
Fig. 9. The boyar residence inside the citadel (photo by Venelin Barakov)
597
S E V L I E V O
is partly preserved, and has been studied in
single sections. The southern wall of the cita-
del has been recorded only in sections. Due to
the fact that rocks are situated in the south, the
construction of a wall along the entire length
was not necessary.
At the highest part of the citadel, at a later
stage, a large tower was built; it is construc-
tively connected to the defensive wall, and
it is atached to the north-eastern corner of
the citadel. The shape of the tower is an ir-
regular square, and its dimensions are: east-
ern wall 10 m long, 2.80 m thick; northern
wall 9.40 m long, 3.50 m thick; western
wall 5.20 m long; southern wall 13 m long
(, . 2007:1011). The construction
of the large tower, which dominated the cita-
del and the city, can be referred to the second
quarter of the 13
th
c. The tower was at least
three-storeyed with inner wooden staircase
and wooden platforms separating the loors
(, . 2007:1415). The wooden con-
structions of the tower were reduced to ashes
at a stage when the entire citadel endured
some cataclysm.
The citadel of the city in the locality Dzhi-
vizli Bunar was sparsely inhabited, as the
results from the archaeological excavations
have shown. Only new excavations may con-
irm or reject the speculation that the citadel
was inhabited by a
comparatively small
number of people
the local governor and
his retinue. Among
the buildings explored
inside the citadel, the
so called boyar church
and boyar residence
stand out due to their
loca tion (,
. 2007:2429). They
were built south of the
tower on the same axis
as the main entrance
of the citadel from the
east. The church is sin-
gle-nave, single-apse
with a vast narthex which was built later (Fig.
8). Its size and lo cation reveal its character
and purpose to serve the nobleman ruler
of the citadel. The church was reconstructed a
couple of times, and three construction stages
can be distinguished. The irst stage is related
to the construction of the temple itself. At its
second reconstruction the dimensions of the
church were signiicantly narrowed, and the
narthex was modiied for a water reservoir
(, . 2007:2627). This repair can
be referred to the 14
th
c. when the church lost
its importance as a religious shrine and be-
came a reservoir for water, serving the needs
of the population of the citadel. The third and
last construction stage dates to the irst centu-
ries of Otoman rule. That is when long stone
benches plastered with mortar were built
along the northern and the southern sides of
the nave. Such elements from the interior of
the churches are typical for the age of the Ot-
toman rule from the end of the 14
th
the irst
half of the 15
th
c.
To the east of the so called boyar church
and north of the passage of the eastern, main
gate, a large residential building has been re-
vealed; it is interpreted as a boyar dwelling
(Fig. 9). The dwelling is an irregular square
in form (, . 2007:2730). The walls
of its foundations are 1 m thick and built of
Fig. 10. Plan of the eastern part of the citadel (plan after Simeon Simeonov)
598
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
quarry stones on mud. It was two-storeyed
and the second loor was used for habitation,
and most probably it was entirely of wood.
Except for the boyar dwelling, a few more fa-
cilities have been studied within the citadel
south of the residence, along the western gate
and the south-western slope by the western
defensive wall of the citadel (Fig. 10). Build-
ings with another purpose were located at a
few sites south of the tower of the citadel
and along the eastern defensive wall work-
shops for iron, processing, melting and cast-
ing of metal; barracks for the military garrison
of the citadel around the two gates, etc.
The setlement at the foot of the citadel was
included along with it in a common fortiied
system and became the lower town of the
fortress. A wall with a gate has been studied
north-west of the western entrance of the cita-
del (Fig. 11). This wall stretches from the south
Fig. 11. Gate and defensive wall at the lower town (photo by Venelin Barakov)
towards the dwellings at the foot of the cita-
del, but it has not been entirely revealed. The
residential quarters of the lower town are situ-
ated on the terraces south of the citadel (Fig.
12). The total area of the lower town, which is
about 50 decares, is fenced from the south by
a wall built of quarry stones on white mortar.
Three transverse walls built of quarry stones
on mud run perpendicular to this exterior
wall and divide the lower town into separate
quarters (Fig. 13). During the period from the
end of the 12
th
to the irst half of the 13
th
c. ive
residential quarters may be distinguished in
the lower town; they were divided from each
other by the transverse walls (, .
2007:3435). In the space between the second
and third quarter there was a gate in the barri-
er wall. The design of the quarters and their ar-
rangement indicates the manner in which the
city developed during the Middle Ages. It is a
599
S E V L I E V O
Fig. 12. The lower town of the medieval city (plan after Venelin Barakov)
Fig. 13. Residential quarter at the lower town (photo by Venelin Barakov)
600
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
complex structure of enclosed isolated spaces.
Despite the seemingly chaotic disposition of
residential buildings and facilities, there were
obviously factors distinguishing some areas
from others. These could have been class,
family quarters or zones with a dominant
production/craft cha racter. The development
of the quarters in the lower town took place
gradually, and the earliest ones are the two
endmost quarters the eastern and western.
They were also the most densely populated
areas. The two quarters were situated north
of the two churches in the lower town. Both
the western and eastern quarters were craft
districts. For ges and kilns have been revealed
in the western one. In the eastern quarter,
four two-chamber potery-kilns have been
studied. This area was used by craftsmen
poters, who specialized in the production of
potery vessels.
It is very likely that the quarters were or-
ganized along family or professional consid-
erations, since there are no major diferenc-
es in the type of the houses or their interior
which would indicate property or class dif-
ferentiation. The dwellings are built above
each other. Most frequently the buildings are
single-section but two-chamber structures
have also been found.
In each quarter the population built
one-storey or two-storey stone houses; the
ground loor is always of stone, built of quar-
ry stones on mud, and the average thickness
of the walls is circa 0.70 m. The second loor
was of adobe construction (wood and wat-
tle). The houses did not have yards and are
situated very close to each other. Some of the
homes had a single small farm building, and
pits for the preservation of grain (,
. 2007:3646). A speciic trait of the dwell-
ings is the inner staircases wooden or stone.
In some of the houses there are niches on
the walls of the ground loor. These niches,
which are a very interesting phenomenon,
give information about the organization of
the interior of the homes (Fig. 14). Perhaps
Fig. 14. Houses from the lower town with niches (photo by Venelin Barakov)
601
S E V L I E V O
illuminants or home icons were put in them.
The loors of almost all the houses are of clay,
although there are also individual examples
of houses paved with slabs. The entrances of
the dwellings face south or east. Thus, the
houses remain protected from the wind and
erosion. The entrances of the dwellings were
1.20-1.50 m wide. All homes have ireplaces
with round or semi-round shapes, or square
stoves. There were also household furnaces
outside the dwellings, which served for bak-
ing bread and meat. Their number is great-
est in the western quarter seven furnaces.
The inds and the coins discovered inside the
houses indicate habitation during the 12
th

the irst half of the 13
th
c. During the 14
th
c. life
in the lower town was not that intensive and
perhaps some of the quarters were deserted.
That is atested to by the almost complete
lack of potery from the 14
th
c.
Two churches have been revealed in the
lower town, respectively in the westernmost
and easternmost quarters. The churches are
single-nave, single-apse similar to church
No 2, and have narthexes. The building tech-
nique and the planning speciics of the two
churches refer their construction to the 11
th
-
12
th
c. This dating is conirmed by the inds
discovered inside them (fragments of bronze
procession crosses) as well as by the presence
of a stratum of earlier graves which is con-
sistent with the disposition of the temples.
Necropolises of the population of the lower
town are situated around the two churches
(, . 2007:4651). More than a hun-
dred and thirty graves from the two necropo-
lises have been explored. The inds from the
graves show that the necropolises were used
for a long period of time from the 11
th
to the
14
th
c. This is due to the fact that along the
southern slope of the hill the early medieval
setlement from the 10
th
-11
th
c. was originally
located.
The two churches in the lower town were
reconstructed at a later stage. Benches were
built along the long sides of the nave, similar
to the church at the citadel. This building has
been dated to the beginning of the 15
th
-16
th
c.
Despite the unquestionable data about the
development and the practicing of various
crafts at the citadel and the lower town of
the city, the main occupation of the popula-
tion remained agriculture. This is atested to
by the numerous inds of farming tools and
instruments ploughshares, sickles, hoes,
pruning-knives, etc. The fertile valley at the
foot of the city along the river valley of the
Rositsa River does not leave any doubt about
the basic lifestyle of the population of the city
agriculture. Despite the evolution of the
setlement into a medieval city whose struc-
ture was gradually outlined during the 13
th
c.
with two clearly distinguished parts citadel
and lower town, the old traditions and the
lifestyle of the population of the setlement
were still strong, and it continued practicing
agriculture.
. Periodization of the Building Stages
The complex analysis of fortiication, build-
ing technique, inds, and numismatic materi-
als, as well as the data from the development
of building at the citadel and the lower town,
allow the reconstruction of the separate stag-
es through which life at the town by present-
day Sevlievo went during the Middle Ages.
Chronologically earliest is the early medi-
eval setlement with borders that are visible
behind the late-antique defensive wall on the
hilltop and along the southern slopes of the
plateau, where the easternmost quarter de-
veloped later. The setlement did not have its
own fortiication system, and used the natu-
ral protection of the area.
During the 11
th
-12
th
c. the setlement grew.
For the needs of the population, kilns for
the production of kitchen potery were con-
structed at the eastern foot of Dzhivizli Bunar
Hill at the end of the 11
th
the beginning of
the 12
th
c. Later, during the second half of the
12
th
c., the fortiication system of the citadel
above the setlement was built; it is a mani-
festation of the emergence of the aristocratic
elite which took control over the setlement
and its arable hinterland. Evidence for refer-
602
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
ring the building of the citadel to the second
half or the end of the 12
th
c. is not only the
building technique and the revealed fortiica-
tion architecture, but the fact that the overall
planning of the fortiication on the top of the
hill is directed towards the setlement in the
lower town, over which the citadel dominates.
The western gate was constructed in such a
way that it was connected with the quarters
in the lower town. Its disposition indicates
the already formed setlement at the foot of
the hill. Its fortiication and the architecture
of the citadel is varied due to the buildings
constructed in its interior the imposing resi-
dence of the local boyar and the church, serv-
ing the needs of the noblemans family. The
interior of the citadel is complemented by
buildings for the needs of the military gar-
rison and workshops and farming structures,
related to the everyday life of its inhabitants.
In the lower town, at the foot of the cita-
del, residential quarters developed during
the irst half of the 13
th
c.; they were divided
by transverse walls and enclosed by a com-
mon wall from the south. The necropolises
of the quarters are located around the two
churches. The inds from the dwellings and
the design of the houses interiors testify to a
high quality of life in the lower town during
the irst half of the 13
th
c. which turned the
fortress and the setlement into a lourishing
city.
The traces of a conlagration established
in the remains of the houses from the low-
er town, the tower and the main gate of the
citadel, as well as coin inds with the last
emissions dating to the time of Theodore
Komnenos Doukas (1230-1237) and John III
Doukas Vatazes (1222-1254) show that by
the mid-13
th
c. the medieval city had endured
some terrible cataclysm. This event could be
associated with the march of the Tartar Khan
Batu through present-day Northern Bulgaria
in 1242-1243 when the city was seriously af-
fected. After this tragic event, life in the me-
dieval city never recovered to the level of
earlier ages. The citadel and the lower town
continued to exist, but with a reduced popu-
lation. The repairs to the defensive wall and
the tower, as well as the narrowing of the
gates, can be referred to the mid-13
th
and the
14
th
c. The lack of stratigraphy makes the dat-
ing very diicult.
All archaeological evidence categorically
points to the destruction of the medieval city
by Sevlievo by the Tartars in 1242-1243, and
not by the Otoman Turks at the end of the
14
th
c. In the second half of the 14
th
c. the lower
town was completely deserted, and life con-
centrated entirely inside the citadel. The so
called boyar church ceased to function, and
was turned into a water reservoir serving the
needs of a prolonged siege. The lourishing
city of the 12
th
the irst half of the 13
th
c., be-
came a small fortiied setlement in the 14
th
c.
During the 15
th
-16
th
c., over the ruins of the
medieval city in the locality Dzhivizli Bunar
by Sevlievo a small setlement with a Chris-
tian population developed, which restored
the medieval churches for its needs. That is
the last stage of life at the setlement. After the
17
th
c. the area was completely abandoned.
The development of fortiication buildings
and a setlement network during the Middle
Ages in Sevlievsko Plain and the surround-
ing hills shows some features that are typi-
cal not only for this area but for the entire re-
gion of Northern Bulgaria. Firstly, this is the
transformation of the setlement in the local-
ity Dzhivizli Bunar by present-day Sevlievo
into a medieval city. There is unquestionable
information about the presence of an urban
culture the presence of authority in the
person of the local administrative governor
who resided at the citadel; residential quar-
ters and enclosed areas related to particular
crafts and production can be distinguished.
Trade and economic relations during this age
were not that developed. This explains why
agriculture was still the main occupation of a
great part of the population of the lower city.
The heavily fortiied citadel provided reli-
able protection to the population of the lower
town in case of danger. The city by present-
603
S E V L I E V O
day Sevlievo fell in the path of the Tartars in
1242-1243, and is the only dated site in Bul-
garia which sufered from this atack. The
city sufered from the invasion and never re-
covered. Life there was revived in the 14
th
c.,
but on a lower level as an ordinary fortiied
setlement.
The population of the setlement were oc-
cupied mostly in crafts, trade exchange with
the rural surroundings, agriculture, and
breeding of sheep and goats. The land was
cultivated to provide food for its population.
Besides the fortress, the population would
have performed protective and signal-obser-
vation functions when an enemy approached.
At the end of the 15
th
or during the 16
th
c.,
the setlement was deserted once and for all.
This was due to the new economic and social
conditions imposed by the Otomans. This
situation relected on the character of the set-
tlement network which endured transforma-
tion. The Bulgarian population was forced to
pay taxes in money and in kind to the cen-
tral authorities and the local spahi (Otoman
landlords), to fulill various labour services,
to provide food and support to the army of
the Otomans, to participate in the building of
bridges, roads and inns, etc. All these obliga-
tions burdened the Bulgarians and they were
forced to look to the lands suitable for culti-
vation to maintain the family, and enable the
payment of taxes. Thus, villages developed at
the foot of the aforementioned medieval cit-
ies. In order to survive, the Bulgarians had to
become involved in the economic system of
the Otoman Empire, which relected on their
everyday life, occupation, traditions and life-
styles. The fortiied setlements were deserted
because they did not meet these new require-
ments. If during the Second Bulgarian King-
dom the cities, fortresses and fortiied set-
tlements were built on inaccessible sites and
security was sought consciously, in the early
centuries of Otoman rule (15
th
-16
th
c.) the val-
leys and ields now started to be occupied;
they allowed for the preservation of life, and
the survival and continuity of the family.
V. The Name of the City
Opinions and Hypotheses
The name of the city in the locality Dzhiviz-
li Bunar by present-day Sevlievo has been ac-
cepted by all researchers so far: N. Kovachev,
S. Simeonov, Hr. Temelski and others, almost
without reserve, as Hotel or Hotalich (in Turk-
ish). This name occurs in a medieval fragmen-
tary inscription from the Batoshevski Monas-
tery which has been destroyed. The inscrip-
tion stated: This temple was raised by Geno
from Hotel, Petar from Tarnov, year 67
(, . 1959: 352356). It is a building
inscription and testiies to the construction
of a church. The building was ordered and
funded by a local boyar who, according to
the aforementioned researchers, was from
the medieval city by Sevlievo (, .
2006:1). The name of the city Hotel, later in
the Turkish tax records occurs in its Turkish
transcription as Hotalich. That is the only me-
dieval source containing the name of the city.
The inscription was discovered far from
the ruins of the medieval city. The specula-
tion that the name Hotel belongs to the bo-
yar who governed it is not serious and should
be rejected. The inscription is evidence of a
building team which performed the construc-
tion of a church that could be aforded only
by a person of aristocratic origin, who con-
ducted administrative functions at the royal
court in Tarnovo. The church discovered at
the so called citadel of the city by Sevlievo is
a small, modest building which can be taken
as a signiicant monument in the traditions of
the building school of Tarnovo. Besides the
city by Sevlievo, during the 13
th
-14
th
c., across
the hilly eminences of the present-day Sev-
lievsko Plain, two more large and very strong
medieval fortresses were raised; we hinted
at them in the beginning by the village of
Kramolin, in the locality Gradat, and the
village of Zdravkovets in the locality Vita-
ta Stena. The excavations of the aforemen-
tioned sites undertaken by Atanas Milchev
and K. Koycheva have shown the presence of
604
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
inner fortiications citadels, churches inside
the citadels, and craft quarters at the foot of
the inner fortiications surrounded by inde-
pendent defensive walls (, ., .
, . 1992:9295; ,
., . . 1978:5255). Both fortresses
show evolution toward medieval cities in
their development. The churches inside their
citadels are large, single-nave structures of
the type compact cross a widespread
type of religious buildings at the capital Tar-
novgrad (Veliko Tarnovo); as at the church
in the locality Vitata Stena it was of alternat-
ing brick and stone layers, with lavish stone
plastic decoration (, ., .
1978:5557).
All this illustrates the status of the fortress,
of the boyar who ruled over it, and his mate-
rial resources (at the excavations a large im-
posing boyar residence and very lavish aris-
tocratic necropolis (Fig. 15) were discovered.
The design of the temple is in the spirit of the
metropolitan architectural-artistic school. The
complex approach to all available data: both
onomastic and archaeological, shows that the
name Hotel probably belonged to the setle-
ment in the locality Vitata Stena by the vil-
lage of Zdravkovets, and not to the medieval
city by Sevlievo. Archaeological surveys in
the area would provide a inal answer to this
question, but a few later sources from the Ot-
toman age present further convincing proof
that medieval Hotalich is not the medieval
setlement above the modern town of Sev-
lievo, and it should not be identiied with it.
The Turkish records from the 15
th
c. on-
wards mention two big setlements in Sev-
lievsko Plain which existed separately a
newly founded village called Selvi whose
direct successor is present-day Sevlievo; and
Hotalich the successor of medieval Hotel,
which lost its status as a fortiied setlement.
The setlement was already developing in
the low and lat plain and for a long time it
Fig. 15. The fortress in the locality Vitata Stena by the village of Zdravkovets (plan after Atanas Milchev
and Kina Koycheva)
605
S E V L I E V O
was the administrative centre of the region
Nahiya. In a record from 1550 representing a
list of the lien properties in the district, it is
stated: In Nahiya Hotalich, also called Hisar-
begli and Zir. The document stresses that
the population of the medieval city of Hotel
left it and setled in the plain: Hisar is the old
fortress-town; zir means under, i.e. the set-
tlement at its foot. To claim that the lower
town of Hotalich is actually the later setle-
ment of Selvi, Servi Sevlievo, is unconvinc-
ing (, . 2007:3). On the contrary,
the Turkish record very clearly testiies to the
transformation undergone by the city in the
locality Vitata Stena it ofered resistance to
the conquerors, it was reduced to ashes as the
archaeological excavations prove, and its pop-
ulation setled at its foot, and kept the name
transcribed in Turkish as Hotalich. The most
convincing localization for the setlement of
Hotalich is by the present-day village of Ya-
vorets, just at the foot of the rocks of the local-
ity Vitata Stena; and the localization of the me-
dieval city of Hotel the fortress on the rocks
in the locality Vitata Stena.
Summarizing the data related to the origin
of the name of Hotel/ Hotalich, we should
mention that they concern two setlements
which developed as a result of the capture and
the abandonment of the medieval fortresses
in the district. The setlement network of the
Second Bulgarian Kingdom was transformed
as the population abandoned the fortiied cit-
ies and the fortresses, and setled in the low
and lat Sevlievsko Plain. The new Otoman
power and administration did not allow the
use of the fortiications of the Second Bulgar-
ian Kingdom, and it did not occupy them. The
inaccessible fortiied cities from the age of the
Second Bulgarian Kingdom in this geographic
area no longer had military-strategic signii-
cance for the Otoman State. Their popula-
tion deserted them voluntarily, and founded
new unfortiied setlements near the arable
land. The reasons for that were of a social and
economic nature new taxes had to be paid,
new labour services and obligations had to
be fulilled, and these considerations tied the
Bulgarians to the land and its cultivation. The
medieval city by present-day Sevlievo, and
medieval Hotel in the locality Vitata Stena,
had a similar historical fate which is convinc-
ingly atested to by the archaeological excava-
tions that continued more than thirty years.
Medieval Hotel/Hotalich is to be discussed in
another study of mine.
606
Thracian, Greek, Roman and Medieval Cities, Residences and Fortresses
BIBLIOGRAPHY
, . 1959: . . . , 22, 1959:352356.
, ., . 1978: . , . .
. , 4, 1978:5265.
, ., . , . 1994: . , . , . .
XIIXIV . . ( ). , 20, 1994:91
107.
, . 2006: . . . :
. , 2006.
, . 2007: . . . - .
2007.