OTTOMAN HISTORY - Halil İNALCIK

12 Pages·2008·8.13 MB·English

Halil
Inalcrk
ESSAYS
IN
OTTOMAN
HISTORY
E
EREN
"I believe we have to consider first whether the Ottomans
themselves divided their history into periods, whether they
were conscious of a distinction between the age in which
they lived and earlier ages, and what ideas they had about
periods in history. "
EREN Tef: (212)2520561
lilllil
llllllllllilllilllllllllillilllllllllllllffi i
*100-03295*
Essavs in Ottoman History
ililil||ilil fiil ilil ililil fiililil ilil|il ililil iltil ilililil tit|
*975-7622-58-3*
I
I
Contents
Preface
I
Part Historiography
1 History
Periods in Ottoman ... . 15
2 History..
How to Read'Ashrk Pasha-zade's ........31
II
Part Sultans and Policies
1
'Ogmdn Ghizi's Siege of Nicaea and The Battle of Bapheus ...5 5
2 Time
Mehmed The Conqueror (1432-1481) and His . . . . . 8 7
3 State
Decision making in the Onoman .. I t 5
4
The R[znamge Registers of the Kadrasker of Rumeli as
Archives
preserved in the Istanbul Miifti.iliik . 125
5 Islamization of ottoman laws on land and land tax . .... 155
6
Tax collection, embezzlement and bribery in
Ottomanfinances
....17j
7
The Status of the Greek Orthodox Patriarch
.
under the Ottomans ..... . 195
III
Part Society and Economy
I Empire
Islam in the Ottoman .229
2 City
Istanbul: an Islamic ...... 247
3 Ottoman Galata, 1453- 1553 ... 2i
I
4
Greeks in Ottoman Economy and Finances , 1453-1500 . . . . . 37 5
5
"Arab" Camel Drivers in Western Anatolia
century
in the fifteenth .... 389
6
The Question of the Closing of the Black Sea
under the Ottomans..... . 4l I
Preface
In this volume are collected papers published between 1960 and 1994,
dealing with early Ottoman history and historiography, and Ottoman urban
and legal history.
In Article I-1 an attempt is made to ascertain periods in Ottoman history.
After a brief review of the ideas of Ottoman historians themselves on this
theme, the article proposes a division on the basis of an analytical approach.
This takes account of the state of equilibrium established between the
Ottoman Empire and foreign powers, the changes in the ruler's authority
within the empire, and the functioning of the system of land-tenure upon
which the military, financial and social institutions of the empire relied.
Written thirty years ago this paper has to be modified or totally replaced by a
new essay in the light of investigations made since then.
Article I-2 is an essay examining the life and work of the most important
Ottoman chronicler of the first two centuries of Ottoman history. When
critically used the work provides authentic and substantial information, even
for the early years of the Ottoman state. It is a mistake to dismiss altogether
these traditions on the assumption that everything in them is pure legend, as
has been believed by some recent authors (see Article II-l in this volume). On
the other hand, 'Ashik Pashazade's interpretation of the events of his own
age is strongly colored or distorted by his prejudices and interests. In this
essay I tried to show some of the personal interests and biases which affected
his history.
In Article II-l the Greek and Ottoman accounts of 'Osman's siege of
Nicaea and the ensuing battle of Bapheus are analyzed comparatively.
Although totally ignored or misinterpreted by historians this event is the most
important in early Ottoman history, clearly responsible for Osman's
appearance as a charismatic leader in the Bithynia frontier region and for the
foundation of the Ottoman dynasty.
In Article Il-2 a detailed critical review is made of Franz Babinger's book,
Mehmed der Eroberer und seine Zeit, Weltenstiirmer einer Zeitenwende,
considered as the definitive account of the Conqueror's history. In this
review the important sources neglected by the author are noted, his
HALIL INRI.CM
interpretations discussed and mistakes in chronology shown, (in the English
version of this work references are made to this article by the ffanslator).
In Article II-3 the decision-making process in Ottoman government
meetings as well as the ruler's actual position in the process are discussed.
The important question as to what extent the consolidation of independently
organized groups of bureaucrats, ulema or soldiery as well as established
customs or law-codes provided a check on the independent or arbitrary orders
of the Sultan is examined.
In Article II-4 kadi-ship, the paramount institution in the Ottoman
administration system, is examined in its various aspects including ranks and
the procedure of assignments as well as conflicts within the group. All this in
done on the basis of the original appointment lists of the kadraskers preserved
in the archives of the shaykhulislamate, Istanbul Mtiftiiltifti.
Article II-5 asks the question why, during Suleyman I's reign, an attempt
was made to reinterpret and adjust Ottoman laws on landholding and taxation
to the shar'i principles established by the authoritative jurists of the second
century of Islam. Eb0ssu'0d argues that the appropriation by individuals of
the state-owned (mtrt) lands is illegal, and the attempt to create new sources
of revenue for the state treasury by raising the rate of tithes from 8 percent to
5 percent was made because of the khara$i nature of the miri lands. Thus,
the reasons for the islamization of Ottoman state laws under Suleyman the
Lawgiver are examined.
Article II-6 is an inquiry on the basis of an official report of the
malpractices committed by the defterdar of Syria. Employing a set of
documents we attempted also to explain the struggle between the Ottoman
administration and the Druze chieftains for control of the fiscal and economic
resources of the Mountain of Lebanon.
Article II-7 reexamines the theory that under the Ottomans the Greek
Qrthodox Patriarch enjoyed an autonomous position, representing the Greek
nation with full religious, judicial and administrative powers. With a revision
of this theory our study attempts to correct this highly exaggerated theory,
showing that the Patriarch was closely dependent on the Sultan for his acts
outside religious affairs, and that the Christians, having the status of dhimmi,
were the direct subjects of the sultan.
Article III-1 is a brief essay on the islamization of the Turks in general,
and on Islam in Asia Minor in particular. A bibliographical essay is added to
this new edition covering the period from the early Turkish conversion to
Islam in East Europe and Central Asia.
Article III-2 is an attempt to show what measures Mehmed the Conqueror
took to rebuild the conquered city of Constantinople and whether or not the
PERIODS IN OTTOMAN HISTORY
typical Islamic city had a ground plan with well-defined urban sections
determined by Islamic concepts and traditions.
In Article III-3, first with an analysis of the ahdnlme, the document of the
surrender of Genoese Galata to the Ottoman state, misinterpretations made on
the nature of this act by western historians are corrected. In the second part of
the paper the process by which the Genoese city was transformed into an
Ottoman one is discussed, mainly on the basis of the original Ottoman
documents.
Article lll/4 describes, on the basis of the archival documentation, the
important roles the Greek subjects of the Sultan played in the economy and
finances of the empire. An interesting observation is that during the Ottoman
period members of the Byzantine aristocracy continued their pre-Ottoman
activities as tax-farmers.
In Article III-5 a detailed investigation is made of the origin and
organization of a group called "Arab boghurdjular", Arab camel drivers, (read
as Azebs in Barkan) in western Anatolia. Ottoman archival evidence and
anthropological data suggest that these "Arabs" might originally have been a
mixed population of Arabs, Turcomans and other ethnic groups, rearing
camels and employed by the Ottoman government under a special
organization in the transport service of heavy goods, principally salt, in the
region.
Article III-6 examines, again in light of the Ottoman archival materials,
how and exactly when the Ottomans established complete control of the
Straits and the Black Sea traffic.
In Collecting these articles here in one volume, no attempt has been made
to revise them except to add a few necetlary footnotes. While in the original
of some of the articles terms and personal names are rendered in
transliteration alphabets in others modern Turkish spelling is followed.
Here is a list of the original editions.
I-l: "Periods in Ottoman History", Published for the first time in this
volume.
l-2: "How to Read 'Ashtk Paga-zade's History" Studies in. Ottoman
Ilistory in Honour of Profe.tsor V.L. Mdnage, edited by Colin
Heywood and Colin Imber, Istanbul: Isis Press, 1994,, 139-156.
II- 1 : "Osmdn GhazT' s Siege of Nicaea and the Battle of Bapheus" , The
Ottoman Emi rate ( I 3 00 - I 3 89 ), ed. Elizabeth Zachariadou, Rethymnon:
Crete University Press, 1993, 77 -98.
ro
HALIL Nnrcrc
rr-2: "Mehmed the conqueror (1432-r4gl) and His time,,, speculttm,
xxxv
(1960), 408_427.
II-3: "Decision Making in the Ottoman State", Decision Making ancl
Change in the Ottoman Empire, ed. Caesar E. Farah, Kirksville: The
Thomas Tefferson University press, 1993, 9_l g.
rl-4: "The RDznlmge Registers of the Kadrasker of Rumeli
as
Preserved in the Istanbul Miifti.iltik Archives", TLrcice, xx (1988),
251-27 5 .
II-5: "Islamization of Ottoman Laws on Land and Land Taxatior",
Festgabe an Josef Matuz: Osmanistik -Turkologie- Diplomatik, eds.
C. Fragner and K. Schwarz, Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1992,
r00-1 16.
II-6: "Tax collection, Embezzlement and Bribery in ottoman
Finances", The Turkish studies Association Bulletin, 16. (l gg2).
II-7: "The Status of the Greek Orthodox Patriarch under the Ottomans".
Turcica, XXI-XXil ( I 991), 407 -436.
ilI-1: "Islam in the ottoman Empire",, cultura Turcica, 5-7 (196g-
1970), tg-29.
lrr-2: "Istanbul: an Islamic City", Journal of Islamic Studies, I (1990),
l-23.
III-3 : "Ottoman Galata, | 453-t553", P remibre Rencontre Internationale
sur l'Empire ottomen et la Turquie Moderne, ed. Edhem Eldem,
Istanbul-Paris: (1991 ), 1 7- I 05.
III-4: "Greeks in ottoman Economy and Finances, 14s3-1500",
To
E'4ANIK2I{: studies in Honor of speros vryonis, Jr., vol. II.
Byzantinoslavica, Armenica, Islamica, the Balkans and Modern
Greece, J.S. Allen et alia, New Rochelle- New York: A.D. Caratzas
1993, 307 -3tg .
UI-5: "Arab Camel Drivers in Western Anatolia in the Fifteenth
century" , Revue de Histoire Maghrebine, xl3l-32 (Tunis, 1983) , z4j -
270.
III-6: "The ouestion of the Closing of the Black Sea under the
Ottomans" Arkheion Pontou,35 (Athens, l97g),74-1I0.
,
Periods in Ottoman History
I believe we have to consider first whether the Ottomans themselves divided
their history into periods, whether they were conscious of a distinction
between the age in which they lived and earlier ages, and what ideas they had
about periods in history.
In the prologue to the elaborate history which he wrote at the command of
Bayezid II, Kemal Pashazade compares the Ottoman history with earlier
Moslem dynasties and sums up under three heads, viicuh-i rilchan,'the
reasons frrr their superiority'.t First, he says, the Ottomans unlike other
Moslem dynasties, came to power not through the violent overthrow of older
Moslem states within the Islamic community, but through the conquest of
territories pertaining to the infidel world, the Dar ul-Harb. Secondly, in the
Ottoman state the authority of the sovereign and the validity of the laws are
complete and absolute. Thirdly, the Ottoman state is richer, more populous
and more extensive than all others. No other state possesses the military
power of the Ottomans; the Ottomans have powerful artillery and a great
maritime power; the aims of the Ottoman Sultan are'tedblr-i'imaret-i ruy-i
zemln' to make the face of the world to flourish', to destroy the foes of the
true Faith, and to uphold the Holy Law.
In popular works such as 'Ashik Pashazade's history and the anonymous
Tewarrkh-i ALi 'Ogman, we find the ideas of a distinction between different
periods expressed in a more subjective fashion. In the Anonymous
Chronicles2, for example, we firrd in the reign of Bayezid I (1389-1402) quite
a violent expression of the reaction of the classes upholding the traditions of
the Ucbeyligi, Principality of the Marches- against the imperial
-the
cenlralist policies of the Sultan.
These chronicles contan bitter criticisms of the elaboration of the court
ceremonial and the development of a centrahzed administration, and of the
adoption of various "Frankish" customs which occurred during Bayezid's
reign. These criticisms contrast sharply the'new'period with the period that
I
Kemal Pashazade, Tevarlh-i Al-i Osmdn, Defter I, ed. $eraf'ettin Turan, Ankara 1970
similar points are made by pseudo- RUhi, Oxford Bodleian Library, Marsh 313.
2 Tawarikh-i Al-i 'Osmdn (Die alt osmanischen amonynten Chroniken), ed. F. Giese,
Breslau 1922,30; a more complete text: Topkapr Sarayr Mtizesi Kiittiphanesi, M.R.
700.
How to Read 'Ashrk Pasha-zade's History
I. Notes on 'Ashrk Pasha-zide's Life and Work
In his chronicle 'Ashrk Pasha-zade (hereafter Agpz.) gives his genealogy as
"Dervish Alrmed 'Ashrki, son of Yahya, son of Selman, son of Bali, son of
'Ashrk Pasha, son of Mukhlis Pasha, son of Baba llyas, who was one of the
khallfus of Ab[' I -W'afa"'. I
We have Agpz.'s signature at the bottom of the miilkname of Hadji Beg
dated 1 Rabi'I,891/12January 14912 as "Fakhr al-Mashayikh Ahmed b.
'Ashrk Pasha". In the document, before his name, we find the name of
Seyyid Welayet rendered as "'umdat al-Awlad al-Rasul Mawlana Seyyid
Welayet bn Al-Seyyid Alrmad bn Al-Seyyid AbLr 'l-Wafa'al-Baghdadi". The
name of the \adi'asker Mawlana Wildan Efendi precedes their names. This
document is a definitive proof that Agpz. was still alive on that date. A$pz.
says that members of his family are all called 'Ashrki, and were all born and
lived in the territory under the Ottoman sultans, and the Ottoman dynasty
always extended their favors to them.
The zaviye of Elvan Qelebi3 at Mecidcizi.i near Qorum, where Agpz. was
born and lived in his youth, was located in the area of Mehmed Qelebi's
I t am using Qiftgio$lu N. Atsrz' edition in his collection of early Ottoman chronicles,
Osmanlt Tarihleri, Istanbul: Ttirkiye Yayrnevi 1949, 91 ff; in his edition Atsrz
combined earlier editions by 'Ali, 'AS,k PaSa-z.ude Tarihi,Istanbul 1332H., and F.
Giese, Die altosmanische Chronik des 'Aiiq paiaz.ade, Leipzig 1929; cf . idem, "Die
verschiedenen Textrezensionen des ASiq pa5azade bei seinen Nachfblgern und
Ausschreibern", Abh. der Preuss. Ak. der Wiss., Phil.-Ilist. Klasse, Nr. 4; since none of
the editions are satisfactory a new critical edition with appropriate emendations is
absofutely necessary (here are some examples of misreadings: "Makam oldu dene Allahu
Ekber" (Atstz, 96) (dene > dlne); "Gerekdtir yir u hemdem i mtinasib" (p.98) (miinasib
> musahib); "Bunun iistadrnt buldumdu hakdan" (buldmtdt > bildinuli); "Osrnan Gazi
yerlti yerinde kondt" (p. 105) (kondt> kod); "Bu Tatdr'a gerge and verdiik" (p. 108),
editions skipped over the phrase "ammd Tatar and bekler ta'ife olmaz" (cf. Neshri, Unat-
Kdymen ed. 124). M. F. Koprtilii, "Agrk Paga-zdde", isldrn Ansiklopeclisi, I.
summarized what was known by his time about Agpz.'s lif'e.
2 The fine original roll with Bayazid II's gold tttgltra is now in my possession. I purchased
it from Cahit Oztelli about twenty five years ago. I am preparing it for publication: see
the photos of the beginning and the end of the document in the Appenclix.
3 O:r Elvan Qelebi and his zaviye see is^ldnt Ansiklopedisi (thereafter iA1,70l-708; Semavi
Eyice, "Qorum'un Meciddzti'nde Agrk Paga-oglu Elvan Qelebi Zdviyesi", Tiirkiyat
'Ogman Ghazr's Siege of Nicaea and
The Battle of Bapheus
During the period 1075-1086 Nicaea became the capital city of the Seldjukid
ruler Stileymanshah I, founder of the Seldjukid Sultanate of Anatolia.l Lost
to the Byzantines as a result of the siege by the crusaders from the west in
1097 its re-conquest remained a constant concern for the Seldjukids.
Seldjukid rule was restored in Nicaea in 1105, but the city was lost again in
ca. 1147 to the Byzantines.
'dry
The Eskigehir plain where Turcomans were pushed back now
becafire a frontier between Byzantines and Seldjukids. Pastoralist Turcomans
needed the hilly country with good mountain pasturelands beyond the
borderline and quite often penetrated with their herds into the Byzantine
territory. Against them Emperor Manuel I Comnenus (1143-11S0) built or
reinforced fortresses on the border including Karaca-Hisar on a mound just
three kilometer from Eskiqehir. However, the crushing Seldjukid victory at
I
See "Stileyman-$ah I", (O. Turan) istdm Ansiklopedisi (thereafter iA) fasc. III (1967),
210-219; S. Vryonis, The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process
of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century, Berkeley: UCP 1971
,
96-142; C. Cahen, La, Turquie pr6-Ottomane, Istanbul: Institut Frangais des Etudes
Anatoliens, 1988, 13-15; Ali Sevim, Anadolu Fatihi Kutalmtgo[lu SiiteymanSah,
Ankara: TTK, 1990; Siileymingah I conquered Nicaea in 1075 and made it the capital
city of the Seldjukid Sultanate in Anatolia. Emperor Alexios Comnenus recognized his
possession of Nicaea with the treaty of Dragos-Creek (near Maltepe) in 1081. Upon
Si.ileyminEih's death in June 1086 (See Ali Sevim, 37-39) the Seldjukid Sultan
Melikshah sent his general Porsuk, and then Bozan to take possession of the city. Ab['l
Kasim, lieutenant of Siileymang[h at Iznik, approached the emperor to be able to resist
the Seljukid emirs until he was put to death by Bozan in 1087. It is to be noted that
Abu'l (asim is credited with the conquest of Nicomedia (Izmit) before his death. Osman
Turan,2l7-218, asserted that the state Siileymangah founded gave rise among the
Turcomans in this part of Anatolia to a tradition of "the frontier state of the ghazis". The
claim in the early Ottoman traditions that Si.iteymingdh was the ancestor of 'Osman
Ghazi may be taken as an evidence of such an enduring tradition over centuries.
However, Enveri, Diisturname (ed. M. H. Yinang,Istanbul 1928,18) correcting the error
on the basis of the better sources, recognizes Si.ileymangah as the son of Kutalmrg and
eives a different genealogy for 'Ogman's ancestors. What is important here is that the re-
conquest of Nicaea and revival of the Turkish-Muslim state of Iznik must become the
ultimate ambition among the Turcomans settled in this area. On the Seldjukid presence
rn Nicaea in general, see S. vryonis, op. cit.,3l-36,52-58, 112-116, 146-155.