Suchergebnisse

After the Ottoman conquest of Syria in 1516, the Janissaries of Damascus were employed to meet the manpower needs of further campaigns in Iran, Cyprus, and particularly Yemen. The recruitment of the necessary troops beyond the dev?irme dramatically changed the character of the Janissary corps and eventually the empire as a whole. It transformed the Janissaries from an elite military unit of slave soldiers into an assemblage of men from diverse origins, slave and free, who performed a variety of functions for the empire in addition to waging war. This transformation affected the role of the Janissaries in Ottoman politics as well as their own concept of themselves and their role, generating shifts among social groups and changes in the way Ottomans regarded their empire. This study examines the change in military recruitment in Syria through the documents of the Ottoman government, showing how the actual beginning of this transformation differed from its description by contemporary writers of nasihatnameler

1. Introduction : the Circle of Justice -- 2. Mesopotamia : "that the strong might not oppress the weak" -- 3. Persia : "the deeds God likes best are righteousness and justice" -- 4. The Islamic empire : "no prosperity without justice and good administration" -- 5. Politics in transition : "curb the strong from riding on the weak" -- 6. The Turks and Islamic civilization : "the most penetrating of arrows is the prayer of the oppressed" -- 7. Mongols and Turks : "fierce toward offenders, and in judgements just" -- 8. Early modern empires : "the world is a garden, its wall is the state" -- 9. Modernization and revolution : "no justice without law applied equally to all" -- 10. The Middle East in the twentieth century : "the regime will endure with unbelief but not with injustice."

From ancient Mesopotamia into the 20th century, "the Circle of Justice" as a concept has pervaded Middle Eastern political thought and underpinned the exercise of power in the Middle East. The Circle of Justice depicts graphically how a government's justice toward the population generates political power, military strength, prosperity, and good administration. This book traces this set of relationships from its earliest appearance in the political writings of the Sumerians through four millennia of Middle Eastern culture. It explores how people conceptualized and acted upon this powerful insight, how they portrayed it in symbol, painting, and story, and how they transmitted it from one regime to the next. Moving towards the modern day, the author shows how, although the Circle of Justice was largely dropped from political discourse, it did not disappear from people's political culture and expectations of government. The book demonstrates the Circle's relevance to the Iranian Revolution and the rise of Islamist movements all over the Middle East, and suggests how the concept remains relevant in an age of capitalism.

This study examines for the first time the finance procedures and documents of the post-classical Ottoman Empire. It provides an overview of institutional and monetary history and a detailed description of assessment and collection processes for Cizye, Avariz and Iltizam -collected taxes, the documents produced by these processes, and the information they contain. The finance department's detailed record-keeping, procedural continuity, and provision of economic justice made it a bulwark of stability in a period of turmoil. For specialists, this book introduces a multitude of sources on the economic and social history of the post-classical age, while for comparativists it places the empire in its seventeenth-century context. It links Ottoman administrative change with early modern state formation and reformulates the seventeenth century as a period of consolidation, not decline

Richard L. Chambers was a professor of Turkish language and history at the University of Chicago. Finding material for this essay on his life was extraordinarily difficult; for a long time it was impossible even to find a copy of his CV. He never published his own book, that advertisement for scholarship that is characteristic of academics. There is not even a gravestone, as he declined to be buried in the family cemetery plot, nor was there a memorial service. He used to complain that he received no recognition for what he had done, but he did not seek recognition or parade his accomplishments. Yet his life and academic career parallel and intertwine with the development of Middle Eastern and Turkish studies in America, to which he made important contributions. This essay was put together through Google searches, speeches that he himself gave on the development of Turkish Studies, contributions from those who knew him, and at long last, a rather skimpy CV. The result is only a sketch, a mere outline, of his many activities and contributions.

Richard L. Chambers was born on 27 September 1929 in Brundidge, Alabama, and died on 1 August 2016 in Montgomery, Alabama. He attended the University of Alabama, studying diplomatic and Middle Eastern history and gaining a B.A. in 1950. He obtained a B.S. in Foreign Service from Georgetown University and a fellowship at the Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich. He then pursued an M.A. in History at Alabama, graduating in 1955, just when Middle Eastern studies really began to expand nationwide. He moved to Princeton for a second master's in 1958 and a Ph.D. in 1968. He studied with Ottoman historian Lewis Thomas and wrote a dissertation on Ahmed Cevdet Paşa, the nineteenth-century Ottoman intellectual, historian, and statesman.

Halil İnalcık was born in Istanbul, the capital of the Ottoman Empire, into a refugee family, probably in 1916 (he did not know his birthday; in Turkey he adopted 29 May, in the US 4 July). He died at age 100 in Ankara on 25 July 2016, as the premier Ottoman historian in the world. To quote one of his students, "Professor İnalcık transformed the field of Ottoman studies from an obscure and exotic subfield into one of the leading historical disciplines that covers the history of the greater Middle East and North Africa as well as the Balkans from the late medieval to the modern period. He set the tone of debate and critical inquiry from the early modern to the modern period." Born an Ottoman, he made Ottoman studies a crucial part of world history.

If there is any aspect of Ottoman history that is considered to be well understood, it is the timar system, the system through which the revenues of the empire and the oversight of peasant agriculture were awarded to cavalrymen (sipahis) in lieu of salary.In the mid-twentieth century the timar was seen as the core issue in Ottoman history, the characteristic institution of the empire's classical era; the device that united the military system, the political system, the economic system and the social system; that made the empire successful, organized its resources, brought its people together, insured its prosperity, and created its identity.Advice writers' complaints, however, paint a picture of the timar system as riddled with corruption and filled with incapable recipients.

Istanbul achieved its eminence well before the Ottoman conquest as Constantinople, the second capital of the Roman Empire and after the fall of Rome its foremost city. It was the goal of the early Islamic jihad, the kızıl elma of generations of warriors over centuries of time. It resisted capture for nearly a thousand years, even though when it finally fell to the armies of Mehmed the Conqueror, the owl was sounding in the castle of Afrasiyab, as the Conqueror himself quoted. Its conquest has been called by Michael Angold "arguably the single most important event in Ottoman history."1 Not only did it link the conquests in Rumeli and Anatolia, it definitively altered the nature of the sultanate from the leader of a band of frontier warriors to the emperor of a new Rome. ; İstanbul 29 Mayıs Üniversitesi Senatosunun 22.06.2020 tarihli ve 2020/14-5 sayılı Açık Bilim Politikası gereğince erişime açılmıştır.