Letteratura scientifica selezionata sul tema "Empire ottoman – 1829-1878"

On 2/14 September 1829, the Peace Treaty of Adrianople between the Tsarist Empire and the Ottoman Empire was concluded with important effects for the two Romanian countries, Moldavia and Wallachia. Their political development was regulated by a separate document, an integral part of the text of the Treaty. The separate Act confirmed the agreements made by the Tsarist Empire and the Ottoman Empire in the text of the Akkerman (White Citadel) Convention on 25 September/7 October 1826, on the election of the Romanian ruler, following the wish and consent expressed by the Sublime Porte. In addition to these political issues, important for the topic covered in this article were the provisions related to the protection of the borders, especially the right bank of the Danube and the islands close to the left bank of the great river that were in proximity to the Ottoman Empire. According to the Adrianople Treaty of 1829, the thalweg along the Danube was considered the border between Moldova and Wallachia on the entire common sector up to the confluence with the Prut River, agreement protected by the Sublime Porte. In 1830, after the Treaty of Adrianople, a commission composed of the delegates of Wallachia, Moldavia, the Tsarist Empire and the Ottoman Empire proceeded to delimiting the river border between the Ottoman Empire and the Romanian Countries by fixing the existing thalweg at that time. Obviously, natural phenomena contributed over time to its modification, so that, after the Congress of Berlin in 1878, when it was decided to trace the land border between the countries bordering the Danube, a series of incidents at the Romanian-Bulgarian river border occurred. In this context, it is highlighted the strategic and economic importance of the Danube.

On 2/14 September 1829, the Peace Treaty of Adrianople between the Tsarist Empire and the Ottoman Empire was concluded with important effects for the two Romanian countries, Moldavia and Wallachia. Their political development was regulated by a separate document, an integral part of the text of the Treaty. The separate Act confirmed the agreements made by the Tsarist Empire and the Ottoman Empire in the text of the Akkerman (White Citadel) Convention on 25 September/7 October 1826, on the election of the Romanian ruler, following the wish and consent expressed by the Sublime Porte. In addition to these political issues, important for the topic covered in this article were the provisions related to the protection of the borders, especially the right bank of the Danube and the islands close to the left bank of the great river that were in proximity to the Ottoman Empire. According to the Adrianople Treaty of 1829, the thalweg along the Danube was considered the border between Moldova and Wallachia on the entire common sector up to the confluence with the Prut River, agreement protected by the Sublime Porte. In 1830, after the Treaty of Adrianople, a commission composed of the delegates of Wallachia, Moldavia, the Tsarist Empire and the Ottoman Empire proceeded to delimiting the river border between the Ottoman Empire and the Romanian Countries by fixing the existing thalweg at that time. Obviously, natural phenomena contributed over time to its modification, so that, after the Congress of Berlin in 1878, when it was decided to trace the land border between the countries bordering the Danube, a series of incidents at the Romanian-Bulgarian river border occurred. In this context, it is highlighted the strategic and economic importance of the Danube.

On 2/14 September 1829, the Peace Treaty of Adrianople between the Tsarist Empire and the Ottoman Empire was concluded with important effects for the two Romanian countries, Moldavia and Wallachia. Their political development was regulated by a separate document, an integral part of the text of the Treaty. The separate Act confirmed the agreements made by the Tsarist Empire and the Ottoman Empire in the text of the Akkerman (White Citadel) Convention on 25 September/7 October 1826, on the election of the Romanian ruler, following the wish and consent expressed by the Sublime Porte. In addition to these political issues, important for the topic covered in this article were the provisions related to the protection of the borders, especially the right bank of the Danube and the islands close to the left bank of the great river that were in proximity to the Ottoman Empire. According to the Adrianople Treaty of 1829, the thalweg along the Danube was considered the border between Moldova and Wallachia on the entire common sector up to the confluence with the Prut River, agreement protected by the Sublime Porte. In 1830, after the Treaty of Adrianople, a commission composed of the delegates of Wallachia, Moldavia, the Tsarist Empire and the Ottoman Empire proceeded to delimiting the river border between the Ottoman Empire and the Romanian Countries by fixing the existing thalweg at that time. Obviously, natural phenomena contributed over time to its modification, so that, after the Congress of Berlin in 1878, when it was decided to trace the land border between the countries bordering the Danube, a series of incidents at the Romanian-Bulgarian river border occurred. In this context, it is highlighted the strategic and economic importance of the Danube.

The southern region of Georgia, historical Meskheti which according to tradition was primary converted in Christianity even in the 1st century AD was occupied by Ottomans since 16th century AD. Only the territories of present Samtskhe-Javakheti and Ajara, approximatelyone third of ancient Messkheti are parts of modern state of Georgia being a part of the Russian Empire since 1829 and 1878 in sequence.It is interesting the different results, which occurred after the entire process. The Muslim inhabitants of Samtskhe-Javakheti, unlike of Ajarians, could not keep up the national consciousness and as of today it admits itself like ethnic Turks. There are some important reasons among which we should emphasize Ottoman ruling traditions and characteristics of Georgian political and cultural life in the 19th century. The case is that Samtskhe in the middle ages was the active political player unlike Ajara. It was one of the initiator of decentralization and because of this significantly the main victim of Ottoman occupation. In 16th-19th centuries Ottomans established their governance institutions definitely in this region and islamization, like to administrative centers in the Balkans, most profoundly is noticed there. On the other hand, in the 1830s when Samtskhe-Javakheti entered to Russian province inhabited by eastern Georgians, upper intellectual strata was in the process of formation. The tradition that prevented Muslims from perception of being Georgians, was still strong. Only later, in the 1870s Muslim population of Samtskhe-Javakheti were promulgated as Georgians by the request of Georgian society. It was late though, however such policies justified in newly joined Ajara. To say shortly, geographical conditions, faulty infrastructure and advanced ideas appeared in the second half of the 19th century in Georgia contributed to preservation of inhabitants of Ajara within the framework of the Georgian national identity.

The article analyzes the main international acts, treaties, conventions governing commercial shipping in the Lower Danube in the XIX – early XX centuries. Considerable attention is paid to the periodization and peculiarities of international diplomacy regarding commercial shipping on the Danube. The measures of European states for the introduction of a single legal regime and guarantees of safety of navigation on the Danube are considered. The attempts of the Russian Empire to establish political, economic and legal hegemony in the European international shipping trade are analyzed. The process of creation of the European Danube Commission (hereinafter – EDC) and its place in the deployment of international shipping in the region is studied. By the middle of the XIX century most often used bilateral diplomacy aimed at strengthening the presence of European countries on the Danube. Britain, Austria, and Russia actually imposed their conditions on the Ottoman Empire regarding shipping and trade relations. The Russian Empire almost monopolized its presence on the Lower Danube with the Peace of Bucharest (1812), the Peace of Andrianople (1829), and the Ackermann Convention of 1826, much to the displeasure of leading European countries. Therefore, from the middle of the XIX century efforts of European countries (including Britain, France, Austria) were aimed at ousting Russia not only from the Danube, but from the Budzhak region and the creation of an international commission (EDC), which would regulate commercial shipping. Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War of 1853-1856 and the loss of the Danube part of Budzhak temporarily drove it out of the Danube region. The legal alternative was the activity of the EDC, which was clearly regulated by international treaties and conventions. In addition to regulating the shipping regime, the EDC dealt with the issue of quarantine, arrangement of shipping channels, legal regime in the area of responsibility. Even the victory in the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878 failed to restore Russia’s full presence. The agreements of 1878–1883, according to which Russia regained the Danube part of Budzhak and the Kiliia estuary, became a certain compromise, and the powers of the EDC extended to the entire Lower Danube. Until 1918, control over waterways continued to be exercised by the European Danube Commission, which in turn also did not take into account the interests of the newly formed Danube states (Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria).

En leur qualité de hauts dignitaires dotés des grades supérieurs de l'administration civile et militaire, les pachas sont répertoriés dans les registres de personnel constitués sous le règne d'Abdülhamid II (1876-1909). L'explooitation sérielle d'un échantillon de près de trois cents notices biographiques tirées de ces registres permet la mise en oeuvre d'une prosopographie selon trois directions successives : une étude des caractéristiques principales des pachas qui délimitent plus ou moins un groupe de statut ; une analyse de la socialisation ottomane qui aborde les individus comme les produits d'une fabrique sociale, scolaire et linguistique ; une reconstitution des âges de la vie, au travers des pratiques administratives et des modalités de la carrière. Au terme de l'enquête, il apparaît que les pachas participent autant au maintien de l'esprit des institutions ottomanes comme serviteurs du sultan qu'à la promotion et à l'application des réformes comme administrateurs de l'Empire
The Ottoman pashas were registered as high ranking civil and military officials in the personnel recordds created during Abdülhamid II's rule (1876-1909). The serial examination of a sample of nearly three hundred biographies attempts to establish a prosopography along three tracks : first, an analysis of the main features of the pashas delineating more or less a status group ; second, a study of ottoman socialization adressing individuals as created by a social, educational and linguistic environment; third, a reconstruction of successive stages of their lives, through administrative procedures and career patterns. It emerges from the investigation that the pashas contributed both to perserving the ethic of the Ottoman institutions as the Sultan's servants and to reform as imperial administrators

Cette thèse a pour objet les savoirs en mouvement. L’enjeu est d’explorer la construction transnationale de l’agronomie, de la sylviculture et de la médecine vétérinaire dans l’Empire ottoman tardif et la jeune Turquie républicaine (1840-1940) à l’aide des savoirs venus d’autres contrées, notamment de France. L’étude vise à répondre à deux questions : pourquoi et comment les savoirs relatifs à ces domaines naissants circulent-ils ? Qu’advient-il de ces savoirs dans leur nouveau contexte ?Mes recherches établissent que le gouvernement ottoman, fortement endetté à la fin du XIXe siècle, investit dans ces disciplines et finance la mobilité des personnes et des objets – étudiants, experts, instruments – principalement parce que les vastes ressources naturelles de l’Empire sont perçues comme capables d’atténuer la détresse économique en générant des gains financiers. Cette volonté de concentrer les efforts sur le secteur primaire convient aux puissances européennes puisqu’elles veulent importer ces biens et exporter des produits industriels vers l’Empire. Les mobilités savantes sont encouragées aussi parce que la France, en concurrence avec ses voisins dans sa quête de suprématie scientifique, cherche à faire rayonner la « science française » dans le monde. Mon approche micrologique permet de mesurer le poids des banales ambitions personnelles. Les experts français acceptent volontiers de partir pour l’Empire car ils y occupent des postes convoités mieux rémunérés qu’en France. C’est aussi l’occasion de mener des recherches dans une nouvelle zone géo-climatique et de publier des travaux inédits. Pour les étudiants ottomans, un diplôme étranger représente un moyen d’accéder à de meilleurs emplois dans l’Empire, sans compter les fonctions symboliques des études en Europe, qui leur confèrent la légitimité du statut d’homme cultivé.Ma thèse démontre qu’il n’existe pas de copie à l’identique. Contrairement aux travaux antérieurs qui tendent à réduire les scientifiques ottomans à de simples imitateurs, les sources que je mobilise révèlent que les savoirs agronomiques, forestiers et vétérinaires étaient nécessairement réinventés, la faune et la flore, les conditions pédoclimatiques et les maladies endémiques variant selon les régions du monde. Les scientifiques ottomans ont eux-mêmes insisté sur la nécessité d’adapter les savoirs étrangers aux besoins locaux et ont aussi inventé des néologismes pour décrire ce processus créatif tel memleketleştirme. Ils ont également produit des nouveaux savoirs et exporté les recherches originales qu’ils ont conduites, principalement par le biais d’articles publiés dans des revues européennes.Ce travail a des implications plus larges pour les études ottomanes et l’histoire des sciences. Il démontre l’inefficacité de la catégorie d’occidentalisation qui impose un paradigme civilisationnel là où il ne devrait pas y avoir. Sans référence aux colonies ni aux métropoles, il expose le modus operandi des circulations scientifiques plus routinières entre les espaces traditionnellement considérés comme « occidentaux » et « non occidentaux »
This thesis investigates scientific knowledge on the move. I examine the transnational construction of agronomy, forestry, and veterinary medicine in the late Ottoman Empire and early Republican Turkey (1840-1940) with knowledge imported from other countries, notably from France. The study aims to answer two questions: why and how did knowledge in these emerging fields circulate, and what happened to this knowledge in its new context?My research establishes that the highly indebted Ottoman government invested in these then-nascent disciplines and financed the mobility of persons and objects – students, experts, instruments – mainly because the Empire’s vast natural resources were perceived as capable of alleviating economic distress by generating financial gains. The Ottomans’ focus on the primary sector suited the European powers, as they wanted to import such goods and export industrial products to the Empire. Scholarly mobilities were also encouraged because France, locked in a competition with its neighbors in its quest for scientific supremacy, sought to raise the profile of “French science” around the world. My micro-level approach makes it possible to identify the impact of ordinary personal ambitions. French experts willingly sailed off for the Empire as they occupied coveted positions that paid three to four times more than in France. It was also an opportunity to conduct research in a new geo-climatic zone and publish original works. For Ottoman students, a foreign degree represented a means of gaining access to better employment in the Empire, not to mention the symbolic functions of studying in Europe, which conferred on them the legitimacy of the status of cultured men.My thesis demonstrates that there is no such thing as an identical copy. Contrary to previous works that tend to reduce Ottoman scientists to mere imitators, the sources I draw on reveal that agronomic, forestry, and veterinary knowledge was necessarily reinvented, as fauna and flora, pedoclimatic conditions, and endemic diseases vary from one location to another. Ottoman scientists emphasized the need to adapt foreign knowledge to local needs, and even invented neologisms to describe this creative process – memleketleştirme. They also produced new knowledge and exported the research they carried out abroad, mainly through articles published in European journals.This work has broader implications for Ottoman studies and history of science. In relation to Ottoman studies, it demonstrates the ineffectiveness of the category of Westernization, which imposes an unneeded civilizational paradigm and renders scientific encounters abnormal. Without references to colonies or metropolises, this thesis exposes the modus operandi of routine scientific circulations between spaces traditionally understood to be “Western” and “non-Western”

Appliqués sous l’influence européenne, visant l’occidentalisation des systèmes de l’état et prometteuses d’une égalité juridique entre les musulmans et les non-musulmans, les réformes dites Tanzimat s’annoncent fort polémiques au XIXe siècle. L’idée d’égalité entre les communautés confessionnelles fait son chemin. A la Régence de Tunis, un mouvement réformateur similaire à celui de la capitale ottomane commence à s’épanouir. De ce fait, tous ces changements effectués au cours de cette période transforment la religion en un enjeu politique. Par conséquent, les grands dignitaires religieux se voient fortement sollicités par les hommes politiques à Tunis et à Istanbul. La règle des sultans et des beys devait être mise en conformité avec la loi de Dieu, tout comme la société musulmane devait suivre les proscrits divins. Cela posé, notre étude porte sur le rôle joué par les chefs des ulémas à Tunis et à Istanbul, à savoir les Şeyhs ül-islam d’Istanbul et les grands-muftis de Tunis, dans ce processus de réforme. Cette étude permettra de dresser un tableau des muftis tunisois et des Şeyhs ül-islam d’Istanbul en tant que participants ou opposants aux mouvements de réformes
Applied under the European influence, aiming at the westernization of the systems of the state and promising of legal equality between the Muslims and the non-Muslims, the said reforms Tanzimat looks very polemical in the XIXth century. The idea of equality between the confessional communities makes its road. In the Regency of Tunis, a reforming movement similar to that of the Ottoman capital begins to bloom. Therefore, all these changes made during this period transform the religion into a political stake. Consequently, the big religious dignitaries see each other strongly sought by the politicians in Tunis and in Istanbul. The rule of the sultans and the beys must be put in accordance with God's law, quite as the Moslem society had to follow the divine outlaws. Supposing that it is the case, our study concerns the role played by the heads of the ulemas in Tunis and in Istanbul, namely the Seyhs ül-Islam of Istanbul and the big muftis of Tunis, in this process of reform

Defence date: 3 June 2013
Examining Board: Professor Anthony Molho, European University Institute (Supervisor) Professor Edhem Eldem, Boğaziçi University (External Supervisor) Professor Antonella Romano, European University Institute Professor Gilles Pécout, Ecole Normale Supérieure
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digital archive of EUI PhD theses
The dissertation is about the genesis of the Ottoman Constitution, which was promulgated on December 23, 1876. The main objective is to reconstruct the nineteenth-century Ottoman constitutional movement in relation to Europe and international politics without neglecting the internal administrative developments that affected the process. The dissertation traces the transcultural and transnational dimension of the internal process of the genesis of the Ottoman Constitution and shows that the Ottoman constitutional movement developed beyond the control of Ottoman bureaucracy and state apparatus, through a web of relations that exceeded the boundaries of the Ottoman territory. The movement incorporated, from domestic authorities to foreign powers, a plurality of formal and informal agents of different ethno-religious, cultural and ideological backgrounds and of different legal norms. The dissertation investigates how Ottoman reformers synthesised different legal traditions, imported from the West to the Ottoman context through various human channels, and how the Ottomans' constitutional thought was shaped and negotiated by the encounter of European models with the imperial political culture as well as by the encounter of foreign actors with domestic draftsmen.