D iscu ssio n s
93, 2006 PL ISSN 0001 6829D ariusz K ołodziejczyk
THE “TURKISH YOKE” REVISITED: THE OTTOMAN NON-MUSLIM SUBJECTS BETWEEN LOYALTY,
ALIENATION, AND RIOT*
The process of E u ro pean unification provides a strong stim u lu s to q uestion m yths em bedded in national m em ories1. In their efforts to form a new, collective E u rop ean identity, some intellec tu als look for in sp iratio n s in th e p a s t su p ra e th n ic an d su p ra national bodies, including the once despised em pires.
S u ch efforts of idealization can provoke negative reactions from the side of th e form er subjects, w hose n in eteen th cen tu ry n atio n al identities were sh ap ed in opposition to im perial centers. W hat London w as to the Irish, St. P etersburg to the Poles, and V ienna to the H un garians, Istan b u l w as to the Greeks an d B ulgarians. While the Polish natio nal historiography w as largely formed in opposition to R ussia a n d G ermany, B ulgarians sh ap ed th eir identity in th e ir fight ag ain st the O ttom an Empire. Typical n atio n state ideologies usu ally required m artyrs to be w orshipped * This articule developed from a short discussion paper, now published as The
Turkish yoke revisited: the Ottoman Empire in the eyes o f its non Muslim subjects
in: Zones o f Fracture in M odem Europe: the Baltic Countries, the Balkans, and
Northern Italy, edited by Almut B u e s , W iesbaden 2005, pp. 157 164. Its later
working version was read a t the 20 th International Congress of Historical Sciences (Sydney, 3 9 Ju ly 2005).
1 Cf. Marek Z i ó ł k o w s k i , Pamięć i zapominanie: trupy w szafie polskiej zbioro
wej pamięci (Memory an d Oblivion: The Skeletons in the P olish National Memory Closet), K ultura i Społeczeństwo 45 (2001), p. 12.
- - -‘ ' - “ "
an d traito rs ren eg ades to be b ra n d e d 2. “Cowardly” conform ists, often forming a m ajority of a given society, were not even w orth to be m entioned in school history textbooks.
A scholarly in terest in “renegades” w as recently raised w hen two French au th o rs pub lish ed a book entitled Les Chrétiens
d'Allah. Recalling the th o u sa n d s of West E u ro p ean s who had
voluntarily adopted Islam an d served the Muslim rulers, B arto lomé an d Lucile B e n n a s s a r challenged seemingly e sta b lished tru th s regarding the social, religious, an d natio nal self identity3. In France this disp ute w as soon overshadow ed by the issue of more recent “ren egades” serving the Vichy regim e4.
The Poles, traditionally (and w ith a good reason) presenting them selves as the m ain victims of WWII, recently h a d to swallow a n u n easy discovery th a t some of them h a d collaborated in m urdering their Jew ish neighbors. A next “skeleton from the closet” is already on the agenda: some scholars search for a more balanced view of the Poles who claimed G erm an roots u n d e r the Nazi occupation (the so called Volksdeutschen).
These new interests and discoveries coincide with a fashionable c u rre n t in m odem historiography: studying m arginal groups and “irregu lar” behaviors, once condem ned to contem pt or oblivion.
The B alkans form an o th er prom ising field for su c h d is coveries. Having in m ind th e w arning of Maria T o d o r o v a , I do not w an t to ridicule the B alkan historiographies as th e “reposi tories of negative ch ara cteristics”5. R ather, I find them , along w ith th e ir a ttitu d es tow ards the O ttom an p ast, typical for the E u ropean nation state ideologies.
Som etim es it requires a foreigner to look at a n a tio n ’s p a st th ro u g h u n b iased lenses. The ‘revisionist’ co ntribution of the W elshm an N orm an D a v i e s to th e Polish historiography can be com pared with the im pact of the D utchm an Machiel K i e l in Bulgaria. Not by accident Kiel’s book on the Art and Society of
2 In h er socio anthropological approach, Mary Douglas distinguishes three types of societies: individualist (or else competitive), hierarchical, an d sectarian, cele brating respectively heroes, patriarchs, an d m artyrs; cf. M. D o u g l a s , How
Institutions Think, Syracuse, New York 1986, pp. 7 8 and 80. Yet, the US cult of
Alamo or the French cult of Je a n n e d Arc show th a t even m odem societies th a t can hardly be described as sectarian include m artyrs to their pantheons. 3 Bartolomé an d Lucile B e n n a s s a r , Les Chrétiens d Allah, Paris 1989. 4 Cf. the revealing book by Sonia C o m b e , Archives interdites: les peurs françaises
fa c e à l histoire contemporaine, Paris 1994.
5 Maria T o d o r o w a , Imagining the Balkans, New York Oxford 1997, p. 188. - - - -’ ‘ ’ ’ ’
-Bulgaria in the Turkish Period is provided w ith a motto: “the n atio n sta te is the prison of the m ind”6.
Kiel’s book w as recently tran slate d an d published in Sofia7. N um erous stu d ie s by B ulgarian h isto rian s prove th a t the Islamic p a s t is no longer a taboo8. W hen a Bulgarian scholar, A ntonina Z h e l y a z k o v a , adm its th a t “m ost B alkan histo rian s have been u n ab le to accept calmly an d analyze objectively the sp read of Islam in the Balkans, both by im m igration an d by the conversion of a segm ent of the local pop ulation”9, th is very statem en t is the proof of a deep change.
Yet, every h istorian knows th a t the im pact of scholarly m onographs is slow and shallow. A novel or a movie can influence p o p u lar im agination m uch stronger th a n a scholarly work. Also politicians rarely read books w ritten by historians. Consequently, we sh o u ld expect th a t som e stereotypes will la st for generations.
The notion of the “T urk ish yoke” h a s been coined in the B ulgarian collective im agination by the fam ous late n in e te e n th cen tury novel by Ivan Va z ov, Pod igoto (Under the yoke). From the political an d literary language, it easily found its way to the acad em ia10. One may nam e a few paradigm s associated with the notion of th e “yoke”:
6 Machiel Ki e l , Art and Society o f Bulgaria in the Turkish Period. A Sketch o f the
Economic, Juridicial and Artistic Preconditions o f Bulgarian Post Byzantine Art and its Place in the Development o f the Art o f the Christian Balkans, 1360/70 1700. A New Interpretation, A ssen/M aastricht 1985, p. 19. This motto origins from the
C hristian Arab scholar William H a d d a d .
7 The tran slatio n by Rossitsa G r a d e v a appeared in 2002.
8 Cf. the article by R ossitsa G rad e v a a n d Svetlana I v a n o v a , Researching the
Past a n d Present o f Muslim Culture in Bulgaria: the popular and high layers,
Islam an d C hristian M uslim Relations 12 (2001), pp. 317 337; this article is also republished in Gradeva, Rumeli under the Ottomans, 15th 18th centuries:
institutions and communities, Istanbul 2004, pp. 133 162.
9 A ntonina Z h e l y a z k o v a , Islamisation in the B alkans a s a Historiographical
Problem: the Southeast European Perspective, in: The Ottomans and the Balkans. A Discussion o f Historiography. Edited by F. Ada n ir a n d S. F a r o q h i , Leiden
2002, p. 265.
10 Some refreshing thoughts can be found in the article by Wojciech G a ł ą z k a ,
Mit niewoli w literaturze i kulturze bułgarskiej (Myth o f Slavery in Bulgarian Literature a n d Culture), in: Mity narodowe w literaturach słowiańskich. Studia pośw ięcone XI M iędzynarodowem u Kongresowi Slaw istów w Bratysławie. Edited b y M. B o b r o w n i c k a , Cracow 1992, pp. 59 65. According to this author, the notion of political freedom w as ab sen t in the n in eteen th cen tu ry colloquial Bulgarian; th u s, in the traditional p atriarchal Bulgarian society the term T urkish yoke could not have assu m ed its m odem political m eaning of political slavery ;
ibidem, p. 64. -‘ ’ ‘ ’ “ - ” -“ ” “ ” “ ”
1 ) T urkish invasion destroyed national sta te s in the B alkans while the national conscience of their in h a b ita n ts h ad been already developed;
2) for over 500 years of their existence the O ttom an s tate and O ttom an institution s were regarded as alien an d hostile by non M uslim subjects; any cooperation betw een the M uslim state an d the C hristian population, not to say loyalty, w as u n th in k ab le an d should be treated w ithin the notion of “natio n al tre a so n ”;
3) the original M uslim culture, developed in the B alkans, was created by “renegades” an d did not belong to the “national heritage” of respective B alkan nations; th is la st stereotype was obviously less w idespread in Bosnia an d Albania th a n in Serbia, Bulgaria an d Greece;
4) O ttom an rule b ro ug ht b ack w ard n ess to B alkan societies; this backw ardness im peded th eir economic grow th an d is resp o n sible for th eir socio economic problem s today; th is opinion, em bedded in the M arxist notion of Asiatic mode of production, w as cherished by official historiographies in all com m unist s ta tes, including no n B alk an countries su c h as the Soviet Union, Poland, an d Hungary. However, the m ost illum inating statem en t origins from a B ritish prim e m inister w hose affiliations w ith M arxism were ra th e r problem atic. To quote after Selim D e r i n g il, in November 1914 David Lloyd George called th e Turks: “a h u m a n cancer, a creeping agony in the flesh of the lands w hich they m isgoverned”11;
5) conquered populations constantly tried to get rid of the O ttom an yoke; local brigands, su c h as th e hayduts an d klephts
were conscious natio nal leaders, rom antic forefathers of Bulga rian an d Greek generals of the B alkan w a rs12. Some B alkan histo rians readily overlooked the confusing fact th a t b and itry w as w idespread in ethnic T urk ish territories as well, a n d the apogee of the haydut activity in the B alkans coincided w ith the so called
celalî rebellions in Anatolia. Polish an d U krainian h isto rian s
know a sim ilar debate on the question w hether the C ossacks were conscious leaders of U krainian O rthodox rebellion ag ain st C ath olic Poland, or ju s t plain b an d its who only with time adopted 11 Selim D e r i n g i l , Turkish foreign policy during the Second World War: an
active neutrality, Cambridge 1989, p. 65.
12A classical m onograph on the Bulgarian h ayduts is Bistra C v e t k o v a s:
Hajdutstvoto v ba lgarskite zemi prez 1 5 /1 8 vek, Sofija 1971.
- - - - ‘ ’ ’
a religious an d political program . P easan t m ovem ents are an o th e r point of confusion. W henever B alkan p e a sa n ts rioted against th eir O ttom an auth orities or simply refused to pay taxes, h isto ria n s tried to associate their behavior w ith religious or national beliefs. I would argue th a t to explain p e asa n t discontent, be it in fo u rteen th -cen tu ry F rance or n in e teen th -cen tu ry Bulgaria, we do n o t necessarily have to bring religious or nation al reasons.
To re tu rn to the first paradigm , it is in no way indisputable. While a B ulgarian scholar, Valeri Ka c u n o v , states th a t “on the eve of Byzantine rule, the B ulgarian society already po ssessed its own ethnic traits th a t distinguished it as a separate ethno social organism ”13, according to a T u rkish scholar, Kemal K a r p a t : “the O ttom ans inherited in the B alkans not sta te s w hose p o p u lations h a d developed distinctive political national allegiances, b u t ra th e r clu sters of u rb a n an d ru ral com m unities bearing a memory of various ruling dynasties, b itter w ars, invasions, and m igrations w hich h ad ravaged the area from the eighth to th ir te en th cen tu ries”14.
Q uite unexpectedly, K arpat w ould find an ally in the person of... V o l t a i r e who viewed the estab lish m en t of the O ttom an Em pire an d its expansion in so u th e astern Europe as a positive phenom enon. According to the F rench philosopher, E u rasia benefited from the replacem ent of m any sm all an archic polities by one extended centralized m o n archy 15.
If Kacunov an d K arpat have anything in common, it is their view of O rthodox religion as a decisive factor sh aping nationhood in so u th e a ste rn E u ro p e16. Consequently, religion w ould play a crucial role in my fu rth er argum ents.
By statin g th a t B ulgarians “h a d no access to the [Ottoman] adm inistrative system , since they were n o t followers of the pro p h et M uham m ad”, Kacunov tacitly a ssu m es th a t B ulgarian con 13 Valeri K a c u n o v , On the Ethnic Self Consciousness of the Bulgarians during
the 15th 17th Century, B ulgarian Historical Review" (1996), No 2, p. 3.
14 Kemal K a r p a t , Millets and Nationality: The Roots o f Incongruity of Nation and
S tate in the Post Ottoman Era, in: Christians a n d J e w s in the Ottoman Empire. The Functioning o f a Plural Society. Edited by B. B r a u d e and B. L e w i s , New York
and London 1982, vol. 1: The Central Lands, p. 143.
15 Krystyna P i e c h u r a , Cette spectaculaire reorganisation de l espace orientale [unpublished pap er presented on the 16th CIÉPO sym posium in Warsaw, J u n e 2004], p. 4. The text should ap p ear in the C anadian Jo u rn a l of History u n d er the title: Did Voltaire side with peace or aggression more often. W estern European
an d other perspectives.
16 K a c u n o v , op. cit., pp. 4 5; K a r p a t , op. cit., p. 144.
- - -- “ -’ “ ”
-verts to Islam were no longer B u lg arian s17. A sim ilar opinion was recorded by a C roatian writer, Predrag M a t v e j e v i ć who re cently visited his native M ostar after the Yugoslavian war. A local teacher, asked why he did not accept M uslim children in his school, reportedly answ ered: “they do not sp eak o u r language”. “So w hat language do they sp eak ?” asked the author. “T u rk ish ” w as the an sw er18. The teach er m u st have know n th a t T urkish could no t be the first language of the local Muslim children. In his sta tem e n t it only symbolized the language of “the o th e r”.
Recent, an d less recent stud ies by su c h au th o rs as Metin K u n t , H eath L o w r y , an d even Radovan S a m a r d ž i ć , d e m o n strated th a t M uslim converts were n o t always “lost” from the national point of view19. To quote Lowry: “th e latter d ay stigm a of ‘tu rn in g T u rk ’ m u st have been viewed differently in th e fif te e n th ce n tu ry O ttom an world. The m a n n er in w hich su c h for m er C h ristians m aintained ties with those family m em bers who h a d n ot converted raises the possibility th a t th e Realpolitik of the era fully em braced the concept of: cuius regio eius religio as the operative m axim ”20. For Metin Kunt, it w as the abolition of the
devşirme m ethod of recru itm en t in the seventeenth century th a t
closed the m ain avenue of advancem ent to non M uslim s and added to their sense of alienation tow ards th e O ttom an s ta te 21.
The question w hether new M uslims were perm anently “lo st” to their respective nations is not merely academic; it is enough to rem ind the very existence and fate of the Bulgarian Pomaks. Yet, m ost of the Ottoman Christians and Jew s did not convert an d this p ap er is focused on th eir attitu d es tow ards the O ttom an state.
Let me s ta rt from a b an al point: no tw ith stand in g a futile attem pt of creating a syncretic Christian M uslim unity, expressed in the cru sh ed rebellion of Sheikh B edreddin (d. 1416), the 17K a c u n o v , op. cit., p. 8.
18Predrag M a t v e j e v i ć , Podróż do M ostam, K rasnogruda 16 (2002/2003), p. 51.
19Metin K u n t , Ethnic-Regional (Cins) Solidarity in the Seventeenth- Century
Ottoman Establishm ent, International Jo u rn a l of Middle E ast S tudies 5 (1974),
pp. 233 239; H eath L o w r y , The Nature o f the Early Ottoman State, Albany 2003, esp. ch ap ter 7: The Last Phase o f Ottoman Syncretism The Subsum ption o f
M embers o f the B yzanto B alkan Aristocracy into the Ottoman Ruling Elite on pp.
115 130; Radovan S a m a r d ž i ć , M ehmed Sokolović, Beograd 1975. 20L o w r y , op. cit., p. 129.
21 K u n t , Transformation o f Zim m i into Askeri , in: Christians and J e w s in the
Ottoman Empire, vol. 1, p. 64.
— — -- -“ ” “ ” -—
-183
O ttom an Em pire w as a M uslim S u nn i state, w here non M uslim s could only enjoy a secon d class subject sta tu s. Yet, the zeal of O ttom an ru lers in im plem enting Koranic prescriptions w as not c o n s ta n t, encou raging th e ir non M uslim su b jects to adopt changing strategies. To quote Antony B l a c k : “O ttom an ideology oscillated betw een the concept of the S u lta n as em peror ruling over diverse peoples an d faiths an d the concept of him as Caliph of M uslim s”22. According to the sam e auth o r, balancing between the m ore pragm atic, patrim onial system , w hich enabled different cu ltu ral groups to coexist peaceably, an d the Islamic rectitude, w as ch aracteristic to other Islamic em pires as well, to m ention only the In dian M ughals23.
S h m u el E i s e n s t a d t lists th ree m ajor objectives directing the behavior of religious elites tow ard the b u reau cratic, im perial s tru c tu re s 24:
a) gaining official recognition an d protection from the state if possible, as th e estab lish ed religion; or else as a secondary, recognized, an d protected one;
b) m ain tain in g its independence in the perform ance of its m ajor functions in the society;
c) preservation of m aterial b ases (i.e., property).
In h is chronicle Divrei Yosef, w ritten in ca. 1672, Rabbi Yosef Sa m b ari of Egypt described how the su lta n reserved three seats in h is divan to the m ufti of Istanbul, th e Greek Orthodox patriarch , an d th e Jew ish rabbi. M inna R o z e n convincingly questions th e tru th fu ln ess of this story, b u t we m u st keep in m ind th a t th is invention is a p ro d u ct of the seventeenth century, an d not of ou r tim es25. It h a s b een correctly argued th a t the classical O ttom an millet system w as in fact a n in e teen th cen tu ry in s titu tion, extrapolated by m o dem scholars into th e earlier centuries. Yet, it does n ot m ean th a t th e C h ristian an d Jew ish religious in stitu tio n s did n o t enjoy certain privileges, financial an d legal autonom y as well as the s ta te support.
22 Antony B l a c k , The History o f Islamic Political Thought. From the Prophet to the
Present, New York 2001, p. 271.
23 Ibidem, p. 350.
24 Shm uel N. E i s e n s t a d t , The Political S ystem s o f Empires, London 1963, p. 185.
25 M inna R o z e n , A History o f the Jew ish community in Istanbul. The form ative
years, 1453-1566, Leiden 2002, pp. 66-70. -— -
In the sixteenth century, Rabbi Yosef C a r o referred to the O ttom an su lta n as “our lord the king, may h is splendor rise aloft”26. His contem porary, Rabbi M osheh A l m o sn i n o wrote ab o u t “our great m aster S u lta n Süleym an, may his memory live forever”27. S u lta n Süleym an w as also the first O ttom an ruler in whose honor a special poem w as w ritten in Hebrew by a n Istan buli poet, Shelom oh ben M a z a l T o v 28. Rabbinic responsa,
stu d ied by M inna Rozen, also contain a seemingly strang e m en tion of a Jew “who h ad love with the viziers”, denoting those Jew s, w hose close relations w ith O ttom an au th o rities enabled them to ask special favors29. Isaac S c h u l h o f , a seven teen th cen tury H ungarian Jew who survived the conquest of B uda by the H absburgs, recalled w ith sentim en t the calm an d safe life u n d er “ou r p a s h a ”30. The possessive form “o u r” is also found in the
responsa studied by Aryeh S h m u e l e v i t z . The O ttom an state
is often referred to as “the gracious Kingdom” or simply “our Kingdom”31.
The Jew ish attitu d e tow ards the O ttom an state is n ot s u rp ri sing, considering frequent p ersecutions of Jew s in W estern E u rope. Even in m ore tolerant P oland L ithuania, the Jew s were not allowed to settle down in n u m ero u s towns. No w onder th a t w hen th e O ttom ans conquered Podolia in 1672, they were greeted by th e local Jew s w ith words, recorded by a T urk ish chronicler: “we know the h ap p in ess of life in the sh ad e of the people of Islam ”32.
More interestingly, also Greek a ttitu d es tow ards the O ttom an rule were by no m eans unequivocal. To quote B enjam in B r a u d e an d B ernard L e w i s : “some Greek w riters of the late eight een th cen tu ry were more sym pathetic to O ttom an rule th a n are th eir d escen d a n ts today”33.
26 Ibidem, p. 20.
27 Ibidem, p. 42. 28 Ibidem, p. 43.
29 Ibidem, p. 40.
30Iszák S c h u l h o f , La Meghilla di Buda (1686). Edited and tran slated by P. A g o s t i n i , Roma 1982, pp. 23 24 and 33.
31 Aryeh S h m u e l e v i t z , The J e w s o f the Ottoman Empire in the late fiftee n th
an d the sixteenth centuries: administrative, economic, legal, an d social relations a s reßected in the responsa, Leiden 1984, p. 33.
32 Ehl i Islam sayesinde olmagi ni m et bilürüz ; see Haci Ali E f e n d i , Fethna
m e i Kamaniçe, Süleymaniye K ütüphanesi [Istanbul], Lala Ismail 308, fol. 85b.
33 Benjam in B r a u d e and B ernard L e w i s , Introduction , in: Christians and
J e w s in the Ottoman Empire, vol. 1, p. 17.
- - - -“ - ’ ” ‘ -“ ”
The inclusion of local chronicles w ritten in Greek an d other v ern acu lars into the framework of O ttom an stu d ies w as already p o stu la ted by J o h a n n S t r a u s s . S uch chronicles provide a dif ferent perspective from the “b u rea u c ra tic” view offered by central O ttom an archives34. Yet, th is is more easily said th a n done. For a n O ttom anist, who already h a d to m aster O ttom an T urkish, at le ast som e P ersian and Arabic, a requirem ent to learn in addition Greek, B ulgarian, Serbian, Armenian, Hebrew, Ladino, an d some o th er v ern ac u lars u sed in the O ttom an dom ains is n o t m uch realistic. On the o ther han d , scholars working on C hristian or Jew ish sou rces com posed w ithin the O ttom an realm are often unfam iliar w ith M uslim institu tio n s. Cross references between, say, the editions of a Greek, a Jew ish, an d a T urk ish local chronicle w ritten in the sam e region an d time, are still very rare.
P erh aps the m ost interesting Greek source from the seven te en th cen tu ry are the mem oirs of Synadinos, a sev en teenth cen tu ry O rthodox p riest from Serres. They provide a fascinating microcosm , full of p assio n s an d conflicts. The a u th o r deeply m o u rn s for every C hristian conversion to Islam, blam ing his com patriots greed, lechery an d frivolity. He also accu ses Greeks th a t due to th e ir sin s “stran g ers took the im perial crow n” of C o n stan tin e35. Yet, w hen referring to th e O ttom an su ltan , Sy nad in o s attrib u te s him th e Greek royal title of ßaaiÀ£Úç, th u s giving him a kind of legitimacy36. M entioning the ja n issa ry rebel lion an d the a ssa ssin a tio n of O sm an II in 1622, the Greek priest regrets th is young an d prom ising ru ler37. His favorite su ltan , however, w as M urad IV, know n for his strict m easu res ag ainst corruption an d his cam paign to abolish tobacco an d coffee. M ourning after M urad’s death, Synadinos could not imagine 34 J o h a n n S t r a u s s , Ottoman Rule Experienced and Remembered: Rem arks on
Some Greek Chronicles o f the Tourkokratia, in: The Ottomans and the B alkans, pp.
193 195.
35 Conseils et mémoires d e Synadinos, prêtre d e Serres en Macédoine (XVIIe siècle). Edited by P. O d o r i c o with the collaboration of S. A s d r a c h a s , T. K a r a n a s t a s s i s , K. K o s t i s , S. P e t m é z a s , Paris 1996, pp. 56 57.
36Ibidem, p. 43; cf. S t r a u s s , op. cit., p. 200. The seventeenth-century Walla- chian chronicler Radu P o p e s c u went even further as he legitimized the right to rule C onstantinople by the O ttom ans, recalling their alleged kinship with the Comneni; see R adu P o p e s c u V o r n i c u l , Istoriile domnilor Ţa rii Romînes ti, edited by C. G r e c e s c u , B ucureşti 1963, pp. 6 7; my th a n k s go to Bogdan M urgescu who provided me with this quotation.
37 Conseils et mémoires de Synadinos, pp. 84 85.
-
-anyone fit to replace him 38. He also recalls the o u tb u rs t of com mon joy an d solem n celebrations after th e O ttom an troops took Erevan in 163439. S u lta n s were not th e only T urk s praised by Synadinos for th eir m erits. A nother positive ch ara cter in his chronicle w as Kenan P asha, sen t to Serres in order to eradicate injustice an d corruption on th e side of th e local b u reau cracy 40.
W riting ab o u t m any plagues affecting h is sm all com m unity, Synadinos en u m erated Turcs, C hristians, Jew s, an d Gypsies sharing the sam e fate41. Not surprisingly, it seem s th a t m ost of his enem ies were am ong h is fellow Greeks. In th e m ost dram atic m om ent of his life, Synadinos barely escaped death, tem porarily deprived of his position a n d banished. He even th o u g h t of going to R ussia, considered already a t th a t time a safe haven for Orthodox C h ristian s42. Like his father, also a n O rthodox priest, he acted as a leader of his local com m unity, being involved in n u m ero u s financial affairs w ith local O ttom an notables, often dining w ith them a n d giving them co unsels43. S u ch inter con fes sional cliental relationships were app aren tly quite com mon. At one place in his m em oirs S ynadinos refers to a n alliance betw een the p a triarc h of C onstantinople an d th e O ttom an g ran d vizier, since they both originated from Albania44.
A sim ilar source from the very sam e period w as w ritten in O ttom an Crim ea by an Arm enian, X ačatu r from Caffa. By no coincidence he w as also a priest, as one could expect literary am bitions m ore w idespread am ong clergy m em bers. Like Synadi nos, he also u sed to explain m isfortunes of h is com m unity by the sin s of its m em bers. The world of X ačatur seem s to be even more isolated th a n th a t of Synadinos as he is m ostly in terested in the
38Ibidem, pp. 94 95; cf. S t r a u s s , op. cit., p. 204. 39Ibidem, pp. 116 117; cf. S t r a u s s , op. cit., p. 202.
40 Ibidem, pp. 96 99. Interestingly, a m iniature depicting C hristian peasants, rejoicing on the arrival of Kenan P asha on his anticorruption cam paign in Macedonia, is preserved in the O ttom an m an u scrip t of Pas aname, dated ca. 1630 an d held in the British M useum (Sloane 3584, fol. 20a). The m a n u scrip t contains a poem w ritten by Tului Ibrahim Efen d i o f K a l k a n d e l e n [today Tetovo in Macedonia], celebrating the exploits of K enan P asha; see G. M. M e r e d i t h O w e n s , Turkish Miniatures, London 1963, p. 29 a n d plate XXIV, containing a black and white reproduction.
41 Conseils et mémoires de Synadinos, pp. 90 91.
42 Ibidem, pp. 144 145.
43 On Sidéres, father of Synadinos, see ibidem, pp. 120 129.
44 Ibidem, pp. 166 167. - -“ ”
-affairs of his A rm enian com m unity. He confuses the island of M alta w ith Crete, yet h is geographical horizon encom passes C onstantinople, Iran, Poland, an d Transylvania. Though he often ac c u se s O ttom an autho rities of collecting excessive taxes and corruption, a t the sam e time he can appreciate certain O ttom an officials. Memi P ash a, killed by the C ossacks offshore Caffa in 1617, is regretted by X ačatur as “a g oo d n atu red m a n ” an d “a friend of [our] la n d ”45. A sim ilar characteristic is given to an o th er p a s h a appointed in 1630, called in th e chronicle “a friend of the city”46. The p riest recalls his grief w hen the new s of an u n s u c cessful O ttom an cam paign arrived from Persia, an d more significantly h is joy w hen th e C rim ean an d O ttom an troops safely retu rn e d hom e after a cam paign in T ransylvania47. The C h ristian solidarity of X ačatur seem s to be limited to Arm enians. He m eticulously registers A rm enian slaves kidnapped in Poland by the T atars, an d m entions the efforts of the A rm enian com m u nity to redeem th em 48. However, the U krainian Cossacks, who liked to p resen t them selves as C h ristian w arriors an d heroes, ap p ea r in X ačatu r’s chronicle as godless ban d its. T hey m u rd er C hristians, p lu n d e r church es, an d kidnap women. After one su ch C ossack incu rsio n to the Crim ea o u r p riest recalled th a t “Arme n ia n s a n d T urks m ou rned an d cried together”49.
In th is context, one is tem pted to recall a confusing event registered in the U krainian chronicle by Samijlo Velyč ko. In 1675 th e C ossacks invaded the Crim ea a n d delivered all the U krainian slaves previously kidnapped by the T atars. To th eir a sto n ish m ent, the slaves refused to leave th e Crim ea as they found their life th ere b etter th a n in th e U kraine. The furious C ossacks m assacred u ng ratefu l countrym en an d retu rn e d hom e alone50.
Let u s move from the Crim ea to the w estern Balkans. Over fifty years ago Halil I n a l c i k pub lish ed a fifteenth century O ttom an survey register of Albania, causing a scholarly sensa 45 E. S c h ü t z (ed.), Eine armenische Chronik von Kaffa aus der ersten Hälfte des
17. Jahrhunderts, Acta O rientalia Academiae S cientiarum H ungaricae 29
(1975), p. 140.
46 Ibidem, p. 149.
47 Ibidem, pp. 140 an d 161. 48 Ibidem, pp. 141 an d 159. 49 Ibidem, pp. 142 143 an d 149.
5 0A. K r y m s k y j, Pro dolju ukrajins k y x polonjanykiv u Kryms komu xanstvi, in: Studiji z Krymu, Kyjiv 1930, pp. 14 17.
- — — -“ ” -’ ’ ’
-tion51. It tu rn ed o ut th a t, contrary to stereotypes, n u m ero u s tim ar holders in the B alkans, on whose su p p o rt the O ttom an rule relied, were C hristians! F u rth er publications of O ttom an defters
proved th a t Albania w as not unique an d we m eet C h ristian tim ar holders in o ther B alkan countries, th e Greek Islands, E astern Anatolia an d H ungary well into th e m id sixteen th cen tu ry 52. As late as 1609, a S erbian sipahi n am ed Milisav X rabren not only restored an O rthodox m onastery in Hercegovina, b u t com m issioned a fresco depicting him self holding th e model of the c h u rc h 53. An inscription Milic a b Cnaxia w as in serted over his head, proving th a t app arently the founder did n ot see any con tradiction betw een his function an d his ethno religious identity. According to S reten Petković, more th a n three h u n d re d c h u r ches rebuilt u n d e r the O ttom an rule betw een the m id 1 5 th an d the end of the 17th century have been preserved in the territory of the P atriarch ate of Peć alone54. Among th eir p at ro n s, quite often one finds the C hristian sipahis.
To re tu rn to the X rabren family, stu d ied in detail by Ljubinka K o jić , la st m ention of a C hristian sipahi from th eir m idst can be found in a source dated 163855. In th e following decades, some of the family m em bers becam e m onks, o th ers quite possibly
adopted Islam, while yet an o th er em igrated to R ussia, to be know n there u n d e r a v ariant family nam e as Miloradović.
Leaving aside those few, who opted for em igration, su c h dilem m as betw een adopting Islam an d becom ing a m onk were
51 Hicrí 835 tarihli Sûret-i d efter-i sancak-i Arvanid, edited by H. I n a l c i k ,
A nkara 1954.
52 K un t. Transformation o f Zimmi into Askeri , in: Christians and J e w s in the
Ottoman Empire, vol. 1, p. 59; Ki e l , Art a n d Society o f Bulgaria in the Turkish Period, pp. 66 74 (the parag rap h on the C hristian sipahis in the Balkans).
53S reten P e t k o v i ć , Art an d patronage in Serbia during the early period o f
Ottoman rule (1450 1600), in: M anzikert to Lepanto. The B yzantine world a n d the Turks 1071 1571. Papers given at the Nineteenth Spring Sym posium o f B yzantine Studies, Birmingham, March 1985. Edited by A. B r y e r a nd M. U r s i n u s ,
Byzantinische F orschungen 16 (1991), p. 406, n. 28; for the reproduction of the fresco, based on a photograph taken in 1867, see Ljubinka Ko j i ć , M anastir
Žitomislić, Sarajevo 1983, p. 92; on the tragic history of this m onastery, destroyed
in 1941 an d th e n completely in 1992 by C roatian m ilitants, see the article by A ndrás R i e d l m a y e r , On the History, Significance, a n d Destruction o f the
Zitomislici Monastery Complex, in: h ttp :// w w w .h a verfo rd .e d u / relg / sells / zitomis lici.html.
54 P e t k o vić . Art and patronage, p. 414.
55 This was Radivoj, son of the aforem entioned Milisav; see Ko j i ć , op. cit., pp. 32 33. -- - -— — -“ ” — —
-THE “TURKISH YOKE” REVISITED 189 a p p a re n tly typical for th o se B a lk a n C h ristia n s w ho in te n d e d to k e e p o r a tta in a privileged social s ta tu s . J o s if B radati, a n eigh te e n th c e n tu r y B u lg a ria n p re a c h e r, a d m o n is h e d h is c o m p a trio ts a g a in s t th e “w ron g” choice. “In o u r tim es th e re a re w om en w ho p re fe r th a t th e ir s o n becom e a T u rk r a th e r th a n a m onk. If h e b ecam e a T urk, sh e w ould praise him a n d look a t h e r so n T u rk w ith joy. B u t if sh e saw him a m onk, sh e w ould pity him a n d m ock”56.
In B ulgaria, a s in S erb ia, n u m e ro u s O rth o dox c h u rc h e s w ere re b u ilt u n d e r th e O tto m a n ru le. M eticu lou s s tu d ie s by M achiel K i e l p roved b ey o n d d o u b t t h a t m a n y c h u rc h e s w ere n o t j u s t re s to re d , b u t en la rg ed a n d em b e llish ed 57. T his w as n o t th e only p ro o f of p ra g m a tis m o n th e side of th e O tto m a n s, w ho often tacitly ig n o red Islam ic p re sc rip tio n s. Likewise, th o u g h in th eo ry th e C h ris tia n s w ere n o t allow ed to rid e h o rs e s 58, in fact n o t only th e fa m o u s ch ief d rag o m a n , A lexander M avrocordato, b u t also B u l g a ria n p rie s ts a re k n o w n to h av e m o u n te d h o rs e s 59.
Few early te x ts left by B u lg a ria n clergym en, c o n ta in in g refe re n c e s to th e ir O tto m a n ru le rs, h ave b e e n collected by Valeri K a c u n o v . Typically th e s e a re j u s t m arg in n o tes, w ritte n by co p iers or re a d e rs of religious m a n u s c rip ts . O ften th e O tto m a n s a re referred to a s “godless a n d law less H a g a rite s”60. In 1476 a B u lg a ria n p rie st, S tefan , c h a ra c te riz e d M ehm ed II a s “th e ill-fated , b a d -te m p e re d a n d g reedy J u d a s ts a r M ehm ed Beg, w h ose glory a s c e n d e d to h e a v en b u t w ho will n o t e scap e d e s c e n d ing to h e ll”61. Selim II w as describ ed , n o t u n ex p ected ly , a s “ts a r 56Bonju Angelov, Savremennici n a Paisij, vol. 1, Sofia 1963, p. 59.
57 Kiel, op. cit., pp. 143 205; see also G radev a, Ottoman Policy towards Christian Church Buildings, in: eadem , Rumeli under the Ottomans, pp. 339-368, esp. pp. 354-356 [the article originally published in 1994].
58 Cf. al-M awardi, Kitab al-ahkam as-sultaniyya [Maverdii Constitutiones Poli- ticae]. Edited by M. E nger, Bonn 1853, p. 251; French translation in Mawerdi (Abou’l-Hasan ‘Ali), Les statuts gouvernementaux ou règles de droit public et administratif, edited by E. F a g n a n , Alger 1915, p. 306.
59 On Mavrocordato, see Suraiya Faroqui, Als Kriegsgefangener bei den Osma nen. Militärlager und Haushalt des Grosswesirs Kara Mustafa Paşa in einem Augenzeugenbericht, in: Unfreie Arbeits und Lebensverhältnisse von der Antike bis in die Gegenwart. Eine Einführung, edited by E. H e rm a n n -O tto , Hildes- heim-Zürich New York 2005, p. 214; on Bulgarian priests (in this case the author himself), see the memoirs by Sofroni V ra č a n s k i, Vie et t ribulations du pécheur Sof roni, edited by J. F e u ille t, Sofi ja 1981, pp. 88-89.
60 K acunoV, op. cit., p. 20; cf. Pisaxme da se znae. Propiski i letopisi, edited by V. N ačev and N. F e rm a n d ž ie v , Sofìja 1984, p. 71 (“без законниагаряне”).
61 “В дните на злочествия, и ненаситниивия и злонра д бег цар, който се я Юда Мехме
въздвиг
на до небеса
та, и който ще се снизи в ада”; Pisaxme da se znae, p. 61; the translation by K acu n o v (op. cit., p. 23): “the malign and bad-tempered Judas czar Mehmed Beg, who glorified himself to the heaven and descended to hell”, is imprecise. -
-190 DARIUSZ KOŁODZIEJCZYK
Selim , a b lo o d th irsty lu stfu l w in e d rin k e r”62. Yet, o th e r n o te s are n e u tr a l (i.e., “in th e d ay s of th e T u rk is h ts a r, S u lta n Ib ra h im ”) or even la u d a to ry . In 1469 th e d e a co n V ladislav (know n a s V ladislav G ram atik ) d a te d h is m a n u s c r ip t “in th e day s of th e g re a t a n d a u to c ra tic M uslim ts a r, th e em ir M ehm ed Beg”63. T his form ula re m in d s of a n official in titu la tio n , fo u n d in th e fifte e n th c e n tu ry O tto m a n d o c u m e n ts w ritte n in G reek: μ ε γ α ς α μ υ ρ α ς σ ου λ τ ά ν ο ς 64. T he Slavic te rm t s a r (цар), a ttr ib u te d by B u lg arian w rite rs to th e s u lta n s , c o rre sp o n d s w ith th e G reek title β α σ ι λ ε ύ ς , u s e d by S y n a d in o s, a n d like in th e form er case, it gives th e O tto m a n ru le rs a k in d of legitim acy.
T he e ig h te e n th c e n tu ry b ro u g h t th e so c a lle d “B u lg a ria n n a tio n a l re n a is s a n c e ” alo n g w ith its m o st p ro m in e n t w riter, P a i s i j X i l e n d a r s k i . In h is S lav o B u lg arian H istory Paisij s u m m o n e d h is c o m p a trio ts to ta k e p rid e in th e ir a n c e stry . Yet, only o n e lo n ger p a s sa g e is devoted to th e T u rk s, w ho seized th e B u lg a ria n lan d , tu rk ic iz e d y o u n g lad s, tu rn e d c h u rc h e s into m o sq u e s, p lu n d e re d a n d killed. “At th e b eg in n in g c o n tin u e s th e a u th o r th e T u rk s w ere fierce a n d g re a t looters. W hen th ey s tr e n g th e n e d th e ir p o sitio n in th e C o n sta n tin o p le K ingdom , th ey le a rn e d a g re a t deal a b o u t C h ristia n o rd e r a n d law a n d for som e tim e a t th e b e g in n in g th ey sto p p e d for a w hile, th ey felt e m b a r r a s s e d to ro b u n law fu lly th e C h ris tia n s ’ belo ngings a n d p ro p e r ties. B u t a t p re s e n t ag ain , th e w re tc h e d people have n e ith e r ju s tic e , n o r a n y c o u rt of law ”65. M uch m ore ra n c o r is d irected a g a in s t th e G reeks, w ho h ave “seized th e T ăr n ovian p a tria rc h a te w ith T u r k is h h elp a n d violence” a n d h ave alw ays tre a te d B u lg a r ia n s w ith d isre s p e c t66. S e rb ia n s do n o t fare b e tte r a s “th e ir k in g d o m w a s sm all, very n arro w , a n d ex isted for a s h o rt tim e. [...] All p eo p les on e a rth c o n c lu d e s th e a u th o r k now th e 62 “Писахик,ик, блудна, кръвн Селим в дните на цара йца”; Pisaxme da se znae, винопи
p. 24. 63 “В дните на великин цар мюсюлмържавея и самод
анск мед бег”; Pisaxme и амир Мех da se znae, p. 60; cf. K a c u η o v, op. cit., p. 23
64 Its variant can be also found in the Latin document of Murad II dated 1444: Magnus Amyras Soltam; cf. Dariusz K o ło d ziejczyk , Ottoman Polish Diploma tic Relations (15th-18th Century). An Annotated Edition of ‘Ahdnames and Other Documents, Leiden 2000, p. 198; cf. also the Serbian intitulation of Sultan Selim I, preserved in his ferman sent in 1514 to Dubrovnik [Ragusa], in: Gliša E l ezović, Tursko-srpski spomenici dubrovačkog arhiva, Beograd 1932, pp. 6 7.
65 P a isy H ile n d a r s k i, A Slavo Bulgarian History, Sofìja 2000, pp. 211-212. 66 Ibidem, pp. 229, 155 156, 216. -— — — — -
-THE TURKISH YOKE REVISITED
B ulgarians a n d in all histories this is recorded a n d found in w riting. About the Serbs there is nothing w ritten, n eith er is there an y evidence in Latin a n d Greek h isto ries”67.
One of Paisij’s followers, Sofronij V r a č a n s k i , w rote u n iqu e m em oirs covering the la st years of the eighteenth century. His adopting the role of a n “innocent victim ” resem bles th e style of Synadinos, as w as already noticed by J o h a n n S t r a u s s 68. C onsequently, h is relations w ith the T u rk s are n o t described as rosy. C hased by some T u rk ish p ed erasts in h is young age, w hen he grew u p he w ould be robbed, torm ented, pulled by th e b eard, im prisoned, a n d th reaten ed w ith d eath by greedy an d u n ru ly O ttom an officials69. Once, hiding from some irregulars, he even so u g h t refuge in a harem . According to th e au th o r, T u rk ish w om en h arb o red him for 26 days, th ou gh according to th e M uslim custom they k ept th eir faces hid d en from h is sig h t70. Yet, in spite of n u m e ro u s extortions, he ap p aren tly m anaged to m ake some m oney by provisioning the O ttom an arm y as h is son w as charged w ith supplying sheep for the troops an d som e tra n sa c tio n s took place in Sofronij’s house.
Like in th e case of Synadinos, X ačatur, Paisij a n d Sofronij, m ost of the firsth a n d testim onies left by O ttom an non M uslim su b jects were w ritten by clergymen. We hardly have m u c h access to th e system of values of C hristian p ea san ts. Yet, som e descrip tions of th eir behavior bring ap p are n t confusion to th e “T u rk ish yoke” paradigm s. In h is fam ous letter to the pope, S tefan To mašević, the la st king of Bosnia, described “disloy al” behavior of B osnian p e a sa n ts who greeted the T u rks w ith hope for th e abolition of corvée71. P easan ts are also know n to have welcomed the O ttom ans in su c h d ista n t lan d s as C yprus, Crete, Morea, an d Podolia72. These places h a d one thing in common: by su p p o rtin g the O rthodox religion an d expulsing th e Catholic land lo rds respectively V enetian an d Polish th e O ttom ans earn ed p o p u larity am ong th e Greek an d U krainian O rthodox in h a b ita n ts.
67 Ibidem, pp. 202 203.
68 S t r a u s s , op. cit., p. 198.
69 Sofroni V r a č a n s k i , Vie et tribulations, pp. 77 89. 70 Ibidem, p. 97.
71 Branislav D u r d e v , O uticaju turske vladavine na razvita k našix naroda, G odišnjak Istoriskog D ruštva Bosne i Hercegovine 2 (1950), p. 34.
7 2
For some relations about the p e a sa n ts behavior in Podolia, see K o ł o d z i e j c z y k , Podole pod panow aniem tureckim. Ejalet kamieniecki 1672 1699 (Podolia
under the Ottoman Rule. The Eyalet of Kam janec , 1672 1699), W arszawa 1994,
p. 63. “ ” — — - -— — -“ ” ’ -’
192 DARIUSZ KOŁODZIEJCZYK
After th e c o n q u e st of C rete in 1645, th e O tto m a n s re in sta lle d a n O rth o d ox m etro p o lita n in th e isla n d a fte r a lm o st f o u r - a n d - a - h a lf c e n tu rie s of C atholic d o m in a tio n 73. An a n a lo g o u s, a lm o st forgotten event w as rec e n tly rem in d ed by th e U k ra in ia n s c h o la r Ih o r S k o č y l j a s . In 1681, a fte r Podolia w as c o n q u e re d from P oland a n d b ecam e a re g u la r O tto m a n province, th e p a tria rc h of C o n sta n tin o p le a p p o in te d th e O rthodox m etro p o lita n of Kam ja n e c ’ n a m e d P a n k ra tij74. T he new ly c re a te d e p a rc h y of Little R u s ’
(the Μ ι κ ρ ά Ρ ω σ ί α ) w as given a u to n o m o u s privileges of a n e x a r c h a te a n d d e p e n d ed directly from C o n sta n tin o p le . It la s te d till
1690. In b o th c a se s C re te a n a n d P odolian th e E c u m en ic al P a tria rc h a te closely c o o p erated w ith th e Porte. T h eir com m on ta rg e t w as to in fluen ce th e ir new O rth o d ox s u b je c ts a n d to c u t th e m off th e ir form er C atholic r u le r s 75.
O th e r “co n fu sin g ” fac ts w ere disclo sed by R o ssitsa G r a d e V a a n d S v e tla n a I v a n o v a . O rth od o x s u b je c ts in B u lg aria often p refe rre d th e S h a ri M uslim c o u rts to th e ir “o w n” C an o n ical c o u rts r u n by th e O rth od ox clergy76. E ven th e vitae of B u lg a ria n n e o 73 Nükhet Adiуeke, Nuri Adiуеke and Evangelia Bal l a, T he poll tax in the years of the Cretan war. Symbol of submission and mechanisms of avoidance, “Θ Η Σ Α Υ Ρ Ι Σ Μ Α Τ A” 31 (2001), p. 330.
74 Ihor Skočyl ja s , Terytorialne rozmiščennja orhanizaci jnyx struktur Halyc’koji (L’vivs’koji) pravoslavnoji eparxiji na Podilli, in: Istoryčne kartoznavstvo Ukrajiny. Zbimyk naukovyx prac’, Lviv-Kyiv-New York 2004, pp. 436-437. The document of appointment, issued in Greek, is published in Akty otnosjaščiesja k is torii Juźnozapadnoj Rusi. Edited by A. P e tru š e v ič , L’vov 1868, pp. 51-55; it is also mentioned in Mikołaj A n d ru s ia k , Józef Szumlański. Pierw szy biskup unicki lwowski (1667 1708). Zarys biograficzny (Josif Šumljans’kyj. The First Uniate Bishop of L’viv, 1667-1708. Biographical Outline), Lwów 1934, p. 93. After WWII, the original document was believed to be lost; only recently it was identified among the manuscripts of the Ukrainian National Library in Kiev (Instytut Rukopysy Nacional’noj Biblioteki Ukrajiny im. V. I. Vemads’koho, f. XVIII (A. Šeptyc’kyj Collection), no. 121). My warmest thanks go to Ihor Skočy ljas and Jaroslav Fedoruk for having provided me with this information.
75 According to Skočyljas, the pro Ottoman policy of the Ecumenical patriarch, Iakobos (1679 1682), prompted the Orthodox bishop of L’viv, Josif Šumljans’kyj, to whose eparchy Podolia had belonged in the “Polish” times, to embrace the proposal of joining the union with Rome; see S k o č y lja s , op. cit., p. 438. 76 G ra d e v a, Orthodox Christians in the Cadi Courts: the Practice of the Sofia Sheriat Court, seventeenth century, in: eadem, Rumeli under the Ottomans, pp. 165-194 [the article originally published in 1997]; Ivanova, Marriage and Divorce in the Bulgarian Lands (XV XIX c.), “Bulgarian Historical Review” 21 (1993), № 2-3, pp. 49-83; even the monks from the Athos mona steries, whom one would expect to be more religiously “conscious”, often turned to the Porte or the local cadi instead of settling their disputes before the Great Synod or the Patriarchal Court [see Aleksandar F otić, Sveta Gora i Xiland ar u Osmanskom carstvu (XV XVII vek), Beograd 2000, pp. 53-62 and 404 (English summary)]; also Jews are known to have turned to the Muslim courts even though such practices were condemned by the Jewish community; see Rozen, op. cit., p. 26.
- — —
-m arty rs, co-m posed with the zeal to stren g th en C hristian soli darity, p resen t the O ttom an cadis as kind, tolerant, an d p rag m atic, unwillingly su rren d erin g to the pressio n s of the fanatic M uslim m ob77. Z denka Ve s e l á dem o nstrated th a t H ungarian an d Slovak p e asan ts from the H absburg O ttom an borderland were voluntarily m igrating to O ttom an territories an d giving their d au g h ters in m arriage to M uslim s78.
The opinions an d behaviors related in th is p ap er lead to the conclusion th a t the attitu d e of non M uslim s tow ards the O tto m an s ta te can no t be described as mere alienation. In h is book on “the m aking of the H absburg m onarchy”, Robert E v a n s dem o n strate d th a t contrary to stereotypes, th e Bohem ian an d H u n garian nobility did not d isap p ear after respectively the Battle of White M ountain, the W esselényi C onspiracy or the Rákóczy Uprising. R ather, they subm erged in the H absburg m onarchy, trying to preserve possibly m u ch of th eir s ta tu s, autonom y, an d au th o rity 79. E van s’ book provides a useful questionnaire for any scholar studying “the m aking of the O ttom an m onarchy”. It seem s th a t the Greek F anariots, whose role is p erh ap s b est know n an d studied, were n o t the only non M uslim s who en tru ste d th eir fate to the w ell being of the O ttom an state.
This allegiance w as in no way unconditional. Non M uslim sources from th e late eighteenth century disclose a strong im pa tience w ith growing disorder, law lessness, an d lack of security in the O ttom an “well protected d om ains”80.
77 G r a d e v a, Turks and Bulgarians, Fourteenth to Eighteenth Centuries, in: e a d e m , Rumeli under the Ottomans, p. 209 [the article originally published in
1995]
7 8
Zdenka Ve s e l á, Slovakia and the Ottoman Expansion in the 16th and 17th
Centuries, in: Ottoman Rule in Middle Europe an d Balkan in the 16th and 17th Centuries. Papers presented at the 9th Joint Conference o f the Czechoslovak-Yu- goslav Historical Committee, Prague 1978, pp. 33 34.
79 Cf. Robert J. W. E v a n s , The making o f the Habsburg monarchy, 1550 1700.
An Interpretation, Oxford 1979.
80 Apart from the mem oirs by Sofronij V r a č a n s k i j , another characteristic local source from this period is the chronicle by Panayis Sko u ze s , who described the tyrannical rule of the voyvoda of Athens, Haci All; see S t r a u s s , op. cit., pp. 208 214. Though the 18th century still provides n u m erous examples of coopera tion between the Porte and its non M uslim especially Greek subjects, a first m ajor crisis of confidence occured already in the late 17th century, during the great w ar against the Holy League. The O ttom ans proved incapable to protect their C hristian subjects against the enem y raids and no less im portant against the enemy propaganda. In 1688 B ulgarians rised in the area of Čiprovci. In 1689 1691 n u m erous S erbians supported the H absburgs an d th e n m igrated to
-- — — - - -- - — — — —
-194
In his fam ous book entitled Exit, Voice, and Loyalty, Albert H i r s c h m a n exam ined various responses to m alfunctioning firms, organizations an d states. W hat w as new in his book was the com parison of a firm in crisis w ith a state in crisis. Comparing h u m a n behavior in the fields of econom ics a n d politics, H irsch m an noticed th a t “exit belongs to th e form er realm, voice to the la tte r”81. W hat is perfectly accepted in the case of a dissatisfied client of a sup erm ark et, will be “b ran d ed as criminal, for it h as been labeled desertion, defection, an d trea so n ” in the case of a dissatisfied citizen of a sta te 82.
Having done the heretical com parison of a state with a s u p e r m arket, H irschm an th e n retra c ts by consenting th a t “exit is ordinarily un th ink able, though n o t always wholly im possible, from su ch prim ordial h u m a n groupings as family, tribe, church, an d sta te ”83. Yet, he him self adm its th a t “th e United S tates owes its very existence an d growth to m illions of decisions favoring exit over voice”84.
Although no model is perfect to describe social behavior, p erh ap s it w ould help to de em otionalize the historiography of the late O ttom an em pire if we agree th a t the non M uslim s chose a collective exit after several centuries of living in a common state. Only those groups, who h ad now here else to go, like the
dönme Jew ish converts in Salonica, chose “voice” in stead of “exit”
an d actively p articipated in the Young T u rkish revolution85. the n o rth along w ith the withdraw ing Imperial army. Srem ski Karlovci, granted extensive privileges by Em peror Leopold I in 1690 1691, replaced Peć as the m ain center of S erbian religion and culture. The ap p aren t shift of allegiance am ong the S erbian Orthodox clergy corresponded w ith a sim ilar process in the Ukraine. In 1685, hoping in vain to prevent joining the Holy League by R ussia, the Porte persuaded the p atriarch of C onstantinople to cede his authority over Kiev to the patriarch of Moscow, in fact abandoning the pro O ttom an m etropolitan of Little R us , who w as still alive and acting; see Kirill K o č e g a r o v , Początek wojny
polsko-tureckiej a stosunki polsko-rosyjskie w pierw szej połowie roku 1683 (The Beginning of the Polish-Turkish War and Polish -R u ssia n Relations in the First Half o f the Year 1683), Kw artalnik Historyczny 112 (2005), p. 75; on the eparchy of
Little R us , see notes 74 75 above.
81 Albert H i r s c h m a n , Exit, Voice, and Loyalty. R esponses to Decline in Firms,
Organizations, a n d States, Cambridge Mass. 1970, p. 15. A Polish tran slatio n of
H irschm an s book w as published in 1995.
82 Ibidem, p. 17. 83 Ibidem, p. 76.
84 Ibidem, p. 106.
85 Cf. ibidem, p. 106. The T urkish term dönm e ( convert ) refers to the Jew ish followers of S abbatai Zevi, who converted to Islam in the seventeenth century b u t
-’ “ ” ’ ’ “ ”
195
There is a deeply h u m a n tru th in the fragm ent of Hirsch m a n ’s book, recalling the experience of social psychologists: “exit is u n se ttin g to those who stay b ehind as there can be no ‘talking b a c k ’ to those who have exited. By exiting one rend ers his arg u m en ts u n an sw erab le”86. P erhaps th is is th e deepest problem for any post im perial historiography, be it in republican Turkey, p o st im perial R ussia, or even Poland, slowly coming to term s with h er e a ste rn L ithuanian, B elorussian, an d U krainian neighbours.
preserved their ethno linguistic identity. To provide a n example of exit and voice from another p a rt of the world, I would m ention two Poles of noble origin, who even attended the sam e school in the R ussian empire at the end of the n ineteenth century. When they grew up, one of them , Józef Piłsudski, becam e the founding father of independent Poland, while another, Feliks Dzierżyński, becam e the R ussian revolutionary (and the patro n of the KGB, b u t this is another story).
86 Ibidem, p. 126.
