Özet Mondros Ateşkes Antlaşması’ndan Anadolu topraklarındaki ilk işgaller Hatay bölgesinde yaşandı. İlk olarak İskenderun 9 Kasım 1918’de İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngilizlerin ardından bölgeye asker çıkaran Fransızlar; 27 Kasım 1918’de İskenderun, Belen, Antakya ve Harim kazalarını içine alan İskenderun Sancağı’nı kurarak başına Fransız bir askerî vali tayin ettiler. Fransızlarla ortak hareket eden Ermenilerin kindar ve acımasız davranışları, Hatay yöresinde silahlı direnişin erken başlamasına neden oldu. Hatay direnişi, yoğunlukla bölgenin kuzeyindeki Gâvur Dağları ile daha güneyde kalan Amik Ovası-Kürt Dağı ve Antakya Kuseyr yörelerinde cereyan etti. Hatay’ın kuzeyinde kalan İskenderun-Dörtyol kesimlerinde Kara Hasan, Hakkı Bey gibi Kuvâ-yı Milliyeciler ön plana çıkarken güneyde ise Tayfur Mürsel, Asım Bey, Ahmet Türkmen gibi isimler önemli yer tuttu. Hatay direnişi, Mustafa Kemal Paşa öncülüğündeki Millî Mücadele hareketi ile kurulan irtibat neticesinde daha organize hâle geldi ve Hatay, Millî Mücadele’nin Güney Cephesi’ne dâhil oldu. Bölgede çarpışmalar devam ederken Türkiye ile Fransa arasında, 20 Ekim 1921 tarihinde Ankara İtilafnamesi imzalandı. Böylece iki devlet arasındaki savaş hali sona erdi ve Türkiye-Suriye sınırı çizildi. Bu antlaşma ile Dörtyol (Payas dâhil) ve Hassa Türkiye sınırları içinde kalırken İskenderun bölgesi için özel bir idare şekli kurulması ve buradaki Türklere birtakım ayrıcalıklar verilmesi kararlaştırıldı. Böylece Misak-ı Milli sınırlarına dâhil olan Antakya-İskenderun yöresinin Suriye’de kalması, Güney cephesindeki çarpışmaları sonlandırabilmek adına istemeyerek de olsa kabul edildi. Bu durum, uygun zaman ve şartların oluşması beklendiğinden Lozan Antlaşması’nda da aynen kabul edildi. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Hatay coğrafyasında yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketleri ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler :Hatay, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Absract
After the Armistice of Mudros, the first occupations in Anatolian lands took place in the Hatay region. Firstly, Iskenderun (Alexandretta) was occupied by the British on 9 November 1918. On 27 November 1918, the French, who landed troops in the region after the British, established the Sanjak of Alexandretta, which included the towns of Iskenderun, Belen, Antakya, and Harim, and appointed a French military governor. The vindictive and ruthless behaviour of the Armenians, who acted in partnership with the French, led to the early start of armed resistance in the Hatay region. The resistance in Hatay took place mainly in the Gâvur Mountains in the north of the region and in the Amik Valley-Kurd Mountain and Antakya- Al-Qusayr regions in the south. While in the İskenderun-Dörtyol region in the north of Hatay, figures from the Kuvâ-yı Milliye such as Kara Hasan and Bey Hakkı came to the fore, in the south, names such as Tayfur Mürsel, Asım Bey and Ahmet Türkmen played an important role. The Hatay resistance became more organised as a result of the contact established with the National Struggle movement led by Mustafa Kemal Pasha, and Hatay was included in the Southern Front of the National Struggle. While the clashes continued in the region, the Treaty of Ankara (the Franklin-Bouillon Agreement) was signed between Türkiye and France on 20 October 1921. Thus, the state of war between the two States ended and the Türkiye-Syria border was drawn. With this treaty, while Dörtyol (including Payas) and Hassa remained within the borders of Türkiye, it was decided to establish a special form of administration for the Iskenderun region and to grant some privileges to the Turks here. Thus, it was accepted, albeit reluctantly, that the Antakya-Iskenderun region, which was included in the borders of Mîsâk-ı Millî (the National Pact), would remain in Syria in order to end the fighting on the Southern Front. This situation was also accepted in the Treaty of Lausanne, as it was expected that the appropriate time and conditions would emerge. In this study, the occupation and resistance movements in the Hatay region after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Hatay, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Millî Mücadele yıllarında hem ekonomik hem de stratejik bir öneme sahip olan Antep, Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra 17 Aralık 1918’de İngiliz işgaline uğradı. İngilizler daha önce Suriye’ye göç ettirilmiş olan Ermenileri de Antep’e getirdiler. Yaklaşık olarak on ay süren İngiliz işgalinde, bazı kötü durumlar görülmekle birlikte silahlı bir çatışma yaşanmadı. Antep’teki İngiliz işgali, 25 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Fransızlar da Antep’in işgalinde Ermenilerden faydalandılar. Bu nedenle şehirdeki Ermeni taşkınlıkları artmaya başladı. 12 Ocak 1920’de, Fransızlar ve Ermenilerin Araptar Köyü’nde neden olduğu olaylar nedeniyle Antep direnişi, ilk olarak şehir dışında başladı. Antep-Maraş yolunda yaşanan bu çarpışmalarda Karayılan ve Boyno oğlu Memik Ağa çeteleri büyük yararlılıklar gösterdi. Şahin Bey de 1920 yılının şubat ve mart aylarında Kilis-Antep yolu üzerinde gerçekleştirdiği faaliyetlerle Fransızları oldukça zor durumda bıraktı. Şahin Bey’in şehadetinden sonra Antep direnişi, 1 Nisan 1920’den itibaren şehir içerisine taşındı. Bu süreçte şehir içi direniş, Kılıç Ali ve Özdemir Bey gibi
kumandanlarca organize edildi. Maraş ve Urfa’da yenilen Fransızlar, Antep’i haftalarca kuşatma altına aldılar. Yaklaşık on bir ay kendi imkânları ile direnen şehir, açlığın son haddine varmasından ötürü 9 Şubat 1921’de düştü. 20 Ekim 1921 Ankara Antlaşması ile Türkiye-Suriye sınırı çizilince Fransız askerleri 25 Aralık’ta Antep’i terk ettiler. Böylece Antep’te Aralık 1918’de İngilizlerle başlayıp sonrasında Fransızlarla devam eden işgal
dönemi, 25 Aralık 1921 tarihinde sona ermiş oldu. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Antep’te yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketi ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Antep, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Absract
Antep, which had both economic and strategic importance during the War of Independence, was occupied by the British on 17 December 1918 after the Armistice of Mudros. The British also brought the Armenians, who had previously been displaced to Syria, to Antep. During the British occupation that lasted for approximately ten months, there were no armed conflicts despite some unfortunate situations. The British occupation of Antep was replaced by the French occupation on 25 October 1919. The French also took advantage of the Armenians during the occupation of Antep. Therefore, Armenian riots in the city started to increase. On 12 January 1920, due to the incidents caused by the French and Armenians in Araptar Village, the Antep resistance first started outside the city. In these clashes on the Antep-Maras road, the Karayılan and Memik Agha son of Boyno gangs proved to be very useful. Şahin Bey also left the French in a very difficult situation with his activities on the Kilis-Antep road in February and March 1920. After the martyrdom of Şahin Bey, the resistance in Antep moved inside the city as of 1 April 1920. In this period, the resistance in the city was organised by commanders such as Kılıç Ali and Özdemir Bey. The French, who were defeated in Maraş and Urfa, besieged Antep for weeks. The city, which resisted with its own means for about eleven months, fell on 9 February 1921 due to starvation. On 20 October 1921, when the Türkiye-Syria border was drawn with the Ankara Treaty, French soldiers left Antep on 25 December. Thus, the occupation period in Antep, which started with the British in December 1918 and continued with the French, ended on 25 December 1921. In this study, the occupation and resistance movement in Antep after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Antep, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Özet
Kilis, Millî Mücadele yıllarında Antep Mutasarrıflığına bağlı bir kaza konumundaydı. Mondros Mütarekesi’nin hemen ardından, İtilâf devletleri daha önce gizli anlaşmalarla paylaştıkları alanlara doğru hızla yayılmaya başladılar. Bu bağlamda ateşkesin hemen akabinde Aralık 1918’de, Kilis İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngiliz işgali döneminde, şehirde silahlı bir direniş görülmedi. Ancak daha sonra oluşturulacak olan Kuvâ-yı Milliye hareketinin tohumları bu süreçte atıldı. Şehirdeki İngiliz işgali, 29 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Fransızlar Kilis’i, Çukurova ve çevresindeki işgal bölgeleri için harekât üssü olarak kullandılar. Suriye’deki Ermenileri bölgeye göç ettirerek Ermeni çetelerinin Türk halkına saldırılarına göz yumdular. Böylelikle Türkler başka yerlere göçe zorlanarak Ermenilerin çoğunluğu teşkil etmesi amaçlandı. Türk halkının güvenlik
ve varlığı tehlikeye düşünce yerel teşkilatlanmaya gidilerek Fransız işgaline karşı direnişe geçildi. Bölgede Kuvâ-yı Milliye’nin örgütlenmesinde Şahin Bey, Sakıp Bey, İslam Bey, Müslüman Bey ve Polat Bey gibi kişilerin önemli bir rolü oldu. Kilis şehri, işgal altında olduğundan silahlı mücadele Kilis dışındaki kırsal alanlarda yaşandı. Bölgede çarpışmalar devam ederken 20 Ekim 1921’de Ankara Hükümeti ile Fransa arasında imzalanan Ankara Antlaşması ile Türkiye-Suriye sınırı belirlendi. Böylece Fransız
kuvvetleri, 7 Aralık 1921’de Kilis’i boşalttılar. Fransızların şehirden ayrılması ile Kilis’te Aralık 1918’den beri devam eden üç yıllık işgal dönemi sona erdi. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Kilis’te yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketi ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Kilis, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Abstract
During the years of the War of Independence, Kilis was a subprovince under the Mutasarrifate of Antep. Right after the Armistice of Mudros, the Entente Powers began to expand rapidly towards the areas they had previously shared through secret agreements. In this context, immediately after the armistice, in December 1918, Kilis was occupied by the British. During the British occupation, there was no armed resistance in the city. However, the seeds of the Kuvâ-yı Milliye movement to be formed later were sown in this period. The British occupation of the city was replaced by the French occupation on 29 October 1919. The French used Kilis as a base of operations for the occupation zones in and around Çukurova (the Cilician Plain). They migrated Armenians from Syria to the region and turned a blind eye to the attacks of Armenian gangs on the Turkish people. In this way, the aim was to force the Turks to migrate elsewhere so that
the Armenians would constitute the majority. When the security and existence of the Turkish people were endangered, the local organisation was established and resistance was started against the French occupation. People such as Şahin Bey, Sakıp Bey, İslam Bey, Müslüman Bey, and Polat Bey played important roles in the organisation of the Kuvâ-yı Milliye in the region. Since Kilis was under occupation, the armed struggle took place in rural areas outside Kilis. While the clashes continued in the region, Türkiye-Syria border was determined with the Ankara Treaty signed between the Ankara Government and France on 20 October 1921. Thus, the French forces evacuated Kilis on 7 December 1921. With the departure of the French from the city, the three-year occupation period in Kilis since December 1918 ended. In this study, the occupation and resistance movement in Kilis after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Kilis, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
30 Ekim 1918 Mondros Ateşkes Antlaşması’ndan sonra İtilaf devletleri, Osmanlı topraklarında geniş çaplı işgallere başladılar. Urfa da ilk olarak 24 Mart 1919’da İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngilizler, asker kılığındaki Ermenileri beraberlerinde getirdiler; bölgedeki aşiretleri de kendi taraflarına çekmeye çalıştılar. 15 Eylül 1919’da imzalanan Suriye İtilafnamesi ile Urfa’daki İngiliz işgali, 30 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Şehirdeki Fransız işgali İngiliz işgaline göre daha şiddetli oldu. Fransızlar; Urfa’ya girdikleri ilk günden itibaren keyfi bir tutumla mahalli hükümetin işlerine müdahale ettiler. Çeşitli yerlerden getirilen Ermeni gönüllüler, Ermeni mahallesine yerleştirildi ve Ermeni taşkınlıklarına göz yumuldu. Fransızlar da İngilizlerin yaptığı gibi siyasi faaliyetlerde bulunarak bölgedeki aşiretleri elde etmeye çalıştılar. İstanbul Hükümeti’nin işgaller karşısında sessiz kalması, Urfa’da yerel teşkilatlanmanın başlamasına neden oldu. Teşkilatlanmanın akabinde ise 8-9 Şubat 1920 gecesi, Yüzbaşı Ali Saib Bey öncülüğünde Fransız işgaline karşı silahlı direniş başladı. Yaşanan şiddetli çarpışmalar neticesinde şehirden ayrılmayı kabul eden Fransızlar, 11 Nisan 1920 tarihinde Urfa’yı boşalttılar. Şehirden ayrılıp Şebeke Mevkii’ne vardıklarında ise aşiret kuvvetleriyle aralarında büyük bir çatışma yaşandı. Bu çatışma neticesinde Fransızlar, Urfa işgalini büyük bir kayıpla sonlandırdılar. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Urfa’da yaşanan işgallerin yanı sıra şehrin direniş ve kurtuluş süreci ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Urfa, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Abstract
After the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918, the Entente Powers started largescale occupations in the Ottoman lands. In this context, Urfa was first occupied by the British on 24 March 1919. The British brought Armenians disguised as soldiers with them and tried to attract the local tribes in the region to their side. With the Syrian Agreement of 15 September 1919, the British occupation of Urfa was replaced by the French occupation on 30 October 1919. The French occupation of the city was more violent than the British occupation. From the first day they entered Urfa, the French arbitrarily interfered in the affairs of the local government. Armenian volunteers brought from various places were placed in the Armenian neighborhood and Armenian excesses were tolerated. The silence of the Istanbul Government against the occupations led to the beginning of local organization in Urfa. Following the organization, armed resistance against the French occupation started on the night of 8-9 February 1920 under the leadership of Yüzbaşı Ali Saib Bey. The French, who agreed to leave the city as a result of the fierce battles, evacuated Urfa on 11 April 1920. When they left the city and arrived at Şebeke district, a major clash took place between them and the tribal forces. As a result of this clash, the French ended their occupation of Urfa with a great loss. In this study, the occupations in Urfa after the Armistice of Mudros as well as the resistance and liberation process of the city will be discussed.
Keywords: Urfa, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Ankara Üniversitesi Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi (OTAM)), 2021
Özet
İlk olarak XIV. yüzyılda Avrupa’nın Akdeniz limanlarında uygulanmaya başlanan karantina, za... more Özet
İlk olarak XIV. yüzyılda Avrupa’nın Akdeniz limanlarında uygulanmaya başlanan karantina, zamanla kurumsallaşarak salgın hastalıklardan korunma hususunda oldukça önemli bir rol üstlenmiştir. Batılı devletler, ülkelerine dışarıdan gelen herkese ayrım gözetmeksizin karantina uygulamışlardır. Dolayısıyla bu devletlere gönderilen Osmanlı elçileri de karantina uygulamasına tabi tutulmuştur. Elçiler kaleme aldıkları sefaretnamelerde bu ülkelerde karşılaştıkları karantina uygulamaları, karantina süreçleri ve karantina mekânları hakkında önemli bilgiler vermişlerdir. Osmanlı elçilerinin karantinaya verdikleri tepkiler, karantina süresi, karantina mekânı ve karantinayı uygulamakla görevli olan yetkililerin tavırlarına göre değişiklik göstermiştir. Elçiler her ne kadar birbirlerinden farklı tavırlar sergilemiş olsalar da kendi ülkelerinden aşina olmadıkları bu uygulamadan genel anlamda rahatsız oldukları gözlemlenmektedir. Elçilerin karantina karşısındaki tutumları insani gerekçelerden kaynaklanmakla birlikte hem Osmanlı zihniyetinden hem de Osmanlı devlet anlayışından izler taşımaktadır. Bu araştırmada Osmanlı Devleti’nde karantina uygulamaları başlamadan önce Avrupa’ya gönderilen elçilerin karşılaştıkları karantina tedbirleri hakkında bilgi verilerek Osmanlı elçilerinin karantinaya karşı tutumları değerlendirilmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Osmanlı Devleti, Elçi, Karantina, Sefaretname.
Abstract:
Quarantine, which was firstly started to be implemented in the Mediterranean ports of Europe in the XIVst century, has become institutionalized over time and has played a very important role in protection from epidemics. Western States have applied quarantine indiscriminately to everyone who came to their countries from outside. Therefore, the Ottoman ambassadors sent to these states were also subjected to quarantine. The ambassadors gave important informations in sefaretnames (the books of embassy) which they wrote about the quarantine practices, the quarantine processes and quarantine places. The responses of the Ottoman ambassadors to the quarantine varied according to the quarantine period, the quarantine space and the attitudes of the authorities responsible for enforcing the quarantine. Although the ambassadors displayed different attitudes from each other, it is observed that they are generally uncomfortable with this practice, which they are not familiar with from their own countries. Although the attitudes of the ambassadors against quarantine stem from humanitarian reasons, they bear traces of both the Ottoman mentality and the Ottoman understanding of State. In this study, the attitudes of the Ottoman ambassadors against quarantine were evaluated by giving information about the quarantine measures encountered by the ambassadors sent to Europe before the quarantine practices started in the Ottoman Empire.
Keywords: Ottoman State, Ambassador, Quarantine, Sefaretname.
FÂRÂBİ ANISINA TÜRKİYE VE TÜRK DÜNYASI ARAŞTIRMALARI-II, 2020
Hicri Rebiülevvel ayının on ikinci günü, İslamî gelenekte Hz. Muhammed’in doğum günü olarak kabu... more Hicri Rebiülevvel ayının on ikinci günü, İslamî gelenekte Hz. Muhammed’in doğum günü olarak kabul edilmekte ve Mevlid-i Şerif olarak anılmaktadır. Hz. Muhammed’e olan saygı ve sevginin bir göstergesi olarak Mevlid-i Şerif’e Müslümanlarca özel bir önem verilmiş olup bu hassasiyet yüzyıllardan beri devam ettirilmektedir. Mevlid-i Şerif, tarihî süreçte İslam devletlerinde hem toplumsal düzeyde hem de devlet düzeyinde gerçekleştirilen merasimler ve çeşitli etkinliklerle kutlanmıştır. Bu bağlamda Mevlid günlerinde hükümdar, devlet adamları, ulema ve halkın katılımıyla törenler düzenlenmiştir. Şenlik havasında kutlanan bu günlerde, Hz. Muhammed’in doğumu için özel olarak kaleme alınmış mevlidler okunmuş, hediyeler alınıp verilmiş, fakir ve muhtaçlar gözetilerek çeşitli hayır işleri gerçekleştirilmiştir. Mevlid-i Şerif geleneği önceki İslam devletlerinde olduğu gibi Osmanlı Devleti’nde de kendisine önemli bir yer edinmiştir. Osmanlılara önceki İslam devletlerinden miras kalan Mevlid-i Şerif geleneği, toplum ve devlet geleneklerine paralel olarak şekillenmiş, diğer İslam devletlerindeki uygulamalara benzer ve farklı yönler ihtiva etmiştir. Bu araştırmada Osmanlı kültüründe Mevlid-i Şerif, saray ve toplum geleneği olarak öncelikle arşiv kaynakları temelinde incelenmeye çalışılmış ve bu hususta elde edilen çıkarımlar değerlendirilmiştir.
In the Islamic tradition, the twelfth day of the month of Hijri Rabi'al-Awwal is accepted as the birthday of Prophet Muhammad and is referred to as Mawlid al-Sharif. As an indicator of respect and love for Prophet Muhammad, a special importance has been given to Mawlid al-Sharif by Muslims and this sensitivity has been maintained for centuries. Mawlid al-Sharif was celebrated in the historical process with ceremonies and various activities carried out both at the social and state level in Islamic states. In this context, ceremonies were held during the mawlid days with the participation of the rulers, statesmen, ulama and the public. These days, which were celebrated in the festive mood, mawlids which were written specifically for the birth of Prophet Muhammad, were read, gifts were accepted and given, and various charitable works were carried out considering the poor and needy. Mawlid al-Sharif tradition has gained an important place in the Ottoman Empire as in previous Islamic states. The tradition of Mawlid al-Sharif, which was inherited from the previous Islamic states to the Ottomans, was shaped in parallel with society and state traditions, and had similar and different aspects to the practices in other Islamic states. In this study, Mawlid al-Sharif in Ottoman culture was tried to be examined primarily on the basis of archive sources as a palace and social tradition and the inferences obtained in this regard were evaluated.
اصبح اليوم الثاني عشر من شهر ربيع الاول يوم مهم في تاريخ الاسلام ويوم مخلد بولادة النبي محمد ، والذي يسمى بمولد النبوي الشريف والذي يدل على حب واحترام النبي حيث اعطى المسلمون اهمية خاصة منذ عدة عقود من الزمن لهذة المناسبة . فعلى مر التاريخ الشعوب والدول الاسلامية كانت تقام شعائر الاحتفال بالمولد النبوي الشريف بشكل مستمروعبر التاريخ وزادت اهميتها لدى الدولة العثمانية احدى التقاليد المهمة حيث كانت مختلف الاحتفالات تشمل انشطة مختلفة فعلى سبيل المثال كانت تعطى الهدايا وتقام الاعمال الاخيرية للفقراءوالمحتاجين ويتم قراءة الاذكار . وكانت الدولة العثمانية قد اعطت اهمية كبيرة بدليل ان جميع اركان الدولة و رجالها كانو يشاركون ويرعون مناسبة المولد النبوي الشريف باهمية كبيرة لما لها من خصوصية في تاريخ المسلمين . في هذا البحث تطرقنا الى نظرة وثقافة العثمانيين لمناسبة المولد النبوي الشريف سواء على كان على مستوى الدولة العثمانية اوالمجتمع العثماني معتمدين على وثائق ومصادر الارشيف العثماني والتي تم تحليلها والتوصل الى استنتاجات.
ÖZ Üç kıtada hüküm süren Osmanlı Devleti'nin aslî unsurunun Türklerden meydana gelmesi, devlet ve... more ÖZ Üç kıtada hüküm süren Osmanlı Devleti'nin aslî unsurunun Türklerden meydana gelmesi, devlet ve saray geleneklerinden birçoğunun kaynağının eski Türk gelenekleri olmasını sağlamıştır. Osmanlı Devleti'nde devlet, saray ve toplum gelenekleri içerisinde bu şekilde yer bulmuş olan eski Türk geleneklerinden birisi de, Ana-dolu'da günümüzde de varlığını farklı şekillerde devam ettiren çanak yağmasıdır. Çanak yağmasının temeli Orta Asya Türklerinde görülen potlaca dayanmaktadır. Potlaç hakanların şölenlerinde yahut bayramlar vesile-siyle gerçekleştirilen büyük şenliklerde halkın yiyecekleri yağmalamasına verilen isimdir. Yağma kelimesi her ne kadar baskın ve zorla ele geçirme anlamına gelse de, eski Türk geleneklerinden olan yağmada gönüllülük esastır. Çanak yağmasında yağma yapanların zor kullanmasından ziyade yağma yaptıranın gönüllü olması, bu olayın eski Türklerde bir gelenek hâline gelmesini sağlamıştır. Bu gelenek gerek belirtilen özelliğinden gerekse yüklendiği diğer anlamlardan ötürü Osmanlılarda da devam ettirilmiştir. Osmanlı hanedan mensuplarına ait evlilik ve sünnet düğünleri gibi büyük çaplı şenliklerde de içleri yemek dolu kapların halk veya yeniçeriler tarafından kapılmasına çanak yağması adı verilmiştir. Osmanlı saray şenliklerinde görülen çanak yağması, gü-nümüzde Sultanahmet Camisi'nin bulunduğu alan olan At Meydanı'nda gerçekleştirilir; bu şenliklerde içleri et ve pilavla doldurulmuş olan büyük çanaklar, meydandaki uygun yerlere yerleştirildikten sonra verilen işaretle birlikte yağmaya açılırdı. Çanak yağmaları, saray düğünleri vesilesi ile gerçekleştirilen şenliklerin doğrudan halka yönelik olan en önemli etkinliğiydi. Bu etkinlik neticesinde halkın, sultanın cömertliğine şahit olması sağlanırdı. Çanak yağması sadece şenliklerde değil, aynı zamanda yeniçerilere ulûfe adı verilen üçer aylık ma-aşlarının verilişinde de uygulanmıştır. Çanak yağmasının bu şekli ise Topkapı Sarayı'nın ikinci avlusundaki belirli bir bölüme aralıklarla yerleştirilmiş, içerisinde pilav ve zerde gibi geleneksel yemeklerin bulunduğu ça-nakların, yeniçeriler tarafından kapılması şeklinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Gerek şenliklerde gerekse saray mera-simlerinde sergilenmesi, çanak yağmasının hem devlet hem de saray geleneği olmasını sağlamıştır. Çanak yağ-maları unutulmaz sahneler teşkil etmelerinden ötürü yerli ve yabancı kaynaklarda ayrıntılı olarak tasvir edil-miştir. Geleneğin gönüllülük esasına dayanması, amacının yağma değil de ona yüklenen anlamlar olduğunu göstermektedir. Temelde cömertlik olgusuna dayanmakla birlikte halk, yeniçeri ve ulema gibi farklı sınıflara uygulanmış olması, bu geleneğin birbirinden farklı anlamlar içerebilmesini sağlamıştır. Bu nedenle Osmanlı Devleti'nde devlet ve saray gelenekleri içerisinde yer alan çanak yağması, çok yönlü anlamlar içeren bir sembol olma özelliği taşımıştır. Ne şekilde uygulanırsa uygulansın sultanın bir ihsanı olan çanak yağması, tebaanın yönetime karşı olan saygı ve bağlılık duygusunun artmasını sağlamıştır. Bu noktada Osmanlı Devleti'nde halk için gerçekleştirilen çanak yağmaları, bu geleneğin daha çok "ihsan" boyutuna odaklanırken yeniçeriler için gerçekleştirilen çanak yağmaları ise ihsandan ziyade "itaat" boyutuna odaklanmıştır.
ABSTRACT The fact that the main element of the Ottoman Empire, which reigned on three continents, consisted of Turks, enabled many of the state and palace traditions to be the old Turkish traditions. One of the old Turkish traditions that took place in the state, palace and social traditions of the Ottoman Empire in this way was the dish plunder which continues its existence in different ways in Anatolia today. The dish plunder is based on potlach which is seen in the Central Asian Turks. Potlach is the name given to the plundering of the food by the people in the big festivities of the khans or on the occasion of the feasts. Although the word plunder means forced seizure, volunteering is essential in the plunder which is one of the old Turkish traditions. The fact that the person who allows the plundering is volunteer rather than plunderers use force made this event a tradition in the ancient Turks. This tradition has been continued in the Ottomans due to both its stated characteristics and other meanings it imposes. In large-scale festivals such as weddings and circumcision feasts belonging to Ottoman dynasty members, it was also called dish plunder to the grabbing of the bowls filled with food by the people or janissaries. The dish plunder seen in the Ottoman palace festivals was carried out at the Horse Square, where
the Blue Mosque is located today; in these festivals, large bowls filled with meat and rice were placed in suitable places in the square and then opened to plunder with the sign given. Dish plunders were the most important event of the festivities held on the occasion of palace weddings, which were devoted directly to the people. As
a result of this activity, it was ensured that the people would witness the generosity of the sultan. The dish plunder was applied not only at the festivities, but also during the payment of the three-month salaries of the janissaries which was called ulûfe. This form of dish plunder was carried out in a certain section in the second courtyard of the Topkapı Palace, where the dishes containing traditional meals such as rice and zerde were grabbed by the janissaries. The fact that it was exhibited in festivals and palace ceremonies ensured that the dish plunder was both state and palace tradition. Dish plunders are described in detail in local and foreign sources as they create unforgettable scenes. The fact that tradition is based on voluntarism shows that its aim is not plunder but the meanings attributed to it. Although essentially it is based on generosity, the fact that it has been applied to different classes such as people, janissary and ulama allows this tradition to have different meanings. Therefore,
the dish plunder as one of the state and palace traditions of the Ottoman Empire was a symbol with multifaceted meanings. Regardless of how it was applied, the dish plunder which was a beneficence of the sultan, increased the respect and loyalty of the people to the administration. At this point, dish plunders for the people in the Ottoman Empire focused on the “beneficence” dimension of this tradition, whereas dish plunders for the janissaries focused on the “obedience” dimension rather than the beneficence.
Öz Karşılıklı diplomasi temelli uluslararası ilişkilerde en önemli husus, devletlerin hak ve ödev... more Öz Karşılıklı diplomasi temelli uluslararası ilişkilerde en önemli husus, devletlerin hak ve ödevlerindeki mütekabiliyettir. Diplomatik ilişkilerin ana unsuru elçiler ve elçilik faaliyetleri olduğundan mütekabiliyet hususunun en somut örnekleri de bu sahada gözlemlenmiştir. Bu husus elçilik faaliyetlerine denklik ve eşitlik olarak yansımış; elçilikle ilgili uygulamalar herhangi bir tarafın üstünlüğüne mahal vermeyecek şekilde düzenlenmeye çalışılmıştır. Bu şekilde mütekabiliyet hususuna ve devletlerin eşitliği ilkesine göre şekillenen uygulamalardan birisi de elçi mübadelesidir. Özellikle devletlerarası antlaşmaların tasdiki amacıyla gerçekleştirilen elçi mübadelesi, yüklendiği anlam itibariyle elçilerin karşılıklı ve çoğu zamanda eş zamanlı olarak görevlendirilmesiyle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Osmanlı tarihinde daha çok sınır komşusu devletlerle yapılan elçi mübadeleleri, iki ülke sınırında icra edilen ve çeşitli sembolik anlamlar yüklenen merasimlerle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elçi mübadelelerinin Osmanlı tarihindeki örnekleri, hem uluslararası ilişkilerin teşrifat boyutuna ışık tutmakta hem de Osmanlıların diğer devletlere karşı duruşuna dair önemli bilgiler içermektedir.
Abstract The most important issue in international relations based on mutual diplomacy are the reciprocity of the rights and duties of states. Since the main elements of diplomatic relations are ambassadors and embassy activities, the most concrete examples of reciprocity have been observed in this field. This was reflected in the embassy activities as equivalence and equality; embassy practices have been tried to be arranged in a way that does not allow superiority of any party. In this way, one of the practices shaped according to the issue of reciprocity and the principle of equality of states is the ambassador exchange. The exchange of ambassadors, especially for the purpose of ratification of interstate treaties, was realized by the mutual and often simultaneous assignment of ambassadors in the sense attributed to this term. In the Ottoman history, the exchange of ambassadors, mostly with neighboring states, were carried out with ceremonies performed at the borders of two countries and attributed various symbolic meanings. The examples of the ambassador exchanges in the Ottoman history shed light on the protocol dimension of the international relations and contain important information about the Ottomans' stance against the other states.
Uluslararası Geçmişten Günümüze Karabük ve Çevresinde Dini, İlmi ve Kültürel Hayat Sempozyumu Bildiri Kitabı, 2019
Muhasebe, hesap verilebilirliğin sağlanması açısından büyük önem taşımaktadır. Bu bağlamda Osmanl... more Muhasebe, hesap verilebilirliğin sağlanması açısından büyük önem taşımaktadır. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı vakıf muhasebe kayıtları, vakıfların işleyişinde şeffaflığın sağlanması açısından büyük rol oynamıştır. Osmanlı Devleti’nde vakıf muhasebesi üzerinde oldukça titiz bir biçimde durulmuş; vakıf muhasebelerinin kaydedilmesi sonucu vakıf muhasebe defterleri ortaya çıkmıştır. Vakıfların dinamik yönünü ortaya koyan en önemli kaynaklar olan muhasebe defterleri, bu açıdan vakıf araştırmalarında kullanılabilecek önemli bir kaynak türüdür. Osmanlı vakıf muhasebe defterleri 19. yüzyılın başlarına kadar merdiven muhasebe yöntemine uygun bir biçimde tutulmuştur. Aynı hususlar Safranbolu İzzet Mehmed Paşa Vakfı’na ait H. 1224/M. 1809-1810 tarihli muhasebe defterinde de görülmektedir. İlgili defter, Osmanlı vakıf muhasebe defterlerine güzel bir örnek teşkil etmekte ve bir muhasebe defterinden beklenebilecek hususlar hakkında tatmin edici bilgiler vermektedir. Accounting is of great importance in terms of ensuring accountability. In this regard, the accounting records of the Ottoman foundations played a major role in ensuring transparency in the functioning of the foundations. In the Ottoman Empire, foundation accounting was emphasized very meticulously; as a result of the recording of the foundation accounts, the foundation accounting books were created. Accounting books, which are the most important sources revealing the dynamic aspect of foundations, are an important type of resource that can be used in foundation researches. The Ottoman foundation accounting books were kept in accordance with the stairs accounting method until the beginning of the 19th century. The same points can be seen in the accounting book dated 1224 / AD. 1809-1810 of İzzet Mehmed Pasha Foundation of Safranbolu. The book mentioned is a good example of Ottoman foundation accounting books and provides satisfying information about the issues that can be expected from an accounting book.
ÖZ
Elçiler devletlerarası ilişkilerin vazgeçilmez unsurlarından olup elçilik faaliyetleri yüzyıll... more ÖZ Elçiler devletlerarası ilişkilerin vazgeçilmez unsurlarından olup elçilik faaliyetleri yüzyıllardan beri öneminden bir şey kaybetmemiştir. Elçilik görevinin başarıya ulaşması ise bu görev öncesinde yapılmış olan iyi bir planlama ile doğru orantılıdır. Bu nedenle elçilik hizmetinin lojistik safhasının oldukça titiz bir şekilde planlanmış olması gerekmektedir. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı elçileri de görevlerine başlamadan önce oldukça ayrıntılı hazırlıklar yaparlar ve görevleri süresince ihtiyaç duyacakları malzemeler, kendilerine devlet eliyle temin edilirdi. Temin edilen bu malzemeler elçilere, elçilik görevinin sonunda geri alınmak koşuluyla verilirdi. H. 1149 / M. 1736 tarihinde İran’a elçi olarak gönderilen Mustafa Paşa’nın elçilik levazımatı da aynı şekilde Hazine-i Âmire’den temin edilmişti. Elçiye verilen malzemeler oldukça titiz bir şekilde tespit edilmiş ve hazırlıklar ona göre yapılmıştı. Bunlar elçilik heyetinin gerek yolculuk esnasında gerekse gidilen yerde ihtiyaç duyacağı türden malzemelerdi. Elçiye verilen bu levazımat, benzer uygulamalarda olduğu gibi elçilik görevinin sonunda geri alınmak üzere emaneten verilmişti. Mustafa Paşa’nın elçilik levazımatı elçilik hizmetlerinin oldukça geniş kapsamlı bir hazırlık safhası gerektirdiğini gözler önüne sermektedir. Elçiye verilen malzemelerin çeşitliliği, tamamlanması aylar süren elçilik hizmetlerinin amacına ulaşabilmesi için en ince ayrıntının bile oldukça önemli olduğunu göstermektedir. Osmanlı Elçisi Vezir Mustafa Paşa için temin edilen bu malzemeler, elçilik görevinin diplomasi sahası dışındaki yüzü hakkında ayrıntılı bilgiler içermektedir.
ABSTRACT Ambassadors are indispensable elements of interstate relations and the activities of embassies haven’t lost their importance for centuries. The success of the embassy mission is directly proportional to the good planning done before this mission. For this reason, the logistics phase of the embassy service must be planned very carefully. In this context, the Ottoman ambassadors made very detailed preparations before they started their duties and the materials they would need during the exercise of their duties was provided by the state. These materials were provided to the ambassadors under the condition that they were taken back at the end of the mission. The supplies for the embassy of Vizier Mustafa Pasha, who was sent as ambassador to Iran on H. 1149 / AD. 1736, were also obtained from the Treasury in this way. The materials given to the ambassador were determined very meticulously and preparations were made accordingly. These were the materials that the embassy committee would need both during the journey and at the destination. The materials given to the ambassador, as in similar practices, were given in consignment and to be taken back at the end of the mission. The supplies for the embassy of Mustafa Pasha show that the embassy services require a very extensive preparation phase. The diversity of the materials given to the Ottoman ambassador show that even the finest detail is very important for achieving the purpose of the embassy services which take months to complete. It is also possible to obtain informations about the face of the embassy mission outside the field of diplomacy.
STRUCTURED ABSTRACT Until the adoption of European-style diplomacy, the Ottoman Empire did not have permanent ambassadors in foreign countries and carried out its diplomatic activities with temporary ambassadors. The presence of ambassadors in the Ottoman territories by other states was perceived as an indicator of the greatness of the Ottoman Empire. The absence of permanent ambassadors to foreign states stems from this perception of superiority. This understanding has created an embassy tradition unique to the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman embassy tradition was based on the Ottoman state traditions and was shaped by the cultures and diplomacy in the region on which the Ottoman Empire ruled. The duty of the ambassadorship in the Ottoman Empire did not belong to any class or group as in the European states. Therefore, there was no class privilege in the election of the Ottoman ambassador and the most appropriate person was endeavored to be appointed for the embassy. Ottoman ambassadors could have different occupations, titles and social status depending on the necessity of the work to be done. This was an indication that merit was given importance in ambassador selection. The reasons of the Ottoman Empire sending ambassadors in the historical process are as follows: 1- To declare the Ottoman Sultan's ascent to the throne 2- To congratulate a foreign ruler on ascent to the throne 3- To call for the surrender of a region before the war 4- To discuss the terms of the treaty 5- To communicate the approved texts of the treaties to the other party 6- To discuss boundary issues 7- To establish good relations between the parties 8- To confirm good relations 9- To strengthen the relations between the parties 10- To check the ground of alliance between states 11- To declare the conquest of a region 12- To reciprocate to the states which sent ambassadors 13- To respond to letters and gifts from foreign states 14- To take the letter of the Grand Vizier 15- To invite to the circumcision feasts of the princes 16- To apologize for the mistreatment of the ambassadors 17- To request claims such as war compensation etc. and to decide terms of payment 18- To be aware of international developments 19- To fulfill the request of another state to send ambassadors 20- To observe scientific and technological developments 21- After the acceptance of the superiority of the Western world, to determine the reasons of this superiority and to apply them to the Ottoman country The messages intended to be given to foreign states were endeavored to be represented in the figures of the Ottoman ambassadors and embassy delegations. For this reason, care was taken to ensure that the ambassadors had an entourage suited to their status. No material sacrifice was inevitable for the creation and equipping of this entourage. In order to meet these needs, there was also a treasury office in the Ottoman Palace, which was named as the Ambassador Treasury. Some of the valuables here were given to the ambassadors on the condition that they would be taken back when they returned in order to increase the magnificence of the embassy committee. In the Ottoman Empire, the needs of the ambassadors were provided in two ways. Their needs during their journeys were usually met by the people on the route. These costs incurred by the public were counted as a substitute for some taxes they had to pay. Materials such as tents for ambassadors were obtained from Mehterhane-i Amire. Their needs, such as torch fee etc. during the journey, were provided in cash from the chief accountant. The ambassadors had to hand over the items they had received from Mehterhane-i Amire, as well as the materials they had received from the Ambassador Treasury. Nadir Shah, who came to the throne of Iran in 1736, sent Abdulbaki Khan to Istanbul as an envoy in order to announce his ascent to the throne. In the same year, the Ottoman Empire sent Vizier Mustafa Pasha to Nadir Shah as an ambassador. The Ottoman ambassador was accompanied by military and civilian officers, and it was around 600 people. For this reason, the materials to be provided from the Hazine-i Âmire for the embassy service were determined first. First, a total of 740 cargo animals, including 120 horses, 350 cargo horses, 120 camels and 150 mules, were allocated during the journey. Other materials categorized below were also provided. 1. Mounts and pack animals 2. Materials for kitchen services 3. Weapons and military supplies 4. Materials for storage and preservation 5. Strength and wealth indicator materials 6. Materials for water need 7. Materials for accommodation needs 8. Materials required for ambassador procession The materials given to the ambassadors in the Ottoman Empire provide information about the face of the embassy mission outside the diplomatic field. Likewise, the materials that were identified and provided for the embassy of Mustafa Pasha, who was sent to Iran in H. 1149/ AD. 1736, shed light on the aspects of Ottoman embassy services which were unvalued. When these materials are taken into consideration, it is possible to obtain detailed information about the logistics phase of the embassy service. The most important point to be mentioned here is that even the finest detail is very important for the embassy service to reach its purpose. While determining the necessary materials for the ambassador, it was not forgotten that even the slightest mistake would put the embassy committee in trouble and acted very meticulously. This meticulousness also shows that the Ottoman embassy tradition is a well-established and rooted tradition. These materials, given to Ambassador Mustafa Pasha and pointing to the logistic phase of the embassy service, show that the preparation process required for the ambassadors is quite burdensome but at the same time one of the most important issues in the success of the embassy mission.
Devletlerarası ilişkilerde hükümdar, hanedan mensubu, elçi gibi resmi sıfatlı yabancı misafirleri... more Devletlerarası ilişkilerde hükümdar, hanedan mensubu, elçi gibi resmi sıfatlı yabancı misafirlerin ağırlanması hususuna mihmandarlar nezaret ederdi. Geçmişi oldukça eski dönemlere giden mihmandarlık geleneği, Osmanlı Devleti tarafından da Türk-İslam gelenekleri çerçevesinde uygulanmıştır. Osmanlı mihmandarları, ülkeye gelen yabancı misafirlerin rahatını temin etmekle yükümlüydüler. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı diplomasi anlayışı gereği, elçi gibi resmi sıfatlı yabancı misafirlerin devlet tarafından karşılanan zaruri harcamalarına da mihmandarlar nezaret ederdi. Mihmandarlar, hesap verilebilirlik adına, yaptıkları bu harcamaları en ince ayrıntısına kadar kayıt altına alırlardı. Bu şekilde tutulan kayıtlardan birisi de İran elçisi Abdullah Bey’in mihmandarlığını yapmış olan Ali Ağa tarafından tutulan masraf defteridir. H. 25 Şaban 1189 / M. 21 Ekim 1775 tarihli bu defter, Osmanlı mihmandar geleneği hakkında önemli bilgiler içermektedir.
In interstate relations, the reception of official foreign guests such as sovereigns, dynasties, envoys was overseen by mihmandars. The mihmandar tradition, history of which goes back to ancient times, was applied by the Ottoman Empire within the framework of Turkish-Islamic traditions. The Ottoman mihmandars were obliged to ensure the comfort of foreign guests arriving in the country. In this context, the obligatory expenses of official guests such as envoys covered by Empire were supervised by the mihmandars. Mihmandars, for accountability, would record their expenses to the finest detail. One of the records kept in this way is the book of expenses which was kept by Ali Ağa, who was mihmandar of the Iranian ambassador Abdullah Bey. This book, dated H. 25 Şaban 1189 / AD. 25 October 1775, contains important information about the Ottoman mihmandar tradition.
Diplomatik misafirlere bulundukları ülkede rehberlik edecek kişilerin görevlendirilmesi, devletle... more Diplomatik misafirlere bulundukları ülkede rehberlik edecek kişilerin görevlendirilmesi, devletlerarası ilişkilerde uygulanagelen oldukça eski bir gelenektir. Hem batı hem de doğu diplomasisinde görülen bu gelenek, Osmanlı Devleti’nde de Osmanlı devlet gelenekleri ve diplomasi anlayışı çerçevesinde uygulanmıştır. Bu nedenle yabancı devletlerden gelen resmi sıfatlı yabancı misafirlerle ilgilenmesi için mihmandar adı verilen görevliler tayin edilmiştir. Mihmandarların yabancı misafirler karşısında Devlet-i Âliyye’nin onurunu temsil ettikleri düşünüldüğünden, mihmandar seçiminde oldukça titiz davranılmıştır. Genel olarak saray görevlilerinden seçilen mihmandarlar, Osmanlı topraklarına gelen diplomatik misafirlerin ağırlanması ve ülke içinde bulundukları sürece ihtiyaçları ile ilgilenip, bu hususta kurumlar arası koordinasyonun sağlanması hizmetini görmüşlerdir. Bu bağlamda mihmandarlık uygulaması, Osmanlı devlet ve diplomasi geleneği açısından önemli kesitler içermekte olup Osmanlı Devleti’ni çağdaşı diğer devletlerden ayırt edici bir özellik taşımaktadır.
The appointment of persons to guide diplomatic guests in which country they are present at is a very old tradition in interstate relations. This tradition, seen in both western and eastern diplomacy, was applied in the Ottoman State within the framework of Ottoman state traditions and diplomacy. For this reason, officials named mihmandar have been appointed in order to deal with official guests from foreign countries. Since it is thought that the mihmandars represent the dignity of Ottoman State in the face of foreign guests, selection of mihmandars has been meticulous. Generally selected from the palace officials, mihmandars were interested in hosting the diplomatic guests coming to the Ottoman lands and their needs as long as they were in the country and providing the coordination between the institutions in this regard. In this context, this practice contains important sections in terms of Ottoman state and diplomacy tradition and has a distinctive feature of the Ottoman State from other contemporary states.
Yabancı devletler n "Kapı" olarak anılan Osmanlı Sarayı'na elç ler göndermes se Devlet-Âl yye'n n... more Yabancı devletler n "Kapı" olarak anılan Osmanlı Sarayı'na elç ler göndermes se Devlet-Âl yye'n n azamet n n b r gösterges olarak algılanmış ve bu anlayış net ces nde elç göndermeler ne z n ver lerek Osmanlı başkent n n dost veya düşman bütün devletlerden gelecek olan elç lere açık olduğu vurgusu yapılmıştır. Yabancı elç ler n Kapı'ya gel şler n n devlet n büyüklüğünün b r gösterges olarak algılanması, bu büyüklüğün, elç ler n şahsında elç gönderen devletlere göster lmes sonucunu doğurmuştur. Elç y gönderen devlete ver lmek stenen mesajlarla çoğu kere elç ler n yüzleşmek zorunda kalması, elç lere olan davranış b ç mler ne, onların ağırlanmalarına ve huzura kabuller ne farklı mot fler katmıştır. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı Devlet 'nde elç lere yapılan muamelelerde, üç kel me le özetleneb lecek üç ana temaya vurgu yapıldığı görülmekted r: KUDRET, HEYBET VE ADALET… LÇİ göndermek ve elç kabul etmek, devletler ç n tar h boyunca kullanılan bağımsızlık E semboller nden olmuştur. Bu nedenle devletler elç göndermeye ve elç kabuller ne oldukça fazla önem verm şlerd r. Devletler n b rb rler ne vermek sted kler mesajlar ç n gönder len elç ler n yanı sıra elç kabuller de oldukça müsa t b r zem n teşk l etm ş ve ver lmek stenen bu mesajlar, elç lerde bırakılacak zlen mlerle şek llend r lmeye çalışılmıştır. Bu anlamda elç lere karşı serg lenen davranışlar b r devletten d ğer ne farklılık göstereb lm ş, bu nedenle elç ler n ağırlanması, onlara karşı olan davranış b ç mler ve yapılan muameleler, devletler b rb rler nden ayırt ed c özell kler taşımıştır.
2nd INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON STUDIES IN TURKOLOGY (ICOSTURK’2017) PROCEEDINGS BOOK, 2017
Osmanlı Devleti’nin kurulmuş olduğu alan, devlet teşkilatı açısından Bizans ve Roma mirasından ya... more Osmanlı Devleti’nin kurulmuş olduğu alan, devlet teşkilatı açısından Bizans ve Roma mirasından yararlanmasını sağlamıştır. Osmanlı devlet teşkilatındaki bu durumu Osmanlı elçi kabullerinde de görmek mümkündür. Karşılıklı diplomasi öncesi Osmanlı elçi kabulleri, Osmanlı Devleti’ne özgü olarak gelişmiştir. Yabancı elçilere Türk ve İslam geleneklerine göre muamelede bulunulmasına karşın, yine de Osmanlı elçi kabullerindeki bazı uygulamaların Türk ve İslam geleneklerinde bulunmadığı görülmektedir. Bu noktada farklılığın nedenini ise belli ölçülerde Roma ve Bizans mirası meydana getirmiştir. Bu çerçevede Osmanlı elçi kabullerinin Bizans ve Roma elçi kabulleriyle birebir aynı olduğunu söylemek mümkün olmasa da, tamamen farklı olduklarını söylemek de doğru değildir. Elçi kabullerine Roma, Bizans ve Osmanlı bağlamında bakıldığında, ortak temanın güç, kudret ve zenginlik olduğu görülmektedir. Roma’da daha basit düzeyde görülen elçi kabulleri, Bizans’ta kurumsallaşmaya başlamış, Osmanlılarda ise güç, kudret ve zenginlik vurgusunun zirve noktasına ulaşmıştır. Bu çalışmada hemen hemen aynı coğrafyalarda hüküm sürmüş olan bu üç devletin elçi kabullerindeki benzerliklere değinilecektir.
There are specific practices that distinguish the great states established throughout history from other states. This is also true for the Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman Empires, which ruled almost exclusively in almost the same geographies. Envoy acceptance is also one of the implied practices for these three empires, and it has become one of the most important arguements for empires to show their greatness to other states. The area that the Ottoman State was founded provided for the benefit from Byzantine and Roman heritage in terms of state organization. Therefore, the Roman and Byzantine state traditions became one of the three main sources that formed the Ottoman state organization with the ancient Turkish state tradition and Islamic state tradition. It is possible to see this situation in the Ottoman state
organization, also in the envoy acceptance of Ottoman. Until the mutual diplomacy, the envoy acceptance seen in the Ottoman Empire developed in the Ottoman Empire specifically. The Ottomans treated to foreign envoys in respect to the Turkish and Islamic customs. However, some practices in the envoy acceptance of Ottoman Empire were not found in the Turkish and Islamic traditions. At this point the practices differentiate the envoy acceptance in the Ottoman Empire from the Turkish and
Islamic traditions to some extent are the similar practices to the envoy acceptances of Roman and Byzantine. In this sense, even it is not true to say that envoy acceptance of Ottoman is completely same with the envoy acceptances of Roman and Byzantine, it is not also true to say that they are completely different from each other. In this paper, it is aimed to identify the similarities and differences in the envoy acceptances of three empires that ruled in almost the same geographies.
Özet Mondros Ateşkes Antlaşması’ndan Anadolu topraklarındaki ilk işgaller Hatay bölgesinde yaşandı. İlk olarak İskenderun 9 Kasım 1918’de İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngilizlerin ardından bölgeye asker çıkaran Fransızlar; 27 Kasım 1918’de İskenderun, Belen, Antakya ve Harim kazalarını içine alan İskenderun Sancağı’nı kurarak başına Fransız bir askerî vali tayin ettiler. Fransızlarla ortak hareket eden Ermenilerin kindar ve acımasız davranışları, Hatay yöresinde silahlı direnişin erken başlamasına neden oldu. Hatay direnişi, yoğunlukla bölgenin kuzeyindeki Gâvur Dağları ile daha güneyde kalan Amik Ovası-Kürt Dağı ve Antakya Kuseyr yörelerinde cereyan etti. Hatay’ın kuzeyinde kalan İskenderun-Dörtyol kesimlerinde Kara Hasan, Hakkı Bey gibi Kuvâ-yı Milliyeciler ön plana çıkarken güneyde ise Tayfur Mürsel, Asım Bey, Ahmet Türkmen gibi isimler önemli yer tuttu. Hatay direnişi, Mustafa Kemal Paşa öncülüğündeki Millî Mücadele hareketi ile kurulan irtibat neticesinde daha organize hâle geldi ve Hatay, Millî Mücadele’nin Güney Cephesi’ne dâhil oldu. Bölgede çarpışmalar devam ederken Türkiye ile Fransa arasında, 20 Ekim 1921 tarihinde Ankara İtilafnamesi imzalandı. Böylece iki devlet arasındaki savaş hali sona erdi ve Türkiye-Suriye sınırı çizildi. Bu antlaşma ile Dörtyol (Payas dâhil) ve Hassa Türkiye sınırları içinde kalırken İskenderun bölgesi için özel bir idare şekli kurulması ve buradaki Türklere birtakım ayrıcalıklar verilmesi kararlaştırıldı. Böylece Misak-ı Milli sınırlarına dâhil olan Antakya-İskenderun yöresinin Suriye’de kalması, Güney cephesindeki çarpışmaları sonlandırabilmek adına istemeyerek de olsa kabul edildi. Bu durum, uygun zaman ve şartların oluşması beklendiğinden Lozan Antlaşması’nda da aynen kabul edildi. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Hatay coğrafyasında yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketleri ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler :Hatay, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Absract
After the Armistice of Mudros, the first occupations in Anatolian lands took place in the Hatay region. Firstly, Iskenderun (Alexandretta) was occupied by the British on 9 November 1918. On 27 November 1918, the French, who landed troops in the region after the British, established the Sanjak of Alexandretta, which included the towns of Iskenderun, Belen, Antakya, and Harim, and appointed a French military governor. The vindictive and ruthless behaviour of the Armenians, who acted in partnership with the French, led to the early start of armed resistance in the Hatay region. The resistance in Hatay took place mainly in the Gâvur Mountains in the north of the region and in the Amik Valley-Kurd Mountain and Antakya- Al-Qusayr regions in the south. While in the İskenderun-Dörtyol region in the north of Hatay, figures from the Kuvâ-yı Milliye such as Kara Hasan and Bey Hakkı came to the fore, in the south, names such as Tayfur Mürsel, Asım Bey and Ahmet Türkmen played an important role. The Hatay resistance became more organised as a result of the contact established with the National Struggle movement led by Mustafa Kemal Pasha, and Hatay was included in the Southern Front of the National Struggle. While the clashes continued in the region, the Treaty of Ankara (the Franklin-Bouillon Agreement) was signed between Türkiye and France on 20 October 1921. Thus, the state of war between the two States ended and the Türkiye-Syria border was drawn. With this treaty, while Dörtyol (including Payas) and Hassa remained within the borders of Türkiye, it was decided to establish a special form of administration for the Iskenderun region and to grant some privileges to the Turks here. Thus, it was accepted, albeit reluctantly, that the Antakya-Iskenderun region, which was included in the borders of Mîsâk-ı Millî (the National Pact), would remain in Syria in order to end the fighting on the Southern Front. This situation was also accepted in the Treaty of Lausanne, as it was expected that the appropriate time and conditions would emerge. In this study, the occupation and resistance movements in the Hatay region after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Hatay, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Millî Mücadele yıllarında hem ekonomik hem de stratejik bir öneme sahip olan Antep, Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra 17 Aralık 1918’de İngiliz işgaline uğradı. İngilizler daha önce Suriye’ye göç ettirilmiş olan Ermenileri de Antep’e getirdiler. Yaklaşık olarak on ay süren İngiliz işgalinde, bazı kötü durumlar görülmekle birlikte silahlı bir çatışma yaşanmadı. Antep’teki İngiliz işgali, 25 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Fransızlar da Antep’in işgalinde Ermenilerden faydalandılar. Bu nedenle şehirdeki Ermeni taşkınlıkları artmaya başladı. 12 Ocak 1920’de, Fransızlar ve Ermenilerin Araptar Köyü’nde neden olduğu olaylar nedeniyle Antep direnişi, ilk olarak şehir dışında başladı. Antep-Maraş yolunda yaşanan bu çarpışmalarda Karayılan ve Boyno oğlu Memik Ağa çeteleri büyük yararlılıklar gösterdi. Şahin Bey de 1920 yılının şubat ve mart aylarında Kilis-Antep yolu üzerinde gerçekleştirdiği faaliyetlerle Fransızları oldukça zor durumda bıraktı. Şahin Bey’in şehadetinden sonra Antep direnişi, 1 Nisan 1920’den itibaren şehir içerisine taşındı. Bu süreçte şehir içi direniş, Kılıç Ali ve Özdemir Bey gibi
kumandanlarca organize edildi. Maraş ve Urfa’da yenilen Fransızlar, Antep’i haftalarca kuşatma altına aldılar. Yaklaşık on bir ay kendi imkânları ile direnen şehir, açlığın son haddine varmasından ötürü 9 Şubat 1921’de düştü. 20 Ekim 1921 Ankara Antlaşması ile Türkiye-Suriye sınırı çizilince Fransız askerleri 25 Aralık’ta Antep’i terk ettiler. Böylece Antep’te Aralık 1918’de İngilizlerle başlayıp sonrasında Fransızlarla devam eden işgal
dönemi, 25 Aralık 1921 tarihinde sona ermiş oldu. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Antep’te yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketi ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Antep, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Absract
Antep, which had both economic and strategic importance during the War of Independence, was occupied by the British on 17 December 1918 after the Armistice of Mudros. The British also brought the Armenians, who had previously been displaced to Syria, to Antep. During the British occupation that lasted for approximately ten months, there were no armed conflicts despite some unfortunate situations. The British occupation of Antep was replaced by the French occupation on 25 October 1919. The French also took advantage of the Armenians during the occupation of Antep. Therefore, Armenian riots in the city started to increase. On 12 January 1920, due to the incidents caused by the French and Armenians in Araptar Village, the Antep resistance first started outside the city. In these clashes on the Antep-Maras road, the Karayılan and Memik Agha son of Boyno gangs proved to be very useful. Şahin Bey also left the French in a very difficult situation with his activities on the Kilis-Antep road in February and March 1920. After the martyrdom of Şahin Bey, the resistance in Antep moved inside the city as of 1 April 1920. In this period, the resistance in the city was organised by commanders such as Kılıç Ali and Özdemir Bey. The French, who were defeated in Maraş and Urfa, besieged Antep for weeks. The city, which resisted with its own means for about eleven months, fell on 9 February 1921 due to starvation. On 20 October 1921, when the Türkiye-Syria border was drawn with the Ankara Treaty, French soldiers left Antep on 25 December. Thus, the occupation period in Antep, which started with the British in December 1918 and continued with the French, ended on 25 December 1921. In this study, the occupation and resistance movement in Antep after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Antep, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Özet
Kilis, Millî Mücadele yıllarında Antep Mutasarrıflığına bağlı bir kaza konumundaydı. Mondros Mütarekesi’nin hemen ardından, İtilâf devletleri daha önce gizli anlaşmalarla paylaştıkları alanlara doğru hızla yayılmaya başladılar. Bu bağlamda ateşkesin hemen akabinde Aralık 1918’de, Kilis İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngiliz işgali döneminde, şehirde silahlı bir direniş görülmedi. Ancak daha sonra oluşturulacak olan Kuvâ-yı Milliye hareketinin tohumları bu süreçte atıldı. Şehirdeki İngiliz işgali, 29 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Fransızlar Kilis’i, Çukurova ve çevresindeki işgal bölgeleri için harekât üssü olarak kullandılar. Suriye’deki Ermenileri bölgeye göç ettirerek Ermeni çetelerinin Türk halkına saldırılarına göz yumdular. Böylelikle Türkler başka yerlere göçe zorlanarak Ermenilerin çoğunluğu teşkil etmesi amaçlandı. Türk halkının güvenlik
ve varlığı tehlikeye düşünce yerel teşkilatlanmaya gidilerek Fransız işgaline karşı direnişe geçildi. Bölgede Kuvâ-yı Milliye’nin örgütlenmesinde Şahin Bey, Sakıp Bey, İslam Bey, Müslüman Bey ve Polat Bey gibi kişilerin önemli bir rolü oldu. Kilis şehri, işgal altında olduğundan silahlı mücadele Kilis dışındaki kırsal alanlarda yaşandı. Bölgede çarpışmalar devam ederken 20 Ekim 1921’de Ankara Hükümeti ile Fransa arasında imzalanan Ankara Antlaşması ile Türkiye-Suriye sınırı belirlendi. Böylece Fransız
kuvvetleri, 7 Aralık 1921’de Kilis’i boşalttılar. Fransızların şehirden ayrılması ile Kilis’te Aralık 1918’den beri devam eden üç yıllık işgal dönemi sona erdi. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Kilis’te yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketi ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Kilis, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Abstract
During the years of the War of Independence, Kilis was a subprovince under the Mutasarrifate of Antep. Right after the Armistice of Mudros, the Entente Powers began to expand rapidly towards the areas they had previously shared through secret agreements. In this context, immediately after the armistice, in December 1918, Kilis was occupied by the British. During the British occupation, there was no armed resistance in the city. However, the seeds of the Kuvâ-yı Milliye movement to be formed later were sown in this period. The British occupation of the city was replaced by the French occupation on 29 October 1919. The French used Kilis as a base of operations for the occupation zones in and around Çukurova (the Cilician Plain). They migrated Armenians from Syria to the region and turned a blind eye to the attacks of Armenian gangs on the Turkish people. In this way, the aim was to force the Turks to migrate elsewhere so that
the Armenians would constitute the majority. When the security and existence of the Turkish people were endangered, the local organisation was established and resistance was started against the French occupation. People such as Şahin Bey, Sakıp Bey, İslam Bey, Müslüman Bey, and Polat Bey played important roles in the organisation of the Kuvâ-yı Milliye in the region. Since Kilis was under occupation, the armed struggle took place in rural areas outside Kilis. While the clashes continued in the region, Türkiye-Syria border was determined with the Ankara Treaty signed between the Ankara Government and France on 20 October 1921. Thus, the French forces evacuated Kilis on 7 December 1921. With the departure of the French from the city, the three-year occupation period in Kilis since December 1918 ended. In this study, the occupation and resistance movement in Kilis after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Kilis, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
30 Ekim 1918 Mondros Ateşkes Antlaşması’ndan sonra İtilaf devletleri, Osmanlı topraklarında geniş çaplı işgallere başladılar. Urfa da ilk olarak 24 Mart 1919’da İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngilizler, asker kılığındaki Ermenileri beraberlerinde getirdiler; bölgedeki aşiretleri de kendi taraflarına çekmeye çalıştılar. 15 Eylül 1919’da imzalanan Suriye İtilafnamesi ile Urfa’daki İngiliz işgali, 30 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Şehirdeki Fransız işgali İngiliz işgaline göre daha şiddetli oldu. Fransızlar; Urfa’ya girdikleri ilk günden itibaren keyfi bir tutumla mahalli hükümetin işlerine müdahale ettiler. Çeşitli yerlerden getirilen Ermeni gönüllüler, Ermeni mahallesine yerleştirildi ve Ermeni taşkınlıklarına göz yumuldu. Fransızlar da İngilizlerin yaptığı gibi siyasi faaliyetlerde bulunarak bölgedeki aşiretleri elde etmeye çalıştılar. İstanbul Hükümeti’nin işgaller karşısında sessiz kalması, Urfa’da yerel teşkilatlanmanın başlamasına neden oldu. Teşkilatlanmanın akabinde ise 8-9 Şubat 1920 gecesi, Yüzbaşı Ali Saib Bey öncülüğünde Fransız işgaline karşı silahlı direniş başladı. Yaşanan şiddetli çarpışmalar neticesinde şehirden ayrılmayı kabul eden Fransızlar, 11 Nisan 1920 tarihinde Urfa’yı boşalttılar. Şehirden ayrılıp Şebeke Mevkii’ne vardıklarında ise aşiret kuvvetleriyle aralarında büyük bir çatışma yaşandı. Bu çatışma neticesinde Fransızlar, Urfa işgalini büyük bir kayıpla sonlandırdılar. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Urfa’da yaşanan işgallerin yanı sıra şehrin direniş ve kurtuluş süreci ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Urfa, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Abstract
After the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918, the Entente Powers started largescale occupations in the Ottoman lands. In this context, Urfa was first occupied by the British on 24 March 1919. The British brought Armenians disguised as soldiers with them and tried to attract the local tribes in the region to their side. With the Syrian Agreement of 15 September 1919, the British occupation of Urfa was replaced by the French occupation on 30 October 1919. The French occupation of the city was more violent than the British occupation. From the first day they entered Urfa, the French arbitrarily interfered in the affairs of the local government. Armenian volunteers brought from various places were placed in the Armenian neighborhood and Armenian excesses were tolerated. The silence of the Istanbul Government against the occupations led to the beginning of local organization in Urfa. Following the organization, armed resistance against the French occupation started on the night of 8-9 February 1920 under the leadership of Yüzbaşı Ali Saib Bey. The French, who agreed to leave the city as a result of the fierce battles, evacuated Urfa on 11 April 1920. When they left the city and arrived at Şebeke district, a major clash took place between them and the tribal forces. As a result of this clash, the French ended their occupation of Urfa with a great loss. In this study, the occupations in Urfa after the Armistice of Mudros as well as the resistance and liberation process of the city will be discussed.
Keywords: Urfa, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Ankara Üniversitesi Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi (OTAM)), 2021
Özet
İlk olarak XIV. yüzyılda Avrupa’nın Akdeniz limanlarında uygulanmaya başlanan karantina, za... more Özet
İlk olarak XIV. yüzyılda Avrupa’nın Akdeniz limanlarında uygulanmaya başlanan karantina, zamanla kurumsallaşarak salgın hastalıklardan korunma hususunda oldukça önemli bir rol üstlenmiştir. Batılı devletler, ülkelerine dışarıdan gelen herkese ayrım gözetmeksizin karantina uygulamışlardır. Dolayısıyla bu devletlere gönderilen Osmanlı elçileri de karantina uygulamasına tabi tutulmuştur. Elçiler kaleme aldıkları sefaretnamelerde bu ülkelerde karşılaştıkları karantina uygulamaları, karantina süreçleri ve karantina mekânları hakkında önemli bilgiler vermişlerdir. Osmanlı elçilerinin karantinaya verdikleri tepkiler, karantina süresi, karantina mekânı ve karantinayı uygulamakla görevli olan yetkililerin tavırlarına göre değişiklik göstermiştir. Elçiler her ne kadar birbirlerinden farklı tavırlar sergilemiş olsalar da kendi ülkelerinden aşina olmadıkları bu uygulamadan genel anlamda rahatsız oldukları gözlemlenmektedir. Elçilerin karantina karşısındaki tutumları insani gerekçelerden kaynaklanmakla birlikte hem Osmanlı zihniyetinden hem de Osmanlı devlet anlayışından izler taşımaktadır. Bu araştırmada Osmanlı Devleti’nde karantina uygulamaları başlamadan önce Avrupa’ya gönderilen elçilerin karşılaştıkları karantina tedbirleri hakkında bilgi verilerek Osmanlı elçilerinin karantinaya karşı tutumları değerlendirilmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Osmanlı Devleti, Elçi, Karantina, Sefaretname.
Abstract:
Quarantine, which was firstly started to be implemented in the Mediterranean ports of Europe in the XIVst century, has become institutionalized over time and has played a very important role in protection from epidemics. Western States have applied quarantine indiscriminately to everyone who came to their countries from outside. Therefore, the Ottoman ambassadors sent to these states were also subjected to quarantine. The ambassadors gave important informations in sefaretnames (the books of embassy) which they wrote about the quarantine practices, the quarantine processes and quarantine places. The responses of the Ottoman ambassadors to the quarantine varied according to the quarantine period, the quarantine space and the attitudes of the authorities responsible for enforcing the quarantine. Although the ambassadors displayed different attitudes from each other, it is observed that they are generally uncomfortable with this practice, which they are not familiar with from their own countries. Although the attitudes of the ambassadors against quarantine stem from humanitarian reasons, they bear traces of both the Ottoman mentality and the Ottoman understanding of State. In this study, the attitudes of the Ottoman ambassadors against quarantine were evaluated by giving information about the quarantine measures encountered by the ambassadors sent to Europe before the quarantine practices started in the Ottoman Empire.
Keywords: Ottoman State, Ambassador, Quarantine, Sefaretname.
FÂRÂBİ ANISINA TÜRKİYE VE TÜRK DÜNYASI ARAŞTIRMALARI-II, 2020
Hicri Rebiülevvel ayının on ikinci günü, İslamî gelenekte Hz. Muhammed’in doğum günü olarak kabu... more Hicri Rebiülevvel ayının on ikinci günü, İslamî gelenekte Hz. Muhammed’in doğum günü olarak kabul edilmekte ve Mevlid-i Şerif olarak anılmaktadır. Hz. Muhammed’e olan saygı ve sevginin bir göstergesi olarak Mevlid-i Şerif’e Müslümanlarca özel bir önem verilmiş olup bu hassasiyet yüzyıllardan beri devam ettirilmektedir. Mevlid-i Şerif, tarihî süreçte İslam devletlerinde hem toplumsal düzeyde hem de devlet düzeyinde gerçekleştirilen merasimler ve çeşitli etkinliklerle kutlanmıştır. Bu bağlamda Mevlid günlerinde hükümdar, devlet adamları, ulema ve halkın katılımıyla törenler düzenlenmiştir. Şenlik havasında kutlanan bu günlerde, Hz. Muhammed’in doğumu için özel olarak kaleme alınmış mevlidler okunmuş, hediyeler alınıp verilmiş, fakir ve muhtaçlar gözetilerek çeşitli hayır işleri gerçekleştirilmiştir. Mevlid-i Şerif geleneği önceki İslam devletlerinde olduğu gibi Osmanlı Devleti’nde de kendisine önemli bir yer edinmiştir. Osmanlılara önceki İslam devletlerinden miras kalan Mevlid-i Şerif geleneği, toplum ve devlet geleneklerine paralel olarak şekillenmiş, diğer İslam devletlerindeki uygulamalara benzer ve farklı yönler ihtiva etmiştir. Bu araştırmada Osmanlı kültüründe Mevlid-i Şerif, saray ve toplum geleneği olarak öncelikle arşiv kaynakları temelinde incelenmeye çalışılmış ve bu hususta elde edilen çıkarımlar değerlendirilmiştir.
In the Islamic tradition, the twelfth day of the month of Hijri Rabi'al-Awwal is accepted as the birthday of Prophet Muhammad and is referred to as Mawlid al-Sharif. As an indicator of respect and love for Prophet Muhammad, a special importance has been given to Mawlid al-Sharif by Muslims and this sensitivity has been maintained for centuries. Mawlid al-Sharif was celebrated in the historical process with ceremonies and various activities carried out both at the social and state level in Islamic states. In this context, ceremonies were held during the mawlid days with the participation of the rulers, statesmen, ulama and the public. These days, which were celebrated in the festive mood, mawlids which were written specifically for the birth of Prophet Muhammad, were read, gifts were accepted and given, and various charitable works were carried out considering the poor and needy. Mawlid al-Sharif tradition has gained an important place in the Ottoman Empire as in previous Islamic states. The tradition of Mawlid al-Sharif, which was inherited from the previous Islamic states to the Ottomans, was shaped in parallel with society and state traditions, and had similar and different aspects to the practices in other Islamic states. In this study, Mawlid al-Sharif in Ottoman culture was tried to be examined primarily on the basis of archive sources as a palace and social tradition and the inferences obtained in this regard were evaluated.
اصبح اليوم الثاني عشر من شهر ربيع الاول يوم مهم في تاريخ الاسلام ويوم مخلد بولادة النبي محمد ، والذي يسمى بمولد النبوي الشريف والذي يدل على حب واحترام النبي حيث اعطى المسلمون اهمية خاصة منذ عدة عقود من الزمن لهذة المناسبة . فعلى مر التاريخ الشعوب والدول الاسلامية كانت تقام شعائر الاحتفال بالمولد النبوي الشريف بشكل مستمروعبر التاريخ وزادت اهميتها لدى الدولة العثمانية احدى التقاليد المهمة حيث كانت مختلف الاحتفالات تشمل انشطة مختلفة فعلى سبيل المثال كانت تعطى الهدايا وتقام الاعمال الاخيرية للفقراءوالمحتاجين ويتم قراءة الاذكار . وكانت الدولة العثمانية قد اعطت اهمية كبيرة بدليل ان جميع اركان الدولة و رجالها كانو يشاركون ويرعون مناسبة المولد النبوي الشريف باهمية كبيرة لما لها من خصوصية في تاريخ المسلمين . في هذا البحث تطرقنا الى نظرة وثقافة العثمانيين لمناسبة المولد النبوي الشريف سواء على كان على مستوى الدولة العثمانية اوالمجتمع العثماني معتمدين على وثائق ومصادر الارشيف العثماني والتي تم تحليلها والتوصل الى استنتاجات.
ÖZ Üç kıtada hüküm süren Osmanlı Devleti'nin aslî unsurunun Türklerden meydana gelmesi, devlet ve... more ÖZ Üç kıtada hüküm süren Osmanlı Devleti'nin aslî unsurunun Türklerden meydana gelmesi, devlet ve saray geleneklerinden birçoğunun kaynağının eski Türk gelenekleri olmasını sağlamıştır. Osmanlı Devleti'nde devlet, saray ve toplum gelenekleri içerisinde bu şekilde yer bulmuş olan eski Türk geleneklerinden birisi de, Ana-dolu'da günümüzde de varlığını farklı şekillerde devam ettiren çanak yağmasıdır. Çanak yağmasının temeli Orta Asya Türklerinde görülen potlaca dayanmaktadır. Potlaç hakanların şölenlerinde yahut bayramlar vesile-siyle gerçekleştirilen büyük şenliklerde halkın yiyecekleri yağmalamasına verilen isimdir. Yağma kelimesi her ne kadar baskın ve zorla ele geçirme anlamına gelse de, eski Türk geleneklerinden olan yağmada gönüllülük esastır. Çanak yağmasında yağma yapanların zor kullanmasından ziyade yağma yaptıranın gönüllü olması, bu olayın eski Türklerde bir gelenek hâline gelmesini sağlamıştır. Bu gelenek gerek belirtilen özelliğinden gerekse yüklendiği diğer anlamlardan ötürü Osmanlılarda da devam ettirilmiştir. Osmanlı hanedan mensuplarına ait evlilik ve sünnet düğünleri gibi büyük çaplı şenliklerde de içleri yemek dolu kapların halk veya yeniçeriler tarafından kapılmasına çanak yağması adı verilmiştir. Osmanlı saray şenliklerinde görülen çanak yağması, gü-nümüzde Sultanahmet Camisi'nin bulunduğu alan olan At Meydanı'nda gerçekleştirilir; bu şenliklerde içleri et ve pilavla doldurulmuş olan büyük çanaklar, meydandaki uygun yerlere yerleştirildikten sonra verilen işaretle birlikte yağmaya açılırdı. Çanak yağmaları, saray düğünleri vesilesi ile gerçekleştirilen şenliklerin doğrudan halka yönelik olan en önemli etkinliğiydi. Bu etkinlik neticesinde halkın, sultanın cömertliğine şahit olması sağlanırdı. Çanak yağması sadece şenliklerde değil, aynı zamanda yeniçerilere ulûfe adı verilen üçer aylık ma-aşlarının verilişinde de uygulanmıştır. Çanak yağmasının bu şekli ise Topkapı Sarayı'nın ikinci avlusundaki belirli bir bölüme aralıklarla yerleştirilmiş, içerisinde pilav ve zerde gibi geleneksel yemeklerin bulunduğu ça-nakların, yeniçeriler tarafından kapılması şeklinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Gerek şenliklerde gerekse saray mera-simlerinde sergilenmesi, çanak yağmasının hem devlet hem de saray geleneği olmasını sağlamıştır. Çanak yağ-maları unutulmaz sahneler teşkil etmelerinden ötürü yerli ve yabancı kaynaklarda ayrıntılı olarak tasvir edil-miştir. Geleneğin gönüllülük esasına dayanması, amacının yağma değil de ona yüklenen anlamlar olduğunu göstermektedir. Temelde cömertlik olgusuna dayanmakla birlikte halk, yeniçeri ve ulema gibi farklı sınıflara uygulanmış olması, bu geleneğin birbirinden farklı anlamlar içerebilmesini sağlamıştır. Bu nedenle Osmanlı Devleti'nde devlet ve saray gelenekleri içerisinde yer alan çanak yağması, çok yönlü anlamlar içeren bir sembol olma özelliği taşımıştır. Ne şekilde uygulanırsa uygulansın sultanın bir ihsanı olan çanak yağması, tebaanın yönetime karşı olan saygı ve bağlılık duygusunun artmasını sağlamıştır. Bu noktada Osmanlı Devleti'nde halk için gerçekleştirilen çanak yağmaları, bu geleneğin daha çok "ihsan" boyutuna odaklanırken yeniçeriler için gerçekleştirilen çanak yağmaları ise ihsandan ziyade "itaat" boyutuna odaklanmıştır.
ABSTRACT The fact that the main element of the Ottoman Empire, which reigned on three continents, consisted of Turks, enabled many of the state and palace traditions to be the old Turkish traditions. One of the old Turkish traditions that took place in the state, palace and social traditions of the Ottoman Empire in this way was the dish plunder which continues its existence in different ways in Anatolia today. The dish plunder is based on potlach which is seen in the Central Asian Turks. Potlach is the name given to the plundering of the food by the people in the big festivities of the khans or on the occasion of the feasts. Although the word plunder means forced seizure, volunteering is essential in the plunder which is one of the old Turkish traditions. The fact that the person who allows the plundering is volunteer rather than plunderers use force made this event a tradition in the ancient Turks. This tradition has been continued in the Ottomans due to both its stated characteristics and other meanings it imposes. In large-scale festivals such as weddings and circumcision feasts belonging to Ottoman dynasty members, it was also called dish plunder to the grabbing of the bowls filled with food by the people or janissaries. The dish plunder seen in the Ottoman palace festivals was carried out at the Horse Square, where
the Blue Mosque is located today; in these festivals, large bowls filled with meat and rice were placed in suitable places in the square and then opened to plunder with the sign given. Dish plunders were the most important event of the festivities held on the occasion of palace weddings, which were devoted directly to the people. As
a result of this activity, it was ensured that the people would witness the generosity of the sultan. The dish plunder was applied not only at the festivities, but also during the payment of the three-month salaries of the janissaries which was called ulûfe. This form of dish plunder was carried out in a certain section in the second courtyard of the Topkapı Palace, where the dishes containing traditional meals such as rice and zerde were grabbed by the janissaries. The fact that it was exhibited in festivals and palace ceremonies ensured that the dish plunder was both state and palace tradition. Dish plunders are described in detail in local and foreign sources as they create unforgettable scenes. The fact that tradition is based on voluntarism shows that its aim is not plunder but the meanings attributed to it. Although essentially it is based on generosity, the fact that it has been applied to different classes such as people, janissary and ulama allows this tradition to have different meanings. Therefore,
the dish plunder as one of the state and palace traditions of the Ottoman Empire was a symbol with multifaceted meanings. Regardless of how it was applied, the dish plunder which was a beneficence of the sultan, increased the respect and loyalty of the people to the administration. At this point, dish plunders for the people in the Ottoman Empire focused on the “beneficence” dimension of this tradition, whereas dish plunders for the janissaries focused on the “obedience” dimension rather than the beneficence.
Öz Karşılıklı diplomasi temelli uluslararası ilişkilerde en önemli husus, devletlerin hak ve ödev... more Öz Karşılıklı diplomasi temelli uluslararası ilişkilerde en önemli husus, devletlerin hak ve ödevlerindeki mütekabiliyettir. Diplomatik ilişkilerin ana unsuru elçiler ve elçilik faaliyetleri olduğundan mütekabiliyet hususunun en somut örnekleri de bu sahada gözlemlenmiştir. Bu husus elçilik faaliyetlerine denklik ve eşitlik olarak yansımış; elçilikle ilgili uygulamalar herhangi bir tarafın üstünlüğüne mahal vermeyecek şekilde düzenlenmeye çalışılmıştır. Bu şekilde mütekabiliyet hususuna ve devletlerin eşitliği ilkesine göre şekillenen uygulamalardan birisi de elçi mübadelesidir. Özellikle devletlerarası antlaşmaların tasdiki amacıyla gerçekleştirilen elçi mübadelesi, yüklendiği anlam itibariyle elçilerin karşılıklı ve çoğu zamanda eş zamanlı olarak görevlendirilmesiyle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Osmanlı tarihinde daha çok sınır komşusu devletlerle yapılan elçi mübadeleleri, iki ülke sınırında icra edilen ve çeşitli sembolik anlamlar yüklenen merasimlerle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elçi mübadelelerinin Osmanlı tarihindeki örnekleri, hem uluslararası ilişkilerin teşrifat boyutuna ışık tutmakta hem de Osmanlıların diğer devletlere karşı duruşuna dair önemli bilgiler içermektedir.
Abstract The most important issue in international relations based on mutual diplomacy are the reciprocity of the rights and duties of states. Since the main elements of diplomatic relations are ambassadors and embassy activities, the most concrete examples of reciprocity have been observed in this field. This was reflected in the embassy activities as equivalence and equality; embassy practices have been tried to be arranged in a way that does not allow superiority of any party. In this way, one of the practices shaped according to the issue of reciprocity and the principle of equality of states is the ambassador exchange. The exchange of ambassadors, especially for the purpose of ratification of interstate treaties, was realized by the mutual and often simultaneous assignment of ambassadors in the sense attributed to this term. In the Ottoman history, the exchange of ambassadors, mostly with neighboring states, were carried out with ceremonies performed at the borders of two countries and attributed various symbolic meanings. The examples of the ambassador exchanges in the Ottoman history shed light on the protocol dimension of the international relations and contain important information about the Ottomans' stance against the other states.
Uluslararası Geçmişten Günümüze Karabük ve Çevresinde Dini, İlmi ve Kültürel Hayat Sempozyumu Bildiri Kitabı, 2019
Muhasebe, hesap verilebilirliğin sağlanması açısından büyük önem taşımaktadır. Bu bağlamda Osmanl... more Muhasebe, hesap verilebilirliğin sağlanması açısından büyük önem taşımaktadır. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı vakıf muhasebe kayıtları, vakıfların işleyişinde şeffaflığın sağlanması açısından büyük rol oynamıştır. Osmanlı Devleti’nde vakıf muhasebesi üzerinde oldukça titiz bir biçimde durulmuş; vakıf muhasebelerinin kaydedilmesi sonucu vakıf muhasebe defterleri ortaya çıkmıştır. Vakıfların dinamik yönünü ortaya koyan en önemli kaynaklar olan muhasebe defterleri, bu açıdan vakıf araştırmalarında kullanılabilecek önemli bir kaynak türüdür. Osmanlı vakıf muhasebe defterleri 19. yüzyılın başlarına kadar merdiven muhasebe yöntemine uygun bir biçimde tutulmuştur. Aynı hususlar Safranbolu İzzet Mehmed Paşa Vakfı’na ait H. 1224/M. 1809-1810 tarihli muhasebe defterinde de görülmektedir. İlgili defter, Osmanlı vakıf muhasebe defterlerine güzel bir örnek teşkil etmekte ve bir muhasebe defterinden beklenebilecek hususlar hakkında tatmin edici bilgiler vermektedir. Accounting is of great importance in terms of ensuring accountability. In this regard, the accounting records of the Ottoman foundations played a major role in ensuring transparency in the functioning of the foundations. In the Ottoman Empire, foundation accounting was emphasized very meticulously; as a result of the recording of the foundation accounts, the foundation accounting books were created. Accounting books, which are the most important sources revealing the dynamic aspect of foundations, are an important type of resource that can be used in foundation researches. The Ottoman foundation accounting books were kept in accordance with the stairs accounting method until the beginning of the 19th century. The same points can be seen in the accounting book dated 1224 / AD. 1809-1810 of İzzet Mehmed Pasha Foundation of Safranbolu. The book mentioned is a good example of Ottoman foundation accounting books and provides satisfying information about the issues that can be expected from an accounting book.
ÖZ
Elçiler devletlerarası ilişkilerin vazgeçilmez unsurlarından olup elçilik faaliyetleri yüzyıll... more ÖZ Elçiler devletlerarası ilişkilerin vazgeçilmez unsurlarından olup elçilik faaliyetleri yüzyıllardan beri öneminden bir şey kaybetmemiştir. Elçilik görevinin başarıya ulaşması ise bu görev öncesinde yapılmış olan iyi bir planlama ile doğru orantılıdır. Bu nedenle elçilik hizmetinin lojistik safhasının oldukça titiz bir şekilde planlanmış olması gerekmektedir. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı elçileri de görevlerine başlamadan önce oldukça ayrıntılı hazırlıklar yaparlar ve görevleri süresince ihtiyaç duyacakları malzemeler, kendilerine devlet eliyle temin edilirdi. Temin edilen bu malzemeler elçilere, elçilik görevinin sonunda geri alınmak koşuluyla verilirdi. H. 1149 / M. 1736 tarihinde İran’a elçi olarak gönderilen Mustafa Paşa’nın elçilik levazımatı da aynı şekilde Hazine-i Âmire’den temin edilmişti. Elçiye verilen malzemeler oldukça titiz bir şekilde tespit edilmiş ve hazırlıklar ona göre yapılmıştı. Bunlar elçilik heyetinin gerek yolculuk esnasında gerekse gidilen yerde ihtiyaç duyacağı türden malzemelerdi. Elçiye verilen bu levazımat, benzer uygulamalarda olduğu gibi elçilik görevinin sonunda geri alınmak üzere emaneten verilmişti. Mustafa Paşa’nın elçilik levazımatı elçilik hizmetlerinin oldukça geniş kapsamlı bir hazırlık safhası gerektirdiğini gözler önüne sermektedir. Elçiye verilen malzemelerin çeşitliliği, tamamlanması aylar süren elçilik hizmetlerinin amacına ulaşabilmesi için en ince ayrıntının bile oldukça önemli olduğunu göstermektedir. Osmanlı Elçisi Vezir Mustafa Paşa için temin edilen bu malzemeler, elçilik görevinin diplomasi sahası dışındaki yüzü hakkında ayrıntılı bilgiler içermektedir.
ABSTRACT Ambassadors are indispensable elements of interstate relations and the activities of embassies haven’t lost their importance for centuries. The success of the embassy mission is directly proportional to the good planning done before this mission. For this reason, the logistics phase of the embassy service must be planned very carefully. In this context, the Ottoman ambassadors made very detailed preparations before they started their duties and the materials they would need during the exercise of their duties was provided by the state. These materials were provided to the ambassadors under the condition that they were taken back at the end of the mission. The supplies for the embassy of Vizier Mustafa Pasha, who was sent as ambassador to Iran on H. 1149 / AD. 1736, were also obtained from the Treasury in this way. The materials given to the ambassador were determined very meticulously and preparations were made accordingly. These were the materials that the embassy committee would need both during the journey and at the destination. The materials given to the ambassador, as in similar practices, were given in consignment and to be taken back at the end of the mission. The supplies for the embassy of Mustafa Pasha show that the embassy services require a very extensive preparation phase. The diversity of the materials given to the Ottoman ambassador show that even the finest detail is very important for achieving the purpose of the embassy services which take months to complete. It is also possible to obtain informations about the face of the embassy mission outside the field of diplomacy.
STRUCTURED ABSTRACT Until the adoption of European-style diplomacy, the Ottoman Empire did not have permanent ambassadors in foreign countries and carried out its diplomatic activities with temporary ambassadors. The presence of ambassadors in the Ottoman territories by other states was perceived as an indicator of the greatness of the Ottoman Empire. The absence of permanent ambassadors to foreign states stems from this perception of superiority. This understanding has created an embassy tradition unique to the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman embassy tradition was based on the Ottoman state traditions and was shaped by the cultures and diplomacy in the region on which the Ottoman Empire ruled. The duty of the ambassadorship in the Ottoman Empire did not belong to any class or group as in the European states. Therefore, there was no class privilege in the election of the Ottoman ambassador and the most appropriate person was endeavored to be appointed for the embassy. Ottoman ambassadors could have different occupations, titles and social status depending on the necessity of the work to be done. This was an indication that merit was given importance in ambassador selection. The reasons of the Ottoman Empire sending ambassadors in the historical process are as follows: 1- To declare the Ottoman Sultan's ascent to the throne 2- To congratulate a foreign ruler on ascent to the throne 3- To call for the surrender of a region before the war 4- To discuss the terms of the treaty 5- To communicate the approved texts of the treaties to the other party 6- To discuss boundary issues 7- To establish good relations between the parties 8- To confirm good relations 9- To strengthen the relations between the parties 10- To check the ground of alliance between states 11- To declare the conquest of a region 12- To reciprocate to the states which sent ambassadors 13- To respond to letters and gifts from foreign states 14- To take the letter of the Grand Vizier 15- To invite to the circumcision feasts of the princes 16- To apologize for the mistreatment of the ambassadors 17- To request claims such as war compensation etc. and to decide terms of payment 18- To be aware of international developments 19- To fulfill the request of another state to send ambassadors 20- To observe scientific and technological developments 21- After the acceptance of the superiority of the Western world, to determine the reasons of this superiority and to apply them to the Ottoman country The messages intended to be given to foreign states were endeavored to be represented in the figures of the Ottoman ambassadors and embassy delegations. For this reason, care was taken to ensure that the ambassadors had an entourage suited to their status. No material sacrifice was inevitable for the creation and equipping of this entourage. In order to meet these needs, there was also a treasury office in the Ottoman Palace, which was named as the Ambassador Treasury. Some of the valuables here were given to the ambassadors on the condition that they would be taken back when they returned in order to increase the magnificence of the embassy committee. In the Ottoman Empire, the needs of the ambassadors were provided in two ways. Their needs during their journeys were usually met by the people on the route. These costs incurred by the public were counted as a substitute for some taxes they had to pay. Materials such as tents for ambassadors were obtained from Mehterhane-i Amire. Their needs, such as torch fee etc. during the journey, were provided in cash from the chief accountant. The ambassadors had to hand over the items they had received from Mehterhane-i Amire, as well as the materials they had received from the Ambassador Treasury. Nadir Shah, who came to the throne of Iran in 1736, sent Abdulbaki Khan to Istanbul as an envoy in order to announce his ascent to the throne. In the same year, the Ottoman Empire sent Vizier Mustafa Pasha to Nadir Shah as an ambassador. The Ottoman ambassador was accompanied by military and civilian officers, and it was around 600 people. For this reason, the materials to be provided from the Hazine-i Âmire for the embassy service were determined first. First, a total of 740 cargo animals, including 120 horses, 350 cargo horses, 120 camels and 150 mules, were allocated during the journey. Other materials categorized below were also provided. 1. Mounts and pack animals 2. Materials for kitchen services 3. Weapons and military supplies 4. Materials for storage and preservation 5. Strength and wealth indicator materials 6. Materials for water need 7. Materials for accommodation needs 8. Materials required for ambassador procession The materials given to the ambassadors in the Ottoman Empire provide information about the face of the embassy mission outside the diplomatic field. Likewise, the materials that were identified and provided for the embassy of Mustafa Pasha, who was sent to Iran in H. 1149/ AD. 1736, shed light on the aspects of Ottoman embassy services which were unvalued. When these materials are taken into consideration, it is possible to obtain detailed information about the logistics phase of the embassy service. The most important point to be mentioned here is that even the finest detail is very important for the embassy service to reach its purpose. While determining the necessary materials for the ambassador, it was not forgotten that even the slightest mistake would put the embassy committee in trouble and acted very meticulously. This meticulousness also shows that the Ottoman embassy tradition is a well-established and rooted tradition. These materials, given to Ambassador Mustafa Pasha and pointing to the logistic phase of the embassy service, show that the preparation process required for the ambassadors is quite burdensome but at the same time one of the most important issues in the success of the embassy mission.
Devletlerarası ilişkilerde hükümdar, hanedan mensubu, elçi gibi resmi sıfatlı yabancı misafirleri... more Devletlerarası ilişkilerde hükümdar, hanedan mensubu, elçi gibi resmi sıfatlı yabancı misafirlerin ağırlanması hususuna mihmandarlar nezaret ederdi. Geçmişi oldukça eski dönemlere giden mihmandarlık geleneği, Osmanlı Devleti tarafından da Türk-İslam gelenekleri çerçevesinde uygulanmıştır. Osmanlı mihmandarları, ülkeye gelen yabancı misafirlerin rahatını temin etmekle yükümlüydüler. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı diplomasi anlayışı gereği, elçi gibi resmi sıfatlı yabancı misafirlerin devlet tarafından karşılanan zaruri harcamalarına da mihmandarlar nezaret ederdi. Mihmandarlar, hesap verilebilirlik adına, yaptıkları bu harcamaları en ince ayrıntısına kadar kayıt altına alırlardı. Bu şekilde tutulan kayıtlardan birisi de İran elçisi Abdullah Bey’in mihmandarlığını yapmış olan Ali Ağa tarafından tutulan masraf defteridir. H. 25 Şaban 1189 / M. 21 Ekim 1775 tarihli bu defter, Osmanlı mihmandar geleneği hakkında önemli bilgiler içermektedir.
In interstate relations, the reception of official foreign guests such as sovereigns, dynasties, envoys was overseen by mihmandars. The mihmandar tradition, history of which goes back to ancient times, was applied by the Ottoman Empire within the framework of Turkish-Islamic traditions. The Ottoman mihmandars were obliged to ensure the comfort of foreign guests arriving in the country. In this context, the obligatory expenses of official guests such as envoys covered by Empire were supervised by the mihmandars. Mihmandars, for accountability, would record their expenses to the finest detail. One of the records kept in this way is the book of expenses which was kept by Ali Ağa, who was mihmandar of the Iranian ambassador Abdullah Bey. This book, dated H. 25 Şaban 1189 / AD. 25 October 1775, contains important information about the Ottoman mihmandar tradition.
Diplomatik misafirlere bulundukları ülkede rehberlik edecek kişilerin görevlendirilmesi, devletle... more Diplomatik misafirlere bulundukları ülkede rehberlik edecek kişilerin görevlendirilmesi, devletlerarası ilişkilerde uygulanagelen oldukça eski bir gelenektir. Hem batı hem de doğu diplomasisinde görülen bu gelenek, Osmanlı Devleti’nde de Osmanlı devlet gelenekleri ve diplomasi anlayışı çerçevesinde uygulanmıştır. Bu nedenle yabancı devletlerden gelen resmi sıfatlı yabancı misafirlerle ilgilenmesi için mihmandar adı verilen görevliler tayin edilmiştir. Mihmandarların yabancı misafirler karşısında Devlet-i Âliyye’nin onurunu temsil ettikleri düşünüldüğünden, mihmandar seçiminde oldukça titiz davranılmıştır. Genel olarak saray görevlilerinden seçilen mihmandarlar, Osmanlı topraklarına gelen diplomatik misafirlerin ağırlanması ve ülke içinde bulundukları sürece ihtiyaçları ile ilgilenip, bu hususta kurumlar arası koordinasyonun sağlanması hizmetini görmüşlerdir. Bu bağlamda mihmandarlık uygulaması, Osmanlı devlet ve diplomasi geleneği açısından önemli kesitler içermekte olup Osmanlı Devleti’ni çağdaşı diğer devletlerden ayırt edici bir özellik taşımaktadır.
The appointment of persons to guide diplomatic guests in which country they are present at is a very old tradition in interstate relations. This tradition, seen in both western and eastern diplomacy, was applied in the Ottoman State within the framework of Ottoman state traditions and diplomacy. For this reason, officials named mihmandar have been appointed in order to deal with official guests from foreign countries. Since it is thought that the mihmandars represent the dignity of Ottoman State in the face of foreign guests, selection of mihmandars has been meticulous. Generally selected from the palace officials, mihmandars were interested in hosting the diplomatic guests coming to the Ottoman lands and their needs as long as they were in the country and providing the coordination between the institutions in this regard. In this context, this practice contains important sections in terms of Ottoman state and diplomacy tradition and has a distinctive feature of the Ottoman State from other contemporary states.
Yabancı devletler n "Kapı" olarak anılan Osmanlı Sarayı'na elç ler göndermes se Devlet-Âl yye'n n... more Yabancı devletler n "Kapı" olarak anılan Osmanlı Sarayı'na elç ler göndermes se Devlet-Âl yye'n n azamet n n b r gösterges olarak algılanmış ve bu anlayış net ces nde elç göndermeler ne z n ver lerek Osmanlı başkent n n dost veya düşman bütün devletlerden gelecek olan elç lere açık olduğu vurgusu yapılmıştır. Yabancı elç ler n Kapı'ya gel şler n n devlet n büyüklüğünün b r gösterges olarak algılanması, bu büyüklüğün, elç ler n şahsında elç gönderen devletlere göster lmes sonucunu doğurmuştur. Elç y gönderen devlete ver lmek stenen mesajlarla çoğu kere elç ler n yüzleşmek zorunda kalması, elç lere olan davranış b ç mler ne, onların ağırlanmalarına ve huzura kabuller ne farklı mot fler katmıştır. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı Devlet 'nde elç lere yapılan muamelelerde, üç kel me le özetleneb lecek üç ana temaya vurgu yapıldığı görülmekted r: KUDRET, HEYBET VE ADALET… LÇİ göndermek ve elç kabul etmek, devletler ç n tar h boyunca kullanılan bağımsızlık E semboller nden olmuştur. Bu nedenle devletler elç göndermeye ve elç kabuller ne oldukça fazla önem verm şlerd r. Devletler n b rb rler ne vermek sted kler mesajlar ç n gönder len elç ler n yanı sıra elç kabuller de oldukça müsa t b r zem n teşk l etm ş ve ver lmek stenen bu mesajlar, elç lerde bırakılacak zlen mlerle şek llend r lmeye çalışılmıştır. Bu anlamda elç lere karşı serg lenen davranışlar b r devletten d ğer ne farklılık göstereb lm ş, bu nedenle elç ler n ağırlanması, onlara karşı olan davranış b ç mler ve yapılan muameleler, devletler b rb rler nden ayırt ed c özell kler taşımıştır.
2nd INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON STUDIES IN TURKOLOGY (ICOSTURK’2017) PROCEEDINGS BOOK, 2017
Osmanlı Devleti’nin kurulmuş olduğu alan, devlet teşkilatı açısından Bizans ve Roma mirasından ya... more Osmanlı Devleti’nin kurulmuş olduğu alan, devlet teşkilatı açısından Bizans ve Roma mirasından yararlanmasını sağlamıştır. Osmanlı devlet teşkilatındaki bu durumu Osmanlı elçi kabullerinde de görmek mümkündür. Karşılıklı diplomasi öncesi Osmanlı elçi kabulleri, Osmanlı Devleti’ne özgü olarak gelişmiştir. Yabancı elçilere Türk ve İslam geleneklerine göre muamelede bulunulmasına karşın, yine de Osmanlı elçi kabullerindeki bazı uygulamaların Türk ve İslam geleneklerinde bulunmadığı görülmektedir. Bu noktada farklılığın nedenini ise belli ölçülerde Roma ve Bizans mirası meydana getirmiştir. Bu çerçevede Osmanlı elçi kabullerinin Bizans ve Roma elçi kabulleriyle birebir aynı olduğunu söylemek mümkün olmasa da, tamamen farklı olduklarını söylemek de doğru değildir. Elçi kabullerine Roma, Bizans ve Osmanlı bağlamında bakıldığında, ortak temanın güç, kudret ve zenginlik olduğu görülmektedir. Roma’da daha basit düzeyde görülen elçi kabulleri, Bizans’ta kurumsallaşmaya başlamış, Osmanlılarda ise güç, kudret ve zenginlik vurgusunun zirve noktasına ulaşmıştır. Bu çalışmada hemen hemen aynı coğrafyalarda hüküm sürmüş olan bu üç devletin elçi kabullerindeki benzerliklere değinilecektir.
There are specific practices that distinguish the great states established throughout history from other states. This is also true for the Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman Empires, which ruled almost exclusively in almost the same geographies. Envoy acceptance is also one of the implied practices for these three empires, and it has become one of the most important arguements for empires to show their greatness to other states. The area that the Ottoman State was founded provided for the benefit from Byzantine and Roman heritage in terms of state organization. Therefore, the Roman and Byzantine state traditions became one of the three main sources that formed the Ottoman state organization with the ancient Turkish state tradition and Islamic state tradition. It is possible to see this situation in the Ottoman state
organization, also in the envoy acceptance of Ottoman. Until the mutual diplomacy, the envoy acceptance seen in the Ottoman Empire developed in the Ottoman Empire specifically. The Ottomans treated to foreign envoys in respect to the Turkish and Islamic customs. However, some practices in the envoy acceptance of Ottoman Empire were not found in the Turkish and Islamic traditions. At this point the practices differentiate the envoy acceptance in the Ottoman Empire from the Turkish and
Islamic traditions to some extent are the similar practices to the envoy acceptances of Roman and Byzantine. In this sense, even it is not true to say that envoy acceptance of Ottoman is completely same with the envoy acceptances of Roman and Byzantine, it is not also true to say that they are completely different from each other. In this paper, it is aimed to identify the similarities and differences in the envoy acceptances of three empires that ruled in almost the same geographies.
Uploads
Studies by Mustafa CAN
Özet
Mondros Ateşkes Antlaşması’ndan Anadolu topraklarındaki ilk işgaller Hatay bölgesinde yaşandı. İlk olarak İskenderun 9 Kasım 1918’de İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngilizlerin ardından bölgeye asker çıkaran Fransızlar; 27 Kasım 1918’de İskenderun, Belen, Antakya ve Harim kazalarını içine alan İskenderun Sancağı’nı kurarak başına Fransız bir askerî vali tayin ettiler. Fransızlarla ortak hareket eden Ermenilerin kindar ve acımasız davranışları, Hatay yöresinde silahlı direnişin erken başlamasına neden oldu. Hatay direnişi, yoğunlukla bölgenin kuzeyindeki Gâvur Dağları ile daha güneyde kalan Amik Ovası-Kürt Dağı ve Antakya Kuseyr yörelerinde cereyan etti. Hatay’ın kuzeyinde kalan İskenderun-Dörtyol kesimlerinde Kara Hasan, Hakkı Bey gibi Kuvâ-yı Milliyeciler ön plana çıkarken güneyde ise Tayfur Mürsel, Asım Bey, Ahmet Türkmen gibi
isimler önemli yer tuttu. Hatay direnişi, Mustafa Kemal Paşa öncülüğündeki Millî Mücadele hareketi ile kurulan irtibat neticesinde daha organize hâle geldi ve Hatay, Millî Mücadele’nin Güney Cephesi’ne dâhil oldu. Bölgede çarpışmalar devam ederken Türkiye ile Fransa arasında, 20 Ekim 1921 tarihinde Ankara İtilafnamesi imzalandı. Böylece iki devlet arasındaki savaş hali sona erdi ve Türkiye-Suriye sınırı çizildi. Bu antlaşma ile Dörtyol (Payas dâhil) ve Hassa Türkiye sınırları içinde kalırken İskenderun bölgesi için özel bir idare şekli kurulması ve buradaki Türklere birtakım ayrıcalıklar verilmesi kararlaştırıldı. Böylece Misak-ı Milli sınırlarına dâhil olan Antakya-İskenderun yöresinin Suriye’de kalması, Güney cephesindeki çarpışmaları sonlandırabilmek adına istemeyerek de olsa kabul edildi. Bu durum, uygun zaman ve şartların oluşması beklendiğinden Lozan Antlaşması’nda da aynen kabul edildi. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Hatay coğrafyasında yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketleri ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler :Hatay, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Absract
After the Armistice of Mudros, the first occupations in Anatolian lands took place in the Hatay region. Firstly, Iskenderun (Alexandretta) was occupied by the British on 9 November 1918. On 27 November 1918, the French, who landed troops in the region after the British, established the Sanjak of Alexandretta, which included the towns of Iskenderun, Belen, Antakya, and Harim, and appointed a French military governor. The vindictive and ruthless behaviour of the Armenians, who acted in partnership with the French, led to the early start of armed resistance in the Hatay region. The resistance in Hatay took place mainly in the Gâvur Mountains in the north of the region and in the Amik Valley-Kurd Mountain and Antakya- Al-Qusayr regions in the south. While in the İskenderun-Dörtyol region in the north of Hatay, figures from the Kuvâ-yı Milliye such as Kara Hasan and Bey Hakkı came to the fore, in the south, names such as Tayfur Mürsel, Asım Bey and Ahmet Türkmen played an important role. The Hatay resistance became more organised as a result of the contact established with the National Struggle movement led by Mustafa Kemal Pasha, and Hatay was included in the Southern Front of the National Struggle. While the clashes continued in the region, the Treaty of Ankara (the Franklin-Bouillon Agreement) was signed between Türkiye and France on 20 October 1921. Thus, the state of war between the two States ended and the Türkiye-Syria border was drawn. With this treaty, while Dörtyol (including Payas) and Hassa remained within the borders of Türkiye, it was decided to establish a special form of administration for the Iskenderun region and to grant some privileges to the Turks here. Thus, it was accepted, albeit reluctantly, that the Antakya-Iskenderun region, which was included in the borders of Mîsâk-ı Millî (the National Pact), would remain in Syria in order to end the fighting on the Southern Front. This situation was also accepted in the Treaty of Lausanne, as it was expected that the appropriate time and conditions would emerge. In this study, the occupation and resistance movements in the Hatay region after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Hatay, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Özet
Millî Mücadele yıllarında hem ekonomik hem de stratejik bir öneme sahip olan Antep, Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra 17 Aralık 1918’de İngiliz işgaline uğradı. İngilizler daha önce Suriye’ye göç ettirilmiş olan Ermenileri de Antep’e getirdiler. Yaklaşık olarak on ay süren İngiliz işgalinde, bazı kötü durumlar görülmekle birlikte silahlı bir çatışma yaşanmadı. Antep’teki İngiliz işgali, 25 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Fransızlar da Antep’in işgalinde Ermenilerden faydalandılar. Bu nedenle şehirdeki Ermeni taşkınlıkları artmaya başladı. 12 Ocak 1920’de, Fransızlar ve Ermenilerin Araptar Köyü’nde neden olduğu olaylar nedeniyle Antep direnişi, ilk olarak şehir dışında başladı. Antep-Maraş yolunda yaşanan bu çarpışmalarda Karayılan ve Boyno oğlu Memik Ağa çeteleri büyük yararlılıklar gösterdi. Şahin Bey de 1920 yılının şubat ve mart aylarında Kilis-Antep yolu üzerinde gerçekleştirdiği faaliyetlerle Fransızları oldukça zor durumda bıraktı. Şahin Bey’in şehadetinden sonra Antep direnişi, 1 Nisan 1920’den itibaren şehir içerisine taşındı. Bu süreçte şehir içi direniş, Kılıç Ali ve Özdemir Bey gibi
kumandanlarca organize edildi. Maraş ve Urfa’da yenilen Fransızlar, Antep’i haftalarca kuşatma altına aldılar. Yaklaşık on bir ay kendi imkânları ile direnen şehir, açlığın son haddine varmasından ötürü 9 Şubat 1921’de düştü. 20 Ekim 1921 Ankara Antlaşması ile Türkiye-Suriye sınırı çizilince Fransız askerleri 25 Aralık’ta Antep’i terk ettiler. Böylece Antep’te Aralık 1918’de İngilizlerle başlayıp sonrasında Fransızlarla devam eden işgal
dönemi, 25 Aralık 1921 tarihinde sona ermiş oldu. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Antep’te yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketi ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Antep, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Absract
Antep, which had both economic and strategic importance during the War of Independence, was occupied by the British on 17 December 1918 after the Armistice of Mudros. The British also brought the Armenians, who had previously been displaced to Syria, to Antep. During the British occupation that lasted for approximately ten months, there were no armed conflicts despite some unfortunate situations. The British occupation of Antep was replaced by the French occupation on 25 October 1919. The French also took advantage of the Armenians during the occupation of Antep. Therefore, Armenian riots in the city started to increase. On 12 January 1920, due to the incidents caused by the French and Armenians in Araptar Village, the Antep resistance first started outside the city. In these clashes on the Antep-Maras road, the Karayılan and Memik Agha son of Boyno gangs proved to be very useful. Şahin Bey also left the French in a very difficult situation with his activities on the Kilis-Antep road in February and March 1920. After the martyrdom of Şahin Bey, the resistance in Antep moved inside the city as of 1 April 1920. In this period, the resistance in the city was organised by commanders such as Kılıç Ali and Özdemir Bey. The French, who were defeated in Maraş and Urfa, besieged Antep for weeks. The city, which resisted with its own means for about eleven months, fell on 9 February 1921 due to starvation. On 20 October 1921, when the Türkiye-Syria border was drawn with the Ankara Treaty, French soldiers left Antep on 25 December. Thus, the occupation period in Antep, which started with the British in December 1918 and continued with the French, ended on 25 December 1921. In this study, the occupation and resistance movement in Antep after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Antep, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Özet
Kilis, Millî Mücadele yıllarında Antep Mutasarrıflığına bağlı bir kaza konumundaydı. Mondros Mütarekesi’nin hemen ardından, İtilâf devletleri daha önce gizli anlaşmalarla paylaştıkları alanlara doğru hızla yayılmaya başladılar. Bu bağlamda ateşkesin hemen akabinde Aralık 1918’de, Kilis İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngiliz işgali döneminde, şehirde silahlı bir direniş görülmedi. Ancak daha sonra oluşturulacak olan Kuvâ-yı Milliye hareketinin tohumları bu süreçte atıldı. Şehirdeki İngiliz işgali, 29 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Fransızlar Kilis’i, Çukurova ve çevresindeki işgal bölgeleri için harekât üssü olarak kullandılar. Suriye’deki Ermenileri bölgeye göç ettirerek Ermeni çetelerinin Türk halkına saldırılarına göz yumdular. Böylelikle Türkler başka yerlere göçe zorlanarak Ermenilerin çoğunluğu teşkil etmesi amaçlandı. Türk halkının güvenlik
ve varlığı tehlikeye düşünce yerel teşkilatlanmaya gidilerek Fransız işgaline karşı direnişe geçildi. Bölgede Kuvâ-yı Milliye’nin örgütlenmesinde Şahin Bey, Sakıp Bey, İslam Bey, Müslüman Bey ve Polat Bey gibi kişilerin önemli bir rolü oldu. Kilis şehri, işgal altında olduğundan silahlı mücadele Kilis dışındaki kırsal alanlarda yaşandı. Bölgede çarpışmalar devam ederken 20 Ekim 1921’de Ankara Hükümeti ile Fransa arasında imzalanan Ankara Antlaşması ile Türkiye-Suriye sınırı belirlendi. Böylece Fransız
kuvvetleri, 7 Aralık 1921’de Kilis’i boşalttılar. Fransızların şehirden ayrılması ile Kilis’te Aralık 1918’den beri devam eden üç yıllık işgal dönemi sona erdi. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Kilis’te yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketi ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Kilis, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Abstract
During the years of the War of Independence, Kilis was a subprovince under the Mutasarrifate of Antep. Right after the Armistice of Mudros, the Entente Powers began to expand rapidly towards the areas they had previously shared through secret agreements. In this context, immediately after the armistice, in December 1918, Kilis was occupied by the British. During the British occupation, there was no armed resistance in the city. However, the seeds of the Kuvâ-yı Milliye movement to be formed later were sown in this period. The British occupation of the city was replaced by the French occupation on 29 October 1919. The French used Kilis as a base of operations for the occupation zones in and around Çukurova (the Cilician Plain). They migrated Armenians from Syria to the region and turned a blind eye to the attacks of Armenian gangs on the Turkish people. In this way, the aim was to force the Turks to migrate elsewhere so that
the Armenians would constitute the majority. When the security and existence of the Turkish people were endangered, the local organisation was established and resistance was started against the French occupation. People such as Şahin Bey, Sakıp Bey, İslam Bey, Müslüman Bey, and Polat Bey played important roles in the organisation of the Kuvâ-yı Milliye in the region. Since Kilis was under occupation, the armed struggle took place in rural areas outside Kilis. While the clashes continued in the region, Türkiye-Syria border was determined with the Ankara Treaty signed between the Ankara Government and France on 20 October 1921. Thus, the French forces evacuated Kilis on 7 December 1921. With the departure of the French from the city, the three-year occupation period in Kilis since December 1918 ended. In this study, the occupation and resistance movement in Kilis after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Kilis, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Özet
30 Ekim 1918 Mondros Ateşkes Antlaşması’ndan sonra İtilaf devletleri, Osmanlı topraklarında geniş çaplı işgallere başladılar. Urfa da ilk olarak 24 Mart 1919’da İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngilizler, asker kılığındaki Ermenileri beraberlerinde getirdiler; bölgedeki aşiretleri de kendi taraflarına çekmeye çalıştılar. 15 Eylül 1919’da imzalanan Suriye İtilafnamesi ile Urfa’daki İngiliz işgali, 30 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Şehirdeki Fransız işgali İngiliz işgaline göre daha şiddetli oldu. Fransızlar; Urfa’ya girdikleri ilk günden itibaren keyfi bir tutumla mahalli hükümetin
işlerine müdahale ettiler. Çeşitli yerlerden getirilen Ermeni gönüllüler, Ermeni mahallesine yerleştirildi ve Ermeni taşkınlıklarına göz yumuldu. Fransızlar da İngilizlerin yaptığı gibi siyasi faaliyetlerde bulunarak bölgedeki aşiretleri elde etmeye çalıştılar. İstanbul Hükümeti’nin işgaller karşısında sessiz kalması, Urfa’da yerel teşkilatlanmanın başlamasına neden oldu. Teşkilatlanmanın akabinde ise 8-9 Şubat 1920 gecesi, Yüzbaşı Ali Saib Bey öncülüğünde Fransız işgaline karşı silahlı direniş başladı. Yaşanan şiddetli çarpışmalar neticesinde şehirden ayrılmayı kabul eden
Fransızlar, 11 Nisan 1920 tarihinde Urfa’yı boşalttılar. Şehirden ayrılıp Şebeke Mevkii’ne vardıklarında ise aşiret kuvvetleriyle aralarında büyük bir çatışma yaşandı. Bu çatışma neticesinde Fransızlar, Urfa işgalini büyük bir kayıpla sonlandırdılar. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Urfa’da yaşanan işgallerin yanı sıra şehrin direniş ve kurtuluş süreci ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Urfa, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Abstract
After the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918, the Entente Powers started largescale occupations in the Ottoman lands. In this context, Urfa was first occupied by the British on 24 March 1919. The British brought Armenians disguised as soldiers with them and tried to attract the local tribes in the region to their side. With the Syrian Agreement of 15 September 1919, the British occupation of Urfa was replaced by the French occupation on 30 October 1919. The French occupation of the city was more violent than the British occupation. From the first day they entered Urfa, the French arbitrarily interfered in the affairs of the local government. Armenian volunteers brought from various places were placed in the Armenian neighborhood and Armenian excesses
were tolerated. The silence of the Istanbul Government against the occupations led to the beginning of local organization in Urfa. Following the organization, armed resistance against the French occupation started on the night of 8-9 February 1920 under the leadership of Yüzbaşı Ali Saib Bey. The French, who agreed to leave the city as a result of the fierce battles, evacuated Urfa on 11 April 1920. When they left the city and arrived at Şebeke district, a major clash took place between them and the tribal forces. As a result of this clash, the French ended their occupation of Urfa with a great loss. In this study, the occupations in Urfa after the Armistice of Mudros as well as the resistance and liberation process of the city will be discussed.
Keywords: Urfa, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
İlk olarak XIV. yüzyılda Avrupa’nın Akdeniz limanlarında uygulanmaya başlanan karantina, zamanla kurumsallaşarak salgın hastalıklardan korunma hususunda oldukça önemli bir rol üstlenmiştir. Batılı devletler, ülkelerine dışarıdan gelen herkese ayrım gözetmeksizin karantina uygulamışlardır. Dolayısıyla bu devletlere gönderilen Osmanlı elçileri de karantina uygulamasına tabi tutulmuştur. Elçiler kaleme aldıkları sefaretnamelerde bu ülkelerde karşılaştıkları karantina uygulamaları, karantina süreçleri ve karantina mekânları hakkında önemli bilgiler vermişlerdir. Osmanlı elçilerinin karantinaya verdikleri tepkiler, karantina süresi, karantina mekânı ve karantinayı uygulamakla görevli olan yetkililerin tavırlarına göre değişiklik göstermiştir. Elçiler her ne kadar birbirlerinden farklı tavırlar sergilemiş olsalar da kendi ülkelerinden aşina olmadıkları bu uygulamadan genel anlamda rahatsız oldukları gözlemlenmektedir. Elçilerin karantina karşısındaki tutumları insani gerekçelerden kaynaklanmakla birlikte hem Osmanlı zihniyetinden hem de Osmanlı devlet anlayışından izler taşımaktadır. Bu araştırmada Osmanlı Devleti’nde karantina uygulamaları başlamadan önce Avrupa’ya gönderilen elçilerin karşılaştıkları karantina tedbirleri hakkında bilgi verilerek Osmanlı elçilerinin karantinaya karşı tutumları değerlendirilmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Osmanlı Devleti, Elçi, Karantina, Sefaretname.
Abstract:
Quarantine, which was firstly started to be implemented in the Mediterranean ports of Europe in the XIVst century, has become institutionalized over time and has played a very important role in protection from epidemics. Western States have applied quarantine indiscriminately to everyone who came to their countries from outside. Therefore, the Ottoman ambassadors sent to these states were also subjected to quarantine. The ambassadors gave important informations in sefaretnames (the books of embassy) which they wrote about the quarantine practices, the quarantine processes and quarantine places. The responses of the Ottoman ambassadors to the quarantine varied according to the quarantine period, the quarantine space and the attitudes of the authorities responsible for enforcing the quarantine. Although the ambassadors displayed different attitudes from each other, it is observed that they are generally uncomfortable with this practice, which they are not familiar with from their own countries. Although the attitudes of the ambassadors against quarantine stem from humanitarian reasons, they bear traces of both the Ottoman mentality and the Ottoman understanding of State. In this study, the attitudes of the Ottoman ambassadors against quarantine were evaluated by giving information about the quarantine measures encountered by the ambassadors sent to Europe before the quarantine practices started in the Ottoman Empire.
Keywords: Ottoman State, Ambassador, Quarantine, Sefaretname.
In the Islamic tradition, the twelfth day of the month of Hijri Rabi'al-Awwal is accepted as the birthday of Prophet Muhammad and is referred to as Mawlid al-Sharif. As an indicator of respect and love for Prophet Muhammad, a special importance has been given to Mawlid al-Sharif by Muslims and this sensitivity has been maintained for centuries. Mawlid al-Sharif was celebrated in the historical process with ceremonies and various activities carried out both at the social and state level in Islamic states. In this context, ceremonies were held during the mawlid days with the participation of the rulers, statesmen, ulama and the public. These days, which were celebrated in the festive mood, mawlids which were written specifically for the birth of Prophet Muhammad, were read, gifts were accepted and given, and various charitable works were carried out considering the poor and needy. Mawlid al-Sharif tradition has gained an important place in the Ottoman Empire as in previous Islamic states. The tradition of Mawlid al-Sharif, which was inherited from the previous Islamic states to the Ottomans, was shaped in parallel with society and state traditions, and had similar and different aspects to the practices in other Islamic states. In this study, Mawlid al-Sharif in Ottoman culture was tried to be examined primarily on the basis of archive sources as a palace and social tradition and the inferences obtained in this regard were evaluated.
اصبح اليوم الثاني عشر من شهر ربيع الاول يوم مهم في تاريخ الاسلام ويوم مخلد بولادة النبي محمد ، والذي يسمى بمولد النبوي الشريف والذي يدل على حب واحترام النبي حيث اعطى المسلمون اهمية خاصة منذ عدة عقود من الزمن لهذة المناسبة . فعلى مر التاريخ الشعوب والدول الاسلامية كانت تقام شعائر الاحتفال بالمولد النبوي الشريف بشكل مستمروعبر التاريخ وزادت اهميتها لدى الدولة العثمانية احدى التقاليد المهمة حيث كانت مختلف الاحتفالات تشمل انشطة مختلفة فعلى سبيل المثال كانت تعطى الهدايا وتقام الاعمال الاخيرية للفقراءوالمحتاجين ويتم قراءة الاذكار . وكانت الدولة العثمانية قد اعطت اهمية كبيرة بدليل ان جميع اركان الدولة و رجالها كانو يشاركون ويرعون مناسبة المولد النبوي الشريف باهمية كبيرة لما لها من خصوصية في تاريخ المسلمين . في هذا البحث تطرقنا الى نظرة وثقافة العثمانيين لمناسبة المولد النبوي الشريف سواء على كان على مستوى الدولة العثمانية اوالمجتمع العثماني معتمدين على وثائق ومصادر الارشيف العثماني والتي تم تحليلها والتوصل الى استنتاجات.
ABSTRACT The fact that the main element of the Ottoman Empire, which reigned on three continents, consisted of Turks, enabled many of the state and palace traditions to be the old Turkish traditions. One of the old Turkish traditions that took place in the state, palace and social traditions of the Ottoman Empire in this way was the dish plunder which continues its existence in different ways in Anatolia today. The dish plunder is based on potlach which is seen in the Central Asian Turks. Potlach is the name given to the plundering of the food by the people in the big festivities of the khans or on the occasion of the feasts. Although the word plunder means forced seizure, volunteering is essential in the plunder which is one of the old Turkish traditions. The fact that the person who allows the plundering is volunteer rather than plunderers use force made this event a tradition in the ancient Turks. This tradition has been continued in the Ottomans due to both its stated characteristics and other meanings it imposes. In large-scale festivals such as weddings and circumcision feasts belonging to Ottoman dynasty members, it was also called dish plunder to the grabbing of the bowls filled with food by the people or janissaries. The dish plunder seen in the Ottoman palace festivals was carried out at the Horse Square, where
the Blue Mosque is located today; in these festivals, large bowls filled with meat and rice were placed in suitable places in the square and then opened to plunder with the sign given. Dish plunders were the most important event of the festivities held on the occasion of palace weddings, which were devoted directly to the people. As
a result of this activity, it was ensured that the people would witness the generosity of the sultan. The dish plunder was applied not only at the festivities, but also during the payment of the three-month salaries of the janissaries which was called ulûfe. This form of dish plunder was carried out in a certain section in the second courtyard of the Topkapı Palace, where the dishes containing traditional meals such as rice and zerde were grabbed by the janissaries. The fact that it was exhibited in festivals and palace ceremonies ensured that the dish plunder was both state and palace tradition. Dish plunders are described in detail in local and foreign sources as they create unforgettable scenes. The fact that tradition is based on voluntarism shows that its aim is not plunder but the meanings attributed to it. Although essentially it is based on generosity, the fact that it has been applied to different classes such as people, janissary and ulama allows this tradition to have different meanings. Therefore,
the dish plunder as one of the state and palace traditions of the Ottoman Empire was a symbol with multifaceted meanings. Regardless of how it was applied, the dish plunder which was a beneficence of the sultan, increased the respect and loyalty of the people to the administration. At this point, dish plunders for the people in the Ottoman Empire focused on the “beneficence” dimension of this tradition, whereas dish plunders for the janissaries focused on the “obedience” dimension rather than the beneficence.
Abstract The most important issue in international relations based on mutual diplomacy are the reciprocity of the rights and duties of states. Since the main elements of diplomatic relations are ambassadors and embassy activities, the most concrete examples of reciprocity have been observed in this field. This was reflected in the embassy activities as equivalence and equality; embassy practices have been tried to be arranged in a way that does not allow superiority of any party. In this way, one of the practices shaped according to the issue of reciprocity and the principle of equality of states is the ambassador exchange. The exchange of ambassadors, especially for the purpose of ratification of interstate treaties, was realized by the mutual and often simultaneous assignment of ambassadors in the sense attributed to this term. In the Ottoman history, the exchange of ambassadors, mostly with neighboring states, were carried out with ceremonies performed at the borders of two countries and attributed various symbolic meanings. The examples of the ambassador exchanges in the Ottoman history shed light on the protocol dimension of the international relations and contain important information about the Ottomans' stance against the other states.
Accounting is of great importance in terms of ensuring accountability. In this regard, the accounting records of the Ottoman foundations played a major role in ensuring transparency in the functioning of the foundations. In the Ottoman Empire, foundation accounting was emphasized very meticulously; as a result of the recording of the foundation accounts, the foundation accounting books were created. Accounting books, which are the most important sources revealing the dynamic aspect of foundations, are an important type of resource that can be used in foundation researches. The Ottoman foundation accounting books were kept in accordance with the stairs accounting method until the beginning of the 19th century. The same points can be seen in the accounting book dated 1224 / AD. 1809-1810 of İzzet Mehmed Pasha Foundation of Safranbolu. The book mentioned is a good example of Ottoman foundation accounting books and provides satisfying information about the issues that can be expected from an accounting book.
Elçiler devletlerarası ilişkilerin vazgeçilmez unsurlarından olup elçilik faaliyetleri yüzyıllardan beri öneminden bir şey kaybetmemiştir. Elçilik görevinin başarıya ulaşması ise bu görev öncesinde yapılmış olan iyi bir planlama ile doğru orantılıdır. Bu nedenle elçilik hizmetinin lojistik safhasının oldukça titiz bir şekilde planlanmış olması gerekmektedir. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı elçileri de görevlerine başlamadan önce oldukça ayrıntılı hazırlıklar yaparlar ve görevleri süresince ihtiyaç duyacakları malzemeler, kendilerine devlet eliyle temin edilirdi. Temin edilen bu malzemeler elçilere, elçilik görevinin sonunda geri alınmak koşuluyla verilirdi. H. 1149 / M. 1736 tarihinde İran’a elçi olarak gönderilen Mustafa Paşa’nın elçilik levazımatı da aynı şekilde Hazine-i Âmire’den temin edilmişti. Elçiye verilen malzemeler oldukça titiz bir şekilde tespit edilmiş ve hazırlıklar ona göre yapılmıştı. Bunlar elçilik heyetinin gerek yolculuk esnasında gerekse gidilen yerde ihtiyaç duyacağı türden malzemelerdi. Elçiye verilen bu levazımat, benzer uygulamalarda olduğu gibi elçilik görevinin sonunda geri alınmak üzere emaneten verilmişti. Mustafa Paşa’nın elçilik levazımatı elçilik hizmetlerinin oldukça geniş kapsamlı bir hazırlık safhası gerektirdiğini gözler önüne sermektedir. Elçiye verilen malzemelerin çeşitliliği, tamamlanması aylar süren elçilik hizmetlerinin amacına ulaşabilmesi için en ince ayrıntının bile oldukça önemli olduğunu göstermektedir. Osmanlı Elçisi Vezir Mustafa Paşa için temin edilen bu malzemeler, elçilik görevinin diplomasi sahası dışındaki yüzü hakkında ayrıntılı bilgiler içermektedir.
ABSTRACT
Ambassadors are indispensable elements of interstate relations and the activities of embassies haven’t lost their importance for centuries. The success of the embassy mission is directly proportional to the good planning done before this mission. For this reason, the logistics phase of the embassy service must be planned very carefully. In this context, the Ottoman ambassadors made very detailed preparations before they started their duties and the materials they would need during the exercise of their duties was provided by the state. These materials were provided to the ambassadors under the condition that they were taken back at the end of the mission. The supplies for the embassy of Vizier Mustafa Pasha, who was sent as ambassador to Iran on H. 1149 / AD. 1736, were also obtained from the Treasury in this way. The materials given to the ambassador were determined very meticulously and preparations were made accordingly. These were the materials that the embassy committee would need both during the journey and at the destination. The materials given to the ambassador, as in similar practices, were given in consignment and to be taken back at the end of the mission. The supplies for the embassy of Mustafa Pasha show that the embassy services require a very extensive preparation phase. The diversity of the materials given to the Ottoman ambassador show that even the finest detail is very important for achieving the purpose of the embassy services which take months to complete. It is also possible to obtain informations about the face of the embassy mission outside the field of diplomacy.
STRUCTURED ABSTRACT
Until the adoption of European-style diplomacy, the Ottoman Empire did not have permanent ambassadors in foreign countries and carried out its diplomatic activities with temporary ambassadors. The presence of ambassadors in the Ottoman territories by other states was perceived as an indicator of the greatness of the Ottoman Empire. The absence of permanent ambassadors to foreign states stems from this perception of superiority. This understanding has created an embassy tradition unique to the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman embassy tradition was based on the Ottoman state traditions and was shaped by the cultures and diplomacy in the region on which the Ottoman Empire ruled.
The duty of the ambassadorship in the Ottoman Empire did not belong to any class or group as in the European states. Therefore, there was no class privilege in the election of the Ottoman ambassador and the most appropriate person was endeavored to be appointed for the embassy. Ottoman ambassadors could have different occupations, titles and social status depending on the necessity of the work to be done. This was an indication that merit was given importance in ambassador selection.
The reasons of the Ottoman Empire sending ambassadors in the historical process are as follows:
1- To declare the Ottoman Sultan's ascent to the throne 2- To congratulate a foreign ruler on ascent to the throne 3- To call for the surrender of a region before the war 4- To discuss the terms of the treaty 5- To communicate the approved texts of the treaties to the other party 6- To discuss boundary issues 7- To establish good relations between the parties 8- To confirm good relations 9- To strengthen the relations between the parties 10- To check the ground of alliance between states 11- To declare the conquest of a region 12- To reciprocate to the states which sent ambassadors 13- To respond to letters and gifts from foreign states 14- To take the letter of the Grand Vizier
15- To invite to the circumcision feasts of the princes 16- To apologize for the mistreatment of the ambassadors 17- To request claims such as war compensation etc. and to decide terms of payment 18- To be aware of international developments 19- To fulfill the request of another state to send ambassadors 20- To observe scientific and technological developments 21- After the acceptance of the superiority of the Western world, to determine the reasons of this superiority and to apply them to the Ottoman country
The messages intended to be given to foreign states were endeavored to be represented in the figures of the Ottoman ambassadors and embassy delegations. For this reason, care was taken to ensure that the ambassadors had an entourage suited to their status. No material sacrifice was inevitable for the creation and equipping of this entourage. In order to meet these needs, there was also a treasury office in the Ottoman Palace, which was named as the Ambassador Treasury. Some of the valuables here were given to the ambassadors on the condition that they would be taken back when they returned in order to increase the magnificence of the embassy committee.
In the Ottoman Empire, the needs of the ambassadors were provided in two ways. Their needs during their journeys were usually met by the people on the route. These costs incurred by the public were counted as a substitute for some taxes they had to pay. Materials such as tents for ambassadors were obtained from Mehterhane-i Amire. Their needs, such as torch fee etc. during the journey, were provided in cash from the chief accountant. The ambassadors had to hand over the items they had received from Mehterhane-i Amire, as well as the materials they had received from the Ambassador Treasury.
Nadir Shah, who came to the throne of Iran in 1736, sent Abdulbaki Khan to Istanbul as an envoy in order to announce his ascent to the throne. In the same year, the Ottoman Empire sent Vizier Mustafa Pasha to Nadir Shah as an ambassador. The Ottoman ambassador was accompanied by military and civilian officers, and it was around 600 people. For this reason, the materials to be provided from the Hazine-i Âmire for the embassy service were determined first. First, a total of 740 cargo animals, including 120 horses, 350 cargo horses, 120 camels and 150 mules, were allocated during the journey. Other materials categorized below were also provided.
1. Mounts and pack animals
2. Materials for kitchen services
3. Weapons and military supplies
4. Materials for storage and preservation
5. Strength and wealth indicator materials
6. Materials for water need
7. Materials for accommodation needs
8. Materials required for ambassador procession
The materials given to the ambassadors in the Ottoman Empire provide information about the face of the embassy mission outside the diplomatic field. Likewise, the materials that were identified and provided for the embassy of Mustafa Pasha, who was sent to Iran in H. 1149/ AD. 1736, shed light on the aspects of Ottoman embassy services which were unvalued. When these materials are taken into consideration, it is possible to obtain detailed information about the logistics phase of the embassy service. The most important point to be mentioned here is that even the finest detail is very important for the embassy service to reach its purpose. While determining the necessary materials for the ambassador, it was not forgotten that even the slightest mistake would put the embassy committee in trouble and acted very meticulously. This meticulousness also shows that the Ottoman embassy tradition is a well-established and rooted tradition. These materials, given to Ambassador Mustafa Pasha and pointing to the logistic phase of the embassy service, show that the preparation process required for the ambassadors is quite burdensome but at the same time one of the most important issues in the success of the embassy mission.
In interstate relations, the reception of official foreign guests such as sovereigns, dynasties, envoys was overseen by mihmandars. The mihmandar tradition, history of which goes back to ancient times, was applied by the Ottoman Empire within the framework of Turkish-Islamic traditions. The Ottoman mihmandars were obliged to ensure the comfort of foreign guests arriving in the country. In this context, the obligatory expenses of official guests such as envoys covered by Empire were supervised by the mihmandars. Mihmandars, for accountability, would record their expenses to the finest detail. One of the records kept in this way is the book of expenses which was kept by Ali Ağa, who was mihmandar of the Iranian ambassador Abdullah Bey. This book, dated H. 25 Şaban 1189 / AD. 25 October 1775, contains important information about the Ottoman mihmandar tradition.
The appointment of persons to guide diplomatic guests in which country they are present at is a very old tradition in interstate relations. This tradition, seen in both western and eastern diplomacy, was applied in the Ottoman State within the framework of Ottoman state traditions and diplomacy. For this reason, officials named mihmandar have been appointed in order to deal with official guests from foreign countries. Since it is thought that the mihmandars represent the dignity of Ottoman State in the face of foreign guests, selection of mihmandars has been meticulous. Generally selected from the palace officials, mihmandars were interested in hosting the diplomatic guests coming to the Ottoman lands and their needs as long as they were in the country and providing the coordination between the institutions in this regard. In this context, this practice contains important sections in terms of Ottoman state and diplomacy tradition and has a distinctive feature of the Ottoman State from other contemporary states.
There are specific practices that distinguish the great states established throughout history from other states. This is also true for the Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman Empires, which ruled almost exclusively in almost the same geographies. Envoy acceptance is also one of the implied practices for these three empires, and it has become one of the most important arguements for empires to show their greatness to other states. The area that the Ottoman State was founded provided for the benefit from Byzantine and Roman heritage in terms of state organization. Therefore, the Roman and Byzantine state traditions became one of the three main sources that formed the Ottoman state organization with the ancient Turkish state tradition and Islamic state tradition. It is possible to see this situation in the Ottoman state
organization, also in the envoy acceptance of Ottoman. Until the mutual diplomacy, the envoy acceptance seen in the Ottoman Empire developed in the Ottoman Empire specifically. The Ottomans treated to foreign envoys in respect to the Turkish and Islamic customs. However, some practices in the envoy acceptance of Ottoman Empire were not found in the Turkish and Islamic traditions. At this point the practices differentiate the envoy acceptance in the Ottoman Empire from the Turkish and
Islamic traditions to some extent are the similar practices to the envoy acceptances of Roman and Byzantine. In this sense, even it is not true to say that envoy acceptance of Ottoman is completely same with the envoy acceptances of Roman and Byzantine, it is not also true to say that they are completely different from each other. In this paper, it is aimed to identify the similarities and differences in the envoy acceptances of three empires that ruled in almost the same geographies.
Özet
Mondros Ateşkes Antlaşması’ndan Anadolu topraklarındaki ilk işgaller Hatay bölgesinde yaşandı. İlk olarak İskenderun 9 Kasım 1918’de İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngilizlerin ardından bölgeye asker çıkaran Fransızlar; 27 Kasım 1918’de İskenderun, Belen, Antakya ve Harim kazalarını içine alan İskenderun Sancağı’nı kurarak başına Fransız bir askerî vali tayin ettiler. Fransızlarla ortak hareket eden Ermenilerin kindar ve acımasız davranışları, Hatay yöresinde silahlı direnişin erken başlamasına neden oldu. Hatay direnişi, yoğunlukla bölgenin kuzeyindeki Gâvur Dağları ile daha güneyde kalan Amik Ovası-Kürt Dağı ve Antakya Kuseyr yörelerinde cereyan etti. Hatay’ın kuzeyinde kalan İskenderun-Dörtyol kesimlerinde Kara Hasan, Hakkı Bey gibi Kuvâ-yı Milliyeciler ön plana çıkarken güneyde ise Tayfur Mürsel, Asım Bey, Ahmet Türkmen gibi
isimler önemli yer tuttu. Hatay direnişi, Mustafa Kemal Paşa öncülüğündeki Millî Mücadele hareketi ile kurulan irtibat neticesinde daha organize hâle geldi ve Hatay, Millî Mücadele’nin Güney Cephesi’ne dâhil oldu. Bölgede çarpışmalar devam ederken Türkiye ile Fransa arasında, 20 Ekim 1921 tarihinde Ankara İtilafnamesi imzalandı. Böylece iki devlet arasındaki savaş hali sona erdi ve Türkiye-Suriye sınırı çizildi. Bu antlaşma ile Dörtyol (Payas dâhil) ve Hassa Türkiye sınırları içinde kalırken İskenderun bölgesi için özel bir idare şekli kurulması ve buradaki Türklere birtakım ayrıcalıklar verilmesi kararlaştırıldı. Böylece Misak-ı Milli sınırlarına dâhil olan Antakya-İskenderun yöresinin Suriye’de kalması, Güney cephesindeki çarpışmaları sonlandırabilmek adına istemeyerek de olsa kabul edildi. Bu durum, uygun zaman ve şartların oluşması beklendiğinden Lozan Antlaşması’nda da aynen kabul edildi. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Hatay coğrafyasında yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketleri ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler :Hatay, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Absract
After the Armistice of Mudros, the first occupations in Anatolian lands took place in the Hatay region. Firstly, Iskenderun (Alexandretta) was occupied by the British on 9 November 1918. On 27 November 1918, the French, who landed troops in the region after the British, established the Sanjak of Alexandretta, which included the towns of Iskenderun, Belen, Antakya, and Harim, and appointed a French military governor. The vindictive and ruthless behaviour of the Armenians, who acted in partnership with the French, led to the early start of armed resistance in the Hatay region. The resistance in Hatay took place mainly in the Gâvur Mountains in the north of the region and in the Amik Valley-Kurd Mountain and Antakya- Al-Qusayr regions in the south. While in the İskenderun-Dörtyol region in the north of Hatay, figures from the Kuvâ-yı Milliye such as Kara Hasan and Bey Hakkı came to the fore, in the south, names such as Tayfur Mürsel, Asım Bey and Ahmet Türkmen played an important role. The Hatay resistance became more organised as a result of the contact established with the National Struggle movement led by Mustafa Kemal Pasha, and Hatay was included in the Southern Front of the National Struggle. While the clashes continued in the region, the Treaty of Ankara (the Franklin-Bouillon Agreement) was signed between Türkiye and France on 20 October 1921. Thus, the state of war between the two States ended and the Türkiye-Syria border was drawn. With this treaty, while Dörtyol (including Payas) and Hassa remained within the borders of Türkiye, it was decided to establish a special form of administration for the Iskenderun region and to grant some privileges to the Turks here. Thus, it was accepted, albeit reluctantly, that the Antakya-Iskenderun region, which was included in the borders of Mîsâk-ı Millî (the National Pact), would remain in Syria in order to end the fighting on the Southern Front. This situation was also accepted in the Treaty of Lausanne, as it was expected that the appropriate time and conditions would emerge. In this study, the occupation and resistance movements in the Hatay region after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Hatay, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Özet
Millî Mücadele yıllarında hem ekonomik hem de stratejik bir öneme sahip olan Antep, Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra 17 Aralık 1918’de İngiliz işgaline uğradı. İngilizler daha önce Suriye’ye göç ettirilmiş olan Ermenileri de Antep’e getirdiler. Yaklaşık olarak on ay süren İngiliz işgalinde, bazı kötü durumlar görülmekle birlikte silahlı bir çatışma yaşanmadı. Antep’teki İngiliz işgali, 25 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Fransızlar da Antep’in işgalinde Ermenilerden faydalandılar. Bu nedenle şehirdeki Ermeni taşkınlıkları artmaya başladı. 12 Ocak 1920’de, Fransızlar ve Ermenilerin Araptar Köyü’nde neden olduğu olaylar nedeniyle Antep direnişi, ilk olarak şehir dışında başladı. Antep-Maraş yolunda yaşanan bu çarpışmalarda Karayılan ve Boyno oğlu Memik Ağa çeteleri büyük yararlılıklar gösterdi. Şahin Bey de 1920 yılının şubat ve mart aylarında Kilis-Antep yolu üzerinde gerçekleştirdiği faaliyetlerle Fransızları oldukça zor durumda bıraktı. Şahin Bey’in şehadetinden sonra Antep direnişi, 1 Nisan 1920’den itibaren şehir içerisine taşındı. Bu süreçte şehir içi direniş, Kılıç Ali ve Özdemir Bey gibi
kumandanlarca organize edildi. Maraş ve Urfa’da yenilen Fransızlar, Antep’i haftalarca kuşatma altına aldılar. Yaklaşık on bir ay kendi imkânları ile direnen şehir, açlığın son haddine varmasından ötürü 9 Şubat 1921’de düştü. 20 Ekim 1921 Ankara Antlaşması ile Türkiye-Suriye sınırı çizilince Fransız askerleri 25 Aralık’ta Antep’i terk ettiler. Böylece Antep’te Aralık 1918’de İngilizlerle başlayıp sonrasında Fransızlarla devam eden işgal
dönemi, 25 Aralık 1921 tarihinde sona ermiş oldu. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Antep’te yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketi ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Antep, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Absract
Antep, which had both economic and strategic importance during the War of Independence, was occupied by the British on 17 December 1918 after the Armistice of Mudros. The British also brought the Armenians, who had previously been displaced to Syria, to Antep. During the British occupation that lasted for approximately ten months, there were no armed conflicts despite some unfortunate situations. The British occupation of Antep was replaced by the French occupation on 25 October 1919. The French also took advantage of the Armenians during the occupation of Antep. Therefore, Armenian riots in the city started to increase. On 12 January 1920, due to the incidents caused by the French and Armenians in Araptar Village, the Antep resistance first started outside the city. In these clashes on the Antep-Maras road, the Karayılan and Memik Agha son of Boyno gangs proved to be very useful. Şahin Bey also left the French in a very difficult situation with his activities on the Kilis-Antep road in February and March 1920. After the martyrdom of Şahin Bey, the resistance in Antep moved inside the city as of 1 April 1920. In this period, the resistance in the city was organised by commanders such as Kılıç Ali and Özdemir Bey. The French, who were defeated in Maraş and Urfa, besieged Antep for weeks. The city, which resisted with its own means for about eleven months, fell on 9 February 1921 due to starvation. On 20 October 1921, when the Türkiye-Syria border was drawn with the Ankara Treaty, French soldiers left Antep on 25 December. Thus, the occupation period in Antep, which started with the British in December 1918 and continued with the French, ended on 25 December 1921. In this study, the occupation and resistance movement in Antep after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Antep, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Özet
Kilis, Millî Mücadele yıllarında Antep Mutasarrıflığına bağlı bir kaza konumundaydı. Mondros Mütarekesi’nin hemen ardından, İtilâf devletleri daha önce gizli anlaşmalarla paylaştıkları alanlara doğru hızla yayılmaya başladılar. Bu bağlamda ateşkesin hemen akabinde Aralık 1918’de, Kilis İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngiliz işgali döneminde, şehirde silahlı bir direniş görülmedi. Ancak daha sonra oluşturulacak olan Kuvâ-yı Milliye hareketinin tohumları bu süreçte atıldı. Şehirdeki İngiliz işgali, 29 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Fransızlar Kilis’i, Çukurova ve çevresindeki işgal bölgeleri için harekât üssü olarak kullandılar. Suriye’deki Ermenileri bölgeye göç ettirerek Ermeni çetelerinin Türk halkına saldırılarına göz yumdular. Böylelikle Türkler başka yerlere göçe zorlanarak Ermenilerin çoğunluğu teşkil etmesi amaçlandı. Türk halkının güvenlik
ve varlığı tehlikeye düşünce yerel teşkilatlanmaya gidilerek Fransız işgaline karşı direnişe geçildi. Bölgede Kuvâ-yı Milliye’nin örgütlenmesinde Şahin Bey, Sakıp Bey, İslam Bey, Müslüman Bey ve Polat Bey gibi kişilerin önemli bir rolü oldu. Kilis şehri, işgal altında olduğundan silahlı mücadele Kilis dışındaki kırsal alanlarda yaşandı. Bölgede çarpışmalar devam ederken 20 Ekim 1921’de Ankara Hükümeti ile Fransa arasında imzalanan Ankara Antlaşması ile Türkiye-Suriye sınırı belirlendi. Böylece Fransız
kuvvetleri, 7 Aralık 1921’de Kilis’i boşalttılar. Fransızların şehirden ayrılması ile Kilis’te Aralık 1918’den beri devam eden üç yıllık işgal dönemi sona erdi. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Kilis’te yaşanan işgal ve direniş hareketi ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Kilis, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Abstract
During the years of the War of Independence, Kilis was a subprovince under the Mutasarrifate of Antep. Right after the Armistice of Mudros, the Entente Powers began to expand rapidly towards the areas they had previously shared through secret agreements. In this context, immediately after the armistice, in December 1918, Kilis was occupied by the British. During the British occupation, there was no armed resistance in the city. However, the seeds of the Kuvâ-yı Milliye movement to be formed later were sown in this period. The British occupation of the city was replaced by the French occupation on 29 October 1919. The French used Kilis as a base of operations for the occupation zones in and around Çukurova (the Cilician Plain). They migrated Armenians from Syria to the region and turned a blind eye to the attacks of Armenian gangs on the Turkish people. In this way, the aim was to force the Turks to migrate elsewhere so that
the Armenians would constitute the majority. When the security and existence of the Turkish people were endangered, the local organisation was established and resistance was started against the French occupation. People such as Şahin Bey, Sakıp Bey, İslam Bey, Müslüman Bey, and Polat Bey played important roles in the organisation of the Kuvâ-yı Milliye in the region. Since Kilis was under occupation, the armed struggle took place in rural areas outside Kilis. While the clashes continued in the region, Türkiye-Syria border was determined with the Ankara Treaty signed between the Ankara Government and France on 20 October 1921. Thus, the French forces evacuated Kilis on 7 December 1921. With the departure of the French from the city, the three-year occupation period in Kilis since December 1918 ended. In this study, the occupation and resistance movement in Kilis after the Armistice of Mudros will be discussed.
Keywords: Kilis, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
Özet
30 Ekim 1918 Mondros Ateşkes Antlaşması’ndan sonra İtilaf devletleri, Osmanlı topraklarında geniş çaplı işgallere başladılar. Urfa da ilk olarak 24 Mart 1919’da İngilizler tarafından işgal edildi. İngilizler, asker kılığındaki Ermenileri beraberlerinde getirdiler; bölgedeki aşiretleri de kendi taraflarına çekmeye çalıştılar. 15 Eylül 1919’da imzalanan Suriye İtilafnamesi ile Urfa’daki İngiliz işgali, 30 Ekim 1919’da yerini Fransız işgaline bıraktı. Şehirdeki Fransız işgali İngiliz işgaline göre daha şiddetli oldu. Fransızlar; Urfa’ya girdikleri ilk günden itibaren keyfi bir tutumla mahalli hükümetin
işlerine müdahale ettiler. Çeşitli yerlerden getirilen Ermeni gönüllüler, Ermeni mahallesine yerleştirildi ve Ermeni taşkınlıklarına göz yumuldu. Fransızlar da İngilizlerin yaptığı gibi siyasi faaliyetlerde bulunarak bölgedeki aşiretleri elde etmeye çalıştılar. İstanbul Hükümeti’nin işgaller karşısında sessiz kalması, Urfa’da yerel teşkilatlanmanın başlamasına neden oldu. Teşkilatlanmanın akabinde ise 8-9 Şubat 1920 gecesi, Yüzbaşı Ali Saib Bey öncülüğünde Fransız işgaline karşı silahlı direniş başladı. Yaşanan şiddetli çarpışmalar neticesinde şehirden ayrılmayı kabul eden
Fransızlar, 11 Nisan 1920 tarihinde Urfa’yı boşalttılar. Şehirden ayrılıp Şebeke Mevkii’ne vardıklarında ise aşiret kuvvetleriyle aralarında büyük bir çatışma yaşandı. Bu çatışma neticesinde Fransızlar, Urfa işgalini büyük bir kayıpla sonlandırdılar. Bu çalışmada Mondros Mütarekesi’nden sonra Urfa’da yaşanan işgallerin yanı sıra şehrin direniş ve kurtuluş süreci ele alınacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Urfa, İşgal, Millî Mücadele, Kurtuluş
Abstract
After the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918, the Entente Powers started largescale occupations in the Ottoman lands. In this context, Urfa was first occupied by the British on 24 March 1919. The British brought Armenians disguised as soldiers with them and tried to attract the local tribes in the region to their side. With the Syrian Agreement of 15 September 1919, the British occupation of Urfa was replaced by the French occupation on 30 October 1919. The French occupation of the city was more violent than the British occupation. From the first day they entered Urfa, the French arbitrarily interfered in the affairs of the local government. Armenian volunteers brought from various places were placed in the Armenian neighborhood and Armenian excesses
were tolerated. The silence of the Istanbul Government against the occupations led to the beginning of local organization in Urfa. Following the organization, armed resistance against the French occupation started on the night of 8-9 February 1920 under the leadership of Yüzbaşı Ali Saib Bey. The French, who agreed to leave the city as a result of the fierce battles, evacuated Urfa on 11 April 1920. When they left the city and arrived at Şebeke district, a major clash took place between them and the tribal forces. As a result of this clash, the French ended their occupation of Urfa with a great loss. In this study, the occupations in Urfa after the Armistice of Mudros as well as the resistance and liberation process of the city will be discussed.
Keywords: Urfa, Occupation, National Struggle, Liberation
İlk olarak XIV. yüzyılda Avrupa’nın Akdeniz limanlarında uygulanmaya başlanan karantina, zamanla kurumsallaşarak salgın hastalıklardan korunma hususunda oldukça önemli bir rol üstlenmiştir. Batılı devletler, ülkelerine dışarıdan gelen herkese ayrım gözetmeksizin karantina uygulamışlardır. Dolayısıyla bu devletlere gönderilen Osmanlı elçileri de karantina uygulamasına tabi tutulmuştur. Elçiler kaleme aldıkları sefaretnamelerde bu ülkelerde karşılaştıkları karantina uygulamaları, karantina süreçleri ve karantina mekânları hakkında önemli bilgiler vermişlerdir. Osmanlı elçilerinin karantinaya verdikleri tepkiler, karantina süresi, karantina mekânı ve karantinayı uygulamakla görevli olan yetkililerin tavırlarına göre değişiklik göstermiştir. Elçiler her ne kadar birbirlerinden farklı tavırlar sergilemiş olsalar da kendi ülkelerinden aşina olmadıkları bu uygulamadan genel anlamda rahatsız oldukları gözlemlenmektedir. Elçilerin karantina karşısındaki tutumları insani gerekçelerden kaynaklanmakla birlikte hem Osmanlı zihniyetinden hem de Osmanlı devlet anlayışından izler taşımaktadır. Bu araştırmada Osmanlı Devleti’nde karantina uygulamaları başlamadan önce Avrupa’ya gönderilen elçilerin karşılaştıkları karantina tedbirleri hakkında bilgi verilerek Osmanlı elçilerinin karantinaya karşı tutumları değerlendirilmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Osmanlı Devleti, Elçi, Karantina, Sefaretname.
Abstract:
Quarantine, which was firstly started to be implemented in the Mediterranean ports of Europe in the XIVst century, has become institutionalized over time and has played a very important role in protection from epidemics. Western States have applied quarantine indiscriminately to everyone who came to their countries from outside. Therefore, the Ottoman ambassadors sent to these states were also subjected to quarantine. The ambassadors gave important informations in sefaretnames (the books of embassy) which they wrote about the quarantine practices, the quarantine processes and quarantine places. The responses of the Ottoman ambassadors to the quarantine varied according to the quarantine period, the quarantine space and the attitudes of the authorities responsible for enforcing the quarantine. Although the ambassadors displayed different attitudes from each other, it is observed that they are generally uncomfortable with this practice, which they are not familiar with from their own countries. Although the attitudes of the ambassadors against quarantine stem from humanitarian reasons, they bear traces of both the Ottoman mentality and the Ottoman understanding of State. In this study, the attitudes of the Ottoman ambassadors against quarantine were evaluated by giving information about the quarantine measures encountered by the ambassadors sent to Europe before the quarantine practices started in the Ottoman Empire.
Keywords: Ottoman State, Ambassador, Quarantine, Sefaretname.
In the Islamic tradition, the twelfth day of the month of Hijri Rabi'al-Awwal is accepted as the birthday of Prophet Muhammad and is referred to as Mawlid al-Sharif. As an indicator of respect and love for Prophet Muhammad, a special importance has been given to Mawlid al-Sharif by Muslims and this sensitivity has been maintained for centuries. Mawlid al-Sharif was celebrated in the historical process with ceremonies and various activities carried out both at the social and state level in Islamic states. In this context, ceremonies were held during the mawlid days with the participation of the rulers, statesmen, ulama and the public. These days, which were celebrated in the festive mood, mawlids which were written specifically for the birth of Prophet Muhammad, were read, gifts were accepted and given, and various charitable works were carried out considering the poor and needy. Mawlid al-Sharif tradition has gained an important place in the Ottoman Empire as in previous Islamic states. The tradition of Mawlid al-Sharif, which was inherited from the previous Islamic states to the Ottomans, was shaped in parallel with society and state traditions, and had similar and different aspects to the practices in other Islamic states. In this study, Mawlid al-Sharif in Ottoman culture was tried to be examined primarily on the basis of archive sources as a palace and social tradition and the inferences obtained in this regard were evaluated.
اصبح اليوم الثاني عشر من شهر ربيع الاول يوم مهم في تاريخ الاسلام ويوم مخلد بولادة النبي محمد ، والذي يسمى بمولد النبوي الشريف والذي يدل على حب واحترام النبي حيث اعطى المسلمون اهمية خاصة منذ عدة عقود من الزمن لهذة المناسبة . فعلى مر التاريخ الشعوب والدول الاسلامية كانت تقام شعائر الاحتفال بالمولد النبوي الشريف بشكل مستمروعبر التاريخ وزادت اهميتها لدى الدولة العثمانية احدى التقاليد المهمة حيث كانت مختلف الاحتفالات تشمل انشطة مختلفة فعلى سبيل المثال كانت تعطى الهدايا وتقام الاعمال الاخيرية للفقراءوالمحتاجين ويتم قراءة الاذكار . وكانت الدولة العثمانية قد اعطت اهمية كبيرة بدليل ان جميع اركان الدولة و رجالها كانو يشاركون ويرعون مناسبة المولد النبوي الشريف باهمية كبيرة لما لها من خصوصية في تاريخ المسلمين . في هذا البحث تطرقنا الى نظرة وثقافة العثمانيين لمناسبة المولد النبوي الشريف سواء على كان على مستوى الدولة العثمانية اوالمجتمع العثماني معتمدين على وثائق ومصادر الارشيف العثماني والتي تم تحليلها والتوصل الى استنتاجات.
ABSTRACT The fact that the main element of the Ottoman Empire, which reigned on three continents, consisted of Turks, enabled many of the state and palace traditions to be the old Turkish traditions. One of the old Turkish traditions that took place in the state, palace and social traditions of the Ottoman Empire in this way was the dish plunder which continues its existence in different ways in Anatolia today. The dish plunder is based on potlach which is seen in the Central Asian Turks. Potlach is the name given to the plundering of the food by the people in the big festivities of the khans or on the occasion of the feasts. Although the word plunder means forced seizure, volunteering is essential in the plunder which is one of the old Turkish traditions. The fact that the person who allows the plundering is volunteer rather than plunderers use force made this event a tradition in the ancient Turks. This tradition has been continued in the Ottomans due to both its stated characteristics and other meanings it imposes. In large-scale festivals such as weddings and circumcision feasts belonging to Ottoman dynasty members, it was also called dish plunder to the grabbing of the bowls filled with food by the people or janissaries. The dish plunder seen in the Ottoman palace festivals was carried out at the Horse Square, where
the Blue Mosque is located today; in these festivals, large bowls filled with meat and rice were placed in suitable places in the square and then opened to plunder with the sign given. Dish plunders were the most important event of the festivities held on the occasion of palace weddings, which were devoted directly to the people. As
a result of this activity, it was ensured that the people would witness the generosity of the sultan. The dish plunder was applied not only at the festivities, but also during the payment of the three-month salaries of the janissaries which was called ulûfe. This form of dish plunder was carried out in a certain section in the second courtyard of the Topkapı Palace, where the dishes containing traditional meals such as rice and zerde were grabbed by the janissaries. The fact that it was exhibited in festivals and palace ceremonies ensured that the dish plunder was both state and palace tradition. Dish plunders are described in detail in local and foreign sources as they create unforgettable scenes. The fact that tradition is based on voluntarism shows that its aim is not plunder but the meanings attributed to it. Although essentially it is based on generosity, the fact that it has been applied to different classes such as people, janissary and ulama allows this tradition to have different meanings. Therefore,
the dish plunder as one of the state and palace traditions of the Ottoman Empire was a symbol with multifaceted meanings. Regardless of how it was applied, the dish plunder which was a beneficence of the sultan, increased the respect and loyalty of the people to the administration. At this point, dish plunders for the people in the Ottoman Empire focused on the “beneficence” dimension of this tradition, whereas dish plunders for the janissaries focused on the “obedience” dimension rather than the beneficence.
Abstract The most important issue in international relations based on mutual diplomacy are the reciprocity of the rights and duties of states. Since the main elements of diplomatic relations are ambassadors and embassy activities, the most concrete examples of reciprocity have been observed in this field. This was reflected in the embassy activities as equivalence and equality; embassy practices have been tried to be arranged in a way that does not allow superiority of any party. In this way, one of the practices shaped according to the issue of reciprocity and the principle of equality of states is the ambassador exchange. The exchange of ambassadors, especially for the purpose of ratification of interstate treaties, was realized by the mutual and often simultaneous assignment of ambassadors in the sense attributed to this term. In the Ottoman history, the exchange of ambassadors, mostly with neighboring states, were carried out with ceremonies performed at the borders of two countries and attributed various symbolic meanings. The examples of the ambassador exchanges in the Ottoman history shed light on the protocol dimension of the international relations and contain important information about the Ottomans' stance against the other states.
Accounting is of great importance in terms of ensuring accountability. In this regard, the accounting records of the Ottoman foundations played a major role in ensuring transparency in the functioning of the foundations. In the Ottoman Empire, foundation accounting was emphasized very meticulously; as a result of the recording of the foundation accounts, the foundation accounting books were created. Accounting books, which are the most important sources revealing the dynamic aspect of foundations, are an important type of resource that can be used in foundation researches. The Ottoman foundation accounting books were kept in accordance with the stairs accounting method until the beginning of the 19th century. The same points can be seen in the accounting book dated 1224 / AD. 1809-1810 of İzzet Mehmed Pasha Foundation of Safranbolu. The book mentioned is a good example of Ottoman foundation accounting books and provides satisfying information about the issues that can be expected from an accounting book.
Elçiler devletlerarası ilişkilerin vazgeçilmez unsurlarından olup elçilik faaliyetleri yüzyıllardan beri öneminden bir şey kaybetmemiştir. Elçilik görevinin başarıya ulaşması ise bu görev öncesinde yapılmış olan iyi bir planlama ile doğru orantılıdır. Bu nedenle elçilik hizmetinin lojistik safhasının oldukça titiz bir şekilde planlanmış olması gerekmektedir. Bu bağlamda Osmanlı elçileri de görevlerine başlamadan önce oldukça ayrıntılı hazırlıklar yaparlar ve görevleri süresince ihtiyaç duyacakları malzemeler, kendilerine devlet eliyle temin edilirdi. Temin edilen bu malzemeler elçilere, elçilik görevinin sonunda geri alınmak koşuluyla verilirdi. H. 1149 / M. 1736 tarihinde İran’a elçi olarak gönderilen Mustafa Paşa’nın elçilik levazımatı da aynı şekilde Hazine-i Âmire’den temin edilmişti. Elçiye verilen malzemeler oldukça titiz bir şekilde tespit edilmiş ve hazırlıklar ona göre yapılmıştı. Bunlar elçilik heyetinin gerek yolculuk esnasında gerekse gidilen yerde ihtiyaç duyacağı türden malzemelerdi. Elçiye verilen bu levazımat, benzer uygulamalarda olduğu gibi elçilik görevinin sonunda geri alınmak üzere emaneten verilmişti. Mustafa Paşa’nın elçilik levazımatı elçilik hizmetlerinin oldukça geniş kapsamlı bir hazırlık safhası gerektirdiğini gözler önüne sermektedir. Elçiye verilen malzemelerin çeşitliliği, tamamlanması aylar süren elçilik hizmetlerinin amacına ulaşabilmesi için en ince ayrıntının bile oldukça önemli olduğunu göstermektedir. Osmanlı Elçisi Vezir Mustafa Paşa için temin edilen bu malzemeler, elçilik görevinin diplomasi sahası dışındaki yüzü hakkında ayrıntılı bilgiler içermektedir.
ABSTRACT
Ambassadors are indispensable elements of interstate relations and the activities of embassies haven’t lost their importance for centuries. The success of the embassy mission is directly proportional to the good planning done before this mission. For this reason, the logistics phase of the embassy service must be planned very carefully. In this context, the Ottoman ambassadors made very detailed preparations before they started their duties and the materials they would need during the exercise of their duties was provided by the state. These materials were provided to the ambassadors under the condition that they were taken back at the end of the mission. The supplies for the embassy of Vizier Mustafa Pasha, who was sent as ambassador to Iran on H. 1149 / AD. 1736, were also obtained from the Treasury in this way. The materials given to the ambassador were determined very meticulously and preparations were made accordingly. These were the materials that the embassy committee would need both during the journey and at the destination. The materials given to the ambassador, as in similar practices, were given in consignment and to be taken back at the end of the mission. The supplies for the embassy of Mustafa Pasha show that the embassy services require a very extensive preparation phase. The diversity of the materials given to the Ottoman ambassador show that even the finest detail is very important for achieving the purpose of the embassy services which take months to complete. It is also possible to obtain informations about the face of the embassy mission outside the field of diplomacy.
STRUCTURED ABSTRACT
Until the adoption of European-style diplomacy, the Ottoman Empire did not have permanent ambassadors in foreign countries and carried out its diplomatic activities with temporary ambassadors. The presence of ambassadors in the Ottoman territories by other states was perceived as an indicator of the greatness of the Ottoman Empire. The absence of permanent ambassadors to foreign states stems from this perception of superiority. This understanding has created an embassy tradition unique to the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman embassy tradition was based on the Ottoman state traditions and was shaped by the cultures and diplomacy in the region on which the Ottoman Empire ruled.
The duty of the ambassadorship in the Ottoman Empire did not belong to any class or group as in the European states. Therefore, there was no class privilege in the election of the Ottoman ambassador and the most appropriate person was endeavored to be appointed for the embassy. Ottoman ambassadors could have different occupations, titles and social status depending on the necessity of the work to be done. This was an indication that merit was given importance in ambassador selection.
The reasons of the Ottoman Empire sending ambassadors in the historical process are as follows:
1- To declare the Ottoman Sultan's ascent to the throne 2- To congratulate a foreign ruler on ascent to the throne 3- To call for the surrender of a region before the war 4- To discuss the terms of the treaty 5- To communicate the approved texts of the treaties to the other party 6- To discuss boundary issues 7- To establish good relations between the parties 8- To confirm good relations 9- To strengthen the relations between the parties 10- To check the ground of alliance between states 11- To declare the conquest of a region 12- To reciprocate to the states which sent ambassadors 13- To respond to letters and gifts from foreign states 14- To take the letter of the Grand Vizier
15- To invite to the circumcision feasts of the princes 16- To apologize for the mistreatment of the ambassadors 17- To request claims such as war compensation etc. and to decide terms of payment 18- To be aware of international developments 19- To fulfill the request of another state to send ambassadors 20- To observe scientific and technological developments 21- After the acceptance of the superiority of the Western world, to determine the reasons of this superiority and to apply them to the Ottoman country
The messages intended to be given to foreign states were endeavored to be represented in the figures of the Ottoman ambassadors and embassy delegations. For this reason, care was taken to ensure that the ambassadors had an entourage suited to their status. No material sacrifice was inevitable for the creation and equipping of this entourage. In order to meet these needs, there was also a treasury office in the Ottoman Palace, which was named as the Ambassador Treasury. Some of the valuables here were given to the ambassadors on the condition that they would be taken back when they returned in order to increase the magnificence of the embassy committee.
In the Ottoman Empire, the needs of the ambassadors were provided in two ways. Their needs during their journeys were usually met by the people on the route. These costs incurred by the public were counted as a substitute for some taxes they had to pay. Materials such as tents for ambassadors were obtained from Mehterhane-i Amire. Their needs, such as torch fee etc. during the journey, were provided in cash from the chief accountant. The ambassadors had to hand over the items they had received from Mehterhane-i Amire, as well as the materials they had received from the Ambassador Treasury.
Nadir Shah, who came to the throne of Iran in 1736, sent Abdulbaki Khan to Istanbul as an envoy in order to announce his ascent to the throne. In the same year, the Ottoman Empire sent Vizier Mustafa Pasha to Nadir Shah as an ambassador. The Ottoman ambassador was accompanied by military and civilian officers, and it was around 600 people. For this reason, the materials to be provided from the Hazine-i Âmire for the embassy service were determined first. First, a total of 740 cargo animals, including 120 horses, 350 cargo horses, 120 camels and 150 mules, were allocated during the journey. Other materials categorized below were also provided.
1. Mounts and pack animals
2. Materials for kitchen services
3. Weapons and military supplies
4. Materials for storage and preservation
5. Strength and wealth indicator materials
6. Materials for water need
7. Materials for accommodation needs
8. Materials required for ambassador procession
The materials given to the ambassadors in the Ottoman Empire provide information about the face of the embassy mission outside the diplomatic field. Likewise, the materials that were identified and provided for the embassy of Mustafa Pasha, who was sent to Iran in H. 1149/ AD. 1736, shed light on the aspects of Ottoman embassy services which were unvalued. When these materials are taken into consideration, it is possible to obtain detailed information about the logistics phase of the embassy service. The most important point to be mentioned here is that even the finest detail is very important for the embassy service to reach its purpose. While determining the necessary materials for the ambassador, it was not forgotten that even the slightest mistake would put the embassy committee in trouble and acted very meticulously. This meticulousness also shows that the Ottoman embassy tradition is a well-established and rooted tradition. These materials, given to Ambassador Mustafa Pasha and pointing to the logistic phase of the embassy service, show that the preparation process required for the ambassadors is quite burdensome but at the same time one of the most important issues in the success of the embassy mission.
In interstate relations, the reception of official foreign guests such as sovereigns, dynasties, envoys was overseen by mihmandars. The mihmandar tradition, history of which goes back to ancient times, was applied by the Ottoman Empire within the framework of Turkish-Islamic traditions. The Ottoman mihmandars were obliged to ensure the comfort of foreign guests arriving in the country. In this context, the obligatory expenses of official guests such as envoys covered by Empire were supervised by the mihmandars. Mihmandars, for accountability, would record their expenses to the finest detail. One of the records kept in this way is the book of expenses which was kept by Ali Ağa, who was mihmandar of the Iranian ambassador Abdullah Bey. This book, dated H. 25 Şaban 1189 / AD. 25 October 1775, contains important information about the Ottoman mihmandar tradition.
The appointment of persons to guide diplomatic guests in which country they are present at is a very old tradition in interstate relations. This tradition, seen in both western and eastern diplomacy, was applied in the Ottoman State within the framework of Ottoman state traditions and diplomacy. For this reason, officials named mihmandar have been appointed in order to deal with official guests from foreign countries. Since it is thought that the mihmandars represent the dignity of Ottoman State in the face of foreign guests, selection of mihmandars has been meticulous. Generally selected from the palace officials, mihmandars were interested in hosting the diplomatic guests coming to the Ottoman lands and their needs as long as they were in the country and providing the coordination between the institutions in this regard. In this context, this practice contains important sections in terms of Ottoman state and diplomacy tradition and has a distinctive feature of the Ottoman State from other contemporary states.
There are specific practices that distinguish the great states established throughout history from other states. This is also true for the Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman Empires, which ruled almost exclusively in almost the same geographies. Envoy acceptance is also one of the implied practices for these three empires, and it has become one of the most important arguements for empires to show their greatness to other states. The area that the Ottoman State was founded provided for the benefit from Byzantine and Roman heritage in terms of state organization. Therefore, the Roman and Byzantine state traditions became one of the three main sources that formed the Ottoman state organization with the ancient Turkish state tradition and Islamic state tradition. It is possible to see this situation in the Ottoman state
organization, also in the envoy acceptance of Ottoman. Until the mutual diplomacy, the envoy acceptance seen in the Ottoman Empire developed in the Ottoman Empire specifically. The Ottomans treated to foreign envoys in respect to the Turkish and Islamic customs. However, some practices in the envoy acceptance of Ottoman Empire were not found in the Turkish and Islamic traditions. At this point the practices differentiate the envoy acceptance in the Ottoman Empire from the Turkish and
Islamic traditions to some extent are the similar practices to the envoy acceptances of Roman and Byzantine. In this sense, even it is not true to say that envoy acceptance of Ottoman is completely same with the envoy acceptances of Roman and Byzantine, it is not also true to say that they are completely different from each other. In this paper, it is aimed to identify the similarities and differences in the envoy acceptances of three empires that ruled in almost the same geographies.