Aegean Islands under Ottoman Sovereignty

Kitabeler, tarihî binaların kimlik kartları olduğu kadar aynı zamanda o binanın ve hatta beldenin aidiyetlik, sanat ve medeniyet nişanesidirler. Kitabeler üzerine yaptığı çalışmalarla adından söz ettiren yazarımız, bu sefer çalkantılı bir tarihî geçmişe sahip İzmir'de, şehrin mührü mesabesindeki Fatih devrine ait kale kitabesini ve keşif hikâyesini sizler için kaleme aldı…

Δημοσίευση του δεύτερου μέρους του χειρογράφου της Συλλογής Φιλίππου Αργέντη. O  F. Lupazzolo  μόνιμος κάτοικος Χίου συντάσσει το 1638(;) αναφορά προς την παπική εκκλησία με θέμα τα νησιά του Αρχιπελάγους και την εκεί κατάσταση του καθολικού και ορθόδοξου ποιμνίου. Μέσα από  την αφήγησή του διαγράφονται γλαφυρά εικόνες από την καθημερινότητα των κατοίκων των Κυκλάδων και διασώζονται ιστορίες ανθρώπων και τόπων στα μέσα του ταραγμένου 17ου αι.

Στην εκτενή βιβλιογραφία για την Ελληνική Επανάσταση ο Πειραιάς και η Nησιωτική Ελλάδα δεν έχουν τύχει της προσοχής που τους αναλογεί. Στον Πειραιά και τις όμορες περιοχές δόθηκαν κρίσιμες μάχες για την Επανάσταση, ενώ έπεσε και ο μεγαλύτερος ίσως των αγωνιστών της Ρούμελης, ο Γεώργιος Καραϊσκάκης. Στην Νησιωτική Ελλάδα πέρα από τις σπουδαίες ναυμαχίες του Αγώνα έλαβαν χώρα και σημαντικά επαναστατικά γεγονότα σε πολλά νησιά (Κρήτη, Σάμος, Χίος, Ψαρά, Σπέτσες, Ὕδρα, Κύπρος, Σαλαμίνα κ.α.), ενώ ακόμη και τα αγγλοκρατούμενα Επτάνησα δεν έμειναν αμέτοχα του εθνικού αγώνα.
Το συνέδριο θα ασχοληθεί με τον Πειραιά και τις μάχες που διεξήχθησαν εκεί και στις όμορες περιοχές κατά την Επανάσταση, τις ναυμαχίες του Αγώνα, καθώς και τις επαναστατικές ενέργειες στα ελληνικά νησιά από την Κύπρο μέχρι την Σαμοθράκη και από την Χίο έως την Κρήτη.

On sekizinci yüzyılın sonlarında, on dokuzuncu yüzyılın başında, Aydınlanma Çağı’nın ve Fransız Devrimi’nin etkisiyle çok etnisiteli ve dinli imparatorluklarda çeşitli cemaatler, etnik, din ve dil birliği olan bağımsız devletlerini inşa etme arzusuna kapılmışlardı. Bu İmparatorluklardan birisi de Osmanlı İmparatorluğu idi. İmparatorluğun coğrafi konum olarak Avrupa’ya en yakın olan Balkan topraklarında bağımsızlık mücadelesi için Mora’daki Rumlar isyan başlatmıştı. İmparatorluk yönetiminde nüfusunun büyük bir çoğunluğu Rum Ortodoks Hıristiyan olan Ege Adaları’nın çoğu bu isyana katılarak Mora’daki bağımsızlık hareketi içinde yer almak istemişlerdi. Bu hareket içinde olmak kendilerine aynı dinden ve etnik gruptan oldukları aynı ve dili konuştukları millî siyasi birliğin parçası olmayı vadediyordu. Bu çağda zimmî olarak kendilerine ikincil statü atfeden Osmanlı idaresi tarafından yönetilmek istemediklerini isyana katılarak ifade etmişlerdi. 1821 Yunan İsyanına aktif olarak katılan Girit, Kıbrıs, Sisam ve Sakız adalarındaki olaylar araştırmalara konu olmuştur. Kuzey Ege’de küçük bir ada olan Semadirek’te bunlardan biriydi ve isyanın bastırılması sırasında ada neredeyse nüfusunun tamamını kaybetmişti. Ada’ya teknelerle gelen isyancıların örgütlemesiyle isyana katılan Semadirekli Rumlar, askerlerin kendilerine isyandan vaz geçmeleri ve Osmanlı’ya itaat etme telkinlerine ısrarla verdikleri kayıplara rağmen olumsuz yanıt vermişler. Bu makale, bilinmeyen Semadirek olayını ortaya çıkarırken Osmanlı otoritesi tarafından gördüğü sert muameleyi şiddet kavramı çerçevesinde incelemektedir.

Abstract
Multi religious and multi-ethnic empires’ various populations had the aim of forming their independent states under the impact of the ideals of the Enlightenment and French Revolution at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries. Ottoman Empire was among these empires, too. The Serbs in the Balkans was the first group to revolt against the Ottoman rule in 1804. Greeks followed them in 1821 with an organized revolt which lasted until 1829 from which an Independent Greek Kingdom arose. The center of the revolt was the Balkan lands of the Empire, Morea Peninsula, which was the closest region to Europe. Therefore, it was not a coincidence that the rebellion broke in the region that first learned about political and intellectual developments in Europe. Production of printing press, newspapers and books, and the Greeks of the Empire who had western education in Europe played crucial role for the transmission of the Enlightenment ideals to the Greek community of the Empire. European travelers who began to travel in the Greek speaking lands of the Empire in the 1750s were interested in the architectural remnants of the ancient Greek civilization. For the Europe that admired ancient Greek Civilization’s impressive architecture, philosophers’ observation, and the political model “demos, the independence ideal of the Greeks in the Ottoman Empire was a striking event. Hence, the Greek Revolt, which was called as the Greek Independence War by the Greeks, became a European ideal. The Ottoman imperial government’s reaction to the revolt was very harsh since it saw it as a menace against the Ottoman reign and Sultan that protected the nonMuslims communities of the Empire through zimmî pact of Islamic Law for centuries. This pact guaranteed their lives, properties, and religion in return for payment of a specific tax (cizye) which was applied to only non-Muslims by the Islamic state in accordance with the Islamic law. Despite this regulation, the pact put the non-Muslims in a secondary position compared to the Muslims in the Empire. Sultan Mahmud II’s reaction was very punitive since he could not understand the fact that rebellious Greeks were no longer wanted to be ruled by Muslim Ottoman dynasty as zimmîs with a secondary status. They wanted to have their independent states with their distinctive Greek identity. The Morea revolt in a short period of time spread to big and small Aegean islands through the activities of sea bandits with boats, Crete, Cyprus, Chios and Samos were among these islands. The severe punishment of the rebellious in Chios island, which was named as the Chios massacre in the literature shocked Europe. The bishop of the island, civil leaders of the Greeks (kocabaşıs), and representatives of Mastiha village were closed in the castle and assassinated by Ottoman soldiers. This event was followed by various mutual battles between the Greeks and soldiers in the island for seven years until 1828. There is another unknown shocking event in the island of Samothrace where almost half of its Greek inhabitants had been killed by the Ottoman soldiers, and women and children were enslaved to be sold in the slave markets with the order of the sultan. This article aims to reveal this unknown event by depending on the Ottoman archival documents and analyze the severe punishment of the Ottoman authority within the framework of violence.

Το νησί της Σκοπέλου, μέσω της δραστηριότητας της οικογένειας Δαπόντε, μέλη της οποίας διαδραμάτισαν σημαντικό ρόλο ως κόνσολοι των δυτικών εμπορικών κρατών - κυρίως της Βενετίας. Αυτά τα γνωστά και σημαίνοντα δημόσια πρόσωπα, αναδείχτηκαν την εποχή του  σφοδρού εμπορικού ανταγωνισμού που έλαβε χώρα στην ανατολική Μεσόγειο του 17ου και 18ου αιώνα. / The island of Skopelos, through the activity of the Daponte family, members of which played an important role as consoli of the Western trading nations – mainly of Venice. These well-known and influential public figures emerged in the era of intense commercial competition in the eastern Mediterranean of the 17th and 18th centuries.

Gallant, Thomas W. (2018) Social history and historical archaeology in Greece: the Kefalonia and Andros Project, 2010-2014. In Reframing classical archaeology in Greece: Festschrift for Anthony M. Snodgrass, (Eds, Lisa Nevett & James Whitely) The McDonald Institute for Archaeology, Cambridge, pp. 1-20. The volume is now out.

By focusing on the documentation preserved at the Archivio di Stato di Venezia – especially letters sent by different social actors who resided in the Ottoman Empire and addressed to the permanent Venetian ambassador in Constantinople, this presentation allows to analyse the role of their requests to be recognised as “Venetians” (or, in other words, as “protected foreigners”) in the political and social formation of their local identity. Usually containing petitionary reports where the petitioners appeared as “ miserabili ”, these letters rhetorically requested the restoration of justice, that is to say, either the enforcement of a legal resource or the redress of unjust classification committed by the local communities. Such fragile condition of “local vulnerability”, and therefore of “foreignness”, characterised the claims of some “trans-local” mobile workers from the Aegean islands and of some Christian notables who, from the second part of the seventeenth century to the early eighteenth century, petitioned the Republic of Venice to be recognised as Venetian subjects and consuls. By showing their willingness to not being identified as Ottoman subjects (or, according to the Venetian sources, as “ miserabili ”), these social actors petitioned the Venetian institutions so as to ensure their property and succession rights, both ones traditionally associated with “citizenship” and social inclusion. This approach displays therefore how different social actors could ground their claims on their social and relational practices for being identified as either “protected foreigner” or “local”.
Given that in the early modern Mediterranean the classification of actors’ membership to a specific community was a telling indication of the deep social inequalities that characterised the “citizenship” of these societies, by investigating the condition of “protected foreignness”, this presentation will provide important insights on the different ways in which social actors produced evidences of their own belonging, and therefore of their own social condition, in a context of jurisdictional competition. The cases presented will therefore display how the condition of “protected foreigner”, along with the one of “citizen”, introduced a powerful criterion of social classification on local and trans-local contexts. Moreover, this presentation will revisit the role of state-sanctioned institutions in both recognising and creating these classifications. Eventually, in order to explain why different social actors petitioned to be recognised as Venetians, this study will question the nature of the early modern Ottoman “citizenship”.

There is a certain type of soil to be found in Limnos which for centuries is belived to be a miraculous cure for a variety of diseases. This article discusses the importance of this soil for the Mediterranean world. The  first point of discussion  is the policies adopted by the Ottomans regarding the procurement of this soil. The second and the main point of the article is the evolution of the stories regarding the healing power of the this soil and the different beliefs  held  by  different  peoples  living  on  the  island.    The  article  further  discusses  the commercial value of this soil which has always been a popular commodity.

Until the Conquest of Crete in the Ottoman Aegean, aside from Euboea, a limited number of soldiers were deployed to the island. Only soldiers were kept in the fortress on the islands adjacent to the western coasts of Anatolia. The study is based on documents such as tahrir, mevacib and mühimme, which were spread from 1490 to 1642. Therefore, very rich administrative and financial data about the garrison and arsenal of the fortress were used. In order to determine the military capacity of the fortress, it was necessary to walk among the soldiers who were on watch in their bastions and to explain the nature of the weapons and ammunition they used. In order to understand the location of the fortress in the policies followed by the Ottoman Empire on the Mediterranean scale, it was necessary to scan the horizon in the ports of Chios, Rhodes, Lesbos and count the ammunition stored in the cellars. In the historical narrative constructed, these structures made of stone and mortar are treated as living organisms. Most of the fortress is built in an acropolis area. These structures, which have survived for millennia and deterred the enemies, have constantly changed and transformed. The historical period focused on in the thesis sheds light on a process in which the fortress almost changed its shell. Because the fortifications built in the age of the spear infantry were captured during the reign of firearms. The main purpose of the study is to reveal that the fortress has economic and social importance as well as military in supporting the dominant position of the Ottoman Empire in the Aegean. In this context, it was necessary to determine the financial resources of the fortress. On the other hand, these fortifications, which were built with the labour of the peoples they protected, survived with their labour. Therefore, without explaining what it means to live in the admirable shadow of the walls, the history of the fortress would be nothing but blood and gunpowder. For this reason, it was necessary to consider what kind of responsibility was imposed on the fortress while producing consent on the subjects of the Ottoman Empire.

The Ottoman fortresses in the Aegean Islands were a part of the defence structure covering the Eastern Mediterranean in the context of the Mediterranean-scale policies of the Ottoman Empire. The castles in question were located on the islands from Bozcaada to Rhodes and lined up along the western coast of Anatolia on a north-south axis. The soldiers serving in the castles had a salaried status (ulufeli), and the financial resources used to meet the soldiers' salaries were located in the area defended by the castles. In other words, the soldiers not only defended the imperial frontier but also defended the resources that provided their wages. However, problems and illegal practices of the kind that were seen almost everywhere throughout the empire were also encountered in the Aegean Islands. Soldiers were rarely able to receive their salaries on time. In some cases, they were illegally losing their position in the castle. Some of them were earning unfairly more income. More importantly, they were suffering from financial difficulties. The livelihood had reached such a level that the records reveal that there were no volunteers to serve in the castles. The fortifications could not be deployed as many soldiers as would be needed for effective defense.
The main reason for the soldiers' difficulty in making a living was the high inflation seen throughout the Mediterranean. On the other hand, from the second half of the 15th century to the 17th century, it is seen that the salaries of the soldiers did not change at all. However, in this period, there was an increase of up to 119% in the prices of basic necessities, which were constantly consumed in order to sustain daily life, due to inflation. Historical records show that especially the soldiers who served in the Ottoman castles tried to make a living through some non-military activities. It is seen that some of the soldiers who served in various parts of the empire were engaged in agriculture and animal husbandry, and accordingly, they were taxpayers. On the other hand, it is understood that the soldiers serving in the castles in the Aegean lacked such opportunities. Obviously, the limited economic capacity of the Aegean Islands did not offer enough job opportunities to the soldiers. Regardless, the Aegean Islands constituted one of the areas where the Ottoman Empire faced its traditional rivals, the Catholic Western powers. The troops, ready to withstand a comprehensive attack at any moment, had to be stationed in the fortresses of the Aegean Islands.
The relationship between the obedience of the soldier and the regular payment of the soldiers' salaries was well known because of the military uprisings that took place starting from the 15th century. The soldiers in the Aegean Islands did not have the potential to initiate bloody and extensive uprisings. Instead of rebelling, they expected grace and charity from the state. In the cases where these demands were not met, they had no choice but to leave the castles. In summary, there was a natural balance between the military's desire to fight and the salary policy. In the Aegean Islands, this balance was disturbed due to economic problems. The resulting defensive weakness was noticed after a while. Kaptanpaşa, who is the most authorized administrative-military chief of the Mediterranean Islands Province (Cezayir-i Bahr-i Sefîd), which includes the Aegean Islands, took action. First of all, it was necessary to improve the salaries of the soldiers; however, there were not enough resources available. As a result of the examination of the records and the counts, it was determined that some soldiers were paid much more than they deserved. For example, it was understood that some of the soldiers who did not have any command duty earned 13 akce per day, while others were trying to live on a daily income of 5 akce. Moreover, it was noticed that the castles were only defended by soldiers who took less than they deserved. In the face of this situation, the surplus in the salaries of the soldiers with more income was added to the salaries of the soldiers who earned less, and income justice was achieved. It is understood that with this exceptional solution, justice was tried to be provided between the soldiers. On the other hand, it is seen that the decisions taken did not address the root of the problem, and no action was taken to punish those who paved the way for income injustice and benefit from it. Obviously, the kaptanpaşa, who was essentially a soldier, acted without disturbing the officials who had a say in the administrative sense, without causing new tensions, and exhibited a pragmatic attitude. Its purpose was to retain the human resources to enable the castles to be defended effectively. There is enough historical record to think that it did, at least for a time.

Από τα πρώτα χρόνια της Οθωμανικής κυριαρχίας στη Μεσόγειο, η Υψηλή Πύλη οργάνωσε ένα εκτεταμένο δίκτυο εμπορικών συναλλαγών με χώρες της Δύσης. Για τον σκοπό αυτό προχώρησε σε ειδικές εμπορικές συμφωνίες (διομολογήσεις) με τις μεγάλες ευρωπαϊκές εμπορικές χώρες, όπως η Ιταλία, η Γαλλία, η Αγγλία, η Ολλάνδία κ.α. Σύμφωνα με τις διομολογήσεις αυτές, ευρωπαίοι υπήκοοι αποκτούσαν εμπορικά δικαιώματα και προνόμια σε πολλές περιοχές της τότε Οθωμανικής Αυτοκρατορίας συμπεριλαμβανομένων των νησιών του Αιγαίου. Προκειμένου να προστατευτούν τα δικαιώματα των ευρωπαίων εμπόρων που διέμεναν ή διέρχονταν με τα πλοία τους από τα νησιά του Αιγαίου δημιουργήθηκαν στα νησιά ευρωπαϊκά προξενεία και υποπροξενεία (κονσολάτα) τα οποία στελέχωναν ξένοι αξιωματούχοι ή ντόπιοι πρόκριτοι, γνωστοί ως κόνσολοι. Με αφετηρία την αναζήτηση των κονσολάτων στο κάστρο της Κιμώλου θα παρουσιαστεί ο τρόπος λειτουργίας των προξενείων και υποπροξενείων στα νησιά του Αιγαίου, καθώς και ο ρόλος των κόνσολων και η σχέση τους με τις τοπικές νησιωτικές κοινωνίες από τον 17ο έως τον 19ο αιώνα. Ομιλήτρια: Μαρία Σάρδη Διδάκτωρ Ιστορίας της Τέχνης και Αρχαιολογίας, Πανεπιστήμιο Λονδίνου https://soas.academia.edu/MARIASARDI

This study explores the Italy’s efforts to settle the Eastern Mediterranean by invading the Dodecanese and Britain’s reaction to this policy. The aim of the work is to analyze this conflict and rivalry regarding the question affected the fate of the Dodecanese. Britain's reaction to Italy's invasion of the Dodecanese is a subject that has not received the attention it deserves in the literature. However, the conflict between the two countries following the occupation of these islands had a direct impact on the Dodecanese issue, and this effect played an extremely important role in determining the fate of the Aegean Islands on a larger scale. The occupation of the Dodecanese was the result of an agreement in principle between the two countries according which Italy would return these islands when the Ottoman Empire ended its resistance in Tripoli. In other words, the occupations would be short-lived. But, since Italy took actions contrary to the statements it made after the invasions, a great crisis of confidence
came into view between the two countries. When Italy refused to leave the Dodecanese, by not abiding the terms of the Lozan Agreement, attempted to widen its occupations and the matter became the most important problem between the two countries in the process leading up to the First World War. Britain saw Italy's presence in the Dodecanese as a threat to its interests in the Eastern Mediterranean and waged a diplomatic war to drive this state away from the region. However, all these attempts failed. Italy managed to hold on to theseislands, not only having the support of its allies but also turning, skillfully, the Aegean Islands issue between the Ottoman Empire and Greece into an advantage. Following the First World War the Dodecanese Islands ceased to be a problem between the two countries, because Britain tried to include Italy in the Triple Entente. The study covers the period from 1912, when Italy began to show its presence in the Eastern Mediterranean, to the First World War and mainly based on the British, Italian and Ottoman archival materials.

The Cyclad Islands, located in the center of the Aegean Sea, had been conquered during the era of Suleiman the Magnificent and remained under Turkish administration for centuries. However, due to the fact that the Aegean Islands constitute an utmost important region, questions were brought on the agenda concerning the Ottoman rule, which could not been answered easily. In other words, a consensus, regarding the definition or identification of the Turkish dominion in that region could not be achieved. But it is a fact that the Cyclades were not within the boundaries, were the central authority was extremely dominant. This fact gave importance to the question of which motive caused the establishment of the Ottoman administration system on a group of island.

It is well known that throughout the empire, Ottomans pursued certain policies with a view to arranging practices in accordance with the demands of the Christian Subjects and by taking into consideration regional peculiarities. The Kanunname in the tahrir defter of 1720 on the Island of Naxos displays a sample of this common approach of the Ottomans. By taking into consideration the truth that this tahrir has been furnished upon the complaints of the Greek people on the Island, it is aimed to emphasize that this tahrir, makes it obvious that prior to the conquest, the Ottomans endeavored to solve problems arising from the superiority of the Catholic Latins, belonging to the ruling class over the Greek folk and to balance the tension between these two people. In this study, by the investigation of the mentioned Kanunname, it is aimed to show that the Ottomans did not display an indifferent attitude towards the demands of the Greeks on Naxos, but arranged relevant regulations and imposed taxes which were much more equitable.

In the second half of the XV. century, the  Aegean Islands started to be included into Turkish domination. In this way, the problems faced by the islanders in every aspect of life, turned into problems that had to be resolved by the Ottomans. For this reason, the duties undertaken by the Islanders under Ottoman administration, regarding coastal defense, have been subject to registrations in the archives.  On the other hand, these problems, which had been not only a part of cultural accumulations, but the cultural accumulations itself, not only shaped the lives of the ‘Islander’, but also shaped their perception to be ‘islanders’. In other words, the solutions the islanders had developed for the problems they had to face from the beginnings  of ancient times on,  had the effect that an identity, unique for this region was born. To this end, at first the issue to be an islander and the status of the islander during the historical continuity of the Ottoman era has been examined. In this respect, the struggle of the inhabitants of the islands, to protect themselves against the constant threat of pirate attacks is discussed in this paper. Thus, the relationship, the islanders established with the Turkish authorities, has been explained within the context of being an islander in the Aegean Sea of the XV. and XVI. centuries.

This study is about the Greek-Turkish attempts to form an alliance leading up to the First World War. The aim of the study is to reveal what the contribution of Germany to this quest and to find an answer whether it was possible or not. The ongoing crisis in the Greek-Turkish relations after the Balkan Wars was threatening the peace in Europe because it could not end the state of war in the region. The bone of contention between the two countries was the Aegean Islands which was occupied by Greece during the First Balkan War and whose status could not be determined despite all the agreements made and where the final decision was left to the Great Powers. While the Ottoman Empire asked some of the islands (especially Chios and Lesbos) be returned because they were vital for the security of Western Anatolia, Greece opposed it and the two countries came to the brink of war. The Great Powers tried to ease the crisis for they believed that this could pave the way for a new Balkan War and ultimately a general war. Germany was the state that made the most effort to end the tension between the parties. The main reason behind this was to include the two countries in its own bloc through the alliance and gain advantage against the Entente bloc. The work is mainly based on the archival sources of the relevant countries and used comparative analysis method when examining the view of the parties. The study concludes that an alliance between the two countries was not possible because of Greece’s negative attitude and German attempts failed to change this attitude.

The Ottoman Empire, as an empire that ruled in ancient lands, in areas that had been inhabited for thousands or even tens of thousands of years, inherited the place names used by the communities that had previously existed in the geography it dominated. While the historical depth enables a place to be called by different names, the factors affecting the production of archival documents in the same historical interval, for example, in the XVI. led to a place being called by more than one name. The reference to the nomenclature in the documents during cataloguing has led to the use of different names for the same place in the catalogues. The historical process that led to the emergence of all these issues and various problems that may occur in archive research are evaluated through the records of the island of Limnos, which has been under Turkish rule for centuries. The documents included in the catalogues of Land Registry Books, Divan-ı Hümâyûn Registries, Mühimme Books, and Public Accounting Books, which were produced in the period between the 15th and 17th centuries, constitute the source of the study.