Ottoman Population 1890 S
Ottoman Population 1890 S
Ottoman Population 1890 S
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
International Journal of Middle East Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
Kemal H. Karpat
I. INTRODUCTION
is true that these are, in a way, indispensable to any study dealing with the popu-
lation of the Ottoman state in the nineteenth century. The value of most of them,
however, is undermined by at least three shortcomings. First, only a few of these
studies are based on reliable statistical information stemming from actual counts
of population. Second, they often were undertaken by Western observers to
advocate the case of certain ethnic or religious groups and, besides demonstrating
an appalling lack of information on practically every aspect of Muslim life, they
reflected the political biases of the scholars involved or of their informants.
Third, most of them dealt with the European part of the Ottoman state and often
left Anatolia and the Arab-speaking countries unaccounted for. In fact, after
most of the Balkans became independent in 1878, thus achieving the hidden
purpose behind the manipulation of some population statistics, the number of
studies on the Ottoman population dropped spectacularly.
The best examples illustrating the above points are found in the monumental
five-volume bibliographical work by Nicholas V. Michoff.2 The essence of this
work is in the first volume. The rest comprise additional titles omitted in the first.
The fifth and last volume deals with Russian works dedicated to population
problems in the Ottoman state. Michoff's study was undertaken in part to
justify the Bulgarian claims to nationhood and, indirectly, to advance the
Bulgarian claims to Macedonia, and to refute the Greek and Serbian efforts to
regard the Bulgarians as part of their own groups. Though a permanent historical
source and a monument to Michoff's dedication to industrious scholarship, the
work has basic weaknesses. The first four volumes include the titles of 3,050
books and articles together with extracts containing statistics and information
on Bulgarian history and society. These titles include 1,126 citations from
the German, 1,123 from French, 731 from English, 63 from Italian, and the
rest from other European languages, but absolutely none from Turkish. The work
includes practically no direct quotations from the official Ottoman censuses, except
a reference to Salahaddin Bey's figures, although Michoff refers to writings and
figures given by Western authors who used Ottoman statistics, such as David
Urquhart, A. Ubicini, and A. Boue, and to statisticians and demographers
such as E. G. Ravenstein and H. Kutschera. It is interesting to note that
Michoff finds the scarcity of official censuses in the Ottoman state a normal
occurrence since even Europe itself did not begin to conduct regular
and systematic censuses until early in the nineteenth century. Michoff
notes that many of the authors he cited estimated the Ottoman population
according to their own subjective judgements or false information supplied
by natives. As an example, Michoff cites the fact that travelers estimated the total
number of Bulgarians in 1800-78 as varying between 500,000 and 8 million
people. A similar misrepresentation had been noted earlier by W. Eton who
dismissed the claim by the Greeks that they numbered 8 million people at the
2 Nicholas
(Nicolas) V. Michoff (Mikhov), Naseleniento na Turtsiia i Bulgarii, prez
XVIII-XIX, La Population de la Turquie et de la Bulgarie atl XVIIIe et au XIXe siecles,
5 vols. (Sofia, 1915, 1924, 1923, 1935, 1968).
end of the eighteenth century.3 Many of these inflated figures were put out in
order to back the claims of these ethnic groups to nationhood. V. Teplov, for
instance, who undertook a study of the Balkan population under the auspices of
the Russian government, used in addition to the Salnames issued by the Otto-
man government, information supplied by churches and native informants. On
the basis of such materials, he concluded arbitrarily that a Muslim family had 5
members while the non-Muslim family had 6-9.37 members.4 The fallacy of
these estimates is clearly shown in an actual count of family members undertaken
by W. L. Stoney in the Philippopoli (Plovdiv) area of Bulgaria in I877. To
answer the request of some Englishmen demanding accurate information on
family size in Bulgaria, Stoney, a British consular official, surveyed 50,622
people or o, I 10 families, in 55 villages having a predominantly Bulgarian popu-
lation and arrived at the conclusion that each had an average of 5,007 members.5
In view of the questionable statistical bases of these ethnographic studies it is
absolutely necessary to go to the basic sources on the Ottoman population in the
nineteenth century. The Salnames contained official population figures, but
these derived from more complete census figures which were seldom made fully
public. These Ottoman censuses provide by far the most reliable figures
available concerning the population of the Middle East and the Balkans in the
nineteenth century. There is no question that they had shortcomings. The first
censuses were based on counts of individual hanes or families which in a number
of cases were households composed of several nuclear families. At times, only
the taxable males or those able to perform military service were included in
censuses. Some of the early counts, especially of non-Muslims, were taken from
information of varying accuracy supplied by communal heads or local officials.
Yet, despite all these shortcomings, the official Ottoman censuses still supply
useful data because their margin of error was far less than the figures given by
observers, travellers, and biased informants, as shown by various comparative
tables. There are several arguments that sustain the value of these censuses. As
indicated later, they had to be accurate and complete since they provided the
only factual basis available to the government for levying taxes and conscripting
men into the army. The government itself constantly tried to improve its census
results by introducing new methods, seeking the advice of outside experts, and
using European models.
The purpose of the present article, part of an extensive research project
on Ottoman population movements and their sociopolitical effects, is to study
briefly the Ottoman census, the evolution of its methods, and the establishment of
a permanent registration system, and to put forth the most reliable results of all this
effort: statistical tables of the Ottoman population in 1893. These tables are
based on a census which began in i881/82, and include extensive quantitative
3 W. Eton, A
Survey of the Turkish Empire (London, I799). For another effort to show
the Armenian Catholics as more numerous than their actual number, see n. 49.
4 V. Teplov, Materialy Dlya Statistikii Bolgarii, Trakii i Makedonii (St. Petersburg,
I877).
5 Great
Britain, House of Come,. ms, Accounts and Papers, vol. 92 (1877), p. I4.
sible tax. The government, therefore, became keenly interested in updating its
records of the non-Muslim population by using its own personnel rather than
relying on the figures given by communal heads.7 This issue acquired special
urgency after a series of old taxes were abolished by Mahmut II and the tax
revenues showed a sharp drop.
The knowledge of the size and change in the composition of the population
became important also for administrative reasons, especially in the second
half of the nineteenth century, as roads, railways, bridges, irrigation schemes,
and a variety of professional schools were planned in accordance with popula-
tion density.
The growing importance attached to accurate population censuses and stat-
istics comes clearly out of a report by the $uray-1 Devlet (Council of State)
concerning the census of I88I/82.8 The Council stated:
It is a duty to mention before everything else that the interest of a government in
compilation of systematic population statistics does not stem solely from military
considerations.To know the exact numberof its own populationis a great achievement
in matters of order and regularityfor a government interested in law, property safe-
guards, financial stability, and municipal order and security. The European States
attach great and continuous care to the collection and distribution of informationon
the [entire]population. It is imperative,urgent, and essential for us to accomplishthis
importanttask [census and registration]in a perfect fashion.9
This keen interest of the Ottoman government in the adoption of modern
statistical methods was shown also during a reception given for the American
ambassador in I886, when he spoke about a recently concluded census in the
United States and was asked for assistance.10
7 These communities often paid less than their number would warrant. The number of
non-Muslims once established remained unchanged for long periods for lack of proper
registers to follow population changes. For instance, Rev. William Jowett mentions the
fact that the population of Mount Athos consisted of about 6,ooo people but 'they pay
to the Turks as for three thousands' (Richard Clogg, 'Two Accounts of the Academy of
Ayvalek [Kydonies] in I818-1919', Revue des etudes sud-est europeennes, Io0, 4 [1972],
652).
8 The correspondence referred to in this article took place between the Mabeyni
Humayun (Secretariat of the Imperial Palace) and the Sadaret, the Premier's office, or
Porte. Reports and regulations on population were issued by the $uray-i Devlet, the
Council of State, either through its Tanzimat Bureau or its General Council (*uray-i
Devlet Umumi Heyeti). The references to correspondence are henceforth shortened as M
to S or vice versa, that is, from the Palace to the Prime Minister (Mabeyni Humayun'dan
Sadarete), followed by the date of communication, the archival reference, such as Basve-
kalet Ar?ivi (BA), and the latter's respective section and number. Although most of
the documents used in this study have both the hijri (H) and mali or rumi (R) years
(about one or two years difference between them) we shall give only the hijri data followed
by the miladi, or solar calendar date (A.D.).
9 Report of
*uray-i Devlet, Tanzimat Dairesi, No. 438, 2I Cemaziyulevvel I248 (2i
April i88I), BA, Irade, $uray-i Devlet, 3148.
10 During the reception, Ambassador S. S. Cox, who replaced General Lewis Wallace,
the author of Ben Hur, mentioned that the United States had compiled new population
statistics which were of great use to his country and suggested that such statistics would
be useful also to the Ottoman government. He was told that an actual census (the one
The topic of this study is the census of 1881/82-1893. Since this census and
the population registration system developed at this date represent the culmina-
tion of an evolutionary process, it is necessary to trace their development from
the beginning. Census taking was a well-established Ottoman tradition. The
early Ottoman governments took censuses and conducted property surveys
after each new territory was conquered, and repeated the process regularly at
thirty-year intervals.1 This tradition was apparently abandoned in the seven-
teenth and eighteenth centuries, although there is some evidence to the con-
trary.12 Yet it is basic to remember that until the nineteenth century the Ottoman
under discussion in this article) was being conducted. The sultan asked the ambassador
to send him a statistical review found in the American Embassy. Eventually, the ambas-
sador sent with the interpreter of the Embassy two volumes of the review for translation
into Turkish. The sultan told the ambassador that he was very interested in such works
and pointed out that it was his high hope to compile a complete and systematic statistical
record of the entire population in his realm and that he had issued an order to this effect
(M to S, Letter by the sultan's private secretary, Sureyya, of 21 Cemaziyulevvel 1303
(Feb. 25, i886), BA, Irade, Dahiliye, 77419).
All this is confirmed by the American Ambassador, Samuel S. Cox, who, as the Chair-
man of the Census Committee, was instrumental in passing the census legislation in the
U.S. Congress. In his memoirs he writes:' In some meetings which I had with the Sultan,
and in reply to his curiosity as to the miraculous growth of our own land in population
and resources, I told him that the only way in which he could possibly understand our
advancement would be to take the salient points out of our Census reports, and especially
the Tenth Census (I88o), have them suitably translated, and apply them to his own land.
He would thus see what an advertisement a good census would be of the vast resources of
his own empire.'
According to Cox the sultan was presented later with census data and concluded that
'with such data for administrative policies we [Americans] could not be other than
prosperous'. Cox continues: 'The Sultan with intelligent grasp, comprehends their
[census data] utility, and the need of their application to his own country. Then he
reminds me of our conversation about a census for his own country, and said that he had
directed his Grand Vizier, Kiamil Pasha, to organize a commission to begin the work. He
was anxious as to its costs.... He asked me if I would aid it by my advice, when the
commission was formed. To which I responded that, consistent with my duties to my
country and health, I would do so, if the President did not object. The law, the instruc-
tions to superintendents, enumerators, and blanks for returns, and the modus operandi of
special experts, were fully detailed by the printed papers in the envelopes which were in
the box. These envelopes he sealed with his own hand, and gave them direction at once.
So that probably Turkey may, if peace prevail, have a census of her own' (S. S. Cox,
Diversions of a Diplomat in Turkey [New York, I887], pp. 37, 44).
11The Ottoman censuses of population and surveys of the land in the fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries are known from 0. L. Barkan's pioneering works: 'Tarihi Demografi
Ara?tirmalarl ve Osmanli Tarihi', Tarih Mecmuasi, 10 (1953); 'Essai sur les donne'es
statistiques des registres de recensement dans l'Empire Ottoman au XVe et XVIe
siecles', Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient, I, I (Aug. 1957), 9-21; and
'Research on the Ottoman Fiscal Surveys', in Studies in the Economic History of the Middle
East, M. A. Cook, ed. (London, I970), pp. I63-17I. See also LeilaErder, 'The Measure-
ment of Preindustrial Population Changes: The Ottoman Empire from the Fifteenth to
the Seventeenth Century', Middle Eastern Studies, iI (3 Oct. 1975), 284-301.
12 I believe that further research in the Ottoman archives may yield substantial infor-
mation on population figures, even for the later centuries. The existing records on taxa-
tion and the distribution of miri (state) land to cultivators could yield excellent figures on
the Ottoman population in the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries. For instance, the
yoklamas, censuses of the timars in 1596, i6o6, I672, I691, I694, I698, and 1715
indicate that the tradition was not abandoned altogether. These surveys show a contin-
uous preoccupation with the size of cultivable lands, at least with those given as fiefs to the
sipahis, and with their revenue. See V. P. Mutafcieva-Str. Dimitrov, Sur l'tat du
systeme des timars des XVIIe-XVIIIe siecles (Sofia, I968).
13 Enver Ziya Karal, Osmanli Imparatorlugu'nda Ilk Niifus Sayimi, 183I (Ankara,
I943).
14 'Traduction d'un memorandum de la Sublime-Porte, adresse aux missions etrangeres
a Constantinople, et relatif au recensement general decrete par S. Hautesse', Le Moniteur
Universel, 248 (4 Sept. 1844).
15 A. Ubicini, Lettres sur la Turquie (Paris, I853). Eugene Bor6, Almanach de l'Empire
ottoman pour l'annee I849 et I850 (Constantinople, I849-I850).
16 The census of the nomadic tribes in these two provinces was carried out by army
officers belonging to the units stationed in the area (S to M, Letter of 7 Sefer I268 [2
Dec. I85i], BA, Irade, Dahiliye, I4855). See also F. Kanitz, Donau-Bulgarien und der
Balkan, 3 vols. (Leipzig, I875); idem, La Bulgarie danubienne et le Balkan: Etudes de
voyages, I86o-i88o (Paris, i882).
17 It appears from official correspondence that the census of the Muslim population in
Cyprus was concluded by i86I, and that a census of the non-Muslim population was
ordered in I862, with the purpose of reforming the tax system. The census of the non-
Muslims in Cyprus was carried out by four teams, each consisting of one Muslim and one
The next Ottoman census, decreed by Mithat Pasa, and carried out between
i866 and 1873, provides an even better insight into the evolution of the Ottoman
censuses. It was taken only for the Danube province, which comprised most of
Bulgaria of today, and part Iraq, and was not published in its entirety, although
the Salnames (yearbooks issued by the government for the entire realm beginning
in 1846, and sporadically for various vilayets) published most of its contents.
The census was taken by using multiple registers which were eventually reduced
to a single one. Officials went from house to house to note the number of people
in a household, their age, marital status, occupation, and real estate properties.18
Special lists indicated the number of household heads together with their real
estate wealth and the rent derived from it, their occupation, and income. All
these findings were summarized in a fourth category of lists which indicated the
actual number of the taxable population and its ethnic composition, the number
of dwellings, the total income of the population, the total value of real estate, and
the tax collected.19 The information in this census material is so ample and
unique as to make it a permanent source of information for studying the social
and demographic history of the European possessions of the Ottoman state.
Professor N. Todorov, a member of the Bulgarian Academy, who was the first
to use, in detail, this census material in conducting his study of the Balkan towns
and their social structure, has acknowledged explicitly their value and reliability.20
One of the purposes of the census of I866 was to issue to all Ottoman subjects
a tezkere-i osmaniye, or Ottoman identity card, and then to use it to register
changes in the individual's status. Preparations were made to print and distribute
5 million cards in the Tuna (Danube) vilayet and, in anticipation of a country-
wide census, another i5 million for the rest of the realm.21
Concomitant with this interest in population matters, the government
appointed after i839: niifus nazrts (inspector-ministers of population) in the
eyalets (provinces), nufus memurs(population officials) in sanjaks and kazas, and
mukayyids (registrars) to record births and deaths and to periodically compile
Christian official plus a secretary. It was expected that the census of the non-Muslims
living in villages and towns would take 4-5 months. The Porte debated at length whether
the expenses of the census should be covered from the general treasury or from a levy
of a tax of one kuru$ on each Muslim and non-Muslim or deducted from the annual tax
collected from Cyprus (S to M, correspondence of 28 Sefer I279 [25 Aug. i862], BA,
Irade, Meclis-i Vala, 21366).
18 This material, under the serial number PC 79/8, is found in the oriental section of
the National Library of Bulgaria in Sofia. For further details see Nicola(i) Todorov, 'The
Balkan Town in the Second Half of the i9th Century', Etudes Balkaniques, 2 (I969), 31-
50.
19 Ibid., n. 3.
20 N.
Todorov, Balkanskiat Grad XV-XIX-vek (Balkan Towns in the XV-XIX
Centuries) (Sofia, 1972). An English translation of this book is to be published by
University of Washington Press, Seattle.
21 The tezkeres for the Tuna/Danube province were to be printed by Boyacloglu Agop
at a cost of I,250,ooo kurus. Actually, the printing of various forms associated with the
census and population registration provided good financial stimulus for the burgeoning
printing business in the Ottoman Empire. See S to M, communication of 9 Rebiulahir
1282 (i Sept. i865) BA, Irade, Meclis-i Vala, 24I67.
cedvels (lists) indicating the total number of people in each district. These
officials were attached to the Ceride-i Niifus Nezareti (Ministry of Population
Registers) in the capital.22 Owing to a variety of internal causes, this ministry
was abolished soon afterward and the provincial population offices were placed
under the Tahiri Emlak Idaresi (Office of Property Surveys) and then, for a
short period, under the Military Affairs Office. During this period, the main-
tenance of the registers deteriorated until a new interest in population censuses
began to emerge in the late i86os.23 After the Suray-i Devlet (Council of State)
was established in I867, it assumed jurisdiction on all population matters. In
1874, the Council introduced a series of measures for taking a census and estab-
lishing a registration system. In 1881/82 it secured the establishment of a General
Population Administration (Niifus-u Umumi Idaresi) attached to the Ministry
of Interior, where it remained until the end of the empire. Later in the I88os, a
statistical office attached to the Ministry of Trade and Construction (later
reorganized into the Ministry of Trade and Agriculture) was established; it
issued population statistics on the basis of information supplied by the Popula-
tion Administration.
It is important to stress that after I870, census taking and the establishment of
an accurate, permanent registration system became a matter of priority both
for the sultan and for the Office of the Prime Minister, as attested by their
frequent orders to the concerned offices. It should be repeated that the niifis
defters, or permanent population registers, were established first in the I830s to
follow up the tahrir (census) and were charged with the registration of births,
deaths, and migrations. These registers, however, became useless for want of
proper care and maintenance and especially because of the influx of millions of
migrants into the empire. Between 1862 and 1870, close to two million Muslims
fled from the Caucasus into the Ottoman Empire, forced out of their ancestral
homes by Russian pressures for conversion to Christianity, service in the army,
and settlement in the unhealthy plains of the north Caucasus. Moreover, the
urbanization that followed the increase of trade and economic relations with
Europe after 1856 produced a shift of population from the rural interior toward
the coastal towns. Finally, the establishment of new provinces, through the
vilayet law of 1864 and its amendment in 187 , led to the abolition of the positions
22 The name ceride
given originally to some of the land and population registers came
later to mean 'newspaper'. The name ceride-i niifiis (population register) was changed
later to niifus sicilli and niifus kiitiigii in order to show its role as the source of all popula-
tion information.
23 Some information on the history of population administration is found in the reports
of the $uray-I Devlet, number 438 of 2I Cemaziyulevvel I298 (2z April I88I) BA, Irade,
*uray-i Devlet, 3148; S to M, communication of 7 Sefer I268 (z Dec. I851), BA, Irade,
Dahiliye, 14855.
assigned to population officials and to the allocation of the funds for their salaries
to other purposes. All these events produced further disorder in the deteriorating
situation of the population registers and undermined the collection of taxes and
conscription of Muslims into the army. Consequently, the $uray-i Devlet
appointed a special committee to study the possibility of taking a new census and
of establishing a new register system. In effect, this committee reported that the
synchronization, updating, and correction of the existing population defters
would take a very long time; that the influx of the ecnebi (bona fide foreigners)
and the rapid increase in the number of the mahmi (Ottoman-born non-Muslims
obtaining passports from European powers to become native proteges serving
foreign interests) aggravated further the registration process. Consequently, the
committee recommended and the Council of State agreed that the best solution
was to conduct a new census and to establish new defters to cover the entire
country, except for Hejez and Yemen.24 In I874, $uray-1 Devlet issued an
order and three regulations to carry out a new census and to establish a new
registration system. The first regulation concerned the census methods, the
second dealt with the establishment of a registration system based on three types
of defters or registers, and the third dealt with the appointment of population
officials. These will be studied briefly in that order.
The census was to be taken by a committee established in each kaymakamilk
(kaza or district). It consisted of one government official, a Muslim, one non-
Muslim chosen from among community leaders, a secretary, and his assistant.25
It was instructed to use the old population registers when possible but to conduct
the census mainly by going to each village and mahalle, or town district, in its
respective area. All male inhabitants, including children living in the locality,
had to appear before this committee and the village ihtiyar meclisi (council of
elders) and register their age, kiinye (nickname), color of eyes and skin com-
plexion, and special physical disabilities 'which will not fade with age'. The
census committee were instructed to see even newborn babies 'with their own
eyes', study each claim to exemption from military service, and see to it that
nobody remained 'hidden' and unregistered.26 Each family had to be registered
as a unit. The roster of the resulting village census was approved by the elders'
council and a copy of it was given to the population office at the kaza center. The
kaza official in turn would send a cumulative list of the number of males in his
district to the superior administrative unit, which would convey the lists to the
ultimate authority at the center, the Defteri Hakani (Ministry of Property
Records). Officials in each kaza were obliged to send copies of the registers of
Muslim males to the regional army offices and to be the repository of all village
24
Report of the Suray-l Devlet, number 695 of 29 Zilhice 1290 (17 Feb. 1874), BA,
Irade, Meclis-i Mahsus, 2086. All these reports concerning the census of 1874 are found
in one folio.
25 See
report of the *uray-i Devlet, Tahriri Niifusun Suret-i Icraiyesini Mutzammin
Talimattir (Instructions Concerning the Conduct of Population Census), S to M of I
Rebiyulevvel 1291 (18 April 1874), BA, Irade, Meclis-i Mahsus, 2089.
26
Ibid., art. 2.
side to study the situation on the spot and to report all changes to their superiors
and, eventually, to the Defter-i Hakani Nezareti (the new name acquired by the
old Defterhane in 1871) in the capital. A copy of the registers kept in areas
inhabited by Muslims was to be sent to the proper military authorities. Those
failing to report births, deaths, and changes in personal status were subjected to
various penalties.
All these instructions were submitted by Premier Hiiseyin Avni Pasa to the
sultan who approved them and issued a special order for their execution.30
Preparations were made, but the census and registration system devised in 1874
could not be carried out. There were several reasons. Revolts in Bosnia-
Herzegovina in I875, the abdication and suicide of Sultan Abdulaziz, the pro-
clamation of a constitution, and accession to the throne of Sultan Abdulhamit II
in 1876, and, especially, the disastrous war with Russia in I877/78 and the
resulting loss of territory substantially upset Ottoman internal order. In addition,
the influx of large numbers of Muslim refugees from the Balkans in 1877/78 and
thereafter, and the need to settle them, created new demographic problems not
foreseen in I874. Delay therefore resulted until they could be worked out.
As soon as the political situation stabilized, the sultan issued an order for
carrying out a new census. The sultan complained through his secretary that the
country did not possess registers indicating the exact number of male subjects
and therefore could not estimate the exact number of soldiers available for active
and reserve duties, nor could it carry out a planned reorganization of the army.
Consequently, in I881, the Palace charged the War Ministry with the duty of
counting Muslim males, whereas officials in the Ministry of Interior counted
the non-Muslims.31 As usual, the issue was referred to the $uray-1 Devlet. This
modern-minded office, eager to adopt advanced techniques of organization,
debated the issue and came out with a series of recommendations which were
based in large measure on the 874 regulations.
These recommendations and the resulting regulations became, in effect, the
basis for the census and registration system used after 188i.32 They were broader
in scope and different in essence from the sultan's directives. The *uray-i
Devlet acknowledged that the census of 1874 could not be carried out because of
internal reasons, although the knowledge gained in devising it was very useful in
planning the new one. It agreed with the military authorities that the division of
the Muslim population into age groups was a matter of vital practical importance.
It stressed also the necessity of providing each Ottoman citizen with a tezkere,
30 See correspondence S to M of 8, 9 Rebiyulahir 1291 (May 25, 26, I874), BA, Irade,
Meclis-i Mahsus, 2089.
31M to S, order of 15 Recep 1297 (June 23, i880), BA, Irade, Dahiliye, 65276.
32 S to M,
$uray-I Devlet, Tanzimat Dairesi, Communication Number 438 of 21
Cemaziyulevvel I298 (21 April i88i), BA, Irade, $uray-l Devlet, 3148.
all births and deaths and provide general statistical information on the entire
population. Consequently, all the previous provisions concerning the census and
and registration system were combined into one single regulation, Sicilli Niifus
Nizamnamesi (Regulation for Population Registers).36 These Regulations were
debated and approved by the General Committee of the *uray-1 Devlet, and
promulgated by the sultan in i88i.37
Officers of the Ottoman Empire's Directorate of Statistics
Years
Rumi
or General Director Assistant to the
Hijri Mali A.D. of Statistics General Director
The Regulations consisted of fifty articles, divided into nine sections. The first
thirty-eight articles, comprising eight sections, were devoted to the organization
of the register system while the last twelve, assembled under the heading
ahkam-zmuvvakate (provisional regulation), dealt with the census itself. Follow-
ing its own reasoning, the Council considered the census as an ad hoc project
while its by-product, the register system, was a permanent one. We shall study
the census first.
The census consisted essentially of registration in the sicil, or register. It was
carried out by committees established in each kaza. Each committee had one
member from the kaza administration council, another from the municipal
council, the population official, and a redif (reserve military officer). In the
kazas that had different religious groups, one additional member was selected
from the most numerous non-Muslim group. A population secretory and his
assistant accompanied the committee (art. 39-40). The registration included
the respondent's name and nickname, his or her father's name, and the address,
age, religion, occupation and profession, electoral status, physical disabilities, and
civil status. The non-Muslims supplied the same information, but were registered
in a different register so as to facilitate the tax levy. The information was supplied
directly by the person involved, but exceptions were recognized in legitimate
cases when a third person accompanied by two witnesses over the age of twenty-
one provided it for an absent party. (This provision apparently was intended to
excuse women from appearing before the census committee since for the first
time women were also counted and registered.) At the end of the census of a
village or mahalle (town district), the accuracy, completeness, and authenticity
of the census results were certified by the imam, muhtar, and the community
councils.38 The kaza population official was obliged to compile, within three
months after the end of the census, a list of all inhabitants in his district and send
it to the province capital, which sent it ultimately to the Niifus-u Umumiye
Idaresi (General Administration of Population).
Compliance with the census registration was insured by a rather compelling
measure. Each registered individual was issued an official niifus tezkeresi
(population bulletin or identity card) which contained all the relevant informa-
tion about the bearer in the register. This card came to be known later as niifus
ciizdanz (population book). Each individual had to show it to the authorities
before buying, selling, or inheriting property, before being accepted in an
occupation or profession, for obtaining travel documents, or for conducting other
official business. Those without such cards, besides unable to conduct official
business, were punished by stiff fines and jail terms ranging from twenty-four
38 During the debates in the $uray-i Devlet, the General Committee suggested that
since some non-Muslim community leaders could not speak Turkish and consequently
faced difficulty in filing the birth certificates, the population officers sent to these areas
should be selected from those who spoke the native languages. In other words, instead
of compelling the citizens to learn Turkish, the language of the administration, the
Ottoman government sought at this date to teach its own officials the regional languages,
a custom long in practice.
hours to one month if they failed to present an acceptable excuse before the court
(art. 5). Those failing to register in order to avoid military service were to be
immediately conscripted.
The Population Administration consisted of a central administration with a
Director General and a Secretariat attached to the Dahiliye (Interior) Ministry.
Each kaza had a population official, while the special districts had a niifus nazirz,
both of whom were assisted by a population secretary and his assistant. Births,
deaths, migration, and marriages occurring in the villages and mahalles after the
census were recorded by the local officials (the muhtars) in one of four types of
standard ilmuhaber(information certificate) in accordance with the instructions
issued by the population official in the kaza (art. I, 12). The latter in turn was
obliged to forward the annual icmal (summary) of the village and mahalle
population reports, after due inspection and approval by the kaza administrative
council, to the superior offices not later than April i. Eventually, the reports
from all the vilayets reached the General Administration of Population in the
Ministry of Interior: 'The copies of the registrations [births, deaths] reaching
the Ministry of Interior would provide the General Administration of Population
with [statistical data] necessary to compile the annual general statistics [of the
population] and would be preserved intact. A list of people reaching military
age together with the [description] of their identity will be compiled and
forwarded to the Military Administration' (art. 14).
The Regulations issued by the $uray-i Devlet contained other detailed
instructions concerning the registration of births (art. 15-22), marriages (art.
23-26), deaths (art. 27-29), and migration (art. 30-3I). They also contained a
special section (art. 32-39) establishing procedures for the control and super-
vision of population registers, assuring a constant upward flow of information
from villages to the superior population authorities, for registering those who
might have failed to do so during the original census, and for correcting the
registers' shortcomings, if any. The Regulations dealt with the financing of the
register system by charging small sums for registering births and issuing travel
certificates. All these proposals were accepted by the sultan who ordered their
implementation as soon as possible.39 It is important to stress the fact that the
registration system, the niifus tezkeresi (identity card), and the administrative
organization established in 1881/82 were implemented, with certain expansions
and modifications, throughout the remainder of the Ottoman Empire and have
survived in a variety of forms in Turkey and other places in the Middle East
right to the present day. A law issued in 13I8 (I900/I) broadened considerably
the registration provisions of the Regulations of 1881/82. Another law and the
accompanying regulations issued in 1320 (I902/3) superseded the law of 1318 and
brought further clarification concerning census taking and registration. Another
census based on this law was apparently started in 1321 (1903/4).
39 See exchangeof lettersbetweenthe Prime Minister'sofficeand the Palace,and the
latter's Irade (Orders) of 7 $evval I298 (i Sept. i88x) and 8 $evval 1898 (2 Sept. i88 ),
BA, Irade, $uray-I Devlet, 3148.
The time needed for preparations did not permit the census and registration
committees established at kaza level to begin their work until sometime in
1882. The census itself, that is, the registration of all the inhabitants in villages
and mahalles, and the issuance of the niifus tezkeresi, took far longer than expected
because of the physical difficulties involved, such as lack of transportation and
bad weather. The first results from the more accessible areas came in I884/85.
Some of these preliminary statistical results were published in a variety of
places, including the Salnames, but have been used by just a few writers, and
only recently.40 Many other vilayets do not appear to have completed their
man territories in the Balkans, Anatolia, and Syria (inclusive of Jordan, most of
Lebanon, and Palestine) were almost completed by 1888/89. There still remained
a few people not registered even in the areas where the census was declared to be
completed. In a few inaccessible areas, populations, particularly the nomadic
tribes, were not counted at all, but were estimated on the basis of information
supplied by tribal leaders and local officials.
The Ottoman census and registration that began in 1881/82 represented a
continuous endeavour. Consequently, it is extremely difficult at this stage of our
ongoing research to state precisely when they ended, if they ended at all. One
can, however, state that the population records issued in I893 represent the
most complete and reliable Ottoman population figures compiled in the nine-
teenth century.
On 5 Sefer 1311 (I7 August 1893) Premier Cevat Pasa submitted them in a
bound manuscript to the sultan who had consistently pressed for their com-
pletion and accuracy.46 Different from a variety of earlier general population
statistics, these gave precise and detailed information on the population of all
areas and noted the districts and regions where the census was not completed,
while providing estimates for the people in these areas-mostly women and
tribesmen-not subjected to individual census and registration.47The figures in
these statistics were considered definitive and reliable and, therefore, were used
as a basis for official statistics concerning the Ottoman population and for
subsequent administrative measures.
The final question to be asked concerns the margin of error, which means
unregistered people (mostly women), in the statistical tables presented below. It
is impossible to provide a definitive answer to this question. My own view on this
matter, stemming in part from the insight one gains by working with such
materials, is that the margin of error in established communities located in the
relatively developed areas with reasonably good communication was low, possibly
between 2 and 5 percent. The practical need for every individual to possess a
niifus tezkeresi used in all dealings with the government forced practically
everyone to register. The margin of error in remote areas probably increased to
6-io percent.48 Even here, the need for personnel in the army, and taxes, forced
46 The letter states that the defter (register) submitted to the sultan was prepared by the
Population Administration following the sultan's orders and that it included the number
of the Muslim and non-Muslim population (cemaat-i muhtelife), and of the foreigners.
Bab-i Ali, Daireyi Sadaret, Amedi Divan-i Humayun, 333, BA, Ylldiz, Perakende, iiS
31 , Number 2 5.
47 See Devlet-i Aliye-i Osmaniyenin I313 Senesine Mahsus Istatistik-i Umumiyesi
(General Statistics of the Ottoman State for the Year 1313 [1895]), Ministry of Trade and
Construction, Istanbul I3I6 (I898). This latter publication was compiled by the Statisti-
cal office on the basis of information supplied by the Population Administration.
48 The validity of the census results obtained in I893 can be tested against some other
reliable estimates. Fortunately, we have a number of estimates on the population of
various important vilayets in Anatolia and Rumili. For instance, the British Consulate
put together eight different population estimates for the population of Sivas. One of the
estimates was issued by the Armenian Patriarch whose figures were grossly wrong both
for Muslims and non-Muslims. The remaining seven estimates made by the Armenian
bishop in Sivas, by foreigners and Ottoman officials acquainted with the local situation,
show the population of Sivas in I88i as varying between 708,550 and 895,682 people;
the Muslim-Christian ratio as varying between 3.4-5.01, exclusive of 50,000 Circas-
sians. The differences between these informed estimates does not differ greatly from
Christian-
Muslim
Source of statistics Christians ratio Muslims Total
SOURCE:Great Britain, House of Commons, Accounts and Papers, vol. 0oo (I88I), No. 6, p. 99.
Patriarch Hassoun's inflated estimates of the number of Armenian Catholics appears in the
same source.
the figures obtained in 1893. The latter including new births since I880 placed the total
population of Sivas at 926,671 people of whom 766,558 were Muslims and 16o,II3
Christians. It is noteworthy that the Armenian Catholic Patriarch Hassoun IX in a letter
to the British showed the Armenian Catholics of Sivas as numbering io,ooo. The
Ottoman census of 1893 showed the number of Catholic Armenians in Sivas province as
3,052 people, almost evenly divided between men and women. Other vilayets show more
or less the same pattern.