Still, compared to other Ottoman exploits (in Anatolia, for
instance), the conquest of the Balkan was a benign affair. Cities
remained intact, the lands were not depopulated and the
indiscriminately ferocious nomadic tribesmen that usually
accompanied the Turkish forces largely stayed at home. The Ottoman
bureaucracy took over most aspects of daily life soon after the
military victories, bringing with it the leaden stability that was
its hallmark. Indeed, populations were dislocated and re-settled as
a matter of policy called "sorgun". Yet such measures were intended
mainly to quell plangent rebelliousness and were applied mainly to
the urban minority (for instance, in Constantinople).
The Church was an accomplice of the Turkish occupiers. It was a part
of the Ottoman system of governance and enjoyed both its protection
and its funding. It was leveraged by the Turk sultans in their quest
to pacify their subjects. Mehmet II bestowed upon the Greek Orthodox
Patriarchate, its bishops and clergy great powers. The trade off was
made explicit in Mehmet's edicts: the Church accepted the earthly
sovereignty of the sultan - and he, in turn, granted them tolerance,
protection and even friendship. The Ottoman religious-legal code,
the Seriat, recognized the Christian's right to form their own
religiously self-governing communities.
These communities were not confined to the orderly provision of
worship services. They managed communal property as well. Mehmet's
benevolence towards the indigents was so legendary that people
wrongly attributed to him the official declaration of a "Millet i
Rum" (Roman, or Greek, nation) and the appointment of Gennadios as
patriarch of the Orthodox Church (which only an episcopal synod
could do).
The Ottoman Empire was an amazing hybrid. As opposed to popular
opinion it was not a religious entity. The ruling elite included
members of all religions. Thus, one could find Christian "askeri "
(military or civil officials) and Muslim "reaya" ("flock" of
taxpayers). It is true that Christians paid the arbitrarily set
"harac" (or, less commonly, "cizye") in lieu of military service.
Even the clergy were not exempt (they even assisted in tax
collection). But both Christians and Muslims paid the land tax, for
instance. And, as the fairness, transparency and predictability of
the local taxmen deteriorated - both Muslims and Christians
complained.
The main problem of the Ottoman Empire was devolution - not
centralization. Local governors and tax collectors had too much
power and the sultan was too remote and disinterested or too weak
and ineffective. The population tried to get Istanbul MORE involved
- not less so.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account