Leyla

Women in Rome generally lacked political, legal, or commercial rights because they were believed to be naturally weaker than men. However, in the period of the seemingly unending Punic Wars, women were obliged to work in and take almost all the responsibilities for many sectors of Roman life, including those previously open only to men. Simultaneously, women gained some advantages for themselves. Following the Punic Wars and the eventual control of the western Mediterranean, the Romans turned their attention to the Eastern Mediterranean; their successes there made them the masters of the entire Mediterranean. This conquest and expansion, in turn, brought Rome into contact with many new sociocultural concepts. The greatest impact on women was that they were able to loosen the guardianship of the men surrounding them. The speed with which men died in Roman wars considerably shortened the length of typical Roman marriages, allowing widowed women to act more autonomously. During these wars for Roman supremacy in the Mediterranean and in their aftermath, women took advantage of the scarcity of men to increase their opportunities in the wider Roman world. These same opportunities presented themselves throughout the 1st Century BCE, during the era of the last Republican civil wars. In this period, women managed to be active in the legal sector, which had previously been open only to men.&nbsp;As was true of all activities in which women tried to engage outside the household, their roles as “lawyers” in the courts were faced with criticism and condemnation. A typical sanctifier of masculine tradition, Valerius Maximus, argued that Roman society should not stay silent any longer against women who are drifting away from modesty, acting contrary to their nature in the Forum and judicial courts, while he expresses his discontentment for their rise to prominence, on the other hand, he gives examples of three women acting as their own attorneys. According to Valerius Maximus, Amaesia Sentia, who was defending her own case before the praetor and was later praised with the word “androgynous” meaning “having a man’s soul in a woman’s body”; was released because she effectively performed all parts of a legal defense in the court gracefully but with a masculine determination. As Amaesia Sentia was acquitted thanks to her legal knowledge and skills, receiving the respect of society even though alienated from her feminine identity and equipped with masculine qualities, the fact remains that she gained her freedom by acting as her own lawyer.Defending herself at every opportunity and heavily criticized by Valerius Maximus as a “monster” and a “bad example of feminine bickering,” C. Afrania, unlike Amaesia Sentia, was not deemed a woman deserving the respect of society; in accordance with social norms. Brought before the praetor many times, C. Afrania was, according to Valerius Maximus, defending herself in court because she was shameless and arrogant. Ulpian claims that Afrania’s extreme assumptions caused a change in the law, and women lost their right to&nbsp;represent others in court because of her. In reality, though, it is obvious that Afrania did not need a lawyer; she was a very skillful rhetorician and had great legal knowledge, despite her reputation as an impudent woman with a negative attitude; who did not need the services of an attorney.The third woman Valerius Maximus discussed is Hortensia. She was spoken of very highly like Amaesia Sentia, but unlike her, Hortensia is distinguished not just for defending herself but also for representing a collective women’s protest. The basis for this protest was the decree of forced evaluation of the properties of the 1,400 richest women in the country to tax them. This valuation was undertaken by Octavian, Mark Anthony, and Lepidus, who were then the political and military leaders of Rome. Hortensia was probably one of the leading protesters. From details of her defense and the legal steps the women took before proceedings, it is understood that Hortensia probably received legal education from her rhetorician father, Quintus Hortensius. Before taking legal action, she followed socially acceptable moral procedures by trying to reach the triumvirs’ spouses, an effort that failed. Only then did the women approach the Forum, which was an important strategy to show their loyalty to the virtuous Roman woman profile, prove their righteousness, and demonstrate that they were deserving of social respect. In her defense, Hortensia cited historical anecdotes, which showed the strong patriotism of her female ancestors, and said that women could even be more devoted and selfless than men when necessary. Hortensia argued that women should be exempted from any punishment for their protest because they had no right to make political decisions, unlike their male ancestors. Her defense was successfully acknowledged, and changes were made in the taxing decree.&nbsp;Despite the discomfort felt in Rome toward women entering public spaces, there was one other woman who acted as her own lawyer—Turia, known from only her funerary inscription. Turia was a Roman woman whose parents were murdered during the civil war that erupted in 49 BCE between Iulius Caesar and Pompeius. According to her funerary inscription, dating to 8-2 BCE, this young woman, who led a very busy life, managed to have the murderer of her parents receive the appropriate punishment and protect her father’s will, even though her relatives had designs on her properties. As her husband, who dedicated the funerary inscription, stated, Turia, when defending her father’s will, took the case herself. She acted with the qualities of an ideal lawyer, displaying intelligence, perseverance, determination, and a sense of duty. Like Hortensia, Turia was victorious in her legal struggles.Manilia, a prostitute, is the earliest recorded woman acting as her own defender in Rome. According to Aulus Gellius, in 151 BCE, Manilia was sued for attacking aedilis curulis Mancinus, who tried to break into her house while he was drunk. Manilia allegedly attacked him by throwing stones and injured him. She was probably found guilty in plebian court. However; since Manilia apparently had knowledge of Roman legal procedure, she took the&nbsp;case to tribunus plebis (tribune of the people) and defended herself by stating that Mancinus tried to force himself into her home without his official uniform. She simply tried to thwart him by throwing stones at him. The tribunus accordingly decided that the wrongdoing was that of the adedilis curulis.&nbsp;Women in Roman courts were usually represented by someone they trusted, mostly men. Based on the cases studied here, there seems to have been no regulation whatsoever preventing them from representing themselves in court or representing others, at least at the end of the Roman Republic. However, since Roman public spaces were reserved for men only, in ancient historical sources, Turia, Amaesia Sentia, and Hortensia were ascribed virtues reflecting masculinity. In other words, the successes of these women were essentially ignored in terms of gender. This attitude shows that women in Rome could only enter public spaces without being condemned under very narrow and specific conditions and then had to assume male roles.&nbsp;

Roma Mahkemelerinde Savunma Yapan “Avukat”  Kadınlar

İlyas

Prof.

Mecnun

In the thirteenth century, lands of the Ishım, Tobol, Irtysh, and Tura Rivers, were handed over to the Kyrgyz nobleman Taibuga, son of Mamık by Genghis Khan. Taibuga established an autonomous country centered on Chimgi-Tura (the current Tyumen) and his successors Hodja Khan and Mar Khan carried on his legacy. However, in time, Taibugids domination was threatened by the Shaybanids, who wanted to take over this country. Thus began the conflict for domination between the Taibugids and the Shaybanids. Although the Shaybanids sovereign Ibak Khan did take the country on 1468, he could not hold it for long and lost it back to the Taibugas in a short time.Following this struggle with the Shaybanids, the Taibugids decided to foster close relations with Moscow to keep their domination strong. Therefore, Moscow was gaining control, first by occupying the Kazan Kaganate in 1552 and the Astrakhan Kaganate in 1556 but also by sending the Russian immigrants and miners to Perm, even spreading through Siberia. Nevertheless, in 1557–1558, Kuchum Khan, who wanted to obtain Sibir Kaganate, put an end to the Taibugids and Moscow’s hopes of possessing this country and in 1563 put an end to the rule of the Taibugids in the Siberian Khanate.Conversely, different opinions have been expressed about the genealogy of Kuchum Khan, and historians are divided over this. The first of these views was formed on the basis of some events relating to Kuchum Khan and that Kuchum Khan was connected to the Kazakh Horde lineage. As it happens, some of the historians who expressed this thought acted independently of the information given in the main sources, while others simply misinterpreted the main sources. The second opinion about the ancestry of Kuchum Khan is that he belonged to the Shaybanids. This view was first put forward by Kadir Ali Bek Celayiri in 1602, and then Abu’l Gazi Bahadır Han made some alterations regarding the family members of Kuchum Khan in line with the same opinion. Despite this, the information given by these two people about the ancestry of Kuchum Khan caused some mistakes when considered within the framework of main sources and logic. Aware of these mistakes, Sh. Marcani made new inferences about the family members of Kuchum Khan by synthesizing the information given by Kadir Ali Bek Celayiri and Abu’l Gazi Bahadır Han within the framework of his research over time. As a result, although Kadir Ali Bek Celayiri and Abu’l Gazi Bahadır Han and Sh. Marcani have expressed various opinions about the family members of Kuchum Khan, it is still valid today, although it is certain that Kuchum Khan is descended from the Shaybanid dynasty.Thus, Kuchum Khan, whom sources confirm as a descendant of the Shaybanids, put an end to the rule of Taibugids in the Siberian Khanate in 1563. Kuchum Khan, who had focused more on the internal affairs of the state because he shared the first years of his rule with his brother, started to deal with the foreign affairs of the state on the death of his brother.&nbsp;&nbsp;Therefore, with the invasion of the Kazan Khanate by Moscow in 1552, he aimed to stop the Russian advance toward Siberia. Achieving this goal required the help of the indigenous tribes of Siberia, especially clergy from Bukhara and Kazan.Kuchum Khan, who received the support of the clergy and local tribes from 1573, conducted extremely successful struggles in Siberia until 1582. However, the fact that the Stroganovs, whose businesses were damaged by the attacks of Kuchum Khan, and the Cossacks, who were supported financially by the Stroganovs, participated in these struggles reversed the situation. Although Kuchum Khan fought with the Cossacks who left the Stroganovs’ households in Chusovo on September 1, 1582, he was forced to leave the city on October 26, 1582, as a result of the occupation of Isker by the Cossacks. Despite this, Kuchum Khan, who was determined to ensure the independence of the Sibir Khanate, attacked the Cossacks with various tactics applied in the steppe and managed to both wear out the Cossack troops and kill various Cossack Atamans at different times. As can be seen, from 1584, the gradual loss of important leaders of the Cossack troops and the emerging food problem confirm the success of Kuchum Khan and his subordinates.After these events, Kuchum Khan made an agreement with the people of Bukhara to deal the final blow to the Cossacks in June 1584 and succeeded in killing the Cossack Ataman Yermak Timofeyevich in an ambush set up on the Vagay River. However, due to the struggle for power in the Siberian Khanate, Kuchum Khan could not take back the Isker. Despite this, after the death of Yermak Timofeyevich, Moscow, taking advantage of the power struggles in Siberia, continued the process leading to the Russian domination of the region with the military governors it sent to Siberia. Thus, while Moscow was building various Russian cities in the region, it struggled with Kuchum Khan and his followers. Despite this, Kuchum Khan, who was determined to expel the Russian central troops as well as expelling the Cossacks from Siberia, fought the central Russian troops until 1598. As of that year, there were not enough soldiers around Kuchum Khan and sources indicate that the lands of the Mangits, namely, the Nogay Orda, were lost.In our study, first of all, under the title “Kuchum Khan’s Genealogy,” the opinions expressed on whether Kuchum Khan is a Kazakh or a Shaybanid will be assessed, then, under the title “Life of Kuchum Khan,” information will be presented about the wars that involved Kuchum Khan and his sense of independence.&nbsp;

Bağımsızlığa Adanmış Bir Hayat: Küçüm Han

Mehmet

Although the rich document collections in the Ottoman Archives have been used extensively by historians, it could be argued that the diplomatic examination of documents and registers still has not received the attention that it deserves. Western and especially Balkan historians have realized the importance of the subject and have conducted studies and publications at various levels. In Turkey, Prof. Uzunçarşılı and Prof. Gökbilgin made important studies on Ottoman diplomatics; however, Prof. M. S. Kütükoğlu’s monumental work, Osmanlı Belgelerinin Dili, Diplomatik (The Language of Ottoman Documents, Diplomatics), which she produced with years of systematic and methodical research, became a turning point in this field.Among the valuable document types of Ottoman palaeography, mahzars are remarkable documents both in terms of their physical appearance and content. Mahzars are noteworthy in terms of their size, their languages, their treatment in offices, and their numerous signatures, seals, fingerprints, and so on. It also has a remarkable feature in terms of reflecting social life and having particularly colorful content. This study examines the diplomatic features of mahzar, and tries to show its elements, expressions, and shapes with examples.A petition with multiple signatures submitted to official authorities for a complaint, request, or thank is called mahzar. The first known examples of multi-signature applications to official authorities in the Ottoman bureaucracy appear in the middle of the sixteenth century. The multi-signature petition submitted to Suleiman the Magnificent, asking the former Şeyhülharem Piri Ağa to return to his post, probably constitutes the first prototype example of the mahzar. Another mahzar, who complained about the abuses of Kadi Mehmed Efendi and is thought to belong to the time of Sultan Murad III, is considered one of the first examples. Since the second half of the seventeenth century, the number of mahzar-type documents gradually increased, and in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, submitting mahzars to official authorities was a well-established practice. There are thousands of mahzars belonging to these periods in the various classifications of the Ottoman State Archive.The mahzars given by the people living in the Anatolia, Rumelia, and Arab provinces in the Ottoman Empire were similar to each other in terms of shape and style. In this similarity, the widely used handbooks and the Ottoman officialdom (mülâzemet) system play an important role.Mahzars were generally arranged in large sizes and in one piece. While the early mahzars were relatively small in size, large mahzars were arranged in the nineteenth century, and the increase in the number of signatures played a role in their enlargement. The size of the documents enlarged with the addition of i’lam, arz, fatwa, mazbata, expense list. In mahzars,&nbsp;Mahzars were generally arranged in large sizes and in one piece. While the early mahzars were relatively small in size, large mahzars were arranged in the nineteenth century, and the increase in the number of signatures played a role in their enlargement. The size of the documents enlarged with the addition of i’lam, arz, fatwa, mazbata, expense list. In mahzars,&nbsp;&nbsp;Mahzars from different regions of the Ottoman Empire written in Arabic, Greek, Bulgarian, Serbian, and Georgian were presented to the Divan-ı Humâyun or to provincial divans. However, mahzars written in languages other than Turkish are limited. Sometimes, short Turkish translations of mahzars written in different languages were added for faster evaluation in the Divan-ı Hümâyun. For matters concerning Muslims and non-Muslims, a mahzar was sometimes held in two different languages.Mahzars were mostly presented to the Divan-ı Hümâyun. There were also mahzars addressed to the sultan (Rikâb-ı Hümâyun), the vizier, the Dârüssaâde aghas and the provincial council. In the mahzars addressed to the sultan, the expression that of “My Sultan (Padişahım)” was written at the top of the document as an expression of respect. Like other documents, the mahzars consisted of some parts in diplomatic terms. After the elkāb part, the city and town where the mahzar owners lived were usually indicated in the mahzars. The subject of complaint or request was briefly summarized in the mahzars and if the subject was complicated it was explained in detail. Then, the mahzar owners express their wishes or thanks.Mahzars did not usually have dates, although some did. The period of undated mahzars can only be understood from the bureaucratic procedures regulating them. Signatures and seals are the most important elements of mahzars; since mahzar was arranged on a single page, the signatures were placed on the same page and consisted of three main elements, namely, the statement of approval, the name or nickname of the person, his duty and position. The seals were placed under the signatures, and due to the lack of space in some mahzars, seals and fingerprints were placed on the back of the paper. Seals belonging to Muslims and non-Muslims had their own characteristics. Seals belonging to non-Muslims contained expressions in Turkish or partly in Turkish and partly in their own language. Seals -especially those belonging to priests- were quite large and had pictures on them. In mahzars, Muslims and non-Muslims would sometimes print fingerprints instead of seals.When the mahzar was prepared and presented to the relevant authorities, it went through various transactions. Mahzar owners wanted their mahzars to be reinforced with documents such as fatwa, i’lam and telhis. The owners of mahzars usually applied to a judge and asked them to inform Istanbul of the matter about which they complained or demanded. Mahzars were sometimes written and signed in the presence of a judge and recorded in the court registers.&nbsp;

Diplomatik Açıdan Mahzar

Hacer

Assist. Prof.

Dimetoka (Didymoteicho) is an ancient Byzantine garrison city established on the banks of the River Erythropotamos, a branch of the Maritsa River. Close to its present-day location, emperor Trajan (98–117) founded the city of Plotinopolis. As the town was sacked by the Barbarians, emperor Iustinianos (527–565) abandoned the ancient city and created a new one close to the nearby River of Erythropotamos. The new city received its name “Didymoteicho” from the double wall that surrounded it, meaning twin fortification (“Didymóteichon”) in Greek. During the Ottoman period, the city was known as Dimetoka.This strongly fortified Byzantine city had strategic importance and served as a defense line in Thrace to protect Constantinople, the imperial capital, from any attacks from Europe. Apart from its strategic importance, it became an imperial base during the Byzantine civil war. Backed by the Thracian nobles, Ioannes Kantakuzenos, the commander-in-chief and the chief lieutenant of the Byzantine emperor, was crowned emperor in the same city on October 26, 1341. Thus, for a certain period, Dimetoka became the de facto rival of the Byzantine capital. In the struggle against his rivals, Ioannes Kantakuzenos (Kantakuzenos VI) allied with Orhan, the Ottoman Sultan. The Ottoman forces had initially crossed to the Rumelian side to provide military aid to their Byzantine ally; later, however, they began to settle down permanently in the region. In 1354, Süleyman Paşa captured the strategically important town of Gelibolu. Following his death, the Ottoman advances in the region continued and the important cities of Edirne and Dimetoka were captured by Sultan Murad I. The conqueror of Dimetoka was an Ottoman commander called Hacı İlbey (1361).Upon his accession to the throne, Murad I preferred to establish his main base and residence in this double-fortified city and then constructed a royal palace in the inner city. Until the rise of Edirne as the imperial capital, the sultan ruled his domains and coordinated his military operations in the Rumelia from his palace in Dimetoka. During this period, the entire city witnessed rapid urbanization, and new residential areas appeared outside the original intramural settlement. A completely new and typical Ottoman city developed in the vast plains around the old Byzantine town.During the reign of Murad I, some neighborhoods were established in the new settlement areas, especially around Köprü Kapısı, the city gate at the south-west part of the city. The urbanization of the south-east zone, marked by the city gate called Çarşı Kapı, was relatively slow and just one neighborhood was established during the fourteenth century. In the subsequent century, this part of the city also became more urbanized with the emergence of new neighborhoods. Some, such as the Mahalle of Cüneyd Abdal, served as the residential quarters for the local Ottoman administrators and colonizing dervishes.&nbsp;Through to the end of the fourteenth century, the facade of the city changed with new buildings. The Mosque of Bayezid I and the marketplace became the center of the city, and shops and a bazaar clustered around them. Bayezid I himself financed the erection of a dervish lodge in the neighborhood of Ahi Denk (Denek) and endowed the revenues of several shops in the marketplace to cover its expenses. The same sultan also funded a water conduit to meet the city’s water demands.The mosque and religious school (madrasa) constructed by Oruç Bey in the fifteenth century became another center of the Dimetoka. The madrasa of Oruç Bey has historical importance as the first madrasa of the city and one of the oldest of the Rumelia. Following a setback during the period of Interregnum, the Ottomans made further investments in education, cultural activities and public works. Similar to the contribution of Oruç Bey, the new buildings constructed by Karagöz Bey contributed to the rise of new residential quarters in different parts of the city. He erected a new mosque and the second madrasa of Dimetoka. All these edifices contributed to the cultural life and the education of the city.A considerable population lived in the 17 neighborhoods of Dimetoka. While around 1500–2000 non-Muslims resided in the inner city during the first half of the fifteenth century, this number shrank to 565 by the end of the same century. This one-third decrease in the nonMuslim population may be somehow related to increased migrations to newly conquered Istanbul. As may be recalled, Dimetoka had served as the main base for one of the rival emperors during the Byzantine civil war. As for the Muslim population of the city, 1750– 1755 Muslims lived in the city in the late fifteenth century, while the total population was around 2400–2500.To sum up, the small Byzantine garrison city in Thrace did not lose its importance under Ottoman rule. On the contrary, it became one of the most important headquarters of the Ottoman advances into Rumelia. Until the rise of Edirne, it served as a capital for Murad I and was rapidly urbanized with the establishment of new residential quarters outside the inner city and later further urbanized by the edifices of Yıldırım Bayezid and Oruç Bey erected in different parts of the city. Almost a century later, Dimetoka turned into a traditional Ottoman city with its mosques, madrasa, marketplace, shops and bathhouses.&nbsp;

Bizans Kalesinden Osmanlı Şehrine: Fethinden XV. Yüzyıl Sonlarına Kadar Dimetoka

Mustafa

Rahime

Res. Assist.

In this study, the life story of Saliha Sultan, daughter of Sultan Ahmed III, and the history of the foundations that she established between 1738–1778 are discussed based on the information found in the chronicles and archive sources of the period. For this purpose, the information in the chronicles and archive documents related to the subject have been translated and interpreted. Moreover, instead of evaluating the text of the foundation; a system based on the management of the foundation, following its sources of income and charitable benefits was followed.In the Ottoman Empire, the daughters of the Sultans had a considerable amount of property thanks to the land income given to them as property, the mahr and inheritance they obtained from their marriage, and their commercial activities.Their fathers, brothers, and sisters, who were also sultans when they were married or widowed, were rarely honored by later sultans who were close relatives. The mahr inherited from their spouses, pashas was the basis of their wealth as widows, and it was supplemented through inheritance or donation.Saliha Sultan was first married at the age of 13 with 10000 gold mahr to Sari Mustafa Pasha in 1728. She was widowed for nine years after the death of her first husband, until she married a second time to Belgrade Guard Abdipashazade Ali Pasha in 1740. Later, she married a third time in 1747, after being a widow for the second time. She wed the Rumeli Governor Yahya Pasha, son of Eyüp Mosque’s Imam Mustafa Efendi; however, this marriage is not mentioned in the published sources, and is only indirectly described in the chronicles of the period.Saliha Sultan lived as a widow for three years after the death of Yahya Pasha and then of her brother Ahmed III. Upon Mustafa’s accession to the throne, she married the Grand Vizier Ragıp Pasha on March 31, 1758 at his request. She was widowed again after Ragıp Pasha’s death in 1763, Saliha Sultan made her last marriage to Kaptan-ı Derya Mehmed Pasha in 1764.As you can see, Saliha Sultan’s marriage journey, which began at the age of 13, ended when she was 56 years old with the death of her last husband, Mehmed Pasha. It is seen that almost all of these marriages were made by the sultans of the period in line with the marriage policies of the sultan’s daughters.An important point to be mentioned in considering the marriages of Saliha Sultan is that the gifts or cash money, customarily given to the Sultan, personally or institutionally, on the marriage decision of the sultans or grand viziers has been announced, could be used in palace expenditures. In this way, the marriage of Saliha Sultan to Kaptanıderya Mehmed Pasha was made with the encouragement of Sultan Mustafa III.&nbsp;After the death of Saliha Sultan in 1778, 25.386,5 kuruş 44 money was obtained from her opposition and a deficit of 59 kuruş was found when the expenses were calculated as 25.446 kuruş.The mukataa found on the Saliha Sultan were determined as follows: Aclun and Leccun 16.300 kurush, Biga 1.897.980 akçe, Cretan olive oil and soap 20.130 kuruş, Karahisar-i Şarki 3.800.700 akçe, a garden in Fatih Emir Buhari 50 kuruş, from Tobacco Customs 960 kuruş, and 11 kuruş per month from 40 coins per day at the inn where a picnic fair was set up on the Peloponnese. After the determination was made, these businesses, the accounts of which were detailed, were taken into custody to be sold to her suitor or one of the members of the dynasty as they were not the property of Saliha Sultan.Saliha Sultan registered seven foundation certificates between 1738–1776. The first of these foundations is dated 1738 and remains in effect. In the following dates, she had additional foundation charters arranged by adding akar to the first charter thereby, changing the charitable condition or adding new charitable conditions. The last endowment registered in her name in the General Directorate of Foundations was dated February 25, 1778, and two of the akars in the earlier charter dated March 12, 1776 are not present. In addition, control of the spending of the revenue obtained in this foundation was left entirely to Saliha Sultan and her children.Although there are no foundations devoted to books in Saliha Sultan’s endowments, the foundation seals on the books she donated to the Hekimoğlu Ali Pasha Library reveal that she donated books to this library.In this study, the transcription and analysis of the foundation will not be done, but the subject is discussed with an approach that reveals the management of the foundation, its akars and charitable conditions, and the changes that have occurred in these fields from time of the Ottoman Empire to the present day. In terms of the management of a particular foundation, managers have been identified from the time of Saliha Sultan until 2021. However, it has not been determined whether the current trustee of the foundation is a descendant of Saliha Sultan.The funds of the foundation changed both during Saliha Sultan’s life and after her death. In this respect, cadastral or ownership studies were carried out on the real estate in Beykoz Göksu. It was noted that the nature of the lands had changed to a large extent, especially in the second half of the 19th century. Likewise, although Küçükçekmece and its surrounding streams, as they are called in the charter, were preserved until the end of the Ottoman Empire,&nbsp;&nbsp;all of these mites were abandoned by the foundation due to the intense construction in the region during the Republic of Turkey period. Further studies could be focused on restoring the mites in Küçükçekmece and its surroundings.The charity conditions applicable to the foundation were continued in the first years of the Republic. However, because the revenues of the foundation have changed hands to a large extent and the mosque services counted in the charter are fulfilled by the Presidency of Religious Affairs, the original charity conditions cannot be fulfilled.&nbsp;

III. Ahmed’in Kızı Saliha Sultan ve Vakıfları (1127-1192/1715-1778)

Ömer

Eyüb Sabri Pasha (d. 1890), a Tanzimat intellectual and admiral, was also a prominent educator, Sufi, and historian. Despite his enlightened nature and substantial works of highquality and all-inclusive content, he has been understudied in the literature. This paper presents Eyüb Sabri’s biography, using newly available documentation and data to contextualize his contribution to the Ottoman intellectual world. It also investigates the existing cultural climate, while studying this forgotten intellectual and statesman with a more comprehensive approach.Little is known of Eyüb Sabri’s family and childhood, except that he was enrolled in Mekteb-i Fünûn-ı Bahriye-i Şahane at the age of fifteen. His editorial dexterity was likely made clear at that point, as he was assigned clerking and teaching tasks. In 1872, the fortyyear-old Eyüb Sabri traveled to the Hejaz, and is believed to have served in the region for an extended period. However, considering other documentation and his responsibilities in Istanbul, it can be concluded that he spent roughly a year and a half on the Arabian Peninsula.While serving as the head clerk, he taught literary composition (münşeat) at the Mekteb-i Bahriye and later, undertook the directorship of Kasımpaşa’s Mekteb-i Rüşdiye-i Bahriye secondary school. During the initial years of his directorate, the school was not able to accomplish its mission, as the graduate turnout was lesser than expected.He was a member of several commissions, starting with The Navy’s Orphan Funds Investigation Commission (Bahriye Eytam Sandıkları Tedkikat Komisyonu) and going on to The Naval Reform Commission (Islahat-ı Bahriye Komisyonu), that coordinated and carried out reforms and other naval initiatives.During his career, he mainly worked on education, and spent considerable time on Haramain history and literature. At the age of fifty-eight, he had authored eight books totaling to thousands of pages as well as articles on a wide range of topics. His intellectual ability was drawn in part from his remarkable cultural entourage and partly due to his own investigative personality. The cultural climate was inhabited by prominent figures of the time, and thus, shaped his intellectual output and choices in the educational missions that he was devoted to. His responsibilities at the school and his works illustrate that he was passionate about nurturing that youth to be moral and well educated.His literary works revolved around the life of Prophet Muhammad and the history and literature of the Hijaz. His magnum opus, Mir’âtü’l-Haremeyn, was mastered over the course of sixteen years that reflected in its quality, bringing the author recognition as one of the foremost historians of his period. He also contributed to newspapers with articles. The series of articles entitled Ayn-ı Zübeyde explores the history and significance of Mecca’s pivotal&nbsp;water supply. The Küçük Tercüman-ı Hakîkat for junior secondary school students released a series of his moral essays titled Nasîhatü’l-etfâl. In his essays, though the topics were largely embellished, they were written fluently and with tasteful style, peppered with numerous anecdotes and parables from Islamic history.An essay published in Tercümân-ı Hakîkat on the questions of reading the Friday sermon in Turkish, argued that part of the sermon should be translated into Turkish to foster adequate understanding. His suggestion encompassed reading the verses and hadiths alongside their Turkish interpretations and translating the advice expressed in the sermon into Turkish. This point, according to him, is the most crucial task for the goal of pan-Islamism.Besides books and articles, he also modeled the Masjid al-Haram and Masjid al-Nabawi. In many ways, the models that he managed surpass their predecessors. First, the engineers’ restoration plans were used during their construction to make them compatible with the authentic proportions of the mosques. The interior parts were given particular attention. The fate of these models is uncertain, but their traces have been followed based on three models located in Istanbul. Considering their size and the several sketches preserved in the Ottoman archives, the Masjid al-Nabawi model at Topkapi Palace might be his work.To conclude, this study reveals Eyüb Sabri Pasha’s prominent and diverse environment, including the influence of statesmen, poets, authors, sheikhs, and journalists from many segments of society. It shows that he shares the Tanzimat generation’s concerns regarding education and writing. It also uncovers his essay on the question of the language of the Friday sermon, which is noteworthy for pioneering discussions regarding worshiping in Turkish. For the first time, this article surveys a series of papers on child education in the context of his life story. Finally, it analyzes the destiny of his Masjid al-Nabawi and Masjid al-Haram models, indicating that the former could be the model that is currently on exhibit at the Topkapi Palace.&nbsp;

Eyüb Sabri Paşa’nın Hayatı, Entelektüel Muhiti ve  Eserleri Üzerine Bazı Yeni Bulgular

Lale

Wedding in the Ottoman palace is a dynastic ceremony in terms of social, cultural, traditional and economic aspects. As much as the conditions of the era shaped this ceremony, the wedding showcaces the power of the palace, and serves as an environment where the state exhibits its power. This study examines, the process of building a dynasty family using the case of Nâile Sultan, one of the daughters of Abdullhamid II (1842-1918), as an example. Her marraige took place during the reign of her father Abdulhamid II. The period, which was an important stage in her life from the choice of a husband and dowry preparations, through her wedding to the shore palace allocated to her has been evaluated. Nâile Sultan was born on January 9 1884. She was only able to see her mother, Dilpesend Kadın, until she was 17. In the summer of 1901, Dilpesend Kadın became sick and died. Nâile Sultan, was a pianist, harpist and violist. She displayed these skills during the visit of the Emperor Wilhem II (1859-1941) and his wife, Empress Augusto Victoria to Istanbul. Upon returning to her country, the Empress relayed that they left Istanbul with good memories and that Nâile Sultan’s musical talent was remarkable for her age. She sent her gifts of toys.The change and transformation that took place in the last century of the Ottoman Empire was experienced in many layers of the social structure. Dynasty weddings and the sultan’s family were also affected by these developments. Palace marriages should be looked at holistically, both because they were formed within the framework of ancient tradition, and because of the special aspects they contain. Several parameters guided the issue of choosing a husband for Nâile Sultan. First, the determination of the groom by the woman and the shaping of the marriage with the consent of the bride can be read as a sign of superiority. The negative marriages of Nâile Sultan sisters, Zekiye and Nâime Sultans also directed her marriage. Nureddin and Kemaleddin, sons of Gazi Osman Pasha, were chosen for Zekiye and Nâime Sultans. Abdulhamid II rejected Gazi Osman Pasha’s younger son Cemaleddin for his daughter, Nâile Sultan, because Nureddin’s and Kemaleddin’s attitudes, which were not suited for marriage, and as result, affected the sultan’s husband choice for Nâile Sultan. After these two negative marriages, the good qualities and paternal discipline of Abdurrahman Pasha’s son Arif Hikmet were valued in the choice of the groom. In this process, the issue of who the groom’s father would be was as much a priority as the choice of the groom. The groom’s father, Abdurrahman Pasha, was a figure that the sultan found to be successful. Lastly, the happiness and felicity of the bride in the marriage was requested for the daughter of the padishah. Nâile Sultan’s wedding took place in Yıldız Palace on, a winter day, on February 27, 1905.&nbsp;Dowry has a significant place the in Ottoman society. If the bride is a member of a dynasty, its magnificence becomes even more prominent. Sultan Abdulhamid II approached the dowry issue sensitively and covered the dowry expenses of some of his daughters himself. Nâile Sultan’s veil, gowns, fur, and shoes were embroidered. Embroidery was present in all sultan’s clothes. The sultan, whose dress and shoes were prepared as a set, were white, blue, pink and amethyst in color. Nâile Sultan’s outfits were completed by a large diamond solitaire gold ring, earrings surrounded by large gold stones, a bracelet surrounded by large-medium gold stones, large-medium gold stones and a crown decorated with small diamonds. Engagement set was prepared for the groom.As the weddings of the sultans were held together, sometimes the wedding dates were also postponed. One of the most striking points about this wedding is that the economic issues and the conditions of the country were taken into consideration. It was underlined that there was no need for banquets held in sultan’s palaces during the period. Although an attitude befitting the sultan’s personality was displayed, during the reign of Abdulhamid II, the number of people who were served meals at weddings decreased in comparison with the previous weddings. Nâile Sultan’s wedding dinner confirms this information. Meanwhile, upon looking at the wedding expenses of Nâile Sultan, this was determined in the wedding expenses of Nâile Sultan, even though the giving of gifts and presents in some wedding ceremonies was abolished.After Arif Hikmet became the groom positive developments in his salary and societal status, along with retirements, plans were noticed. He received a sıhriyyet salary as a groom. Sıhriyyet salary is the salary that the groom receives due to his duty and the money he receives upon the approval of his marriage. This marriage did not only have financial benefits for the groom. The salary of Nâile Sultan was also adjusted. Nâile Sultan’s salary was higher than Arif Hikmet Pasha’s. Among the factors affecting the increase in the salary of the married sultan, was her father’s being alive with whom she has a strong relationship. The shore palace allocated to Nâile Sultan in Kuruçeşme is among the precious districts in Istanbul at the beginning of the 19th century. The shore palace and the mansion behind it, which belonged to the former Naval Minister Hasan Pasha, were given to the sultan for residence. Both structures needed repair. Nâile Sultan and her husband lived in the seaside palace in Kuruçeşme for 19 years between 1905 and 1924.&nbsp;

Bir Sultan Ailesinin İnşâsı: Padişah II. Abdülhamid’in Kızlarından Nâile Sultan ve Damat Arif Hikmet Paşa’nın İzdivacı

Şit

This article focuses on the developments that took place during Sharif Husayn Pasha’s Emirate of Mecca between July 1877 and March 1880. The first part of the article briefly explains the unique administrative status of the province of Hijaz in the Ottoman state, the main factors that made the province particularly important for the Ottomans as well as for the Great Powers of the period, namely England, France, and Russia. It also elaborates on the international significance of Hijaz as a center for Muslims around the world, which carried risks as well as benefits for the Ottoman government since several of these Muslim pilgrims visited Mecca and Medina annually from the colonies of the abovementioned states. The Ottoman government was inevitably concerned for fear that this interest in the welfare of the pilgrims would develop into an attempt to exercise political influence in Hijaz. It is from this perspective that the article examines the Emirate of Mecca. After brief background information is given on the emirate, the Ottoman practice of appointment of the emirs as well as the ambiguity of the rules and regulations concerning the institution of the Emirate are explained.The second part of the study deliberates upon the political developments in Hijaz during Husayn Pasha’s Emirate in Mecca. Husayn Pasha was appointed to the Emirate in July 1877 after his brother Abdullah Pasha’s demise. Due to Abdullah Pasha’s positive impression, and because Husayn Pasha had already been familiar with state affairs due to his employment as a member of the Council of State, his appointment to the role of emir took place without hesitation. At the time of appointment, the Ottoman state was facing a serious crisis due to the Russo-Ottoman War of 1877–78. As the new emir of Mecca, Husayn Pasha acted in accordance with the policies of the Ottoman government until the first quarter of 1879. Thus, at this juncture of his career, he cooperated well with both the civil and military authorities of the province.The third part of the article is devoted to Husayn Pasha’s search for a new political future. It appears that from March 1879 onward, he initiated an unusual and secret dialogue with Britain, which has not yet been examined in Turkish. Based mainly on the British archival sources, the article explains how and when Sharif Husayn initiated this dialogue. He first convinced the British authorities in England and India that the true spiritual leader of the Muslims was not the Ottoman caliph but himself since he was a descendant of the Prophet Muhammad. Afterward, the emir conveyed a message to the British that he was ready to use his spiritual power in the service of Britain; through the pretext of the Anglo-Afghan War of 1878, he proposed sending a mission to advise the Afghans to end the war against Britain on the basis that the British people were friends of the Muslims.Zohrab, the British consul in Jidda, immediately conveyed the proposal to London and urged his authorities not to miss this opportunity. After serious discussions between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the India Office, and the Viceroy in India, the proposal was accepted despite some reservations of the government in India and the British Ambassador in Istanbul. Upon learning of the acceptance of his proposal, Sharif Husayn held several meetings with the ulema of Mecca and some Meccan dignitaries to complete the preparations for the mission; the dragoman of the British consulate in Jidda, Yusuf Kudsi, also attended some of the meetings. When preparations were completed in Mecca, Sharif Husayn decided to meet Zohrab in person in Jidda to finalize the details of the mission and offer a final shape to the letters to be sent to the Afghans.The following section of the article moves on to explain Sharif Husayn’s journey to Jidda, his reception by an official ceremony, and his assassination by an Afghan while he was proceeding toward his residence. The emir’s death on the next day and the interrogation and trial of the assassin in Mecca are expounded upon in this part. Issues related to the fact that the assassin was an Afghan and that he had attempted to approach Sharif Husayn while in Mecca and during his journey to Jidda several times are also examined and discussed. This section ends by posing questions such as how far the Ottoman authorities in Hijaz and Istanbul were aware of Sharif Husayn’s secret dealings with the British and addressed in the light of the Ottoman and British primary sources.The final part of the paper focuses on the consequences of the assassination. As soon as the trial ended, the execution of the assassin took place as he was considered old and in poor health. The assassin’s identity and timing of the assassination led to several speculations by the British diplomats in Istanbul as well as in Hijaz and Egypt. The British diplomats tried to find answers to questions such as whether the Ottoman authorities knew anything about Sharif Husayn’s secret dealings with the British, whether the assassin’s Afghan identity was pure coincidence, and whether the assassination could be related to the proposed Afghan mission. In the absence of any sound evidence to answer any of these and other related questions, the British diplomats proposed some speculative ideas to the Foreign Office in London. This section narrates and discusses all those speculations.In conclusion, it is argued that Sharif Husayn was motivated by the crisis that the Ottoman state underwent in the years following 1875 and decided to develop close but secret ties with&nbsp;Britain. The choice of Britain was obvious since, as one of the strongest Great Powers of the time, Britain had vital interests in Hijaz due to the millions of Muslims living in the British colonies and had a need to develop good relations with a Muslim leader such as Sharif Husayn Pasha. However, due to the assassination, the secret Afghan mission was not realized. If it had, however, Britain would have learned the answer to the question of whether the Ottoman caliph or the emir of Mecca was the more effective Muslim leader in the eyes of the Afghan Muslims.&nbsp;

Hicaz’da Bir Suikastın Arkaplanı: Şerif Hüseyin,  Afganlar ve İngilizler (1877-1880)

The military–public administration, which the Russian Empire imposed to rule certain parts of the North Caucasus, was a military-based administrative structure shaped by the conditions of the period. This system differed from the civil structure that applied in the other provinces of the Russian Empire and was shaped by a perceived need for extreme precautions. After the capture of Sheik Shamil in the summer of 1859, the rebellion against Russia gradually broke down, leading to the creation of the Dagestan Oblast. In 1860 with the approval of the regulation named “The Organization and Administration of Dagestan Oblast” by Aleksandr Baryatinskiy, Viceroy of the Caucasus, the system officially took effect. After some time, it was extended to the Terek and Kuban Oblasts.Ranked military officers served in the staff of the military–public administration, and the military uniform was intended as a visible demonstration of the authority of the public administration. The administration of the Caucasus believed that the mountain-dwellers, who disdained those without military uniform, could only be affected in this way. It could thus be said that the military uniform itself was a sign of great authority. Thus, in establishing the military–public administration on a permanent basis, the advice of administrators who had served in the Caucasus and knew the region well was highly influential. As a matter of fact, military officers were of the opinion that it was not yet possible for the civil administration used in other provinces to be effective throughout the Caucasus.In the military–public administrative system, military officers had absolute authority to make and implement decisions over the management of Muslims. Thus, it can be understood from both the actions and the reports of the military governors that the administration exerted significant pressure on inhabitants. These reports frequently offer justifications for keeping the population oppressed. According to them, information about the inhabitants and their lifestyles during previous wars led the military governors to apply oppressive policies. The opinion is frequently expressed that Muslims were inclined to obey the administration thanks to the politics of pressure, and that pleasure could be seen on their faces. In fact, it is implied that Muslims could only respect a strong ruler and organize themselves in obedience to that power.Officers of the military–public administration possessed the authority to deploy troops against local civilians and to take all manner of precautions in case of disarray and revolt. It seemed obligatory to ensure that such a system could respond quickly and efficiently. While local administrators usually had to take decisions in consultation with their headquarters, this system did not require it. Instead, everything was left in the hands of military administrators, including legal and administrative responsibilities. In practice, this was problematic, as a lack of administrators to follow the orders of certain institutions and military governors caused&nbsp;inefficiency. This inefficiency manifested itself most clearly issues related to villagers, lands, etc., particularly when these were affected by imperial laws and required the knowledge of ministry officials or specialists. Accordingly, it was difficult for one person to effectively undertake all the administrative functions related to, e.g., the variety of peasant tasks, difficulties in taxation, growth in commerce, widespread works in the mountains, progress in the manufacturing sector, increasing opportunities for public education, etc. In spite of the defects of military–public administration, it was highly convenient from the perspective of security-focused management. Due to their broad powers and privileges, administrative officers assumed great authority over the inhabitants. The merger of legal and administrative authority also strengthened their control, which was further supported by the administration’s right to impose punishment.While the military–public administration aimed to ensure Russian dominion in the Caucasus, it sought to enforce its rule not only militarily but also culturally. Constant efforts were made to increase the importance of Russian schools in the education of Muslims in the region. Starting primary school in their own language was, for local people, practically an execution. After all, Russian education was universal after the first grade. The spread of Russian institutions meant that everyone learned Russian culture and language, which was eventually supposed to lead to a sense of belonging to that culture.Another characteristics of military–public administration was the assignment of local inhabitants as administrators in the management of regencies or khanates in rural areas. Officials called “kadi” (Muslim judges) would be appointed as the head of regencies. Nonetheless, these kadi did not assume any religious duties—this title was used because it was familiar to local inhabitants. These officials were doubtlessly selected from local inhabitants on the basis of their loyalty to the Russian government, a measure that reflected Russia’s efforts to assert its own legitimacy. In effect, the administration tried to create a traditional authority by highlighting patrimonial boundaries. The assignment of officials to take charge of administrative units in the North Caucasus, ether on the basis of undoubted loyalty or to gain benefits, was a common practice in the 19th century.&nbsp;&nbsp;The military–public administration claimed that its first objective was to preserve the customs and traditional lifestyle of the North Caucasus Muslims. In reality, it aimed to weaken and to eventually dispel their specific culture. The opinions of Aleksandr Baryatinskiy, Viceroy of the Caucasus and architect of the military–public administration in the region, confirm this. According to him, the success of the Caucasian War didn’t bring an end to strife in the region—peace would depend entirely on ensuring sociopolitical, economic, and cultural cohesion between the North Caucasus and the Russian Empire.&nbsp;The Russian government sought to change the demographic structure by promoting Christianity in the districts where the military–public administration had been established. To this end, the government took decisions to hinder the return of Muslims who had left the area during and after the Crimean War. Moreover, it gave other groups settled in that area the opportunity to appropriate the property of those who managed to return successfully. This hindered a return on any significant scale. The first step by the military–public administrations to change the demographic structure was to increase the Christian population.Initially, the military–public administration was considered a temporary measure, and it was expected that the region would eventually be governed under a civil administrationoriented order like the other provinces of Russia. However, there was uncertainty about when this it happen. Eventually, in 1882, a radical change occurred in the Caucasus. The Viceroy of the Caucasus was revoked and the Viceroyalty of the Caucasus was constituted. This alteration led to discussions on reforming the military–public administration, which lasted from 1883 to 1909. The reports pertaining to those discussions enable us to understand what kind of politics lay behind preparations to switch to a civil administration without dramatically affecting the lives of local inhabitants—the main goal of the military–public administration. While these discussions resulted in some partial changes, there was no attempt to change the fundamentals of the administration. The relevant statements in the military governors’ reports on the nature of reconstruction are quite interesting, as they express disagreement about the timing of the launch of reconstruction.As a result, after conquering the North Caucasus, Russia ruled through a system of governance characterized by extraordinary terms and military control over local civilians. Since Russia couldn’t completely implement certain aspects of the central administration’s legal arrangements in some challenging regions of the Caucasus, the military–public administration was created specifically for these regions. In light of archival data, this research reveals how the system operated and affected local inhabitants. Moreover, the reports of the military governors offer first-hand accounts of the challenges that the Russian government faced in the military–public administration, the attitude of the government toward Muslims, and insight into the significance of the Caucasus Muslims in Ottoman-Russian relations.&nbsp;

Rusya’nın Kafkasya Müslümanlarını İdare Yöntemi  Olarak Askeri-Halk İdaresinin Teşekkülü ve Uygulanışı  (1860-1917)

Arzu

Gábor

A generation before Lepanto, the Ottoman Empire was a superpower due to its vast human and economic resources and military and naval power. In the first decade of Sultan Süleyman’s reign, the empire’s revenues are estimated at almost 11.5 million gold ducats. However, in the last years of his reign, revenues of the central treasury decreased to 3 million gold ducats, as opposed to 4.8 ducats in 1527-28, and the treasury had 110,000 and 370,000 ducats deficits in 1565-66 and 1566-67. Still, revenues increased to 3.8 million ducats next year, and the treasury closed the fiscal year with a positive balance. It was not until 1592 that the treasury faced recurring deficits.&nbsp;The vast empire of the Habsburgs possessed human and economic resources comparable to those of the Ottomans. However, unlike the padishah’s territorially contiguous “wellprotected domains,” the Spanish Habsburgs had a discontinuous empire with territories loosely arranged and scattered all over Europe and overseas. Charles V’s combined revenue from Castile, the Kingdom of Naples, and the Low Countries’ core provinces amounted to about 4.8 million Spanish ducats in 1540. However, Castile alone collected 10 million ducats by the end of the century. Ferdinand I, Charles’ brother and the Ottomans’ main rival in central Europe collected about 1.9 million Venetian ducats annually. The revenues of the Republic of Venice, the Ottomans’ maritime rival in the eastern Mediterranean, were equally modest: about 2 million ducats before 1570.The padishah had a professional army of 125,00-130,00 men at his disposal, which reached 160,000-170,000 men with the auxiliary raiders (akıncı) and the infantry peasant militia (azab). The professional army consisted of 70,000-80,000 provincial cavalrymen remunerated by military fiefs (timar). The number of the salaried standing troops of the Porte (kapukulu) fluctuated between 15,000 and 19,000 soldiers before Lepanto. Süleyman routinely mobilized 60,000 to 70,000 troops for his campaigns.Initially, neither Charles V nor Ferdinand had a standing field army. Both had to raise armies anew for each new campaign and negotiate with the Estates of their respective kingdoms to get the troops and funds necessary to pay them. However, when not fighting against his Valois rival in Italy, Charles V could assemble an army comparable in size to that of Süleyman’s. In 1532, contemporary estimates put the combined military force of the Habsburg brothers at 160,000 to 220,000 men. No wonder, Neither Charles nor Süleyman risked an open battle. The Venetians had a modest standing force, 6,750 men in about 1550 and 9,279 men by 1582, but in wartime, such as the war years of 1570-73, the Republic was capable of maintaining an average of 33,400 soldiers.&nbsp;&nbsp;The Ottomans’ naval superiority rested not on the quality of their ships but the empire’s ample natural and human resources and efficient organization. In Istanbul, the main Ottoman Arsenal (Tersane-i Amire) had 160 docks by 1515. Between 1527 and 1531, it built 61 ships and repaired 146 vessels. The Venetian bailo in Istanbul reported in 1558 that the Ottomans could build and outfit 130 ships without difficulty, although he considered them of inferior quality, made with green timber. Four years later, the secretary of the bailo claimed that the Ottomans could deploy 170 galleys “for long voyages” and some 200 “for short ones,” plus those that the corsairs owned.Charles V’s Mediterranean fleet was under the able leadership of Andrea Doria, the Genoese maritime condottiere. The fleet consisted of Doria’s galleys, galley squadrons from Spain, Sicily, Naples, and other hired galleys from Italy. For major naval campaigns, the emperor could mobilize several hundreds of vessels and tens of thousands of troops. For his Tunis campaign in 1535, he mobilized over 400 vessels and 50,000 men. The Venetians also had a strong navy. In the mid-sixteenth century, in the Venetian Arsenal, 120-130 light galleys (galie sotili), 6-12 large galleys (galie grosse), and 12-21 flagships (galee bastarde) were built or under construction. The Arsenal had 100 light galleys, four to ten great galleys, eight biremes, and 16 light dispatch and scouting vessels. Of these vessels, 25 galleys were held in basins, armed and equipped, ready to be dispatched at short notice. The rest of the fleet was kept on land, complete in hull and superstructure, and could be launched after caulked.As can be seen, only the joint military and naval might of Spain, Venice, and their allies could successfully challenge the Ottomans. This was the case at the Battle of Lepanto in 1571. Still, the numbers of vessels recorded in various contemporary sources (202 to 219 galleys and six galleasses on the Christian side instead of 205 galleys and 35 to 68 galiots on the Ottoman side) are misleading. They exclude the smaller transport ships in both navies and the galiots and frigates in the Christian fleet. The Holy League slightly outnumbered the Ottomans in terms of combatants and auxiliaries: 62,100 men to 57,700 men. More importantly, the league had a substantial advantage in firepower: 1,334 to 741 guns. Ottoman accounts also underlined that their fleet suffered from a shortage of manpower. Many died during the 1571 campaign, and the soldiers aboard the coastal begs’ ships had already returned home for the winter.Following the destruction of the Ottoman fleet at the battle, the abundance of Ottoman resources and efficient resource management enabled the Ottomans to rebuild their navy. The strength of the rebuilt Ottoman navy was estimated at between 180 and 230 ships in 1572. The resurgence of the Ottoman navy forced the Venetians to conclude a separate treaty with the padishah in 1573. Although in 1573 the Spanish conquered Tunis, in 1574 a large Ottoman fleet of some 240 galleys, 16 galleasses, three galleons, and other ships under Kılıç Ali Pasha’s command conquered La Goletta (Halk al-Wadi), which the Spanish had held since 1535, and retook Tunis. The victory—off the coast of Spanish Habsburg, Sicily at such a great distance from Istanbul, the logistical center of Ottoman operations—demonstrated Ottoman naval resurgence and restored Ottoman military prestige. However, these wars exhausted the belligerents who concluded a treaty in 1580 to attend to more pressing concerns in the Netherlands and Persia. Spain, Venice, and the Ottomans all faced significant financial difficulties, negatively affecting their naval power.&nbsp;

Karşılaştırmalı Perspektifle Osmanlı Askeri ve Deniz  Gücü: İnebahtı Öncesi ve Sonrası

Güneş

Assoc. Prof.

On March 23, 1570, Kubad Çavuş arrived in Venice to present to the Senate a letter from Selîm II and one from the grand vizier, Sokollu Mehmed Pasha, both dating from the first days of February 1570. Public honors were not rendered to Kubad, transmitter of the texts, and he was introduced unceremoniously to the Senate, presided over by the Doge. Because of the dispatches of Marc’Antonio Barbaro, Venetian representative at the Sublime Porte, the patricians knew part of the content of the letters, which were to contain the grievances of the Sublime Porte on some Venetian activities after the granting of the Capitulations in 1567. However, the letters that Kubad delivered were much more detailed than usual and somewhat atypical.The sultan started his letter with a discussion about common borders that the Venetians were not respecting despite many warnings. Moreover, they were building fortresses in Dalmatia. In a previous letter, Selîm II had already asked for the demolition of some thirtyfour fortresses built contrary to the recent treaty. The sultan then moved on to the public grievances, which were made for the first time. The most important among those is about the support that Venetian authorities in Cyprus gave to the Catholic corsairs. The Venetians did not communicate to the governor of Alexandria the names of those who had recently captured two Muslim ships after having refueled with food and water on the Cypriot bases. The sultan also mentioned a recent assault to a Turkish ship near the Rosetta Canal by two privateer ships, which also obtained water from Cyprus. When the Ottoman authorities captured those and the hostages in the ships were questioned, they confirmed that the Venetians had provided assistance. Selîm II then evoked the case of the Venetian ships which had been confronted with Muslim corsairs. Once again, contrary to the Capitulations, where it is stipulated to not claim the blood of fallen privateers but to send them to the responsible State, the Venetians had executed the corsairs and seized their property.From that point, the sultan moved on to the difficulty of negotiating with the bailo. Cases were unnecessarily postponed or not settled.His other grievances were related to the commercial affairs of Ottoman subjects in the Venetian territories. For instance, in Venice, the father of a dhimmî merchant was kidnapped and killed on the pretext that he was trafficking in iron, a prohibited commodity. Uskok pirates robbed the merchant Hacı Ali, who embarked at Kotor in the Venetian territory to trade mohair and other products, without being compensated by the Republic, despite a relevant article in the Capitulations.After listing all those points, the sultan summoned the Republic to cede Cyprus.In his letter to the Senate, the grand vizier reiterated similar criticisms, but in a somewhat different manner, rather acting as a diplomat. He began by referring to the good relations between the two states during the days of the previous sultan. Sokollu Mehmed, as his grand vizier, frequently negotiated with the bailo who were to confirm his continued efforts for Ottoman-Venetian friendship. After the new sultan’s accession to the throne, he continued to give not only his advice to Venetian emissaries in Istanbul but some warnings also. However, they were not heeded as they might have been.For example, after the delimitation of the borders in accordance with the Treaty of 1567, the Ottoman emissaries observed the formation of Venetian settlements in the Ottoman territory and informed the Ottoman capital about them. After that, Sokollu could only present those reports to the sultan. He then criticized the Veneitan Republic’s treatment of Muslim privateers. While the Serenissima, according to the treaty, was to send them to Istanbul for trial and punishment, she illegally detained them. Whenever the Pasha tried to argue with the Venetian representatives in Istanbul on those matters, the latter delayed negotiations on various pretexts, and as a result, several cases remained unresolved. However, when the Venetians had business dealings with him, all of them were fully examined and settled.After those criticisms and remarks, he turned to the important matter of Cyprus. He evoked, just as the sultan did, the privateer ships captured near Alexandria which had obtained supplies in Cyprus. He accused the Venetian authorities of sheltering and supplying the enemies of the sultan at the expense of the Capitulations. Therefore, if they wished to repair the damaged relations, they should cede Cyprus by their own will. Otherwise, they would have to suffer severe consequences.The grand vizier’s letter differed from the sultan’s by a more personal tone, so much so that at the beginning of his letter, he tries to present himself as an intermediary between the two powers and does not hide his sympathy for the Republic of Saint Mark. But when the Porte’s interests compelled the grand vizier to position himself as the enemy of Venice, the advices of the skillful diplomat turned into real and surreptitious threats.After the reading of the letters, 220 senators participated in a vote: 199 approved the Doge’s proposal of resistance; five were of the opposite opinion; sixteen balls were canceled. Two states entered into bloody warfare.In this article, I not only propose an edition of the two hitherto unpublished letters (the sultan’s is a nâme, and the grand vizier’s a mektûb) of ultimatum but try to explicitly give the circumstances in which the letters were composed, focusing especially on Sokollu Mehmed Pasha’s dealings with the Venetian emissaries in Istanbul and international configuration in the first months of 1570.&nbsp;

Diplomatik Bir Yenilik? II. Selîm’in Nâmesi ve Sadrazamının Mektubu  Bağlamında 1570 Yılında Venedik Cumhuriyeti’ne Verilen  Ültimatomun İncelenmesi ve İlgili Metinlerin Neşri

İdris

One of the two most important naval battles in the history of the Mediterranean is Lepanto. The Ottomans, who were victorious over the Allied European naval powers in Preveza (1538), were defeated in Lepanto (1571). Following Preveza, the Ottoman expansion in the Mediterranean was gradual, with several expeditions organized to further consolidate its position in North Africa and the Mediterranean islands. Djerba was captured from Spain at the end of these expeditions (1560), but the Ottoman attempt to capture Malta failed (1565), despite the Ottomans’ determined effort. In this period, the Ottomans moderately took France under their protection, just like Venice, by granting ahidnâmes and establishing amicable relations. Since the Ottomans’ greatest struggle in the Mediterranean was often with Spain, granting ahidnâmes to France and Venice left Spain largely isolated.Because Cyprus was a Venetian Island, the Ottomans, who were tasked with ensuring the security of pilgrimage and trade routes in the Eastern Mediterranean, did not intervene after the conquest of Egypt (1517). However, they were disturbed by the situation because the island had become a base for Christian pirate activities. A campaign to Cyprus was decided upon by a fatwa issued by Shaykh al-Islām Ebussuûd Efendi and a decision made by the Imperial Council. As diplomatic contacts with Venice did not yield any results, the preparations which had already started, gained more speed. Armies from Rumelia and Anatolia were prepared for this campaign, and a large navy consisting of 350–400 ships sailed from three different points. Lala Mustafa Pasha, the commander-in-chief, lead this navy, with commanders including Piyale Pasha, Murad Reis, the chief of levends, and Grand Admiral Muezzinzade Ali Pasha. Eventually, with the surrender of Nicosia on September 9, 1570, and then Famagusta on August 1, 1571, the endmost outpost of the Catholic Christian World in the Eastern Mediterranean came under Ottoman rule.The Ottoman expedition to Cyprus (1570-71) resulted in the formation of a Crusader alliance in Europe, which included states such as the Papacy, Spain, and Venice. The goal was to either retake Cyprus from the Ottomans or seize another Ottoman territory in exchange.To prevent this alliance from organizing an operation toward Cyprus, the Ottomans set sail to the Mediterranean on May 4, 1571, under Pertev Pasha, the commander-in-chief. Later, navy ships under important figures such as Grand Admiral Muezzinzade Ali Pasha, Algerian governor Uluç Ali Pasha, Hayreddin Pashazade Hasan Pasha, Cafer Pasha, and fleets of volunteer levend chiefs, joined Pertev Pasha. The Ottoman fleet, which went as far as Dubrovnik by plundering the Venetian islands in the Aegean and Mediterranean, returned from that area and anchored in the port of Lepanto.On October 7, 1571, in the war that took place outside the Gulf of Lepanto near the island of Oxeia, which the Ottomans called Beydemir, the Ottoman navy was almost destroyed and most of the ships were either sunk or captured. The Ottomans lost not only ships but also their highest-ranking commanders, galley chiefs, bannermen, experienced sailors, and crews in the Battle of Lepanto. In two ways, this result was widely discussed in the Ottoman capital and was hotly debated by historians of the time. There had to be an explanation for the heavy loss suffered immediately following a victory like Cyprus, and several explanations were advanced. Some criticized war tactics and strategy by emphasizing flaws. Others interpreted the defeat as a punishment for the deterioration of moral values and non-compliance with the given covenants.The defeat of Lepanto caused grief, but Sultan Selim II and the grand vizier Sokullu Mehmed Pasha decided to build a new navy the day after they received the news of the defeat. Shaykh al-Islām Ebussuûd Efendi also paved the way for new activities to be carried out with moral encouragements and with his fatwas by making some decisions based on the results of the war. One of these fatwas was about those who fought in the Battle of Lepanto, and two of them were about meeting the needs of the soldiers who would serve in the navies.In his fatwa on the soldiers of Lepanto, he stated that those who died in the battle were martyrs and that those who survived would be rewarded in Allah’s presence. Those who flee or drown while fleeing, on the other hand, will be cursed by the creator. The advocacy and conferment made by Pertev Pasha, the commander-in-chief, about all members of the navy after the war were canceled as a requirement of this fatwa. Orders were issued to other commanders, and it was requested that no one be conferred.Shaykh al-Islām Ebussuûd Efendi contributed to the preparations after Lepanto by giving two fatwas on the importance of jihad with wealth and giving zakat for this purpose to meet the needs of the ghazis who will fight in the navy. According to him, it was the responsibility of wealthy Muslims to save money for the military equipment and ammunition required by the sea warriors who would serve on the ships. Just as the companions of the prophet Muhammed mobilized their financial resources in the early days of Islam to meet the needs of those who went to war, wealthy Muslims of the time should do the same. Besides, he issued a fatwa about zakat. According to this fatwa, he said that rich Muslims can give the zakat of that year together with their unpaid zakat and the zakat they will give in the following years. This situation also shows the gravity of the current conditions.In this article, the fatwas issued by Ebussuûd Efendi about the Cyprus Campaign, the Battle of Lepanto, and the effects of these fatwas on the wars will be examined.&nbsp;

Fetvanın Osmanlı Yönetimi ve Toplum Üzerindeki Etkisi:  Ebussuûd Efendi’nin Kıbrıs ve İnebahtı Fetvaları

Zoltán

Tarihi Muzaffer Muharebeler Yazar: Görkemli İnebahtı (1571) ve  Unutulmuş Preveze (1538)

Ergün

Klaus

Fuggerzeitung Koleksiyonu'ndan İnebahtı Savaşı Hakkında Bir Belge

Mikail

The period between 1538 and 1571 marked the peak of Ottoman maritime power in the Mediterranean. Specifically, the superiority of the Ottoman navy, which began with the Turkish victory at Prevesa, secured the eastern Mediterranean for the Ottoman Empire within this period. However, the Ottoman naval activities and conquests from Prevesa to Cyprus ended with another major battle of the 16th century, at Lepanto. The victory of Christian powers called the Holy League at Lepanto has long been considered one of the decisive naval battles in the Mediterranean. It has also been given a special place in the history of the Mediterranean and Europe.&nbsp;Since a large number of Christian fleets, mainly composed of ships from Venice, Spain and the Papacy, participated in the Holy League, the event achieved religious significance by all of Catholic Europe. However, one of these fleets in the Holy League, consisting of a number of galleys and smaller vessels belonged to the Grand Duke of Tuscany, who had been struggling to remove the Spanish monarchy over Florence. The 12 galleys of Tuscany, five of which belonged to the Knights of St. Stephen, created in 1561 by Cosimo I de’ Medici, the first Grand Duke of Tuscany, were hired by the then Pope and commanded by Marcantonio Colonna, a Papal admiral. The main goal of Cosimo I was to take part in the anti-Ottoman struggles as an independent state, gain a place in the internal politics of Italy and play in active role on the Mediterranean scene.On the other hand, the participation of the Order of St. Stephen in the siege of Malta, in 1565, which resulted in the defeat of Ottoman navy, prompted the sultan’s harsh reaction. On 1 May, 1566, the Ottoman Sultan ordered the deportation of all Florentine residents in the empire, after which diplomatic relations were broken off between the two countries. Moreover, the anti-Ottoman activities of the order and the participation of the Tuscan galleys at Lepanto worsened the situation.Prior to the battle, despite Spain’s opposition, the Pope’s approval of Florence as the Grand Duchy in 1569, had caused a minor crisis. However, the Ottoman expedition to Cyprus, offered a new opportunity to the Medici to overcome this crisis, by offering their galleys to the Pope. This action by the Papacy paved the way for this newly formed state to participate in the Battle of Lepanto. Meanwhile, despite King Philip II’s objections, Pope Pius V had granted Cosimo the title of Grand Duke of Tuscany in 1569. Specifically, until the very last moment, King Philip II and Emperor Maximilian II opposed Cosimo I de’ Medici’s participation in the league. However, King Philip II was eventually convinced.One of the most important points here is that the 12 galleys rented by the Papacy from Tuscany are known as the ships of the Papal navy among modern Ottoman scholars. Despite&nbsp;this designation, this information found in very few Ottoman sources. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to reveal the activities and roles of the Tuscan fleet that participated in the Battle of Lepanto under the Papal banner. Furthermore, it examines the effects of the battle on the relations between the Ottoman Empire and the Grand Duchy of Tuscany.&nbsp;

İnebahtı Muharebesi’nde Toskana Kadırgaları

Volkan

Through the deliberation of the Collegio on February 20, 1550, two voluntary private notaries (nodaro/notario) in the service of the Duchal Chancellery or two Venetian citizens who were not notaries might have been sent to Constantinople with the title of language boy. These language boys had a five years’ education in Turkish, Arabic, and Persian from the School of the Language Boys (La Scuola dei Giovanni di Lingua) which was founded at the residence of the Bailo. There they undertook translation issues with their assignments to the translation office. Besides, the Venetian government required them to be at least 20 years old and to have served for at least for five years. Its principal goal was to ensure a more productive continuance of Venetian–Ottoman relations; to achieve this goal, the translation office had to be transformed into a solid institution with an educational body. The Bailo also had the responsibility of supervising the aforementioned school, presenting a two years’ report to the government to inform about the abilities, performance, and degree of advancement of the first language apprentices. The School of the Language Boys had to cope with two major problems in its process of establishment.&nbsp;The first one was the plague, and it appeared several times in Constantinople in the 16th century including the years 1551, 1552, 1553, 1560, 1568, 1575, 1590, and 1592. The second problem was the high prices of the Turkish, Arabic, and Persian language books, which were used in the courses of the language boys. The Ottomans copied these language books by hand, never allowing them to be printed. Because of this attitude, the aforementioned books were so expensive. The issues were dealt with by Bailo Antonio Erizzo; he was on duty between 1554 and 1556. In addition to these problems, the Turkish tutor of the language boys was not qualified in Italian and this created a problem of connection between the tutor and his students.&nbsp;The diplomatic missions of Venice’s dragomans and language boys in Constantinople during the difficult political climate of the Conquest of Cyprus and the Naval Battle of Lepanto are the focus of this essay. The release and the exchange of the captives and the resolution of the border contraversions constituted their focus. This article evaluates and analyzes the negotiation methods that the dragomans adopted when they made a contribution to the settlement of the aforementioned problems. The deliberations of the Senate and the letters of the Bailo of the Venetian State Archive were utilized as the primary resources other than secondary resources such as some Italian history books and researchers’ articles.In this article, it was emphasized that the dragomans of Venice had to be very competent in the Ottoman society, palace, governing class, law, commerce, politics, and the current affairs of the Ottoman land besides having a brilliant comprehension of the select languages. They were entrusted with multitudinous important diplomatic missions on the condition that they were superintended by the Bailos and the Extraordinary Envoys.&nbsp;&nbsp;The article also discusses and analyzes in detail when and how the dragomans were included in the aforementioned matters, the regions where they were commissioned and how they affected the process of negotiation and found a solution. Within this context, the Grand Dragoman, who was acting on the Bailo’s orders, negotiated with the Ottoman governing class on these matters. For example, following the Naval Battle of Lepanto, the Dragoman Matteca Salvago dealt with border and debt concerns while also participating in negotiations for the release of the hostages. When he came to the presence of the Grand Vizier Mehmed Pasha, he reported about the Muslim and the Jewish merchants who were the subjects of the Ottoman Empire and were imprisoned in Venice. He also shared with the Grand Vizier the information about their properties. In return for their liberation, he requested for the restitution of the captives who were the subjects of the Venetian Republic and taken as a captive in the Ottoman ruled soils, such as Constantinople, Alexandria, and Syria. In the same period, the Venetian Senate sent the Dragoman Giacomo Ragazzoni to Constantinople. He, like Salvago, was tasked with informing the Ottoman governing class about the Ottoman captives and their properties’ predicament. He informed the Grand Vizier of the Senate’s deliberations and reports on the aforementioned issues. For his travel expenses, he was paid 500 ducats. The Ottoman–Venetian exchange of captives also included Rome. The Dragoman Bartolomeo the 1st Bruti was an intermediary for the restitution of some leading Muslim captives and their conduct to Ancona. The four sons of Müezzinzâde Ali Pasha, namely, Şahin, Melikbuğ, Ahmed, and Mehmed were also rescued with thousands of captives.&nbsp;

Kıbrıs ve İnebahtı Seferleri Sırasında Venedik Dragomanlarının Diplomatik Rolleri

Özgür

The Ottoman conquest of Cyprus in 1571 caused great distress in the Catholic world. Due to the efforts of Pope Pius V, the conquest also led to the establishment of a Holy League against the Turks. Soon after the fall of Famagusta, the Ottoman navy was virtually destroyed in the battle of Lepanto by a fleet of the Holy League. This sea battle was a great victory for the Holy League, and historians have rightfully interpreted it as such. Conversely, further developments, such as the dissolution of the Holy League and the Venetian diplomatic attempts to make peace with the Ottomans, demonstrate that the effects of this victory were short-lived. In the end, Venice requested peace, and following negotiations, reached an agreement with the Ottomans. On March 7, 1573, Selim II issued an ahdname, and with that, the war between the two states was officially over.The ahdname of 1573 has been briefly mentioned by several historians, and numerous transliterations of two existing copies have been published. However, there are some gaps and misinterpretations in the literature regarding its articles. Furthermore, this ahdname was a renewal of the ahdname of 1567, which itself was a renewal of the 1540 ahdname. In order to have a thorough understanding of the ahdname of 1573, one needs to be conversant with all these three texts. Mahmut Şakiroğlu tried to do just that and published a comparative study of the two texts but omitted the 1540 ahdname.The ahdname of 1573 obliged Venice to pay 300,000 ducats to the Ottoman Empire. This requirement has been interpreted by several scholars as comprising reparations. Some scholars have even argued that the money had to be paid to the Ottoman Empire to cover the expenses of the Cyprus campaign. Although this payment can be seen as reparations at first glance, both the Ottomans and the Venetians preferred not to use this term and instead simply called it a “payment.” A similar payment existed in the ahdname of 1540, where again it appeared under this term. However, when ambassadors paid installments, and the Ottomans received them, different names started appearing in the letters, including “pişkeş” (gift) or “kesim” (tax). Other letters and chronicles show that the Ottomans had sought the amount as a precondition for issuing the ahdname. In this regard, I prefer to interpret and define this payment as the “price of friendship.”When the decision to reach peace was made, the Ottoman castle of Sopoto was under Venetian control. Together with the 300,000 ducats, the Ottomans asked Venice to return the castle. This demand, I argue, was also a “precondition” for peace as well as the “price of friendship.” In the ahdname, it was made very clear that both Bosnia and Albania would return to their prewar borders. Based on this term of the ahdname, Sopoto Castle would have become Ottoman property in any case but because this transfer was to be a precondition of the ahdname and its other details were not yet set, the Ottomans asked for the castle to&nbsp;prove the Venetian desire for friendship. A similar demand had been made in 1540, when the Ottomans got the last Venetian castles in Morea, Nafplio, and Monemvasia, in precisely the same way.As I mentioned above, the ahdname of 1573 defined Ottoman–Venetian borders in accordance with the principle of status quo ante bellum. Although this principle sought only a return to the prewar borders, which sounded very simple, it took approximately three years to draw the final border due to constant disagreements and local uprisings. In the end, the two states settled their dispute, but the Ottomans never returned Ulcinj and Antivari.The ahdname of 1573 regulated the following two different tribute issues as well: Cyprus and Zante. The Venetians had been paying tribute for Cyprus to the Ottomans since 1517, but during this war, as the Ottomans had captured the island, the Venetians no longer had to pay the tribute of 8,000 ducats. The ahdname does not mention Cyprus other than in this specific article and does not discuss its sovereignty. By accepting the abolishment of the Cyprus tribute, Venetians implicitly accepted the Ottoman jurisdiction over the island. In the second tribute regulation, the Ottomans increased the tax of Zante, an Ionian island held by the Venetians since 1485, from 500 ducats to 1,500 ducats.At the beginning of the war, both sides arrested each other’s subjects and confiscated their merchandise and properties. With the 1573 ahdname, all the arrested subjects of the two parties were to be released and their properties returned. If the merchandise had been sold or disappeared, the states had to offer compensation.Although the Ottomans suffered a great defeat in the battle of Lepanto, they managed to compensate for their loss at the diplomatic table. On the contrary, Venice not only lost territory but also had to accept burdensome terms, including the sizable payment and increases in its previous tribute. In this sense, following a great victory, the Venetian Republic suffered a humiliating peace.&nbsp;

“Zaferin Ardından Gelen Onur Kırıcı Bir Antlaşma”: II. Selim’in Venedik’e Verdiği 1573 Ahidnamesi

Güner

While many works were published in Europe on the Turks (Muslims/Ottomans), Italy is where these works are most concentrated. Emerging as citizens of city-states in the Italian region, Venetians and Genovese and later the Florentines worked with the Turks in every aspect of society, especially trade, since the early era of their contacts. This mutually beneficial relationship between the parties would create a desire to receive information from each other over time. Italians were more ambitious in contact Ottomans and, therefore, ensured the placement of an ambassador who represented them in Istanbul diplomatically. Diplomatic documents were written by the ambassadors, or in other words, by Bailo, by obtaining information about the Turks from almost every aspect, and would become important sources of information coming from the East to Italy. Over time, this information undoubtedly interested other states besides the Italian city-states, and Italy was to play a significant role as a bridge in transferring the news and information from East to the West.News about the Turks, especially diplomatic documents written by the ambassadors in Italy, did not concern the general public. These diplomatic documents, of course, appealed to the rulers. However, even if there were no similar content, the printed texts that were partially similar in terms of the information offered and appealed to the general public started to be published in Italy. This publication began with the first communication with the East and became more common, especially when ongoing communication with the Turks was established. This article focuses on these texts, especially those written around the time of the Battle of Lepanto, a turning point for Turkish and European history. The main aim in our study, which covers four years, is to understand how works published in Italy at the time of the Battle of Lepanto are in a change both in content and number.The works examined in the article reached readers in different cities of Italy at different times. Still, they were written to illustrate and understanding of the Turks in all respects since early times. However, at first, the attempt to understand Turks focused predominantly on the military field. The first thing the authors of these texts wanted to learn was about Turkish military power. Especially after the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453, the Turks, who were then in a period of continuous expansion, soon encountered Italians both at sea and on land. Therefore, any information obtained from the Turks relating to the military sense was valuable for Italians. While this information was particularly valuable for the rulers and soldiers, it is evident that the general public also desired this information as a matter of intellectual curiosity. The questions of how the Turks, who constantly threatened their own lands, were fighting and their military structure were repeatedly addressed in the texts.&nbsp;&nbsp;Apart from other wars, the Battle of Lepanto, in both a military sense and in terms of the defeat of the Ottoman army, had a great impact in different cities of the Italian peninsula as well as in the rest of Europe. The Battle of Lepanto inspired Italian visual arts and literature. Many works were written in Italy about the Battle of Lepanto, but most of these works were not prose but poems written under different specific names. The most important issue underlying such a preference is undoubtedly related to the readership. Besides the Sonettos, the considerable number of Canzone, Barzelletta and Poetica, each evaluated in the same manner in terms of content and writing, ensured that the publications written under these titles were preferred and read by the public, As they were both concise and constructed with exciting sentences in terms of content, these works were consistently popular. Poetry-style works were practical in providing information for the readership in a short space, while popular as entertainment. Here, it is necessary to consider the literacy rate of the Italian readership, and studies showed that the situation of literacy rates were superior in Italy compared to other European states.&nbsp;Another point emphasized by this article is that 1571, the year of the Battle of Lepanto, saw the highest number of publications in terms of publication density. Indeed, regardless of their nature, a significant number of works reached readers that year compared to other years. These publications were issued to celebrate victory and aimed to satisfy the general curiosity of the people. Conversely, it seems right to attribute the multitude of works to two different factors: the first being gratitude to God and the other to prevent the disintegration of the Holy Unity of Western Christianity. In the end, the first of the two issues was realized, while the other was not. The Sacred Unity, was extensively considered, had disintegrated in a short time after Lepanto. The disappointment of the text authors with the separation of Spain from the union increased even more with the peace treaty signed by the other pioneers of the union and their own nation, the Venetians, with the Ottomans. In short, the messages given by the works published in the year of the Battle of Lepanto disappeared rapidly.Finally, it should be noted that there was a serious change in the number of works in the short term, both in number and content, in the Italian literature published after the Battle of Lepanto. While a certain number of works about Turks continued to be written, an attempt to understand the Turks took place more intensely than the message given in the contents of these works. Entering a period of peace with the Turks was an effective tool in this attempt at understanding.&nbsp;

Savaştan Uzlaşmaya: İnebahtı Deniz Savaşı Öncesi ve  Sonrası İtalyan Yazınında Türkler (1570-1573)

Evrim

The defeat of the Ottoman forces by the armada of the Holy League in the autumn of 1571 has been the subject of several historical narratives and analyses. Since then, this naval victory against the Ottomans has become an important part of Christian iconography, artistic, and literary representations, and is commemorated with festivals and celebrations in many parts of the Christian world. Studies on the Battle of Lepanto have revealed the centurieslong echoes of this battle and its place in historical memory. However, little attention has been paid to the function that the memory of the Holy League and the victory/defeat at Lepanto played in political events right after the war. This article discusses how and in what contexts the historical memory of the Holy League and Lepanto occupied in the discourses of Spanish, Italian, and Ottoman diplomats and ministers at the end of the 16th century and the beginning of the 17th century. Beginning in the 1590s, these diplomats and ministers made frequent references to the War of Cyprus, the Holy League, the Battle of Lepanto, and the ensuing developments in their diplomatic negotiations, decision-making processes, and the advice they gave their rulers.In this period, the memory of the Holy League and Lepanto became influential in the analysis of political and military issues. The Ottoman armada’s attempt to reenergize their Mediterranean policy in 1590–1591, the end of the Spanish-Ottoman truce, the outbreak of the Ottoman-Austrian war in 1593, the efforts of the Papacy to establish a new Holy League, and the aggressive policy of the Ottomans in the Mediterranean revived the memory of the events that occurred between 1570 and 1573. In this context, the article will analyse the correspondence of the Spanish and Italian ministers and diplomats such as Admiral Gian Andrea Doria of the Spanish armada (1540–1606), Duke of Sessa Antonio Fernández de Córdoba y Cardona (1550–1606), Spanish ambassador in Rome, Paolo Paruta (1540–1598), Venetian ambassador in Rome, and Francisco de Vera (1533–1603), Spanish ambassador in Venice. Additionally, I will especially focus on the letters in which the Venetian ambassadors in Istanbul, Matteo Zane and Marco Venier, quoted their conversations with Ottoman ministers such as Hoca Sadeddin Efendi (1536–1599) and Ferhad Pasha (d.1595). These diplomats and ministers interpreted the current political, diplomatic, and military issues they faced by referring retrospectively to the Lepanto period as a personal experience of recent history.&nbsp;This article examines how the memory of the Holy League and the Battle of Lepanto was reflected in the daily political practices of these diplomats and ministers in three parts. First, I will discuss how the restructuring of the Ottoman navy in 1590–1591 triggered the references to Lepanto. Next, I will analyse how the events of 1570–1573 became a major topic in the negotiations between the Pope Clement VIII (1536–1605) and the Venetian and Spanish representatives in Rome. In this part, special importance is given to the year 1594, in which the importance of Lepanto reached its peak because of a possible rapprochement between Spain, Venice, and the Papacy. Finally, the third part will deal with the references to Lepanto during the reign of Philip III, when the anti-Ottoman policy gained a different dimension in the overall foreign policy of the Spanish monarchy.The article reveals that the events of the Lepanto period functioned as historical references that shed light on the political and military circumstances of the late 16th and early 17th centuries, such as the distrust between Spain and Venice, the tension between Spain and the Papacy, the balance in Venetian-Ottoman relations, and the Ottoman fear of a renewed Holy League. I demonstrate that the historical memory of Lepanto is used on some occasions as a historical comparison, a victory to be repeated, and a process from which to learn lessons, and on other occasions as an instrument of political leverage and a motive for mutual reconciliation. One significant aspect is that all these diplomats and ministers directly or indirectly experienced the Battle of Lepanto. The importance this generation gave to Lepanto in their negotiations, recommendations, and advice were analyses based mostly on their own experiences, without necessarily consulting a history book. Doria’s constant recalling of the resurgence of the Ottoman fleet immediately after Lepanto can be read both as an indication of the fear of the potential power of the Ottoman Empire and as an attempt to find a historical reference for his failure to act in the Mediterranean. Paolo Paruta’s references to Lepanto functioned to legitimize Venice’s policy of neutrality and political caution. Unlike Doria and Paruta, Pope Clement VIII saw in the Lepanto period a victory to repeat as an emulation of Pope Pius V, the patron of the initial stages of his ecclesiastical career. For Hoca Sadeddin, who endorsed a cautious foreign policy in the Ottoman Empire and watched this process from a completely different perspective, Lepanto symbolized a catastrophe that could harm the Ottoman Empire if it was repeated. The rhetoric of Lepanto, as seen in the correspondence and conversations of these officials, shows that the hostility, mutual distrust, and fears of military attack in the Mediterranean were still high even in the period when the Mediterranean is thought to have withdrawn from the stage of history.

İnebahtı’nın Siyasi Hafızadaki Yeri: 16. Yüzyılın Sonları  ile 17. Yüzyılın Başlarında Uluslararası Politikada Kutsal  İttifak ve İnebahtı Çağrışımları

Ardian

İnebahtı Sonrası Balkanlarda Osmanlı Karşıtı Projelerin Canlanması  ve Venedik'in Osmanlılarla En Uzun Süreli Barışı Sağlama  Mücadelesi (1573-1645)

On October 7, 1571, the Mediterranean witnessed one of the most violent and destructive sea battles in its history. The Battle was fought with galleys and galleons belonging to the Ottoman Empire and the major Catholic powers united under the banner of the Holy League. The two fleets encountered one another at the Bay of Lepanto at noon, and in four and a half hours, the Ottoman navy was virtually destroyed. Although eventually the Fourth Ottoman-Venetian War (1570–73) was resolved in favor of the Ottomans, with the Ottoman conquest of Cyprus and Lepanto (İnebahtı, in Turkish) remaining in Ottoman hands, the Holy League’s victory at Lepanto became a symbolic triumph by halting the “unstoppable” Ottoman advancement toward the Western Mediterranean in the 16th century. In European literature and historiography, it became symbolic of the triumph of Catholicism over the “infidel” Ottomans.Naturally, the Battle immediately became a popular subject among European artists, and in time its influence expanded beyond the geography and time it occurred. Many artists from different periods and places produced commemorative works or paintings even centuries after the Battle took place, using different media of art. Not only the media but also the motives of these productions were various. This paper examines some examples of this artistic heritage, focusing on European engravings, frescoes, and oil-on-canvas paintings over the centuries.The author primarily analyzes the artworks in accordance to their genres and the motives behind their production. The first group of depictions is titled: “Documentary Representations” and includes maps, engravings, and frescoes made principally with the purpose of documenting the battle as it happened. In these purely descriptive depictions, the chief aim is to document and disseminate the news of the Battle, depicting mostly the formation of the Battle, its ships, and the topography. These versions are mostly produced by 16th century Venetian and Roman engravers with the purpose of passing on the information available at the time about the Battle and therefore serve as avvisi-like broadsheets. The goal was to document the Battle as a contemporary event. Artists such as Antonio Lafreri, Giovanni Francesco Camocio, and Cosimo Bartoli work in consultation with the Battle’s participants, including Marcantonio II Colonna and Monsignor Romegas to represent the actual situations in the Battle. Therefore, their depictions can be considered as essentially actual contemporary representations. However, these avvisi-like broadsheets disappear in later centuries.The second group consists of “History and Maritime Paintings” and examines the Lepanto theme in the 17th century Northern European artistic movements of the military painting genre. Maritime artists, whose main inspiration was the sea itself and then the naval battles, created a significant number of paintings on the Lepanto, again in a “secular” manner, generally depicting the glorious mariners of the armada of the Holy League and the devastated Ottoman navy among waves in a turbulent sea. From the examples of paintings from the Dutch Golden Age by artists such as Andries Van Eertvelt, Pieter Brünniche, and Johannes Lingelbach, one can observe that the Battle had become a subject for its historical and naval value and served solely artistic purposes. Therefore, although in some of the depictions the effort for accurate portrayal of galleys and topography is apparent, the artistic concerns frequently overcome historical accuracy. Following the artistic fashion, these depictions slowly disappear in the following centuries.The most enduring theme for the Lepanto art had become the “Symbolic Depictions” dominated by religious propaganda purposes. Considering the fact that the Catholic Church in the 16th century was endeavoring to reestablish its authority and demonstrate its power against all the “infidels,” including the Protestants of the European Reformation and the Muslim Ottomans, in particular, the Holy League’s victory at Lepanto had by then become a significant means to achieve that purpose. In accordance with spirit of the Catholic Counter-Reformation, the Battle’s paintings depicting the glory of the Holy fleet were very favorably received. Many of the European protagonists of the Battle commissioned paintings to immortalize the victory and these served as means of religious propaganda. These commissions focused almost entirely on religious unity and biblical and divine figures, and gave the impression overall that the Holy League had been able to defeat the Ottomans through their Catholic faith. These symbolic works generally portray some form of divine intervention, sometimes Madonna with Child and sometimes the Madonna of the Rosary appearing on top of the clouds over the Holy fleet, leading the Christians to victory. These “legendary” portrayals of the Battle of Lepanto had mainly Catholic propaganda purposes and played a significant part in strengthening the image of the Church. These symbolic depictions that began appearing immediately after the Battle created a traditional visual narrative which survived until today, beginning with the paintings of Renaissance painters such as Giorgio Vasari, Tiziano Vecellio, Jacopo Tintoretto, and Paolo Veronese, and continuing in later centuries with artists from different regions, such as Filippo Gherardi, Giovanni Coli, Charles Lemiere, and Albino Americo Mazzotta.Overall, this study aims to show how the Lepanto depictions in European art history changed and developed over the centuries. Among the abundant Lepanto-themed works from different genres in the 16th and the 17th centuries, the documentary representations and examples of maritime art disappeared in the following centuries, leaving the field open for those depictions with a core religious narrative. The symbolic meaning attributed to this Battle in the religiously motivated imaginary depictions created since the 16th century is still alive. As paintings from different genres and eras, and their thematical and iconographical analyses demonstrate, the Battle of Lepanto has always been a popular theme among artists, yet within centuries, the weight of the artistic output shifted from the examples of documentary representations to maritime art pieces and finally to the religiously symbolic versions.&nbsp;

Tasvirden Tahayyüle: Avrupa Resminde İnebahtı Muharebesi

@JOURNAL_BOX_CURRENT

@JOURNAL_BOX_EARLYVIEW

Vural

It is well known that many Iranian scholars and intellectuals traveled between Ajam and Rum towards the end of the 15th century, in order to secure wealthy and benevolent patrons. The reason for the mobility of scholars, which can be traced back to the reign of Murad the Second (1421-1451), was undoubtedly related to the changes occurred across the Islamic world. Of these changes, the conquest of Istanbul was the most important. Adding “the protector of Islam” to his extant titulatures with this conquest, Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror, proclaimed that he was the only representative of the Islamic world. The second reason was the decline of Timurid Empire after the demise of Shahrukh (d. 1447) who were the reputed patron of science and art like&nbsp;his father towards the second half of the 15th century. By exiling scholars and crafters from newly conquered lands to his capital Samarqand, Timur created a Renaissance era and bequeathed this cultural heritage to his successors. Timurid princes’ fights for the throne perpetuated in Iraq, Fars, Mazandaran, Mawara al-Nahr and Khurasan, and several handovers and plunders of Samarqand and Herat precipitated the exodus of Timurid scholars and craftsmen in order to secure wealthy patrons and safe places, after the demise of Shahrukh. This chaotic atmosphere pervaded in Iran and on the other hand Ottoman sultans’ patronage of science and art made the Ottoman lands a safe and inviting shelter for Iranian scholars and literary men. Based on the claims that they were the only representative of Islam, the Ottomans’ superiority over the Aqquyunlus who presented themselves as Timur’s licit heirs, led this competition to another phase. Reputed with his wealth, benevolence and power, Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror made his capital Istanbul a center of attraction for Iranian scholars and poets.&nbsp;His patronage of science and art had spread across Iran so much so that his palace was replete with Iranian scholars and encomiasts at the very beginning of his reign. Along with scholars and bureaucrats such as Şemseddin Fenârî, Molla Gürânî, Mevlana Şeyh Ebu İshak Tebrizî and Ali Kuşçu, encomiasts and man of letters such as Ma’âlî, Kâşifî, Hamidî, and Kabûlî presented their works to Sultan Mehmed and, made contributions to sultan’s imperial image from the viewpoint of Ajamness. It is also well known that Sultan Mehmed endeavored to take famous Iranian scholars under his patronage and, for this purpose he sends them enticing gifts.&nbsp;Benevolent and wealthy image of Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror and, his capital’s hallmark as a center for a multi-cultural junction, attracted another Ajam known as Riyâzî. He was less known among the Ajams in Sultan’s palace. Neither contemporary chroniclers nor collection of the biographies of poets mention him. Beside his Persian epistle, which he penned on the occasion of Sultan Mehmed’s conquest of Akçahisar and constitutes the subject of the present study, there are at least three copies of his Divan survived to this date. None of these primary sources provide any information concerning his migration from Ajam to Rum and his residence in Istanbul. According to his Divan, his full name was Mawlana Riyâzî-i Samarqandî. This specifies the fact that he was native of Timurids’ cultural center Samarqand. Most probably in order to escape the political chaos and seeking a new patron, he headed towards Istanbul, after the decline of the Timurid Empire in Iran and Mawara al-Nahr. In the patrimonial states of the 16th-century Islamic world, scholars and craftier were more depended on court patronage. Because of that sultans were the only resorts. When the scholars fell from the grace of their patron(s), they set on a journey seeking for welfare and patronage in another sultan’s court.&nbsp;Riyâzî’s venture was not different from the scholars and bureaucrats who lost their patronage and set out to secure a new one in 15th and 16th centuries Islamic world. Although it is not known how and when he managed, he might have come to Istanbul and secured Sultan Mehmed’s patronage prior to 1479. Beyond the Sultan Mehmed’s personal interest to attract many Iranians, this phenomenon should be supported with the role which sultan played himself. Eventually, patronizing Muslim scholars and craftsmen was an indispensable source of legitimacy for the sultan who had claims for superiority in the Islamic world.&nbsp;&nbsp;Although his contemporaries Ma’âlî and Kabûlî gave huge details on their journeys, observations on the palace and how they managed to secure Sultan’s patronage, neither in his Persian epistle presented to Sultan Mehmed nor in his Divan replete with poems of love and separation Riyâzî-i Samarqandî does not provide any information about himself and his personal experiences. In contrast to Ma’âlî, Kabûlî, and Hamidî, he has never presented a panegyric to his patron. The only information about his life in Istanbul was his disease, which he could not recuperate and finally died in 884/1479-80. Though he did not relate his observations on the palace and the Sultan, and how he behaved, accounts of other Ajam’s provide details about the perception of Ajamness in the Ottoman palace, which we can further elaborate on. Furthermore, it is well known that there was a competition of superiority between highly-educated Ajams and their rival Rumîs in Sultan Mehmed’s palace.Riyâzî-i Samarqandî penned his Persian epistle entitled with Risâle-i Tehniyet-i ‘Iyd ve Nevrûz Berây-ı Ebu’l-feth Sultan Mehmed or Tehniyet-i ‘Iyd ve Fethnâme-i Akçahisar in 1479 on the occasion of the conquest of Akçahisar in Albania and presented to the Sultan. The seal of Sultan Mehmed on the folios verifies that the epistle was accepted to the personal library of Sultan. The coincidence of Sultan Mehmed’s conquest of Akçahisar with Nawruz feast was a double occasion for Riyâzî to present himself to the Sultan. Unlike his fellows in this genre, he merely confined his epistle to create an imperial image for the Sultan with titles and titulatures, which he formulated for him. He furthermore explained the reason for giving these titles to the Sultan under each titulatures. It should also be specified that this Persian epistle penned and presented to the Sultan to proclaim Ottoman dynasty’s superiority over the other dynasties such as Aqquyunlu and Mamluk, and to show them how Ottomans were the only protectors of Islam.As a wealthy, powerful, benevolent and just sultan, Mehmed the Conqueror took many Iranian scholars, encomiasts, and craftsmen under his patronage. Thus, he commenced “Eastern Renaissance” which would last in his successor’s reign Bayezid the Second (1481-1512). Thanks to this cultural mobility, those who came from Ajam, penned and presented many epistles and panegyric to the Sultan. It should not be forgotten that Iranian shahnama-writers had major contributions for the creation of the imperial image of Sultan Mehmed, which would be imitated in Bayezid the Second’s reign as well. It can be concluded that like his Iranian contemporaries’ pieces, Riyâzî-i Samarqandî’s Persian epistle was also a contribution to create an imperial image for the Sultan from the viewpoint of an Ajam.

FATİH’İN EMPERYAL İMAJINA BİR ACEM’İN KATKISI: RİYÂZÎ-İ SEMERKANDÎ

Arda

The efforts for founding an Israeli state in Palestine, which gained momentum with the Balfour Declaration issued in the end of World War I, constituted one of the most important problems causing instability in the Middle East during the interwar period. In this process, when Jewish immigration to Palestine increased and Arabs and Jews began to have serious conflicts in the region, Turkey did not get involved in the developments in Palestine. The conflicts became bitterer following World War II when the victorious USA began to back up the efforts for the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. The ambitions of Western countries and the Jews for Palestine became the prominent issue for Arab countries after World War II. Arab nationalists gathered around anti-Westernism and the Palestine issue.&nbsp;&nbsp;Unlike its passive position in the interwar period, Turkey began to take more active involvement in the Palestine issue after the war. Turkey’s increasing interest in the issue following 1945 was due to its convergence with Arab nations, rather than religious or nationalist considerations. Turkey was left alone against the Soviet Union by Western nations. With no alternative but to create stronger bonds with the states in the region against the Soviet threat, Turkey approached its Arab neighbours and realized that the Palestine issue was the first item on their agenda. When the Palestine issue was brought to UN, Turkey supported Arab nations due to its sense of solidarity with Arab nations and its concern that a Jewish state to be founded in the area might cause instability. Turkey’s support to Arab nations for the Palestine issue would come to an end with the improvements in Turkey’s relations with Western nations and the outbreak of the First Arab-Israeli War.As a result of its strategic alliance with Western nations against the Soviet Union threat, Turkey felt the need for acting in concert with its allies in the international area. Meanwhile, it became clear to Turkey during the First Arab-Israeli War that military alliance with Israel would be more beneficial than with Arabs. At this stage, the UN decided to set up a Conciliation Commission for resolution of the Palestine issue. Acting uniformly with Western nations in the Conciliation Commission and carrying out missions together with the USA and France, Turkey made it clear that it would no longer take an approach supporting Arab theses in the Palestine issue.The UN Conciliation Commission for Palestine was important in that it was the first multilateral attempt for resolution and Turkey’s first critical alliance with Western nations following World War II. Turkey was included in the conciliation commission with the USA and France due to its support for Arab countries in the conflict, but it did not maintain its support in the works of the commission. Commission membership increased Turkey’s diplomatic contact with Israel, and as a result&nbsp;of these interactions Turkey’s concerns over Israel disappeared and led Turkey to become the first Muslim country to recognize Israel.&nbsp;The Conciliation Commission was set up with great expectations and strong international support. At the time the Commission made serious efforts for resolution of the problem, the disagreement between the two parties was new and so there were suitable grounds for resolution. However, the biggest disadvantage of the Commission was its Western identity which caused lack of trust with Arab nations. France, a member of the Commission that aimed to provide suitable conditions for lasting peace following the First Arab-Israeli War, was known for its colonial past among Arab nations. Turkey’s membership was also met with mistrust due to memories from the Ottoman Empire period and the Hatay issue, which was seen as a conspiracy set against Arab countries by Turkey and Western nations. The USA was the only nation with no colonial past from the point of view of Arab nations. However, the USA’s strong support for the founding of a Jewish state in Palestine following World War II was known by the Arab public. For these reasons, the Commission’s neutrality was questioned by Arab nations.&nbsp;Between the Commission’s most active years of 1949 and 1952, Arab nations were devoid of strong governments that could sign a peace treaty with Israel, as they were struggling with political and military depression caused by the First Arab-Israeli War. Israel, on the other hand, had seen the weaknesses of Arab troops during the War, and aimed to extend and strengthen its boundaries through further conflicts rather than make peace with Arab nations. The works of the Conciliation Commission failed as they were trying to reconcile those with no power for making peace and those with no intention of doing so. After the Paris Conference of 1951, the Commission acknowledged that it would be unable to reach its aim of ensuring a peace accord, and decided to focus on the resolution of the problems of Arab refugees. However, it failed to gain effective results in its smaller targets because the parties of the Arab-Israeli conflict adopted more uncompromising attitudes as the Cold War began to influence the Palestine issue. During the course of the work of the Commission after 1952, the relations between some of the Arab nations that were expected to be made better through the joint efforts of the members, namely Turkey, the USA, and France, became even worse. With Arab nations being supported by the Soviet Union, and Israel by the USA in the international area, the parties of the conflict began to manifest their uncompromising attitudes more comfortably, which put the Conciliation Commission in a situation where it could no longer function.&nbsp;The Conciliation Commission was an unsuccessful experience on the part of Turkey. Turkish foreign policy pursued until the 1960s did more harm than good on&nbsp;the works of the Conciliation Commission. During the 1950s, Turkey formed closer economic and political relationships with Israel, while its relations with important Arab nations such as Egypt and Syria deteriorated. Such direct conflicts between Western and Arab nations as the Suez Crisis did not only worsen the relations between Western and Arab nations in the Conciliation Commission, but also caused Turkey to lose its role of mediator. With Cold War and the Soviet Union becoming more influential over Middle East, Turkey’s policies on Arab nations, especially Egypt and Syria, became stricter. When Turkey and Syria were on the brink of war in 1957, the two nations had no chance of cooperation and resolution under the Conciliation Commission. Egypt and Syria also sharpened their irreconcilable attitudes against Turkey both in terms of regional policies and of international relations with the support they received from the Soviet Union. Because Egypt perceived a Muslim state’s contribution to the resolution of the Palestine issue as interference in the internal affairs of Arab nations at a time when it saw itself as the protector of Arab nations, it did not support Turkey’s efforts for conciliation. The Conciliation Commission for Palestine was imbedded in history as another UN initiative that failed to provide solutions to international relations under the existing structure of the UN.

FİLİSTİN UZLAŞTIRMA KOMİSYONU VE TÜRKİYE

@JOURNAL_BOX_FEATURED

Gökhan

Known as the Neo-Babylonian Chronicles, the cuneiform texts were compiled (copied) by Babylonian scribes and mostly concern the historical events of both the recent and distant past. Recorded concisely and chronologically, they detail events starting from the Babylonian king Nabunassar era in 747-734 BC and continue to the period just after the capture of Babylonia by the Persians in 539 BC. In this study, the records concerning the illnesses and disabilities of the Mesopotamian and Elamite kings in these chronicles will be discussed. We will attempt to determine the historical importance of these medical problems of the kings with regards to the medical history of Mesopotamia. Some assessments will be made concerning the relations between these records and the political, religious, and traditional aspects of Babylonian historiography. Additionally, other pieces of information in other chronicles such as Esarhaddon, Weidner, and Chronicle of Early Kings will be referred to when needed. Although numerous Babylonian and Assyrian kings are mentioned concerning political events in the Neo-Babylonian Chronicles, the only king whose illness is mentioned is the Neo-Assyrian king Esarhaddon (681- 669 BC). The king fell ill during one of his campaigns and subsequently died. There is not much detailed information about the king’s illness in the relevant chronicles. Similarly, the chronicles do not mention the illnesses of the Babylonian kings in much detail. While the Neo-Babylonian king Nabunassar (747-734 BC) died after becoming sick in his palace, another Babylonian king Nabonidus (555-539 BC) was also ill but recovered. In brief, it is observed that the medical backgrounds of some of the numerous Babylonian and Assyrian kings are mentioned in the Neo-Babylonian Chronicles and that these references are only superficial. However, it is very clear that the illnesses and disabilities of the Neo-Elamite kings, who reigned during the 1st millennium BC, are mentioned in more detail by the chronicle scribes. What is the reason behind the fact that no detailed information is given about the illnesses of the Assyrian and Babylonian kings, while the health situations and deaths of their contemporary Neo-Elamite kings include more details? There might be more than one answer to this question. One answer might be that the scribes could not find sufficient information in the ancient sources about these issues while compiling the chronicles. In addition, statements indicating that the demise of the kings did not result from an illness and particularly that some of them “died in the palaces” are either proof of&nbsp;the fact that there is not sufficient information about the cause of death of these kings or it is possible that these individuals were accepted as “well-remembered figures” in Babylonian history. However, another answer (and one which is the main focus of the study) should be sought in the relation between the medical knowledge and tradition of Babylonian historiography, in which political and religious ideologies are dominant. It is possible to find pieces of information about the health problems of kings such as Esarhaddon and Nabonidus in other cuneiform sources such as the royal inscriptions and correspondence. However, only in the chronicles is it possible to encounter details about the illnesses of the Elamite kings. The records of the death of two Neo-Elamite kings following a stroke and/or paralysis can be considered as an example of the reflection of a pro-Babylonian attitude towards historiography. It is certain that the scribe or scribes, who mentioned these pieces of information, are eager to leave no stone unturned about information and the details concerning the disabilities or deaths of the Elamite kings. It should be considered that a conscious preference in deciding which pieces of information to be recorded might be related to the world views of the scribes, the relevance of the kings, the form of the illnesses to be mentioned, divine background, and the political/ideological aspects of historiographical tradition. Similarly, this relation is conspicuous in the health problems of the Sargon of Akkad and Isin king Erra-imitti written in the records of the Chronicles of the Early Kings and Weidner as well.It is possible that some of the details concerning the illnesses of the kings might contain fabrications, exaggerations, or personal comments. However, even if these details are supported by information from other cuneiform sources or even if it is medically possible, it doesn’t change the possible views asserted in the study about the intentions behind adding them to the chronicles. Sometimes concise and sometimes relatively longer, the information provided by the chronicle writers about the illnesses of the Assyrian, Babylonian, and Elamite kings, and even about the Isin king Erra-imitti contribute to our knowledge about the medical history of ancient Mesopotamia. Independent from the individuals, since these medical cases (such as stroke, paralysis, fever, insomnia, and respiratory problems) are common in royal correspondence and literary texts and particularly in medical texts, they have no particular privilege. However, these medical details in the chronicles are important with regards to Babylonian historiography. It is observed in the chronicles that only the health problems of the kings are detailed with interest. However, some kings like the Neo-Babylonian King Nabonidus (who recovered after the illness), or kings who died without getting sick, are also discussed. Particularly in the latter case, it was also relevant that some of the scribes did not have knowledge about the causes of deaths of the kings. Additionally, it was recorded that some of the kings (like the Babylonian king Nabunassar) died in the palaces, even without getting sick. The Babylonian scribes were probably informed about the details of the illness of the Neo-Assyrian king Esarhaddon; however, they did not mention it. In fact, Esarhaddon was a Neo-Assyrian king, who was trying to revive the city of Babylonia and return it to its old magnificent days after his father, Sennacherib, wrathfully devastated the city. It can be considered that these kings were not remembered with ill feelings by later generations. However, this interpretation can involve problems, since it is a result of an overall general view about the whole life of the individual. It is also possible that they were punished with illnesses resulting in death by the gods due to their misconduct in any period of their kingdom or in any issue that might annoy (!) the gods.Therefore, all of these examples have great importance since they reflect the dominant understanding concerning the ancient Mesopotamian historiography: a religious belief that the illness is a divine punishment arising from the faults of an individual. The common trait of almost all of the kings, about whom the chronicles give detailed information concerning their illnesses, is that they were all remembered negatively with regards to the history of Babylonia. It is possible that there was an attempt to create a perception that the patron deity of the city of Babylon Marduk (Bel) punished these kings who were in the wrong. Illnesses and deaths related with these situations were remarkable events since they demonstrated the proof of the relation between the crime and the punishment. Thus, the motives behind the intention to abstain from recording the known or fabricated medical causes of deaths of some kings should not be examined, to a large extent, in the epistemological concerns. These motives should be investigated in the relations between historiography and its political, religious, and traditional aspects. For example, mentioning the insomnia problems of Sargon of Akkad doesn’t have a medical or historical importance in itself. This record reaches significance when there is an attempt to establish relations between the current ideologies and compilation of literary narratives, whose “reality is suspicious”, that are dated to the 1st millennium BC. It might also be mentioned that, sometimes while narrating, the role and influence of these relations are behind the inclusion of the themes and contents, which are thought to arouse curiosity and interest, with a high potential of speculation.

TIBBİ BİLGİNİN İDEOLOJİK KULLANIMI ÜZERİNE OKUMALAR: YENİ BABİL KRONİKLERİNDE HASTALIKLAR VE BABİL TARİH YAZICILIĞI

Ebru

The Last Penetration of The Crusader Armies into the Seljuḳ Territory of Anatolia: Emperor Friedrich Barbarossa’s Crusade (1089-1190)In the 12th century, Anatolia witnessed the great struggles between the Crusaders and the Turks, and the Crusaders penetrated into Seljuḳ territory for the last time during the Third Crusade (1189–1192). By conquering Jerusalem in 1187, the Egyptian-Syrian ruler, Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn, put an end to the Crusaders’ domination in Jerusalem, which lasted 88 years. It was at this point that German Emperor Friedrich Barbarossa, who had accompanied his uncle Conrad III, King of Germany during the Second Crusade, once again agreed to participate in the Crusade—this time as a 70-year-old ruler. He formed an immense army with the goal of capturing Jerusalem from Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn. While the English and French kings traveled by sea to the Holy Land with their forces, Friedrich tried to reach the East through Anatolia. This paper discusses the march of the German Crusaders under the command of Friedrich Barbarossa in Anatolia, and the Seljuk-Crusader relations in this period.&nbsp;Emperor Friedrich, who started to prepare for the expedition after accepting the cross, sent ambassadors to Hungarian King Bela III, Byzantine Emperor Isaakios Angelos II, and Seljuk Sultan Ḳilidj Arslan II to ask for permission to pass through their countries. In response, Emperor Isaakios said that the Crusaders would be allowed to enter the territory of the empire if they promised not to take any action against the Byzantine State. When this stipulation was accepted by Friedrich, the Byzantine emperor agreed to provide guidance and suitable markets to the Crusaders during the transition from Anatolia. After that, Emperor Isaakios took the necessary measures in accordance with the agreement reached; however, Barbarossa’s contact with the enemies of Byzantine Serbs and Seljuks increased Isaakios’s concerns. Faced with such danger, Isaakios found it appropriate to contact Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn for the interest of his country. According to Ibn al-Asir, when Isaakios learned of the German emperor’s movement, he sent an envoy to Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn and promised that he would prevent Friedrich from passing through the Byzantine land.After the year-long preparations, Friedrich finally moved from Regensburg to the East in May 1189. His enormously large and well- organized army seemed almost invincible. Barbarossa passed Hungary, where he was welcomed by King Bela, and by crossing the Danube near Belgrade, he entered the Byzantine territory in 1189. The Crusader army was said to have 50,000 horsemen and 100,000 infantrymen. Meanwhile, the Serbs and Bulgarians’ attempt to form an alliance with the German emperor destressed the Byzantines.Because of the events in the Balkans, the relations between the two sides became so bad that Friedrich even contemplated attacking Istanbul. Eventually, Friedrich, who intended to arrive in Palestine after spending the winter months in Adrianople, went to Gallipoli in March 1190, and by crossing through the Dardanelles into Anatolia, he entered the path that Alexander the Great had followed about 15 centuries prior. After crossing the Granikos Stream and the Angelokomites River, the Crusaders followed a Byzantine military road between Miletopolis and today’s Balikesir (Akhyraous), and they moved southward through Balikesir-Ala Shehir before heading toward Seljuḳ territory after the Byzantine border town of Laodiceia (Denizli). The German emperor thought that he would easily pass from Anatolia, in accordance with the old friendship and the agreements between Ḳilidj Arslan II and him. In the last two years, he sent ambassadors to the sultan several times, and he stated that his intention was to go to Jerusalem. When the German army was in Adrianople, Sultan Ḳilidj Arslan and his son Malik Shah’s envoys had gone to Friedrich and promised to help him. Meanwhile, the Anatolian Seljuk State had lost its political unity. Sultan Ḳilidj Arslan did not actually have power. The feuds for the throne had begun among the Maliks soon after he allocated the country between his 11 sons in 1187. Because of these circumstances, the Turks were not in a position to openly fight against this enormous army, but they also did not want to let them pass through Anatolia. As a result, they followed the German Crusader army and harassed them. In the meantime, the Turkmens, who acted on their own at the borders, also pursued the Crusaders along the road from Denizli. The Turkmens initially retreated to the mountains and grazed large herds of animals (around 5,000) along the Germans’ way and therefore condemned the horses of the Crusaders to starvation. Then they suddenly attacked the Crusaders, who were devastated by fatigue and starvation. As&nbsp;a result of these attacks in the mountains and passages in the Uluborlu region, the Germans suffered great losses. While the attacks of the Turkmens continued along the way, the Germans were forced to carry out a series of fierce battles (from April 28 to May 18). The Turks also continued their activities around the Crusader camp at nights, shouting and shooting arrows until the morning, causing the Germans sleepless and troubled nights. In the meantime, under the rain of arrows that pierced the tents, the Crusaders were sometimes killed while they were asleep. For this reason, most of the Crusaders were unable to remove their armor at night for weeks. This situation created an exasperating impact on them. Also, the water resources along the way of the Crusader army were rendered unusable, all kinds of foodstuffs were destroyed, cities were evacuated, and the people hid in the forests and mountains.As a result of the war tactics applied by the Turks, the German army, which was miserable because of both the lack of food and water and the constant Turkish attacks, suffered heavy losses. They set Aḳshehir on fire and marched toward Iconium (Konya). After a fierce battle, Emperor Friedrich finally managed to enter Iconium by force on May 18th. However, after leaving Iconium, Friedrich drowned while crossing the Saleph River (Silifke /Salūḳiya). As a result of this, the German army disbanded (June 10, 1190), and only a small part of the army, led by his son Friedrich VI of Swabia, reached Acre.

HAÇLI ORDULARININ ANADOLU’DA SELÇUKLU TOPRAKLARINA SON GİRİŞİ: İMPARATOR FRIEDRICH BARBAROSSA’NIN HAÇLI SEFERİ (1189-1190)

@JOURNAL_BOX_MOSTREAD

Tarih Dergisi (Turk J Hist), İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi’nin çift-kör hakemli açık erişimli bilimsel yayın organıdır. Dergi Şubat, Haziran ve Ekim aylarında olmak üzere, yılda üç sayı olarak yayınlanır. Yayın dili Türkçe ve İngilizce’dir.

Tarih Dergisi (Turk J Hist); ulusal, bölgesel tarih ve dünya tarihiyle ilgili her konuyu kapsayan araştırma makalesi ve çeviri makaleler yayınlamaktadır. Dergide aynı zamanda eleştiri ve değerlendirme yazılarına da yer verilmektedir.

Tarih Dergisi (Turk J Hist); ulusal, bölgesel tarih ve dünya tarihiyle ilgili her konuyu kapsayan nitelikli makaleler yayınlayarak, literatüre katkıda bulunmayı amaçlar. 

Tarih Dergisi (Turk J Hist); ulusal, bölgesel tarih ve dünya tarihiyle ilgili araştırma makalesi ve çeviri makaleler yayınlamaktadır. Dergide aynı zamanda eleştiri ve değerlendirme yazılarına da yer verilmektedir.

ERIH PLUS

DOAJ

Scopus

TR Dizin

Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)

EBSCO

SOBIAD Sosyal Bilimler Atıf Dizini

@METRIC_VOLUMES

@METRIC_ISSUES

@METRIC_ARTICLES

@METRIC_OPENACCESS

Tarih Dergisi

@INFO_TAB_ABOUT

Editor in Chief

Co Editor in Chief

Editorial Management Board Member

Editorial Assistant

Editorial Board Member

@INFO_TAB_BOARDS

Tarih Dergisi (Turk J Hist); ulusal, bölgesel tarih ve dünya tarihiyle ilgili her konuyu kapsayan nitelikli makaleler yayınlayarak, literatüre katkıda bulunmayı amaçlar. Tarih Dergisi (Turk J Hist); ulusal, bölgesel tarih ve dünya tarihiyle ilgili araştırma makalesi ve çeviri makaleler yayınlamaktadır. Dergide aynı zamanda eleştiri ve değerlendirme yazılarına da yer verilmektedir.

Amaç Kapsam

<ul><li>Web of Science Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)</li><li>TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR-Dizin</li><li>SCOPUS</li><li>EBSCO Historical Abstracts</li><li>EBSCO Historical Abstracts with Full Text</li><li>Erih Plus</li><li>DOAJ</li><li>SOBİAD</li></ul>

Dizinler

Dergi yayın etiğinde en yüksek standartlara bağlıdır ve Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) ve World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) tarafından yayınlanan etik yayıncılık ilkelerini benimser; Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing başlığı altında ifade edilen ilkeler için: <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing</a> Gönderilen makaleler derginin amaç ve kapsamına uygun olmalıdır. Orijinal, yayınlanmamış ve başka bir dergide değerlendirme sürecinde olmayan, her bir yazar tarafından içeriği ve gönderimi onaylanmış yazılar değerlendirmeye kabul edilir. Makale yayınlanmak üzere Dergiye gönderildikten sonra yazarlardan hiçbirinin ismi, tüm yazarların yazılı izni olmadan yazar listesinden silinemez ve yeni bir isim yazar olarak eklenemez ve yazar sırası değiştirilemez.İntihal, duplikasyon, sahte yazarlık/inkar edilen yazarlık, araştrma/veri fabrikasyonu, makale dilimleme, dilimleyerek yayın, telif hakları ihlali ve çıkar çatışmasının gizlenmesi, etik dışı davranışlar olarak kabul edilir. Kabul edilen etik standartlara uygun olmayan tüm makaleler yayından çıkarılır. Buna yayından sonra tespit edilen olası kuraldışı, uygunsuzluklar içeren makaleler de dahildir.İntihal Ön kontrolden geçirilen makaleler, iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal/kendi kendine intihal tespit edilirse yazarlar bilgilendirilir. Editörler, gerekli olması halinde makaleyi değerlendirme ya da üretim sürecinin çeşitli aşamalarında intihal kontrolüne tabi tutabilirler. Yüksek benzerlik oranları, bir makalenin kabul edilmeden önce ve hatta kabul edildikten sonra reddedilmesine neden olabilir. Makalenin türüne bağlı olarak, bunun oranın %15 veya %20'den az olması beklenir.Çift Kör Hakemlikİntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir. Editör, makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakemlikten geçmesini sağlar ve makale biçimsel esaslara uygun ise, gelen yazıyı yurtiçinden ve /veya yurtdışından en az iki hakemin değerlendirmesine sunar, hakemler gerek gördüğü takdirde yazıda istenen değişiklikler yazarlar tarafından yapıldıktan sonra yayınlanmasına onay verir.

Politikalar

Dergi açık erişimlidir ve derginin tüm içeriği okura ya da okurun dahil olduğu kuruma ücretsiz olarak sunulur. Okurlar, ticari amaç haricinde, yayıncı ya da yazardan izin almadan dergi makalelerinin tam metnini okuyabilir, indirebilir, kopyalayabilir, arayabilir ve link sağlayabilir. Bu <a href="https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/translations/turkish-translation" target="_blank">BOAI</a> açık erişim tanımıyla uyumludur. Derginin açık erişimli makaleleri Creative Commons Atıf-GayrıTicari 4.0 Uluslararası (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.tr" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) olarak lisanslıdır.

Derginin tüm giderleri İstanbul Üniversitesi tarafından karşılanmaktadır. Dergide makale yayını ve makale süreçlerinin yürütülmesi ücrete tabi değildir. Dergiye gönderilen ya da yayın için kabul edilen makaleler için işlemleme ücreti ya da gönderim ücreti alınmaz.

Yazarlar dergide yayınlanan çalışmalarının telif hakkına sahiptirler ve çalışmaları  Creative Commons Atıf-GayrıTicari 4.0 Uluslararası (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.tr" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) olarak lisanslıdır. CC BY-NC 4.0 lisansı, eserin ticari kullanım dışında her boyut ve formatta paylaşılmasına, kopyalanmasına, çoğaltılmasına ve orijinal esere uygun şekilde atıfta bulunmak kaydıyla yeniden düzenleme, dönüştürme ve eserin üzerine inşa etme dâhil adapte edilmesine izin verir.

Editörler, yayınlanan makalede, bulguları, yorumları ve sonuçları etkilemeyen küçük hatalar tespit edilirse düzeltme yayınlamayı düşünebilirler. Editörler, bulguları ve sonuçları geçersiz kılan büyük hatalar / ihlaller söz konusu olduğunda, makaleyi geri çekmeyi düşünmelidir. Yazarlar tarafından araştırma veya yayını kötüye kullanmaya yönelik olasılık söz konusu ise; bulguların güvenilir olmadığına ve yazarların kurumlarının olayı soruşturmadığına dair kanıtlar var veya olası soruşturma haksız veya sonuçsuz görünüyor ise, editörler endişe ifadesi yayınlamayı düşünmelidir. Düzeltme, geri çekme veya endişe ifadesi ile ilgili olarak COPE ve ICJME yönergeleri dikkate alınır.

Dergide yayınlanan tüm yazıların korunmasını ve kalıcı olarak erişilebilir olmasını sağlamak için makaleler, ulusal bir arşiv sitesi olarak hizmet veren ve aynı zamanda LOCKSS'in içeriği toplamasına, korumasına ve sunmasına izin veren Dergipark'ta saklanmaktadır.Ek olarak, yazarların kendilerinin makalelerinin son PDF sürümünü Open Archives Initiative (<a href="https://www.openarchives.org/" target="_blank">https://www.openarchives.org/</a>) standartlarına uygun açık elektronik arşivlerde arşivlemeleri önerilir. Yazarlar, yayınladıkları arşiv versiyonundan, İ.Ü. Yayınevinin dergi web sitesinin URL'sine bağlantı sağlamalıdır.

Tarih Dergisi (Türk J Hist), yayın etiğinde en yüksek standartlara bağlıdır ve Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) ve World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) tarafından yayınlanan etik yayıncılık ilkelerini benimser; Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing başlığı altında ifade edilen ilkeler için: <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing</a> Gönderilen tüm makaleler orijinal, yayınlanmamış ve başka bir dergide değerlendirme sürecinde olmamalıdır. Her bir makale editörlerden biri ve en az iki hakem tarafından çift kör değerlendirmeden geçirilir. İntihal, duplikasyon, sahte yazarlık/inkar edilen yazarlık, araştrma/veri fabrikasyonu, makale dilimleme, dilimleyerek yayın, telif hakları ihlali ve çıkar çatışmasının gizlenmesi, etik dışı davranışlar olarak kabul edilir.Kabul edilen etik standartlara uygun olmayan tüm makaleler yayından çıkarılır. Buna yayından sonra tespit edilen olası kuraldışı, uygunsuzluklar içeren makaleler de dahildir.

Etik

Tarih Dergisi araştırma etiğinde en yüksek standartları gözetir ve aşağıda tanımlanan uluslararası araştırma etiği ilkelerini benimser. Makalelerin etik kurallara uygunluğu yazarların sorumluluğundadır.<ul><li>Araştırmanın tasarlanması, tasarımın gözden geçirilmesi ve araştırmanın yürütülmesinde, bütünlük, kalite ve şeffaflık ilkeleri sağlanmalıdır.</li><li>Araştırma ekibi ve katılımcılar, araştırmanın amacı, yöntemleri ve öngörülen olası kullanımları; araştırmaya katılımın gerektirdikleri ve varsa riskleri hakkında tam olarak bilgilendirilmelidir.</li><li>Araştırma katılımcılarının sağladığı bilgilerin gizliliği ve yanıt verenlerin gizliliği sağlanmalıdır. Araştırma katılımcıların özerkliğini ve saygınlığını koruyacak şekilde tasarlanmalıdır.</li><li>Araştırma katılımcıları gönüllü olarak araştırmada yer almalı, herhangi bir zorlama altında olmamalıdırlar.</li><li>Katılımcıların zarar görmesinden kaçınılmalıdır. Araştırma, katılımcıları riske sokmayacak şekilde planlanmalıdır.</li><li>Araştırma bağımsızlığıyla ilgili açık ve net olunmalı; çıkar çatışması varsa belirtilmelidir.</li><li>Deneysel çalışmalarda, araştırmaya katılmaya karar veren katılımcıların yazılı bilgilendirilmiş onayı alınmalıdır. Çocukların ve vesayet altındakilerin veya tasdiklenmiş akıl hastalığı bulunanların yasal vasisinin onayı alınmalıdır.</li><li>Çalışma herhangi bir kurum ya da kuruluşta gerçekleştirilecekse bu kurum ya da kuruluştan çalışma yapılacağına dair onay alınmalıdır.</li><li>İnsan öğesi bulunan çalışmalarda, “yöntem” bölümünde katılımcılardan “bilgilendirilmiş onam” alındığının ve çalışmanın yapıldığı kurumdan etik kurul onayı alındığı belirtilmesi gerekir.</li></ul>

Makalelerin bilimsel ve etik kurallara uygunluğu yazarların sorumluluğundadır. Yazar makalenin orijinal olduğu, daha önce başka bir yerde yayınlanmadığı ve başka bir yerde, başka bir dilde yayınlanmak üzere değerlendirmede olmadığı konusunda teminat sağlamalıdır. Uygulamadaki telif kanunları ve anlaşmaları gözetilmelidir. Telife bağlı materyaller (örneğin tablolar, şekiller veya büyük alıntılar) gerekli izin ve teşekkürle kullanılmalıdır. Başka yazarların, katkıda bulunanların çalışmaları ya da yararlanılan kaynaklar uygun biçimde kullanılmalı ve referanslarda belirtilmelidir.Gönderilen makalede tüm yazarların akademik ve bilimsel olarak doğrudan katkısı olmalıdır, bu bağlamda “yazar” yayınlanan bir araştırmanın kavramsallaştırılmasına ve dizaynına, verilerin elde edilmesine, analizine ya da yorumlanmasına belirgin katkı yapan, yazının yazılması ya da bunun içerik açısından eleştirel biçimde gözden geçirilmesinde görev yapan birisi olarak görülür. Yazar olabilmenin diğer koşulları ise, makaledeki çalışmayı planlamak veya icra etmek ve / veya revize etmektir. Fon sağlanması, veri toplanması ya da araştırma grubunun genel süpervizyonu tek başına yazarlık hakkı kazandırmaz. Yazar olarak gösterilen tüm bireyler sayılan tüm ölçütleri karşılamalıdır ve yukarıdaki ölçütleri karşılayan her birey yazar olarak gösterilebilir. Yazarların isim sıralaması ortak verilen bir karar olmalıdır. Tüm yazarlar yazar sıralamasını <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/BCBF605901234F42B7485526E85D55E1" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formunda</a> imzalı olarak belirtmek zorundadırlar.Yazarlık için yeterli ölçütleri karşılamayan ancak çalışmaya katkısı olan tüm bireyler “teşekkür / bilgiler” kısmında sıralanmalıdır. Bunlara örnek olarak ise sadece teknik destek sağlayan, yazıma yardımcı olan ya da sadece genel bir destek sağlayan, finansal ve materyal desteği sunan kişiler verilebilir.Bütün yazarlar, araştırmanın sonuçlarını ya da bilimsel değerlendirmeyi etkileyebilme potansiyeli olan finansal ilişkiler, çıkar çatışması ve çıkar rekabetini beyan etmelidirler. Bir yazar kendi yayınlanmış yazısında belirgin bir hata ya da yanlışlık tespit ederse, bu yanlışlıklara ilişkin düzeltme ya da geri çekme için editör ile hemen temasa geçme ve işbirliği yapma sorumluluğunu taşır.

Baş editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden,  uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirir. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar. Gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalacağını garanti eder. Baş editör içerik ve yayının toplam kalitesinden sorumludur. Gereğinde hata sayfası yayınlamalı ya da düzeltme yapmalıdır.Baş editör; yazarlar, editörler ve hakemler arasında çıkar çatışmasına izin vermez. Hakem atama konusunda tam yetkiye sahiptir ve dergide yayınlanacak makalelerle ilgili nihai kararı vermekle yükümlüdür.Hakemlerin araştırmayla ilgili, yazarlarla ve/veya araştırmanın finansal destekçileriyle çıkar çatışmaları olmamalıdır. Değerlendirmelerinin sonucunda tarafsız bir yargıya varmalıdırlar. Gönderilmiş yazılara ilişkin tüm bilginin gizli tutulmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir. Bazı durumlarda editörün kararıyla, ilgili hakemlerin makaleye ait yorumları aynı makaleyi yorumlayan diğer hakemlere gönderilerek hakemlerin bu süreçte aydınlatılması sağlanabilir.

Daha önce yayınlanmamış ya da yayınlanmak üzere başka bir dergide halen değerlendirmede olmayan ve her bir yazar tarafından onaylanan makaleler değerlendirilmek üzere kabul edilir. Gönderilen ve ön kontrolü geçen makaleler iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir.Seçilen makaleler en az iki ulusal/uluslararası hakeme çift taraflı kör hakemlik ile değerlendirmeye gönderilir; yayın kararı, hakemlerin talepleri doğrultusunda yazarların gerçekleştirdiği düzenlemelerin ve hakem sürecinin sonrasında baş editör tarafından verilir.

Hakemlik Hakkında

Baş editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirirler. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar. Gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalacağını garanti eder. Baş editör içerik ve yayının toplam kalitesinden sorumludur. Gereğinde hata sayfası yayınlamalı ya da düzeltme yapmalıdır. Baş editör; yazarlar, editörler ve hakemler arasında çıkar çatışmasına izin vermez. Hakem atama konusunda tam yetkiye sahiptir ve dergide yayınlanacak makalelerle ilgili nihai kararı vermekle yükümlüdür.Hakemler, araştırma, yazarlar ve/veya araştırmaya fon sağlayanlarla çıkar çatışması içinde olmamalıdır. Hakemler değerlendirmelerinin sonucunda tarafsız bir yargıya varmalıdırlar. Gönderilmiş yazılara ilişkin tüm bilginin gizli tutulmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir. Bazı durumlarda editörün kararıyla, ilgili hakemlerin makaleye ait yorumları aynı makaleyi yorumlayan diğer hakemlere gönderilerek hakemlerin bu süreçte aydınlatılması sağlanabilir.

Daha önce yayınlanmamış ya da yayınlanmak üzere başka bir dergide halen değerlendirmede olmayan ve her bir yazar tarafından onaylanan makaleler değerlendirilmek üzere kabul edilir. Gönderilen ve ön kontrolü geçen makaleler iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir.Baş Editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirir. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar.Seçilen makaleler en az iki ulusal/uluslararası hakeme değerlendirmeye gönderilir; yayın kararı, hakemlerin talepleri doğrultusunda yazarların gerçekleştirdiği düzenlemelerin ve hakem sürecinin sonrasında baş editör tarafından verilir.Baş editör; yazarlar, editörler ve hakemler arasında çıkar çatışmasına izin vermez. Hakem atama konusunda tam yetkiye sahiptir ve dergide yayınlanacak makalelerle ilgili nihai kararı vermekle yükümlüdür.Hakemlerin değerlendirmeleri objektif olmalıdır. Hakem süreci sırasında hakemlerin aşağıdaki hususları dikkate alarak değerlendirmelerini yapmaları beklenir.-Makale yeni ve önemli bir bilgi içeriyor mu?-Öz, makalenin içeriğini net ve düzgün bir şekilde tanımlıyor mu?-Yöntem bütünlüklü ve anlaşılır şekilde tanımlanmış mı?-Yapılan yorum ve varılan sonuçlar bulgularla kanıtlanıyor mu?-Alandaki diğer çalışmalara yeterli referans verilmiş mi?-Dil kalitesi yeterli mi?Hakemler, gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir.

Dil Dergide Türkçe ve İngilizce makaleler yayınlanır. Gönderilen makalelerde makale dilinde öz, İngilizce öz olmalıdır. Yazıların Hazırlanması ve Gönderimi Makaleler sadece <a href="https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/iutarih" target="_blank">https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/iutarih</a> adresinde yer alan derginin online makale yükleme ve değerlendirme sistemi üzerinden gönderilebilir. Diğer mecralardan gönderilen makaleler değerlendirilmeye alınmayacaktır. Gönderilen makalelerin dergi yazım kurallarına uygunluğu ilk olarak Editoryal Ofis tarafından kontrol edilecek, dergi yazım kurallarına uygun hazırlanmamış makaleler teknik düzeltme talepleri ile birlikte yazarlarına geri gönderilecektir. Yazarların; <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/BCBF605901234F42B7485526E85D55E1" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu’nu</a> ilk gönderim sırasında online makale sistemine yüklemeleri gerekmektedir. Tarih Dergisi’ne gönderilen tüm yazılar, A4 boyutunda MS Word uyumlu programda Times New Roman yazı karakterinde 11 punto olarak yazılmalıdır.Türkçe hazırlanan makalelerde TDK yazım kılavuzu esas alınır. <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/F358B490D3384A8383B44DD531C9EF9B" target="_blank">Kapak sayfası</a>: Gönderilen tüm makalelerle birlikte ayrı bir kapak sayfası da gönderilmelidir. Bu sayfa; • Makalenin başlığını ve 50 karakteri geçmeyen kısa başlığını, • Yazarların isimlerini, kurumlarını ve eğitim derecelerini, • Yazarların ORCID numaralarını • Finansal destek bilgisi ve diğer destek kaynakları hakkında detaylı bilgiyi, • Sorumlu yazarın ismi, adresi, telefonu (cep telefonu dahil), faks numarası ve e-posta adresini, • Makale hazırlama sürecine katkıda bulunan ama yazarlık kriterlerini karşılamayan bireylerle ilgili bilgileri • Makale daha önceden bir bilimsel toplantıda sunulduysa, ilgili bilimsel toplantının detaylı bilgilerini içermelidir. Özet: Özgün araştırma makalelerinde 80 kelimeyi aşmayan Türkçe ve İngilizce özet bulunmalıdır. Özet bölümü alt başlık içermeyecek şekilde hazırlanmalıdır. İngilizce genişletilmiş özet: Türkçe yazılan makalelerin uluslararası platformda görünürlüğü ve atıf oranını arttırmak amacıyla, yalnızca araştırma makaleleri için 1.000 kelimelik İngilizce geniş özet hazırlanıp sisteme yüklenmelidir. İngilizce geniş özet makalenin hipotezini, çıkarımlarını ve yorumların kapsamlı bir biçimde özetleyecek şekilde hazırlanmalıdır. Anahtar Sözcükler: Araştırma makaleleri en az 3 en fazla 6 anahtar kelimeyle birlikte gönderilmelidir. Anahtar kelimeler İngilizce ve Türkçe olarak hazırlanıp ilgili özetin altına yazılmalıdır. Makale Türleri Araştırma Makalesi: Ana metin, araştırmanın konusuna uygun şekilde alt başlıklara ayrılmalıdır. Alt başlıklar konusunda yazarlar serbest bırakılmışlardır. Çeviri: Çeviri türündeki yazılarda, orijinal makalenin yazarından alınan izin ile orijinal makalenin bir kopyası ve asıl metnin tam bibliyografik künye bilgilerini içeren dosyalar da online makale sistemine yüklenmelidir. Tablolar Tablolar ana dosyaya eklenmeli, kaynak listesi sonrasında sunulmalı, ana metin içerisindeki geçiş sıralarına uygun olarak numaralandırılmadır. Tabloların üzerinde tanımlayıcı bir başlık yer almalı ve tablo içerisinde geçen kısaltmaların açılımları tablo altına tanımlanmalıdır. Tablolar Microsoft Office Word dosyası içinde “Tablo Ekle” komutu kullanılarak hazırlanmalı ve kolay okunabilir şekilde düzenlenmelidir. Tablolarda sunulan veriler ana metinde sunulan verilerin tekrarı olmamalı; ana metindeki verileri destekleyici nitelikte olmalılar Resim ve Resim Altyazıları Resimler, grafikler ve fotoğraflar (TIFF ya da JPEG formatında) ayrı dosyalar halinde sisteme yüklenmelidir. Görseller bir Word dosyası dokümanı ya da ana doküman içerisinde sunulmamalıdır. Alt birimlere ayrılan görseller olduğunda, alt birimler tek bir görsel içerisinde verilmemelidir. Her bir alt birim sisteme ayrı bir dosya olarak yüklenmelidir. Resimler alt birimleri belli etme amacıyla etiketlenmemelidir (a, b, c vb.). Resimlerde altyazıları desteklemek için kalın ve ince oklar, ok başları, yıldızlar, asteriksler ve benzer işaretler kullanılabilir. Makalenin geri kalanında olduğu gibi resimler de kör olmalıdır. Bu sebeple, resimlerde yer alan kişi ve kurum bilgileri de körleştirilmelidir. Görsellerin minimum çözünürlüğü 300DPI olmalıdır. Değerlendirme sürecindeki aksaklıkları önlemek için gönderilen bütün görsellerin çözünürlüğü net ve boyutu büyük (minimum boyutlar 100x100 mm) olmalıdır. Resim altyazıları ana metnin sonunda yer almalıdır. Makale içerisinde geçen tüm kısaltmalar, ana metin ve özette ayrı ayrı olmak üzere ilk kez kullanıldıkları yerde tanımlanarak kısaltma tanımın ardından parantez içerisinde verilmelidir. Tüm kaynaklar, tablolar ve resimlere ana metin içinde uygun olan yerlerde sırayla numara verilerek atıf yapılmalıdır. Revizyonlar Yazarlar makalelerinin revizyon dosyalarını gönderirken, hakemlerin istediği düzeltmeleri ve hakemlerin sorularına yanıtlarını ana metin içerisinde renklendirerek belirtmelidir. Revize makaleler karar mektubunu takip eden 30 gün içerisinde dergiye gönderilmelidir. Makalenin revize versiyonu belirtilen süre içerisinde yüklenmezse, revizyon seçeneği iptal olabilir. Yazarların revizyon için ek süreye ihtiyaç duymaları durumunda uzatma taleplerini ilk 30 gün sona ermeden dergiye iletmeleri gerekmektedir. Yayına kabul edilen makaleler dil bilgisi, noktalama ve biçim açısından kontrol edilir. Yayın süreci tamamlanan makaleler, yayın planına dahil edildikleri sayıyla birlikte yayınlanmadan önce erken çevrimiçi formatında dergi web sitesinde yayına alınır. Kabul edilen makalelerin baskıya hazır PDF dosyaları sorumlu yazarlara iletilir ve yayın onaylarının 2 gün içerisinde dergiye iletilmesi istenir.

Yazım Kuralları

Referans Stili ve Formatı Yayınlara atıf yapılırken en son, en güncel yayınlar tercih edilmelidir. Kaynakların doğruluğundan yazar(lar) sorumludur. Referanslar dip not sistemine uygun olarak belirtilmelidir. Metin içi referansları ve kaynakça bölümü için dikkat edilmesi gereken detaylar aşağıda belirtilmiştir. Metin içi referanslar üst simge ile 1’den başlayarak gösterilmelidir. Dipnotlar, Times New Roman yazı karakterinde, 9 punto tek aralık yazılmalıdır. Tüm noktalama işaretlerinden sonra bir boşluk bırakılmalı ve tüm dipnotların sonuna, mutlaka nokta konulmalıdır. Metin içindeki atıflar sayfa altına dipnot şeklinde 1’den başlayarak numaralandırılmalıdır. Bunun dışında metin içinde atıf yapılmamalıdır. Dipnotlarda kaynaklar verilirken, kitap ve dergi ismi italik olmalı, makale isimleri tırnak içerisinde düz olarak verilmelidir. Dipnotlarda, ilk geçtiği yerde yazar ismi ve kaynak künyesi tam olarak verilmeli, daha sonra sadece yazar soyadı ve a.g.e., a.g.m., veya a.g.t. gibi yazarın belirlediği kısaltmalarla yazılmalıdır. Bir yazarın birden fazla kitap ve makalesi kullanılıyorsa ikinci eserin ilk kullanımından sonra, yazarın soyadı, sonra kitap veya makalenin kısaltılmış adı verilmelidir. Çok yazarlı kaynakların ilk geçtiği yerde yazarların tümü yazılmalı, daha sonrakilerde kısaltılarak verilmelidir. Dipnotlarda makale, kitap içinde bölüm veya ansiklopedi maddesinin tamamına yönelik bir atıf mevcutsa, başlangıç ve bitiş sayfaları gösterilmelidir. Örnekler: Kitap: Mübahat S. Kütükoğlu, Menteşe Sancağı 1830 (Nüfus ve Toplum Yapısı), TTK Yay., Ankara 2010, s. 115. Sonraki atıflarda: Kütükoğlu, a.g.e., s. 123 ya da Kütükoğlu, s. 123. Bir yazarın birden fazla yayınına atıf yapılacak ise, ilk atıfta tam künye verilmeli; daha sonra yine kullanılacaksa nasıl kısaltılacağı parantez içerisinde gösterilmelidir: Arzu Terzi, Hazine-i Hassa Nezareti, TTK Yay., Ankara 2000, s. 98 (Terzi, Hazine-i Hassa). Eserin cildine işaret etmek için (cilt ya da c. yazılmadan) sadece Romen rakamıyla cilt sayısı yazılmalıdır: Hoca Sa‘deddin Efendi, Tâcü’t-tevârîh, I, İstanbul 1279, 25. Tayyâr-zâde Atâ, Osmanlı Saray Tarihi Târîh-i Enderûn, haz. Mehmet Arslan, Kitabevi, III, İstanbul 2010, 138. Çeviri eserler: Philippe du Fresne-Canaye, Fresne-Canaye Seyahatnamesi 1573, çev. Teoman Tunçdoğan, İstanbul 2009, s. 51. Ansiklopedi maddeleri: Feridun M. Emecen, “Başmukataa Kalemi”, DİA, V, 135. Bir yazarın iki ayrı çalışması aynı dipnotta peş peşe gösterilecekse: Mustafa Akdağ, Celali İsyanları, 1550-1603, Anlara 1963, s. 110; keza büyük kaçgunluk için bk. ayn. yzr. ya da ayn.mlf., “Celâlî İsyanlarından Büyük Kaçgunluk, 1603-1606”, Tarih Araştırmaları Dergisi, II/2-3 (Ankara 1964), 1-50. Birden çok yazarlı bir eser kullanılacaksa: Robert Anhegger-Halil İnalcık, Kānūnnāme-i Sultānī Ber Mūceb-i ‛Örf-i ‛Osmānī, II. Mehmed ve II. Bayezid Devirlerine Ait Yasaknāme ve Kānūnnāmeler, TTK Yay., Ankara 2000, s. 25. Aynı eser daha sonraki kullanımlarda sadece yazar soyadlarına yer verilmelidir: Anhegger-İnalcık, a.g.e., s. 36. Makale: Mübahat S. Kütükoğlu, “Osmanlıdan Günümüze Yer Adları”, Belleten, LXXVI/275 (2012), 149. Bekir Kütükoğlu, “Ahmed Cevdet Paşa, Ma‘rûzât”, Güney-Doğu Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, sayı 10-11, İstanbul 1983, s. 251. Mücteba İlgürel, “Şer‘iyye Sicillerinin Toplu Kataloğuna Doğru”, Tarih Dergisi, sayı 28-29 (1975), s. 164.Kitap İçinde Bölüm:Ayten Altıntaş, “Dârüşşifâlar Hakkında”, Karşılıksız Hizmetin Muhteşem Abideleri İstanbul Şifahaneleri, haz. Abdullah Kılıç, İstanbul 2009, s. 19-38.Christoph K. Neumann, “XVIII. Yüzyıl Osmanlı Saray Mutfağında Baharat”, Soframız Nur Hanemiz Mamur, Osmanlı Maddi Kültüründe Yemek ve Barınak, ed. Suraiya Faroqhi - Christoph K. Neumann, İstanbul 2016, s. 145-183.İdris Bostan, “Osmanlı Bahriyesinde Sağlık Hizmetleri”, Osmanlılarda Sağlık, ed. Coşkun Yılmaz-Necdet Yılmaz, İstanbul 2006, c. I, s. 111-115.Sempozyum Tebliğleri: İdris Bostan, “Kuyûd-ı Mühimmat Defterlerinin Osmanlı Teşkilât Tarihi Bakımından Önemi”, OsmanlıTürk Diplomatiği Semineri, 30-31 Mayıs 1994, İstanbul 1995, s. 145. Birden çok yazarlı bir makale: Kayhan Orbay-Hatice Oruç, “Sultan II. Murad’ın Edirne Câmi‘-i Şerîf ve Dârü’l-hadîs Vakfı (1592-1607)”, Tarih Dergisi, sayı 56 (2012/2), İstanbul 2013, s. 10. Aynı makalenin daha sonraki kullanımlarında sadece yazar soyadlarına yer verilmelidir: Orbay-Oruç, a.g.m., s. 15. Çeviri yazıları: Géza Dávid, “XVI. Yüzyılda Osmanlı-Habsburg Mücadelesinin Bir Kaynağı Olarak Mühimme Defterleri”, çev. Özgür Kolçak, Tarih Dergisi, sayı 53 (2011/1), İstanbul 2012, s. 295-349. Aynı soyadlı iki yazarın makalelerinin gösterilmesi: Mübahat S. Kütükoğlu, “Osmanlıdan Günümüze Yer Adları”, Belleten, LXXVI/275 (2012), 149. Bekir Kütükoğlu, “Ahmed Cevdet Paşa, Ma‘rûzât”, Güney-Doğu Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, sayı 10-11, İstanbul 1983, s. 251. Daha sonraki kullanımlarda: M. S. Kütükoğlu, a.g.m., s. 160 ya da B. Kütükoğlu, a.g.m., s. 250. Tez atıflarında; tezi yapan, tez adı (italik), kurum ismi sırasıyla verilmelidir: Sinem Serin, Yıldız Çini/Porselen Fabrikası, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Tarih Anabilim Dalı Osmanlı Müesseseleri ve Medeniyeti Tarihi Bilim Dalı, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul 2009, s. 146.Arşiv Belgelerinin Kullanımı: Arşiv belgeleri dipnotta kullanılırken öncelikle arşivin adı, sonra tasnifin adı, dosya ve evrak numarasına sırasıyla yer verilecektir. Tasnif için arşivlerin kullandıkları kısaltmalar kullanılabilir. Kaynakçada bunların açılımı yapılmalıdır. Mesela: BOA, A.MKT, nr. 145/629. Arşivden defter tasnifinden bir bilgi kullanılacaksa: BOA, Maliyeden Müdevver Defterler (MAD), nr. 9146, s. 200. BOA, Mühimme Defteri, nr. 120, s. 103, h. 250. Kaynakça: Makalelerde kullanılan kaynak ve araştırmalar makale sonunda bu başlık altında gösterilmelidir. Kaynakça, bu başlık altında yeni bir sayfadan başlamalı ve 11 punto yazılmalıdır. Sadece dipnotlarda kullanılan kaynaklar yer almalı ve yazarların soyadına göre alfabetik olarak düzenlenmelidir.  Kütükoğlu, Mübahat S., Menteşe Sancağı 1830 (Nüfus ve Toplum Yapısı), TTK Yay., Ankara 2010.Hoca Sa‘deddin Efendi, Tâcü’t-tevârîh, I-II, İstanbul 1279-80.Birden çok yazarlı bir esere yer verilecekse:Anhegger, Robert -Halil İnalcık, Kānūnnāme-i Sultānī Ber Mūceb-i ‛Örf-i ‛Osmānī, II. Mehmed ve II. Bayezid Devirlerine Ait Yasaknāme ve Kānūnnāmeler, TTK Yay., Ankara 2000.Sadece editör veya yayına hazırlayanlar var ise bu isimler kitap adından sonra yer almalıdır:Osmanlı Uygarlığı, yay. haz. Halil İnalcık-Günsel Renda, Kültür Bakanlığı Yay., I-II, Ankara 20093.Kitap içinde bölüm olarak geçen makaleler: Terzi, Arzu, “II. Abdülhamid’in Emlakı ve Irak Petrolleri”, Sultan II. Abdülhamid ve Dönemi, ed. Coşkun Yılmaz, İstanbul 2014, s. 181-188.Çeviri eserler:Fresne-Canaye, Philippe du, Fresne-Canaye Seyahatnamesi 1573, çev. Teoman Tunçdoğan, İstanbul 2009.Kitabın kaçıncı baskısı olduğunu belirtmek üzere basım tarihinin üzerine üst simge şeklinde basım sayısı yazılmalıdır:Terzi, Arzu, Sultan Abdülhamid’in Mirası, Petrol ve Arazi, Timaş Yayınları, İstanbul 20142.Kaynakçada yer alan makalelerde makalenin başlangıç ve bitiş sayfalarına yer verilmelidir:Kütükoğlu, Mübahat S., “Osmanlıdan Günümüze Yer Adları”, Belleten, LXXVI/275 (2012), 147-165.Sempozyum Tebliğleri: Bostan, İdris, “Kuyûd-ı Mühimmat Defterlerinin Osmanlı Teşkilât Tarihi Bakımından Önemi”, Osmanlı-Türk Diplomatiği Semineri, 30-31 Mayıs 1994, İstanbul 1995, s. 143-163.Ansiklopedi maddeleri: Emecen, Feridun M., “Başmukataa Kalemi”, DİA, V, 135.Kaynakçada teze yer verirken; tezi yapan, tez adı (italik), kurum ismi sırasıyla verilmelidir:Arşiv Belgelerinin Gösterilmesi:Kaynakçada dipnotlarda kullanılan arşiv tasnifleri açık bir şekilde yazılır, kısaltma kullanıldıysa bunlar parantez içinde belirtilir. Farklı arşivlerden kaynak çalışması var ise bu arşivler tasniflenir. Dipnotlarda kullanılan arşiv belgelerinin numaraları burada sıralanmalıdır. Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi (BOA)Cevdet Bahriye Evrakı (C.BH), 123/3500; 350/8560.Şura-yı Devlet (ŞD), 21350; 103953.Deniz Tarihi Arşivi (DTA)Bahriye Nezareti (BN), 180/4050; 181/4063; 333/11830.Makale dipnotlarında kullanılacak kısaltmalarTürkçe makaleler için:                                        çev.     :         çeviren                                        trc.      :         tercüme eden                                        yay.     :         yayınlayan                                        haz.     :         hazırlayan                                        sad.     :         sadeleştiren                                        nşr.     :         neşreden                                        ed.      :         editör                                        a.g.e.   :         adı geçen eser                                        a.g.m.  :         adı geçen makale ya da madde                                         a.g.t.    :         adı geçen tez                                        ayn.yzr.         :     aynı yazar                                        ayn.mlf.         :     aynı müellifYabancı Dildeki makaleler için:                                        id.        :         aynı yazar                                        ibid., loc.cit, op.cit., passim      : aynı yerdea.g.e., s. 27; a.g.m., s. 28; a.g.t., s. 29 şeklinde kullanılmalıdır.

Aşağıdaki listede eksik olmadığından emin olun:<ul><li>Makalenin türünün belirtilmiş olduğu</li><li>Başka bir dergiye gönderilmemiş olduğu</li><li>Sponsor veya ticari bir firma ile ilişkisi varsa, bunun belirtildiği</li><li>İngilizce yönünden kontrolünün yapıldığı</li><li>Referansların derginin benimsediği sistemin kurallarına uygun olarak düzenlendiği</li><li>Yazarlara Bilgide detaylı olarak anlatılan dergi politikalarının gözden geçirildiği</li></ul>● <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/BCBF605901234F42B7485526E85D55E1" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a>● Daha önce basılmış materyal (yazı-resim-tablo) kullanılmış ise izin belgesi● <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/2315C9D1C8BB44849A41C6542283288A" target="_blank">Kapak sayfası</a><ul><li>Makalenin kategorisi</li><li>Makale dilinde ve İngilizce başlık</li><li>Yazarların ismi soyadı, unvanları ve bağlı oldukları kurumlar (üniversite ve fakülte bilgisinden sonra şehir ve ülke bilgisi), e-posta adresleri</li><li>Sorumlu yazarın e-posta adresi, açık yazışma adresi, iş telefonu, GSM, faks nosu</li><li>Tüm yazarların ORCID’leri</li><li>Finansal destek (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Çıkar çatışması (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Teşekkür (varsa belirtiniz)</li></ul>● Makale ana metni<ul><li>Önemli: Ana metinde yazarın / yazarların kimlik bilgilerinin yer almamış olması gerekir.</li><li>Makale dilinde ve İngilizce başlık</li><li>Öz: 100-150 kelime</li><li>Anahtar Kelimeler: 3-6 adet makale dilinde ve 3-6 adet İngilizce</li><li>Makale ana metin bölümleri</li><li>Kaynaklar</li><li>Tablolar-Resimler, Şekiller (başlık, tanım ve alt yazılarıyla)</li></ul>

<div><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/BCBF605901234F42B7485526E85D55E1" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/39CA4BB00C8447BFB6DE791FDFF2B4AA" target="_blank">Kapak Sayfası</a></div>

Sayı Türü	Regular
Tarih	09.11.2021
Editör(ler)	Arzu Terzi
Kapak (PDF)
Ön Sayfalar (PDF)

Tarih Dergisi

SAYI 75, 2021

Roma Mahkemelerinde Savunma Yapan “Avukat” Kadınlar

Bağımsızlığa Adanmış Bir Hayat: Küçüm Han

Diplomatik Açıdan Mahzar

Bizans Kalesinden Osmanlı Şehrine: Fethinden XV. Yüzyıl Sonlarına Kadar Dimetoka

III. Ahmed’in Kızı Saliha Sultan ve Vakıfları (1127-1192/1715-1778)

Eyüb Sabri Paşa’nın Hayatı, Entelektüel Muhiti ve Eserleri Üzerine Bazı Yeni Bulgular

Bir Sultan Ailesinin İnşâsı: Padişah II. Abdülhamid’in Kızlarından Nâile Sultan ve Damat Arif Hikmet Paşa’nın İzdivacı

Hicaz’da Bir Suikastın Arkaplanı: Şerif Hüseyin, Afganlar ve İngilizler (1877-1880)

Rusya’nın Kafkasya Müslümanlarını İdare Yöntemi Olarak Askeri-Halk İdaresinin Teşekkülü ve Uygulanışı (1860-1917)

BİLGİ

PAYLAŞ