Orthodox Christians in the Late Ottoman Empire: A Study of Communal Relations in Anatolia by Ayşe Özil (review)

Reviewed by: Εκ δυσμών το φως; Εξελληνισμός και οριενταλισμός στην Οθωμανική Αυτοκρατορία (μέσα 19ου–αρχές 20ου αιώνα)(Χάρης Εξερτζόγλου) [Light from the West? Hellenism and Orientalism in the Ottoman Empire (mid-nineteenth to the beginning of the twentieth century)] by Haris Exertzoglou Elektra Kostopoulou (bio) Haris Exertzoglou (Χάρης Εξερτζόγλου), Εκ δυσμών το φως; Εξελληνισμός και οριενταλισμός στην Οθωμανική Αυτοκρατορία (μέσα 19ου–αρχές 20ου αιώνα) [Light from the West? Hellenism and Orientalism in the Ottoman Empire (mid-nineteenth to the beginning of the twentieth century)]. Athens: Ekdoseis tou Eikostou Protou. 2015. Pp. 247. Cloth €19. Almost four decades after the publication of the late Hayden White’s Metahistory (1975), Haris Exertzoglou’s engaging study reminds us of intellectual history’s endless potential to capture the nature of historical writing. In both format and content, the book mirrors itself structurally in its own deliberations. The book is divided into seven consecutive chapters, all of which revolve around the same central issue: the intellectual vista of Greek Orthodox communities in the late Ottoman Empire, as shaped by their understandings of East and West. Exertzoglou’s protagonists do not identify fully with either category. Their narratives form acts of translation that borrow from the abovementioned polarity in order to negate it de facto. Hence, they try to define themselves by creating an original in-between space of intellectual existence. At times, they wrestle with external dogmatisms. At times, they produce their own. The resulting tension is the central focus of the book, which discusses modernity as the expression—and the synthesis—of imperfect divisions. Already in his Prologue, Exertzoglou reminds us that Greek Orthodox thought was an integral part of the late Ottoman Empire. This approach challenges the isolationist tendencies that continue to characterize Modern Greek Studies. Moreover, it reveals that the exclusive association of Ottoman history with Islam originates in—as well as reproduces—problematic ideological, methodological, and political stereotypes. Given that the author himself meticulously traces the intellectual entanglements of the existing literature, the limited length of this review cannot do the book justice. Suffice it to say that reading Exertzoglou’s work side by side with the classic contributions of Selim Deringil (2000) and Ussama Makdisi (2002)—to mention only two indicative [End Page 404] works that resonate with Exertzoglou’s analysis—affirms that Ottoman intellectual history should neither focus merely on Islam nor merely on the central dynasty or the capital city. This main premise becomes clear in the Introduction and Chapter 1, which examine the intersection between nationalism, colonialism, and empire in the Greek Orthodox intellectual universe. The narrative focuses on the tension between East and West, as understood by the book’s protagonists, namely, Greek Orthodox intellectuals. To them, the West was identified with progress, industrialization, modern infrastructure, and the secularization of education. Did their anti-Western tendencies automatically imply a black-and-white contrast between modernity and tradition? Quite to the contrary, Exertzoglou argues. For the book’s protagonists, this very tension became modernity. In other words, they tried to reconcile Western progress with their own understanding of tradition. By implication, they did not accept Western modernity as universal; rather, they proposed that the integration of Greek values with Western progress produced the only version of modernity with universal value. Building on the above argument, the second chapter discusses the example of material culture along the lines of binary perceptions; in other words, it focuses on the objects, resources, and other ponderable manifestations of East versus West. Western modernity centered on technological innovation and industrial capitalism. Hence, it established an uneven relationship with the East in the abovementioned spheres. Far from remaining the passive terrain for Western expansion, however, some Greek Orthodox communities and urban strata found a new sense of agency in the production and theorization of material culture. They claimed a central role in communal education, defending a convenient hybrid of material progress and traditional values. By doing so, they transformed—without erasing—the traditional role played by religion in educating the nation. Greek Orthodox intellectuals equated the study of Greek letters, under the guidance of urban middle-classes, with an inner-civilizing mission for Ottoman lands. They presented antiquity, in particular, as proof of their own cultural superiority over the West, despite the fact that they drew inspiration from the West’s own appropriation of ancient Greece. As discussed in Chapters 4 and 5...

This article investigates the extent to which religious festivals played a formative role in shaping dynamic relations between Greek Orthodox Ottomans and the Ottoman and Greek states in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. A considerable number of festivals held on recurring cycles in the Ottoman Empire served as a unifying force by bringing together Greek Orthodox groups hailing from disparate geographical locations in the Ottoman Empire, Greece, and elsewhere. Although they were primarily religious occasions, these festivals, especially Easter, carried substantial cultural and social importance since they served as a crucial catalyst in the emergence and articulation of nationalist ideals among Ottoman Greeks.

<i>Orphans and Destitute Children in the Late Ottoman Empire</i>. By Nazan Maksudyan. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2014. Pp. xviii + 232. $39.95 (hardcover).

Greek Tragedy or Gestation Period: Future of the Modern Church in Greece

Litigants and Neighbors: The Communal Topography of Ottoman Damascus

<i>Prisons in the Late Ottoman Empire: Microcosms of Modernity</i>. By Kent F. Schull. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014. Pp. xiii + 226. £70.

Purpose The Westernization and its reflections could be observed in the architecture, urbanism and social life in Istanbul in 19th century. The Tanzimat Edict (1839), Vienna Protocol (1855) and Islahat Edict (1856) affected the lifestyle of non-Muslims, especially in the administrative, religious and educational sphere. These political, legal and social reforms had also affected the Greek Orthodox community living in the Ottoman lands and their architectural activities about the churches. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to clarify the restoration works of Galatasaray Panagia Church conducted in the 19th century based on the archival documents. Design/Methodology/Approach The archival documents provide a comprehensive understanding of the changes, repairs, architectural implementations and formal procedure of the restoration of the Greek Orthodox churches. The methodology of the paper is mainly to analyze the archival documents and do the field survey. The archival documents about the extension of the Galatasaray Panagia Church was analyzed in detail. Then field survey was done. Present-day conditions of the church was observed and compared with the archival documents. Moreover, the analogical research was done to understand the situation before the implementation in 19th century. Findings The archival documents were the important proofs of the interventions of the conservations, which were applied at the end of the 19th century. They give information about to the drawing techniques, characteristics of interventions, construction materials, construction sector, responsible authorities and the process of getting necessary permissions for the restoration and the details of labors. At the end of the 19th century, restoration process of the Greek Orthodox churches was changed with the removal of the restrictions. For example, the new construction materials were used from European countries. Research Limitations/Implications This study examines the archival documents to provide the information about the church and aims to underline the importance of these documents to understand the history of the church, as well as the conservation methodology and process in the 19th century. Practical Implications The archival documents are not merely materials to help understand the building better, but they also serve as tangible evidences of past restorations. The technical details that archival documents include, guide the decision process of the future interventions. Moreover, they provide reliable and valuable information about the later additions that must be conserved. Social Implications The Greek Orthodox community was one of the important non-Muslim groups, had a significant role in the Ottoman Empire. Considering the present-day conditions, most of the Greek Orthodox churches could survive owing to the extensive repairs, restorations or, in some cases, reconstructions. This study made an important contribution to the research on the Greek Orthodox churches, which has a small population today. Originality/Value Most studies on this subject is based on just classification of the archival documents. However, this study is focused to analyze the documents in detail with the observation on the structure. The originality of this study is both to analyze historical archival documents and to observe present-day conditions together. Thereby while the past restoration process was understood, future implementation are shed light on.

Journal of the Ottoman and Turkish Studies Association, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 3–5 Copyright © 2017 Ottoman and Turkish Studies Association. doi:10.2979/jottturstuass.4.1.01 Crime, Punishment, and Social Control in the Late Ottoman Empire: An Introduction Ufuk Adak The idea of publishing this special issue entitled “Crime, Punishment, and Social Control in the Late Ottoman Empire” edited by Kent Schull (Binghamton University, SUNY) and guest editor Ufuk Adak (Istanbul Kemerburgaz University) emerged following a stimulating workshop held at the Zentrum Moderner Orient (ZMO) in Berlin in the summer of 2015.1 The workshop provided us with an opportunity to present and discuss recent scholarly work on security, crime, and punishment in the late Ottoman Empire, leading us to offer new insights into Ottoman social and legal history. Five of the seven contributing authors in this issue participated in the productive presentations and long discussions of the workshop. All seven respond to and join a growing interest in crime, punishment, and social control in the Ottoman Empire, reflected in a bourgeoning literature and academic conferences ,2 by rethinking the interconnected historical relations between reform, law, penal policy, and security. Although each article in this issue approaches its respective subject different methodologically, all share similarities and connections; each author conducts extensive analysis of archival sources and 1. The ZMO, now the Leibniz-Zentrum Moderner Orient, and the Forum Transregionale Studien, Europe in the Middle East—The Middle East in Europe (EUME) deserve special thanks for their generous support in organizing this workshop. Ufuk Adak, “Security, Crime, Punishment, and Prisons in the Late Ottoman Empire, 9 June 2015, Berlin Zentrum Moderner Orient,” Journal of the Ottoman and Turkish Studies Association 2, no. 2 (2015): 447–49. 2. Avi Rubin, “Modernity as a Code: The Ottoman Empire and the Global Movement of Codification,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 59, no. 5 (2016): 828–56; Kent F. Schull, Prisons in the Late Ottoman Empire: Microcosms of Modernity (Edinburgh : Edinburgh University Press, 2014); Noémi Lévy-Aksu, Ordre et désordres dans l’Istanbul ottomane (1879–1909) (Paris: Karthala, 2013). The most recent international conference on punishment, particularly prisons, entitled “The World of Prisons: The History of Confinement in a Global Perspective, Late Eighteenth to Early Twentieth Century” organized by the University of Bern was held in Switzerland 7–10 September 2016. 4 Journal of the Ottoman and Turkish Studies Association, Vol. 4.1 provides much-needed analytical and empirical frameworks for the legal and security policies of the empire. The promulgation of the Tanzimat hastened the implementation of legal reform in the Ottoman Empire. The codification process included new criminal codes, regulations, and ordinances issued in the nineteenth century. The Ottoman reformers sought ways to standardize crimes—their definitions, scopes, and typologies—and also attempted to provide limits and uniformity for the forms of punishment that would be applied throughout the empire. The nineteenth-century Ottoman legal reforms encompassed new judiciary processes and established new legal and penal institutions such as Nizamiye courts and prisons on the basis of new criminal codes. The implementation of new penal law and the standardization of law enforcement for all of the subjects living in the empire was not an easy task for Ottoman officials throughout the empire. For instance, in regards to the imposition of the death penalty in the late Ottoman Empire, Ebru Aykut illustrates how the new criminal justice system and the dual trial procedure constrained the Ottoman judiciary in their rulings. Examining several cases drawn from archival sources, Aykut analyzes the complex structure and processes of nineteenth-century Ottoman judicial decision-making through a discussion of the Tanzimat’s judicial reforms, legality , and procedural correctness particularly regarding the death penalty. This shift in Ottoman conceptions of crime and punishment resulted in the construction of a new relationship between the state’s political power and its legitimacy. İbrahim Halil Kalkan argues that banning torture in criminal investigations and as a form of punishment in the mid-nineteenth century provides a stark illustration of this new relationship, particularly in regards to the state’s aim of treating all Ottoman subjects equally. Kalkan explores this ban as...

Osman Hamdi Bey and the Americans: Archaeology, Diplomacy, Art Pera Museum, Istanbul 15 October 2011–8 January 2012 Scramble for the Past: A Story of Archaeology in the Ottoman Empire, 1753–1914 SALT Galata, Istanbul 22 November 2011–11 March 2012 Artamonoff: Picturing Byzantine Istanbul, 1930–1947 Koc University Research Center for Anatolian Civilizations, Istanbul 25 June–10 November 2013 Three exhibitions that examine ways of looking at the ancient and Byzantine past from the eighteenth to the early twentieth century were recently on display in Istanbul. These exhibitions reevaluated the changing discourses and practices of archaeology as both a scholarly enterprise and a popular endeavor, particularly in relation to the late Ottoman and early Turkish contexts. They explored how contemporaries looked at, understood, and wrote about the culture, art, and architecture of the past from their various and varying perspectives. The exhibition Scramble for the Past: A Story of Archaeology in the Ottoman Empire, 1753–1914 at SALT Galata was curated by Zainab Bahrani, Zeynep Celik, and Edhem Eldem (Figure 1). It revolved around a double narrative of an apparently conventional historical account of the birth and development of “modern archaeology” from the founding of the British Museum in 1753 to the establishment of the Ottoman Pious Foundations Museum in 1914 alongside a contested story about some historically renowned archaeological sites that once dotted the former Ottoman lands. As its provocative title Scramble for the Past suggests, rather than presenting a celebratory narrative of archaeological practice, the exhibition put forward a critical interpretation of the history of archaeology. The seemingly neutral time line, highlighting the major dates in the long march of archaeology alongside significant historical political events, constituted a backdrop on the walls and literally encircled the main body of display, which focused on certain archaeological sites within the framework of eight different themes. True to the exploratory and interdisciplinary cultural mission of SALT, the sites were presented through their various historical representations in different media from written texts to oil paintings, from drawings to photographs and films, together with some original artifacts, among which were also dispersed commissioned installations on the nature of archaeology by artists Mark Dion …

Reviewed by: Orphans and Destitute Children in the Late Ottoman Empire by Nazan Maksudyan Heidi Morrison Orphans and Destitute Children in the Late Ottoman Empire. By Nazan Maksudyan. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2014. 232 pp. Cloth $39.95. Historian Nazan Maksudyan breaks new ground as one of the first scholars to insert children into the Ottoman Empire’s historical narrative. Through the lens of meticulously collected archival records on orphans and destitute children, [End Page 327] Maksudyan argues that children are invaluable historical actors in the late Ottoman Empire’s process of modernization, including projects of urbanization, citizen formation, and welfare policies. As the multinational and decentralized late Ottoman Empire sought to transform to a centralized modern nation state, concerned parties saw the regulation of abandoned, vagrant, begging, and refugee children as a way to refashion religious and political identities, as well as create a new workforce. The state, foreign missionaries, and religious and civil leaders competed to save unfortunate children, who went from being once invisible, non-political members of society to prospective future subjects. Maksudyan’s book begins by making a generalized case for why it is important to write a “history from below,” then traces marginalized children’s activity from the innermost recesses of society to the international stage. Chapter one examines new state techniques for the governance of foundlings, which were propagated to advance the image of modernity. In reality, children in the institutions were ill-cared for, and non-Muslim communities felt alienated by the state’s intrusion into the care of its youngest members. Chapter two provides an intimate look at domestic servant girls’ resistance to abuse by fostering patriarchs. Government concern for these girls did not focus on abuse, but instead on using the girls as a means of policing sexuality and furthering its reach into the population. The third chapter argues that the expansive number of vocational orphanages at the heart of cities was linked to the process of disciplining urban centers and furthering industrial progress. The final chapter looks at the role that abandoned children played in international politics. Foreign missionaries rivaled the Ottoman state and local communal leaders in their thinly veiled proselytizing relief efforts for war-orphaned children. Overall, Maksudyan’s book shows that orphaned and destitute children were at the center of creating the new, modern social order of the late Ottoman Empire. Maksudyan’s book does not provide novel arguments about Ottoman history, nor does it purport to do so. Several historians have documented that the late Ottoman state, and other interested parties, sought to manipulate and control subjects in the modernization process. The contribution of Maksudyan’s book comes from the light it shines on destitute and neglected children as integral to the process of Ottoman modernization. (Historian Benjamin Fortna has already shown that mainstream schoolchildren were part of this process.) Maksudyan’s book successful rescues the most marginalized of children from the past and triumphantly reminds historians to pay attention to the human terms of modernization. From cries at the doorsteps of police stations to little dead bodies without registered names, discarded children are makers of history. It is up to future researches to take the torch Maksudyan has helped light [End Page 328] and move forward in discerning what new insights children can provide about Middle Eastern history. Beth Baron’s The Orphan Scandal: Christian Missionaries and the Rise of the Muslim Brotherhood (2013) provides perhaps one of the first examples of how this can be done, albeit in the context of modern Egypt. Maksudyan’s book can be of interest to historians seeking to unearth the subaltern in the Ottoman past, and also to historians of other world regions seeking to compare care-taking systems for abandoned and orphaned children. Adoption is not legally possible in Islamic law, and hence unknown in Ottoman society. Heidi Morrison University of Wisconsin, La Crosse Copyright © 2015 Johns Hopkins University Press

The political developments that eventually resulted in the founding of the Turkish nation-state marked drastic changes in the status and strength of the Greek Orthodox patriarchate of Constantinople as an institution and of the patriarch(s) as its head. Following heated debates at the peace negotiations between the Turkish and the Allied delegations at Lausanne, at which the partriarchate's removal from its historical seat at Phanar in Istanbul was insistently advocated by the Turkish representatives, the patriarchate was finally given the right to retain its position on the condition of renouncing “all political and non-ecclesiastic attributes.”1 The rationale of the Turkish delegation's demand for the partiarchate's removal from Istanbul emanated from their perception of the patriarchate as a “fifth-column” that had acted to the detriment of the Turkish national interests in the past. According to this perception, which resurged from time to time in the following decades, the patriarchate and the Ottoman Empire's Greek Orthodox community had been engaged in disloyal activities against the state and had become an instrument of foreign intervention in the Ottoman-Turkish domestic affairs. Specifically, it was considered the “agent of Greek imperialism in Turkey.”2 Consequently, it was not surprising that the leadership of the new Turkish nation-state made absolutely sure that the Treaty of Lausanne (1923), the founding treaty of the Turkish nation-state, eliminated all the privileges that the patriarchate had enjoyed, especially those related to civil jurisdiction and secular functions. Thereafter, the patriarchate became a purely religious organization authorized only for religious and moral affairs of its adherents—the Turkish citizens of the Greek Orthodox religion—whose numbers decreased dramatically following the exchange of populations between Greece and Turkey,3 and the status of the patriarch(s) was restricted to spiritual affairs.4 Still, the patriarchate continued to be suspicious in the eyes of the Turkish statesmen, and accordingly, all its activities were put under surveillance.

Security, Crime, Punishment, and Prisons in the Late Ottoman Empire 9 June 2015, Berlin Zentrum Moderner Orient (ZMO) The bourgeoning literature on security, crime, punishment, and prisons in the Ottoman Empire presents opportunities to explore not only new archival investigations and methodological discussions about the notions of criminality in the Empire, but also encourages us to re-think the interconnected relation between law, security and penal policy in the Empire. This one-day workshop entitled “Security, Crime, Punishment, and Prisons in the Late Ottoman Empire” was a chance to present and discuss some recent examinations of the triangle of security, crime, and punishment in order to offer new insights into Ottoman social and legal history by providing case studies from throughout the Empire. As in many contemporary states, the nineteenth-century Ottoman Empire saw the institutionalization of security forces and also the expansion of surveillance mechanisms, such as passport regulations in order to track population movements. More importantly, these mechanisms focused on hastening the process of surveilling criminals as defined by the State. Furthermore, through administrative and infrastructural urbanization attempts, particularly in the imperial center, which aided in regulating street life, new understandings of criminality generated novel relationships between Ottoman cities and their residents. This relationship was expressed through adherence, or not, to policies and the eventual construction of new prisons throughout the Empire. The workshop had three sessions and overall seven papers were presented during these sessions. In the first session of the workshop, Ebru Aykut (Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University) examined the practice of the death penalty and the meaning of justice in the late Ottoman Empire. Aykut argued that for the local authorities, the death penalty was a necessary instrument to deter criminals and maintain public order and security, which could be accomplished only if the punishment was inflicted immediately without delay. Aykut stated Journal of the Ottoman and Turkish Studies Association, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 447–449 Copyright © 2015 Ottoman and Turkish Studies Association. doi:10.2979/jottturstuass.2.2.19 that according to the State, the principle of legality and procedural correctness was more important and necessary than deterrence by punishment. Thus, there was a gap between the local understandings of justice, which were concerned more with the promptness of punishment than procedures and written law, and what justice meant for the central government. In this respect, Aykut elaborated that the death penalty turned into a contested and in some cases negotiable issue between the central and provincial authorities in the late Ottoman Empire. As the second presenter of the first session, Noémi LévyAksu (Boğaziçi University) focused on the use of martial law (örfi idare) in the aftermath of the Russo-Ottoman war of 1877–78 in various districts of the Balkans and Eastern Anatolia. Lévy-Aksu discussed and posited that banditry, gangs and ethno-religious tensions were the main reasons behind the application of martial law in these districts. By presenting many case studies from the late 1870s to early 1880s, Lévy-Aksu argued that martial law turned into a tool of government in terms of dealing with serious tensions at different levels of the state apparatus. In the second session of the workshop, İlkay Yılmaz (Istanbul University /ZMO) presented a paper on the hotel registers in the Hamidian Era, which were part of new mechanisms against security threats perceived by the Ottoman state. Yılmaz stated that some incidents occurred in the late Ottoman Empire, for instance assassination attempts and the demonstrations of Kumkapı in 1890 and Bâb-ı Âli in 1895, which played a major role in the shift of security practices of the Empire. Yılmaz argued that as in contemporary states such as in France and Belgium, the Ottoman government issued new registration regulations not only to collect individual information about the visitors of hotels and residents of apartments but also to track anarchists in the Empire. After presenting the relationship between city and crime in fin de siécle Istanbul, Nurçin İleri (Binghamton University) touched upon mapping criminality through space and time, which existed in the physical and social borders of the city, and analyzed the quantitative and...

Despite the lifesaving benefits of organ and tissue donation, a worldwide shortage of suitable and registered donors exists. Although the reasons for this shortage are multifactorial, it has been recognized that distinct barriers to registration, family discussion, and consent that require targeted intervention and action are present among minority cultural, religious, and immigrant communities. To explore the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of 3 orthodox religious communities in Australia (Macedonian, Greek, and Serbian Orthodox) and determine the implications for engaging with these communities to improve knowledge, attitudes, family discussion, and the ability to make an informed decision about donation. Qualitative approach using focus groups moderated by researchers and bicultural health workers with the assistance of accredited interpreters. 98 adult members of the Greek, Macedonian, and Serbian Orthodox communities in the Illawarra region of New South Wales, Australia. Clear barriers to discussing and making an informed decision about organ and tissue donation were identified. Knowledge of processes and procedures was low and discussion about death (and organ and tissue donation) with family members and loved ones was considered taboo. Despite these barriers, all 3 communities expressed a desire for more information and engagement. Of particular interest were the perspectives of 3 types of "experts": medical, religious, and other community members (who had experience with the organ and tissue donation system). Future programs designed for orthodox religious communities should consider the need for active strategies that facilitate information sharing and engagement between community members and these 3 types of experts.

Nearer, My God, to Thee

Acknowledgements - List of Abbreviations - Introduction - Employment of Slaves in the Classical Ottoman Empire - Traditional Ottoman Policies towards Slavery before the Tanzimat - Means of Enslavement and Slave Acquisition in the Late Ottoman Empire: Continuation of Ottoman Slavery after 1839 - British Policy and Ottoman Slavery - Ottoman Policy during the Tanzimat Period, 1846-1876 - Ottoman Policy during the Reign of Abdulhamid II and the Advent of the Young Turks, 1876-1909 - The Emancipation and Care of Slaves in the Late Ottoman Empire -Conclusion - Notes - Bibliography - Index