State, faith, and nation in Ottoman and post-Ottoman lands

Abstract

FREDERICK F. ANSCOMBE, State, Faith, and Nation in Ottoman and Post-Ottoman Lands (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014). Pp. 323. $30.99 paper.This is ambitious book that aims to connect political history of different provinces of Ottoman Empire throughout its history and to relate that history to current period. The first half of book-the first five chapters-deals Ottoman rule. Part 2 (chapters 6, 7 and 8) covers transition to post-Ottoman states in Balkans, Turkey, and Arab Lands, adhering to conventional geographic labeling of Ottoman provinces to west of modern Turkey and ethnolinguistic labeling of those to southeast. Part 3, (the last three chapters) focuses on Contemporary Post-Ottoman States. Anscombe argues that religious self-identification processes dominated empire's lands throughout its history; following collapse of empire, new states unsuccessfully tried to replace supralocal religious identities national ones. While underscoring national identities' weaknesses, Anscombe does not scrutinize complexities of religious self-identification processes as much.The first chapter discusses how empire reached 'starting point' of modern (p. 22). Too weak to coerce their subjects, Ottoman rulers relied on to provide supratribal legitimation (p. 25) and the backbone for Ottoman of (p. 23). Despite weakness of rulers, this was eminently sustainable until late eighteenth century when, under pressure from Christian European foes, Ottoman faced need to strengthen itself at a pace more rapid than any (p. 32). As Anscombe admits, his discussion necessarily relies on sweeping statements that belie variations, but he insists that the stability of link between Ottoman rule and and premodern period seems incontrovertible (p. 31). Broad statements about debated concepts such as gaza (p. 25) or circle of justice (p. 26) support Islam's unchanging relevance. The use of such concepts has long been subject of scrutiny by scholars including Linda Darling, Heath Lowry, and Cornell Fleischer, who are, unfortunately, not included in Anscombe's bibliography.In remainder of Part 1, Anscombe focuses on character of rulers and their relationship provincial elite before CUP took charge and underscores link between Islam, justice and sovereignty. Selim III's regime, he points out, fell [he ignored] implicit and explicit understandings that bound and society together under old ... and principles that made empire Abode of Islam (p. 33), depending increasingly on local notables for financial health and military prowess of empire. Reliant on notables and unable to communicate effectively his commitment to Islamic values at an era of raised religious sensibilities, as [Ottomans] were conscious that very existence of empire... was threatened by superior Christian enemies (p. 50), Selim's disastrous foray into war making in 1768-74 did, in fact, destroy stability of system (p. 43). The failure of his reform attempts lay sultan who limited his reform focus and was unwilling to punish Muslims because of his pious nature influenced by sufism (p.56).Anscombe compares personalities of Mahmud II and Selim III to explain the breaking of premodern Islamic state. Mahmud ruled essentially in opposition to what he had seen of Selim's practice ... to break extant systems or to cripple them ... to ensure their subservience (p.61) at center, but he failed to reign in provinces and dispensed with justice rather than dispensing it in to maintain legitimacy. Loyalty and dependence became hallmarks of Mahmud's imperial order (p.74) as he punished even Muslims who posed a threat to his authority; his regime seemed embarked upon a violent struggle against both Muslims of empire and key practices of religion that legitimated state (p. …