詳細検索結果
以下の条件での結果を表示する: 検索条件を変更
クエリ検索: "オスマン帝国"
1,264件中 1-20の結果を表示しています
  • 早坂 真理
    日本中東学会年報
    1987年 2 巻 166-186
    発行日: 1987/03/31
    公開日: 2018/03/30
    ジャーナル フリー
    東欧近代史における
    オスマン帝国
    の位置は,いわゆる東方問題との関係において大国の視点でのみこれまで語られ,とりわけロシアのニコライー世の"瀕死の病人"という表現のなかに象徴的に示されているといえよう。けれども,
    オスマン帝国
    が衰退に向かう頃,十八世紀末に分割されて滅び去った士族共和制ポーランドの影を追うポーランド人の営為のなかに,
    オスマン帝国
    に協力を求め,三分割勢力,すなわちロシア・オーストリア・プロイセンに立ち向かおうとした行勤は,歴史の表面には現れない小国の試行として見逃すわけにはゆかない。
    オスマン帝国と士族共和制ポーランドとの交流は十四世紀にオスマン帝国
    がバルカン半島に進出したときに遡り,トルコ人たちはポーランドをレヒスタン,すなわちレフ(シュラハタ)の国と呼んでポーランド士族(シュラハタ)の勇気を讃えたのであった。そしてポーランド分割に臨んではヨーロッパ大陸において分割反対を唱えたのは
    オスマン帝国
    が唯一であったし,また分割反対を叫ぶバール連盟の兵士たちやコシチューシコの反乱の参加者たちを領内に温かく迎え入れたのもオ
    スマン帝国
    であった。それは,ロシアの南下を防ぐ防壁としてポーランドが有益であったからにほかならない。それゆえ,ポーランド分割後,ポーランド人亡命者たちが対ロシア政策を進めるに際し,容易に
    オスマン帝国
    と協力関係を結んだのはいうまでもない。同時に
    オスマン帝国
    の方でも,ロシアとの対抗上,近代化・西欧化を推進せざるを得なくなったとき,ポーランド人たちの協力を必要としたのであった。この路線を定めたのが,パリに亡命の拠点を築いたアダム=チャルトリィスキ侯を指導者と仰ぐ右派政治グループであった。彼らが1840年代に展開した「二つの汎スラヴ主義」論,すなわち「ロシアの汎スラヴ主義」とそれと対決する「スラヴの汎スラヴ主義」の図式こそが彼らの描く戦略的布陣であった。後者に依拠するチャルトリィスキ派は,ポーランドの指導の下にスラヴ・バルカン諸民族を連邦制に組入れることによってロシアの南下に対処しようとした。「諸国民の春」が敗北したあと,守りの一策として採られたイスラム化政策も,いうなればスルタンの宗主権下においてこの路線の一貫性を図ろうとした結果にほかならない。このイスラム化政策はまた,東欧史において伝統的な意味をもつ連邦制の問題に通じ,スルタンの支配権を容認した上でトルコ・スラヴ主義という形で再生し,展開されるものでもあった。
  • 澤井 一彰
    地域研究
    2013年 13 巻 2 号 433-442
    発行日: 2013年
    公開日: 2020/10/28
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 小松 香織
    日本中東学会年報
    1990年 5 巻 113-172
    発行日: 1990/03/31
    公開日: 2018/03/30
    ジャーナル フリー
    オスマン帝国
    軍艦エルトゥールル号は、スルタン。アブデュル・ハミト2世の命により1890年日本に来航したが、帰路熊野灘で暴風雨のため遭難し多数の犠牲者を出した。この悲劇的な事件は、これまで日土交渉史の文脈の中で繰り返し語られてきた。本稿は、この事件の百周年を契機に、従来とは別の視点から捉え直そうと試みたものである。第1章では、トルコ海軍文書館の史料に基づき、エルトゥールル号派遣計画の立案から遭難に至るまでの経緯を整理し、事実関係をできるだけ明らかにするとともに、いくつかの問題点を指摘した。第2章では、背景となった19世紀末の
    オスマン帝国
    をめぐる国際関係、特にアブデュル・ハミト2世の外交政策を分析し、その結果をふまえてエルトゥールル号派遣の持つ歴史的意味を考察した。なお、詳しくは拙稿「アブデュル・ハミト2世と19世紀末の
    オスマン帝国
    -エルトゥールル号事件を中心に-」(『史学雑誌』第98編第9号40-82頁)をご参照いただきたい。
  • 16世紀末の王子の割礼祭を事例として
    奥 美穂子
    オリエント
    2017年 60 巻 1 号 64-77
    発行日: 2017/09/30
    公開日: 2020/10/01
    ジャーナル フリー

    This paper considers gifting customs between the Ottoman ruler and officers at the Royal Festivity celebrating Prince Mehmeds circumcision in Istanbul in 1582. By analyzing business and accounting records, the customs for gifting and forms of rewards are elucidated.

    At the circumcision festival in 1582, a wide variety of gifts were presented both domestically and from abroad. Gifts, especially from within the empire, followed the contemporary gifting customs with regard to the types of items and their quantity. A combination of luxury fabrics and vessels was considered to be the basic style, and ritualistically, the number of items was based on the odd numbers so esteemed in the Islamic world. These gifting customs were well rooted and known in the 16th-century Ottoman Empire, especially for the local officers such as beylerbeyis and sancakbeyis.

    In return, Sultan Murad III gave rewards in various ways. Generally, vassals were rewarded with luxury fabrics and kaftans signifying honours and possessions. These cases also confirmed that cash or tax collection rights, serving vassals as regular income, were given by the Sultan.

    As for the role of fabrics in the gift exchanges, fabrics were gathered to Istanbul from various areas and some of them were then delivered to the two treasuries of the Empire. In addition, it was fabrics and kaftans made by luxury fabrics that were rewarded to vassals. In other words, fabrics useful as high-quality gifts also functioned as a medium signifying loyalty and protection between the Ottoman ruler and officers in the gift-exchange system of the Ottoman Empire.

  • 鴨野 洋一郎
    社会経済史学
    2012年 78 巻 1 号 49-74
    発行日: 2012/05/25
    公開日: 2017/06/10
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
    中世後期イタリアの都市国家フィレンツェは,15世紀半ばから
    オスマン帝国
    との間で外交的友好関係に基づく貿易活動を開始した。フィレンツェの中規模な毛織物会社はこの貿易によって活動の場を与えられ,フィレンツェ繊維製品を
    オスマン帝国
    まで輸送して販売し,その代金で東方物産を購入してフィレンツェへ輸送する,というオスマン貿易のパターンを確立する。これらの会社が貿易で成功するためには,
    オスマン帝国
    で販売した製品の代金を確実に徴収することが重要な条件となっていた。そこで本稿では,1480年代に
    オスマン帝国
    で毛織物を販売したグワンティ毛織物会社に着目し,ブルサに駐在したバルトロメーオ・グワンティの駐在員帳簿を基に,彼が行った代金徴収の過程を検討する。検討の結果,バルトロメーオは代金の大半を,バーター取引ないし現金徴収によって遅延なく徴収していたことが判明した。このことは,中規模会社でも確実な代金徴収に基づく国際商業を展開できたことを意味し,大規模会社中心に理解されてきた従来のフィレンツェ商業史像に対し再考を促す事例となるであろう。
  • 中央公論新社,2018年12月,i-iv+319頁,定価900円(税別)
    岩本 佳子
    オリエント
    2019年 62 巻 2 号 147-152
    発行日: 2020/03/30
    公開日: 2023/04/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • ―その意義についての再検討―
    黛 秋津
    ロシア・東欧研究
    2008年 2008 巻 37 号 94-105
    発行日: 2008年
    公開日: 2010/05/31
    ジャーナル フリー
    Undoubtedly, the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union played an important role in modern Balkan history. In international politics, the treaty of Kuchuk Kainardji (1774) is considered as one of the most significant points for Russian advancement into the Balkans. This article outlines the significance of this treaty by analysing its background and stipulations.
    After the Ottoman Empire lost its predominance over the West European countries and Russia at the end of the seventeenth century, the Ottoman Empire, Russia, the Habsburg Empire and the newly emerging Prussia coexisted in the first half of the following century and these four countries gradually strengthened their ties. In this situation, Russia attempted to expand its influence into the Balkans. However, at that time the Ottoman control over the Balkans was still so firm that such attempts were unsuccessful.
    This situation, however, changed when the Russo-Ottoman war broke out in 1768. In this war, the Russian troops defeated the Ottoman troops at most fronts including Greece and the Danubian principalities. As Russia's victory continued, the orthodox subjects in the Balkans began to expect Russian protection. Consequently, the Habsburg Empire and Prussia sensed an impending crisis due to the expansion of the Russian influence into the Balkans, and they began to intervene in this war as mediators. In the peace negotiations, although Russia occupied most of the territory of Wallachia and Moldavia, it was obliged to return both countries to the Ottoman Empire because of immense pressure from both the mediators. Nevertheless, Russia attempted to maintain its influence on the Danubian principalities and to obtain some clues for its advancement into the Balkans in the future. In 1774, Russia and the Ottoman Empire signed a peace agreement at Kuchuk Kainardji.
    Then, we analyse the contents of this treaty. We consider that there were three articles that enabled Russian advancement into the Balkans. Firstly, Article 16 stipulates Ottoman protection for the local subjects in Wallachia and Moldavia and in this article Russia obtained a voice concerning the affairs of both principalities. This right allowed Russia to officially involve itself in the issues pertaining to the Danubian principalities, and these two countries provided the base for Russia's further advancement into the Balkans. Secondly, some researchers have conjectured that owing to this treaty, Russia obtained the right to protect the orthodox Christian subjects in the Ottoman Empire; however, this is not true. Article 7 states that the orthodox Christian subjects in the Ottoman Empire must be protected by the Porte and not by Russia. The above-mentioned misunderstanding was caused due to Russia's exaggerated insistence on the eve of the Crimean War that in this treaty, it had obtained the right to protect the orthodox Ottoman subjects. However, it is true that this treaty was indirectly the beginning for Russia's insistence. Thirdly, Article 11, which stipulates the activities of merchants, provides Russia the right to open consulates anywhere within the territory of the Ottoman Empire. Using this right, Russia opened consulates and vice-consulates in the Danubian principalities in the 1780s, followed by those in the other Balkan areas in the nineteenth century. These consulates played an important role in Russian advancement into the Balkans by collecting information, maintaining contact with local leaders, ecclesiastics and other local influential men.
    Thus, this treaty was of great significance for Russian advancement into the Balkans.
  • 松井 真子
    日本中東学会年報
    2003年 18 巻 1 号 137-157
    発行日: 2003/02/28
    公開日: 2018/03/30
    ジャーナル フリー
    関税表とは、輸出入商品に対する関税を商品別に記した一覧表であり、国際貿易交渉の大きな焦点の一つとなってきた。本稿は、1800年代から1830年代までを対象とした
    オスマン帝国
    の関税表台帳を紹介し、当時の帝国とヨーロッパ諸国間における関税表の役割、オスマン市場をめぐる両者の関係を分析するものである。
    オスマン帝国
    のヨーロッパ人商人に対する関税は、カピテュラシオン(スルタンがヨーロッパ諸国の元首らに下賜した居留・通商特許)によって定められていた。ヨーロッパ諸国は、17世紀より関税率の引き下げに成功し、18世紀には従価3%がヨーロッパ人商人に対する基本的な関税率となっていた。この関税率は、帝国臣民のムスリム商人の4%、非ムスリム商人の5%に対しても有利なものであった。
    オスマン帝国
    の関税は従価税を基本としていたが、実際の徴収にあたっては、徴収額に関する税関官吏と商人の諍いを防ぐために、それぞれの商品の時価より関税を算出して作成した関税表(gumruk ta'rifesi)を利用していた。当初は国内向けに利用されていた関税表が、正確にいつからヨーロッパ諸国との間でも適用されたかは不明であるが、遅くとも18世紀末には、
    オスマン帝国
    と主なヨーロッパ諸国の間で関税表が作成されていたことが知られている。関税表は、ヨーロッパ人商人にとって、税関官吏の不正徴収への対抗手段を提供するのみならず、定められた関税率よりも実際にはさらに低い関税を支払う道を開いた。
    オスマン帝国
    における物価の高騰や貨幣の悪鋳による為替条件の変化がヨーロッパ人商人には有利に働き、関税表の有効期間(19世紀初頭においては14年間が基本)が終了する頃には、関税表に定められた関税は、率にして1〜2%、商品によっては1%に満たないことすらあった。更にこの頃、ヨーロッパ人商人は
    オスマン帝国
    の内国商業への参入をも試みはじめ、その際カピテュラシオンを盾に、内国関税にも3%の対外関税率が適用されるべきだと主張した。これに対してオスマン政府は、参入には帝国臣民の非ムスリム商人と同様5%の内国関税および内国通商に課されたその他の諸税の支払いを条件とするとして対抗した。本稿で紹介する台帳には、オーストリア、ロシア、イギリス、フランスをはじめとする各国の関税表の写しが記録されるとともに、関税行政に関する様々な文書の写しも控えられている。主な貿易相手国、貿易商品とその関税、更新毎の関税の変化といったデータのみでなく、内国商業をめぐる攻防、さらに関税収入の帝国近代化改革への利用に関する情報も読みとることができる。当時、帝国財政は逼迫し、通商への統制が強化されつつあった。ヨーロッパ諸国は、例えば国内商業にもカピテュラシオンの規定を持ちこむことにより、次第に「貿易障壁」の撤廃に成功していった。この台帳は、ヨーロッパによるこうしたカピテュラシオンの再解釈過程、およびそれに対するオスマン側の対応のあり方を明らかにするものである。
  • 慶応義塾大学出版会,2015年4月,388+v 頁,定価6300円(税別)
    小松 香織
    オリエント
    2016年 59 巻 1 号 77-81
    発行日: 2016/09/30
    公開日: 2019/10/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • Tadashi SUZUKI
    Orient
    2003年 38 巻 117-134
    発行日: 2003年
    公開日: 2008/03/24
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 三倉 康博
    HISPANICA / HISPÁNICA
    2005年 2005 巻 49 号 135-149
    発行日: 2005/12/25
    公開日: 2010/06/11
    ジャーナル フリー
    En el Viaje de Turquía, diálogo anónimo del siglo XVI, encontramos dos visiones distintas del Imperio Otomano, una positiva y otra negativa.
    Por medio de Pedro de Urdemalas, ex cautivo de Estambul e interlocutor principal en dicho diálogo, el autor alaba algunas características del Imperio Otomano en contraposición con la sociedad española de la época; valora muy positivamente la devoción y laboriosidad de los turcos; tiene una elevada estimación por la eficacia de su justicia y de su ejército; y además, habla a favor de la política de tolerancia religiosa y sistema de movilidad social de Turquía. Por momentos, los audaces alcances de esta visión laudatoria del Imperio Otomano son sorprendentes.
    Pero por otro lado la obra abunda en descalificaciones acerca de los turcos, y en los estereotipos antimusulmanes más comunes de la época: su religión-el Islam-es falsa y terrenal; su moral sexual es materia de corrupción; los otomanos no son continuadores, sino destructores, de la civilización bizantina; el nivel de sus letras y de sus ciencias- sobre todo en el ámbito de la medicina-es deplorable.
    Estas aparentes contradicciones en la imagen que el autor nos presenta sobre la sociedad turca tienen su explicacián: para él, al igual que para muchos contemporáneos, el Imperio Otomano es el enemigo religioso irreconciliable de la cristiandad. Partiendo de esta premisa, el Viaje de Turquía subraya los defectos de los turcos para justificar la guerra contra ellos, y al mismo tiempo elogia sus virtudes para demostrar al lector lo que falta a España para vencer al enemigo.
  • 三倉 康博
    HISPANICA / HISPÁNICA
    2011年 2011 巻 55 号 135-154
    発行日: 2011/12/25
    公開日: 2012/02/21
    ジャーナル フリー
    El autor anónimo del diálogo del siglo XVI, el Viaje de Turquía, afirma que su obra es un informe sobre el Imperio Otomano.
    Después de que exhaustivos análisis documentales confirmaron que el autor utilizó varias obras antecedentes y ajenas sobre el Imperio Otomano, algunos críticos han llegado a negar la experiencia turca del autor, quitando importancia a su intención de difundir las noticias sobre Turquía. Otros siguen sosteniendo que el autor anónimo conocía directamente el Imperio Otomano y recurrió a las fuentes solamente para refrescar la memoria.
    Sin embargo, en la Europa de aquel momento el valor de los textos sobre el Imperio Otomano no descansaba sobre la experiencia directa de sus autores. Para situar el Viaje en el contexto cultural de la época en que fue escrito, tenemos que compararlo, temática y estructuralmente, con otros textos informativos contemporáneos sobre Turquía. El resultado de la comparación es que el Viaje tiene muchos puntos en común con éstos. Un lector de ese momento lo habría aceptado como un informe válido, independientemente de si la información había sido recopilada o no como resultado de una experiencia personal.
  • 吉田 達矢
    日本中東学会年報
    2005年 20 巻 2 号 245-268
    発行日: 2005/03/31
    公開日: 2018/03/30
    ジャーナル フリー
    Osmanli Imparatorlugu'nda nufus bakimindan Muslumanlardan sonra ikinci sirayi alan Rumlar, ozerklik icinde yasayarak devlete sadakatle hizmet ediyorlardi. Bu durum 1821'de Mora'da ortaya cikan ve 1829'a kadar suren Rum Ihtilaliyle degisti. 1830'da Yunan Devleti(1833'ten sonra Kralligi)'nin bagimsizligi, Buyuk Gucler tarafindan kabul edildi. 1832'de Yunanistan'in sinirlari tespit edildi. O zamanki Osmanli Imparatorlugu'nda yasayan Rumlarin nufusu, bagimsizlik elde eden Yunanistan'daki Rum nufusundan yaklasik uc kat fazlaydi. Osmanli Imparatorlugu ile Yunanistan Kralligi arasindaki halkin hareketleri hakkinda simdiye kadar yapilan arastirmalarin tartismasi, ozetle "goclerin hangi taraftan hangi tarafa goclerin daha fazla oldugu" merkezinde idi. Fakat, bu arastirmalarda gocmenlerin niceligi belirtilmiyordu. Ayrica, "gocmek" ile "gurbete gitmek" kavramlarinin farkliligi belirtilmeyip, bolge ve tarih sinirlamasi da olmadigindan, halkin hareketlerinin durumu acikca anlasilamamaktadir. Zaten, halkin 1821'den sonraki hareketlerinin tam bir istatistiki durumunu cikarmak mumkun gorunmuyor. Buna ragmen hususi bir bolge ve donemin incelenmesi, gelecek arastirmalar icin faydali olacaktir. Bundan dolayi bu makale Yunanistan'in kurulusundan, yani 1830'dan Islahat Fermani'nin ilan edildigi 1856'ya kadarki surede, -ozellikle 1832'den sonra bir sinir bolgesi olan-Tesalya Bolgesi'ndeki halkin hareketlerini incelemektedir. Osmanli-Yunanistan arasindaki sinir bolgesinde, sadece Osmanli Rumlari ve Yunanistan Rumlari degil, Muslumanlar ve diger gruplar(Ulah, Arnavut) da bu hareketlere katilarak hududu gecmekte idiler. Sinir bolgesinde yasayanlar, 1830'dan onceki hareketlerine buyuk oranda devam etmektelerdi. Tesalya Bolgesindeki bu karsilikli gidip gelmeler, ticaret, hizmetkarlik, ciftliklerde calismak ve akrabalar ile gorusmek gibi sebeplerden kaynaklanmaktaydi. Hatta bazi Yunanli askerler ile suclularin Osmanli topragina, bazi Osmanli askerler ve suclularin da Yunanistan'a firar ettikleri bilinmektedir. Osmanli topragina firar eden Yunanlilar, bolgedeki Osmanli memurlari tarafindan sorusturulduktan sonra, sinirdan uzak olan ve Rumeli ordusunun bulundugu Manastir'da iskan edildiler. Yunanistan'a firar ettikten bir sure sonra geri donen Osmanli askerleri ise, Anadolu veya Arabistan'daki ordulara gonderildiler veyahut Ergiri'deki komur madenlerinde calistirildilar. Aslinda Osmanli tebaasindan olan, fakat Rum Ihtilali donemlerinde veya ondan sonraki donemlerde Yunanistan'a firar edip, bir sure sonra Tesalya ve Epir Bolgelerine donen ve tekrar Osmanli tabiiyetini kabul eden en az 1000 kisi oldugu bilinmektedir. Onlarin disinda, donmek isteyenlerin sayisi yaklasik 8500 hane ve 43 kisi idi. Ama belgelerde bu iki durum hakkinda fazla bilgi yoktur. Bundan dolayi, bu kisilerin ne zaman ve neden firar ettikleri ve geri donmelerindeki sebepler tam olarak belli degildir. Donenlere Osmanli Devleti iki veya uc senelik cizye muafiyeti verdi ve diger vergilerini de hafifletti. Ama geri donenlerin kefil bulmasi zorunluydu. Bunlarin geri donusu cogunlukla 1841'den sonra olmustur. Ozellikle 1848'de geri donus artmistir. Donus sebeplerinin, Yunanistan'daki kotu durum(isyan, haydut hareketleri, ve dogal afetler vb), Tesalya ve Epir Bolgelerinin sinir bolgesi olmalarindan dolayi Osmanli hukumetinin buralari daha hassas bir sekilde idare etmesi ve Gulhane Hatt-i Humayununa ve islahatlara baglanan umitler oldugu tahmin edilmektedir. Yunan tabiiyetinde olanlar Osmanli topraginda esnaf olabiliyorlarsa da kethudalik ve Osmanli tebaasindan birinin mirascisi olamazlardi. Bundan dolayi, geri donenler tekrar Osmanli tabiiyetini kabul etmistir.
  • ⽮⼝ 啓朗
    ロシア・東欧研究
    2021年 2021 巻 50 号 88-103
    発行日: 2021年
    公開日: 2022/06/11
    ジャーナル フリー

    Why did Russia abandon the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi, which was Russo-Turkish alliance, and accept the Straits Convention, which was signed by 5 powers on 13 July 1841? Previous studies have cited three reasons for this: (1) Russia’s weakened influence over the Ottoman Empire, (2) Russian Foreign Minister Nesselrode’s orientation toward the Concert of Europe, and (3) France’s isolation. However, how did Russia evaluate the ability of its alliance partner? Using a commitment problem as an analytical framework, this study will clarify the security problems which Russia perceived in the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi and how it attempted to rectify them through the Straits Convention.

    In the first half of the 19th century, Russia, seeking to keep the Ottoman Empire vulnerable, gave military support to the Empire, which was reeling from the First Egyptian-Turkish War. After being approached by the Ottomans for an alliance, Russia signed the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi with the aim of expanding its influence over the Ottoman Empire and prohibiting the passage of foreign warships through the Dardanelles. However, this treaty not only caused a fierce opposition from Britain, which Russia had not expected, but also threatened the security of the Black Sea coastal region, which she had hoped.

    What did Russian policymakers think of these security threats? First, the Russian Military Officers questioned the Ottoman Empire’s military capabilities and believed that they would have to occupy the Bosphorus and Dardanelles in the event of a war with Britain, regardless of the intentions of their allied partner. Nesselrode also saw the Ottoman Empire as incapable of resisting British and French pressure and recognized that the conflict with Britain posed a serious threat to Russia’s security environment. And when the Second Egyptian-Turkish War broke out, Russia began to fear that it would be drawn into a war with Britain in the Straits region.

    In this situation, Russia tried to defuse the situation by participating in the conference of the five European powers. Russia approached Great Britain to abrogate the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi and conclude a new agreement that would prohibit the passage of warships through the Bosporus and Dardanelles. Russia believed that a new agreement, based on the Concert of Europe, would be more credible in its commitment to prohibit the passage of warships through both straits than the Russo—Turkish bilateral alliance. Although it was also Russia’s goal to isolate France at the London Conference, Russia believed that its commitment to the ban on passage through the Straits could be maintained with the agreement of the four powers, regardless of France’s consent. It can be said that the abrogation of Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi was the result of seeking a more reliable guarantee to replace the Ottoman Empire, which was uncertain about its commitment to the Dardanelles blockade, besides easing tensions with Britain.

  • 瀧川 美生
    美学
    2017年 68 巻 2 号 61-
    発行日: 2017年
    公開日: 2019/01/02
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
    Bezmiâlem Valide Sultan Mosque (commonly known as Dolmabahçe Mosque, 1852- 1855, Istanbul) has not been properly valued in the history of Ottoman architecture. The prevalent view is that Ottoman mosques of the 18th and 19th centuries degenerated from the Golden Age because more importance was attached to decoration rather than structure under European influences, thereby breaking with the Ottoman tradition. However, this mosque shares, along with European elements, the following essential characteristics with the Ottoman mosques of the Golden Age: (1) The unified space of the prayer hall formed by the single dome without any elements dividing the space; (2) the effects of the surroundings and the opening of the prayer hall, as well as the overall construction of the mosque; and (3) The rectangle form topped by a semicircle found in every part of the mosque, like the building’s form, windows, piers, and arches, among others.
  • 川本 智史
    比較都市史研究
    2022年 41 巻 5-6
    発行日: 2022/12/20
    公開日: 2023/03/03
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 小松 香織
    オリエント
    1993年 36 巻 2 号 180-206
    発行日: 1993年
    公開日: 2010/03/12
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 松井 真子
    日本中東学会年報
    1999年 14 巻 197-218
    発行日: 1999/03/31
    公開日: 2018/03/30
    ジャーナル フリー
    Commercial relations between the Ottoman Empire and European countries were regulated by the capitulations. Under the capitulatory regime European merchants were granted the status of muste'men, enjoying commercial privileges and protection in the world of. Islam. As trade began to expand in the mid-eighteenth century, muste'men merchants began to participate in trade within the Ottoman Empire, a situation which had been rather limited when the capitulations had first been granted. This commercial activity of muste'men merchants coincided with a period of financial crisis in the Ottoman Empire caused by incessant wars with neighboring countries. The Ottoman government were trying to raise its revenue in whatever way it could. One of the government's main targets was the custom revenues from trade. When this attempt extended to the imposition of internal duties on muste'men merchants, European consulates protested, and the situation finally ended up in the signing of free trade treaties between the Ottoman Empire and European countries. This paper analyzes this process by examining 1) the significance of miri duty (resm-i miri), one of the main internal duties imposed on muste'men merchants, and 2) the European opposition to miri duty in Izmir, a city which connected Ottoman internal and external trade networks.
  • アルメニア・カトリック共同体独立承認の事例から
    上野 雅由樹
    オリエント
    2005年 48 巻 1 号 69-87
    発行日: 2005/09/30
    公開日: 2010/03/12
    ジャーナル フリー
    Mahmud II's famous speech has led to the belief that he endeavored to integrate his non-Muslim subjects by treating them and his Muslim subjects equally. However, little attention has been paid to the policy aimed at the non-Muslims of that period. To clarify this policy, this article analyzes the integration process of the Armenian Catholics. Before the recognition of the Armenian Catholic community, the Ottoman government attempted to exclude the Catholic converts. In 1830 however, the French intervention compelled the Ottoman government to recognize the Armenian Catholic community and to permit them to have their own chief and be independent of the Armenian community.
    To integrate the Armenian Catholics, the Ottoman government emphasized that the Armenian Catholics were the re'âyâ of the Ottoman Empire and did them favors by accepting their requirements. The Ottoman government attempted to portray that the newly appointed patriarch of the Armenian Catholics had an equal status with the Rûm and the Armenian patriarchs. For this purpose, the government conferred decorations on the three patriarchs simultaneously and informed the entire Empire about this event through Takvîm-i Vekayi'. This led the Jews to request a similar conferment, and to answer this request, the Ottoman government started to appoint the hahambasi at the Bâb-i 'Alî with a decoration and a robe of honor.
    Despite these favors, it cannot be said that Mahmud treated his non-Muslim and Muslim subjects equally. The word re'âyâ means both “the ruled” and “non-Muslim, ” and in Takvîm-i Vekayi', articles concerning non-Muslims appeared after articles on the Muslims.
    Therefore, it can be concluded that the Ottoman government attempted to integrate non-Muslim subjects by granting them favors through novel means, while retaining Muslim superiority.
  • 田口 晶
    オリエント
    2002年 45 巻 2 号 93-110
    発行日: 2002年
    公開日: 2010/03/12
    ジャーナル フリー
    In the last decade of the Ottoman Empire, Muhammad Kurd 'Ali (1876-1953), a leading intellectual in Modern Syria, was a well-known journalist. He campaigned against the Ottoman government in his Arabic periodical, al-Muqtabas, and in a daily paper of the same name. However, upon the outbreak of the First World War, he abandoned his cause and collaborated with the Ottoman government in the production of anti-Sharifian propaganda. This study examines the background to the tunabout in his thought, to which little attention has previously been paid, in light of his discourse and practice.
    The attempt of Kurd 'Ali to criticize the policy of the Ottoman government through periodicals and daily papers and to support constitutionalism through activities in the Arab Revival Society (Jam'iya al-nahda al-'arabiya) deserves mention as part of the struggle to pluralize the centralized state of the Ottoman Empire and to form an autonomous space for critical discussion in Arabic within the public sphere. Although the Arab Revival Society changed its name to the Syria Revival Society (Jam'iya al-nahda al-suriya), a close relationship was maintained between having an Arabic-speaking public sphere and having a common identity as Syrians. Moreover, Kurd 'Ali's argument about Syrian autonomy led to an acceptance of the eventual strengthening of the Ottoman Empire through the rationale of providing for the defense of Syria and Syria's assumption of responsibility for public works in place of the Ottoman government.
    Kurd 'Ali's wavering led in practice to a “politics of identity”, the stance of claiming identity and place in the social structure. But it brought about oppotunism through a narrowing of political concerns. This is borne out by the fact of his support for the first Arab Congress (1913) in Paris and his approach to the Ottoman government under the policy of appeasement after the Congress.
    Kurd 'Ali's subjection to the existing order during an exceptional wartime situation was a means of survival, but the conflict between his wavering discourse and his acceptance of gradual reform in practice resulted in the loss of his political autonomy.
feedback
Top