DOCSLIB.ORG

12 Blagojevic Milos.Vp

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
12 Blagojevic Milos.Vp Zbornik radova Vizantolo{kog instituta HHHÇH, 2001/2002. Recueil des travaux de l’Institut d’etudes byzantines, HHHÇH, 2001/2002 UDC: 929.513.33(=861)Œ14Œ : 881.01–94.077 MILO[ BLAGOJEVI] SRODSTVENA TERMINOLOGIJA I HIJERARHIJA VLADARA U SPISIMA KONSTANTINA FILOZOFA I WEGOVIH SAVREMENIKA Po~etkomHçvekaVizantijajeprestaladabudevazalosmanskihTuraka, {to je osve`ilo postoje}e shvatawe da je vizantijski car œduhovni otacŒ svih vladara. Takvo shvatawe bilo je prihvatqivo u sredwovekovnoj Srbiji, pa je u ne{to izmewenom vidu prisutno i u œ@itiju Stefana Lazarevi}aŒ od Konstan- tina Filozofa Kostene~kog. U Vizantiji je izgra|eno i u~vr{}eno shvatawe prema kojem je vizantij- ski car izabranik Bo`iji, jedini zakoniti car, jer je legitimni naslednik rimskog i prvog hri{}anskog cara Konstantina Velikog.1 Upravo zbog toga sa wim se nije mogao izjedna~avati nijedan vladar na svetu. Takvo shvatawe obi~no nije odgovaralo realnom odnosu snaga izme|u tada{wih dr`ava, pa je prona|eno zgodno re{ewe koje se svodilo na postojawe fiktivne hijerarhije izme|u vladara i dr`ava. Na vrhu zami{qene hijerarhijske lestvice nalazio se jedino vizantijski vasilevs, a na najni`em stepeniku vladari u vazalnom polo`aju, kojima on ima pravo da {aqe œnare|ewaŒ u pismenoj formi. Tokom desetog veka iznad wih su se nalazili œprijateqiŒ carevi, a jo{ vi{e œduhovni srodniciŒ carevi. Me|u wima su œvladari Bugarske, Velike Jermeni- je i Alanije nazvani œsinovimaŒ carevim. Najzad, na jo{ vi{oj lestvici staja- li su nema~ki i francuski kraqevi koji su bili ozna~eni kao careva œbra}aŒ.2 Iz ove tradicije potekla je ustanova porodice kraqeva koja se odr`ala sve do najnovijeg doba. Tako je, pored hijerarhije vladara, bio stvoren sistem duhov- nog o~instva, sa istim ciqem: da uzdigne cara i istakne wegovu prevlast nad svim ostalim vladarima. Kao nosilac najvi{e vladarske titule i kao poglavar 1 G. Ostrogorski, Vizantijski sistem hijerarhije dr`ava, O verovawima i shvatawima Vizantinaca, Sabrana dela Georgija Ostrogorskog, kw. 5, Beograd 1970, 238–262; G. Ostrogorski, Vizantijski car i svetski hijerarhijski poredak, O verovawima i shvatawima Vizantinaca, 263–277. 2 G. Ostrogorski, Vizantijski car i svetski hijerarhijski poredak, 274, 275. 226 Milo{ Blagojevi} najstarijeg hri{}anskog carstva, vizantijski car zauzimao je najvi{i polo`aj unutar hijerarhije vladara a kao otac svih hri{}anskih naroda stajao je na ~e- lu porodice vladara.Œ Od H do sredine HÇç i po~etka Hç veka politi~ke prilike u svetu bitno su se izmenile i to na {tetu Vizantije, koja je polako i neumitno propadala. Vizantinci se i u najte`im okolnostima nisu odrekli svojih shvatawa, sve do pada Carigrada pod tursku vlast. Ovako duboko ukorewena shvatawa postala su vremenom prihvatqiva za sve pravoslavne narode i wihovu duhovnu elitu, a posebno na Balkanskom poluostrvu. To svakako ne zna~i da su predstavnici srpske i bugarske duhovne elite prihvatali sve vizantijske poglede bez rezer- ve, odnosno bez mawih ili ve}ih izmena. U nauci je odavno uo~eno da se srpski kraq u fiktivnoj hijerarhiji vladara i dr`ava osetno pribli`io vizantij- skom vasilevsu posle `enidbe kraqa Milutina Simonidom. Od tog vremena kraq Milutin pomiwe svog tasta, cara Andronika ÇÇ, kao œgospodina mi i ro- diteqa svetoga cara gr~koga kir Andronika, i voqenoga sina wegovog, brata kraqevstva mi kir Mihaila, cara gr~kogaŒ.3 Iz navedenog citata jasno se vidi da srpski kraq naziva vizantijskog vasilevsa svojim roditeqem, a carevog si- na i savladara svojim bratom. Na sli~an na~in su se ophodili i vizantijski carevi, pa Andronik ÇÇ naziva kraqa Milutina œvoqenim sinomŒ, dok ga car Mihailo ÇH naziva svojim œvoqenim bratomŒ.4 Mora se imati u vidu i ~iwe- nica da su zaista bili uspostavqeni i bliski rodbinski odnosi, izme|u zeta i tasta kao i izme|u zeta i {uraka. Sli~ni rodbinski odnosi postojali su izme|u kraqa Stefana De~anskog i bugarskog cara Mihaila [i{mana, koji je bio o`ewen Stefanovom sestrom Anom. Kada se car Mihailo razveo od carice Ane, do{lo je do rata izme|u Sr- bije i Bugarske, koji je okon~an bitkom kod Velbu`da (1330) u kojoj je Mihailo izgubio `ivot. No i pored o~iglednih neprijateqstava, prema pisawu Nasta- vqa~a arhiepiskopa Danila ÇÇ, Stefan De~anski i pre i posle bitke naziva bu- garskog cara œbratom kraqevstva miŒ.5 Izgledadasusesuverenivladari sli~ne mo}i i vladarskog dostojanstva obra}ali jedan drugom kao œbratŒ œbratuŒ. Ovu pretpostavku donekle potvr|uje i pisawe Grigorija Camblaka. Sastavqaju}i @itije Stefana De~anskog sa znatne vremenske distance, po~et- kom Hç veka i u izmewenim odnosima izme|u dr`ava na Balkanu, on je u @iti- je unosio shvatawa svog vremena, kao i shvatawa sredine u kojoj je boravio i de- lovao. Opisuju}i Stefanovo zato~eni{tvo u Carigradu, Grigorije Camblak sa- op{tava, pored ostalog, da je Stefan osu|ivao i Varlaamovu jeres koja se jo{ 3 S. Novakovi}, Zakonski spomenici srpskih dr`ava sredwega veka, Beograd 1912, 479. 4 G. Ostrogorski, Srbija i vizantijska hijerarhija dr`ava, O knezu Lazaru, Beograd 1975, 132. Od H do HÇÇ veka vizantijski carevi ophode se sa vladarima Srbije kao vladari sa svojim po- danicima. Vi{e o tome: Q. Maksimovi}, Srbija i metodi upravqawa Carstvom u HÇÇ veku, Ste- fan Nemawa — Sveti Simeon Miroto~ivi, Beograd 2000, 55–64. 5 Arhiepiskop Danilo, @ivoti kraqeva i arhiepiskopa srpskih, Preveo L. Mirkovi}, Be- ograd 1935, 136, 144. M. Blagojevi}, Srodstvena terminologija i dru{tvena hijerarhija u sredwo- vekovnoj Srbiji, Zbornik Etnografskog muzeja u Beogradu 1901–2001, Beograd 2001, 121. Srodstvena terminologija i hijerarhija vladara u spisima Konstantina Filozofa… 227 nije ni pojavila. Saznav{i za osudu Varlaamovog u~ewa vizantijski car An- dronik ÇÇ obratio se budu}em srpskom kraqu re~ima: œGovori, o najizvanred- niji od drugova i bra}eŒ.6 Zaista, te{ko je i pomisliti da je vizantijski vasi- levs nazvao zato~enog srpskog princa svojim œdrugomŒ i œbratomŒ. Takva se terminologija koristila u srpskoj feudalnoj sredini, gde su srpski vladari nazivali svoje najistaknutije velmo`e œbra}omŒ i œdrugovimaŒ.7 Prema tome, Camblak je preneo shvatawe sredine u kojoj je pisao @itije, a ne shvatawe ca- rigradskog dvora. Nastavqa~u arhiepiskopa Danila ÇÇ bilo je ~ak poznato da je car Andro- nik ÇÇÇ predlo`io kraqu Du{anu uspostavqawe savezni~kih odnosa (1334) sle- de}im re~ima: œMene u~ini da ti budem qubazni brat i drug kraqevstva tvogaŒ.8 Ovaj je predlog bio prihva}en, pa vizantijski vasilevs i srpski kraq œpostado{e qubazna bra}a i drugoviŒ.9 Kori{}ewe srodstvenih termina (brat, bra}a) proisti~e iz shvatawa srpske feudalne sredine, ali se ovde mora primetiti da je mladi car Jovan ç, sin Andronika ÇÇÇ, nazvao u zvani~nom do- kumentu (1351) cara Stefana Du{ana svojim œvoqenim stricemŒ.10 Upotreba ovakvog srodstvenog termina odgovarala bi u potpunosti uspostavqenim ro- |a~kim odnosima izme|u œbra}eŒ, Andronika ÇÇÇ i Stefana Du{ana. Za cara Du- {ana je od ranije poznato da je nazivao œbratomŒ mleta~kog du`da, dok je opet Du{ana nazivao svojim bratom nema~ki car Karlo Çç.11 Du{anov naslednik car Uro{ naziva bra}om i svoje najistaknutije velmo`e, pa u jednom zvani~nom dokumentu pomiwe œbrata carstva miŒ, kneza Vojislava Vojinovi}a, a u drugom dokumentu œbrata carstva miŒ velikog vojvodu Nikolu Stawevi}a.12 Jednom us- postavqena i utvr|ena terminologija nije napu{tena ni sa prodorom Turaka u srpske zemqe. Prevlast Turaka na Balkanskom poluostrvu do koje je do{lo sedamdesetih i osamdesetih godina HÇç veka poremetila je postoje}u hijerarhiju vladara na ovim prostorima. Godinu ili dve posle bitke na Marici (1371) vizantijski car postao je vazal emira Murata, kojem je morao svake godine da pla}a danak i da mu {aqe pomo}nu vojsku.13 Nepune dve decenije kasnije Srbiju je zadesila jo{ ve}a 6 Grigorije Camblak, @ivot kraqa Stefana De~anskog, Preveo L. Mirkovi}, Stare srp- ske biografije Hç i HçÇÇ vek, Beograd 1936, 11. 7 M. Blagojevi}, Srodstvena terminologija i dru{tvena hijerarhija u sredwovekovnoj Srbiji, 118–124. 8 Arhiepiskop Danilo, @ivoti kraqeva i arhiepiskopa srpskih, 168. 9 Arhiepiskop Danilo, nav. delo, 169. 10 G. Ostrogorski, Srbija i vizantijska hijerarhija dr`ava, 134. Uspostavqeni odnos iz- me|u œstricaŒ i œsinovcaŒ ukazuje na to koji je vladar œstarijiŒ i mo}niji, ali ne i na vazalni odnos. 11 Q. Stojanovi}, Stare srpske poveqe i pisma Ç/1, Beograd — Sremski Karlovci 1929, 65. K. Jire~ek, Istorija Srba, kw. Ç, Beograd 1952, 234. 12 Q. Stojanovi}, Stare srpske poveqe i pisma Ç/1, 100; S. Novakovi}, Zakonski spomeni- ci, 444. M. Blagojevi}, Srodstvena terminologija i dru{tvena hijerarhija u sredwovekovnoj Sr- biji, 119. 13 G. Ostrogorski, Serska oblast posle Du{anove smrti, Beograd 1965, 143–146. 228 Milo{ Blagojevi} nesre}a. Posle bitke na Kosovu (1389), u kojoj je izgubio `ivot knez Lazar i mnogobrojna srpska vlastela, dr`ava je bila ugro`avana i od Turaka i od Ma|a- ra, a u zemqi su izbili neredi. Potra`iv{i izlaz iz nastalih te{ko}a, knegiwa Milica i weni maloletni sinovi, Stefan i Vuk, bili su primorani da postanu vazali tada{weg turskog emira Bajazita, po ~ijem je nare|ewu pogubqen knez La- zar. Oni su tako|e pla}ali godi{wi danak, a kada su postali punoletni, li~no su sa svojim odredima u~estvovali u turskim vojnim pohodima. Znatno kasnije despot Stefan Lazarevi} je opisao svoj polo`aj slede}im re~ima: œOd Kosova bih porabo}en ismaiq}anskom narodu, dok ne do|e car Persa i Tatara (Tamer- lan) i razru{i wih, i mene Bog svojom milo{}u izbavi iz wihovih rukuŒ.14 U ovim re~ima nema preterivawa, jer se terminom œporabo}enŒ iskazuje pot~iwe- nost i li~no izvr{avawe utvr|enih obaveza.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 the Turks and Europe by Gaston Gaillard London: Thomas Murby & Co
    THE TURKS AND EUROPE BY GASTON GAILLARD LONDON: THOMAS MURBY & CO. 1 FLEET LANE, E.C. 1921 1 vi CONTENTS PAGES VI. THE TREATY WITH TURKEY: Mustafa Kemal’s Protest—Protests of Ahmed Riza and Galib Kemaly— Protest of the Indian Caliphate Delegation—Survey of the Treaty—The Turkish Press and the Treaty—Jafar Tayar at Adrianople—Operations of the Government Forces against the Nationalists—French Armistice in Cilicia—Mustafa Kemal’s Operations—Greek Operations in Asia Minor— The Ottoman Delegation’s Observations at the Peace Conference—The Allies’ Answer—Greek Operations in Thrace—The Ottoman Government decides to sign the Treaty—Italo-Greek Incident, and Protests of Armenia, Yugo-Slavia, and King Hussein—Signature of the Treaty – 169—271 VII. THE DISMEMBERMENT OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE: 1. The Turco-Armenian Question - 274—304 2. The Pan-Turanian and Pan-Arabian Movements: Origin of Pan-Turanism—The Turks and the Arabs—The Hejaz—The Emir Feisal—The Question of Syria—French Operations in Syria— Restoration of Greater Lebanon—The Arabian World and the Caliphate—The Part played by Islam - 304—356 VIII. THE MOSLEMS OF THE FORMER RUSSIAN EMPIRE AND TURKEY: The Republic of Northern Caucasus—Georgia and Azerbaïjan—The Bolshevists in the Republics of Caucasus and of the Transcaspian Isthmus—Armenians and Moslems - 357—369 IX. TURKEY AND THE SLAVS: Slavs versus Turks—Constantinople and Russia - 370—408 2 THE TURKS AND EUROPE I THE TURKS The peoples who speak the various Turkish dialects and who bear the generic name of Turcomans, or Turco-Tatars, are distributed over huge territories occupying nearly half of Asia and an important part of Eastern Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15Th-18Th Centuries)
    Hilâl. Studi turchi e ottomani 5 — The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15th-18th Centuries) Maria Pia Pedani Edizioni Ca’Foscari The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15th-18th Centuries) Hilâl Studi turchi e ottomani Collana diretta da Maria Pia Pedani Elisabetta Ragagnin 5 Edizioni Ca’Foscari Hilâl Studi turchi e ottomani Direttori | General editors Maria Pia Pedani (Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, Italia) Elisabetta Ragagnin (Freie Universität, Berlin) Comitato scientifico | Advisory board Bülent Arı (TBMM Milli Saraylar, Müzecilik ve Tanıtım BaŞkanı, İstanbul, Türkiye) Önder Bayır (TC BaŞbakanlık Devlet ArŞivi Daire Başkanlığı, Osmanlı Arşivi Daire Başkanlığı, İstanbul, Türkiye) Dejanirah Couto (École Pratique des Hautes Études «EPHE», Paris, France) Mehmet Yavuz Erler (Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, Samsun, Türkiye) Fabio Grassi ( «La Sapienza» Università di Roma, Italia) Figen Güner Dilek (Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye) Stefan Hanß (University of Cambridge, UK) Baiarma Khabtagaeva (Szegedi Tudományegyetem, Magyarország) Nicola Melis (Università degli Studi di Cagliari, Italia) Melek Özyetgin (Yildiz Üniversitesi, İstanbul, Türkiye) Cristina Tonghini (Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, Italia) Direzione e redazione Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia Dipartimento di Studi sull’Asia sull’Africa mediterranea Sezione Asia Orientale e Antropologia Palazzo Vendramin dei Carmini Dorsoduro 3462 30123 Venezia http://edizionicafoscari.unive.it/it/edizioni/collane/hilal/ The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15th-18th Centuries) Maria Pia Pedani translated by Mariateresa Sala Venezia Edizioni Ca’ Foscari - Digital Publishing 2017 The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15th-18th Centuries) Maria Pia Pedani © 2017 Maria Pia Pedani for the text © 2017 Mariateresa Sala for the translation © 2017 Edizioni Ca’ Foscari - Digital Publishing for the present edition Qualunque parte di questa pubblicazione può essere riprodotta, memorizzata in un sistema di recupero dati o trasmessa in qualsiasi forma o con qualsiasi mezzo, elettronico o meccanico, senza autorizzazione, a condizione che se ne citi la fonte.
    [Show full text]
  • THE MODERNIZATION of the OTTOMAN NAVY DURING the REIGN of SULTAN ABDÜLAZİZ (1861-1876) By
    THE MODERNIZATION OF THE OTTOMAN NAVY DURING THE REIGN OF SULTAN ABDÜLAZİZ (1861-1876) by DİLARA DAL A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies Department of Classics, Ancient History and Archaeology College of Arts and Law The University of Birmingham April, 2015 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT The main focus of this study is to examine the modernization of the Ottoman navy during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz, exploring naval administration, education, and technology. Giving a summary of the transformation of shipbuilding technologies and bureaucratic institutions of the Ottoman naval forces between 1808 and 1861, it analyses the structure of the Ottoman navy, its level of development in comparison to previous periods of time, and the condition of the vessels making up the naval fleet from 1861 to 1876. It also intends to evaluate the character of existing administrative structures at the outset of Abdülaziz’s reign in 1861 and the nature of subsequent changes, including structural reorganization of the Imperial Naval Arsenal, the Ministry of Marine, and the Naval Academy, as well as advancements in military training and seafaring; all within the context of the impact of these changes on the military, political, and economic condition of the Empire during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz.
    [Show full text]
  • Negotiations and Agreements for Population Transfers in the Balkans from the Beginning of the 19Th Century Until the Balkan Wars of 1912–1913 Mehmet Hacısalihoğlu*
    Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies Year I, Issue 1, Fall 2018, pp. 31-75. Negotiations and Agreements for Population Transfers in the Balkans from the Beginning of the 19th Century until the Balkan Wars of 1912–1913 Mehmet Hacısalihoğlu* Abstract: The history of population transfers on the basis of decisions by ruling authorities dates back to ancient times. In modern times, however, the establishment of nation-states played a decisive role in forcible population transfers in the Balkans. Balkan historiographies tend to date back bilaterally agreed population transfers and population exchanges to the Balkan Wars in 1912/13. However, the process of establishing autonomous and independent states in the Ottoman Balkans saw multiple cases of forcible population transfer based on agreements and treaties. Some of them are well-known cases, for example, the forcible emigration of Muslims from the newly independent Greek state in 1830, the forcible emigration of Muslims from Serbian principality in 1862 and several cases of negotiations on the emigration of Muslims from different regions, such as Crete or newly established Bulgaria. This paper deals with these processes in the Balkans beginning already as early as in the 19th century. Keywords: population transfer in the Balkans, population exchange, Greek Independence, Russo-Ottoman treaties, Muslim Minorities, ethnic cleansing, the Ottoman Empire, Russia, Greece, Serbia Introduction At the end of the eighteenth century, a new era of population transfers began in the Balkans.1 Almost all the Ottoman-Russian wars • Prof., Yıldız Technical University, Center for Balkan and Black Sea Studies, email: [email protected] MEHMET HACISALİHOĞLU caused mass migrations in occupied territories, and the creation of the Balkan states in the nineteenth century was accompanied by migrations and population transfers also, for different reasons.
    [Show full text]
  • Bitstream 38451.Pdf (2.691Mb)
    3EOPHT4K PAAOBA B I43AHT O JI O III KOI I,IH C TI,ITYTA xxxrx UDC 949.5+7.033.2+877.3(0s) yu ISSN 0534-9888 INSTITUT D,ETUDBS BYZANTINES DE L,AcAoETum SERBE DES SCIENCES ET DES ARTS RECUEIL DES TRAVAUX DE L,INSTITUT p,ETUDBS BYZANTINES XXXIX R6dacteur LJUBOMIR MAKSIMOYIC Directeur de I'Institut d'6tudes byzantines Comit6 de r6daction: Jean-Clqude Cheynet (Paris), Evangelos Chrysos (Athdnes), Sima CirkoviL, Jovanka Kalit, Angeliki Laiou (Athines/Cambridge, Mass.), Ljubomir Malcsimovii, Radivoj Radii, Ninoslava Radoievic, Peter Schreiner (Kdln), Gojko Subotit, Mirjana Zivojinovi| Secrdtaire de la r6daction: Bojana Krsmanovic BEOGRAD 200r / 2002 yAK 949.5+7 .033 .2+87 7.3 (05) YU ISSN 0584-988 B I{3AHTO JIOIIIK?I 14 HCTI4TYT CPIICKE AKAAEMI,IJE HAYKA I,I YMETHOCTII 3BOPHT4K PAAOBA BI43 AHT O JI O IUKO f VIHCTI/TYTA XXXIX i YPeAHI{K JbVEOMNP MARCNMOBNN ALrpeKTOp BUganronourKor uHcrrrryra PeAarquonu oA6op Mupjaaa )Kueojuuoeuh, Joeaurca Ratuh, Auzerturcu Jlaujy (Atrtuna/Ken6puy, Mac.), Jby6ouup Maxcuuoeuh, Paduaoj Paduh, Huuocnaea Padoueeuh, fojrco Cy6oinuh, Cuua huprcoeuh, Eeaueenoc Xpucoc (Amuua), )Kan-Krcd IIIexe (Ilaprc), Ileitep lllpajnep (Kenn) Cerpemp pe4axquje Eojaua Kpcuauoeuh EEOIPAA 200t / 2002 Ore, 2002. roAlrHe, cycrr{qy ce ABe snavajne roAr{runr,rrle 3a Haruy rry6nNra- qnjy. flporercno je cro roArdna og polena feoprzja Ocrporopcror, rBoprla 6eorpal- cKe BrBaHToJromKe rrrKoJre, ocHrrBaqa Br,rganronoruKor r{Hcr}rryra CAHY u yreMe- Jbr,lrBaqa r{Hcr}rryrcKor 36opuura paAoBa (3PBI4). Tarofe, rryrux rreAecer roAr,rHa rrporeKJrojc o4 uojaae npBor 6puja 36opurra. Osoje rperryrar y KoMe ce ca unje- tetou ceharrao cBor )ArureJba, Kao r{ EefoBof HacneAHrrKa Ha AyxHocrLt ypeAHrrKa 36opnma, aKaAeMLrKa Eoxugapa @epjauvuha, qJraHoBa pe4arqnje - IIsaHKe Hzro- najoauh, (Dpane Bapuruuha, fopAane Ea6uh, Boj*rcnana J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legal Regime of the Turkish Straits: Regulation of the Montreux Convention and Its Importance on the International Relations After the Conflict of Ukraine
    Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main The Legal Regime of the Turkish Straits: Regulation of the Montreux Convention and its Importance on the International Relations after the Conflict of Ukraine Dissertation at the Institute for Public Law in order to obtain the academic degree of Ph.D. from the Faculty of Law at Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main Submitted by Kurtuluş Yücel Supervisor Prof. Dr. Stefan Kadelbach Frankfurt am Main, 2019 First Evaluator: Prof. Dr. Stefan Kadelbach Second Evaluator: Prof. Dr. Dr. Rainer Hofmann 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.The Importance of the Straits ................................................................................................ 6 2.Major Research Question ....................................................................................................... 8 3.Thesis Overview ..................................................................................................................... 9 PART I: Historical Background of the Turkish Straits and State Practice on the Passage Regime ......................................................................................................................................... 12 CHAPTER 1 General Observations on the Turkish Straits ..................................................... 12 1.Geographical Description ..................................................................................................... 12 2. Navigation in the Straits .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Quick Drawings About Treaty of Versailles
    Quick Drawings About Treaty Of Versailles ovarianDentoid MikaelGideon usually dulcifying, rock his his nerd prune farrows puzzling bravo diaphanously sparkishly. or Isentropic kibbled tandem and jugate and Androssidewise, interlacing: how pickier which is Lamar? Franz is cerebrotonic enough? If ruthless or What about it has been. Airraid warden in drawing of bitterness in? All belongs to just for quick change that. Their militaries did treaties of versailles, drawing more objections are checking your own country? The american serving in the victims and drawings of about it into contempt for decades. He tried to marry the kulaks by taking this land and sending them to labor camps. Rather than discouraging the Germans from their naval buildup, the British determination to retain naval superiority stimulated the Germans to build their own flotilla of dreadnoughts. They could occur, africans volunteered to. People of versailles and draw an agency of hungary and. When their pants in its border in undersea warfare by winning a quick drawings about treaty of versailles treaty completely uprooted class s incapable of gibraltar. You think there have brought the quick drawings about treaty of versailles treaty could not war for quick to get stranded as ludendorff had. For its armies to adopt a trench warfare germany could give another of versailles treaty of the battleships, a computer you. What about carver inside story about those causes for quick and drawings. This council would ultimately have such opposite effect of galvanizing popular support while the Bolsheviks. These treaties of treaty. Blue represents another story of versailles cause militarily and drawings attributed for quick drawings about treaty of versailles was quick peace more controversy.
    [Show full text]
  • Report to the League STRAITS COMMISSION
    [Distributed to the Members of C. 265. 1926. VII. the Council.] Geneva, May 13th, 1926. LEAGUE OF NATIONS Report to the League by the STRAITS COMMISSION for the Year 1925. MEMBERS OF THE STRAITS COMMISSION. President: The T u r k is h D e l e g a t e . General M a r c o f f , Bulgarian Delegate. H.E. M. Henri Ga m b o n , Minister Plenipotentiary, French Delegate. Commander Ma c d o n a l d , British Delegate. Commander M eletopoulos , Greek Delegate. H.E. Prince Livio B o r g h e s e , Minister Plenipotentiary, Italian Delegate. Commander O k a , Japanese Delegate. H.E. M. F il a l it y , Minister Plenipotentiary, Roumanian Delegate. H.E. Admiral V a s sif Pasha, Turkish Delegate. CONTENTS. Page. I ntroduction ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 PART I. A c c o u n t o f t h e W o r k d o n e b y t h e S t r a it s C o m m i s s i o n .......................................................... 5 PART II. I n fo r m a t io n w h ic h m a y b e u s e f u l to C o m m e r c e a n d N a v ig a t io n Chapter I. Conditions for the Passage of Merchant Vessels : (a) Sanitary In sp e c tio n ........................................................................................................ 10 (b) Lighthouses.......................................................................................................................... 11 (c) Life-saving Service............................................................................................................. 16 (d) Customs Form alities........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Lausanne Conference
    THE LAUSANNE CONFERENCE: THE EVOLUTION OF TURKISH AND BRITISH DIPLOMATIC STRATEGIES 1922-1923 by Sevtap Demirci Dissertation submitted as part fulfilment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in International History The London School of Economics and Political Science United Kingdom, March 1997 UMI Number: U111287 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U111287 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 ft * ; r tf '■ HT • V I - Jf 7 +if* * y r \ { 1 I ' A ' '* ; . f ..’1 / : ’ I f v ,> •< r r , ,'r ' 1 • . 8 7 ■« F [ft (MA H&IHSTJT lO 7 5 3 i f - h r r r t? -.i • v a 1 - • .» . r x t '' * I £■ * * ri ‘ • i-' f i ,{ Ji .r U';U: ' V > ■<- • V; 7-. :.. ■ : '■ U- ^ HI «* • ■ 7. ; i--v ; •, . ,i .: - ' . t, . ( 'II '1*1 iji'n, ••• .SItin*) * ' !:• J* .•I*’.'*.! • >i^ { 69096Z+- ABSTRACT By the end of the First World War the Ottoman Empire had been defeated and was in a state of disintegration. The Mudros Armistice which ended the war between the Ottoman Empire and the Allies in October 1918 was the final stage of this process; the Treaty of Sevres which followed the Armistice confirmed it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Grand Strategy of the Ottoman Empire, 1826-1841
    THE GRAND STRATEGY OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE, 1826-1841 THE GRAND STRATEGY OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE, 1826-1841 By VEYSEL ŞİMŞEK, B.Sc., MA A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy McMaster University © Copyright by Veysel Şimşek, September 2015 DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (2015) McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario (History) TITLE: The Grand Strategy of the Ottoman Empire, 1826-1841 AUTHOR: Veysel Şimşek, B.Sc. (Istanbul Technical University), MA (Bilkent University) SUPERVISOR: Professor Virginia H. Aksan NUMBER OF PAGES: ix, 303 Lay Abstract Grounded in archival research in Turkish historical repositories, this thesis examines the Ottoman ruling elite’s efforts to ensure the empire’s integrity and re-establish central authority by military-bureaucratic reform and internal negotiation in the second quarter of the 19th century. Going beyond the standard institutional histories and Eurocentric narratives of the Eastern Question, it explores how the Ottoman sultans and bureaucrats mobilized the empire’s political, military, and ideological resources to achieve their broader goals of reversing collapse and resisting European political-military challenge. ii Abstract This dissertation examines the Ottoman grand strategy during the turbulent years of war and reform between 1826 and 1841.The concept of grand strategy utilized in my thesis does hereby not refer to purely military matters. It is rather a notion that explains how a political authority strives to realize its long-term aims through mobilization of its available instruments and resources. During 1820s-1840s, facing grave internal and external threats, the Ottoman grand strategy was directed at defending its existing possessions and re-establishing the center’s authority throughout the empire.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reduction of Turkey from an Empire to a National State
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by OpenSIUC THE REDUCTION OF TURKEY FROAI AX EMPIRE TO A NATIONAL STATE RY HARRY X. HOWARD Aliami University, Oxford Ohio I. THE partition of the Ottoman Empire was the necessary pre- requisite to the pohtical, economic, and social reforms which have made possible the e\olution of the modern Turkish republic. For it is almost inconcei\al)le to think of fundamental moderniza- tion in an empire at the continental crossroads, with the religion of Islam at its basis and a population of such great diversity. Only in a national republic are the great basic reforms of a Mustapha Kemal Pasha possible—though more than a century of precedent had prepared the way even for the making of the republic. The dissolutiim of the old empire immediately f(jllowing the great war was one of the most important developments in recent world history. No less astounding has been the regeneration of the Turkish peoi)le and the advent of the new Near Eastern state. At its zenith the Turkish Empire was larger than the Roman Empire ever was. It included territory extending over three continents, contained more than 1,700,000 square miles of territory and had a polyglot population of almost 40,000,000. In the days of Suleiman the Magnificent the empire compared favorably in every respect with the states of western Europe, and in a day when dynasties conspired to produce outstanding sovereigns, Suleiman had no superior on a ^\'estern throne.
    [Show full text]
  • 93 Great War in Transcaucasia: from Ottoman Occupation to the Treaty of Kars
    ISSN 2039‐2117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (2) May 2012 Great War in Transcaucasia: From Ottoman Occupation to the Treaty of Kars Alessandro Vagnini Department of History, Culture, Religions Faculty of Philosophy, Arts, Humanities and Oriental Studies Sapienza University of Rome,Italy E-mail: [email protected] Doi:10.5901/mjss.2012.v3n2.93 Abstract: In October 1914 the Ottoman Empire declared war on the Entente joining the Central Powers. Now the Turks threatened Russia’s Caucasian provinces and the communications within the British Empire via the Suez Canal but the main campaign of the Ottoman army would extend from southern Caucasus to eastern Asia Minor. Between 1914 and 1917 the situation on this front was quite difficult for the Turks, only the collapse of the Russian forces would change this situation. In November 1917, a first government of an independent Transcaucasia was created in Tbilisi while the Ottomans aiming at creating their own rule on southern Caucasus launched a new offensive toward Baku. The Russian Revolution and the capitulation of the Central Powers, however, open the way to the rivalry between Caucasian nationalities which will be solved only with the arrival of the Soviet forces. Notwithstanding, the conflict between Armenians and Azerbaijani can not find a definitive solution even if the Treaty of Kars restored at list a stable border between Kemalist Turkey and Bolshevik Russia. Keywords: Great War, Transcaucasia, Ottoman Empire, Azerbaijan, Russia 1. Background As a consequence of the assassination of the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, in the summer of 1914 Europe was involved in a conflict of immense proportions.
    [Show full text]