Russia and the Eastern Question

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Bitis
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Eastern Question ◽  
Book Covers ◽  
Russian Military ◽  
The Military ◽  
European Diplomacy

This book covers one of the most important and persistent problems in nineteenth-century European diplomacy, the Eastern Question. The Eastern Question was essentially shorthand for comprehending the international consequences caused by the gradual and apparently terminal decline of the Ottoman Empire in Europe. This volume examines the military and diplomatic policies of Russia as it struggled with the Ottoman Empire for influence in the Balkans and the Caucasus. The book is based on extensive use of Russian archive sources and it makes a contribution to our understanding of issues such as the development of Russian military thought, the origins and conduct of the 1828–1829 Russo-Turkish War, the origins and conduct of the 1826–1828 Russo-Persian War and the Treaty of Adrianople. The book also considers issues such as the Russian army's use of Balkan irregulars, the reform of the Danubian Principalities (1829 –1834), the ideas of the ‘Russian Party’ and Russian public opinion toward the Eastern Question.

V. British Policy in the Balkans, 1908-9

1964 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 258-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. B. Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Asia Minor ◽  
Special Position ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Administrative Reforms ◽  
British Military ◽  
Eastern Question ◽  
Public Reaction

Britain acted as a principal arbitrator of the Eastern Question throughout the nineteenth century. During the 1890's, however, Britain lost this position owing to diplomatic isolation, the hostility of the Sultan of Turkey—who had found a new ally in Germany—and an equal hostility to the Sultan in Britain, where he was regarded as a brutal oriental despot presiding over an empire in the last stages of decay. The immediate cause of Britain's loss of status in Turkey was her failure to provide vigorous support to Sultan Abdul Hamid in the critical period following the Congress of Berlin. Turkey was bankrupt, but the Sultan's appeal for a loan met with no response in Britain; Turkey's European provinces were on the verge of slipping out of the Sultan's control but Britain refused to extend the terms of the Cyprus Convention (which guaranteed the Sultan's dominions in Asia Minor) to cover the more turbulent Balkans. The Convention itself had an alienating effect, since the guarantee was dependent upon the introduction of administrative reforms in Asia Minor under the direction of British military consuls. Britain's insistence on the application of this provision aroused the suspicion that she was actually seeking political control over this area. Turkey's loss of confidence in Britain, however, had deeper roots. ‘Many Muslims believed that Britain had deserted Turkey in the hour of need, that her protection of Islam was disproved by her war with Afghanistan, that her desire for the integrity of the Ottoman Empire was shown to be a pretence by the occupation of Cyprus, and that her power to rule provinces properly was doubtful after her failures in Egypt.’ In fact as early as 1879 Britain had lost the special position which she had held in Turkey for nearly half a century; and thereafter her prestige diminished rapidly, especially after the strong public reaction to the Armenian massacres of 1894-95.

An Examination of Russian Imperialism: Russian Military and Intellectual Descriptions of the Caucasians during the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-21
Author(s):  
Keziban Acar
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
Large Region ◽  
Religious Groups ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
Russian Military

In nineteenth-century Russia, the Caucasus was a large region composed of various territories and ethnic and religious groups. This region included Circassia, Mingrelia, Georgia, a part of Armenia, the ancient Media, Daghestan and the territories of Suanctians, Ossetians, Abkhazians, Karakalpaks and other mountaineer nations. During the nineteenth century, Persia, Russia and the Ottoman Empire wanted to establish their influence and power on the Caucasus. Due to this conflict, these powers, especially Russia with Persia and Russia with the Ottoman Empire, fought with each other.

The Diplomatic Background to the Eastern Question from Its Origins to 1821

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Bitis
Keyword(s):  
Diplomatic History ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Eastern Question ◽  
History Of ◽  
Russian Military ◽  
The Military

This chapter gives an overview of the military and diplomatic history of Russo-Turkish relations from their origins to 1815. It outlines the reasons for Russian military ascendancy over its eastern neighbour. It covers the Eastern question in the Balkans, regarding the Russo-Turkish relations from 1810 to 1821; the relations between Russia, Turkey and Persia to 1813; the origins of the ‘weak neighbour’ policy. Political concerns, primarily the fear of the European powers' potentially hostile reaction to a Russian forward policy had frustrated the aims of the army in 1821. This was a precedent destined to characterize much of Russian policy during the Eastern crisis of the 1820s.

scholarly journals David Urquhart’s perceptions of the eastern question the affairs of Serbia

Balcanica ◽  
2014 ◽  
pp. 203-219
Author(s):  
Jelena Milojkovic-Djuric
Keyword(s):  
Political Discourse ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Eastern Question ◽  
Grand Design

At the beginning of his diplomatic career in Constantinople in 1835, David Urquhart was instrumental in promoting the British cause by endorsing its political grand design and mercantile interests in Turkey, Greece, the Caucasian region, Crimea, Serbia and adjacent Balkan principalities. While observing the complexities of the Eastern Question, Urquhart recognized the underlying importance that Serbia had attained in the context of competing imperial interests in the Balkans. His engaged commentaries on the crucial changes in Serbian political discourse elucidated as well his understanding of Serbian history and culture past and present. Urquhart discerned a correspondence between Serbian political affairs and the inherent situa?tion in the region of the Caucasus and Circassia.

Serfs, slaves, or wage earners? The legal status of labour in Russia from a comparative perspective, from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century

2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Stanziani
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Extreme Case ◽  
The West ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
Territorial Expansion ◽  
Forced Labour ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Wage Earners

AbstractComparative analyses of labour in Russia and the West often assume a dividing line between free and forced labour that is universally applicable. The first aim of this article is to show that, in Russia, the historical and institutional definition of serfdom poses a problem. I will therefore explore Russian legislation, and how it was applied, from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century. Contrary to generally accepted arguments, serfdom as such was never clearly introduced institutionally in Russia. I will also discuss the presence of slaves in Russia, and the association between certain forms of servitude (especially for debt) and slavery. The presence of chattel slaves in the empire was related to territorial expansion, and to commercial relations with the Caucasus and the Ottoman Empire. Russian forms of bondage are compared to those in other situations, such as indentured service in the West, debt servitude in India, and Islamic slavery. My conclusion is that, not only in Russia but also around the globe, the prevailing forms of labour were not those familiar to us today, which were not introduced until the early twentieth century. Russia constituted an extreme case in a world in which severe constraints were imposed everywhere on labour and its movement, and the legal status of the wage earner and the peasant was lower than that of the master.

Sultan Abdülhamid II and Palestine: Private Lands and Imperial Policy

2008 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 129-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy S. Fischel ◽  
Ruth Kark
Keyword(s):  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
Rural Settlements ◽  
Private Lands ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Economic Profit ◽  
New Towns ◽  
External Threats ◽  
Modern Methods ◽  
Unique Measure

AbstractThis paper surveys the private lands owned by of Sultan Abdülhamid II in Palestine and analyzes their spatial distribution and impact, in the context of regional imperial policy. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the Ottoman Empire faced serious external and internal problems. Sultan Abdülhamid II (r. 1876-1909) used various traditional and modern methods in order to increase the internal cohesion of the empire and strengthen it vis-à-vis external threats.One unique measure taken by the sultan was the purchase of large tracts of land. He became one of the largest landowners in the empire. In Palestine alone, the sultan purchased around 3% of the total area and initiated measures to increase these lands' productivity for his Privy Purse. In addition to gaining economic profit, Abdülhamid II employed his private lands to solve problems which challenged the sovereignty of the empire. These included attempts to settle the Bedouins, the establishment of new towns in order to subjugate nomads in regions where they threatened rural settlements, settling Muslim refugees from the Caucasus and the Balkans, and protecting strategically sensitive lands located on the frontiers, by purchasing them and thus keeping them out of the hands of others.

scholarly journals Conversion of the population of Gora and Opolje to Islam, according to the ottoman cadastral registers

2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-82
Author(s):  
Tatjana Katic
Keyword(s):  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
The Other ◽  
16Th Century ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
High Ranking ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Conversion To Islam ◽  
The One ◽  
The Military

The Islamisation of the population of two neighbouring regions south of Prizren, Gora and Opolje, occurred in varying degrees during the centuries-long rule of the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans. In Gora, inhabited by the Slavic population, it was extremely slow, while in Opolje, inhabited by the Albanians, it was incomparably more intensive. This paper aims to elucidate, based on the analysis of the Ottoman 15th and 16th century cadastral registers, the factors that affected the rate of conversion to Islam among the inhabitants of these two former Serbian medieval counties (zupas), later Ottoman nahiyes. Among the most important are the highly developed church organisation in the region of Gora on the one hand, and on the other hand, the proximity of Prizren, the military and administrative centre of the Prizren Sanjak in which high ranking officials of Opolje origin operated.

Turkish northern Caucasus foreign policy impact Russian national security

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruslan Shangaraev ◽  
Aidamir Valiev
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
The United States ◽  
Northern Caucasus ◽  
North Caucasus ◽  
South Caucasus ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
The North

Turkey offers itself to be a regional leader for the Middle East, North Africa, partly for the Balkans and the Caucasus, while pursuing its own interests, not least economic ones. Turkey's foreign policy activation, and not only in the South, but also in the North Caucasus, is probably intended to create an additional platform for foreign policy bargaining with Moscow on issues of interest to Ankara. When analyzing the foreign policy of Turkey during the rule of the ruling Justice and Development Party, of course, you need to pay special attention to the foreign policy concept of neo-Ottomanism, the architect of which is Ahmet Davutoglu. The developed new approach "strategic depth" means that for Turkish diplomacy, Turkey's deep historical and cultural roots in the Balkans, the Middle East, the Greater Caucasus and Central Asia (former territories of the Ottoman Empire) are more important than the existing state borders. The pragmatism of Ankara's foreign policy is also manifested in a sober assessment of the popularity in the Caucasus of such ideas as Great Turan (a pan-Turkic project of a single state for all ethnic Turks) and neo-Ottomanism. For Caucasians, the times of the rule of the Ottoman Empire are the golden age of prosperity. Turanism is more aimed at awakening "kindred feelings" based on the common Turkic heritage. "They are implementing practical humanitarian projects, identifying leaders of public opinion who are ready to cooperate. Ankara is pursuing a policy of small steps in order to change the social and cultural image of the region in the long term. In general, Turkish leader is confident that due to historical reasons and the realities of modern politics The Caucasus is a zone of direct strategic interests of Turkey. Ankara, relying on the support of the United States and NATO, takes an active part in most regional political and economic projects, actively intervenes in the affairs of the Middle East, South Caucasus, Central Asian and North African regions, tries to strengthen its role beyond their borders, which often overlaps with the national interests of Russia.

“Bulgarian Horrors” Revisited: the Many-Layered Manifestations of the Orientalist Discourse in Victorian Political Construction of the External, Intimate and Internal Other

Belleten ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 81 (291) ◽  
pp. 525-568
Author(s):  
Nazan Çi̇çek
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
Salient Feature ◽  
Cognitive Map ◽  
The Political ◽  
Parliamentary Debates ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Eastern Question ◽  
The Times ◽  
The Many

This study largely drawing upon the established conceptual framework of Orientalism in Saidian terms shall analyse the British perceptions and representations of the Bulgarian Crisis of 1876, a salient feature of the Eastern Question, as they appeared in British parliamentary debates. It will also make occasional yet instructive references to the coverage of the Crisis as well as the image of the Ottoman Empire and the Balkans which were organic parts of the Crisis, in some influential periodicals of the era such as the Times and the Contemporary Review in order to better contextualize the debates in the parliament. The main point this article shall make is that the Bulgarian Crisis worked as a catalyst in reinforcing the hegemony of the Orientalist discourse in the political construction of the Ottoman Empire as an absolute external Other in Britain at the time. It shall also delve into the construction of the Balkans as an "intimate other" whose Oriental and European features were alternately accentuated during the Crisis with a view to enlist the British public in either supporting or denouncing the Bulgarian uprising. All in all, it will suggest that the Orientalist rhetoric was embedded at the very core of the Victorian British elites' cognitive map, and was also unsparingly employed in negating the domestic political opponents swamping them with negative Orientalist stereotypes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document