Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros5ControverseOttoman studies in Greece: a refl...

Controverse

Ottoman studies in Greece: a reflective gaze

Les études ottomanes en Grèce : un regard réflexif
Marinos Sariyannis, Eleni Gara et Phokion Kotzageorgis

Résumés

Les études ottomanes grecques, longtemps victimes d’un certain nationalisme et de l'écrasante domination des études néo-helléniques, sont désormais suffisamment solides pour nous permettre un effort de réflexivité. Trois ottomanistes formés dans les années 1990 et ayant suivi des spécialisations différentes en histoire économique, sociale et culturelle, Eleni Gara, Phokion Kotzageorgis et Marinos Sariyannis, offrent leurs réponses à quelques questions sur l'état de la recherche et ses perspectives : les ottomanistes grecs ont‑ils développé une école particulière et distincte, ou ont‑ils simplement suivi le rythme de l'historiographie ? Qu'ont‑ils apporté au domaine des études ottomanes qui puisse être qualifié de contribution particulière et, d'autre part, quelles perspectives offrent‑ils à l'histoire grecque ? Quelle pourrait bien être la vision des ottomanistes grecs pour l'avenir ?

Haut de page

Texte intégral

  • 1 Collective work, Ιστορία του ελληνικού έθνους [History of the Greek nation], 15 vols, Athens, Ekdo (...)

1Ottoman history in Greece, once a promising sibling of Greek studies, has now fully grown into a robust field in its own right. Compared to the other successor states of the Ottoman Empire, Greece was the last country to develop the study of this aspect of its past, at least among its Balkan neighbours. University education, let alone research, was heavily centred around the “history of the Greek nation” (to quote a famous multi-volume history that formed the canon of “official history” in the 1970s).1 Whereas Ancient and Byzantine, as well as modern history were mostly studied from the point of view of the strictest histoire événementielle possible, the Ottoman period, termed Tourkokratia, or “Turkish rule”, was generally seen as a period of static or declining institutions (the timar system, the janissary levy), within which the only events worth studying were the efforts of the nation to rebel against this yoke. Furthermore, the plethora of Greek sources originating from that period, together with the consensus (among Ottomanists as well) that the non‑Muslim populations lived within separate institutional frameworks and with minimal contact with the Ottoman authorities and the Muslim inhabitants, created the impression that nothing much would be lost if one ignored the history of the Ottoman state or of the Muslim societies.

2The grim image of the Tourkokratia of course had its nuances, but it was not until the 1970s and the fall of the right‑wing, nationalist military junta that a group of scholars, mostly educated in Paris, started seeing the Ottoman past as a field of economic, social and cultural forces with their own dynamics. The institutional changes in the Greek universities in the early 1980s, that abolished the domination of the professorial chair, allowed this new current to impact education and create its own disciples and continuators. Even though their contact with Ottoman Turkish sources was second-hand, through translations and secondary bibliography, many Greek historians (Spyros Asdrachas, Vassilis Panagiotopoulos and others, following on from Nikos Svoronos) realized the importance of an integrative perspective that would build bridges with the burgeoning field of Ottoman Studies. In the same context, and accompanying the anti-nationalist strand dominating certain segments of Greek society in these decades, a handful of Ottomanists also started to take a firm grip and to impose the notion that in order to better understand the dynamics of the centuries that preceded the creation of the Greek nation-state the study of the Ottoman archives was required.

  • 2 There are by now quite a lot of metahistorical articles on the development of Ottoman studies in G (...)

3This is mostly due to the pioneering work done by the few scholars struggling to open the way in the 1980s and 1990s, namely Evangelia Balta, Vassilis Demetriades, Pavlos Hidiroglou, Paraskevas Konortas and, more significantly for the subsequent development of the field in Greece, John C. Alexander (Alexandropoulos) and the late Elizabeth A. Zachariadou. The change in the intellectual climate and the shift of Greek academia away from nationalist historiography inspired several students to pursue the difficult field of Ottoman studies, thus creating a critical mass of scholars who were ready to people universities and research centres throughout Greece, when specialized posts were being created, in the early 2000s at a time of economic growth; these scholars, in their turn, created or consolidated a set of institutions that allowed Ottoman studies to take root and to expand. In this context, we should not underestimate the fact that quite a lot of Greek Ottomanists have received their training abroad, bringing home different traditions and schools of Ottomanist scholarship. Building upon these solid foundations, the younger generations of Greek Ottomanists contributed their own research interests, methodological insights and educational projects to form what may perhaps be called a particular school in the international landscape of Ottoman studies. From Corfu (Sophia Laiou) to Athens (Evangelia Balta, Antonis Hadjikyriakou, Paraskevas Konortas, Emilia Themopoulou), from Thessaloniki (Phokion Kotzageorgis, Demetris Papastamatiou) to Crete (Antonis Anastasopoulos, Elias Kolovos, Marinos Sariyannis, Yannis Spyropoulos, and also from a more Byzantinist point of view Kostas Moustakas), from Volos (Mohammad Shariat-Panahi) to Mytilene (Eleni Gara) and from Kozani (Costas Kampouridis) to Komotini (Georgios Salakides), not to count promising scholars with no permanent position yet, they carry out research in diverse directions, from economic history of the Greek lands to history of literature or gender history. To these names we should add several Greek Ottomanists who pursued a university career abroad (for instance Meropi Anastassiadou, Yorgos Dedes, Dimitris Kastritsis or Evgenia Kermeli). In addition, Greek Ottomanists are remarkably extrovert, participating in international conferences and collaborative research projects in a regular basis.2

  • 3 Faroqhi 2009, p. 46: “In emphasizing social history Greek researchers working on Ottoman archival (...)

4Entering the 2020s, one may say that the state‑of‑the‑art is mature enough to allow us an effort for reflexivity. Have Greek Ottomanists developed a particular and distinct school, or, as Suraiya Faroqhi argues, they have simply followed the pace of “the trends of historical research current in other parts of the world”?3 What have they brought to the field of Ottoman studies that can be termed a particular contribution, and, on the other hand, what insights have they offered for Greek history? And what could be a vision for the Greek Ottomanists for the future? We asked three Ottomanists of this generation, who trained in the 1990s and have followed different paths of specialization in economic, social and cultural history, to give their views on the questions above: Eleni Gara (University of the Aegean), Phokion Kotzageorgis (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki) and Marinos Sariyannis (Institute for Mediterranean Studies/FORTH).
 

5– What have Greek Ottoman studies brought to the field of Ottoman history so far? Do their topics, theoretical presuppositions and methods come with specific characteristics? In other words, can we talk of a “Greek school” in writing Ottoman history?

  • 4 This distinction (“document-oriented” versus “problem-oriented” studies) comes from Suraiya Faroqh (...)
  • 5 See e.g. the studies collected in Kolovos (ed.) 2015, as well as Evangelia Balta’s studies: Balta (...)
  • 6 See e.g. Alexander 1985b; Anastasopoulos 2002; Anastasopoulos 2005; Anastasopoulos 2021; Gara 2005 (...)
  • 7 The pioneer of such studies was of course John C. Alexander (Alexandropoulos), with his group of d (...)
  • 8 Anastasopoulos 2006; Laiou 2014; Laiou 2017.
  • 9 Kolovos 2007; Kolovos 2017; Kotzageorgis 2008b; Kotzageorgis 2019; Kotzageorgis 2021b; Laiou 2002.
  • 10 Gara 2007.

6Marinos Sariyannis: Greek Ottomanists have usually pursued a “document-oriented” style of research,4 which is not at all surprising since they have had to exploit a significant volume of primary sources (public archives in various Greek cities, private archives of monasteries and prominent families) that were previously unavailable or rather illegible for the history of the Greek lands. The selection of their topics was largely due to the restrictions posed by this corpus: thus, their studies have focused mainly on rural societies5—but also Salonica, as well as a number of smaller cities whose judicial archives have been preserved),6 monasteries,7 and, more recently, merchants’ activities.8 Thus, Greek studies mostly belong to the fields of social, demographic and economic history, with much less attention paid to the history of ideas or culture. The same source restrictions have also led to a predominantly “hard data” approach: tax registers, judicial documents, and of course Evliya Çelebi’s travelogue have been exploited as thoroughly as possible, always with a solid critical eye, leaving less space for theory and speculation—although there are some notable theorizations concerning, for instance, Ottoman insularities or small cities.9 One has to note that almost every single contribution (with some few but remarkable exceptions)10 deals with the Greek lands and their Christian populations. This “restriction” (reinforced by the fact that sometimes Ottomanists occupy posts of “Balkan studies” or “Early modern Greek history” in Greek universities) is at the same time the core of the Greek contribution to international Ottoman studies: these detailed and insightful descriptions of rural, urban and monastic life in a significant part of the Ottoman Empire, often written in English or French and presented or published in international venues and journals, offer an indispensable overview that complements an important lacuna in the jigsaw puzzle of Ottoman realities and leads to useful and fascinating comparisons.

  • 11 Some studies on (rare) cases documented by both Greek and Ottoman sources: Gara forthcoming b; Gar (...)
  • 12 See e.g. several works by Konstantinos Moustakas (Moustakas 2015; Moustakas 2019) and others.

7On the one hand, all the above (except, perhaps, from the emphasis on monasteries) do not constitute a particularly Greek school of thought or approach. What may be called the main characteristic (and also advantage) of Greek Ottomanists, on the other hand, is their use of a multilingual corpus of sources—and, inevitably, one of a variety of sorts too: because these Christian, mostly Greek-speaking populations produced their own literary and archival texts, scholars were able to have access to a most singular combination of documentation. This combination is almost unique for the core area of the Empire (Slavic lands have less Serbian or Bulgarian sources to offer), i.e. if we exclude the Arabic-speaking areas; the ability of Greek Ottomanists to move freely and in an erudite way between two languages constitutes, up to a certain degree, the main unifying factor that may be said to form a “Greek school”.11 One could see this feature as an attempt to write Ottoman history “from below”, albeit with the voices of the Greek-speaking Ottoman subjects. By the same token, the robust development of Byzantine studies in Greek universities combined with the mastery of medieval Greek sources has contributed to Greek Ottomanists being the par excellence students of the transition from Byzantine to Ottoman era, following the tradition of the late Elizabeth Zachariadou.12 Something similar can be said on a more theoretical but also methodological level: the majority of Greek Neohellenists, who had been studying the Greek lands under Ottoman rule for some decades before the emergence of the younger generations of Ottomanists, were and are strongly influenced by the Annales school. Greek Ottomanists, studying the same or similar topics, have been conversing with their work and thus the Annales influence can be seen in their studies as well, to a degree perhaps much more significant than their colleagues from Turkey, the USA and Central or Western Europe (although we have to note here that Ottomanists of the former socialist countries of the Balkans, and particularly Bulgaria, had long been using such methods as well).

  • 13 Sariyannis 2019a; Sariyannis 2021. See also Kotzageorgis 1997; Salakidis 2018; Sigalas 2007; Sigal (...)

8Eleni Gara: The production of Greek Ottomanists is quite varied, therefore I would not talk of a Greek school stricto sensu. On the other hand, there are common traits and themes, as well as the shared concern to better understand the history of what we may call the “Greek provinces” under Ottoman rule. Greek scholarship is distinguished by the conscious effort to combine Ottoman, Greek and other non-Ottoman sources, and not to rely only on Ottoman material as is usually the case in the field. This trait originates with our academic background. Almost all of us were trained as historians before specializing in Ottoman studies and are acutely aware of the importance of taking into consideration as much available material as possible. We took the laborious path of pursuing a second training as Ottomanists so as to remedy a shortcoming in Greek historiography, not to repeat the mistakes for which Ottomanist historiography has often been rightly criticized. That is also why we treat the high-quality work of older generations of Greek historians of the Tourkokratia with respect even though we are very critical toward the national history paradigm. On the other hand, again because of our academic background, most of us are inadequately equipped to deal with subjects that require the in‑depth study of works of literature or philosophy. We rarely venture into cultural history in any systematic way. Marinos Sariyannis is the only one among us who has consistently explored the field of the history of ideas.13

  • 14 See above, n. 5–9.

9Greek scholarship contributes to Ottoman Studies in two ways: by broadening the thematic scope of research and by helping shift the perspective from the “Muslim” (Anatolia and the Middle East) to the “Christian” (Rumelia and the Islands) part of the empire. Greek Ottomanists have introduced subjects that have a long tradition in Greek historiography but had been until recently neglected in the field; the functioning of urban and rural communities, the political and socio-economical role of Christian notables, the island societies, the Church and the monasteries are the most notable examples.14 By focusing on the nature, the modes and the intricacies of Ottoman rule in the Greek mainland, the Morea and the Islands, Greek scholarship has contributed to a reappraisal of the imperial condition. In Ottoman Studies, there is a tacit long-standing equation of Ottoman with Turkish and of the Ottoman Empire with Anatolia and the Middle East; the European provinces are implicitly treated as not Ottoman enough. Greek Ottomanists, like their other Balkan colleagues, have consistently argued that the Rumelian experience is integral to understanding the Ottoman Empire.

  • 15 Alexander 1985a; Demetriades 1973; Demetriades 1997; Demetriades 2003; Balta 1989; Balta 2009; Kam (...)
  • 16 Papastamatiou 2017; Sariyannis 2019a.

10Phokion Kotzageorgis: Until recently, Greek Ottomanists have not conducted any projects that engage with the broad topics of Ottoman history. Their main focus concerned the history of the Greek lands during the Ottoman period. The difference from other “Ottomanist schools” of successor states is that, because it took a while to come to scientific maturity and/or productivity, the Greek one bypassed the “national phase” of the other “Ottomanist schools” which involved a negative attitude towards the Ottoman past. In addition, the “mature phase” of Greek Ottomanology in the 1990s went hand in hand with the shift in Greek society's attitude as it de‑incriminated its Ottoman past and, on the other hand, with the dizzying development of Ottoman Studies internationally. Greek Ottomanists used the research tools that had already been established in the international Ottomanist community. They used mainly two groups of archival material: the Ottoman Başbakanlık archive and the archival collections within Greece (mainly monasteries and Ottoman court records housed in the State Archives, but also private collections). They contributed to the publication of Ottoman sources in Greek (and occasionally in English or German),15 while their international imprint was given mainly through scholarly articles on specific topics and not through syntheses, with two exceptions: on Ottoman political thought and on wealth distribution in eighteenth-century Salonica.16 Having mostly studied in History Departments, Greek Ottomanists worked within the historiographical framework of the Annales school, which was dominant in international Ottoman studies toward the end of the 20th century. Their methodology was limited, on the one hand by the above historiographical framework and on the other, by the kind of Ottoman sources they studied (e.g. tax registers, court registers, imperial decrees, documents of economic nature, etc.). Therefore, the social and economic history from a centralistic point of view formed the main framework for Greek Ottomanists’ studies.

  • 17 Most notably Konortas 1998.

11After the above-mentioned, I think that there is no special “Greek school” of Ottoman studies. Its particularity lies in that the mass emergence of the new generation of Greek Ottomanists in 1990 did not have, nor did it inherit, the nationalist entanglements of other “national schools” of Ottomanology and thus it opened up more easily to stimuli and challenges and became fully integrated into international Ottomanology with which, to this day, it converses on equal terms. A contribution of Greek Ottomanists to the international scientific community of Ottoman studies mainly concerns the better knowledge of Ottoman provinces in the Greek lands and some Ottoman institutions that were a place of action for Ottoman Christians (e.g. the Orthodox Church, the Phanariotes).17
 

12– Conversely, what do you think Greek Ottoman studies have contributed to the study of Greek history? What new angles, new insights or new aspects of society, economy and culture have they offered?

  • 18 The proceedings of the conference on Greek identities, which took place in 19–21 January 2017, hav (...)

13Marinos Sariyannis: The obvious contribution is that students of Greek history now not only have a much larger corpus of sources to draw upon, but they also feel the need to incorporate them in their research. Research projects directed by experts on early modern Greek history now consider assistance from an Ottomanist indispensable, in order to secure knowledge of Ottoman sources; conferences on the Greek populations under Ottoman rule and beyond have begun to include Ottomanists as a rule (one may cite recent events on national identities or on the Greek War of Independence).18 Presumably by now we all are fully conscious of the fact that one has to look at recent Ottomanist literature to describe the socio-economical context of the life of Greek communities in the Balkans and Anatolia; still, the Muslim (not to mention Jewish) communities living side by side with them are perhaps less visible. A less obvious result of the development of Greek Ottoman studies is that by now we have a more dynamic image of the Ottoman institutional and political context for the transformations of the Greek communities. The picture of a dynamic Greek nation that breaks through the decline of the timariot system has given its place to an understanding of an equally dynamic institutional and social framework, where vakf foundations have their parallel in Christian monasteries and the maktu tax system is mutually beneficial for the community self-governance and the Ottoman fiscal policy.

14In general, I like to compare Ottoman studies to a pendulum: as a reaction to the prominent nationalism of pre‑1980s Greek historiography (including some Ottomanists like Pavlos Hidiroglou up to the early 1990s), which was resurrected in the mid‑1990s (the formative period of most Ottomanists of the younger generation) due to the so‑called “Macedonian question”, and maybe under the influence of the strong statist point of view from the patriarch of Ottoman history, Halil İnalcık, studies that appeared after the late 1990s may have overstressed the benevolent and tolerant side of Ottoman rule, as well as the friendly coexistence of religious communities before the rise of nationalisms. At least this is how these studies were perceived by journalists or amateur historians in the domain of public history, closely interconnected as it is with school education (the content of school books, especially concerning early modern and modern Greek history, being always a highly debated public issue). In recent years, it seems that public history is shifting once again to the nationalist extreme; academic history, on the other hand, is currently maintaining a balance of dissolving myths of the past without glorifying Ottoman state policies.

  • 19 Gara, Tzedopoulos 2015.

15Eleni Gara: For most of the 20th century, the study of Greek history was pursued with only minimal reference to the Ottoman state and limited understanding of its workings. The research of Greek Ottomanists has opened up new paths, not merely through the exploration of new sources but also through the introduction of new perspectives, which have enabled a better understanding of the collapse of the Eastern Roman world in the late Middle Ages and the emergence of a new political and social order. The most important new insight is that the early modern Greek Orthodox societies and institutions, as of course all aspects of everyday life, were profoundly shaped by Ottoman realities (methods of rule, ideology, interreligious relations, material culture, etc.) and cannot be properly understood unless they are analysed within their Ottoman context. Recent research has also brought to the fore the variety and depth of interaction between members of different religious communities, especially between Christians and Muslims, which changes long‑standing perceptions about the formation of social and economic, sometimes also of cultural life.19 These new insights and their ramifications, however, are not always easy to get through to non-Ottomanist historians, not to mention to the general public that is outright hostile to interpretations that do not conform to the national history narrative.

  • 20 Sariyannis 2020b.
  • 21 Moiras 2020; Kolovos, Ilıcak, Shariat-Panahi 2021; Papastamatiou, Kotzageorgis 2021; Laiou, Sariya (...)

16Phokion Kotzageorgis: Greek Οttoman studies essentially renewed the study of Greek history, as it was in a research quagmire in the 1990s. Either with its traditional approach or within the paradigm of the Annales school (based on the pioneering work of Spyros Asdrachas), the history of the Greek people under Ottoman domination had utilized, on a factual level, much of the extant Greek and Western European sources of the period. Thus, the “arrival” of the Ottomanists worked in a complementary way, that was also refreshing. First and foremost, Ottoman studies integrated the history of the Greeks into the wider historical context. Until then, the research of Greek history had created the impression that the Greeks lived on islets of everyday life, cut off from the Ottoman state framework and/or social environment and in the absence of the state apparatus. With the inclusion of their study in the wider historical context, on the one hand, the idea of the Greeks as a kind of “God’s chosen people” was put aside and on the other hand, the Greek, as a people, were studied in the realities they actually experienced, in which Muslims and Ottoman authorities were omnipresent, even in the remote and secluded Greek islands. Some of the research contributions offered by Ottoman studies to the study of Greek history include political and economic behaviour, conditions of coexistence with other peoples and the dissemination in the Greek scientific community of how Ottoman institutions functioned. Consequently, basic themes for the Greek history of the period, such as the revolutionary movements and the Greek Revolution itself, the so‑called “institutions of Hellenism” (Church, communities, Christian armed forces, Phanariotes), trade and taxation, or the demographic composition of the Greek lands not only benefited from the rich new documentary evidential material of the Ottoman sources, but the field was renewed with new research approaches and views. Recently, in the field of culture, an attempt has been made by Marinos Sariyannis to comparatively approach the two “Enlightenments”, the “Greek” and the “Ottoman” and to draw conclusions for both, opening new research fields for Ottoman studies.20 Last year, on the occasion of the celebration of 200 years from the Greek War of Independence, Greek Ottomanists became actively involved in the whole project. As of now, five books have appeared, based on Ottoman material, thus broadening the perspective of the academic community about the Revolution of 1821 and presenting the point of view of the Ottoman centre.21
 

17– How do you see the prospects for the future of the field? Do you see any particular directions in which Greek Ottomanists might or should expand?

  • 22 Anastasopoulos 2008b; Anastasopoulos 2013; Spyropoulos 2019.
  • 23 Salakidis 2019; Gara forthcoming a.
  • 24 For an exception see Spyropoulos 2010.
  • 25 On the post-Tanzimat period, see e.g. Themopoulou 2005; Themopoulou 2012; Evangelia Balta’s studie (...)
  • 26 Vryonis Jr 1971.

18Marinos Sariyannis: While actively engaging in a fertile dialogue with both their peers abroad and their Neohellenist colleagues in Greece, Greek Ottomanists remain predominantly focused on the study of the Christian, Greek-speaking populations of the Balkan peninsula (and first and foremost the lands constituting modern‑day Greece). This is only natural and it is not likely to change in the future; it is almost a duty for scholars who move with agility between two different sets of rich sources to exploit this advantage, to which they are rightly entitled. Of course, one would welcome a broadening of Greek Ottomanists’ studies toward more “general” issues: and indeed, we can already cite papers and books on problems such as the relation between centre and periphery in the Ottoman Empire,22 works of Ottoman literature produced in other parts of the Empire,23 or issues of intellectual history. What is perhaps more important and urgent (one cannot accuse these scholars of ignoring non‑Greek subjects, especially since most of them teach courses of Ottoman history in universities) is that the focus of these studies of the “Greek lands” becomes enlarged. For one thing, with the exception of some pioneering studies on Greek-speaking Muslims, non‑Christian and non‑Greek-speaking populations are still largely neglected.24 It is imperative, in my view, to include these people in our surveys of economy, society and culture of Ottoman Greece. Conversely, very few studies have been made of the Greek Orthodox populations of Istanbul and Anatolia, especially for the pre‑Tanzimat period.25 This is a very promising field, given the richness of Ottoman sources and the given familiarity of Greek Ottomanists with Greek (including Byzantine) material: very few things have been written on this subject after Vryonis’ 1971 book—which, furthermore, does not go beyond the fifteenth century.26

19A second direction that could offer significant new horizons of analysis is the enlargement of the epistemological field. Most studies so far concern demographic, economic and social history. Cultural history constitutes a major lacuna: in all its aspects (intellectual history or, as it was traditionally called, history of the ideas, history of mentalities/representations, conceptual history), this field has been almost monopolized by Neohellenists, and a dialogue with their studies would really be of major importance for our understanding of Greek society under Ottoman rule. Ottomanists could also engage in a conversation with other disciplines: social or political anthropology (as well as other fields, such as sociology of religion) offer a multitude of tools and methods that help us understand world images, behaviour patterns (“scripts”), moral systems and so forth. Moreover, whereas there are studies focusing on Ottoman monuments and their fates or Ottoman inscriptions and tombstones, there is still much to be desired from an active collaboration with ethnoarchaeology and historical archaeology.

20Eleni Gara: Greek Ottomanist scholarship must expand to new fields, engage more with cultural history and the history of ideas and study Muslim societies as well. It would also be great to see new research on Jews and Armenians, although this requires language skills that are not easily acquired. I must confess, however, that I am not very optimistic about future prospects. There are so few of us. Expansion into new thematic areas would require recruiting, training and subsequently employing young researchers, which is especially difficult under the circumstances.

21In addition, it is imperative that our work remains relevant to the Greek public if we want to be heard and make a difference. This is especially challenging because, as I have found repeatedly, people outside academia do not understand historians’ eagerness to pursue new paths of research. Most of the public perceives the unearthing of a new source or of a new fact about their hometown, for example, or about an event of local or national history as more important and necessary than the exploration of new subjects. We should neither forget nor ignore this reality, however inconvenient it might be. We cannot afford to abandon the publication of Ottoman sources or of books on subjects of “Greek interest”, even if such work appears parochial or old‑fashioned from the point of view of international academia. I personally feel morally obligated to share my work between pieces written for an international audience and others written with a Greek audience in mind.

  • 27 Sariyannis 2019a.

22Phokion Kotzageorgis: Greek Ottomanology first of all needs to produce syntheses on a subject, in order to leave a research imprint in the international arena. This will divert it from “source-oriented” studies to “theme-oriented” ones. In addition, it needs to deal with issues and explore sources that so far have received little attention or not been studied at all. Narrative Ottoman sources are one such area, which will open research perspectives for the study of Ottoman intellectual history. A first attempt in this direction was made with the research on Ottoman political thought.27 Another direction concerns the long 19th century and the late Ottoman period in general. This is a particularly promising field internationally, as illustrated by publications in the first two decades of the 21st century, almost none of which were authored by Greek Ottomanists. The latter have much to contribute in this area through the comparative use of the rich Greek sources of the period to re‑approach and re‑interpret issues of both Ottoman and Greek history. In the same vein, a more extensive and thorough use of the equally rich Greek sources for the long 18th century can be made in tandem with the new Ottoman sources that are constantly being discovered, in order to approach issues of Ottoman culture. Here, the society of Istanbul could be a very promising field for Greek Ottomanists, not to mention the original research potential of the study of communities and guilds, integrating them into the broader Ottoman context. Research into the Greeks of Anatolia is a field in which Greek Ottomanists can shake off any “Greek-loving” interpretative commitments for a more realistic approach to the history of these peoples during the Ottoman era. In all of the above, the use of Greek sources along with Ottoman sources is a privileged tool for Greek Ottomanists internationally.

  • 28 Kolovos, Vionis 2019; Vionis 2012. See also the significant literature on Ottoman inscriptions (Li (...)
  • 29 Hadjikyriacou, Kolovos 2015; Kolovos, Kotzageorgis 2015; Kolovos, Kotzageorgis 2019.
  • 30 Sariyannis 2020a; Sariyannis 2019b.

23Opening up to interdisciplinary approaches and collaborations is a challenge for all Ottomanists. For the Greeks in particular, the field of Ottoman archaeology and architecture is a challenge that is relatively easy to adopt due to the development of similar studies in Greece in recent years and the good number of surviving Ottoman buildings in the country.28 Digital humanities and environmental history have already piqued the interest of Greek Ottomanists and can yield research outcomes.29 Finally, the disengagement of Greek Ottomanists from issues of Greek interest to purely Ottoman ones is a desideratum for Ottomanists of all successor states and therefore for Greeks as well. The first steps have already been taken with the study of the supernatural in the Ottoman Empire by a Greek Ottomanist.30 I look forward to other such projects as well.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Alexander 1982
John Alexander, “The Monasteries of the Meteora during the First Two Centuries of Ottoman Rule”, Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 32.2, 1982, pp. 95–103.

Alexander 1985a
John C. Alexander, Toward a History of Post-Byzantine Greece: The Ottoman Kanunnames for the Greek Lands, circa 1500circa 1600, Athens, privately published, 1985.

Alexander 1985b
John Alexander, “Law of the Conqueror (the Ottoman State) and Law of the Conquered (the Orthodox Church): The Case of Marriage and Divorce”, in XVI congrès international des sciences historiques : Rapports, vol. 1, Stuttgart, s.n., 1985, pp. 369–370.

Alexander 1997
John Alexander, “The Lord Giveth and the Lord Taketh Away: Athos and the Confiscation Affair of 1568–1569”, in Mount Athos in the 14th16th Centuries, Athens, Institute for Byzantine Research, Athonika Symmeikta 4, 1997, pp. 149–199.

Alexander 2005–2006
John Alexander, “Conquest and Assimilation: Urban and Rural Real Estate in the Town of Tripolitsa, 1698–1716”, Archivum Ottomanicum 23 [Mélanges en l’honneur d’Elizabeth A. Zachariadou], 2005–2006, pp. 29–46.

Alper Arısoy et al. 2020
İbrahim Alper Arısoy et al., “Yunanistan’da Osmanlı tarihi literatürü üzerine bir değerlendirme”, Ankara Anadolu ve Rumeli Araştırmaları Dergisi 1, 2020, pp. 5–55.

Anastasopoulos 2002
Antonis Anastasopoulos, “Lighting the Flame of Disorder: Ayan Infighting and State Intervention in Ottoman Karaferye, 1758–1759”, International Journal of Turkish Studies 8, 2002, pp. 73–88.

Anastasopoulos 2005
Antonis Anastasopoulos, “The Mixed Elite of a Balkan Town: Karaferye in the Second Half of the Eighteenth Century”, in Antonis Anastasopoulos (ed.), Provincial Elites in the Ottoman Empire. Halcyon Days in Crete V: A Symposium Held in Rethymno, 1012 January 2003, Rethymno, Crete UP 2005, pp. 259–268.

Anastasopoulos 2006
Antonis Anastasopoulos 2006, “Building Alliances: A Christian Merchant in Eighteenth-Century Karaferye”, in Ebru Boyar, Kate Fleet (eds), The Ottomans and Trade, Rome, IPOCAN, Oriente Moderno 25.1, 2006, pp. 65–75.

Anastasopoulos 2008a
Antonis Anastasopoulos, “The Islamic Gravestones of Ottoman Rethymno: Preliminary Remarks and Thoughts about Them”, in Antonis Anastasopoulos (ed.), The Eastern Mediterranean under Ottoman Rule: Crete, 16451840. Halcyon Days in Crete VI: A Symposium Held in Rethymno, 1315 January 2006, Rethymno, Crete UP, 2008, pp. 317–329.

Anastasopoulos 2008b
Antonis Anastasopoulos, “Centre-Periphery Relations: Crete in the Eighteenth Century”, in Björn Forsén, Giovanni Salmeri (eds.), The Province Strikes Back: Imperial Dynamics in the Eastern Mediterranean, Helsinki, The Finnish Institute at Athens, 2008, pp. 123–136.

Anastasopoulos 2013
Antonis Anastasopoulos, “Imperial Geography and War: The Ottoman Case”, in Sahar Bazzaz, Yota Batsaki, Dimiter Angelov (eds.), Imperial Geographies in Byzantine and Ottoman Space, Washington, Center for Hellenic Studies – Harvard University, 2013, pp. 111–132.

Anastasopoulos 2021
Antonis Anastasopoulos, “The Sicils of Karaferye (Veroia) in the 18th Century: A Case of Transformation?”, in Seyfi Kenan, Selcuk Akşin Somel (eds.), Dimensions of Transformation in the Ottoman Empire from the Late Medieval Age to Modernity. In Memory of Metin Kunt, Leiden, Brill, 2021, pp. 367–378.

Anastasopoulos, Kolovos, Sariyannis 2017
Antonis Anastasopoulos, Elias Kolovos, Marinos Sariyannis, “Οι πρώτοι δύο αιώνες οθωμανικής κυριαρχίας στην Κρήτη (1645–1821): νέες πηγές και ερμηνευτικές προσεγγίσεις [The first two centuries of Ottoman rule in Crete (1645–1821): new sources and approaches]”, Kritika Chronika 37, 2017, pp. 163–193.

Balta 1988
Evangelia Balta, “Τουρκικά αρχεία στην Ελλάδα [Turkish archives in Greece]”, Sygchrona Themata 37, 1988, pp. 140–143.

Balta 1989
Evangelia Balta, L’Eubée à la fin du xve siècle : économie et population : les registres de l’année 1474, Athens, National Foundation for Research, 1989.

Balta 1997a
Evangelia Balta, Karamanlidika. Nouvelles additions et compléments I, Athens, Center for the Study of Asia Minor, 1997.

Balta 1997b
Evangelia Balta, Problèmes et approches de l’histoire ottomane : un itinéraire scientifique de Kayseri à Egriboz, Istanbul, Isis Press, 1997.

Balta 1999a
Evangelia Balta, “Οι οθωμανικές σπουδές στην Ελλάδα [Ottoman studies in Greece]”, Ta Istorika 16.31, 1999, pp. 455–460.

Balta 1999b
Evangelia Balta, Peuple et production : pour une interprétation des sources ottomanes, Istanbul, Isis Press, 1999.

Balta 2003
Evangelia Balta, Ottoman Studies and Archives in Greece, Istanbul, Isis Press, Analecta Isisiana 70, 2003.

Balta 2004
Evangelia Balta, “Οι οθωμανικές σπουδές στη νεοελληνική ιστοριογραφία [Ottoman studies in modern Greek historiography]”, in Paschalis Kitromilides, Triantafyllos Sklavenitis (eds.), Ιστοριογραφία της νεότερης και σύγχρονης Ελλάδας 18332002 [Historiography of modern and contemporary Greece, 1833–2002], vol. 1, Athens, National Research Foundation, 2004, pp. 259–271.

Balta 2009
Evangelia Balta, Η οθωμανική απογραφή των Κυθήρων 1715 [The Ottoman register of Kythira, 1715], Athens, National Foundation for Research, 2009.

Balta 2010a
Evangelia Balta, “Turkish Archival Material in Greek Historiography”, Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi 8.15, 2010, pp. 755–792.

Balta 2010b
Evangelia Balta, Beyond the Language Frontier, Studies on the Karamanlis and the Karamanlidika Printing, Istanbul, Isis Press, 2010.

Balta 2013
Evangelia Balta, Miscellaneous Studies on the Karamanlidika Literary Tradition, Istanbul, Isis Press, 2013.

Balta 2015
Evangelia Balta, Population and Agricultural Production in Ottoman Morea, Istanbul, Isis Press, Analecta Isisiana 132, 2015.

Demetriades 1973
Vassilis Demetriades, Η Κεντρική και Δυτική Μακεδονία κατά τον Εβλιγιά Τσελεμπή [Central and western Macedonia according to Evliya Çelebi], Thessaloniki, Society for Macedonian Studies, 1973.

Demetriades 1997
Vassilis Demetriades, Η Θεσσαλονίκη της Παρακμής. Η ελληνική κοινότητα της Θεσσαλονίκης κατά τη δεκαετία του 1830 με βάση ένα οθωμανικό κατάστιχο απογραφής του πληθυσμού [Thessaloniki in decline. The Greek community of Thessaloniki in the 1830s according to an Ottoman register], Iraklio, Crete UP, 1997.

Demetriades 2003
Vassilis Demetriades, Ο Κώδικας των θυσιών [The “Codex of Sacrifices”], Iraklio, Crete UP, 2003.

Faroqhi 1999
Suraiya Faroqhi, Approaching Ottoman History: An Introduction to the Sources, Cambridge, UP, 1999, pp. 38–39.

Faroqhi 2009
Suraiya Faroqhi, Another Mirror for Princes: The Public Image of the Ottoman Sultans and Its Reception, Istanbul, Isis Press, 2009, pp. 42–46.

Gara 2005a
Eleni Gara, “Çuha for the Janissaries – Velençe for the poor: Competition for Raw Material and Work-force between Salonica and Veria, 1600–1650”, in Suraiya Faroqhi, Randi Deguilhem (eds.), Crafts and Craftsmen of the Middle East: Fashioning the Individual in the Muslim Mediterranean, London, New York, Tauris, 2005, pp. 121–152.

Gara 2005b
Eleni Gara, “Moneylenders and Landowners: In Search of Urban Muslim Elites in the Early Modern Balkans”, in Antonis Anastasopoulos (ed.), Provincial Elites in the Ottoman Empire, Rethymno, Crete UP, 2005, pp. 135–147.

Gara 2007
Eleni Gara, “Marrying in Seventeenth-Century Mostar”, in Elias Kolovos et al. (eds.), The Ottoman Empire, the Balkans, the Greek Lands: Toward a Social and Economic History. Studies in Honor of John C. Alexander, Istanbul, Isis Press, 2007, pp. 115–134.

Gara forthcoming a
Eleni Gara, “The Forty Vezirs: Advice Literature in an Entertaining Format for an Ottoman Audience”, in Ioannis Smarnakis, Zisis Ainalis (eds.), The Palaiologan Romance in Context: Narrativity, Identities and Gender in the Mediterranean (12th–16th centuries), Milton Park, Routledge, forthcoming.

Gara forthcoming b
Eleni Gara, “Writing contemporary history: Ottoman Turkish and Greek narrations of the Morean rebellion in the late 18th century”, in Ovidiu-Victor Olar, Konrad Petrovszky (eds.), Writing History in Ottoman Europe (15th–18th century), Leiden, Brill, forthcoming.

Gara, Olar 2022
Eleni Gara, Ovidiu Olar, “Confession-Building and Authority: The Great Church and the Ottoman State in the First Half of the 17th Century”, in Tijana Krstić, Derin Terzioǧlu (eds.), Entangled Confessionalizations? Dialogic Perspectives on the Politics of Piety and Community Building in the Ottoman Empire, 15th–18th centuries, Piscataway (NJ), Gorgias Press, 2022.

Gara, Tzedopoulos 2015
Eleni Gara, Yorgos Tzedopoulos, Χριστιανοί και μουσουλμάνοι στην Οθωμανική Αυτοκρατορία: Θεσμικό πλαίσιο και κοινωνικές δυναμικές [Christians and Muslims in the Ottoman Empire: institutional framework and social dynamics], Athens, Association of Greek Academic Libraries 2015, online, https://repository.kallipos.gr/handle/11419/2882, accessed on October 17, 2022.

Giannopoulos 1971
Ioannis Giannopoulos, “Η εξέλιξις των τουρκολογικών σπουδών και η ανάγκη καλλιέργειας αυτών εν Ελλάδι [The development of Turcological studies and the need to cultivate them in Greece]”, Mnemon 1, 1971, pp. 5–22.

Hadjikyriacou, Kolovos 2015
Antonis Hadjikyriacou, Elias Kolovos, “Rural Economies and Digital Humanities: Prospects and Challenges”, in Elias Kolovos (ed.), Ottoman Rural Societies and Economies, Rethymno, Crete UP, 2015, pp. 415–422.

Kampouridis 2009
Konstantinos Kampouridis, Η νεότερη Ελλάδα μέσα από οθωμανικές αρχειακές πηγές: οικονομία, θεσμοί και κοινωνία στη Θεσσαλία του 17ου αιώνα [Modern Greece through Ottoman archival sources: economy, institutions and society in the 17th century Thessaly], Thessaloniki, Stamoulis, 2009.

Kampouridis 2016
Konstantinos E. Kampouridis, Η Λέσβος τον 16ο αιώνα. Οικονομία και Πληθυσμός. Το οθωμανικό κατάστιχο απογραφής του 1548 [Lesvos in the 16th century. Economy and population. The Ottoman register of 1548], Thessaloniki, Stamoulis, 2016.

Kampouridis, Salakidis 2013
Kostas Kampouridis, Georgios Salakidis, Η επαρχία Σερβίων τον 16ο αιώνα μέσα από οθωμανικές πηγές [The province of Serfice during the 16th century through Ottoman sources], Thessaloniki, Stamoulis, 2013.

Katsiardi-Hering et al. (eds.) 2018
Olga Katsiardi-Hering et al. (eds.), Έλλην – Ρωμηός – Γραικός. Συλλογικοί προσδιορισμοί και ταυτότητες [Hellene, Romios, Greek: collective identifications and identities], Athens, Eurasia, 2018.

Katsiardi-Hering, Seirinidou (eds.) 2017
Olga Katsiardi-Hering, Vasso Seirinidou (eds.), Νεοελληνική Ιστορία και Οθωμανικές Σπουδές: Μια απόπειρα χαρτογράφησης. Επιστημονική συνάντηση (8 Απριλίου 2016, Ιστορικό Αρχείο του Πανεπιστημίου Αθηνών), Athens, Department of History and Archaeology, Kapodistrias University of Athens, 2017, online, http://www.arch.uoa.gr/fileadmin/arch.uoa.gr/uploads/images/ekdoseis/e-book_neolliniki_istoria_kai_othomanikes_spoudes.pdf, accessed on 17 October, 2022.

Kermeli 2017
Eugenia Kermeli, “Kyrillos Loukaris’ Legacy: Reformation as a Catalyst in the 17th Century Ottoman Society”, The Muslim World 107, 2017, pp. 737–753.

Kolovos (ed.) 2011
Elias Kolovos (ed.), Μοναστήρια, οικονομία και πολιτική από τους μεσαιωνικούς στους νεώτερους χρόνους [Monasteries, economy and politics from Medieval to Modern Times], Iraklio, Crete UP, 2011.

Kolovos (ed.) 2015
Elias Kolovos (ed.), Ottoman Rural Societies and Economies. Halcyon Days in Crete VIII: A Symposium Held in Rethymno, 1315 January 2012, Rethymno, Crete UP, 2015.

Kolovos 2005
Elias Kolovos, “Negotiating for State Protection: Çiftlik-Holding by the Athonite Monasteries (Xeropotamou Monastery, Fifteenth-Sixteenth C.)”, in Colin Imber, Keiko Kiyotaki, Rhoads Murphey (eds.), Frontiers of Ottoman Studies: State, Province, and the West, London, New York, Tauris, 2005, pp. 197–209.

Kolovos 2006
Elias Kolovos, H νησιωτική κοινωνία της Άνδρου στο οθωμανικό πλαίσιο: Πρώτη προσέγγιση με βάση τα οθωμανικά έγγραφα της Καϊρείου Βιβλιοθήκης [The insular society of Andros in Ottoman context: a preliminary approach based on the Ottoman documents from the Kaireios Library], Andros, Kaireios Library, 2006.

Kolovos 2007
Elias Kolovos, “Insularity and Island Society in the Ottoman Context: The Case of the Aegean Island of Andros (Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries)”, Turcica 39, 2007, pp. 49–122.

Kolovos 2012
Elias Kolovos, “Riot in the Village: Some Cases of Peasant Protest around Ottoman Salonica”, in Antonis Anastasopoulos (ed.), Political Initiatives “From the Bottom‑Up” in the Ottoman Empire, Halcyon Days in Crete VII: A Symposium Held in Rethymno, 911 January 2009, Rethymno, Crete UP, 2012, pp. 47–56.

Kolovos 2013
Elias Kolovos, Οθωμανικές πηγές για τη νεώτερη ιστορία της Λευκάδας [Ottoman sources concerning the Early Modern history of Lefkada], Iraklio, Crete UP, 2013.

Kolovos 2016
Elias Kolovos, “Christian Vakıfs of Monasteries in the Ottoman Greek Lands from the Fourteenth to Eighteenth Centuries”, in Sabine Mohasseb Saliba (ed.), Les fondations pieuses Waqfs chez les chrétiens et les juifs, Paris, Geuthner, 2016, pp. 103–127.

Kolovos 2017
Elias Kolovos, Ὃπου ἦν κῆπος: Η μεσογειακή νησιωτική οικονομία της Άνδρου σύμφωνα με το οθωμανικό κτηματολόγιο του 1670 [“There was a garden…” The economy of the Mediterranean island of Andros according to the Ottoman land and property survey of 1670], Iraklio, Crete UP, Kaireios Library, 2017.

Kolovos 2018
Elias Kolovos, “An Ottoman Register of Venetian Candia”, in Anna Valerio (ed.), Venetians and Ottomans in the Early Modern Age, Venice, Ca’Foscari, Hilâl. Studi Turchi e Ottomani 6, 2018, pp. 75–85.

Kolovos, Ilıcak, Shariat-Panahi 2021
Elias Kolovos, Şükrü Ilıcak, Mohammad Shariat-Panahi, Η οργή του σουλτάνου. Αυτόγραφα διατάγματα του Μαχμούτ Β΄ το 1821 [The Sultan’s anger. Mahmud II’s autograph orders in 1821], Athens, Open UP, 2021.

Kolovos, Kotzageorgis 2015
Elias Kolovos, Phokion Kotzageorgis, “Halkidiki in the Early Modern Period: Towards an Environmental History”, in Basil C. Gounaris (ed.), Mines, Olives and Monasteries, Thessaloniki, Epikedro, Faros, 2015, pp. 123–161.

Kolovos, Kotzageorgis 2019
Elias Kolovos, Phokion Kotzageorgis, “Searching for the ‘Little Ice Age’ Effects in the Ottoman Greek Lands: The Cases of Salonica and Crete”, in Onur İnal, Yavuz Köse (eds.), Seeds of Power: Explorations in Ottoman Environmental History, Winwick, The White Horse Press, 2019, pp. 17–34.

Kolovos, Vionis 2019
Elias Kolovos, Athanasios Vionis, “Ottoman Archaeology in Greece: A New Research Field”, Archaeological Reports 65, 2019, pp. 145–156.

Konortas 1998
Paraskevas Konortas, Οθωμανικές θεωρήσεις για το Οικουμενικό Πατριαρχείο, 17οςαρχές 20ού αιώνα [Ottoman perceptions of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, 17th–early 20th centuries], Athens, Alexandreia, 1998.

Kotzageorgis 1997
Phokion Kotzageorgis, Το ισλάμ στα Βαλκάνια. Ένα ελληνόφωνο μουσουλμανικό κείμενο από την Ήπειρο του 18ου αιώνα [Islam in the Balkans. A Greek Muslim text from 18th century Epirus], Athens, Association of Megaloscholites, 1997.

Kotzageorgis 2002
Phokion Kotzageorgis, Η αθωνική μονή Αγίου Παύλου κατά την οθωμανική περίοδο (τέλη 14ου αι1830) [The Athonite monastery of Aghios Pavlos under Ottoman rule, late 14th c.–1830], Thessaloniki, University Studio Press, 2002.

Kotzageorgis 2008a
Phokion Kotzageorgis, “Συνωμοτικές κινήσεις στην περιοχή της Θεσσαλονίκης μετά τη ναυμαχία της Ναυπάκτου (1571): η οθωμανική μαρτυρία [Conspiratorial movements in Thessaloniki after the battle of Lepanto in 1571: Ottoman testimonies]”, Thessaloniki 7, 2008, pp. 71–81.

Kotzageorgis 2008b
Phokion Kotzageorgis, Μικρές πόλεις της ελληνικής χερσονήσου κατά την πρώιμη νεότερη εποχή. Η περίπτωση της Ξάνθης (15ος17ος αι.) [Small cities of the Greek peninsula in the early modern era. The case of Xanthi (15th–17th c.)], Xanthi, Archdiocese of Xanthi and Peritheorio, 2008.

Kotzageorgis 2016
Phokion Kotzageorgis, “A City on the Move. Non-Salonicans in Thessaloniki and Salonicans abroad in the 18th Century According to the Οttoman Probate Inventories”, Archiv Orientalni 84, 2016, pp. 105–137.

Kotzageorgis 2018
Phokion Kotzageorgis, “Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: The Formation of the Society of Early Ottoman Thessaloniki”, Études balkaniques 54, 2018, pp. 423–456.

Kotzageorgis 2019
Phokion Kotzageorgis, Πρώιμη οθωμανική πόλη. Επτά περιπτώσεις από τον νοτιοβαλκανικό χώρο (Αδριανούπολη – Σέρρες – Καστοριά – Τρίκαλα – Λάρισα – Θεσσαλονίκη – Ιωάννινα) [Early Ottoman city: seven cases from the Southern Balkans (Edirne – Serres – Kastoria – Trikala – Larissa – Thessaloniki – Ioannina], Athens, Vivliorama, 2019.

Kotzageorgis 2021a
Phokion Kotzageorgis, “Crisis and Survival of the Athonite Monasteries during the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Preliminary Findings and Thoughts”, in Roumen Avramov et al. (eds.), Monastic Economy across Time: Wealth Management, Patterns, and Trends, Sofia, Centre for Advanced Study, 2021, pp. 98–111.

Kotzageorgis 2021b
Phokion Kotzageorgis, “Preliminary Remarks on the Formation of Early Ottoman Cities in the Southern Balkans. The Case of the Ottoman Administrative Centers”, Διεθνές επιστημονικό συμπόσιο προς τιμήν του ομότιμου καθηγητή Γεωργίου Βελένη, 47 Οκτωβρίου 2017. Πρακτικά [International Symposium in honour of Emeritus Professor George Velenis. Thessaloniki, amphitheatre of Ancient Agora, 4‑7 October 2017. Proceedings], Athens, Ministry of Culture and Sports, 2021, pp. 1019–1030.

Kotzageorgis, Papastamatiou 2014
Phokion Kotzageorgis, Demetrios Papastamatiou, “Wealth Accumulation in an Urban Context the Profile of the Muslim Rich of Thessaloniki in the Eighteenth Century on the Basis of Probate Inventories”, Turkish Historical Review 5, 2014, pp. 165–199.

Laiou 2002
Sophia Laiou, Η Σάμος κατά την οθωμανική περίοδο, 16ος18ος αι. Πτυχές του κοινωνικού και οικονομικού βίου [Samos in the Ottoman period, 16th–18th centuries. Aspects of social and economic life], Thessaloniki, University Studio Press, 2002.

Laiou 2011
Sophia Laiou, Τα οθωμανικά έγγραφα της μονής Βαρλαάμ Μετεώρων [The Ottoman documents of Varlaam monastery in Meteora], Athens, Academy of Athens, 2011.

Laiou 2014
Sophia Laiou, “The Ottoman Greek ‘Merchants of Europe’ at the Beginning of the 19th Century”, in Evangelia Balta, Georgios Salakidis, Theoharis Stavrides (eds.), Festschrift in Honor of Ioannis Theocharides. Studies of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey, vol. 2, Istanbul, Isis Press, 2014, pp. 313–331.

Laiou 2017
Sophia Laiou, “The Ottoman State and the Black Sea Trade, End of the Eighteenth –Beginning of the Nineteenth Century”, in Edhem Eldem, Sophia Laiou, Vangelis Kechriotis (eds.), The Economic and Social Development of the Port‑Cities of the Southern Black Sea Coast and Hinterland, Late 18thBeginning of the 20th Century, Corfu, Black Sea History Project Working Papers 5, 2017, pp. 1–15.

Laiou, Sariyannis 2019
Sophia Laiou, Marinos Sariyannis, Οθωμανικές αφηγήσεις για την ελληνική επανάσταση. Από τον Γιουσούφ Μπέη στον Τζεβντέτ Πασά [Ottoman narratives on the Greek Revolution: from Yusuf Bey to Cevdet Pasha], Athens, National Foundation for Research, 2019.

Liakopoulos 2019
Georgios C. Liakopoulos, The Early Ottoman Peloponnese. A Study in the Light of an Annotated Edition Princeps of the TT 101/4662 Ottoman Taxation Cadastre, London, Gingko Press, 2019.

Liakopoulos, Paliougkas 2013
Georgios C. Liakopoulos, Theodoros Paliougkas, Οθωμανικές επιγραφές της Λάρισας [Ottoman inscriptions of Larissa], Thessaloniki, Stamoulis, 2013.

Loupis 1999
Dimitris Loupis, Ο Πιρί Ρέις (14651553) χαρτογραφεί το Αιγαίο. Η οθωμανική χαρτογραφία και η λίμνη του Αιγαίου [Piri Reis (1465–1553) maps the Aegean: Ottoman mapmaking and the lake of the Aegean], Athens, Trochalia, 1999.

Moiras 2020
Leonidas Moiras, Η Ελληνική Επανάσταση μέσα από τα μάτια των Οθωμανών [The Greek Revolution through the eyes of the Ottomans], Athens, Topos, 2020.

Moustakas 2015
Konstantinos Moustakas, “The Myth of the Byzantine Origins of the Osmanlis. An Essay in Interpretation”, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 39.1, 2015, pp. 85–97.

Moustakas 2019
Konstantinos Moustakas, “Ottoman Greek Views of Ottoman Rule (15th–16th Centuries). The Perspective of the Patriarchate Associates”, in Marinos Sariyannis (ed.), Political Thought and Practice in the Ottoman Empire, Rethymno, Crete UP, 2019, pp. 311–317.

Papastamatiou 2017
Demetris Papastamatiou, Wealth Distribution, Social Stratification and Material Culture in an Ottoman Metropolis: Thessaloniki According to the Probate Inventories of the Muslim Court (17611770), Istanbul, Isis Press, 2017.

Papastamatiou, Kotzageorgis 2021
Demetris Papastamatiou, Phokion Kotzageorgis, Στις παρυφές της Επανάστασης: Μια νέα προσέγγιση του αγώνα στη Χαλκιδική με βάση οθωμανικό τεκμηριακό υλικό [On the fringes of the Revolution: a new approach to the struggle in Halkidiki based on Ottoman archival material], Athens, Open UP, 2021.

Salakidis 1995, Sultansurkunden des Athos-klosters Vatopedi aus der Zeit Bayezid II. und Selim I, Thessaloniki, Institute for Balkan Studies, 1995.

Salakidis 2004
Georgios Salakidis, Η Λάρισα (Yenişehir) στα μέσα του 17ου αιώνα. Κοινωνική και οικονομική ιστορία μιας βαλκανικής πόλης και της περιοχής της με βάση τα οθωμανικά ιεροδικαστικά έγγραφα των ετών 10501052 (16501652) [Larissa (Yenişehir) in the mid‑17th century. Social and economic history of a Balkan town and its hinterland on the basis of Ottoman court registers, 10501052 (16501652)], Thessaloniki, Stamoulis, 2004.

Salakidis 2005
Georgios Salakidis, Τα σουλτανικά έγγραφα της βιβλιοθήκης της Κοζάνης [Sultanic documents in the library of Kozani], Kozani, Institute of Book and Reading, 2005.

Salakidis 2018
Georgios Salakidis, “Islamische Frömmigkeit in griechischer Sprache: Ein griechisches Gedicht in arabischer Schrift auf die Geburt des Propheten Muhammad”, in Christiane Bulut (ed.), Linguistic Minorities in Turkey and Turkic-Speaking Minorities of the Periphery, Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz, 2018, pp. 343–407.

Salakidis 2019
Georgios Salakidis, Το κρασί και το χασίσι του ποιητή Φουζουλί. Αγώνας λόγων στην τουρκική λογοτεχνία του 16ου αιώνα [Wine and Hashish, by the poet Fuzulî. A confrontation in 16th‑century Turkish literature], Thessaloniki, Stamoulis, 2019.

Salakidis, Theocharidis 2014
Georgios Salakidis, Ioannis Theocharidis, Η κεντρική Ελλάδα τον 15ο αιώνα. Το ανέκδοτο οθωμανικό κατάστιχο του 1485 [Central Greece in the 15th century: the unpublished Ottoman register of 1485], Thessaloniki, Stamoulis, 2014.

Sariyannis 2005–2006
Marinos Sariyannis, “Aspects of ‘Neomartyrdom’: Religious Contacts, ‘Blasphemy’ and ‘Calumny’ in 17th Century Istanbul”, Archivum Ottomanicum 23, 2005–2006, pp. 249–262.

Sariyannis 2019a
Marinos Sariyannis, A History of Ottoman Political Thought Up to the Early Nineteenth Century, Leiden, Brill, 2019.

Sariyannis 2019b
Marinos Sariyannis, Perceptions ottomanes du surnaturel. Aspects de l’histoire intellectuelle d’une culture islamique à l’époque moderne, Paris, Éditions du Cerf, Les conférences de l’École pratique des hautes études 13, 2019.

Sariyannis 2020a
Marinos Sariyannis, “Studying Ottoman Views of the Supernatural: The State‑of‑the‑art and a Research Agenda”, Aca’ib: Occasional papers on the Ottoman perceptions of the supernatural 1, 2020, pp. 5–20, online, https://doi.org/10.26225/se2r-f887, accessed on 17 October 2022.

Sariyannis 2020b
Marinos Sariyannis, “The Limits of Going Global: The Case of ‘Ottoman Enlightenment(s)’”, History Compass, 2020, online, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/hic3.12623, accessed on 17 October 2022.

Sariyannis 2021
Marinos Sariyannis, The Horizons, Limits, and Taxonomies of Ottoman Knowledge, Berlin, Verlag, Otto Spies Memorial Series 11, 2021.

Sigalas 2007
Nikos Sigalas, “Devlet et État : du glissement sémantique d’un ancien concept du pouvoir au début du xviiie siècle ottoman”, in Gilles Grivaud, Sokratis Petmezas (eds.), Byzantina et Moderna : mélanges en l’honneur d’Hélène Antoniadis-Bibicou, Athens, Alexandreia, 2007, pp. 385–415.

Sigalas 2011
Nikos Sigalas, “Des histoires des Sultans à l’histoire de l’État. Une enquête sur le temps du pouvoir ottoman (xviexviiie siècles)”, in François Georgeon, Frédéric Hitzel (eds.), Les Ottomans et le temps, Leiden, Brill, 2011, pp. 99–127.

Spyropoulos 2010
Yannis Spyropoulos, “The Creation of a Homogeneious Collective Identity: Towards a History of the Black People in the Ottoman Empire”, International Journal of Turkish Studies 16.1–2, 2010, pp. 25–46.

Spyropoulos 2015
Yannis Spyropoulos, Οθωμανική διοίκηση και κοινωνία στην προεπαναστατική δυτική Κρήτη: αρχειακές μαρτυρίες (18171819) [Ottoman administration and society in the pre‑revolutionary Crete: archival evidences (1817–1819)], Rethymno, General State Archives, 2015.

Spyropoulos 2019
Yannis Spyropoulos, “Janissary Politics on the Ottoman Periphery (18th–Early 19th c.)”, in Marinos Sariyannis (ed.), Political Thought and Practice, Rethymno, Crete UP, 2019, pp. 449–481.

Spyropoulos, Poulios, Anastasopoulos 2020
Yannis Spyropoulos, Stefanos Poulios, Antonis Anastasopoulos, “Çiftliks, Landed Elites, and Tax Allocation in Eighteenth-Century Ottoman Veroia”, European Journal of Turkish Studies 30, 2020, pp. 1–35.

Themopoulou 2005
Emilia Themopoulou, “Les élites urbaines pendant l’époque de Tanzimat : le cas de Salonique”, in Antonios Anastasopoulos (ed.), Provincial Elites in the Ottoman Empire, Rethymno, Crete UP, 2005, pp. 343–348.

Themopoulou 2012
Emilia Themopoulou, “Aspects des villes en transition dans l’Empire ottoman : la gestion et l’organisation de l’espace publique”, in Actes du colloque de l’Association internationale d’études du Sud‑Est européen : l’homme et son environnement dans le Sud‑Est européen (2426 septembre 2009, Paris), Paris, Belon, 2012, pp. 212–220.

Theocharides, Stavrides 2002
Ioannis Theocharides, Theoharis Stavrides, “The Course of Ottoman Studies in Greece (An Overview),” in Yusuf Halaçoğlu, Halil Inalcık (eds.), The Turks 4, Ankara, Yeni Türkiye, 2002, pp. 714–719.

Theocharidis 1988
Ioannis Theocharidis, “Η ανάπτυξη των τουρκολογικών σπουδών στην Ελλάδα” [The development of Turkological studies in Greece], Dodoni 17.1, 1988, pp. 19–60.

Ursinus 2016
Michael Ursinus, “Ottoman Studies Triumphant: The Success Story of Rethymno, Crete”, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 40, 2016, pp. 89–98.

Vionis 2012
Athanasios K. Vionis, A “Crusader”, “Ottoman”, and “Early Modern” Aegean Archaeology: Built Environment and Domestic Material Culture in the Medieval and Post-Medieval Cyclades, Greece (13th20th Century AD), Leiden, UP, 2012.

Vryonis Jr 1971
Speros Vryonis Jr., The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, University of California Press, 1971.

Zachariadou 1996
Elizabeth A. Zachariadou, Δέκα τουρκικά έγγραφα για τη Μεγάλη Εκκλησία, 14831567 [Ten Turkish documents on the Great Church, 14831567], Athens, National Research Foundation, 1996.

Zachariadou 2009
Elizabeth A. Zachariadou, Ιστορία και θρύλοι των παλαιών σουλτάνων (13001400) [Stories and legends of the sultans of old, 1300–1400], Athens, Education Foundation of the National Bank, 2009.

Zachariadou, Aivali, Xanthynakis 2005
Elizabeth A. Zachariadou, Gülsun Aivali, Antonis Xanthynakis, Το χρονικό των ουγγροτουρκικών πολέμων (14431444) [The chronicle of the Hungarian-Turkish wars, 1443–1444], Iraklio, Crete UP, 2005.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Collective work, Ιστορία του ελληνικού έθνους [History of the Greek nation], 15 vols, Athens, Ekdotiki Athinon, 1970–1978. A 16th volume covering the period from 1941 to the present was added in 2000.

2 There are by now quite a lot of metahistorical articles on the development of Ottoman studies in Greece. See Giannopoulos 1971; Theocharidis 1988; Balta 1988; Balta 1999a; Balta 2004; Anastasopoulos, Kolovos, Sariyannis 2017. See also Theocharides, Stavrides 2002; Faroqhi 2009; Balta 2010a; Ursinus 2016; Alper Arısoy et al. 2020. An effort to have Neohellenists and Ottomanists meet and converse was made in 2016, with proceedings published as Olga Katsiardi-Hering and Vasso Seirinidou (Katsiardi-Hering, Seirinidou [eds.] 2017).

3 Faroqhi 2009, p. 46: “In emphasizing social history Greek researchers working on Ottoman archival documents fit in very well with the trends of historical research current in other parts of the world. While the localities studied are mostly in Greece, there is limited interest in what might be called ‘Greek peculiarities’; and as a group, scholars who work on Ottoman documents seem to distance themselves from nationalist discourse. The records used are Ottoman at least for the most part; but the methodology is international”.

4 This distinction (“document-oriented” versus “problem-oriented” studies) comes from Suraiya Faroqhi (Faroqhi 1999).

5 See e.g. the studies collected in Kolovos (ed.) 2015, as well as Evangelia Balta’s studies: Balta 1997b; Balta 1999b; Balta 2003; Balta 2015. Let us note here that the works cited in this and the following notes are only a sample of the studies available.

6 See e.g. Alexander 1985b; Anastasopoulos 2002; Anastasopoulos 2005; Anastasopoulos 2021; Gara 2005a; Gara 2005b; Kolovos 2012; Kolovos 2013; Kolovos 2018; Kotzageorgis, Papastamatiou 2014; Kotzageorgis 2016; Kotzageorgis 2018; Papastamatiou 2017; Salakidis 2004; Spyropoulos, Poulios, Anastasopoulos 2020.

7 The pioneer of such studies was of course John C. Alexander (Alexandropoulos), with his group of disciples in Thessaloniki: Alexander 1982; Alexander 1997; Kolovos 2005; Kolovos (ed.) 2011; Kolovos 2016; Kotzageorgis 2002; Kotzageorgis 2021a; Laiou 2011.

8 Anastasopoulos 2006; Laiou 2014; Laiou 2017.

9 Kolovos 2007; Kolovos 2017; Kotzageorgis 2008b; Kotzageorgis 2019; Kotzageorgis 2021b; Laiou 2002.

10 Gara 2007.

11 Some studies on (rare) cases documented by both Greek and Ottoman sources: Gara forthcoming b; Gara, Olar 2022; Kermeli 2017; Kotzageorgis 2008a; Sariyannis 2005–2006.

12 See e.g. several works by Konstantinos Moustakas (Moustakas 2015; Moustakas 2019) and others.

13 Sariyannis 2019a; Sariyannis 2021. See also Kotzageorgis 1997; Salakidis 2018; Sigalas 2007; Sigalas 2011.

14 See above, n. 5–9.

15 Alexander 1985a; Demetriades 1973; Demetriades 1997; Demetriades 2003; Balta 1989; Balta 2009; Kampouridis 2009; Kampouridis 2016; Kampouridis, Salakidis 2013; Kolovos 2006; Kolovos 2013; Laiou 2011; Laiou, Sariyannis 2019; Loupis 1999; Salakidis 1995 ; Salakidis 2005; Salakidis 2019; Salakidis, Theocharidis 2014; Liakopoulos 2019; Liakopoulos, Paliougkas 2013; the series of Ottoman court registers of Candia/Kandiye, directed by Elizabeth Zachariadou (four volumes since 2003), as well as various translations of sources she made or directed (e.g. Zachariadou 1996; Zachariadou 2009; Zachariadou, Aivali, Xanthynakis 2005.

16 Papastamatiou 2017; Sariyannis 2019a.

17 Most notably Konortas 1998.

18 The proceedings of the conference on Greek identities, which took place in 19–21 January 2017, have been published by Olga Katsiardi-Hering, Anastasia Papadia-Lala, Katerina Nikolaou, and Vangelis Karamanolakis (Katsiardi-Hering et al. [eds.] 2018).

19 Gara, Tzedopoulos 2015.

20 Sariyannis 2020b.

21 Moiras 2020; Kolovos, Ilıcak, Shariat-Panahi 2021; Papastamatiou, Kotzageorgis 2021; Laiou, Sariyannis 2019. Note also the previously published Spyropoulos 2015.

22 Anastasopoulos 2008b; Anastasopoulos 2013; Spyropoulos 2019.

23 Salakidis 2019; Gara forthcoming a.

24 For an exception see Spyropoulos 2010.

25 On the post-Tanzimat period, see e.g. Themopoulou 2005; Themopoulou 2012; Evangelia Balta’s studies on Karamanlidhes, collected among others in her Karamanlidika: Balta 1997a; Balta 2010b; Balta 2013.

26 Vryonis Jr 1971.

27 Sariyannis 2019a.

28 Kolovos, Vionis 2019; Vionis 2012. See also the significant literature on Ottoman inscriptions (Liakopoulos, Paliougkas 2013) and tombstones (Anastasopoulos 2008a).

29 Hadjikyriacou, Kolovos 2015; Kolovos, Kotzageorgis 2015; Kolovos, Kotzageorgis 2019.

30 Sariyannis 2020a; Sariyannis 2019b.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Marinos Sariyannis, Eleni Gara et Phokion Kotzageorgis, « Ottoman studies in Greece: a reflective gaze »Bulletin de correspondance hellénique moderne et contemporain [En ligne], 5 | 2021, mis en ligne le 20 décembre 2022, consulté le 16 avril 2024. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/bchmc/957 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/bchmc.957

Haut de page

Auteurs

Marinos Sariyannis

Research Director at the Institute for Mediterranean Studies, Foundation of Research and Technology – Hellas

Eleni Gara

Associate Professor at the Department of Social Anthropology and History, University of the Aegean

Phokion Kotzageorgis

Associate Professor at the Department of History and Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search