 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
What you say doesn't make sense I'm afraid Ancyrean.
Even the fact that there was a rebelion only points towards that suffering and the will to end it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
You didn't get to be a Janisarry until you converted. . |
Garbage. Boys were taken from their (Christian) families between the ages of 7 and 10 to be trained for the Janissary corps. They were not converted first. quote:
Furthermore, I know this story has to be false, as the practice of making eunichs is forbidden in Islam. Eunichs were purchased from Chrisitan states |
Garbage. The practice of using eunuchs to serve the Sultan's palace continued up to the 20th century. Non-eunuchs could not be trusted with the Sultan's harem. Which Christian state do you think was selling eunuchs to the Turks throughout the 19th century?
quote:
This is not to say they were treated as equals by the Moslems. The difference between how a Christian was treated by the Empire and how a Moslem was treated by the Habsburgs was emense. The Christian lords had to build forts in order to keep peasants from fleeing to the Turks. At the same time, Christian peasants found life under the Turks much easier, as taxes decreased from 50% to 8% when the Latin lords were replaced by Moslem ones. |
Really? Could you imagine living in a land where your word was worthless in court against mine? The rules sound very much like good old southern segregation. quote:
Jews, of course, found life in the Empire much better than in Europe (with the exception of the Union of Poland-Lithunania, which was similarly enlightened). Sephardic Jews flocked to the Empire in such numbers that until the Nazis conquest of Greece, Spanish was still spoken in Thessalonika.
|
Why then did the vast majority of Jews in Europe at the from the 16th to the 20th centuries live in Germany and Russia instead of the Balkans and Turkey?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by paiktis22
saying everything was just peachy before... well it certaintly wasn't  That's why it's was called slavery and not "citizenship" or something to that effect. |
Who's saying everything was just peachy?
Oh, wah, wah, children were snatched from their mothers by the mean old Turks. Ever hear of a little Italian town called Bari? It was the Byzatine's principle slave trading port. From here, the Orthodox Greeks sold millions of Slavs into slavery for hundreds of years (this is why the Slavs are called Slavs, btw), until the Norman, Robert Guiscard, took Southern Italy from the Greeks.
On the Byzantine-Seljik fronteer, the Greeks had their own version of the Gazi, whose name I cannot remember.
As for the horrible "child-snatching," please explain why families bribed officials to take their sons.
Why did the Greeks revolt? You say there must have been oppression. Look at the United States. Why did we revolt from Great Britain? Were we oppressed? We certainly said so, but compared to how the Brits treated their own, we were priveleged people. Also consider that until WWI, the Americans did not look upon the British kindly. Did the Brits do anything horrible to us to deserve how we felt about them? No, not really. But they were our former masters, so we hated them.
The truth is, until Catherine the Great decided she wanted to put her son on the throne of a resurrected Romania with its capital in Constantinople, the Greeks preffered Turkish rule to the rule of Christian states. How else can you explain the Greek revolt in the Morea against the Venetians when the Turks invaded in 1718? How can you explain the Cypriots and Cretens not only not lifting a finger to help the Venetians fight the Turks, but giving the Turks supplies. How do you think a Turkish army could have survived a 20 year naval blockade of Crete without the aid of Greeks. Why did so many Cretens willing convert to Islam to help fight the Venetians?
As for being recognized as villains worldwide, the truth is rather the opposite, pattycakes. The tolerance of the Ottomans wasn't for a "brief" moment, but from its founding in 1288 through the 18th Century.
Does that mean that the Ottomans were perfect? Hell no. Was anyone else better? No. Was anyone else equal? No. Was anyone else even close? Maybe the Dutch.
Dr.S I am aware that the Janisaries were taken as children. However, one didn't get to become a Janisary until one converted to Islam. You remained a low-level slave-boy, kapikulu, a page. Janisaries were the elite of the elite.
While I don't know how the Sultans got their eunichs in the 20th Century, I do know that the practice of making a eunich is forbidden in Islam, and that their eunichs were purchased from Christian states. Black eunichs came from Ethiopia. White eunichs were pruchased from Italy.
As for being a second class citizen, that is how it was back then. Could an Italian testify in court against a Englishman? Could a Jew testify against a Christian? No. No one is saying the Ottomans are a model of how to run an enlightened society. We are saying that compared to other Christian states of the period, with the exception of the last 100 years), they were more enlightened.
Finally, as to the Jews, I think you are incorrect. Most Jews in Europe at this time lived in Poland-Lithunania. Most Jews in the world lived in the Ottoman Empire. Bahdad had the largest Jewish population in the world. Yemen also had a large Jewish population.
Last edited by chegitz guevara on 30-06-2004 at 23:42
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Og
My home town for example was burnt by the turks in 1878 so it's really hard for me to appreciate their tolerance. |
My home town was bombed by the Germans in WWII with the express intention of obliterating its beautifully preserved mediaeval heart.
Last week, the cross in Dresden's main cathedral was restored, work done by a British artisan, whose father had helped bomb Dresden.
The British ruled my parents' homeland for more years than the Turks ruled Greece, with invasions, and religious atrocities and exiles galore.
You can nurture the memory of defeat and invasion and occupation and all it will get you is bitterness, ashes and a Serbian kind of history, where a military defeat is enshrined as some awful national/religious icon, to be brought out, kissed and polished every time some poisonous demagogue not worth an obol slouches into politics, for his day in the sun.
Would I have rather been a Jew or Greek in the Ottoman Empire, and risen to the post of Vizier, and been the friend of Suleyman the Magnificent?
Or a Jew in the Russian Pale of Settlement, subject to arbitrary justice, discrimination and Cossack pogroms?
A Catholic in Ireland, denied a priest and the right to speak in Erse?
A Huguenot from France, sent into exile, or roped together with fellow believers and drowned in the mass noyades?
A Bohemian Hussite, dispossessed of lands, or sent to the stake?
The problem for the Ottomans was that they encouraged the national churches of their subject peoples. If there's one thing worse than either nationalism or religious fervour, it's the two of them combined.
Dr. S- castrati were still singers in Italy in the 19th century- I think the last died in the 20th century.
http://www.usrf.org/news/010308-castrati.html
Clearly, someone 'Christian' was lopping their bits off.
http://wa.essortment.com/castratihistory_rzna.htm
A slightly sensationalized history of eunuchs:
http://www.rotten.com/library/sex/castration/eunuch/
It's still practised in India, where eunuchs are occasionally prostitutes, but also bless weddings.
Eunuchs in the harem and out of it:
"All eunuchs were castrated en route to the markets by Egyptian Christians or Jews, as Islam prohibited the practice of castration but not the usage of castrated slaves.
There were several different varieties of eunuchs:
Sandali, or clean-shaven: The parts are swept off by a single cut of a razor, a tube (tin or wooden) is set in the urethra, the wound is cauterized with boiling oil, and the patient is planted in a fresh dung-hill. His diet is milk, and if under puberty he often survives.
The eunuch whose penis is removed:
He retains all the power of copulation and procreation without the wherewithal; and this, since the discovery of caoutchouc, has often been supplied.
The eunuch, or classical thlibias and semivir, who has been rendered sexless by the removing of the testicles..., or by their being bruised..., twisted, seared or bandaged.
Black eunuchs tended to be of the first category:
Sandali, while white eunuchs were of the second or third categories, thus have part or their entire penis intact. Because of their lack of parts, black eunuchs served in the harem, while white eunuchs served in the government (and away from the women). At the height of the Ottoman Empire, as many as six to eight hundred eunuchs served within the Seraglio (palace). Most eunuchs arrived as gifts from governors of different provinces. At the end of their training as young eunuch pages, eunuchs were assigned to service. White eunuchs were placed under the patronage of various government officials or even into the service of the Sultan himself (like in Topkapi Palace). If they were black eunuchs, they were placed into the service of a harem personage, such as a Kadin, or a daughter or sister of the Sultan. They could also serve under the Kizlar Agha (master of the girls), the Chief Black Eunuch.
The Chief Black Eunuch (Kizlar Agha)
The Kizlar Agha was the third highest-ranking officer of the empire, after the Sultan and the Grand Vizier (Chief Minister). He was the commander of the baltaci corps (or halberdiers - part of the imperial army). His position was a pasha (general) of three tails (tails referring to peacock tails, and the most number of tails permitted being four and worn by the Sultan). He could approach the Sultan at any time, and functioned as the private messenger between the Sultan and the Grand Vizier. He was the most important link between the Sultan and the Valide Sultan (mother of the Sultan).
The Kizlar Agha led the new odalisque to the Sultan’s bedchamber, and was the only "man" who could enter the harem should there have been any nocturnal emergencies. His duties were to protect the women, to provide and purchase the necessary odalisques for the harem, to oversee the promotion of the women (usually after the death of a higher-ranking kadin) and eunuchs. He acted as a witness for the Sultan’s marriage, birth ceremonies, and arranged all the royal ceremonial events, such as circumcision parties, weddings, and fêtes. He also delivered sentence to harem women accused of crimes, taking the guilty women to the executioner to be placed into sacks and drowned in the Bosphorus which lay outside the Topkapi Palace.
The Chief White Eunuch (Kapi Agha)
The Chief White Eunuch was the head of the Inner Service (which is the palace bureaucracy) and the head of the Palace School (school for white eunuchs). He was also Gatekeeper-in-Chief, head of the infirmary, and master of ceremonies of the Seraglio. The Kapi Agha controlled all messages, petitions, and State documents addressed to the Sultan, and was allowed to speak to the Sultan in person. In 1591, Murad III transferred the powers from the white to the black eunuchs as there were too many embezzlements and various other nefarious crimes being attributed to the white eunuchs, among them being purported intimacy with the harem women. The Kapi Agha’s loss of powers was seen through the decreasing of his ceremonial duties (which had various stipends entailed) and the decrease in his overall income. Originally, the Kapi Agha was the only eunuch allowed to speak to the Sultan alone, but as his importance decreased, the Valide Sultan and the Kizlar Agha were able to request private audience with the Sultan also. Because of their possible disloyalty, white eunuchs were assigned positions that did not bring them into contact with the harem women as many of them had incomplete castrations (still possessing of their penis). The total number of white eunuchs in the Seraglio at any given time was between 300 and 900."
http://www.allaboutturkey.com/harem.htm
"14th-17th centuries – Ottoman eunuchs Malik Sarwar, a Habshi eunuch, was vizier to the Sultan of Delhi, Muhammad b. Firuz, and was appointed governor in 1394. He brought peace to the region and expanded it. He was succeeded by his adopted black slave son Qaranful, who took the title of Mubarak Shah, ruled three years, and made his own coins. Mubarak Shah's brother, Ibrahim Shah, succeeded him in 1402 and ruled for 38 years. His army was strong enough to be independent from Delhi. Sultan Rukn al-Din Barbak Shah ruled Bengal from 1459-1475 and had 8,000 black slave soldiers. A Habshi eunuch commanded the army, assassinated the Sultan's successor, and seized the throne. In the 16th century, Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire brought white eunuchs from castration centers in Christian Europe and Circassia. They served in the new palace built by Mehmed II. He employed only black eunuchs in the old Byzantine palace, where the Sultan's harem and female relatives lived. Black eunuchs were a small percentage of the total number of eunuchs, but were the most prominent. Suleiman I, who ruled 1520-66, transferred the harem to the new palace, giving the eunuchs a greater role to play in palace life. In 1595, the first year of Mehmed II's reign, the chief black eunuch named Mustafa Agha was given the office of managing the mosques of Mecca and Medina, a financially powerful position. A white eunuch had previously held the position. He also remained in control of the harem and became the Sultan's advisor, living with him informally, and becoming a member in the imperial divan. Suleyman Agha was the head of the black eunuchs in the service of Turhan, the Valide Sultan (mother of the Sultan) of Mehmed IV, who came to power in 1648. Suleyman Agha commanded the eunuchs to murder Kosem, Mehmed IV's jealous, powerful grandmother who was jealous of her son's concubine's rise to power. Suleyman Agha was raised to the office of the chief black eunuch, but Turhan dismissed him nine months later. "
http://www.eunuch.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=3109
Of course, one might winder if the Ottomans were simply following the Byzantine Greek example- one of the Byzantines' ablest commanders being the eunuch, Narses:
"The great church, Hagia Sophia, still remains. In the tenth century we would find many eunuchs there as well. Alongside “whole” or “bearded” men, eunuchs serve as priests, bishops, and even patriarchs, and are celebrated for their perfect celibacy. Such churchmen also have households staffed with eunuch servants and singers. As we move about the city we find eunuch monks and holy hermits. We encounter luxurious monasteries reserved especially for eunuchs, elite places of retirement or incarceration for powerful eunuchs who have grown too old or too bold in the imperial service. Eunuchs serve in hospitals and orphanages and convents; they dispense largess to widows, orphans, and the poor."
http://www.eunuch.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=3886
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Og
|
|
Lurking in Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
Jun 2001
time: 07:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by molly bloom
You can nurture the memory of defeat and invasion and occupation and all it will get you is bitterness, ashes and a Serbian kind of history, where a military defeat is enshrined as some awful national/religious icon, to be brought out, kissed and polished every time some poisonous demagogue not worth an obol slouches into politics, for his day in the sun. |
Again. I have no problems with present day Turks. But we should not forget the past and we should not try to change it and make it look better or worse. Forgiving is one thing forgetting is totaly different.
quote:
Originally posted by molly bloom
Would I have rather been a Jew or Greek in the Ottoman Empire, and risen to the post of Vizier, and been the friend of Suleyman the Magnificent?
Or a Jew in the Russian Pale of Settlement, subject to arbitrary justice, discrimination and Cossack pogroms?
A Catholic in Ireland, denied a priest and the right to speak in Erse?
A Huguenot from France, sent into exile, or roped together with fellow believers and drowned in the mass noyades?
A Bohemian Hussite, dispossessed of lands, or sent to the stake?
|
AFAIK there were no orthodox christian Viziers in the Ottoman Empire. I am sure that if people gave up their religion in the examples you are showing they would be just as fine as the converted christians in the Ottoman Empire. This doesn't prove that the situation in the Ottoman Empire was somehow better than the situation in all the other European countries.
I can uderstand your and Che's fascination with the "Tollerant Eastern Empire" but you are missing a majour point. The Ottoman Empire ramained in the middle ages untill the 20th century while the rest of Europe moved along a couple of centuries earlier.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-06-2004 16:23
|