The Ottoman-Persian War of 1820-1823, ended in 1823 with both parties signing the Treaty of Erzurum, known commonly in the literature as the First Treaty of Erzurum. The First Treaty of Erzurum resolved the problems between the two states and was in essence based on the terms in the Treaty of Kerden that the two states had signed and agreed upon a century prior in 1746. However, certain disagreements that emerged in the process of composing the terms of the treaty posed a serious obstacle to properly establishing the terms for peace. Both states had a different version of the treaty based on their idea of how it had been composed, and these different versions continue to warrant further discussion. Certain clauses from the Treaty of Erzurum led to even greater problems, and due to the audacity that had been derived from these different versions, the states turned these into problems in the future, problems that occupied the agenda of the Ottomans and Iranians to a great extent. Some of these problems even carried over to 20th century. Abstract The Ottoman-Persian War between 1820-1823 was the last war between the Ottoman and Persian States who had been struggling with one another in the East for centuries and concluded with the signing of the treaty known in the literature as the First Treaty of Erzurum. This Treaty was established based upon the Treaty of Kerden, which both states had signed in 1746. Negotiations over the treaty were conducted in Erzurum, and fierce disputes occurred over the articles of the treaty to be signed. As a consequence of these fierce disputes over the text of the treaty, copies of the letter that had been confirmed by the representatives both states had assigned were sent on July 28, 1823 to both Fath Ali Shah of Persia and the Ottoman Emperor Mahmud II for their confirmation. This study has been prepared with the aim of addressing the falsifications in the letters of agreement that had been sent to the rulers of both states in 1823 and that weren’t even brought up during the treaty negotiations, the consequences of these falsifications, and some of the problems that resulted from them in the Ottoman-Persian relationships that would follow. Before carrying on with this study, some data were found in the Persian sources regarding these issues. However, these data were not compiled or interpreted by means of comparing and analyzing the Turkish and Persian sources side by side. Research regarding this subject has comprehensively addressed both Ottoman archival documents and major Persian and Turkish resources of the era in attempts to clarify the issue in detail. In this respect, the Ottoman and Iranian states are seen to have attempted to resolve the situation through the envoys they sent one another after signing the Treaty of Erzurum. The Ottoman envoy Necip Efendi was the one who brought the letter of agreement to Persia in the name of the Ottoman Empire and faced an unexpected situation there. The Iranian diplomatic
{"title":"I. Erzurum Antlaşması Metninde Yapılan Tahrifat ve Antlaşmanın Uygulanmasında Yarattığı Sorunlar","authors":"E. Azap","doi":"10.26650/iutd.1086380","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1086380","url":null,"abstract":"The Ottoman-Persian War of 1820-1823, ended in 1823 with both parties signing the Treaty of Erzurum, known commonly in the literature as the First Treaty of Erzurum. The First Treaty of Erzurum resolved the problems between the two states and was in essence based on the terms in the Treaty of Kerden that the two states had signed and agreed upon a century prior in 1746. However, certain disagreements that emerged in the process of composing the terms of the treaty posed a serious obstacle to properly establishing the terms for peace. Both states had a different version of the treaty based on their idea of how it had been composed, and these different versions continue to warrant further discussion. Certain clauses from the Treaty of Erzurum led to even greater problems, and due to the audacity that had been derived from these different versions, the states turned these into problems in the future, problems that occupied the agenda of the Ottomans and Iranians to a great extent. Some of these problems even carried over to 20th century. Abstract The Ottoman-Persian War between 1820-1823 was the last war between the Ottoman and Persian States who had been struggling with one another in the East for centuries and concluded with the signing of the treaty known in the literature as the First Treaty of Erzurum. This Treaty was established based upon the Treaty of Kerden, which both states had signed in 1746. Negotiations over the treaty were conducted in Erzurum, and fierce disputes occurred over the articles of the treaty to be signed. As a consequence of these fierce disputes over the text of the treaty, copies of the letter that had been confirmed by the representatives both states had assigned were sent on July 28, 1823 to both Fath Ali Shah of Persia and the Ottoman Emperor Mahmud II for their confirmation. This study has been prepared with the aim of addressing the falsifications in the letters of agreement that had been sent to the rulers of both states in 1823 and that weren’t even brought up during the treaty negotiations, the consequences of these falsifications, and some of the problems that resulted from them in the Ottoman-Persian relationships that would follow. Before carrying on with this study, some data were found in the Persian sources regarding these issues. However, these data were not compiled or interpreted by means of comparing and analyzing the Turkish and Persian sources side by side. Research regarding this subject has comprehensively addressed both Ottoman archival documents and major Persian and Turkish resources of the era in attempts to clarify the issue in detail. In this respect, the Ottoman and Iranian states are seen to have attempted to resolve the situation through the envoys they sent one another after signing the Treaty of Erzurum. The Ottoman envoy Necip Efendi was the one who brought the letter of agreement to Persia in the name of the Ottoman Empire and faced an unexpected situation there. The Iranian diplomatic","PeriodicalId":56176,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of History-Tarih Dergisi","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75785782","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The relations between the states of the Mamluks and the Golden Horde aimed at common interests were shaped and developed around the discourse of the common enemy. Accordingly, the parties had drawn the image of allies until the third reign of Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad. However, with the effects from differing conjunctures, Sultan al-Nasir made a policy change and tried to pursue a policy of balance between the Golden Horde and Ilkhanate states. In the post-Ilkhanid period, the attempt was made to revive Mamluk–Golden Horde relations, this time around another common enemy discourse. This study aims to determine these aforementioned relations, examine them in all their aspects, and also provide a new interpretation regarding their general nature. Extended Abstract Mamluk and Golden Horde relations began and developed toward common interests by virtue of the initiatives of Sultan Baibars. The Ilkhanid were pivotal to these relations as a common enemy, and the diplomatic agenda of the parties was shaped by a prospective joint operation against the Ilkhanid. The joint operation against the Ilkhanate remained and could even be claimed to have been exclusively kept on the agenda for nearly half a century. However, this study reveals no such operation was ever launched due to what beclouded the relationship between the parties and the policy the Mamluks adopted. Nevertheless, preserving the discourse on a possible joint expedition had well suppressed the Ilkhanate. Until the third reign of Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad, Mamluk–Golden Horde political and diplomatic relations remained within the above-mentioned framework, and the parties showed complete alliance, at least diplomatically. However, Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad’s ascension to the throne for a third time was a milestone in the course of this relationship and may be closely associated with Abu Said Bahadur Khan’s ascension to the Ilkhanid throne in 1317 and adoption of a different policy than the previous Ilkhanid rulers. The Ilkhanid abandoned their aggressive policies against the Mamluks and took a pro-peace stance, one which the Mamluks reciprocated. A peace treaty was signed in 1323 pursuant to negotiations. This treaty shifted the course of Mamluk–Golden Horde relations. Sultan al-Nasir had abandoned the traditional policy in which the Mamluks were fully allied with the Golden Horde and began following a policy of balance between the Golden Horde and the Ilkhanid states. This attitude fell far below the expectations of the Golden Horde and caused diplomatic problems between the two states. Despite these above-mentioned problems, the Mamluks and Golden Horde preserved their diplomatic relations. The Sultan and Uzbek existence the altered Horde
{"title":"Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri","authors":"Kazım Uzun","doi":"10.26650/iutd.202214","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.202214","url":null,"abstract":"The relations between the states of the Mamluks and the Golden Horde aimed at common interests were shaped and developed around the discourse of the common enemy. Accordingly, the parties had drawn the image of allies until the third reign of Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad. However, with the effects from differing conjunctures, Sultan al-Nasir made a policy change and tried to pursue a policy of balance between the Golden Horde and Ilkhanate states. In the post-Ilkhanid period, the attempt was made to revive Mamluk–Golden Horde relations, this time around another common enemy discourse. This study aims to determine these aforementioned relations, examine them in all their aspects, and also provide a new interpretation regarding their general nature. Extended Abstract Mamluk and Golden Horde relations began and developed toward common interests by virtue of the initiatives of Sultan Baibars. The Ilkhanid were pivotal to these relations as a common enemy, and the diplomatic agenda of the parties was shaped by a prospective joint operation against the Ilkhanid. The joint operation against the Ilkhanate remained and could even be claimed to have been exclusively kept on the agenda for nearly half a century. However, this study reveals no such operation was ever launched due to what beclouded the relationship between the parties and the policy the Mamluks adopted. Nevertheless, preserving the discourse on a possible joint expedition had well suppressed the Ilkhanate. Until the third reign of Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad, Mamluk–Golden Horde political and diplomatic relations remained within the above-mentioned framework, and the parties showed complete alliance, at least diplomatically. However, Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad’s ascension to the throne for a third time was a milestone in the course of this relationship and may be closely associated with Abu Said Bahadur Khan’s ascension to the Ilkhanid throne in 1317 and adoption of a different policy than the previous Ilkhanid rulers. The Ilkhanid abandoned their aggressive policies against the Mamluks and took a pro-peace stance, one which the Mamluks reciprocated. A peace treaty was signed in 1323 pursuant to negotiations. This treaty shifted the course of Mamluk–Golden Horde relations. Sultan al-Nasir had abandoned the traditional policy in which the Mamluks were fully allied with the Golden Horde and began following a policy of balance between the Golden Horde and the Ilkhanid states. This attitude fell far below the expectations of the Golden Horde and caused diplomatic problems between the two states. Despite these above-mentioned problems, the Mamluks and Golden Horde preserved their diplomatic relations. The Sultan and Uzbek existence the altered Horde","PeriodicalId":56176,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of History-Tarih Dergisi","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89642516","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Son Dönem Osmanlı Devleti’nde Zeytin Tarımı ve Zeytinyağı İmalatının Geliştirilmesine Dair Görüş ve Öneriler","authors":"Serap Sunay","doi":"10.26650/iutd.2022297","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.2022297","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56176,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of History-Tarih Dergisi","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74047737","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"XIX. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Kıbrıs’ta Diplomat Arkeologların Eski Eser Araştırmaları","authors":"Gürsoy Şahin","doi":"10.26650/iutd.1081295","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1081295","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56176,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of History-Tarih Dergisi","volume":"37 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72409594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"“Zaferin Ardından Gelen Onur Kırıcı Bir Antlaşma”*: II. Selim’in Venedik’e Verdiği 1573 Ahidnamesi","authors":"Özgür Oral","doi":"10.26650/iutd.202208","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.202208","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56176,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of History-Tarih Dergisi","volume":"64 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87115317","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Karşılaştırmalı Perspektifle Osmanlı Askeri ve Deniz Gücü: İnebahtı Öncesi ve Sonrası","authors":"Gábor Ágoston","doi":"10.26650/iutd.202201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.202201","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56176,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of History-Tarih Dergisi","volume":"79 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79077493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"İnebahtı’nın Siyasi Hafızadaki Yeri: 16. Yüzyılın Sonları ile 17. Yüzyılın Başlarında Uluslararası Politikada Kutsal İttifak ve İnebahtı Çağrışımları","authors":"Evrim Türkçelik","doi":"10.26650/iutd.202210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.202210","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56176,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of History-Tarih Dergisi","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82158563","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Kıbrıs ve İnebahtı Seferleri Sırasında Venedik Dragomanlarının Diplomatik Rolleri","authors":"Volkan Dökmeci","doi":"10.26650/iutd.202207","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.202207","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56176,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of History-Tarih Dergisi","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86690921","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：