特权与无保护:1830 - 1914年奥斯曼帝国的美国执政官、归国移民和治外法权之争

IF 0.7 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Journal of World History Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.1353/jwh.2022.0027
John K. Bragg
{"title":"特权与无保护:1830 - 1914年奥斯曼帝国的美国执政官、归国移民和治外法权之争","authors":"John K. Bragg","doi":"10.1353/jwh.2022.0027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Expansive U.S. extraterritorial claims are nothing new. Such jurisdictional tactics date back to the early republic. This paper focuses on the commingling of extraterritorial and national questions in the U.S.-Ottoman relationship in the nineteenth century. It employs a socio-legal approach to determine how majoritarian and nativist biases—on both sides of the Atlantic—imbued everyday consular practices around extraterritoriality, nationality, and protection. Three primary catalysts advanced the debate. First, the Ottoman state repurposed emerging diplomatic norms in the 1850 s to deny the local brokers of foreign merchants their accustomed protections. Second, Ottoman consuls refuted U.S. notions of expatriation and thereafter vacated key extradition and nationality treaties of 1874. Third, at the first turn of twentieth century, Ottoman officials lobbied against State Department policies enabling further restrictions to naturalized and derivative citizenship. Ultimately, the U.S.-Ottoman case became globally significant in demarcating new flash points of mass migration, humanitarian movements, and human rights on the eve of the Great War.","PeriodicalId":17466,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World History","volume":"33 1","pages":"429 - 458"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Privileged and the Unprotected: U.S. Consuls, Return Migrants, and Extraterritorial Debates in the Ottoman Empire, 1830 – 1914\",\"authors\":\"John K. Bragg\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/jwh.2022.0027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Expansive U.S. extraterritorial claims are nothing new. Such jurisdictional tactics date back to the early republic. This paper focuses on the commingling of extraterritorial and national questions in the U.S.-Ottoman relationship in the nineteenth century. It employs a socio-legal approach to determine how majoritarian and nativist biases—on both sides of the Atlantic—imbued everyday consular practices around extraterritoriality, nationality, and protection. Three primary catalysts advanced the debate. First, the Ottoman state repurposed emerging diplomatic norms in the 1850 s to deny the local brokers of foreign merchants their accustomed protections. Second, Ottoman consuls refuted U.S. notions of expatriation and thereafter vacated key extradition and nationality treaties of 1874. Third, at the first turn of twentieth century, Ottoman officials lobbied against State Department policies enabling further restrictions to naturalized and derivative citizenship. Ultimately, the U.S.-Ottoman case became globally significant in demarcating new flash points of mass migration, humanitarian movements, and human rights on the eve of the Great War.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17466,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of World History\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"429 - 458\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of World History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/jwh.2022.0027\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jwh.2022.0027","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:美国的治外法权主张并不是什么新鲜事。这种管辖策略可以追溯到共和国早期。本文着重探讨19世纪美国与奥斯曼关系中域外问题与国家问题的融合。它采用了一种社会法律方法来确定大西洋两岸的多数派和本土主义偏见是如何影响日常领事实践的,涉及域外、国籍和保护。三个主要的催化剂推动了这场辩论。首先,奥斯曼帝国在19世纪50年代重新调整了新兴的外交规范,拒绝给予当地外国商人的经纪人惯常的保护。其次,奥斯曼帝国领事驳斥了美国关于移居海外的概念,并随后撤销了1874年的关键引渡和国籍条约。第三,在二十世纪初,奥斯曼帝国官员游说反对国务院进一步限制入籍和衍生公民身份的政策。最终,美国与奥斯曼帝国的案件在大战前夕划定大规模移民、人道主义运动和人权的新爆发点方面具有全球意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Privileged and the Unprotected: U.S. Consuls, Return Migrants, and Extraterritorial Debates in the Ottoman Empire, 1830 – 1914
Abstract:Expansive U.S. extraterritorial claims are nothing new. Such jurisdictional tactics date back to the early republic. This paper focuses on the commingling of extraterritorial and national questions in the U.S.-Ottoman relationship in the nineteenth century. It employs a socio-legal approach to determine how majoritarian and nativist biases—on both sides of the Atlantic—imbued everyday consular practices around extraterritoriality, nationality, and protection. Three primary catalysts advanced the debate. First, the Ottoman state repurposed emerging diplomatic norms in the 1850 s to deny the local brokers of foreign merchants their accustomed protections. Second, Ottoman consuls refuted U.S. notions of expatriation and thereafter vacated key extradition and nationality treaties of 1874. Third, at the first turn of twentieth century, Ottoman officials lobbied against State Department policies enabling further restrictions to naturalized and derivative citizenship. Ultimately, the U.S.-Ottoman case became globally significant in demarcating new flash points of mass migration, humanitarian movements, and human rights on the eve of the Great War.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Devoted to historical analysis from a global point of view, the Journal of World History features a range of comparative and cross-cultural scholarship and encourages research on forces that work their influences across cultures and civilizations. Themes examined include large-scale population movements and economic fluctuations; cross-cultural transfers of technology; the spread of infectious diseases; long-distance trade; and the spread of religious faiths, ideas, and ideals. Individual subscription is by membership in the World History Association.
期刊最新文献
Between World-Imagining and World-Making: Politics of Fin-de-Siècle Universalism and Transimperial Indo-U.S. Brotherhood Colonial City, Global Entanglements: Intra-and Trans-Imperial Networks in George Town, 1786–1937 Empire, Kinship and Violence: Family Histories, Indigenous Rights and the Making of Settler Colonialism, 1770–1842 by Elizabeth Elbourne (review) Many Black Women of this Fortress: Graça, Mónica, and Adwoa, Three Enslaved Women of Portugal's African Empire by Kwasi Konadu (review) Inter-Imperial Entanglement: The British Claim to Portuguese Delagoa Bay in the Nineteenth Century
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1