Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:17:24.472Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Justin McCarthy, The Arab World, Turkey, and the Balkans (1878–1914). A Handbook of Historical Statistics (Boston: G. K. Hall and Co., 1982). Pp. xxx + 310.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2009

Engin D. Akarli
Engin D. Akarli
Affiliation:
Boğaziçi Universitesi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Reviews
Information
International Journal of Middle East Studies , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , November 1983 , pp. 579 - 582
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1 To the best of my knowledge, the only other work that can be compared to McCarthy's is Eldem's, VedatOsmanli Imparatorlugu 'nun Iktisadî Şartlari Hakkinda bir Tetkik (Ankara, 1970), which is more analytical but less detailed.Google Scholar

2 The Ottoman lists reflect the importance attributed to each province. They could be rearranged according to the proximity of the provinces, but that is not the criterion used by McCarthy. Incidentally, the “independently administered sub-provinces” of Serfice and Zor and the tributary provinces of Bosnia and Egypt are omitted from McCarthy's list of 1884–85, while other sub-provinces and districts of similar status are not.Google Scholar

3 For example, “Sürye” (Syria), repeated throughout the work, is irritating; it should be spelled “Suriye.” The dotted and undotted i, o, and u, as well as s, ş, t, z and izafe are often improperly and inconsistently used throughout the text. With a little diligence, McCarthy could have avoided these inaccuracies and similar ones such as “Gelenboy” instead of the correct “Gelenbevî (pp. 131. 132), “Mülaziz” instead of “Ma'müretül'azīz” (p. 129), or even “Destroying pious (nasik) properties and documents” which should have been “Destroying and damaging property belonging to others (nâsin)” (p. 141).Google Scholar

4 See the explanatory notes on pp. 48, 59, and passim in 1329–1330 Senesi Ma'ârif-i Umûmiye Ihsâiyât, Mecmûasi, on which McCarthy bases some of his tables. For more detailed information see Ergin, Osman, Türkiye Maarif Tarihi. 2nd print (Istanbul, 1977) pp. 481–486. 495–500, 917–934, 1326, and 1423–1445;Google Scholar and Kodaman, B., Abdulhamid Devri Eĝitim Sistemi (Istanbul, 1980), passim.Google Scholar

5 1329 ve 1331 Seneleri Sanâyi' Istatistigi (Istanbul, 1333), pp. 5–10;Google Scholar also Ökçün, G., ed., Osmanli Sanayii (Ankara, 1970), pp. 2–8.Google Scholar

6 Aybar, Celal, Osmanli İmparatorlugu 'nun Ticaret Muvazenesi, 1878–1913 (Ankara, 1939);Google ScholarSönmez, Attila, “Ottoman Terms of Trade, 1878–1913,” METU Studies in Development, no. 1 (Fall 1970), pp. 111–148;Google ScholarŞevket Pamuk, “Kapitalist Dünya Ekonomisi ye Osmanli Diş Ticaretinde Uzun Dönemli Dalgalanmalar, 1830–1913,” METU Studies in Development, 1979–1980 Special Issue, pp. 161–204, here 184–197;Google Scholar also Pamuk, Ş., “Foreign Trade, Foreign Capital and the Peripheralization of the Ottoman Empire, 1830–1913.” unpublished PhD. thesis. Univ. of California, Berkeley, 1978. Chapter III and Appendix II.Google Scholar