Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:42:54.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Laonicus Chalcocondyles and the Ottoman Budget

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2009

Speros Vryonis Jr
Speros Vryonis Jr
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The subject of this communication is a relatively short but interesting passage in the ίστορίαι of the Athenian historian Laonicus Chalcocondyles, which deals with the administration and fiscal income of the Ottoman Empire in the reign of Muhammad II. The contents of this text were first utilized by von Hammer and most recently by Franz Babinger in his monumental history of the reign of Muhammad II, so it is obvious that in choosing this theme I am not presenting something completely new or unknown. Nevertheless, this material merits closer scrutiny than it has hitherto enjoyed, not only because of the scarcity of early sources on Ottoman fiscal history but because it will contribute to the ongoing evaluation of the historical worth of the toίστορίαι, and finally because it gives a view of the system to which the peoples of the empire were subject. A translation of the text is presented, followed by an analysis of the contents and a partial comparison with other sources.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Middle East Studies , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , July 1976 , pp. 423 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976

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

1 On Chalcocondyles see: Krumbacher, K., Geschichte der byzantinischen Literatur (New York, 1970), 1, 302–305;Google ScholarMoravcsik, G., Byzantinoturcica, I: Die byzantinischen Quellen der Geschichte der Türkenvolker, 2d ed. (Berlin, 1958), pp. 396 ff.;Google ScholarDitten, H., Der RusslandExkurs des Laonikos Chalkokondyles (Berlin, 1968);Google Scholaridem, “Laonikos Chalkokondyles und die Sprache der Rumänen”, Aus der byzantinistischen Arbeit der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, ed. J. Irmscher, I (1957), 93–105.

2 von Hammer-Purgstall, Joseph, Geschichte des Omanischen reiches (Pest, 1840), I, 589.Google ScholarBabinger, F., Mehmed der Eroberer und seine Zeit: Weltstürmer einer Zeitwende (Munich 1959), pp. 482–488 and passim.Google Scholar

3 Chalcocondyles, Laonicus, Historiarum demonstrationes, ed. Darko, E. (Budapest, 1922), II, 197–205 (hereafter cited as Chalcocondyles). The translated text appears on pp. 197–201.Google Scholar

4 Babniger, F., Die Aufzeichnungen des Genuesen lacopo de Promontorio de Canipis über den Osmanenstaat um 1475, Bayeri, sche Akadernie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, Sitsungsberichte, Jahrgang 956 Heft 8 (1957).Google Scholar

5 Chalcocondyles, II, 198.Google Scholar

6 Ibid., pp. 198–199.

7 Ibid., p. 201.

8 It is difficult to ascertain whether Chalcocondyles means to say inhabitants (ένοίχων) or rents (ένοιχίων).Google Scholar

9 On these rice farms see Babinger, F., Beiträge zur Frühgeschichte der Türkenherrschaft in Rumelien (14.–15. Jahrhundert) (Brno, Munich, and Vienna, 1944).Google Scholar

10 Krumbacher, Byzantinischen Literatur, I, 302.Google Scholar

11 Chalcocondyles, II, 201.Google Scholar

12 Ducas, , Istoria turco-bisantina (1341–1462), ed. Grecu, V. (Bucharest, 1958), p. 287: on the death of his father Muhammad II inspected the treasury, found it rich, and then sealed it.Google ScholarCritoboulos, (Din domnia lmi Mahomed al II-lea, 1451–1467, ed. Grecu, V. [Bucharest, 1963], p. 45) states that he tightened up the financial administration so that it would produce more and so that it would be spent more carefully.Google Scholar

13 Babinger, Iacopo, pp. 30, 48, 60.Google Scholar

14 Ibid, pp. 45, 55. Iacopo gives their salaries (Chalcocondyles does not) as 32,000 ducats for the beylerbey of Rumeli and 22,000 for the beylerbey of Anatolia (ibid., pp. 49, 56).

15 Babinger, Mehmed, p. 478.Google Scholar

16 Iacopo does, however, give their salaries (27,000 ducats for the one, and 10,000 each for the other two) (Babinger, Iacopo, p. 30). Babinger, (Mehmed, p. 474), gives the salaries of the defterdar at 600,000 akçes and of the nisançi at 400,000 akçes, which are not far from the estimates of Iacopo. But the salary that he gives for the grand vezir, 2,600,000 akçes is much larger than that reported by Iacopo.Google Scholar

17 Cholcocondyles, II, 200.Google Scholar

18 Babinger, Iacopo, p. 62.Google Scholar

19 Chalcocondyles, II, 199.Google Scholar

20 Inalcik, H., “Djizya,” Encyclopedia of Islam, new edition (Leiden, 1965);Google ScholarHadžibegić, H., Glavarina u osmanskoj državi (Sarajevo, 1966).Google Scholar

21 Babinger, Iacopo, p. 62: “Primo ha in Grecia et tutte antedicte provincie adherenti a quella sottoposte, hoc est al gouerno del beghlerbei di Greci charaihari, id est focagij a numero cinque cento cinquanta milia, tutte di christiani tantummodo, da quali ha per fuoco uel per casa aspri LXX, che sono ducati uno e mezzo in piu… ascendano tra tutti a numero di ducati VIIIe Lta milia.”Google Scholar

22 Ellissen, A., Analekien der mittel- und neugriechsichen Literatur (Leipzig, 1855–1862), III, 234. Aγρίϰησα πολλαίζ ϕοραίζ aπò τοùζ χαρατζáρονζ, óτι óρίξει ó āπιστοζ Хπισστιανùζ ρτο§óξουζ Σπήτιαμέταίζ πταϰοσίζ хιλιá§εζ On the date of this lament,Google ScholarBeck, H.-G., Geschichte der byzanhinischen Volksliteratur (Munich, 1971), p. 164.Google Scholar

23 Babinger, Mehmed, p. 483.Google Scholar

24 Barkan, Ö, “894 (1488/89) y˘li cizyesinin tahsilâtina âit muhasebe bilânçolari,” Belgeler, Türk Tarih Belgeleri Dergisi, I (1964), 1–117.Google Scholar

25 Ibid., pp. 3–5.

26 On tables of conversion from akçes to ducats, Beldiceanu, N., Les Actes des premiers sultans conserveś dons les manuscrits turcs de la Bibliothèque nationale à Paris, I, Actes de Mehmed II et de Bayezid II du Ms. Fonds Turcs Ancien 39 (Paris, 1960), p. 175. Drawing on contemporary documents Beldiceanu has drawn the following chart of fluctuations:Google Scholar

27 Chalcocondyles, II, 200.Google Scholar

28 Babinger, Iacopo, pp. 62 ff.Google Scholar

29 Chalcocondyles, II, 200. Babinger, Iacopo, pp. 62–65. Here the figures of Jacopo are higher, though in other items Chalcocondyles gives higher estimates. Thus the latter reckons foreign tribute at 100,000 ducats, but Iacopo reckons it at only 52,000 ducats.Google Scholar

30 Chalcocondyles, II, 199.Google Scholar

31 On the agricultural taxes see the numerous articles of Inalcik, H.: “Čift-resmi,” “Čiftlik,” Ispendje,” in EI 2; “Osmanlîlar'da raiyyet rüsümu,” Belleten, Türk Tarih Kurumu, 23 (1959), 575–610.Google Scholar See also Cağatay, N., “Osmanli imperatorluğnda reâyadan alinan vergi ye resimler,” Ankara Universitesi Dil ve Tarih-Cografya Fakültesi Dergisi, 5 (1947), 483–511. For further bibliography,CrossRefGoogle ScholarVryonis, S., “The Byzantine Legacy and Ottoman Forms,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 23–24 (1969–1970), p. 727, n. 61.Google Scholar

32 Chalcocondyles, II, 200. The figures he actually inclues in his breakdown amount to only 2,300,000, but his portion from the revenues shared with the provincial officials is missing, as are the pasturage of sheep, one-fifth booty, and so 1,700,000 ducats are unaccounted for.Google Scholar

33 Babinger, Iacopo, pp. 75–72. The individual items total 1,810,000 or 10,000 ducats more than the total Iacopo records.Google Scholar

34 Schefer, C., Le voyage d'outreiner de Bertrandon de Ia Brocquicre (Paris, 1892), p. 182.Google Scholar

35 Babinger, Mehmed, p. 488; idem., “Das Rätsel um die Goldbeute von Byzanz (1453),” in Aufsätze und Abhandlungen zur Geschichte Südosteuropa's und der Levante (Munich, 1966), II, 196–197.

36 Babinger, Iacopo, p. 72, estimates expenditures at 1,375,000 ducats.Google Scholar

37 Chalcocondyles, II, 201.Google Scholar

38 “Baştina” is, of course, of Slavic origin.Google Scholar