Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T22:45:57.117Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Military Household in Ottoman Egypt

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2009

Jane Hathaway
Jane Hathaway
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor at the Department of History, Ohio State University, 230 W. 17th Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210-1367, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For over 350 years, Egypt was the largest province of the Ottoman Empire, which had captured it from the Mamluk sultanate in 1517. It is well known that the Ottomans retained key Mamluk usages, above all in subprovincial administration, and that a number of the defeated Mamluks who were willing to cooperate with the new regime were allowed to join the Ottoman administration. In consequence, a number of practices of the Mamluk sultanate survived the Ottoman conquest. Critical administrative offices such as those of pilgrimage commander (amīr al-ḥajj), treasurer (daftardār), and deliverer of the annual tribute to Istanbul (khaznadār) were analogous to offices of the Mamluk sultanate, and the grandees whom the Ottomans installed in these offices were analogous to the Mamluk amirs of the sultanate. Above all, the practice of recruiting boys and young men from the Caucasus as military slaves, or mamluks, and training them as soldiers in households geared to that purpose appears not only to have survived but to have flourished in Ottoman Egypt. By the time of Bonaparte's invasion of Egypt in 1798, in fact, the province's military elite was dominated by Caucasian, and above all Georgian, mamluks. In the face of such apparent similarities with the Mamluk sultanate, it is tempting to define the military society of Ottoman Egypt as a continuation or revival of the sultanate.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Middle East Studies , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , February 1995 , pp. 39 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

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 Barkan, Ömer Lutfi, Osmanh imparatorluǧunda ziraî ekonominin hukukî ve malî esaslari (Istanbul: Türk Tarih Kurunilan, 1943), vol. 1, chap. 105Google Scholar, “Misir Kanunnâmesi”; Shaw, Stanford, The Financial and Administrative Organization and Development of Ottoman Egypt, 1517–1798 (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1962), chap. 1Google Scholar; Holt, P. M., “The Beylicate in Ottoman Egypt during the Seventeenth Century,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 24, 2 (1961): 223CrossRefGoogle Scholar. I have used an Arabic transliteration system for place names in Egypt and for administrative offices when these are not specifically Turkish. I have retained Turkish transliterations for the grandees' names on the theory that these come closest to the grandees' pronunciation of their own names.

2 Cezzar, Ahmed Pasha, Ottoman Egypt in the Eighteenth Century: The Nizâmnâme of Cezzâr Ahmed Pasha, ed. and trans. Shaw, Stanford (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1962), 33Google Scholar.

3 See, for example, Holt, , “Beylicate,” 218, 223, 225Google Scholar; idem, Egypt and the Fertile Crescent, 1516–1922 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1966), 73, 85, 90–92Google Scholar; Shaw, , Financial and Administrative Organization, 33, 37, 63, 186, 194Google Scholar; Ayalon, David, “Studies in al-Jabarti I: Notes on the Transformation of Mamluk Society in Egypt under the Ottomans,” pts. 1–2, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 3, 2–3 (1960), passimGoogle Scholar; Crecelius, Daniel, The Roots of Modern Egypt: A Study of the Regimes of ʿAli Bey al-Kabir and Muhammad Bey Abu al-Dhahab, 1760–1775 (Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1981), 30–31Google Scholar; Winter, Michael, “Turks, Arabs, and Mamluks in the Army of Ottoman Egypt,” Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 72 (1980): 100, 120–22Google Scholar; Piterberg, Gabriel, “The Formation of an Ottoman Egyptian Elite in the Eighteenth Century,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 22 (08 1990): 280Google Scholar.

4 On land tenure in the Mamluk sultanate, see Rabie, Hasanayn, The Financial System of Egypt, A.H. 564–741/A.D. 1169–1341 (London: Oxford University Press, 1972), chap. 2Google Scholar; idem, “The Size and Value of the Iqṭāʿ in Egypt, 564–741 A.H./1169–1341 A.D.,” in Studies in the Economic History of the Middle East, ed. Cook, M. A. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1970), 129–38Google Scholar; N.Poliak, A., “Some Notes on the Feudal System of the Mamluks,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1937): 97–107Google Scholar. On the Ottoman timar, see Inalcik, Halil, The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age, 1300–1600, trans. Itzkowitz, Norman and lmber, Colin (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1973), 104–18Google Scholar. On developments in Ottoman Egypt, see Shaw, , Financial and Administrative Organization, 28 ff., 65 ffGoogle Scholar.

5 Peirce, Leslie P., The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), passimGoogle Scholar; Necipoǧlu-Kafadar, Gülrü, “The Formation of an Ottoman Imperial Tradition: The Topkapi Palace in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries” (facsimile of a Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1986), 588–97Google Scholar.

6 Uzunçarşili, I. H., Osmanli Devletinin Saray Teşkilati (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlan, 1945), esp. 432–39, 465–87Google Scholar; idem, Osmanli Devleti Teskilatmdan Kapukulu Ocaklari, 2 vols. (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlari, 1943–1944), 1:60, 65, 137–38, 478, 2:198Google Scholar; Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., s.v. “Bostandji,” by I. H. Uzunçarşili; El2, s.v. “Adjami Oghlan,” by Bowen, H.Google Scholar.

7 Kunt, Metin, The Sultan's Servants: The Transformation of Ottoman Provincial Government, 1550–1650 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1983)Google Scholar; Abou-el-Haj, Rifaat, “The Ottoman Vezir and Pasa Households 1683–1703: A Preliminary Report,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 94 (10–12 1974): 438–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Uzunçarşili, , Kapukulu Ocaklari, 1:167–71, 234–37, 254–59Google Scholar.

9 These were the Müteferrika, Çavuşan, Janissaries (Mustahfizan), ʿAzeban, Gönüllüyan, Tüfenkçjyan, and Çerakise.

10 Raymond, André, “Essai de géographie des quartiers de résidence aristocratique au Caire au XVIIIe siècle,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 6 (1963): 58–103Google Scholar.

11 Aḥmad Çelebi and al-Jabartī refer to the large household of ʿOsman Çavuş. al-Qāzdaǧli in this manner. See al-Ghani, Aḥmad Çelebi b. ʿAbd, Awḍaḥ al-ishārāt ft man tawallā Miṣr al-Qāhira min alwuzarāʾ wa al-bāshāt, ed. al-Rahim, ʿAbd al-Rahim ʿAbd al-Rahman ʿAbd (Cairo: Maktabat al-Khanji, 1978), 608Google Scholar; and al-Jabartī, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, ʿAjāʾib al-āthār fī al-tarājim wa al-akhbār, 7 vols. (Cairo: Lajnat al-Bayan al-ʿArabi, 1958–1967), 2:12Google Scholar.

12 On Küçük Mehmed, see, for example, al-Damūrdāshī, Aḥmad Katkhudā ʿAzabān, Al-durra almuṣāna fī akhbār al-kināna, British Museum, MS Or. 1073–74, 14, 26Google Scholar; Çelebi, Aḥmad, Awḍaḥ, 190 ffGoogle Scholar.; al-Jabartī, , ʿAjā07AA;ib, 1:130 ffGoogle Scholar.; Holt, P. M., “The Career of Kūchūk Muhammad (1676–94),” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 26, 2 (1963): 269–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On Ifranj Ahmed, see ʿAbdurraḥmān, ʿAbdülkerīm b., Tārīḥ-i Miṣir, Istanbul, Süleymaniye Library, MS Hekimoglu Ali Paşa 705, fols. 128r–146vGoogle Scholar; Çelebi, Aḥmad, Awḍaḥ, 229 ffGoogle Scholar.; al-Jabartī, , ʿAjāʾib, 1:107 ffGoogle Scholar.; Raymond, André, “Une ‘revolution’ au Caire sous les Mamelouks: La crise de 1123/1711,” Annales islamologiques 6 (1966): 95–120Google Scholar.

13 For example, the entourages of the early Qazdaǧh leaders Mustafa Kâhya and Hasan Çavuş are called variously ṭaraf and ṭāʾifa. See al-Jabartī, , ʿAjāʾib, 1:107, 238Google Scholar; ʿAbdülkerīm, , Tārīḫ-i Miṣir, fol. 135vGoogle Scholar. Interestingly, similar groupings were noted in the former Soviet army in Germany. See “Bad Blood in Germany: The Soviet Army Can't Leave Soon Enough,” Newsweek, 12 11 1990, 42Google Scholar.

14 A çavuş was the third-highest-ranking officer in most regiments, behind the agha and the kâhya.

15 On ʿOsman Çavuş al-Qazdaǧh's house, see al-Jabartī, , ʿAjāʾib, 2:48Google Scholar; Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, Azbakiyya and Its Environs: From Azbak to Ismail, 1476–1879 (Cairo: Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale, 1985), 55–62Google Scholar; Raymond, , “Essai de géographie,” 74Google Scholar.

16 See, for example, al-Jabartī, , ʿAjāʾib, 2:90Google Scholar. (The plural is usually atbāʿ, but occasionally tāwabiʿ.)

17 Piterberg, , “Formation of an Ottoman Egyptian Elite,” 279Google Scholar; Ayalon, , “Studies in al-Jabarti,” pt. 2, 278–83Google Scholar.

18 Quoted by Ayalon, , “Studies in al-Jabarti,” pt. 2, 279Google Scholar.

19 ʿAbdülkerīm, , Tāriḫ-i Miṣir, fol. 152vGoogle Scholar, referring to Kazdaǧh Hasan Kâhya; Istanbul, Basbakanlik Osmanli Arşivi, Mühimme-i Miṣir, 5:313, dated 1147 A.H. (1734), referring to Kazdaǧli ʿOsman Kâhya. Kâzdaǧh Ibrahim Kâhya appears in Mühimme-i Miṣir, 6:418, 419, 426, 427, all dated 1160 A.H. (1747); 6:591, 592, both dated 1161 A.H. (1748); 7:121, dated 1167 A.H. (1754); 7:185, 214, both dated 1168 A.H. (1755); 7:547, dated 1172 A.H. (1759).

20 Istanbul, Başbakanhk Osmanli Arşivi, Maliyeden Müdevver 7069, a register of 3000 soldiers dated 1150 A.H. (1737–38)Google Scholar, specifies places of origin for seven followers of household founder Mustafa Kâhya al-Qazdaǧli. Of these, five come from a variety of districts in Anatolia (see n. 23).

21 Cairo, al-shakhṣiyya, Maḥkama li-al-aḥwal, ʿAskariyya no. 108 (3 01 1716), 110Google Scholar; ʿAskariyya, no. 147 (24 03 1740), 17. Professor Raymond cited these documents in a communication to meGoogle Scholar.

22 For random examples, see Çelebi, Aḥmad, Awḍaḥ, 235Google Scholar; and ʿAbdūlkerīm, , Tārīḫ-i Miṣir, fol. 135vGoogle Scholar (both concerning Hasan Çavuş al-Qazdaǧli).

23 I have examined two registers from the Başbakanlik Oşmanh Arsivi in detail: Maliyeden Müdevver 4787, dated 1086–88 A.H. (1675–77), which lists 2,000 soldiers for an unspecified imperial campaign; and 7069, dated 1150 A.H. (1737–38), which lists 3,000 soliders for a campaign against Austria.

24 Mühimme-i Miṣir, 5:18, dated 1146 A.H. (1733)Google Scholar.

25 Abou-el-Haj, , “Vezir and Paşa Households,” 441Google Scholar, where he notes that in central Ottoman sources, atbāʿ refers to “followers/hangers on” of a vizierial household.

26 For an example of a çirak of one patron who was the tābiʿ of another, see Çelebi, Aḥmad, Awḍaḥ, 514Google Scholar.

27 Kunt, , The Sultan's Servants, especially chap. 5 and Conclusion. See also Abou-el-Haj, “Vezir and Paşa Households,” 446, n. 37Google Scholar.

28 The naqīb al-ashrāf was appointed from Istanbul until the 18th century, when the Bakri family, a prominent Cairene clan of descendants of the Prophet, came to monopolize the post.

29 See Hathaway, Jane, “The Role of the Kizlar Aǧasi in Seventeenth-Eighteenth Century Ottoman Egypt,” Studia Islamica 75 (06 1992): 141–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30 Çelebi, Aḥmad (Awḍaḥ, 514) records what is to my knowledge the first instance of an ocak officer raising a client to the beylicate in 1727, when the Janissary kâhya Hüseyin al-Dimyati made his client Mustafa Agha al-Wali sancak beyi of Jirja and Minya in Upper EgyptGoogle Scholar.

31 The kâhya, also rendered katkhudā or ketḫüda, was nominally second in command to the agha; by the 18th century, however, the kehyas of the Janissary and ʿAzeban corps exercised de facto control over their respective regiments.

32 On al-Qird, see al-Jabartī, , ʿAjāʾib, 3:158Google Scholar; on al-Sabunji, , al-Damūrdāshī, , Durra, 491, 546, 549–52Google Scholar, and al-Jabartī, , ʿjāʾib, 2:116–18Google Scholar; on Hamza Bey and the Abaza household generally, al-Damūrdāshī, , Durra, 533, 542, 543, 559.Google Scholar

33 Lang, David M., The Last Years of the Georgian Monarchy, 1658–1832 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1957), 11–22, 57–58, 69, 74, 105, 114–15, 139–42Google Scholar. Lang notes (p. 105) that the slave trade with western Georgia also intensified early in the 18th century.

34 Holt, , Egypt and the Fertile Crescent, 146.Google Scholar

35 Al-Damūrdāshī, , Durra, 55–56.Google Scholar

36 Al-Jabartī, , ʿAjāʾib, 2:110.Google Scholar

37 See, for example, Brown, L. Carl, The Tunisia of Ahmad Bey, 1837–1855 (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1974), chap. 2Google Scholar; Rafeq, Abdul-Karim, The Province of Damascus, 1723–1783 (Beirut: Khayats, 1966; 2nd ed. 1970), 234.Google Scholar

38 Al-Damūrdāshī, , Durra, 560, 577–78.Google Scholar

39 Raymond, André, Artisans et commerçants au Caire au XVIIIe siècle, 2 vols. (Damascus, 1973–1974), 1:156–57, 175–79.Google Scholar

40 Hathaway, Jane, “Marriage Alliances among the Military Households of Ottoman Egypt,” Annales islamologiques 29 (1995).Google Scholar

41 Raymond, , “Essai de géographie,” 73 ff.Google Scholar; Behrens-Abouseif, , Azbakiyya and Its Environs, 49 ff.Google Scholar

42 See, for example, al-Jabartī, , ʿAjāʾib, 4:256–57.Google Scholar

43 Hathaway, , “Marriage Alliances,” 18 ff. (manuscript).Google Scholar

44 Raymond, André, “Soldiers in Trade: The Case of Ottoman Cairo,” British Society for Middle East Studies Bulletin 18, 1 (1991): 21 ff.Google Scholar

45 Based on Maliyeden Müdevver 7069, dated 1150 A.H. (1737–38)Google Scholar.

46 I am grateful to Professor Daniel Crecelius for this information.

47 For a study of the phenomenon in medieval Europe, see Lansing, Carol, The Florentine Magnates: Lineage and Faction in a Medieval Commune (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1991), esp. chap. 2–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In “Soldiers in Trade,” cited earlier, André Raymond has made an intriguing study of the wealth of low-ranking officers, based on inheritance registers.

48 See, for example, Tuchscherer, Michel, “Le pèlerinage de I'émir Sulaymân Gâwiš al-Qazduglî, sirdâr de la caravane de la Mekke en 1739,” Annales islamologiques 24 (1988): 155–206Google Scholar. The followers listed in such a register do not necessarily comprise the totality of their patron's entourage, however.

49 For a description of these chronicles, see Holt, P. M., “Ottoman Egypt (1517–1798): An Account of Arabic Historical Sources,” in Political and Social Change in Modern Egypt, ed. Holt, P. M. (London: Oxford University Press, 1968), 3–12Google Scholar; and Crecelius, Daniel, “Aḥmad Shalabī ibn ʿAbd al-Ghanī and Aḥmad Katkhudā ʿAzabān al-Damūrdāshī: Two Sources for al-Jabartī's ʿAjāʾib al-āthār fīʾ l-tarājim wa'l-akhbār,” in Eighteenth Century Egypt: The Arabic Manuscript Sources, ed. Crecelius, Daniel (Claremont, Calif.: Regina Books, 1990), 89–02Google Scholar. See also the published edition by ʿAbd al-Rahim, ʿAbd al-Rahim ʿAbd al-Rahman (Cairo: Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale, 1989)Google Scholar and the English translation, Al- Damūrdāshī s Chronicle of Egypt, 1688–1755: Al-durra al-muṣāna fi akhbār al-kināna, ed. and annotated by Crecelius, Daniel and Bakr, ʿAbd al-Wahhab (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991).Google Scholar

50 The manuscript is discussed by Kafadar, Cemal in his “Bir Misir Yeniçerisinin Fransa Anilari” (Paper presented to the meeting of the Comité international d'études pré-ottomanes et ottomanes, Ankara, 09 1992).Google Scholar

51 For an analogous analysis of the literary output of the soldiers of the Mamluk sultanate, see Flemming, Barbara, “Literary Activities in Mamluk Halls and Barracks,” in Studies in Memory of Gaston Wiet, ed. Rosen-Ayalon, Myriam (Jerusalem: Institute of Asian and African Studies, Hebrew University, 1977), 249–60.Google Scholar

52 See nn. 13,47.