Post-Ottoman Coexistence: Sharing Space in the Shadow of Conflict

by Rebecca Bryant (Editor)

In Southeast Europe, the Balkans, and Middle East, scholars often refer to the “peaceful coexistence” of various religious and ethnic groups under the Ottoman Empire before ethnonationalist conflicts dissolved that shared space and created legacies of division. Post-Ottoman Coexistence interrogates ways of living together and asks what practices enabled centuries of cooperation and sharing, as well as how and when such sharing was disrupted. Contributors discuss both historical and contemporary practices of coexistence within the context of ethno-national conflict and its aftermath.
 

292 pages, Library Binding

Published March 1, 2016

About the author

I am Professor of Cultural Anthropology at Utrecht University and an anthropologist of politics and law. My work has focused on ethnic conflict and displacement, border practices, post-conflict reconciliation, and contested sovereignty on both sides of the Cyprus Green Line and in Turkey. I studied Philosophy (B.A.) and Cultural Anthropology (M.A., Ph.D.) at the University of Chicago and have since held teaching and research positions at the London School of Economics, George Mason University, and the American University in Cairo. I have also taught as a Fulbright fellow at Boğaziçi University in Istanbul and as a visiting professor at Middle East Technical University's Cyprus campus. I hold affiliations as an Associate of the Peace Research Institute Oslo and a Senior Research Fellow in the European Institute of the London School of Economics.

Reviews

[Eugene Kernes · Rating 2 out of 5]

Shared spaces are those in which different faith and ethnic groups come together to work, worship, rejoice, and connect. Coexistence obtains special meaning when it is lost. Its loss is felt deeply, but evanescent during existence. Events that make history are not those which make coexistence as everyday life rarely leaves a record. Coexistence is an uneventfulness from which much can be learned. A culture in which everyone practices small acts of diplomacy. Even under enormous tension, different people can come together. Mistrust and hostility can come about by the rash actions of a few.

The Ottoman Empire appreciated differences and managed them. Allowed people of other religions to be judged under their own laws and represented by their religious leaders. Although other religions were allowed within the Ottoman Empire, they were subordinated to Islam. Muslims imposed their physical signs on architecture to show superiority. This trend was reversed as the Ottoman Empire weakened. Ottoman Empire right to rule depended on its defense of the peasants. To guarantee the peasants subsistence and market provisions, while preventing excessive accumulation by private individuals.

What was lost in deportations was the community, culture, and the deep bonds between people. The home was not a completely private space, neighbors could easily stop by and drink coffee. Keeping the doors open meant that the neighbors frequently interacted with each other, which facilitated the practice of moral exchange with everyday diplomacy. Getting back to coexistence is made difficult by the narratives being told about the past as they silence many minority counter-narratives which threaten the hegemonic narrative.

Although the book uses a variety of means to show coexistence, there seems to a lack of convergence. The lack of clarity about what time periods are being discussed to what the examples mean reduces the understanding of the topic. There were parts of the book that were well written and bring with them meaning to coexistence, but a large part of the book is best understood by those who have personal experience with the topics, or have a decent understanding of the historic and contemporary related topics.