Social Disintegration and Popular Resistance in the Ottoman Empire, 1881-1908: Reactions to European Economic Penetration

by Donald Quataert

19. yüzyılda Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun Avrupa iktisadi gücü karşısındaki konumu zayıflarken ve bu gücün imparatorluk üzerindeki etkisi artarken Osmanlı tebaasının tepkisi nasıl şekillendi? Yalnızca iktisadi süreçlerle ilgili bir tepki mi söz konusuydu yoksa kişiler gruplar farklı saikler de öne sürdüler mi? Ele alınan direnç ve eklemlenmelerin biçim ve içerikleri neydi? Quataert özellikle madencilik, tren yolu, tütün rejisi ve liman işletmelerinde şekillenen, Osmanlıların Avrupa iktisadi yayılımı karşısındaki etkileşim biçimlerini, tutumlarını ve karşı koyma pratiklerini ele aldığı bu eserinde, Osmanlı toplumsal hayatının daha önce incelenmemiş yönlerine odaklanıyor.“Oluşmakta olan Avrupa hâkimiyetindeki dünya ekonomisi, Ortadoğu’da yaşayanların hayatlarını kazanma yollarını, toplumsal statülerini ve siyasi davranışlarını nasıl değiştirmişti? (...) Osmanlının öyküsünün toplumsal yönü temelde incelenmeyi beklemektedir. Dolayısıyla, 19. yüzyılın sonlarında sermaye yatırımlarındakigenişleme ve ticaretteki artış en yüksek noktasına ulaştığında halk kesiminde, seçkinler dışındaki gruplarda ortaya çıkan değişmeleri incelemeye karar verdim.” Donald Quataert

Genres: History

205 pages, Hardcover

First published September 1, 1983

About the author

Donald George Quataert (September 10, 1941 – February 10, 2011) was a Dutch-American born historian at Binghamton University. He taught courses on Middle East/Ottoman history, with an interest in labor, social and economics, during the early and modern periods. He also provided training in the reading of Ottoman archival sources.

Reviews

[Efrahim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Quataert evvela, 1908'e giden yolun sadece bir güç kaybetme, toprak kaybı ve Batı baskısı gibi etmenlerle açıklanamayacağını ve bu sürecin alttaki sıradan insanlar açısından nasıl yaşandığını ve onların ne şekilde etki ettiğini kavramanın önemli olduğunu belirterek önemli bir uyarı yapmış. Bu toplumsal dönüşümlerin ne şekilde gerçekleştiğini anlayabilmek için Avrupa merkezli doğrudan yatırımların Anadolu ve İstanbul halkının yaşam döngüsünü nasıl etkilediğini, halkın işçileşme ve örgütlenme biçimlerini, bu dönüşüme karşı ortaya koydukları direnç noktalarını güzelce ortaya koymuş. Yani esasında dünya ekonomisindeki dönüşümlerin Osmanlı toplumuna olan etkisinin pürüzsüz olmadığını, bu sürecin salt bir çözülme olarak görülemeyeceğini belirtmek istemiş.
Quataert ayrıca bu meselenin teorik bir açıklamasını yapmasa da, devletin de bu süreçte Osmanlı toplumunun kapitalistleşmesi sürecindeki farklı taraflar arasındaki güç mücadelesinin bir alanı haline geldiğini ve yekpare bir devletten bahsedilemeyeceğini bazı hukuki karar örnekleriyle ortaya koymuş.
Yukarıda belirttiğim nedenlerle ve yazıldığı tarih itibariyle, bu kitabın 1908 literatürü açısından ön açıcı nitelikte olduğu su götürmez.

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

Donald Quataert’s Social Disintegration and Popular Resistance in the Ottoman Empire is based on the premise that scholars who have studied the impact of the West on the economy of the Ottoman Empire have focused too heavily on how the state accommodated changes and not enough on how locals resisted them. Through an examination of five case studies, the author posits that the book’s two eponymous forces, social disintegration and popular resistance, characterized the indigenous reaction to foreign investment into the empire. At the same time, a tension between the state’s need to protect its foreign commitments, interest in maintaining stability, and desire to remain as autonomous from imperial powers left the central government relatively impotent when dealing with these transformations.

Quataert outlines the context of his work by arguing that integration into world trading systems began in earnest in the 16th century, but developed unevenly. After a brief history that touches upon important turning points, such as the establishment of the Public Debt Administration in 1881, he introduces his first case: the Régie tobacco monopoly. The loss of jobs that resulted from this French intrusion convinced many that the company should be resisted, an opinion that manifested itself most prominently in smuggling operations. While the French were able to adapt and eventually force the state’s hand, initial government vacillation in supporting the company contributed to the smuggling’s effectiveness in preventing the Régie from becoming a domineering force in the Ottoman economy.

Quataert’s second case study documents the Ottoman Empire’s granting of mining concessions to the Ereğli Company after the former’s failure to develop an indigenous coal industry. Local resistance to the corporation emerged as the French introduced increasing numbers of foreign workers into the mines at the expense of locals and their traditional economic patterns. Once again, the passive hostility of the central government and its unwillingness to act decisively against its own subjects contributed to the firm’s inability to produce substantial profits. In the case of the Berlin-Bagdad Railway, the author’s third example, it was the barriers faced by the locals in advancing to the upper echelons of the company that fomented dissent among the locals.

The case of the Istanbul Quay Company demonstrates the friction ignited between Western encroachment and traditional guild structures. For the firm’s survival, the French make concessions to the guilds of porters and boatmen but, as these compromises eroded the corporation’s profit potential, they developed new strategies and forced an indecisive central government to act in their interests. The Young Turk revolution, however, disrupted both of these tactics and led to the overall failure of the company. Quataert’s final study examines the boycott of Austria-Hungary across various cities and concludes that, although its effectiveness varied and is impossible to determine precisely, the Austrian government’s willingness to engage with the boycott suggests that there must have been a significant impact.

Quataert’s study is a quick and easy read, although one gets the feeling that some level of analytical rigour has been sacrificed to achieve this aim. Most notably, his terminology can be nebulous, and it can be difficult to pinpoint or define the exact “force” (in general terms) that is fomenting resistance and disintegration. Even the definition of “resistance” itself, as well as its target, could have used refinement. In some cases, such as the railway, it is obviously not the foreign investment itself that is resented, since the worker’s grievances concern their inability to advance within the company. Nonetheless, Quataert offer fresh perspective on the reaction of the empire to its integration into the world economy, one that displays strength rather than weakness and corruption. Particularly considering its focus on the local level, this book is important reading for anyone seeking to understand the complex interplay between the Ottoman Empire and the rest of the world during the end of its period of alleged decline.

[J.M. Hushour · Rating 5 out of 5]

An outstanding work of history which, for some reason, no one reads anymore. Quataert focuses on four episodes of European economic intrusion in Anatolia and shows how the labor policies of the European monopolies engendered resistance and social protest against their companies. The tobacco Regie, the mines at Zonguldak, the Anatolian Railway, and the dockworkers of Istanbul are the four cases focused on. In all of them, dislocation and crappy labor policies of the Europeans, half-heartedly backed by the Ottoman government caused widespread discontent, smuggling, and strikes. Much of worth here, especially the portrayal of the average Ottoman, whatever his religion or ethnicity lashing out at the man and actually sometimes being backed by the sultan and co. A rare history of the little guy in the late Ottoman Empire who could have cared less about Abduh, Young Turks, or any of that crap.