The Ottoman Empire was, for almost 7 centuries, a whole that was both united and diverse. This new Dictionary of the Ottoman Empire allows us to take its measure and shows the vitality of the studies devoted to it.
What do Pir Sultan Abdal, an Alevi poet from XVIe century, and a ” Zimmi “, member of a non-Muslim minority practicing a religion of the book? These two notices, among the 720 that the Dictionary of the Ottoman Empireinitiate and close the vast panorama of both recent and older research on a still little-known field. The Ottoman Empire is both a chronological era and an area of study, from XIVe century ending in XXe century, and extends from the Balkans to Morocco. Its study is gradually becoming a field in its own right, as recalled by the two articles on “historiography”, at the intersection of Arab, Byzantine, and Turkish studies. The multiple entries testify to the magnitude of the task of bringing together Ottoman diversity in a single volume. Let us immediately emphasize the extraordinary richness of this work. Twenty-five maps, 8 pages of color iconography, a thematic, nominative, and geographical index complete the volume of articles, each of which is accompanied by bibliographical entries. All these elements make the Dictionary of the Ottoman Empire a research and work tool as well as a synthesis that is most enjoyable to browse.
A large-scale publishing enterprise
This book attests to an editorial gamble made by a publishing house, Fayard, and to a long-term work. Fayard sets a new milestone in Ottoman studies. In 1989, The History of the Ottoman Empire directed by Robert Mantran gave the French-speaking reader access to new historical schools, testifying to the ” ottoman turn ” in Turkish and Arab research in the 1970s. It has remained a reference ever since. This Dictionary of the Ottoman Empire boldly renews this enterprise. This time, 15 years were necessary between the conception and the publication, recording the results of several generations of researchers, of many nationalities. Europeans, Americans, Israelis, Arabs, Turks rub shoulders in these pages. Confirmed researchers write alongside new authors who have since demonstrated the vitality of Ottoman research. The three directors of the work reinforce this observation by their institutions of affiliation.
Figures, places and notions
Four types of notices share the entries of the Dictionary. The first relates to geographical areas and events. Cities such as Cairo, Istanbul or Baghdad, countries such as Syria, regions or provinces such as Kosovo or Wallachia constitute all entry points. The best specialists have been brought together. For example, the late André Raymond, whose thesis Craftsmen and traders inaugurated Ottoman urban research in France, wrote the one on Cairo. Similarly, Édouard Méténier, one of the great connoisseurs of contemporary Iraq, offers in the sections “Baghdad” and “Iraq”, a new look at these territories too often neglected. Naturally, it will be easy to criticize the choices or to mention the absences: why Mosul rather than Basra, for example? Similarly, the writing of these articles is subject to a permanent tension: which period should be favored during the 5 centuries of the existence of the Empire? We also sometimes note distortions linked to the specialties of the authors, which favor for example the XVIIIe century for the study of the Levant. The multiplicity of places arouses the desire to see other places covered, even though the geographical scope is already very substantial. As for the events, these are primarily battles allowing students and researchers to clarify their meaning. The Dictionary plays its role as a work tool here.
The second type of entry concerns personalities. First, the reader will find notices on most of the sultans, but also the grand viziers and ministers such as the Koprülü. These great figures allow a detailed follow-up of the political history of the Ottoman Empire. The choice of such names underlines the intersection of several historiographies. One, older, is interested in the great actors of the conquests, which were thought of as the golden age par excellence. Other approaches question the time of reforms during the XIXe century, presenting the great ministerial figures or the families of viziers. In this way, some elements of prosopography useful to social history are made available to the reader. These biographical notices do not only concern the political world. Other personalities from the cultural world are selected. They are mainly poets and thinkers recalling the productions of forgotten times. It is certainly a question of showing that this Ottoman moment is well in line with the great cultural hours of these regions of the world, and thus of perfecting the demonstration that the Ottoman Empire is in no way a time of decline or stagnation. According to the theories forged by orientalists and taken up by the historical schools of the new independent states, after the golden age of the medieval period, the Arab and Turkish countries suffered a strong decline in the Ottoman era, which recent studies deny.
The third category, the largest, is that of thematic entries. The latter are divided between those that deal with general themes, such as “animals”, “cuisine” or “slavery”; and others, specific to the Ottoman world, such as “the Ottoman debt”. The latter are the most expected in this type of work. Thus each confessional and ethnic minority is the subject of a presentation clarifying for all what is meant by “Catholic”, “Armenians” or “Kurds”. These notices bring to light the latest knowledge and the recent debates that animate Ottoman studies. They also present the controversial points. This is particularly the case for the genocide of 1915, treated on several occasions in a way that updates the scientific approach around this notion.
The last area concerns terms specific to the Ottoman worlds, such as ” Agha “, “Janissaries”, ” Kanun, Kanunname “. A major distinction is made in the approach to this lexicon. Some notices only concern a precision, in a few lines, concerning the origin and applications of the term. Other terms on the contrary are the subject of a detailed explanation, which allows to grasp the historiographical issues and the successive meanings of the term in question. Here, the reader will sometimes be disappointed not to find more headings. The terms of ” defter » (register) or « wali ” (governor) are absent. Such a lexicon would have perfected the expected updating undertaking of this Dictionary.
Dynamism of Ottoman Studies
One of the dictionary’s greatest originalities, however, lies in the general thematic entries. They reveal a whole crossed historiography, angles of approach set aside, and more than ever place Ottoman studies in the latest trends in historical research. “Transport”, “Mines”, or “Foreigners” are all entry points that testify to the new perspectives developed in Ottoman studies. The choices are undoubtedly more arbitrary here than in other sections. It is regrettable that no entry truly deals with climates (except for the entry “Natural disasters”). Similarly, there are no entries for “Revolt” or “Revolution”. Here two phenomena specific to studies on cultural areas intersect. The first is due to the interdisciplinarity that is generally stronger there, opening Ottoman studies to sociology and economics. Similarly, reflections on historical demography and price movements have been treated in detail where they were only briefly addressed in other historical fields. They highlight the vigor and openness of such research. However, the second phenomenon undermines this ambition: the small number of researchers specializing in these areas of study prevents covering all fields.
Overall, the Dictionary of the Ottoman Empire stands out for the richness and diversity of the approaches it accommodates. The quality of the translations and the edition of the texts make it a most pleasant read, with a great unity of style. An effort could have been made to balance the presentations so that they restore the different periods in a more harmonious way. Similarly, one can regret that the present edition cannot easily be acquired by all readers… It is certain that other formats, particularly electronic ones, should make it more accessible. Apart from these few limitations, which arise from the very high quality of this dictionary, one must salute the enterprise, the perseverance and the richness of the present work which will remain for a long time an essential reference in Ottoman, Balkan and Middle Eastern studies.