my-server
← Wiki Redirected from Ottoman vassal state

Vassal and tributary states of the Ottoman Empire

The Ottoman Empire had a number of tributary and vassal states throughout its history. Its tributary states would regularly send tribute to the Ottoman Empire, which was understood by both states as also being a token of submission. In exchange for certain privileges, its vassal states were obligated to render support to the Ottoman Empire when called upon to do so. Some of its vassal states were also tributary states.

These client states, many of which could be described by modern terms such as satellite states or puppet states, were usually on the periphery of the Ottoman Empire under suzerainty of the Sublime Porte, over which direct control was not established. The Ottoman Empire maintained relationships with various states, some of which were under their direct rule (provinces) and others that were vassal states or tributary states, meaning they recognized Ottoman suzerainty but retained a degree of autonomy.

Functions

Ottomans first demanded only a small yearly tribute from vassal princes, as a token of their submission. They later demanded that a vassal prince's son should be held as hostage, that the prince should come to the Palace once a year and swear allegiance, and that he should send auxiliary troops on the sultan's campaigns. Vassal princes were required to treat the sultan's friends and enemies as their own. If the vassal failed in these duties, his lands would be declared as darülharb (lit. territory of war) open to the raids of the Ghazis. The Ottomans considered as their vassals all states whose rulers agreed to pay tribute. Even the Habsburgs fell into this category after Ferdinand I (1526–64) agreed to buy peace from the Ottomans in 1533. In fact, the Habsburgs were tributary (vassal?) in name only, as was Ragusa. Transylvania depended much more on the goodwill of the Ottomans than did those ruling in either Vienna or Ragusa, and the so-called Danubian Principalities, (Moldavia and Wallachia) were indeed vassal states in the strictest legal sense of the term. The territories the Ottomans had conquered were either administered as provinces or transformed into vassal states, such examples as Fezzan, which was an independent state conquered and turned into a vassal state. The Ottomans established a pattern of government within their own territories or principalities that were incorporated gradually through tribute and military alliance before there full annexation. The Ottomans would give local dynasty that would recognize themselves as vassals, particularly in border zones, this policy allowed local ruler to have local authority exchange for tribute such as military support and coinage, public rituals such as naming the sultan in khutba, while recognize the ottomans as head ruler, and serve as buffer zones.

Forms

  • Some states within the eyalet system included sancakbeys who were local to their sanjak or who inherited their position (e.g., Samtskhe, some Kurdish sanjaks), areas that were permitted to elect their own leaders (e.g., areas of Albania, Epirus, and Morea (Mani Peninsula) was nominally a part of Aegean Islands Province but Maniot beys were tributary vassals of the Porte, or de facto independent eyalets (e.g., the Barbaresque 'regencies' Algiers, Tunisia, Tripolitania in the Maghreb, and later the Khedivate of Egypt). Egypt specifically had a unique case, Muhammad Ali Pasha became its Ottoman Governor but transformed himself to be its de facto ruler. He went to war with the Ottoman Sultan twice and established a dynasty that would rule Egypt until the revolution of 1952, even after the Ottoman sovereignty ended in 1914.
  • Outside the eyalet system were states such as Moldavia, Wallachia and Transylvania which paid tribute to the Ottomans and over which the Porte had the right to nominate or depose the ruler, garrison rights, and foreign policy control. They were considered by the Ottomans as part of Dar al-'Ahd, thus they were allowed to preserve their self-rule, and were not under Islamic law, like the empire proper; Ottoman subjects, or Muslims for that matter, were not allowed to settle the land permanently or to build mosques.
  • Territories Subject to the Caliphate. The Muslims of India (Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh), Sri Lanka, the Maldives, Afghanistan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Comoros, Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, the South of Africa, the western Turkestan Khanates (the Khanates of Khiva, Bukhara, and Kokand), and eastern Turkestan. Zanzibar sultanate
  • Some states, such as Ragusa, paid tribute for the entirety of their territory and recognized Ottoman suzerainty.
  • Others, such as the Sharif of Mecca, recognized Ottoman suzerainty but were subsidized by the Porte. The Ottomans were also expected to protect the Sharifate militarily – as suzerains over Mecca and Medina, the Ottoman sultans were meant to ensure the protection of the Hajj and Umrah pilgrimages and safe passage of pilgrims. The Amir al-hajj was a military officer appointed by the Sultanate to ensure this.
  • During the nineteenth century, as Ottoman territory receded, several breakaway states from the Ottoman Empire had the status of vassal states (e.g. they paid tribute to the Ottoman Empire), before gaining complete independence. They were, however, de facto independent, including having their own foreign policy and their own independent military. This was the case with the principalities of Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria
  • Some states paid tribute for possessions that were legally bound to the Ottoman Empire but not possessed by the Ottomans, such as the Habsburgs for parts of Royal Hungary or Venice for Zante.

There were also secondary vassals such as the Nogai Horde and the Circassians who were (at least nominally) vassals of the khans of Crimea, or some Berbers and Arabs who paid tribute to the North African beylerbeyis, who were in turn Ottoman vassals themselves. Other tribute from foreign powers included a kind of protection money, sometimes called a "horde tax" (similar to the Danegeld), paid by the Tsardom of Russia or the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. It was usually paid to the Ottoman vassal khans of Crimea rather than to the Ottoman sultan directly.

List of Ottoman tributaries and vassals

See also

References

Further reading

  • Gábor Kármán (ed.), Tributaries and Peripheries of the Ottoman Empire, BRILL, 2020.
  • Ahmad Al-Sharif, The Sahara: A Political and Economic History (1979)
  • J. Despois, Les Touaregs du Hoggar (1957) (18th–19th centuries)
  • Books on the Ottoman Expansion Area

Ahmet Akgündüz, Unknown Ottoman, Istanbul 1999

Ahmet Kavas, From Past to Present Africa, Istanbul 2005

Ahmet Kavas, Ottoman–Africa Relations, TASAM Publications, Istanbul 2006

Hatice Uğur, A Sultanate in Ottoman Africa: Zanzibar, Istanbul: Küre Publications, 2005 [Link]

Türkiye Newspaper, Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire

1970 Hayat Encyclopedia

Erhan Afyoncu, The Ottoman Empire with Questions

İlber Ortaylı, The Ottomans

  • From the works of Ahmet Kavas:
  • “The Dominance and Influence of the Ottoman Empire on the African Continent”, Yeni Türkiye Journal Ottoman Special Issue, I, 421-430 (2000). English translation of the same article. “The Dominance and Influence of the Ottoman Empire on the African Continent”, The Great Ottoman, Turkish Civilisation, Ankara 2000, I, p. 248-258
  • “The Relations of the Ottoman Empire with the Muslim Emirate of Harar and Its Effect on the Rapprochement with the Christian Abyssinian (Ethiopian) Empire”, Pax Ottomana Studies in Memoriam Prof. Dr. Nejat GÖYÜNÇ, Sota-Yeni Türkiye Publications, Haarlem-Ankara 2001, p. 443-464
  • “The Establishment of the Gat District in the Great Sahara and Ottoman–Tuareg Relations”, Journal of Islamic Studies, 3, 171-196 (1999)
  • “Ottoman–Tibu Relations: The Establishment of the Reşâde (Chad) and Kavar (Niger) Districts in the Great Sahara”, Journal of Islamic Studies, 4, 69-104 (2000)
  • “The Islamic Policy Implemented by France in North and West Africa: The Issue of Rejecting the Call for Jihad Published by Sultan Reşad”, Religious Studies, 6, 23-50 (April 2000)
  • “The Last Bilad al-Sudan State Founded by Rabih b. Fazlullah Before the Colonisation of Africa and His Struggle with France”, Ottoman Studies, XX, 9-35 (2000)
  • “Ottoman Sovereignty on the East African Coast: The Position of the Zeila Port in Northern Somalia (1265-1334/1849-1916)”, Journal of Islamic Studies, issue: 5, 2001, p. 109-134
  • “A Poor Field in Turkish Academic Research: Ottoman Africa”, Journal of Turkish Studies Literature (Talid), Vol: 1, No: 2, 2003, Foundation for Science and Art Turkish Studies Center, Istanbul, p. 513-528
  • “The Relations of the Ottoman Empire with the Indigenous People in North Africa”, International Congress on Science and Education in the Ottoman World, Istanbul, 12–15 April 1999