オスマン帝国末期イスラーム法官の 4 類型

̶法官組織に⾒られる社会移動̶

Osuman teikoku makki isuramu hokan no 4 ruikei: Hokan soshiki ni mirareru shakai ido

Journal of Asian and African Studies, No. 69, 2005, 65–97. https://doi.org/10.15026/20214
Translation: https://researchmap.jp/jun_akiba/published_papers/24525821

Social Origins of the Late Ottoman Sharia Judges:

Some Observations on Mobility and Integration*

Akiba, Jun
(Chiba University)

[65] ABSTRACT
This article focuses on the social and educational backgrounds of the judges of Sharia courts in the
late Ottoman Empire, making a quantitative analysis based on the personnel records kept in the
Archives of the İstanbul Müftülüğü. The collection of personnel records contains the curricula vitae
of ulema serving at salaried posts from 1892 onwards. 295 personnel files of judges were selected
from the collection as the sample for this study. The analysis of the birthplace of judges reveals that
a large number of judges originated from particular regions, namely Istanbul, Ergiri, İbradı and the
province of Trabzon.
Not surprisingly, Istanbul (11%) was overrepresented in proportion to its population. Istanbul-
born judges were almost exclusively from ulema families.
It is notable that about 12% of the sample came from the southern Albanian district of Ergiri
(Gjirokaster). 20% of Ergiri-bom judges’ fathers were again judges; but the majority had a non-ulema
background. Notable sand landowners were the largest group (37%). As regards their education, more
than half graduated from the Naibs’ College (Mekteb-i Nüvvab). These results indicate that Ergiri-
born judges were relative newcomers to this profession, acquiring positions through formal education
as well as personal networks.
İbradı in Konya province was another town famous for producing judges. Reflecting its long
tradition dating back to the eighteenth century, most İbradı-born judges were sons of judges and
trained in a traditional way, through a system of apprenticeship. However, the people of İbradı began

To cite this article, please refer to the original Japanese version. The original page numbers are given
in parentheses.
Keywords: The Ottoman Empire, Sharia Court, Ulema, Social Mobility, Education
*
This article is a substantially revised version of part of chapter 4 of my doctoral dissertation (Akiba
2003). The original form of this article was a paper (“The Making of a Judge in the Late Ottoman
Empire: Some Observations on Social Mobility and Integration”) presented at the Annual meeting of
the Middle East Studies Association of North America in Orlando, Florida, in November 2000.
Research on the primary sources for this article in Turkey was made possible through the scholarship
of the Heiwa Nakajima Foundation from 1998 to 2000.

1
to switch careers from the Sharia judiciary to other branches of governmental service, especially to
the new secular judiciary and the local administration.
[66] There are also significant numbers of judges from Trabzon province in the Eastern Black
Sea region, most with relatively modest backgrounds, including those born in villages. Education in
Istanbul was crucial for their upward mobility.
The study of the backgrounds of judges can thus contribute to the understanding of the social
mobility and integration into the Ottoman bureaucratic mechanism among the Muslim population of
the Empire.

Introduction
Mehmet Hurşid Efendi was born in 1855/56 in the village of Paskala, Arhavi county (nahiye),
on the eastern coast of the Black Sea. According to his own account, his father, Ali Ağa, was
“not an official, had no official rank, and was not a well-known person.” Mehmet studied the
Qur’an and the precepts of Islam in the village and then learned Arabic grammar in a village
medrese.1 In 1871, he traveled to Istanbul, where he enrolled in a medrese, attended lectures
at the Fatih mosque, and studied logic, theology, legal theories, philosophy, and law, for
which he was awarded a diploma. In 1876, he took the exam for admission to the Naibs’
College (school for sharia judges) and graduated in 1878 with a third grade of the sharia
judiciary. In 1881, he was appointed the sharia judge of the Muş district in Bitlis province in
eastern Anatolian. Before his death in November 1904, he served as a sharia judge in Anatolia,
the Arab regions, and the Balkans a total of six times after completing his initial two-year
term.2
Mehmed Hurşid was one of the numerous people in the late Ottoman Empire who, despite
being born in a remote rural area, successfully obtained government positions, ascended the
ranks through their education. [67] His chosen profession, the office of sharia judge, had
existed in the Ottoman Empire from its earliest days, but its organization underwent a major
transformation in the late nineteenth century. Without the existence of the “naibship system,”
with its new appointment and training procedures, there would not have been success stories
like the one of Mehmed Hurşid.

1
In the Ottoman Empire’s medreses (schools for teaching traditional Islamic studies) in Anatolia and
the Balkans in the nineteenth century, education generally began with basic studies such as Arabic
grammar and logic, and later progressed to jurisprudence. See Akiba (1996; 1998a).
2
Istanbul Mufti’s Office, Meşjhat Archjves, Sjcjll-j Ahval Dosyaları, no. 1908. Hereafter abbreviated
as SA dos. 1908); Albayrak 1996, 3:208.

2
 From the earliest days in the Ottoman Empire, kadıs or sharia judges were dispatched to
each city and town to preside over the sharia courts and to be engaged in local administration.
A prominent feature of the kadıship institution in the Ottoman Empire was that the kadıships
were ranked and formed a hierarchical system of offices along with the medrese professorship
hierarchy. This hierarchical organization of kadıships and professorships was called the
“ilmiye institution,” with the Şeyhülislam or the chief mufti of the Empire at the top.3 The
term “naib” originally meant deputy to the kadı; however, the generalization of deputy
appointments rendered the kadıship system obsolete by the eighteenth century, and the
naibship system was established in its place in the following century, with the naib being a
paid sharia judge appointed from the center. As a result of the 1864 Provincial Law’s
reorganization of the local administrative system, the principle of established in 1871 that a
salaried naib would be appointed by the Şeyhülislam’s Office (Bab-ı Meş?hat) to the sharia
court of each province (vilayet), subprovince (sancak), and district (kaza) throughout the
Empire. This can be considered the beginning of the naibship system. The ranking of naibs
was based on five grades, which were granted by examinations. Then a system was then
established to train judges through a new school (established in 1855) called the Naibs’
College (Muallimhane-i Nüvvab, renamed Mekteb-i Nüvvab, Mekteb-i Kuzat, and
Medresetü’l-kuzat) (Akiba 2005; 2003; Akiba 1998b).
Simultaneously, [68] the relative status of the sharia judiciary within the Ottoman state
apparatus changed drastically. With the expansion of the imperial bureaucracy and the
development of the local administrative system, the traditionally central role of sharia judges
in local civil administration diminished. In addition, the establishment of the nizamiye court
(statute law court) system as part of the local administrative reforms that began in 1864
limited the scope of the sharia courts’ jurisdiction. Although the presidency of the civil courts
of the nizamiye courts was usually held simultaneously by a naib, a new judicial bureaucracy
consisting of criminal judges, prosecutors, and lawyers was established.4
What modification to the sharia judiciary resulted from this new system and environment?
Who were they, where did they originate, and how did they become sharia judges? Moreover,
how prevalent were cases similar to Mehmed Hurşid? The primary objective of this article is

3
For the classical ilmiye institution in Japanese, see Matsuo (1996).
4
For the nizamiye courts, see Encyclopaedia of Islam, New edition (hereafter EI2), s.v. “Mahkama
2,” by C. V. Findley, Bingöl (1998), Ekinci (2004), among others.

3
to examine, from a macro perspective, these questions, namely the social origins of sharia
judges in the late Ottoman Empire.
Sharia courts have been of particular interest in the study of Ottoman history in recent
years, and since the 1990s there has been a growing tendency to focus on issues of legal
practice, replacing the traditional socioeconomic historical method of extracting data from
court registers.5 Needless to say, it is crucial to know the backgrounds of judges in order to
understand the practice of law in the courtroom.6 Agmon (2004) focuses on a Damascus-
born judge in the late Empire. Her article is complementary to this macro-study. This article
attempts to identify overall trends in the organization of the sharia judiciary and situate
individual cases within it.
Given the office of sharia judge is part of the ilmiye system and is exclusive to the ulema,
this study is also a study of the ulema during the late Ottoman period. Originally, ulema was
a collective term for scholars of traditional Islamic studies, particularly Islamic law. The
ulema were typically engaged in professions such as sharia judge, mufti, medrese professor,
imam, and preacher, which can be considered the ulema’s specific occupations, but some of
them were also engaged in other occupations such as commerce and agriculture. In the late
Ottoman Empire, however, it was common for those who had completed their medrese
education but entered the civil service career (mülkiye) and switched their rank in the ilmiye
system to the civil service grade to no longer be called ulema (although it was possible to
retain their ilmiye rank while serving in the civil bureaucracy). In any case, the ulema were a
highly diverse group, and this must always be kept in mind when discussing them. Regarding
the origins and careers of the late Ottoman ulema, Kushner (1994) analyzed 500 ulema
selected from Albayrak (1996, 1st ed., 1980–81), a collection of ulema biographies. However,
Kushner’s argument is not very rigorous because he analyzed without distinguishing the
occupations of the ulema, or without clarifying the profile of the population.7 [69] In fact,
Albayrak (1996) arbitrarily selected 2,854 ulema from the ulema’s personnel records

5
I am thinking of studies by Iris Agmon, Beshara Doumani, Boğaç Ergene, Leslie Peirce, and Najwa
Al-Qattan. In Japanese, see Miura (1998; 2004).
6
In his review essay of studies on Ottoman sharia courts, Ze’evi (1998, 53) points out the importance
of studying judges.
7
Due to the limitations of sources prior to the first half of the nineteenth century, biographical
collections were used to study the origins and career paths of high-ranking ulema, including judges
(Faroghi [Faroqhi] 1973; Zilfi 1983a, 1983b, 1988). For Şeyhülislams, Itzkowitz (1969) and Itzkowitz
and Shinder (1972) analyzed long-term changes.

4
preserved in the Meşihat Archives of Istanbul Mufti’s Office (which I used as primary sources
for this article) and summarized their biographies.
This article, using personnel records as the primary sources, analyzes a sample of 295
sharia judges selected in the manner described in the following. First and foremost, the
analysis will reveal that the geographical origin of the judges is concentrated in certain
regions. As shown below, the judges from each of four regions, including Istanbul, the Ergiri
district in southern Albania, İbradı in southwestern Anatolia, and Trabzon Province in eastern
Black Sea regions from which Mehmet Hurşid originated, represent approximately 10% of
the total sample, respectively. How were the people from these regions, which apart from
Istanbul are rather remote from the Empire, incorporated into the imperial bureaucracy of the
judicial service and how did they achieve upward social mobility? This article focuses on
people from these specific regions.
Clayer (2000) has already discussed the social origins, education, and career patterns of
sharia judges from Ergiri and Libohova based on Albayrak (1996). Meanwhile, Toumarkine
(2000), who also relies on Albayrak (1996) and discusses ulema from Trabzon province and
the Caucasus region, analyzes similarly judges from Trabzon province. Even though the
discussion in both articles overlaps with sections 3 and 5 of this article in some respects, it
should be noted that both articles have limitations due to their reliance on secondary sources
and their lack of analysis concerning the relation with the overall judiciary organization and
with other regions.
The presence of provincial representatives in the judiciary organization indicates that the
expansion of the bureaucracy and the spread of the education system in the Ottoman Empire
brought the provincial population closer to the state. Moreover, people who had previously
been outside or on the periphery of the state bureaucracy joined the expanding bureaucratic
organization. In other words, the judiciary is an excellent case study for analyzing the
problems of integration and social mobility of Ottoman subjects through their participation
in the school system and bureaucracy.
Related to this article from this perspective is the work of Findley (1989), who investigates
the social origins, education, and careers of foreign ministry officials based on their personnel
records that are similar to the ulema’s personnel records. Szyliowicz (1971), Findley (1989,
114–119), Blake (1991), and Nagata (2001) analyze the origins of graduates of the Mülkiye

5
School (School of Civil Administration), which produced mainly provincial administrators.8
In addition, other studies in the history of late Ottoman Arab regions investigate the origins
and backgrounds of local notables by using biographical collections and sharia court
registers.9 Guided by the methods and results of these previous studies, this article aims to
examine the issues of the integration and mobility of the provincial people by investigating
the social origins of sharia judges and [70] to comprehend the position of the sharia judiciary
within the imperial bureaucracy and Ottoman society.

I. Sources and sample

The primary sources that form the basis of this study are the ulema personnel record
collection, currently held at the Meşihat Archives of the Istanbul Mufti’s Office.10 These
documents were produced to conduct and administer personnel affairs systematically. The
system of managing personnel records was first introduced in 1879 for the civil bureaucracy,
as the bureaucratic organization developed11 and was adopted in the Şeyhülislam’s Office in
1892 (Akiba 2003, 115). The personnel records were of two types: dossier and register. The
most basic is the curriculum vitae (CV; tercüme-i hal varakası) filled out by the applicant,
which, along with other documents related to the personal history (copies of appointment
letters and diplomas submitted with the CV, lists of employment history and salaries for
pension calculation, petitions, etc.), is kept in a personal file. The files were maintained as
personnel record dossiers (Sicill-i Ahval Dosyaları) (6,386 dossiers in total). Meanwhile,
personnel record registers (Sicill-i Ahval Defterleri) were compiled to summarize the
contents of each dossier, roughly categorized by job category (7 volumes exist).
The CV format varies slightly from period to period, but they all consist of a
questionnaire with questions printed on it and a box separating the questions and answers,

8
These studies are based on Çankaya (1968–71), which was compiled using personnel records.
However, Blake (1991) makes use of primary personnel records. Elsewhere, Baltaoğlu (1998)
employed personnel records of former Ottoman officials to focus on the prefects of the Turkish
Republic during the Atatürk period. Szyliowicz (1975) conducted a pioneering study in which he
analyzed the origins and career paths of 1,023 senior central and local officials using unpublished
biographical collections. However, because the subjects covered were too diverse, the period covered
was too long, and the link to the bureaucracy’s structure was weak, the discussion is undeniably
unclear. Olivièr Bouquet is currently working on a study of the “paşas” at the end of the Empire using
the personnel records in the Prime Minister's Ottoman Archives.
9
Roded 1983; 1986; Yazbak 1995; 1997; 1998.
10
For the personnel record collection in the Meşihat Archives, see Bilici (1995) and Zerdeci (1998).
11
For the personnel records of civil officials, see Findley 1989, 343–355.

6
usually with the answers written in the respondents’ own handwriting. 12 The questions
include the applicant’s name, father’s name and rank, year and place of birth, educational
background, spoken and written languages, written works, employment history, salary, rank,
awards, and punishments. CVs are the most basic source of information on the social origins
of applicants. A catalog (Zerdeci 1998) of personnel dossiers containing these basic
documents was compiled, and the sample was extracted based on this catalog. According to
the positions listed in the inventory, 1,384 of the 6,386 names are naibs or kadıs. First, of
these 1,384 persons, starting from the third person at the top of the list, we selected every
third persons in order, and selected 461 dossiers.13 From these, we selected 295 individuals
who had held positions as sharia judges in administrative units above the nahiye level and
whose personnel files contained CVs or their summaries14 and formed the basic sample for
our analysis.15 [72] Nahiye judges, or judges of an administrative unit below the district level,

12
The paper used for CV is slightly larger than A3 with the exception of the double-fold, four-page
format used at the end of the period. Some are completely handwritten, most likely due to a lack of
formatted papers. Figure 1 is an example of a CV. See also Albayrak 1996, 3:452, appendix 38.
13
The dossiers are arranged roughly alphabetically (in Arabic) by the name of the province from
which the personnel records were sent (i.e., the places of appointment of the sharia judges at the time
the CVs were prepared), though there was also a great deal of irregularity. The dossier numbers are
the original document numbers, but the same person’s dossier number was frequently changed. In
historiography, it is customary practice to sample the entire collection every few cases (Hudson 2000,
172). A discussion of the sample’s representability can be found in note 15. We must admit that we
overlooked one person (SA dos. 550, Mahmud Hamdi) when selecting these 461 people, but it is safe
to assume that this did not bias the sample.
14
However, even when the personnel dossier lacked a CV or a summary of the CV, those whose CV
summaries were recorded in the personnel registers (hereafter SA def.) were included. Priştıneli
Abdurrahman Sabit (SA dos. 1232; SA def. 5: 76); Ünyeli Mehmed Nuri (SA dos. 1457; SA def. 3:
89). Furthermore, after checking their contents against other materials in the dossiers, we take the
following two individuals, whose CVs were not preserved in the dossiers but whose detailed
biographies were included in Albayrak (1996) that were obviously based on their (lost) CVs, as
samples: Mardinli Yusuf Sıdkı (SA dos. 162; Albayrak 1996, 4: 378); Bağdadlı Mehmed Sabit (SA
dos. 2931; Albayrak 1996, 3: 302).
15
If we assume that the number 885, which is simply the sample number (295) multiplied by three,
represents the number of files of sharia judges at or above the district level whose CVs are available,
the sample error of the survey of the sample (295) relative to the population (885) is less than 4.7%.
In other words, the sample of 295 in this article roughly reflects the attribute of the entire group of
the personnel dossier collection. As described below, the personnel dossiers include incumbent sharia
judges (at the district level and above) since 1892. The total number of those sharia judges since 1892
is estimated to be approximately 3,200 based on the number of Naibs’ College graduates (assuming
that sharia judges served for 30 years, we applied the figures obtained from our sample to the
percentage of Naibs’ College graduates among the new recruits to the sharia judiciary). A sample of
more than 344 would be required if a random sampling of all 3,200 sharia judges was conducted with
a margin of error less than 5%, However, the collection of personnel dossiers does not randomly
represent the entire population of actual sharia judges. Whether or not a CV survives is not always
due to chance; at the very least, the later the date of initial appointment, the less likely the CV will

7
[71]

Figure 1. CV of Ahmed Tevfik from Alaiye (SA dos. 1917)

2 Şevval 1310 (19 February 1893)

survive (see below). Therefore, we analyze the data by categorizing the judges based on the year of
their first appointment. Furthermore, because we conduct analysis by place of origin, the sample size
for each location is smaller, and the margin of error is naturally larger. However, because the results
of the analysis by birthplace (Table 4) clearly show the characteristics of each region, an exhaustive
survey is unlikely to significantly change the conclusions. In any case, in this article, we take into
account the sample’s incompleteness and try not to draw conclusions solely from statistical
calculations, but also from other historical materials and data, so that the figures obtained from the
sample are not taken as absolute. In addition to the foregoing, the amount of information contained
in each dossier is extremely large, and electronic copying and photography were prohibited at the
archives during our visit. These conditions make a comprehensive survey of personnel dossiers not
fully worth the effort.

8
were excluded from the sample because these positions were not under the direct control of
the Şeyhülislam’s Office before the Young Turk Revolution and, like the court scribes, they
were regarded as apprentices to become a district naib.
The personnel management system began in 1892; hence, the 295 individuals in the
sample are either current judges as of 1892 or have held a judge position since then (Akiba
2003, 115). To understand the characteristics of these judges diachronically, we divide the
year in which each individual was first appointed to a judge position into four time periods.
Each period is divided by the year in which there was a change in the system of recruitment
or appointment of a judge. This is because changes in the system are expected to naturally
lead to a change in the tendencies of the recruited or appointed persons.
The oldest judge in the sample was first appointed in 1844. The period from 1844 to
1867, when the 1864 provincial law was applied almost throughout the Empire, is designated
as Period I. The reorganization of the Naibs’ College in December 1883 and the expansion
of the quota increased the number of graduates from the following year onward, so we
consider Period II from 1868 to 1883. The regime change brought about by the Young Turk
Revolution of 1908 also had a significant impact on the naib system: in September 1909, a
large-scale purge (tensik-i umumi) began in the Şeyhülislam’s Office. Naibs who had not
graduated from the Naibs’ College or who did not have a grade had to take an examination
at the Naibs’ College and obtain a grade before they could next enter the judicial service. The
judges in office at that time were subject to strict scrutiny by the “Purge Committee” (Tensik
Komisyonu) and were sometimes dismissed. Those who were over 65 years of age were also
required to retire. As a result, recruits to the naib (at or above the district level) were restricted
to graduates of the Naibs’ College or experienced nahiye judges (below the district level)
who had passed an examination in Istanbul. In addition, the Naibs’ College formerly had a
special class for the children of high-ranking ulema, but this was also abolished immediately
after the revolution (Akiba 2003, 142–143, 151). Period III is defined as the period from 1884
to 1909, before these reforms took effect, and Period IV is from 1910 to 1916, the final year
of the recruitment for the naib in the sample.
When we classify the sample according to the above periods, we find 45 judges in Period
I (1844–67), 116 in Period II (1868–83), 111 in Period III (1884–1909), [73] and 23 in Period
IV (1910–16). Since the CV was introduced in 1892, the number of judges in Period I is
understandably small, but the number of students in Period IV is very small, both in absolute
numbers and per year. A close examination of the 23 people shows that 20 died and one was

9
missing before the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Therefore, the personnel records of the judges
who were recruited during Period IV and survived the dissolution of the empire were likely
transferred to other places, perhaps to the relevant offices in the Turkish Republic. 16 In
general, the length of tenure is related to the age at first appointment, and the age at first
appointment is related to the career before assuming the office of sharia judge. In fact, the
average age at the first appointment for the 17 graduates of the Naibs’ College included in
Period IV is 32.3 years old, whereas the average age at the first appointment for the other six
(all from nahiye naibs) is 44.7 years old. In other words, judges who were promoted to the
district naibship after serving as nahiye naibs (26%) are overrepresented in Period IV. In
comparison, the percentage of the graduates of the Naibs’ College who could be appointed
to the position of district judge at a younger age (74%) is lower than the actual percentage.
Before interpreting the results, I will compare the sample size of Period IV, which is small
and thus unreliable, to the data of all graduates of the Naibs’ College. This is also because we
estimate that graduates of the Naibs’ College will constitute the vast majority, exceeding 74%
in Period IV. The percentages of graduates of the Naibs’ College in Period I, II, and III were
20%, 22%, and 36%, respectively, indicating a steady increase until 1909 and a sharp increase
in Period IV.
As mentioned above, the characteristics of the sharia judiciary can be seen in the
distribution of their places of origin (birthplaces). 17 First, Table 1 shows the regional
classification of birthplaces. Although the number of judges from Istanbul is the highest per
capita, it is surprisingly low, at a little over 10%, given the city’s central location. The three
major regional divisions of the Balkans, Anatolia, and the Arab regions produced an
approximately proportional number of judges to their populations. However, the majority of
Period IV judges were from Anatolia, and this must be considered.
Tables 2 and 3 provide a more specific breakdown of the birthplace by province and
district. As is evident at first glance, the birthplaces of the sharia judges are not evenly
distributed, but rather highly concentrated in specific locations. Nearly half of the sample is

16
Indeed, there are many empty dossiers with the words “Sent to the Diyanet” (Directorate of
Religious Affairs) written on the front.
17
The Arab regions are defined here as the area covered by the eight provinces of Syira, Beirut,
Mosul, Baghdad, Basra, Hijaz, Yemen, and Tripoli (Trablusgarb), three subprovinces of Zor,
Jerusalem, and Mount Lebanon, and Aleppo province excluding the Maraş subprovince, based on the
administrative division of 1897. The subprovince of Maraş is regarded as Anatolia. In what follows,
I refer to the Ottoman state statistics of 1897 and Güran (1997) for the administrative divisions.

10
comprised of individuals from the provinces of Konya, Yanya, and Trabzon. At the district
level, Ergiri in Yanya and Akseki in Konya stand out for having a comparable number of
judges born in Istanbul. The majority of judges from the Ergiri district are from the town of
Ergiri and the nearby village of Libohova, while the majority of judges from the Akseki
district are from İbradı county. It is surprising that such a large number of judges came from
such small towns, counties, and villages in remote areas. What types of backgrounds have
produced judges in these locations? As shown in Table 4, the origins of these judges varied
significantly between regions. Therefore, we will analyze the judges from Istanbul, Ergiri,
İbradı, and the province of Trabzon, respectively.

[74]
Table 1. Birthplaces of the Sharia Judges (by Region)
Period I Period II Period III Period IV Population of
Total (%) (%) (%) (%) Muslim Male
Birthplace
(%) (1906–1907)*
1844–1867 1868–1883 1884–1909 1910–1916 (%)
Istanbul 11 9 9 15 4 3
Balkans 22 27 26 19 4 14
Anatolia 50 51 45 47 87 65
Arab Regions 15 11 20 14 4 17
Outside Empire 2 2 0 5 0 -
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
N= 295 45 116 111 23 8,280,000
* Karpat 1985, 168.

Table 2. Birthplaces of the Sharia Judges (by Province)

Total Period I Period II Period III Period IV
Province
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Konya 18 27 16 14 35
Yanya 13 18 16 9 0
Trabzon 12 9 9 16 13
Istanbul 11 9 9 15 4
Mosul 4 4 6 3 0
Sivas 3 2 4 2 9
Others 39 31 39 41 39
Total 100 100 100 100 100
N= 295 45 116 111 23

11
Table 3. Birthplaces of the Sharia Judges (by District)
Total (%) Period I (%) Period II (%) Period III (%) Period IV (%)
District
N N N N N
Ergiri 12 18 15 9 0
(Ergiri 18 4 8 6 0
(Libohova 15 4 7 4 0
(Nepravişta 2 0 2 0 0
Akseki 12 20 12 6 17
(İbradı 27 8 11 4 4
(Gödene 6 1 3 2 0
(Sılles 1 0 0 1 0
Istanbul 11 33 9 4 9 11 15 17 4 1
Hopa 3 8 0 0 2 2 4 4 9 2
Damascus 3 8 2 1 3 4 3 3 0 0
Rize 2 6 2 1 3 3 2 2 0 0
Others 58 171 49 22 56 65 61 68 70 16
Total 100 100 100 100 100
N= 295 45 116 111 23

Table 4. Occupations of Sharia Judges’ Fathers (by Birthplace)

Trabzon
Occupation Istanbul (%) Ergiri (%) İbradı (%)
Province (%)
Others (%) Total (%)
Sharia Judge 67 20 63 3 15 24
Other Ulema 27 6 4 28 41 31
Local
0 9 0 19 2 4
Administration
Military 0 9 4 0 1 2
Local Notable,
0 37 0 6 8 9
Landowner
Merchant 0 3 11 6 6 5
Craftsman 0 0 4 0 4 2
Peasant 0 0 4 6 4 3
Others 3 0 0 6 1 2
Unknown (No
3 17 11 28 18 17
Official Position)
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
N= 33 35 27 36 164 295

[75]
2. Istanbul: “In Case of Necessity”
Most sharia judges born in Istanbul were born into ulema families (31 out of 33, 94%), and
22 had fathers who had experience as judges. Moreover, 85% (28 judges) of all Istanbul-born
judges are high-ranking ulema with the rank of “mevleviyet” or higher.18 Since the imperial
capital, Istanbul, was the center of education, recruitment, and appointment of sharia judges,

18
Our sample does not include many ulema families who had held higher ranks in the ilmiye
institution for generations. At least 16 ulema fathers originated from the provinces.

12
those from Istanbul had the greatest advantage regarding access to judicial posts. Furthermore,
children of high-ranking ulema were in a privileged position in terms of educational
opportunities, apprenticeships, and naibship grades.19 The Naibs’ College had a special class
for children of high-ranking ulema until the Revolution of 1908, and at least one of the former
students in the sample, Abdurrahim Şükrü (SA dos. 2681), noted on his CV that he was
admitted to the Naibs’ College without examination.
Despite this overwhelming advantage, however, the percentage of judges who were born
in Istanbul is not particularly high. Compared with the data showing that 76% of the Foreign
Ministry bureaucrats of the same period were from Istanbul (Findley 1989, 99), 11% even
seems rather small. This is due, first of all, to the fact that the judge position was essentially
a provincial office. Service in the provinces was not always desirable for the ulema who were
born in Istanbul. In this regard, Mahir İz, who was born into an ulema family, wrote in his
memoirs, “The ulema of Istanbul, once called şehrî (city-born), did not customarily go to the
provinces unless it was necessary (zaruret olmadıkça) (İz 1990, 19).” In the case of his father,
who had previously been a clerk in the Şeyhülislam’s Office, he gladly accepted the position
of sharia judge in Midilli (Lesbos), contrary to this custom.20 Confirming his description,
Mehmed Bahaeddin (SA dos. 3188) in the sample candidly notes that he had worked in the
Fatwa Office (Fetvahane) in the Şeyhülislam’s Office but was “driven by necessity (zaruret-
i hal sevkiyle)” to a career of naib. In other words, the sharia judiciary was primarily a means
of livelihood, and therefore, in general, the judicial profession was not chosen by those with
sufficient income in the capital.
Note that the number of Istanbul-borns newly recruited to the sharia judiciary after 1910
has plummeted. The changes mentioned above in the judiciary institution in 1908–1909 must
have had a significant impact on reducing the favorable conditions for the ulema families.
However, it is more likely that it was due to the decline in the reputation of the sharia judiciary
in the eyes of the ulema families in the center.
The fact that most of the Istanbul-born judges were from the ulema families also means
that non-ulema living in Istanbul were not interested in the juridical profession. The Muslim
residents of the capital city, especially children of elite families, would have had far better

19
The children of high-ranking ulema were conferred a rank when they were children. Holders of
high ranks were automatically given higher grades of naibship. See Akiba 2005, 48–49; “Nüvvâb
hakkında Nizamname,” art. 2, Düstur, 1: 315–324; “Hükkâm-ı Şer‘iye Nizamnamesi,” art. 2, Ibid.,
2: 721–725.
20
For the biography of his father, İsmajl Abdülhaljm, see Albayrak 1996, 2:249.

13
conditions for education and appointment than those from rural areas, but they were hardly
found in the sharia judiciary.
[76] A comparison of the graduates of the Mülkiye School and Law School (Mekteb-i
Hukuk) with those of the Naibs’ College clarifies the type of choices made by the people born
in Istanbul who placed importance on education and aspired to governmental posts. Looking
at the period from 1885 to 1902 (Table 5), almost half of the 754 graduates of the Mülkiye
School and approximately 30% of the 729 Law School graduates were from Istanbul, whereas
of the 307 graduates of the Naibs’ College, only 10% to 15% were from Istanbul. This
indicates a hierarchy between these three higher education schools. It also suggests a
hierarchy of occupations to pursue after graduating from each school: typically, local
administrative offices, judicial offices in the nizamiye court system, and offices of sharia
judge. In any case, according to Table 5, the residents of Istanbul clearly had low expectations
for the sharia judiciary. Conversely, this provided a place for people from the provinces to
play an active role in the sharia judiciary organization.

Table 5. Homelands of Graduates of the Naibs’ College, the Law School and the Mülkiye
(1885–1902)
Naibs’ College* Law School** Mülkiye*** Population****
Homelands
(%) (%) (%) (%)
N N N
Istanbul 10.5 32 31.6 241 45.8 334 4.14
Zadegân (Only for the
4.9 15
Naibs’ College)
Ergiri subdistrict 13.8 42 3.9 30 0.8 6 0.04
Other Balkans 10.8 33 21.9 167 22.9 167 22.02
İbradı 0.7 2 3.4 26 1.5 11 0.04
Trabzon Province 19.3 59 5.0 38 3.3 24 6.43
Other Anatolia 37.0 113 27.3 208 15.2 111 53.77
Arab Regions 2.3 7 5.6 43 8.6 63 13.58
Outside Empire 0.7 2 1.3 10 1.8 13
Unknown 2 33 0
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.00
N= 307 796 729
* İlmiye Salnamesi, 705–721. “Zadegân” means the graduates with unknown homelands but with family
names like “… Efendizade” or “… Hafidi,” who are most likely Istanbul-borns.
** Salname-i Nezaret-i Maarif-i Umumiyye, no. 1 (1316): 580–602, 2 (1317): 651–653, 3 (1318): 695–
701, 4 (1319): 94–95, 6 (1321): 94–99.
*** Çankaya 1968–71, 3:183–969. Not including the special class for the tribal families (sınıf-ı mahsus).
**** Karpat 1985, 168–169.

14
3. Ergiri District: Adaption to the Naib System
Ergiri, in southern Albania, is a town built on a slope overlooking a plain at the foot of a
mountain. The citadel, from which the Byzantine name Argyrokastro is derived, is located at
the top of a small hill overlooking the entire town,21 which today is known as Gjirokastër in
Albania. This town was at the end of the Ottoman Empire the center of the Ergiri subprovince,
part of Yanya province, with a population of approximately 8,000. It is fascinating to note
that a large number (12% of the sample) of sharia judges emerged from Ergiri and its
suburban villages, which could be called the “periphery” of the Ottoman Empire. 22 In
addition to the 18 from the town of Ergiri, the sample includes 15 from the village of
Libohova and 2 from the village of Nepravişta. [77] Libohova is a relatively large village at
the foot of the mountains, located about 20 km southwest of Ergiri. It was promoted from a
village to a nahiye during the Second Constitutional Period.23
Since late Ottoman times, it had been well known that a large number of judges were
from Ergiri and Libohova. In his Encyclopedia of History and Geography, Şemseddin Sami,
a native of Fraşeri, in the Ergiri subprovince, states: “Most of the Muslim population [in
Ergiri] are medrese students and members of the ulema, and from this town and the large
village opposite it, Libohova, a large number of kadıs have been produced” (Sami 1306–16,
2: 836). He also notes that “the villages of Libohova and Nepravişta are so large, and
Libohova has so many medreses and means for the acquisition of learning, that the majority
of the inhabitants consist of medrese students and ulema who travel around as kadıs” (Ibid.,
2: 837).
Why, then, did so many sharia judges emerge from this region? Let us examine the social
groups that produced judges in the Ergiri district. First of all, 20% of the judges from Ergiri
had fathers who were also judges. However, excluding them, the majority are from non-
ulema families. This indicates that specialization in the sharia judiciary was a relatively new
phenomenon. In terms of social origin, [78] the largest group (13 persons, 37%) is made up
of local nobles and landowners. In general, this category includes those who are referred to

21
For a general view on the town of Ergiri (during the 1970s), see Riza (1978). For an outline of its
history, see Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslâm Ansiklopedisi, s.v. “Ergiri,” by Machiel Kiél, 11: 298–299;
EI2, s.v. “Ergiri,” by V. L. Ménage, 2: 708–709.
22
For the judges from Ergiri and Libohova, there is a monographic article by Clayer (2000), as
mentioned above. Kreiser (1989) has already pointed out the existence of a large number of judges
from that region.
23
Salname-i Devlet, no. 67 (1328): 967.

15
in the sources as “notables” (e.g., eşraf, hanedan), as well as landowners, tax collectors, and
others. This inclusion is because the economic foundation of Ottoman local notables was
typically land ownership and tax farming. In the case of the Ergiri district, landowners, tax
collectors, and military men stand out among the judges’ fathers. First, there are six people
whose fathers were notables based on land holding, including those whose fathers were
“engaged in their estates” (kendi emlâkiyle meşgul)24 or “landowners” (ashab-ı alâka),25
and one who ran large farms (çiftlikât).26 Ergiri is generally mountainous, and there is not
much land suitable for agriculture, but there is a fertile plain in the basin of the Drin River,
below the town of Ergiri, and presumably they owned relatively large farmlands in this area.
Furthermore, four judges indicate that their fathers were engaged in tax farming. 27 One
judge’s father was a merchant, he may have also come from a prominent family.28
Three fathers belong to the group of Aghas (ağavat or ağalar),29 and two are notables
with the title of “Bey.”30 In the eighteenth-century Ottoman Empire, it was common in many
places for those who belonged to Janissaries, sipahis, or irregular corps to grow into powerful
local figures by taking advantage of various privileges, including the right to tax farming.
The Aghas and the Beys above are considered to belong to such military families. In addition,
although classified as “military” in Table 4, two persons belonged to the sipahi corps and
thus may have been landowners.31 A typical example with all these attributes is the father of
Yusuf Agâh Efendi (SA dos. 198) from Libohova. He “belonged to the group of the Aghas,

24
SA dos. 214 (Ergirili Yusuf Nabi); SA dos. 779 (Ergirili Halil Hamidullah). See also the case of
Libohovalı Mehmed Tevfik (SA dos. 204), whose father lived on the proceeds of [his] property (emvâl
hasılâtıyla).
25
SA dos. 172 (Libohovalı Mehmed Sıdki); SA dos. 245 (Ergirili Mustafa Ragıb).
26
SA dos. 210 (Ergirili Mehmed Hayreddin).
27
SA dos. 176 (Libohovalı Mehmed Naim); SA dos. 198 (Libohovalı Yusuf Agâh); SA dos. 268
(Ergirili Ali Murteza); SA dos. 1513 (Libohovalı Ahmed Besim).
28
SA dos. 777 (Ergirili Mehmed Said). A Libohova-born judge whose father was a tax farmer wrote
that his father was engaged in “the commerce of a tax famer” (mültezim ticareti) (SA dos. 176).
29
SA dos. 198; SA dos. 239 (Ergirili Hasan Fehmi); SA dos. 1501 (Libohovalı İsmail Hulusi).
30
SA dos. 160 (Ergirili Mehmed Rüşdî); SA dos. 204 (Libohovalı Mehmed Tevfik). The latter
belonged to the family of “Paşalı,” who was among the conquerors of Libohova.
31
SA dos. 166 (Ergirili Ali Rıza); SA dos. 2280 (Libohovalı Mehmed Şevki). The other military man
(SA dos. 291, Libohovalı Üveys Naili) was a “captain” (yüzbaşı), called with a title “Bey”, which
suggests that he came from a notable family. “Bey” was a military title given to lieutenant colonels
and above but was also given to those from Paşa famjljes and other djstjngujshed notable famjljes
(Hejdborn 1908–12, 1:186; Samj 1317–18, s.v. “bey”). Samj’s dictionary is again instructive with
regard to the presence of military notables in Ergiri. According to him, the inhabitants of Ergiri “were
all brave and belligerent men, and until recently had belonged to the irregular forces” (asakir-i
mu‘avine); their leaders served as commanders, while those of earlier [generations] earned their
livelihood as sipahi (Sami 1310–16, 2:836).

16
was from the Dokat tribe (Dokat kabilesinden), and lived on the proceeds of his property
(kendi emval hasılatıyla) and by contracting the collection of the tithes (a‘şar-ı şer‘iyeyi
iltizam ederek).”
The above results obtained from the sample are also consistent with the report of the
governor of Yanya province written in 1868. Governor Ahmet Rasim Paşa wrote, “Some of
the naibs engaged in sharia litigation in the Yanya province are of local origin like the naibs
from Libohova and Ergiri [79] and tend to resort to unfair practices to protect the personal
interests of their brothers and relatives who are tax farmers and merchants.”32
It is unclear when sharia judges first appeared in Ergiri. While some families in our
sample produced judges in the eighteenth century, other non-ulema notable families also
produced judges in the 1860s and 1870s. In addition, the appointment registers of naibs show
that naibs from Ergiri and Libohova had already established a semi-monopoly of judicial
posts in the latter half of the 1850s in the districts of Yanya province and other surrounding
districts.33 Considering these facts, it can be speculated that, as Clayer (2000, 53) points out,
the first half of the nineteenth century was probably a turning point, when various incidents
and factors intertwined, such as the downfall of Tepedelenli Ali Paşa, who ruled the whole
Albanian region based in Yanya, the abolition of Janissaries in 1826, and military reforms in
the following years, Mahmut II’s policy of suppressing ayans,34 and the abolition of timar
system in 1848. These changes may have caused the notables of Ergiri and Libohova, whose
power and economic foundations were beginning to be shaken, to adapt to the new
environment by joining the sharia judiciary. Official services would have been one of the
most effective means for the survival and expansion of political and economic power in a

32
BOA, Şura-yı Devlet Evrakı 2085/12, From the governor of Yanya to the Grand Vizier, 4
Cemaziyelahir 1285/9 Eylül 1284 (21 Sept. 1868). Clayer (2000, 38) summarizes the social origins
of Ergiri-born sharia judges as judges, other literate class, and small local notables (petits notables
locaux) who may have already included ulema in their ranks (apart from the father). She also claims
that there were few sons of the largest families of local notables among the judges from Erigiri and
Libohova. According to Clayer (2000), more than half of judges’ fathers (64 out of 109) were of
unknown occupation, which may be due to Albayrak (1996)’s simplified description. While definitive
statements are not possible because this study is also based on a sample survey, it appears more
appropriate to assume that the typical Ergiri-born judges came from military notables (though
possibly small-scale notables) based on land ownership and tax farming, considering Rasim Paşa and
Sami’s testimonies.
33
İstanbul Müftülüğü Meşihat Arşivi, D/I, no. 144, Naib Defteri. This register was created in the
aftermath of the 1855 naibship reform. For example, from 1856 to 1864, ix naibs from Ergiri were
appointed in succession in Filorina (Florina in Greece) (Ibid., fol. 42b).
34
For Mahmud II’s policy toward ayans, see Nagata (1969).

17
region with limited resources like Ergiri. In the first half of the nineteenth century, the
Ottoman civil bureaucracy was not yet fully developed, and Ergiri notables may have viewed
the sharia judiciary as the best alternative to military positions in order to protect and expand
their interests.35
However, mobility to the ulema class was not always unidirectional. For example, the
family of Mehmed Hayreddin (SA dos. 210) had one from “the famous ulema and kadıs” in
his grandfather’s (or a great-grandfather’s) generation, although his father was a manager of
large farms (çiftlikât). In the case of İsmail Hulusi (SA dos. 1501), who originated from a
prominent family that belonged to Aghas (ağavat) for generations, his father’s grandfather
was a (medrese) teacher. Such examples suggest that even if a family produced a member of
ulema, not all male members of that family would subsequently go on to become ulema. [80]
Thus, as Rasim Paşa commented above, there existed a situation in which “brothers and
relatives” were “tax collectors and merchants,” and the continuation of the family lineage
was ensured through mutual protection and cooperation among relatives.
What, then, was the reason for the success of those from the Ergiri district? To quote
again the words of Rasim Paşa, Yanya governor, “It is clear that the reason they were
appointed [in Yanya province] despite being locals (yerlüden) is because their knowledge of
Greek was considered.” 36 The Yanya province was under the strong influence of Greek
culture and had a large Greek-speaking population as well as ethnic Greeks. Greek was the
second official language of the province, as the first provincial newspaper published in 1868
was written in both Turkish and Greek.37 It is not surprising that the knowledge of Greek
was required of sharia judges, given the important roles they played not only in the sharia
courts but also in the nizamiye courts and local councils. As if to prove Rasim Paşa’s claim,
31 out of the 35 judges from the Ergiri district in our sample indicated in their CVs that they
were conversant in Greek. In addition, 22 of them could also write Greek. It is unclear how
these nearly exclusively Albanian-speaking Muslim judges from the Ergiri district 38

35
In general, the status of ulema was considered appealing because it conferred religious legitimacy
as well as the privilege of exemption from property confiscation. During the first half of the nineteenth
century, the descendants and followers of Tepedelenli Ali Paşa are also known to have gained status
within the ilmiye institution (Zilfi 1983a, 335). There is an Ergiri-born naib in our sample who was a
relative (akrabalarından) of Alj Paşa (SA dos. 174, Ergjrjlj Abdülhaljm).
36
BOA, Şura-yı Devlet Evrakı 2085/12,
37
Strauß 1995, esp., 306; EI2, s.v. “Yanya,” by Meropi Anastassiadou, 11: 282.
38
On their CVs, 31 out of 35 judges from the Ergiri district declared that they knew the Albanian
language. Given the environment in which they were born and raised, it is difficult to believe that the
remaining four did not know Albanian.

18
acquired the ability to read and write Greek. In any case, they utilized their knowledge of
Greek to obtain positions as judges in the province of Yanya and the neighboring districts.
This is evidenced by their domination over a large portion of the Yanya province, as shown
in the abovementioned appointment register from the late 1850s. Obviously, they must have
established a foothold by utilizing local and familial networks 39 within the judiciary
organization and among the local notables.
However, Ergiri-born judges were not only local elite in Albania but also the elites of the
Ottoman Empire. Their studies at the Naibs’ College (20 judges, 57%) were their most
characteristic feature. Those who studied in Istanbul accounted for 83% (29 judges). Indeed,
they were trained in the heart of the Empire. It is also important to note the proportion of
graduates coming from the Ergiri district among the total number of graduates of the Naibs’
College. Of the 768 graduates from its founding to 1909, 18% (141 judges) were from Ergiri
and Libohova, by far the largest number of graduates from a single district (Table 6).
Obviously, the people of Ergiri quickly adapted themselves to the changing policies of the
Ottoman central government and the Şeyhül?slam’s Office. They must have realized that the
human network in the local society was not enough to obtain a position as a sharia judge after
the 1855 reform and that graduation from the Naibs’ College was the most advantageous to
obtain a naibship grade, which became very important to obtain an office. [81] Especially for
those originating from the Ergiri district, who were relatively new to the judiciary profession,
utilizing the new system undoubtedly helped them to consolidate their position in the
judiciary organization.
Even more surprising is the success of students from the Ergiri district, where Albanian
is the primary language, at the Naibs’ College, which emphasized Turkish language
proficiency (Akiba 2003, 144–145). However, a major reason for their success may have
been that they had a strong orientation toward the judicial profession and enjoyed favorable
conditions to acquire the required education for the judicial profession within the network of
co-local sharia judges that already existed in their hometowns and in Istanbul. This is

39
The local and kinship network can also be seen in the practice of apprenticeship. See the case of
Mehmed Şevkj from Libohova (SA dos. 191), who served his apprenticeship in a court where his
father and brother were presiding judges. Yusuf Agah (SA dos. 198) went to Yanya with his co-local
judge Salih Efendi to serve as a scribe under him, before being appointed to the naibship of Ayasluğ
county in the district of Kuşadası, under the direction of another co-local judge Yusuf Efendi, who
was the judge of Kuşadası. See also SA dos. 207 (Libohovalı Mustafa Âsım); SA dos. 2547 (Ergirili
Musa Rıza). Clayer (2000, 46–47) has also pointed out a similar practice.

19
supported by the fact that some of them had already served court apprenticeships before
entering the Naibs’ College.40

Table 6. Homelands of the Naibs’ College Graduates

Homeland/Year of Total Period I (%) Period II (%) Period III (%) Period IV (%)
Graduation (%) 1856–1867 1868–1883 1884–1909 1910–1917
Istanbul 9 9 10 10 4
Zadegân 3 3 7 4 0
Istanbul +Zadegân 12 12 18 14 4
Ergiri district 14 19 29 15 2
Other Yanya Province 2 6 5 1 0
Selanik Province 3 3 2 2 4
Other Balkans 6 4 7 5 8
Balkans Total 25 32 43 23 14
Trabzon Province 17 4 13 22 17
İbradı 2 13 1 1 1
Other Konya Province 5 7 6 4 7
Sivas Province 5 10 4 4 4
Adana Province + Maraş
5 1 2 7 6
District
Hüdavendigâr Province 5 4 1 3 13
Aydın Province 5 1 1 3 11
Other Anatolia 14 13 10 13 18
Anatolia Total 58 53 38 57 76
Arab Regions 4 4 2 2 2 2 5 5 4 4
Outside Empire 1 1 2 2 0 0 1 1 1 1
Unknown (N) 16 4 6 4 2
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
N= 1037 116 194 458 269
* İlmiye Salnamesi, 689–736; Ceride-i İlmiye, 14 (1333): 92–93, 24 (1334): 568–569, 32 (1335): 916–
917.
The districts of İzmit and Kale-i Sultani (Biga) are included in Hüdavendigâr Province.

Regarding specialized higher education schools other than the Naibs’ College, when the
Mülkiye School opened in Istanbul in 1859 to train local officials such as district
administrators, Ergiri-born students did not miss the opportunity as many medrese students
were enrolled at a time when new-style schools were not yet developed. In the first 17 years,
eight students (5.4% of all graduates) from Ergiri and Libohova graduated from the Mülikye
School (Çankaya 1968–71, 3:20–40).41 However, when the school was developed into a full-

40
SA dos. 166; 207; 779; 1501.
41
One of the eight fathers is a notable, two are sharia judges, and the remaining five, whose
occupations are unknown, bear the title of “Ağa.”

20
fledged institution of higher education, the number of graduates from the Ergiri district
decreased to only six (0.8%) between 1885 and 1902. During the same period, Law School
produced [82] more graduates from the Ergiri district (30 graduates, or 3.9%). However, this
is still less than the 42 (13.8%) graduates of the Naibs’ College from the Ergiri district during
the same time period (Table 5). In other words, people from the Ergiri district had greater
success in the sharia judiciary than in the new judicial system and the civil bureaucracy.
Local elites from the remote Ergili district were transformed into Ottoman elites through
the process of education, examination, and appointment in Istanbul. In addition to their home
province of Yanya and its environs, they were appointed to Anatolia and the Arab regions.
Twenty percent of the 35 judges in our sample had never been assigned outside the Balkans,
whereas the remaining 80% served in Anatolia, with six (17%) also appointed to the Arab
regions. In later generations, the number of appointments to Anatolia and the Arab regions
tended to increase. In the first period, Anatolia and the Arab regions accounted for 23% of
the appointments of judges from the Ergiri district, whereas in the third period, the proportion
increased to 38%.42
Finally, the context of the rise of Albanian nationalism should be considered. In 1868,
when the governor of Yanya viewed native sharia judges as a problem, he did not necessarily
fear their nationalism, but rather their localism, that is, the growth of autonomous forces in
the provinces. Nonetheless, when the Prizren League was dissolved in 1881, Ergiri-born
judges also suffered. Derviş Paşa, who led the League’s repression, dismissed seven (or
twelve, according to a different source) judges for being Albanian (Arnabud bulunmak
hasebiyle). Our sample includes three judges who were removed at that time.43 It is unknown
to what extent they were involved in the activities of the Prizren League, but it is likely that
they had contact with key League members, due to their important position in local
government.
During the Second Constitutional Period, Albanian nationalism rose as an independence
movement. Ergiri was also a major center of the nationalist movement (Gawrych 1980, 233).
Two judges from the Ergiri district in our sample were expelled in 1913 for their alleged

42
Clayer (2000, 49–51) reached a similar conclusion by categorizing the judges into three groups
based on their birth year and calculating the proportion of places of appointment.
43
SA dos. 172 (Libohovalı Muharrem Sıdki, then judge of Kalkanderen [Tetovo]); SA dos. 270
(Ergirili Ali Murteza, then judge of Gilan); SA dos. 729 (Ergirili Mehmed Said, then judge of İpek).
On the suppression by Dervjş Paşa, see Külçe (1944, 265–270), though no mention is made of the
dismissal of sharia judges.

21
involvement in the “Albanian insurrection movement” (Arnavutluk harekât-ı isyaniyesi).44
After the secession of Albania in 1912, many of the Ergiri-born judges remained on Ottoman
land and continued to work as judges,45 but the flow of people from Albania to Istanbul
seems to have almost stopped after 1912. Just as there are no newly recruited judges from the
Ergiri district after 1910 in our sample, the graduates from the Ergiri district disappeared
from the Naibs’ College after the graduation of one in 1912.
[83] Currently, there is little information available on what happened to those who
returned home upon independence and the members of the judge families. However, we can
assume that in the new Albania they would have served in sharia courts or other positions
within the judicial and administrative sphere.46 It can be said that the judges from the Ergiri
district, who had joined the Ottoman elites, now became part of the national elites.47

4. İbradı: Switching Professions

After turning west from the main road connecting Alanya, Beyşehir, and Konya in the
opposite direction of Akseki, the town of İbradı is approximately 20 km up a winding
mountain road. It is hard to imagine how this small town, nestled on the slopes of a hill,
produced so many sharia judges up until about a century ago.48 What is this town’s history?

44
SA dos. 291; Albayrak 1996, 4:344–346 (Libohovalı Üveys Naili); SA dos. 296 (Ergirili Ahmed
Ramiz). The latter declared in his CV, “my nationality is Albanian” (milliyetim Arnabuddur).
45
After serving three times as the sharia judge of Marmaris, Said, the son of an Ergiri merchant, held
the office of mufti of Marmaris at the strong request of the residents. He returned home for “personal
matters” (masalih-i zatiye) in 1890, after serving as the mufti for more than seven years, but was
appointed as the mufti of Marmaris for the fourth time in 1899. At the end of 1913, he was still living
in Marmaris (SA dos. 777). For more examples of those who remained in the Ottoman Empire to
serve as sharia judges, see SA dos. 770 (Libohovalı Musa Kazım); SA dos. 1398 (Ergirili Ali Haydar);
SA dos. 1428 (Libohovalı Hüseyin İbrahim). In another case, in 1913, a Libohova-born judge fled the
Balkan Wars and settled in Istanbul, though he did not serve as a judge (SA dos. 1513, Libohovalı
Ahmed Besim).
46
In independent Albania, sharia courts continued to exist (Popovic 1986, 16). Some co-locals who
graduated from the Mülkiye School returned to Albania to hold important positions in the newly
formed state. See Çankaya 1968–71, 3:984 (Abdürrauf), 3:1077 (Abdülkerim Sabit); 4:1254 (İbrahim
Pertev), 4:1410 (Hasan Hüsni), 4:1420 (Bahri Omar), 4:1472 (Zeynelabidin).
47
Albanian nationalism was originally aligned with the Ottoman Empire’s interests in terms of the
territorial integrity of the Empire. Thus, being an Ottoman and being an Albanian were not so
diametrically opposed. Cf. Ishimaru 2002, 73–91.
48
The fact that there were many sharia judges from İbradı has already been pointed out by Kreiser
(1989, 275), Clayer (2000, 38 n. 22), and Meeker (2002, 274–277), based on Albayrak (1996). In
particular, Meeker provides a suggestive discussion of the background of the emergence of many
ulema from İbradı and Akseki, comparing them with Of on the Black Sea coast (see below).

22
 [84] Before the Tanzimat, İbradı was a district in the Alaiye (Alanya) subprovinces.
However, it was demoted to a nahiye in the Akseki district when the Konya province was
reorganized in 1867. 49 During the Republican period, the place’s name was changed to
Aydınkent, but the people did not like it and soon changed it back to the original name. Today
it is a district (ilçe) of Antalya Province. Even among historians of the Ottoman Empire, the
name of this town is not well-known. Local historians say that because İbradı was located in
a mountainous area with little land suitable for agriculture, people sought livelihood outside
of the town, especially in the government service.50 This is not surprising considering the
reality of today, where a large proportion of the population has migrated to urban areas.

Figure 3. A distant view of İbradı (photographed by the author, August 2002)

According to a tradition, the development of learning and education in İbradı can be

traced back to the period when a notable family called Minkarizade settled there. 51 The
lineage of Minkarizade family dates back to the reign of Selim I, when an ancestor of the
family established a villa in İbradı for summer retreats when he was appointed to the office
of sancakbey of Alaiye. In the mid-seventeenth century, Şeyhül?slam Yahya Efendi emerged

49
Salname-i Devlet, no. 22 (1284): 176; 23 (1285): 180.
50
Şahankaya 1977, 3, 7, 62. We thank Yonca Köksal for helping me obtain a copy of this book.
51
Özkaynak 1954, 100–101; Enhoş 1974, 281 (citation from Özkaynak); Sümbül 1989, 114 (citation
from Özkaynak).

23
from this family.52 The following is an interesting anecdote concerning this Şeyhül?slam.
During his office, the people of İbradı were primarily engaged in business, particularly as
jewelers in Istanbul. One day, the Şeyhül?slam gathered all the jewelers from İbradı in
Istanbul; he told them how much they could earn from the court fees during their two-year
term of office as judges and encouraged them to send their sons to pursue this path. 53
Although this anecdote itself is unlikely to be historically correct, it may indicate the great
influence of Yahya Efendi and other members of the Minkarizade family on the appointment
of ulema from İbradı to judiciary positions.
At the end of the eighteenth century, Kadı Abdurrahman Paşa emerged from the family
of Minkarizade in İbradı. He is known for his contribution to the organization of the Nizam-
ı Cedid Army in Anatolia during the reign of Selim III.54 As his name (Kadı) suggests, he
was originally a sharia judge who served as a naib in Konya and a kadı in Kayseri. However,
when his uncle, who was a mine administrator and tax collector (maden emini) was killed by
an ayan of Bozkır in 1801, [85] he gave up his kadı position and led his own army to avenge
his uncle’s death, for which he was appointed administrator (mutasarrıf) of Alaiye and was
awarded the title Paşa. According to Uzunçarşılı (1971), Kadı Abdurrahman Paşa’s father,
brother, and nephew were also sharia judges, suggesting that many judges had already
emerged from the Minkarizade family in İbradı in the eighteenth century. Local historians
write that İbradı had become a center of learning and wealth in the eighteenth century
(Özkaynak 1954, 101; Enhoş 1974, 281; Sümbül 1989, 114). The office of his uncle and the
fact that he quickly assembled a military force show that the Minkarizades was a powerful
ayan family with a wide sphere of influence based in İbradı, and that the sharia judge’s office
was one of their important power bases.55 The İbradı tradition of producing judges probably

52
For Şeyhüljslam Yaha Efendj, see İlmiyye Salnamesi, 483; Rif‘at Efendi n.d., 70–71; Mehmed
Süreyya 1308–11, 4:637, 3:585, s.v. Ömer Efendi, Minkari.
53
Mr. Nabi Duru, a businessman from İbradı, told me this story during my interview in İbradı in
August 2002. Mr. Duru stated that he heard this story from his father-in-law, who had been a sharia
judge. The accuracy of the details, such as the kadıs’ two-year term of office and their income from
the fees, lends an impression of credibility of this anecdote.
54
After the downfall of Selim III, Kadı Abdurraman Paşa returned to central politics when Alemdar
Mustafa Paşa came to power. He was killed, however, in 1809, when he fled back to his native town
of İbradı following the Janissary uprising. More on him can be found in Uzunçarşılı (1971) and also
Şahankaya (1977, 22–28), which is mostly a citation of Uzunçarşılı (1971).
55
Kadı Abdurrahman was officially recognized as the ayan of İbardı in 1796 (Uzunçarşılı 1971, 246).

24
began with the success of their family, from which the people of İbradı established
themselves in the sharia judiciary by using the network of geographical and kinship ties.56
Reflecting this long tradition, the majority (17 judges or 63%) of the sharia judges from
İbradı in our sample also had judge fathers.57 Additionally, the presence of three merchants
increases the plausibility of the Yahya Efendi tradition. Even though both Ergiri and İbradı
are “kadı towns,” there is a clear difference in their social origins. In Ergiri, the transition
from the military class to the ulema occurred primarily during the first half of the nineteenth
century, whereas in İbradı, a large number of judge families already existed by the beginning
of the nineteenth century. Four judges born earlier, between 1815 and 1829, also share the
same profession as their fathers.
The village of Gödene, south of İbradı, also began producing ulema around the time of
Abdurrahman Paşa, according to a local historian (Özkaynak 1954, 39). The sample includes
six judges born in this village, five of whom are sons of judges, indicating a long tradition.
Many of the İbradı-born judges were trained in the traditional manner, serving their
apprenticeship as court scribes or nahiye judges. This suggests the existence of a preexisting
human network within the judicial organization. In several instances, a would-be judge
served as a scribe in a court where his father, brother, uncle, or fellow countryman also served
as a judge.58 However, only three out of 27 judges graduated from the Naibs’ College, despite
the fact that the majority (21 judges or 78%) studied in Istanbul. This is in stark contrast to
the judges from Ergiri and Libohova.
The choice of İbradı-born judges of such a traditional training and recruitment method,
not studying at the Naibs’ College, seriously disadvantaged their promotions. Only three
(11%) of the judges had a grade of third or higher, two of whom were graduates of the Naibs’
College. A local historian notes that many İbradı-born judges lost their positions during the
Second Constitutional Period because judges who had not graduated from the Naibs’ College
were expelled from the offices (Şahankaya 1977, 48).59 Although none of the İbradı-born

56
A local historian writes, “Kadı Abdurrahman Paşa’s services in Anatolia and Alaiye enabled many
ulema from İbradı to go to Istanbul and their children, grandchildren, and relatives to gain positions
(mevki sahibi olmaları) in Istanbul and the provinces” (Özkaynak 1954, 39).
57
Note that the father of Mehmed Tahir (SA dos. 748) in the sample was a naib from İbradı, but he
was born in Beyşehir, where his father was appointed.
58
Ahmet Niyazi (SA dos. 1598), who worked as a scribe under his father, uncle, and elder brother,
and Mehmet Nafi (SA dos. 2667), who worked as a scribe and a nahiye judge under the supervision
of his relatives and co-locals, are two typical examples.
59
Şahankaya writes that the CUP supporter Şeyhülislam Hayri Efendi expelled kadıs who were not
graduates of the Naibs’ College (mektepsiz). Despite the fact that Hayri Efendi took office as

25
judges in our sample completely lost their status due to the general purge of 1909–1910, three
of them lost their jobs (kadro haric) due to the purge and were later [86] reinstated after
taking examinations at the Naibs’ College.60 Later in 1914, Mehmed Arif (SA dos. 722) was
dismissed by the Inspector General of Justice for “not being competent enough (?kt?darı kâf?
olmadığı).”61 These facts appear at first glance to indicate that the judges from İbradı failed
to adapt to the new appointment system. However, the people of İbradı had already given up
on the sharia judiciary at the end of the nineteenth century.
The elite of İbradı chose as their new profession the new judiciary positions under the
nizamiye court system and the civil official positions particularly in local administration. The
local historian Şahankaya writes by quoting a newspaper article:

The people of İbradı, after the establishment of the Faculty of Law [Law School], did
not fail to educate intellectuals throughout the country by directing professional men of
their local tradition to the judiciary and at the same time engaging them in other civil
services of the state (Şahankaya 1977, 62).

Their “switching” can be seen in their educational choices. First, between 1860 and 1876,
13 students from İbradı graduated from the newly established Mülkiye School. This number
is the second highest after the 21 Istanbul-born graduates (Çankaya 1968–71, 3:20–51).62 As

Şeyhülislam in March 1914, the expulsion of judges who did not graduate from the Naibs’ College
began in 1909. The same author notes that “some of the kadıs from İbradı were harmed” after the
1908 Revolution, adding that because the judge who sentenced Midhat Paşa to death was Ali Sürurj
Paşa from İbradı and hjs son was an agent of the sultan, not only was his son expelled, but those who
had obtained their positions through his patronage were also purged (Şahankaya 1977, 48).
60
SA dos. 169 (Mehmed Rifat); SA dos. 2696 (Yahya Niyazi); SA dos. 3327 (Mehmed Tahir). There
is also an example of a judge from İbradı who did not lose his job but took the exam five times before
passing and receiving the fifth grade (SA dos. 2887, Mehmed Tevfik).
61
He had taken his examination at the Naibs’ College in 1910 and had the fifth grade. The
ŞeyhülNslam at the time of his dismissal was the above-mentioned Hayri Efendi.
62
During this time period, İbradı-born graduates account for 9% of all graduates (147). We do not
know much about their social backgrounds because many of their fathers’ occupations or positions
are unknown. Examples of the fathers’ occupations include a notable, a sipahi, and a sharia judge.
Aside from these 13 graduates, there is one who was born in İçel but whose father was a naib from
İbradı (Çankaya 1968–71, 3:66). Szyliowicz (1971, 381) first drew attention to the presence of people
from İbradı in the Mülkiye School, stating that it had become a well-established tradition for the
people from this small town to attend this school. Findley (1989, 115) also mentioned this
phenomenon and speculated that some of the teachers at this school might have come from İbradı,
implying the “guildlike” nature of this school in its early days. However, neither of them sees it as
continuing the tradition of İbradı-born people in the sharia judiciary. Cf. Clayer 2002, 38.

26
shown in Table 5, the Law School, which trained new lawyers, produced 26 İbradı-born
graduates between 1885 and 1902.63 Although the number of İbradı-borns who graduated
from the Mülkiye School during the same eighteen years is not large (eleven graduates),
compared to the fact that only two İbradı-borns graduated from the Naibs’ College during the
same time period,64 the orientation of the İbradı population is quite clear. Notable is the fact
that eight of the eleven İbradı-born Mülkiye graduates were sons of sharia judges. Here, we
observe an intergenerational occupational shift from the sharia judiciary to the local
government. [87] This change in occupation suggests that the new judicial and administrative
positions were viewed as more promising than the sharia judiciary.65
The works of local historians include many short biographies of İbradı-born lawyers and
local and central bureaucrats and politicians who were active from the end of the Ottoman
Empire to the beginning of the Turkish Republic (Özkaynak 1954, 139–170; Şahankaya 1977,
29–46, 115–129; Enhoş 1974, 471–488). Muammer Aksoy (1917–1990), an İbradı-born
lawyer who was involved in the preparation of the 1961 constitution, represents the İbradı
tradition that was carried over into the republican period. Thus, the İbradı people successfully
adapted to the new environment of the legal, administrative, and educational reforms of the
Ottoman Empire and the establishment of the Turkish Republic, transforming themselves
from the “traditional” elite of the Ottoman Empire to the “modern” elite and then to the elite
of the Republic.
Table 3 shows the increase in the proportion of İbradı-born judges relative to the total
number of judges during the fourth period, i.e., from 1910 onwards. However, they were all
promoted from nahiye naibships, and two of them became district level or higher judges at

63
In the Ministry of Education’s yearbook, seven Akseki-born graduates and two Gödene-born
graduates are found in the list of Law School graduates. It is possible that some of the graduates
whose hometown is listed as Akseki are actually from İbradı. See Salname-i Nezaret-i Ma‘arif-i
Umumiye, no. 1 (1316): 580–602, 2 (1317): 651–653, 3 (1318): 695–701, 4 (1319): 94–95, 6 (1321):
94–99.
64
If we include graduates whose hometowns are listed as Akseki or Alaiye, there could be three more
from İbradı. It should be noted that the following two graduates, whose birthplace was indeed Akseki
according to our sample or Albayrak (1996), are not among the three mentioned above. Mehmed
Seyyid, İlmNye SalnamesN, 711, SA dos. 1313; Mustafa Nafj, İlmNye SalnamesN, 712, Albayrak 1996,
4:96.
65
Mehmed Kazım, who was born in İbradı in 1859/60 and graduated from Law School in 1886, is a
good example of intergenerational and individual career transition. As the son of a sharia judge and
upon receiving medrese education in Istanbul, initially, he held the rank of ilmiye as a member of the
ulema, but switched to the rank of civil servant in 1887/88, after graduating from the Law School. He
later became the dean of Law School. See Salname-i Nezaret-i Maarif-i Umumiye, no. 3 (1318): 672–
673.

27
the ages of 48 and 49,66 respectively. In other words, if we recall that Period IV contains
more judges who died before the end of the Empire and that new recruits who graduated from
the Naibs’ College at a younger age were underrepresented, the proportion of those from
İbradı should also be revised downward. In any case, their presence is consistent with the
trends described thus far, as they can be considered as newcomers to the judiciary. The father
of one was indeed a judge but had only previously served as a nahiye judge and was then
engaged in commerce.67 The other three are, a merchant, a craftsman, and a “non-official,”
respectively.68 During this time, the traditional judge families had already shifted professions,
and these newcomers entered the judiciary to fill the void.
As already mentioned, İbradı’s judge families had begun to move into new occupations
at the end of the nineteenth century, which had the following consequences. Until 1913, the
office of judge was usually for a two-year to two-and-a-half-year term, and judges returned
to their hometown while waiting for another appointment.69 However, since the new judicial
and administrative positions were not fixed-term, those who took these positions left the
country and did not return home (Şahankaya 1977, 7). Although population outflow probably
began in the 1860s, when İbradı was relegated from a district to a nahiye, it accelerated
thereafter, leading to a decrease in the town’s population from 4,550 in 1921 (Ibid., 16) to
2,016 in 1954 (Özkaynak 1954, 101).70

[88]
5. Trabzon Province: Upwardly-Minded People
Trabzon province, located on the southeastern coast of the Black Sea, also produced a large
number of judges when compared on a province-by-province basis. Our sample contains 36
judges from Trabzon province (12%). About half of these judges (19) are from the

66
SA dos. 722 (Mehmed Arif); SA dos. 1483 (İsmail Hakkı).
67
SA dos. 1025 (Osman Remzi).
68
SA dos. 1483 (“tüccardan”); SA dos. 2292 (Mehmed Emin, “İbradı Nahiyesi esnafından”); SA dos.
722 (son of Hacı Ahmedzade Ahmed Ağa).
69
For example, Yahya Niyazi (SA dos. 2696) writes, “While out of office, I spent my time in Istanbul
and in my birthplace İbradı, engaged in personal affairs (umur-ı zatiyemle meşgul).
70
The population was 2,498 in 1970 (Enhoş 1974: 284). Many people from İbradı became state civil
servants and migrated to major cities such as Ankara, Antalya, İzmir, Istanbul, Bursa, and Konya by
the 1950s, resulting in an outflow of 300 to 400 households (İller Bankası 1956, 1: 258). İbradı was
elevated from a township (bucak) to a district (ilçe) in 1990.

28
easternmost subprovince of Lazistan (with Rise at the center).71 The Hopa district, situated
on the eastern edge of the Lazistan subprovince, produced the largest number of judges in
Lazistan, with eight judges, five of whom are from Arhavi. It is interesting to note that the
greater the distance from the provincial center, the greater the number of judges there are on
the province’s outskirts. Our sample also includes ten judges from the central subprovince of
Trabzon, five from the western subprovince of Canik (with Samsun at the center), and two
from the interior subprovince of Gümüşhane.
Muslims constituted the majority of the population in the eastern Black Sea region during
the nineteenth century. According to end-of-century population statistics, the proportion of
Muslims tended to increase toward the east, and the population of the Lazistan subprovince
was 99% Muslim (Karpat 1985, 138–139). However, it was not until the seventeenth century
that this former territory of the Trebizond Empire became almost completely Islamicized.72
With the progress of Islamization, medrese education began to spread, and by the late
eighteenth century, Of had become an academic hub in the region east of Trabzon (Meeker
2002, 164–165). According to the Trabzon provincial yearbook of 1869, more than 2,000
medrese students were in the Of district alone.73 In addition, yearbooks and the CVs of the
judges in our sample indicate that medrese education had spread to the village level in the
late nineteenth century in other districts as well. These religious and cultural conditions were
one of the sources for the emergence of sharia judges from this region.
In the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the powerful local magnates that
emerged from the irregular forces greatly influenced this region. In particular, Tuzcuoğlu
Memiş Ağa, an ayan of Rize, brought the entire Lazistan region under their control in the
early nineteenth century, subjugating neighboring notables. Although the Tuzcuoğlus were
forced to submit to the central government in 1834, the region remained highly autonomous,
which delayed the Ottoman incorporation of the Trabzon province into the Tanzimat regime
until 1847.74 The location on the frontier of the Empire, the lack of direct central control,

71
Although not among those from the Trabzon province, four are from Batum (Batumi, Georgia),
which was the center of the Lazistan subprovince before being annexed to Russia under the Treaty of
Berlin of 1878.
72
Meeker 2002, 157–160; EI2, s.v. “Rize,” by Suraiya Faroqhi, 8: 566–567.
73
Trabzon Vilayeti Salnamesi, no. 1 (1286): 71. Repr., Kudret Emiroğlu, ed., Trabzon Vilayeti
Salnamesi, 1869 (Trabzon: Trabzon İli ve İlçeleri Eğitim, Kültür ve Sosyal Yardımlaşma Vakfı, 1993),
150–151.
74
Aktepe 1951–52, 21–52. On the rise of local notables and the Tuzcuoğlus’ revolt, see also Bryer
1969; Toumarkine 1995, 12–27; Meeker 2002, 171–181, 213–226. For the Tanzimat reforms in this
region, see Çadırcı 1991, 197; Sarıoğlan 1996, 34–45.

29
and the rule of military families are characteristics of the Trabzon province shared by the
Ergiri district.
The geographical and economic conditions of the Trabzon province are similar to those
of İbradı. In the eastern Black Sea region, particularly east of Trabzon, there is only a narrow
strip of flat land along the coast, with steep slopes leading to mountain ranges immediately
behind it, limiting the land suitable for agriculture. Therefore, [89] there were few favorable
conditions for the establishment large farms. Limited agricultural productivity necessitated
the search for wealth outside of the region. It was a common practice in the region to go to
work in various places to earn a living.75 Around the end of the eighteenth century, migration
to Istanbul became a marked trend (Güler 1999, 344–347) that has persisted to the present
day. Similar to these migrant workers, judges who left their country in search of better
opportunities can also be understood in this context. The high number of judges from
Lazistan, the Trabzon province’s easternmost subprovince, is proportional to the region’s
economic difficulties.
The high interest in education in the eastern Black Sea region, as evidenced by the spread
of medreses, is also related to the economic conditions that forced people to seek
opportunities outside the region. The Hopa people are described in the Trabzon provincial
yearbook of 1902 as “superior to the rest of the country in their zeal for reading and writing”
(okumak yazmak heves?nde dah? d?ğer mahallere müreccah).76 Thus, the eastern Black Sea
region and İbradı share a similarity in that many ulema had been produced due to the harsh
conditions in their homelands that had driven people to move outward.77
Despite the partial similarities mentioned above between the eastern Black Sea region,
Ergiri, and İbradı, there are crucial differences when comparing the social origins of the
judges. In our sample, 60% of İbradı-born judges and 20% of Ergiri-born judges were
children of judges, whereas only one judge from the Trabzon province had a judge as his
father. Although more judges originated from ulema families compared to those from Ergiri,
their proportion was just under 30% (11 judges), lower than the overall average. One of their

75
The yearbook of Trabzon province mentions that people of the province traveled to the Caucasus
and Romania to earn living, by working as laborers (rencber) or bakers (fırıncı). See Trabzon VNlayetN
SalnamesN, no. 20 (1320): 72, 80, 101, 273, 280, 286. The inhabitants of Of also used to travel as far
as Romania and the Crimea for trade. See Meeker 2002, 99 n31. See also McCarthy 1979, 319–320.
76
Trabzon Vilayeti Salnamesi, no. 20 (1320): 286. The prominent historian of Ottoman economy
Professor Mehmet Genç, who is from Arhavi, once told me that during the early Republican period,
all the inhabitants of Arhavi could read and write.
77
The similarity of eastern Black Sea region to İbradı is also pointed out by Meeker (2002, 276).

30
fathers had already moved to Istanbul to become a ders-i âm (mosque teacher)78 but apart
from this case and the father who was a judge as mentioned above, the rest of the fathers who
were ulema were local ulema, many of whom were engaged in teaching.79 However, there is
only one müderris (medrese professor), and three are known only as “hoca,” probably
referring to a traditional elementary school teacher or a preacher. Most of these local ulema
can be considered to be in a lower position among the ulema. The relatively higher number
of local officials among fathers (19%, 17 judges) is noteworthy. Except for one nahiye
administrator,80 the rest are clerks and district officials in charge of practical affairs81 and
can be described as lower-level government officials. By becoming judges, their sons were
[90] able to reach a higher position in the Ottoman system than their parents’ generation.
Another difference from the judges from the Ergiri district is that few of the judges from
Trabzon province had fathers of the military class.82 The 1869 yearbook of the Trabzon
province shows that many of the elected members of the local councils had the title “Ağa” or
“Bey.” They were probably from the prominent families that ruled in the region. However,
among the titles/honorifics of the judges’ fathers, there are only a few “Ağas” (four instances)
and no “Bey.” Rather, it is noteworthy that the majority of the fathers used “Efendi”, the
honorific title for the literate class.83 Although some of them had military-related family
names, such as Sancaktarzade (son of a flag bearer) and Kalyoncuzade (son of a galleon
sailor), they are all village-dwelling Efendis.84 They were among the literate class in the

78
A teacher giving lectures to medrese students at a mosque in Istanbul. See Akiba (1996).
79
The category “Others” includes one elementary school teacher, who is also likely to have been a
lower-ranking member of the ulema. SA dos. 940 (Hopa-Arhavili Mehmed Celaleddin).
80
SA dos. 2465 (Ordu-Perşembeli Osman Nuri).
81
The fathers worked as a scribe of the market supervisor (ihtisab kitabeti) (SA dos. 2408, Ünyeli
Abdülcelil Vehbi), a scribe (ketebeden) (SA dos. 2553, Hopa-Viçeli Ahmed Hamdi), a scribe under
the governor of Baghdad (SA dos. 3502, Hopa-Arhavili Yakub Sabri), an official in charge of tithes
(aşar memuru) (SA dos. 1080, Ünyelj Mahmud Cemal; SA dos. 1456, Ünyelj Mehmed Nurj), and a
census officer (nüfus memuru) (SA dos. 3070, Rizeli Emin Hilmi). While two judges had a father in
charge of tithes, their fathers were the same person because they were brothers. Even in such cases,
the fathers are calculated repeatedly in this study.
82
The only father who appears to have been among the military notables is a landowner (ashab-ı
emlak) of the Anifa(?) village in the Vakfısagir district, who is named Alemdarzade (son of the flag
bearer) İsmajl Ağa (SA dos. 428, Vakf-ı Sagirli Hacı Ali Vehbi). The other father who is classified as
local notable is Bekir Efendi, a notable (eşrafından) of the Village of Vartlar(?) in the Rize district
(SA dos. 1380, Rizeli Mehmed Tevfik).
83
“Efendi” was then an honorific that given to anyone who could read and write, whereas “Ağa” was
an honorific title for people who were not literate. Heidborn 1908–12, 1:185–186; Sami 1317–18, s.v.
“efendi,” “ağa.”
84
Mehmed Necib (SA dos. 2474) “originally came from the Ayanzade family that belonged to a
prominent family in Sürümene” and had the family name “Sancaktarzade” because his grandfather

31
villages. Although the literate class, which included the ulema and local officials, may have
been notables in the local society, it is more likely that they were not from powerful military
families but rather from relatively weak notables who were under the patronage of such
powerful notables.85
It is now clear that the judges from the eastern Black Sea region were different from
those from Ergiri and İbradı. What more clearly characterizes their social origins is the
considerable number of judges from rural areas. The 24 judges, 19 from the villages and five
from counties, represent two-thirds of the total. Thus, it can be said that the social origins of
the judges from Trabzon province were relatively low compared to the previous cases. The
relatively high percentage (28%, 10 judges) of respondents without information on the
occupation or position of their fathers (“no official position”) also suggests that their
background was not high enough to be especially mentioned.
At the same time, the above-mentioned fact that only one of the judges from Trabzon
province in our sample was a judge’s son implies that all but one were newcomers to the
profession. The number of new recruits increased from the third period or 1884 onward,
which means that the entry into the sharia judiciary was the latest compared with Ergiri and
İbradı, and it started after the mid-nineteenth century.
Except for two, all of their studies were completed in Istanbul. [91] As newcomers
without a firm foothold in the judiciary organization, it is easy to understand why they
gravitated toward the capital, where educational and appointment opportunities were
concentrated. In addition, roughly half of them (17) graduated from the Naibs’ College. Their
education in Istanbul, particularly their studies at the Naibs’ College, ensured their social
advancement, as evidenced by the fact that 13 (36%) of them attained the third grade or
higher in the naibship system.
Seventeen percent of the total number of graduates of the Naibs’ College hailed from
Trabzon province. This province produced the most graduates per province, slightly more

was a flag bearer in the Russo-Ottoman War. However, his father was a village kapudan (ship captain),
giving the impression that he was a distant relative of the main family. The father of Reşjd Fehmj of
the Kalyoncuzade family (SA dos. 2417, Atina-Mapavrili) was a village medrese professor. In the
case of Ali Rıza, another judge of the Alemdarzade family (not the above Hacı Ali Vehbi, in note 82), ,
his father’s occupation and position are unknown, but he (father) was a villager with the title of
“Efendi” (SA dos. 2405).
85
Mehmed Efendi (father of the judge Yakub Sabri) from a village belonging to Hopa-Arhavi is a
typical example (SA dos. 3502). He was a relative (müteallikatından) of “Laz” Ali Rıza Paşa, known
for defeating the Mamluks in Baghdad as the governor of the province, and served as scribe among
his retinue (refakatinde). On Ali Rıza Paşa, see Mehmed Süreyya 1308–11, 3:568–569.

32
than Yanya, which includes a large number of Ergiri-born graduates (Table 6). The fact that
the number of graduates from Trabzon province was negligible in the first period but
significantly increased in the second period confirms that they were late entrants into the
judiciary. Importantly, Trabzon province continued to send its people to the sharia judiciary
through the Naibs’ College until the end of the Empire, in contrast to Ergiri and İbradı, whose
representatives almost vanished from the Naibs’ College after 1910.
The province of Trabzon produced a large number of other ulema in addition to sharia
judges. For example, the Ottoman state yearbook of 1877 shows that there were more ders-i
âms in Istanbul from Trabzon province than any other province.86 This in contrast to the
ulema from Ergiri/Libohova and İbradı, who primarily chose to specialize as sharia judges.
True, ulema from certain regions, such as Arhavi, appear to have specialized as sharia judges,
but there were also many ders-i âms from Rize, Hemşin, and others (Albayrak 1996, pass?m).
Some sharia judges also emerged from the Of district, which is known to traditionally
produce many teachers and preachers.87
In addition, people from Trabzon province were also active outside the ilmiye system.
As shown in Table 5, from 1885 to 1902, 38 students from Trabzon province graduated from
Law School, which provided personnel for the nizamiye court system. This represents 5.0%
of all graduates during that period. Still, excluding those from Istanbul, which accounted for
one third of the total, it is the second-highest percentage after Konya and Yanya when
compared by province. In the case of the Mülkiye School, 24 (3.3%) of the 729 students who
graduated during the same period were from Trabzon province, which ranks high among the
provinces even though approximately half of the graduates were from the capital. Between
1910 and 1915, at the end of the Ottoman Empire, 26 (6.2%) students from Trabzon province
graduated from the Mülkiye School, making it the province with the highest number of

86
Salname-i Devlet, no. 32 (1294): 181–194. According to Haljl İbrahjm Erbay, who is conducting
research on ders-i âms using the Meşjhat Archjves’ personnel records collection like this author,
Trabzon Province produced the largest number of ders-i âms at the end of the nineteenth century,
followed by the provinces of Kastamonu (on the Black Sea coast) and Ankara. His paper entitled,
“Being Teachers in the Ottoman Traditional Education: Social Mobility and Career Pattern Among
Istanbul Dersiams in the Late 19th Century,” was presented at a workshop entitled “Reproduction of
Islamic Knowledge in the Ottoman Empire: Continuity and Change in the Islamic and Ottoman
Traditions,” organized by the research group “Knowledge and Society,” under the Islamic Area
Studies Project sponsored by Japanese Ministry of Education, Tokyo, October 2001.
87
Although there is only one judge from Of in the sample (SA dos. 283, Mustafa Zühdi), fifteen
graduates from Of are found among all the graduates of the Naibs’ College. Among the graduates’
hometowns, Of is the fourth most common district within Trabzon province, following Hopa, Atina,
and Rize. On the “hocas” from Of, see Meeker (2002).

33
graduates other than Istanbul, where the percentage reached 30% (Çankaya 1968–71, 4:
1259–1666).88 This demonstrates that the people of Trabzon province tended to be outwardly
focused and strongly oriented toward education and government positions.89
[92] In terms of numbers, it was in the ilmiye system that people from Trabzon province
played an outstanding role, and they were most successful, especially in the sharia judiciary
organization. Those from the remote villages of the Ottoman Empire went to Istanbul,
graduated from the Naibs’ College, and became sharia judges, thus securing a position in the
state apparatus of the Empire. Thus, they achieved social advancement. Their success as
sharia judges, however, was a result of their late entry into the imperial system. As evidenced
by the educational preferences of the inhabitants of Istanbul and İbradı in the late nineteenth
century, the Naibs’ College occupied a lower position in the hierarchy of the higher education
institutions. Consequently, the college was open to newcomers. The success of people from
Trabzon province in the sharia judiciary was closely related to the relative position of the
sharia judiciary in the Ottoman state.

Conclusion
We have examined the social background of sharia judges in each of the four regions that
produced a large number of sharia judges at the end of the Ottoman Empire: Istanbul, the
Ergiri district, İbradı, and Trabzon Province. The origins of the judges were clearly different
in each region. There are four types of judges: those from Istanbul, who are mostly children
of high-ranking ulema; those from the Ergiri district, who originated from local notables and
were educated at the Naibs’ College; those from İbradı, where judges were trained through
traditional apprenticeships for generations; and those from Trabzon province, who were
mainly from the rural literate class and latecomers to the profession through the Naibs’
College. Differences between the four types were due to factors such as the economic
conditions, social stratification, cultural traditions, and the degree of integration into the
central state.

88
Szyliowicz (1971: 378) observes that the proportion of graduates from the Black Sea region
(including Kastamonu, Bolu, and others) among the graduates of the Mülkiye School remained
relatively high from 1860 to 1949.
89
According to Kaori Komatsu, many people from Trabzon province were also included in the
personnel of the navy and the state-run steamships. See Kaori Komatsu, “Shipping and the People on
the Black Sea Coast in the Late Ottoman Empire: an Analysis of the Sources of Turkjsh Maritime
Organization,” presented at the 19th Annual Meeting of the Japan Association for Middle East Studies
in Oita in May 2003.

34
 Nonetheless, these four regions shared the spread of medrese education (an Istanbul-
centered medrese culture mediated by the Turkish language) and limited means of subsistence,
whereas the situation in Istanbul was different (in Istanbul, on the contrary, the ulema who
needed to make a living chose a judge position). These two points related naturally to the
characteristics of the sharia judge position. The sharia judiciary profession was supported by
medrese education and its extension to court apprenticeship and education at the Naibs’
College. The office of sharia judge was a salaried position, but its appointees were required
to move from region to region, far from their hometowns. In contrast, even in regions where
medrese education was prevalent, few sharia judges emerged from towns such as Konya and
Kayseri, which were themselves central and rich in means of livelihood.
The fact that sharia judiciary was supported by medrese education means that education
in new-style schools was not necessarily required. Although the Naibs’ College had
characteristics similar to new-style schools, the admission condition was to pass exams in
Arabic grammar, logic, rhetoric, and the basics of jurisprudence, all of which were in line
with the medrese education (Akiba 2003, 139 n63). In other words, education in new-style
schools was not required for admission to the Naibs’ College. [93] On the contrary, in the
case of the Mülkiye School, which has been referred to for comparison in this article, students
were required to have completed their secondary education at the affiliated high school or
other new-style school (Çankaya 1968–71, 1:225–229). Although graduation from new-style
schools was not a prerequisite for admission to Law School, students were selected through
entrance examinations on the Ottoman language, basic Arabic grammar, logic, geography,
arithmetic, and history, which corresponded to the curriculum of new-style secondary schools.
The comparison above does not necessarily imply that the academic standards required by
the Naibs’ College were lower than those of the other two schools; however, it does indicate
that the Naibs’ College was not central in terms of its degree of integration into the new
system created by the late Ottoman Empire, and thus its position within the centralized
system. The hierarchy that existed between the Mülkiye School, the Law School, and the
Naibs’ College reflects the relationship between the professions corresponding to each
school: civil officialdom, especially in the local administration, the judicial profession under
the nizamiye court system, and the sharia judiciary. Although the sharia judiciary was a
position of high status and prestige within the ilmiye institution, probably second only to
administrative positions within the Şeyhülislam’s Office, it was not at the highest level in the
Ottoman bureaucracy in terms of salary, status security, and other benefits. In the new system

35
of the late Ottoman Empire, they were not ranked higher than the local administrative and
new judicial offices in terms of status, authority, and power.
This position of the sharia judiciary within the Ottoman bureaucracy was an important
factor in determining people’s orientation toward it. Residents of regions that were closely
integrated with the Ottoman center and strongly influenced by reforms tended to pursue
opportunities for newer forms of social advancement rather than the sharia judiciary. This, in
turn, allowed the residents of the peripheral regions room to participate in the sharia judicary
organization. Thus, people from regions such as Ergiri and Trabzon Province, which had been
only loosely integrated into the imperial center until the beginning of the nineteenth century,
were able to take their place in the imperial system through the sharia judiciary organization.
This was also why the people of İbradı were able to firmly maintain their position in the
sharia judiciary for such a long time, and why they moved to new official positions beginning
in the late nineteenth century.
In the 1910s, this trend became even more evident. Although the data for Period IV in
Tables 1, 2, and 3 are not necessarily reliable due to the small sample size of the fourth period,
the trend is clearly shown in Table 6 for all graduates of the Naibs’ College. That is, graduates
from Istanbul, Ergiri, and İbradı almost disappeared from the ranks of newly recruited sharia
judges after 1910, and those from Trabzon province and other Anatolian provinces became
the majority in the sharia judiciary organization. Those from the Arab regions, who had
originally tended to study in the educational centers of their respective regions rather than in
the Naibs’ College, were almost completely excluded from new recruitment by strict
enforcement of the principle of graduation from the Naibs’ College. Furthermore, the number
of sharia judges whose fathers were sharia judges (71) is particularly high in Istanbul (22),
İbradı and Gödene (22), followed by Ergiri and Libohova (7) and the Arab regions (9) in our
sample. With this in mind, we may assume that most of the graduates of the Naibs’ College
after 1910, when few came from these regions, were newcomers to the judiciary organization.
Moreover, given the fact that 70% of the sample in the fourth period came from rural areas
(38% for all periods), and 13% (2% for all periods) came from the peasantry, [94] one can
conclude that the overall trend of new recruits during this period, which was dominated by
graduates of the Naibs’ College, was the entry of more people with relatively low social status.
The preceding discussion has elucidated the primary characteristics of the organization
of the sharia judiciary in the late Ottoman Empire. It should be noted, however, that in
addition to the four types discussed above, there is a fifth type of sharia judge that is

36
characteristic of sharia judges from the Arab regions who primarily remained in their home
regions and served as sharia judges. This category of judges should be the subject of its own
article. Additionally, by examining the origins of ulema besides sharia judges, it will be
possible to understand the ulema during the late Ottoman period as a whole. Further, although
this article frequently refers to Mülkiye School and Law School graduates for comparison, if
the main career paths of these graduates, such as local administrators and nizamiye court
judges and public prosecutors, are analyzed according to place of origin as done by this article,
the characteristics of bureaucratic organization in the late Ottoman Empire as well as various
aspects of social mobility and integration will become even more apparent.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Archival Sources
Turkey, Prime Ministry Ottoman Archives (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi, BOA)
Şura-yı Devlet Evrakı
Istanbul Mufti’s Office Meşjhat Archjves (İstanbul Müftülüğü Meşihat Arşivi)
Sicill-i Ahval Dosyaları (SA dos.)
Sicill-i Ahval Defterleri (SA def.)
Defter (D/I)

2. Ottoman Official Publications

Statute Book
Düstur. First Series. 4 vols. and 4 suppl. İstanbul: Matba‘a-i Âmire, 1289–1302.
Yearbooks
Ceride-i İlmiye (İstanbul).
İlmiye Salnamesi. İstanbul: Matba‘a-i Âmire, 1334.
Salname-i Devlet (İstanbul).
Salname-i Nezaret-i Ma‘arif-i Umumiye (İstanbul).
Trabzon Vilayet Salnamesi (Trabzon).
Statistics
Devlet-i Aliye-i Osmaniye’nin Bin Üç Yüz On Üç Senesine Mahsus İstatistik-i Umumisidir. İstanbul:
Âlim Matba‘ası, 1316.

3. Other Publications
Agmon, Iris. 2004. “Social Biography of a Late Ottoman Shari‘a Judge.” New Perspectives on Turkey,
30: 83–113
Akiba Jun 秋葉淳. 1996.「オスマン朝末期イスタンブルのメドレセ教育──教育課程と学⽣
⽣活」 『史学雑誌』105 (1): 62‒84.

37
–––. 1998a.「アブデュルハミト⼆世期オスマン帝国における⼆つの学校制度」 『イスラム世
界』50: 39‒63.
–––. 1998b.「オスマン帝国近代におけるウラマー制度の再編」 『⽇本中東学会年報』13: 185‒
214.
—. 2003.「オスマン帝国近代のイスラーム法官̶̶任命制度・教育・出⾃の変容」博⼠論⽂，
東京⼤学.
Akiba Jun. 2003. “A New School for Qadis: Education of the Sharia Judges in the Late Ottoman
Empire.” Turcica, 35: 125–163.
—. 2005. “From Kadı to Naib: Reorganization of the Ottoman Sharia Judiciary in the Tanzimat
Period.” Frontiers of Ottoman Studies, 2 vols. (Colin Imber, Keiko Kiyotaki and Rhoads
Murphey, eds.), 1: 43–60. London: I. B. Tauris.
Aktepe, Münir M. 1951–52. “Tuzcu Oğulları İsyanı.” Tarih Dergisi, 3 (5–6): 21–52.
Albayrak, Sadık. 1996. Son Devir Osmanlı Uleması, 2nd ed., 5 vols. İstanbul: İstanbul Büyükşehir
Belediyesi.
Baltaoğlu, Ali Galip. 1998. Atatürk Dönemi Valileri (29 Ekim 1923–10 Kasım 1938). Ankara: Ocak
Yayınları.
Bilici, Faruk. 1995. “Les archives du Şeyh’ül-Islam en tant que source de l’histoire de la fin de
l’Empire ottoman.” Histoire économique et sociale de l’Empire ottoman et de la Turquie (1326–
1960): Actes du sixième congrès international tenu à Aix-en-Provence du 1er au 4 Juillet 1992
(Daniel Panzac, ed.), 27–34. Paris: Peeters.
Bingöl, Sedat. 1998. “Nizamiye Mahkemelerinin Kuruluşu ve İşleyişi, 1840–1876.” PhD diss.,
Akdeniz Üniversitesi.
Blake, Corinne. 1991. “Training Arab-Ottoman Bureaucrats: Syrian Graduates of the Mülkiye
Mektebi, 1890–1920.” PhD diss., Princeton University.
Bryer, Anthony. 1969. “The Last Laz Risings and the Downfalls of the Pontic Derebeys, 1812–1840.”
Bedi Kartlisa, Revue de Kartvélologie, 26: 191–210.
Clayer, Nathalie. 2000. “Les cadis de l’après Tanzimat: L’examples des cadis originaires d’Ergiri et
Libohova.” Turcica, 32: 33–58.
Çadırcı, Musa. 1991. Tanzimat Döneminde Anadolu Kentleri’nin Sosyal ve Ekonomik Yapıları.
İstanbul: TTK.
Çankaya, Mücellidoğlu Ali. 1968–71. Yeni Mülkiye Târihi ve Mülkiyeliler. 8 vols. Ankara: Mars
Matbaası.
Ekinci, Ekrem Buğra. 2004. Osmanlı Mahkemeleri: Tanzimat ve Sonrası. İstanbul: Arı Sanat.
Enhoş, Mustafa. 1974. Bütün Yönleriyle Akseki ve Aksekililer. İstanbul: n.p.
Faroghi [Faroqhi], Suraiya. 1973. “Social Mobility among the Ottoman ‘Ulemâ in the Late Sixteenth
Century.” International Journal of Middle East Studies, 4: 204–218.
Findley, Carter Vaughn. 1989. Ottoman Civil Officialdom: A Social History. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Gawrych, George Walter. 1980. “Ottoman Administration and the Albanians, 1908–1913.” PhD diss.,
University of Michigan,

38
Güler, İbrahim. 1999. “XVIII. Yüzyılda Trabzon’un Sosyal ve Eknomik Durumuna dair Tesbitler.”
Cumhuriyet’in 75. Osmanlı Devleti’nin 700. yılında Trabzon Tarihi İlmî Toplantısı (6–8 Kasım
1998), Bildiriler (Kemal Çiçek et al, eds.), 327–349. Trabzon: Trabzon Belediyesi.
Güran, Tevfik, ed. 1997. Osmanlı Devleti’nin İlk İstatistik Yıllığı 1897. Ankara: T. C. Başbakanlık
Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü.
Heidborn, Adolf. 1908–12. Manuel de droit public et administratif de l'Empire ottoman, 2 vols.
Vienne and Leipzig: C. W. Stern.
Hudson, Pat. 2000. History by Numbers: An Introduction to Quantitative Approaches. London:
Arnold.
Ishimaru Yumi ⽯丸由美. 2002.「オスマンルルックとアルバニア⼈̶̶「オスマン国⺠」理
念の受容の問題をめぐって」 『史学』71 (2‒3): 73‒91.
Itzkowitz, Norman. 1969. “‘Kimsiniz Bey Efendi,’ or a Look at Tanzimat through Namier-Colored
Glasses.” Near Eastern Round Table, 1967–68 (R. Bayly Winder, ed.), 41–52. New York: New
York University.
Itzkowitz, Norman and Joel Shinder. 1972. “The Office of Şeyh ül-Islâm and the Tanzimat: A
Prosopographic Enquiry.” Middle Eastern Studies, 8: 93–101.
İller Bankası. 1956. Belediyelerimiz. Ankara: İller Bankası.
İz, Mahir. 1990. Yılların İzi, 2nd ed. İstanbul: Kitabevi.
Karpat, Kemal H. 1985. Ottoman Population, 1830–1914: Demographic and Social Characteristics.
Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Kreiser, Klaus. 1989. “Süß-bittere Erinnerungen an Rumelien... Türkische Dichter, Bürokraten,
Ulema und Politiker aus Südosteuropa.” Südosteuropa-Jahrbuch, 19: Die Staaten Südosteuropa
und die Osmanen (Hans Georg Majer ed.), 271–280. München: Selbstverlag der Südosteuropa-
Gesellschaft.
Kushner, David. 1994. “Career Patterns among the Ulema in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth
Centuries.” Tanzimat'ın 150. Yıldönümü Uluslararası Sempozyumu: Ankara, 31 Ekim – 3 Kasım
1989), 165–171. Ankara: TTK.
Külçe, Süleyman. 1944. Osmanlı Tarihinde Arnavutluk. İzmir: n.p.
Matsuo Yuriko 松尾有⾥⼦. 1996. 「オスマン朝中期におけるウレマー──専⾨職業的ヒエ
ラルヒーの形成とその担い⼿たち」 『お茶の⽔史学』39: 45‒74.
McCarthy, Justin. 1979. “Age, Family and Migration in Nineteenth-Century Black Sea Provinces of
the Ottoman Empire.” International Journal of Middle East Studies, 10: 309–323.
Meeker, Michael E. 2002. A Nation of Empire: The Ottoman Legacy of Turkish Modernity. Berkeley
and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Mehmed Süreyya. 1308–11. Sicill-i Osmani yahud Tezkire-i Meşahir-i Osmaniye. 4 vols. İstanbul:
Matba‘a-i Âmire.
Miura Toru 三浦徹. 1998.「19 世紀ダマスクスのイスラム法廷⽂書 (1)̶̶サーリヒーヤ法
廷をめぐる⼈間関係」 『東洋⽂化研究所紀要』135: 147‒227.
‒‒‒. 2004.「当事者の世界と法廷の世界̶̶イスラーム法における契約」『⽐較史のアジア
所有・契約・市場・公正』 （三浦徹・岸本美緒・関本照夫編） ，113–140. 東京⼤学出版
会．

39
Nagata Yuzo 永⽥雄三. 1969.「マフムート⼆世の中央集権化政策の⼀端̶̶アーヤーン，デ
レベイ対策をめぐって」 『オリエント』12 (3‒4): 149‒168.
–––. 2001「オスマン帝国における近代教育の導⼊: ⽂官養成校（ミュルキエ）の教師と学⽣
たちの動向を中⼼に」 『駿台史学』111: 63‒90.
Özkaynak, Kemal. 1954. Akseki Kazası: Tarih - Coğrafya - Turizm - Biyoğrafya. Ankara: Akgün
Matbaası.
Popovic, Alexandre. 1986. L’Islam balkanique: Les musulmans du sud-est européen dans la période
post-ottomane. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrossowitz.
Riza, Emin. 1978. Gjirokastra: Ville - Musée. Tirana: Editions «8 Nëntori».
Roded, Ruth. 1983. “Ottoman Service as a Vehicle for the Rise of New Upstarts among the Urban
Elite Families of Syria in the Last Decades of Ottoman Rule.” Asian and African Studies, 17:
63–94.
–––. 1986. “Social Patterns Among the Urban Elite of Syria During the Late Ottoman Period (1876–
1918).” Palestine in the Late Ottoman Period: Political, Social and Economic Transformation
(David Kushner, ed.), 146–171. Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi, Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Sami, Şemseddin. 1306–16. Kamusu’l-A‘lam. 6 vols. İstanbul: Mihran Matba‘ası. Repr. Ankara:
Kasgar Neşriyat, 1996.
–––. 1317–18. Kamus-ı Türkî. 2 vols. İstanbul: İkdam Matba‘ası. Repr. İstanbul: Enderun Kitabevi,
1989.
Sarıoğlan, E. Esin. 1996. “Tanzimat’ın Trabzon’da Uygulanması (1839–1856).” Master’s Thesis,
Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi.
Strauß, Johann. 1995. “Das Vilayet Janina 1881–1912- Wirtschaft und Gesellschafts in einer
"geretteten Provinz".” Türkische Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte (1071-1920): Akten des IV.
internationalen Kongresses, München 1986 (Hans Georg Majer and Raoul Motika, eds.), 297–
313. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Sümbül, Ali. 1989. Evliya Çelebi gibi Geze Geze Akseki Kazası ve Köyleri. İstanbul: Yaylacık
Matbaası.
Szyliowicz, Joseph. 1971. “Elite Recruitment in Turkey: The Role of the Mülkiye.” World Politics 23
(3): 371–398.
–––. 1975. “Changes in the Recruitment Patterns and Career-lines of Ottoman Provincial
Administrators during the Nineteenth Century.” Studies on Palestine during the Ottoman Period
(Moshe Ma’oz, ed.), 249–283. Jerusalem: Magnes Press.
Şahankaya, Kemal Naci. 1977. Çeşitli Yönleriyle İbradı. İzmir: n.p.
Toumarkine, Alexandre. 1995. Les Lazes en Turquie (XIXe-XXe siècles). Istanbul: ISIS.
–––. 2000. “Oulémas originaires du Lazistan, d‘Adjarie, de Circassie et du Daguestan pendant les
dernières décennies de l‘Empire Ottoman (fin XIXème siècle - début XXème siècles): Approche
préliminaire.” Caucassia between the Ottoman Empire and Iran, 1555–1914 (Raoul Motika and
Michael Ursinus, eds.), 49–67. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
Uzunçarşılı, İsmail Hakkı. 1971. “Kadı Abdurrahman Paşa.” Belleten, 35 (138–139): 246–302, 409–
451.
Yazbak, Mahmoud. 1995. “Strife among the Social Elite in Haifa 1870–1914, The Traditional Elite
versus a New Rising Elite: Based Upon the Sijill of the Shari’a Court.” Histoire économique et

40
 sociale de l’Empire ottoman et de la Turquie (1326–1960): Actes du sixième congrès
international tenu à Aix-en-Provence du 1er au 4 Juillet 1992 (Daniel Panzac, ed.), 539–554.
Paris: Peeters.
–––. 1997. “Nabulsi Ulama in the Late Ottoman Period, 1864–1914.” International Journal of Middle
East Studies, 29: 71–91.
–––. 1998. Haifa in the Late Ottoman Period 1864–1914: A Muslim Town in Transition. Leiden: Brill.
Ze’evi, Dror. 1998. “The Use of Ottoman Sharī‘a Court Records as a Source for Middle Eastern Social
History: A Reappraisal.” Islamic Law and Society, 5 (1): 35–56.
Zerdeci, Hümeyra. 1998. “Osmanlı Ulema Biyografilerinin Arşiv Kaynakları (Şer’iyye Sicilleri).”
Master’s Thesis, İstanbul Üniversitesi.
Zilfi, Madeline C. 1983a. “Elite Circulation in the Ottoman Empire: Great Mollas of the Eighteenth
Century.” Journal of Economic and Social History of Orient, 26: 318–364.
–––. 1983b. “The İlmiye Registers and the Ottoman Medrese System Prior to the Tanzimat.”
Collection Turcica III: Contribtutions à l’histoire économicque et sociale de’l’Empire ottoman
(Jean-Louis Bacqué-Grammont et Paul Dumont, eds.), 309–327. Leuven: Édtions Peeters.
–––. 1988. The Politics of Piety: The Ottoman Ulema in the Postclassical Age (1600–1800).
Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica.

41