Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures, Maps and Tables
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction: Rethinking Kurdish Nobility in the Ottoman Empire
- Part I A Tenuous Accord
- Part II A Quasi-Rift
- Part III Restructuring and Violence
- Conclusion: The End of the Nobility in Kurdistan
- Postscript
- Glossary
- Select Bibliography
- Index
Chapter 3 - The Kurdish Nobility and the Making of Modern State Power in Kurdistan
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 October 2023
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures, Maps and Tables
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction: Rethinking Kurdish Nobility in the Ottoman Empire
- Part I A Tenuous Accord
- Part II A Quasi-Rift
- Part III Restructuring and Violence
- Conclusion: The End of the Nobility in Kurdistan
- Postscript
- Glossary
- Select Bibliography
- Index
Summary
Around the year 1838, one year before the promulgation of the Tanzimat (Re-organisation) Decree, and seven years before the provinces of Diyarbekir, Van and Maden-i Hümayûn were brought under the Tanzimat programme, the Finance Ministry produced a register showing the recent revenue accounts of different provinces. Along with presenting data about the values of tax farms, and timar revenues, the register offered a brief report about the general situation in Diyarbekir province in terms of the prevalent land-holding and taxation systems:
The vacant tax resources in Diyarbekir province [such as] those fiefs (timars) and tax units (mukataas) that remained [vacant] after the Zirkî begs’ [exile] along with the fiefs granted to the male slaves (gılman) of the Amid fortress, have been seized by the Mansure treasury and converted to tax-farms. However, the Diyarbekir province has long been under the control of the Kurds (ekrad). As a result, it has not been possible to accurately determine what regulations are needed, and [what] the various vacant [holdings] are … Should one wish to seize and tithe each of these tax-farms, since the inhabitants of this area are like animals (hayvana benzer adamlar) unaccustomed to being governed, they would not take easily such an arrangement. For instance, if there are a few tax units in a district, and if each unit is granted to a tax farmer, he would set out to tithe [the inhabitants] separately and their [demand for] food and fodder would be a burden on the poor [commoners]. Thus, these ungovernable people would not be able to tolerate too many officers. [In this way], [even if] part of the province is brought under control, another part will be in disorder, and there will not be a time without disorderliness.
The report reveals an Ottoman official’s unadulterated frustration with the diversity of landholding and tax-collection arrangements in Kurdistan. To the contemporary eye, too, this description seems befuddling, given that none of the land/tax-collection arrangements mentioned – iltizam, malikâne or timar – survives today. Lacking any information about this official’s background and position, we can be sure of one thing: his report was very much in line with the Ottoman administrators’ overarching agenda at that moment in the imperial capital.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Kurdish Nobility in the Ottoman EmpireLoyalty, Autonomy and Privilege, pp. 107 - 131Publisher: Edinburgh University PressPrint publication year: 2022