600 Years of Rule Made the Ottomans Blind to Changes
A Story Unfolding Across Timelines
This is a guest post from the JPF family by Liat Portal. Subscribe to her Substack, The Liat Show for more of her informative writing.
All future stories written by Reuben Salsa (every Thursday, 8 am Auckland time) will be for paid subscribers only. Guest posts will remain free and posted every Sunday (8 am Auckland time).
A raised fist of defiance to our newest paid subscribers to the JPF fam,
, , and . They regret nothing!Pay for a subscription today! Guaranteed raising of middle digits to fanatical antisemitic a-holes!
For more articles by Jewish authors, subscribe to the JPF on Medium (click on the image below).
600 Years of Rule Made the Ottomans Blind to Changes
Like Europe and the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire's population was polarized into two distinct classes: the aristocrats, the elite, who owned the majority of the land, and the poorest of the people. There was no such thing as a middle class, so the public split between the masses of illiterate and uneducated poor, on the one hand, and the extremely wealthy and educated, on the other.
While facing similar global challenges, the lower classes in Europe and Russia generally had greater access to education and a broader skill set than the lower class in the Ottoman Empire. These huge disparities contributed to the widening gap between these regions, especially in economic development and social progress.
Most people in the Ottoman Empire were engaged in agriculture, with limited exposure to intellectual knowledge or technical skills. During the 600 years of the Ottoman Empire's rule, the primary profession was peasantry, which used the same business model for hundreds of years. The empire, represented by the Sultan, the aristocracy, or individual proprietors, owned the land while the peasants cultivated it.Â
Peasants were granted the use of land in exchange for a portion of the harvest, which was often divided equally between the landowner and the peasant. The Ottoman land system provided minimal means of subsistence for peasants, but it mainly concentrated wealth in the hands of landowners, which led to inequality and significant wealth disparities between landowners and peasants.
In that business model, landowners could exploit their power, demanding excessive portions of the harvest or imposing unfair labor obligations. The peasants didn't have any incentive to invest in land improvements because they did not own the land and, at the same time, didn’t have the technical knowledge that had developed in Europe during the Industrial Revolution. At best, the peasants kept using the same farming techniques from the 15th and 16th centuries instead of learning modern new ones.
In the 19th century, the Ottoman Empire was on the verge of bankruptcy, and the agricultural land system began to erode. Population growth, economic changes, and the influence of European ideas about land ownership reached the landlords and elite, who realized that global changes could impact their wealth.
During that time, the Ottoman Empire tried to improve the status of the peasants. It introduced new reforms aimed at modernizing the land tenure system, but these efforts met resistance from peasants. The peasants, who were supposed to benefit from the new regulations, suspected government interference. Meanwhile, the elite class and wealthy landowners feared increased taxation and potential loss of land, which also threatened Waqf's control over land management.
The aristocrats and the elite wanted to secure their wealth more than they cared about the implications of peasants or weakening the management system of the Waqf. As a result, when the demand for land rose, they sold it immediately without giving any notice to the peasants or even offering them the opportunity to buy it first. The Ottoman Muslim aristocrats sold their lands to anyone willing to pay for it generously, especially in the area of land of Israel, also known as the Palestine region in the Ottoman Empire.
While the sale of aristocratic land wasn't widespread throughout the Ottoman Empire, the amount of land sold in the Palestine region was exceptional. The relationship between landlords and peasants, built on a system of mutual dependence for years, was unexpectedly severed without considering the tenants' future situation. The rapid pace of land sales and the complex legal and social changes accompanying the process left peasants with no other alternatives for livelihood.Â
As a result, hate and resentment arose towards the new landowners. The new buyers, who wanted to be farmers and work the land on their own, didn't need the peasants to the same extent, and the financial situation of the local peasants worsened even more. This hatred is the root of the resentment and desire for revenge among the local Palestinian peasants towards the new landowners, especially the Jewish owners. Hatred has been deeply rooted ever since in their culture and soul. So, how does one break free from the emotional chains that have bound them for years? There is no easy answer, only the will to let go to pave a new path.
How Was That Even Possible? Capitulation
A capitulation is a treaty or unilateral contract by which a sovereign state relinquishes jurisdiction within its borders over the subjects of a foreign state. So, with the weakening of the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century, it signed capitulations mostly with European countries, the United States, and Russia by which foreigners resident in the territories of the Ottoman Empire were subjected to the laws of their respective countries.Â
The capitulation agreements, which constituted a fundamental violation of the Ottoman imperial authority, were signed after Britain, Russia, and Austria-Hungary helped the Ottoman government eradicate the forces of the ruler of Egypt from Israel and Syria at the beginning of the 19th century.
The capitulations ushered in a new and privileged era for foreigners in the Ottoman Empire. European countries could establish civil systems parallel to those provided by the empire, such as postal services, banks, hospitals, schools, road construction, and railroads.
The capitulations symbolized subjugation for the host country at the hands of the developed nations. In addition to the ability to purchase land, they granted foreign merchants significant economic advantages. They allowed them to avoid Ottoman taxes and regulations, unlike the citizens of the empire, who were obligated to obey the laws and pay.
While the lower classes, especially peasants of the Ottoman Empire, were likely unaware of the specific details of the capitulations, they experienced the consequences of these agreements through their economic and social conditions. The capitulations contributed to a broader sense of decline and foreign domination and significantly impacted the empire's stability and cohesion.
How to Let Go?
At its core, a significant part of the root of the conflict to this day originates from the suppression of the peasants regarding the sale of land to the Jews. The ignorance of the peasants about the property laws of the empire and about the right of the aristocratic landowners to sell land without giving them an account or worrying about their future is a trauma that deeply scarred them. As a result, the Palestinian peasants carry this trauma for generations to this very day.
And I will add something on Islam: after the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1918 and the the decision of Ataturk to dissolve the Umma was born the most radical trend of Islam in 1928 with the Muslim Brothers of Hassan el Banah in Egypt. His links with the Grand Mufti are very well documented and so are their links to postwar Egypt
Well many people have had to move from their countries of origin during their lifetimes, some under more duress than others over the history of the world. And many have had to travel around or through neighboring countries that refused them hospitality. For instance, why are you a resident of the United States?