Ottoman Institutions and Customs

… and their origins

The question of the origins of the Ottoman institutions has been hotly argued for a long time.  Some historians like H.A. Gibbons, claim that there was a “strong Byzantine and a moderate Turkish influence” on the legislation of Mehmed II and the Arab influence only appeared early in the sixteenth century with the capture of Syria, Egypt, northern India and Iraq.  He also thinks that Byzantine influence over the royal family and the upper classes included such customs and ceremonies as would be described at the wedding of Beyazid with Delvet Shah Hatun, the Germiyan princess; the disarming of ambassadors, before they are presented in court; even the veiling of women. 1 Other historians suggest that “the political and military institutions of the Byzantine empire were taken wholesale by the Ottoman empire” 2, 9

More recently Ottoman scholars have been searching for the origins of the Ottoman legal institutions, within the framework of the Anatolian Seljuks and the other Anatolian beyliks.  Anyone tracing the history of the Turks will need to consider any links to the beginning of Islamic hegemony, as well as the older legal institutions of China, Iran and India.   The more we know about the legal institutions of other Turkic beyliks, the more we can compare them with those of the Ottomans.  Here Russian ethnographic descriptions of the legal institutions of some of their Turkic tribes have been of use. 3

It is probably worth reminding ourselves that at the beginning of the 9th century, Asian nomads – the Ottomans’ predecessors – the Oghuz family of tribes, under the leadership of the Seljuks took large parts of Trans-Caucasia and reached present day Samarkand.  There, they met and established cultural and trade relations with the Arabs from the Islamic Caliphate, who had been invading lands north and east of their base, finally engulfing the Persian Empire.  Their trade links with the Oghuz tribes became well established.  In turn, the Turks were influenced by the Arabs and gradually began to forsake their paganism and accept Islam. 4

By the 11th century the Empire of the Arabs crumbled, the Seljuks stepped in their shoes and created an Islamic state, founded on the cultural and civic traditions of the Abbasid Caliphate.  In this state, they incorporated other Turkic tribes and principalities (beyliks).  In this way, with a much-enhanced army, they gradually expanded their domains over Persia, then Mesopotamia and Syria. 

The Seljuks overcame the challenge of adapting to sedentary life and managed to develop into empire-builders, who successfully blended their own institutions and laws with traditions, which they inherited from the Arabs.  The state they created as a result, reached a new level of achievement within the social, religious, economic, literary and architectural development of Moslem civilization. 5

After the collapse of the Seljuk Empire, the Seljuks of Rum carried through many of the traditions and institutions of the Great Seljuks of Persia.  These traditions included structures, facilitating government decision-making, and civil service administration, a desire for civic building of bridges, mosques, schools, and the development of an urbanized and powerful state, which attained its pinnacle in the first half of the 13th century. 5

Not only had the Ottomans replicated many of the Seljuk institutions and traditions. They could be found in many of the successor states – like the Seljuks of Syria, Iran and Anatolia, as well as in the Muslim states of North Africa.  Some examples of these traditions could be the playing of a band in front of the sovereign or Governor, the umbrella being held over the head of the ruler, etc. 3

Hunting and ceremonies, related to it, appear to be the passion of various Seljuk rulers – they even provided gold collars for their hunting animals.  It is obvious that by the time of Beyazid I, the Ottoman palace was quite a splendid institution and that hunting remained an opportunity to show off extravagance and pomp.  The German prisoner Johann Schiltenbergerprovided a good example, describing Beyazid’s hunting party. 3

The influence of the Mongols over the Turkish world should also not be underestimated.  After the conversion of the Ilkhanids to Islam, the Mongol institutions did not lose their significance and survived for centuries to come.  Some of those institutions were used by the Golden Horde and also by the Tartars in Crimea.  The ideas that the Golden Horde was a barbarian state, with no civilisation and/or aptitude and interest in science and fine arts has now been corrected by the research of Russian archaeologists and ethnographers.  It also appeared that this state had developed its own Turkish literature and its institutions have not only influenced the development of administrative and financial institutions of the Muscovite Russian Tsardom, but the Turks in Anatolia as well. 3

A custom, practised by the Ottomans, originating in both Seljuk and Mongol dynasties as well as the West, was the distributing of gratuities on the accession to the throne.  As the principle of accession was not clearly defined and many of the sultan’s sons competed for the throne, it was very important for the new ruler to buy the loyalty of the troops from his personal means or from the state treasury. 3

Some customs passed from the Byzantines to the Ottomans, but the Byzantines had taken them from others – a typical example is the custom of applause, which passed from the Abbasids to the Byzantine and then to the Ottomans.  It was customary for the ruler/khan of the Turkish tribes to give public banquets – to feed his retainers, according to the concept of “paternal guardianship” – he was responsible for the “feeding, clothing and enriching of his subjects”.  In those banquets – remnants of old religious rites – there were specific seating arrangements and types of food offered for the members of each tribe.  All people who came to the palace to work should eat their daily food there.  Neglect of the prescribed rules could lead to a revolt.  Many of those banquets were described in Turkish folk epics. 3

Another interesting tradition was that of awarding robes tohonour your subjects.  This had been practised by many national groups before the Ottomans – the Chinese demonstrated such favours (and the robes included accessories, such as gold and silver belts); the Pharaohs of Egypt also gave robes to bestow favour and confirm rank; the rulers of the Ilkhanids, the Mongols as well as the Golden Horde also respect this custom.  It is possible that this practice originated from Babylon and Assyria and had been passed through the centuries to the Far East pre-Islamic and post-Islamic societies, as well as to Byzantium. 3  

This practice was also known in Bulgaria, where it probably came from Byzantium.  As I mentioned in Part Two (Chapter 16) of my book ”Tamara Shishman and Murad I” in the grave of Caesar Constantine, who was governing the Nish-Pirot, the body was found, dressed in a gold-woven robe, extremely well preserved, and decorated with beautiful depictions of two-headed eagles, birds and deer, as well as a monogram with the text: Ivan Alexander, Tsar of Bulgarians and Greeks.  It appears that the Caesar was given this robe by the Tsar himself andtreasured the gift so much, he wanted to be buried in it.  Remnants of this robe, were displayed recently (2008/9) in London as part of the Byzantium exhibition. 7,8

Methods of Humiliation within the Ottoman Empire included cutting one’s beard – a tactic, used much later by Peter the Great for his modernisation programme in Russia.  The custom of cutting someone’s beard continued amongst the Ottomans until the time of Suleiman the Magnificent in the 16th century.  Other methods of humiliation included forcing men to ride a donkey and sending a man woman’s clothes. 3

It is interesting to know how Europeans adapted to sitting on the ground, on cushions and low divans when they joined the early Ottomans in Bursa.  Although the chair had been in existence since the 4th – 3rd century B.C., the Ottomans were only introduced to the chair and its daily function after the taking of Gallipoli, although they would have seen its use on their visit to the Byzantine court during the wedding of Orhan and the Byzantine Princess Theodora.  The use of the chair, which in Europe became a sign of civilisation and indicated the distancing of man from the ground/earth, was used first by the monarchs – as a symbol of their power and greatness towards the end of 4th century A.D..  By the 5th century B.C., the chair was used much more widely in Europe and on Mediterranean lands, although in Asia Minor, the Arab world in North Africa, India, and some parts of Europe, people remained seated on the ground.  It appears the men were the first to sit on chairs – under Arab influence the women in Spain did not start to use chairs until the 17th century, while men did so earlier. 6

As in the Ottoman Empire, very low traditional tables were used by the Bulgarian peasants, while sitting on the ground.  It appears that while the common people sat on the ground, the aristocracy, the religious leaders, the Tsar and the Royal family in Bulgaria sat on chairs.  There are mural paintings of thrones of Bishops – as the one from “St Demetrious” church in Boboshevo village, near Kyustendil from 1488.  Other examples include the magnificent throne of Despot/Creaser Hrelyo, from his estate in Rila, which could be seen in the Rila Monastery and dates from 1340, as well as other thrones of religious leaders. 6

At the same time, the Ottomans found it difficult to adapt to the European use of the chair – people in the East to the day sit on the ground with their legs crossed.  In fact, when the Ottomans acquire thrones in much later times – Mohamed I (1730 -1754) received a magnificent throne as a present from the Shah of Iran – they were high enough to need steps to climb to them, but the Sultan still sat on them with his legs crossed. 6

Ottoman Institutions and Customs and Their Origins

  1. Gibbons Herbert Adams: The Foundation of the Ottoman Empire – A History of the Osmanlisup to the Death of Bayezid I (1300 – 1403), Oxford, The Clarendon Press, 1916, p 73
  2. Grousset Renė: Histoire de l’Asie, Paris, 1921-22, volume I, p 286
  3. Köprülü Mehmed Fuad: Some observation of the Influence of Byzantine Institutions on Ottoman Institutions – translated, edited and with an introduction and postscript by Gary Laiser; Osmanli Devletï’ nin 700. Kuruluş Yil Dönümü, TÜRK TARİH KURUMU BASIMEVI – ANKARA, 1999, p 18 -159
  4. Kinross Lord: The Ottoman Centuries – The Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire,  Jonathan Cape, London, 1977, p 15 – 43
  5. Köprülü Mehmed Fuad: The Seljuks of Anatolia, Their History and Culture According to Local Muslim Sources, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, 1992, p 15 – 89
  6. Петрински Иван: Истинската История на България: Битието, Ciela, София, 2009, ст 87 – 95
  7. Подбрани извори за Българската история: Българските Държави и Българите през Средновековието, Том Втори, Книга 14 от Библиотека Българска Вечност на Тангра ТанНакРа ИК, София, 2004; Автори и съставители: Георги Бакалов, Георги Владимиров, Диана Илиева, Ваня Мичева, Пламен Павлов, ст 317, 348 – 352
  8. Byzantium – 330 -1453, Edited by Robin Cormack and Maria Vassilaki, Royal Academy of Arts, London, 2008, p 164 – 166, 308 -356
  9. Continuity and Change in Late Byzantine and Early Ottoman Society, edited by Bryer and Lowery, , Dumbarton Oaks, The University of Birmingham, Centre for Byzantine Studies, 1986
Tags: , , , , ,