Bøger om Multi-continental

The fall of Constantinople in 1453 to the Ottoman armies led by Mehmed II marked a momentous event that had far-reaching repercussions across Renaissance Europe. This event catalyzed the migration of Byzantines to various regions, including Italy, carrying with them the rich heritage of Greek antiquity. Among the figures contributing to the Renaissance was Laonikos Chalkokondyles, whose work held particular significance. His detailed application of Herodotos' historical methods to the fifteenth century, titled "Apodeixis Historion," served as a lens through which he interpreted the rise of the Ottoman Empire in light of ancient history. This work, printed in Latin, French, and Greek, achieved widespread success.Chalkokondyles' historical approach rejuvenated ancient categories such as ethnicity, political governance, language, and geography to provide insight into contemporary events and societies. By restoring these Herodotean concepts, he offered a framework to understand the dynamics of his time. In this endeavor, he markedly diverged from the approaches taken by previous Byzantine historians, demonstrating a departure that can be termed "revolutionary classicizing."This term encapsulates Chalkokondyles' innovative approach to historical interpretation. Instead of adhering to the traditional model of lawful imperial rule, he reintroduced the notion of oriental tyranny when describing the emerging Ottoman state. While his emulation of ancient classics might appear on the surface, his revival of political concepts represented a radical departure from the norm. Notably, he reintroduced the idea of city-states as distinct ethnic units, emphasized freedom as independence from foreign domination, and highlighted law-giving as a core element of Hellenic tradition-a concept not typically extended to the Christian era.Chalkokondyles' work illustrates the complex relationship between historical interpretation and contemporary perspectives. By applying ancient methodologies to his time, he crafted a new understanding of political structures and principles. In essence, his "revolutionary classicizing" approach exemplified how the past could be reimagined and repurposed to comprehend the evolving world, ultimately contributing to the transformative period of the Renaissance.

"The seventeenth-century Ottoman Empire was rife with polemical debate, around worshipping at saints' graves, medical procedures, smoking tobacco, and other everyday practices. Fueling these debates was a new form of writing, the pamphlet - a cheap, short, and mobile text that provided readers with simplified legal arguments. These pamphlets were more than simply a novel way to disseminate texts, they made a consequential shift in the way Ottoman subjects communicated. This book offers the first comprehensive look at a new communication order that flourished in seventeenth-century manuscript culture. Through the example of the pamphlet, Nir Shafir investigates the political and cultural institutions used to navigate, regulate, and encourage the circulation of information in a society in which all books were copied by hand. He sketches an ecology of books, examining how books were produced, the movement of texts regulated, education administered, reading conducted, and publics cultivated. Pamphlets invited both the well and poorly educated to participate in public debates, thus expanding the Ottoman body politic. They also spurred an epidemic of fake authors and popular forms of reading. Thus, pamphlets became both the forum and the fuel for the polarization of Ottoman society. Based on years of research in Islamic manuscript libraries worldwide, this book illuminates a vibrant and evolving premodern manuscript culture"--

Describes and analyses British pressure to partition and ultimately destroy the Ottoman Empire Although it was at times valuable to Britain to support the Ottoman Empire against Russian encroachment, by the end of the 19th century successive British governments had begun to sponsor the dismemberment of the Empire. British public opinion and political pressure groups portrayed the Ottomans in universally defamatory terms, affecting the diplomatic actions of politicians. Some politicians themselves harboured deep prejudices against the Turks and Islam. The result, through numerous incidents, was British pressure to dismember the Ottoman Empire. Justin McCarthy shows how - from ignoring provisions guaranteeing Ottoman territorial integrity to refusing to publish consular reports that described the oppression of Muslims - the British were anything but friends to the Ottomans. Key Features  An in-depth study of British relations with the Ottoman Empire and the Turks  Considers British plans for the Ottoman Empire in the most important crises of the late 19th and early 20th centuries  Draws extensively on British diplomatic records and records of other European Powers, the Ottoman Empire and Turkey  Examines the role of diplomats, media, the church and politicians in fostering negative views about the Ottoman Turks and Muslims  Helps us understand the historical origins of many of the conflicts in the Balkans, Anatolia, the Middle East and even in the Caucasus Justin McCarthy is Emeritus Professor of History at the University of Louisville. His recent books include The Armenian Rebellion at Van (2006), The Turk in America (2010) and Sasun (2014).