지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Urban revolts by tradesmen or those that were supported by them became rather familiar over the seventeenth-and eighteenth-centuries during the Ottoman period． In Istanbul, where military revolts abounded since the late sixteenth-century, there were large-scale revolts by guildsmen in 1651 and 1688; guildsmen participated in the rebel coalition against sultan Mustafa II's government in Edime in 1703; in Patrona Halil rebellion of 1730, many rebel leaders were identified with trades and/or marginally with the military． Up until now, guildsmen's participation in revolts has not drawn much attention, although it was an important sign of changes in Ottoman society and politics in the post-classical era
This paper focuses on the 1651 rebellion of the guildsmen, which was the first of its kind in Istanbul． The key questions involved are: How did the Istanbul guildsmen who were portrayed as obedient subjects of the sultan come to rebel? How did their normal patterns of petitioning tie into their behaviors in rebellion? And, how did the guildsmen's experience of the 1651 rebellion influence their political behaviors afterwards?
To answer these questions in a comprehensive manner, I used the Istanbul court register, the divan (Ottoman cabinet) records, various chronicles and Evliya Celebi's travel account． Analyzing these sources directly, one should note that guildsmen did not simply follow the governments command． They actively petitioned to the government to promote their interests, relying on various active strategies． Moreover, many of these strategies in their enlarged form could be used again in the rebellion． The 1651 rebellion actually broke out on the extension of a mass petition, as the petitioners were repeatedly frustrated． Once the guildsmen attained successful results from the revolt, they participated in later rebellions with remarkable readiness
The findings of this paper can be summarized into the following three points: 1) The normal patterns of petitioning behavior among the guildsmen were compatible with a rebellion． While the tradesmen were looking for redress within the given system of justice, they inadvertently arrived at the alternative of rebellion． 2) Despite the fact that guilds were useful organizations for the administrative purposes of the government, once the government's demands went beyond certain limits, the guilds, their leaders, and their business and non-business networks could also turn into a vehicle of protest． 3) Tradesmen had always had a potential relevance to the political arena and this became clearer after the 1651 rebellion, although they were not primarily political beings.
This paper focuses on the 1651 rebellion of the guildsmen, which was the first of its kind in Istanbul． The key questions involved are: How did the Istanbul guildsmen who were portrayed as obedient subjects of the sultan come to rebel? How did their normal patterns of petitioning tie into their behaviors in rebellion? And, how did the guildsmen's experience of the 1651 rebellion influence their political behaviors afterwards?
To answer these questions in a comprehensive manner, I used the Istanbul court register, the divan (Ottoman cabinet) records, various chronicles and Evliya Celebi's travel account． Analyzing these sources directly, one should note that guildsmen did not simply follow the governments command． They actively petitioned to the government to promote their interests, relying on various active strategies． Moreover, many of these strategies in their enlarged form could be used again in the rebellion． The 1651 rebellion actually broke out on the extension of a mass petition, as the petitioners were repeatedly frustrated． Once the guildsmen attained successful results from the revolt, they participated in later rebellions with remarkable readiness
The findings of this paper can be summarized into the following three points: 1) The normal patterns of petitioning behavior among the guildsmen were compatible with a rebellion． While the tradesmen were looking for redress within the given system of justice, they inadvertently arrived at the alternative of rebellion． 2) Despite the fact that guilds were useful organizations for the administrative purposes of the government, once the government's demands went beyond certain limits, the guilds, their leaders, and their business and non-business networks could also turn into a vehicle of protest． 3) Tradesmen had always had a potential relevance to the political arena and this became clearer after the 1651 rebellion, although they were not primarily political beings.
목차
서론
Ⅰ. 17세기 前半의 이스탄불 길드와 사회환경
Ⅱ. 평상시에 있어서 길드와 정부 사이의 대화
Ⅲ. “시장 사람들”의 반란
Ⅳ. 상공인들의 정치적 잠재력과 그 표현
결론
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
18세기 淸州지역의 謀反ㆍ掛書 사건
역사와 담론
2008 .09
-
Ecological Reinterpretation of Sin as Rebellion against Creation
한국기독교신학논총
2007 .12
-
잭 케이드 반란과 민중, 그리고 셰익스피어의 ‘급진주의’
고전 르네상스 영문학
2010 .01
-
白蓮敎軍이 언급한 嘉慶 白蓮敎反亂 : 白蓮敎軍 진술서 분석을 중심으로
동양사학연구
2019 .03
-
‘홍경래 난’ 연구의 쟁점
한국인물사연구
2009 .03
-
The Development of the Chinju Peasants' Rebellion of 1862
International Journal of Korean History
2002 .12
-
17세기 이스탄불에서 기독교인 이주의 영향 : 인구 구성과 종교집단 간 관계에 대한 함의
역사학보
2015 .06
-
憲宗 10년(1844) 懷平君 李元慶 謀反 사건과 그 의미 : 哲宗 즉위의 숨겨진 배경
역사와 담론
2010 .04
-
인조 9년(1631) 鄭澣 모반 사건과 그 의미
동양고전연구
2010 .01
-
19세기 초 중국 八卦敎亂과 비교한 洪景來亂의 정치적 특성
대동문화연구
2006 .01
-
오스만 제국 길드 내의 '전통'과 변화 : 17세기 초ㆍ중엽 이스탄불의 사례를 중심으로
역사학보
2001 .12
-
1728년 湖南 戊申亂의 전개양상과 叛亂軍의 성격
역사와 담론
2011 .12
-
홍경래의 난, 폭넓은 시각과 수많은 논쟁거리「Marginality and Subversion in Korea : The Hong Kyŏngnae Rebellion of 1812」 - Sun Joo Kim, The University of Washington Press, 2007
역사비평
2008 .05
-
기억과 망각의 정치학 : 『헨리 4세』1부에 나타난 국가 통합의 전략
Shakespeare Review
2016 .03
-
여순사건 당시의 계엄령과 군법회의
제노사이드연구
2009 .08
-
17세기 이스탄불 길드의 조직과 운영에 대한 試論
역사교육
2003 .09
-
Revolt against Heaven
신학지남
1968 .09
-
唐律에 구현된 謀叛罪의 구성요건과 형벌 체계 : 宋·元律과의 비교·검토
역사와경계
2019 .03
-
여순사건의 시적 재현양상
비평문학
2019 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-910-016406344