THE NORTH BRITISH REVIEW, No. L. FOR AUGUST, 1 8 5 6. 3. History of the Ottoman Turks. By E. S. dian power-assigned to France the germ It will here be our aim to consider the prospects which present themselves to the Ottoman Empire, at the close of a military contest and a diplomatic negotiation, which have constituted an era both in its external relations and in its political organisation. In virtue of the stipulations originated or recorded in the Treaty of Paris, Turkey has received an internal constitution which has no parallel in its past government; and has been raised to an international position without In order to estimate the magnitude both example in the history of the last eighty years. The struggle sustained for the inde- of the immediate and prospective results of pendence of Europe thus indirectly threaten- the Treaty of Paris in its relations with the ed in the East, has been immediately associ- Ottoman Empire, it will be necessary, in the ated, not only with the discharge of ancient first place, to take a rapid review of the obligations to the Ottoman State, but with course of military disaster and internal misthe interests of freedom and commerce, of government which have followed the Treaty Christianity and mental development, among of Kainardji (1774). At so recent a period the rising races of the Cross. That struggle as that of the treaty in question, the military was an event which had been gradually fore- strength of Turkey was not unequal to that seen for the past forty years; and the nine- of Austria, and the dominance of the Moslem teenth century has, in this respect, formed over the Christian population was secure as the exact counterpart of the seventeenth. that of Muscovy over the external races of For, as the Treaties of Westphalia (1648)- the Russian Empire. 1. The Peace of Kainin endeavouring to adjust the equilibrium of ardji initiated the system of territorial and Europe, which had been lost in the union of political aggression by which Russia aimed the Austrian, the Castilian, and the Burgun- during the eighty following years, (1774– VOL. XXV. D-12 1854,) simultaneously to contract the extent ing the fifty-five years intervening between of the Turkish Empire, and to destroy the the earlier campaigns of Catherine and the allegiance of its Christian subjects. By that earlier campaigns of Nicholas. treaty, the Crimea and the whole territory to During the quarter of a century which the eastward of the Dniester-subject hither- elapsed between the Treaty of Adrianople to to the government or suzerainty of Turkey and the commencement of the recent war -were erected into an independent Tartar (1829-1854), the watchful policy of England State; and Russia obtained a right of medi- effectually repressed the progress of the ation between the Porte and its Christian Russian dominion in the East. It also gave populations, tantamount to a qualified pro- a vast extension to the Turkish commerce. tectorate. 2. By the declaration of 1783, The schemes developed by Russia in 1839 the greater part of this Tartar State was in- were defeated by the armed intervention corporated with the Russian Empire. 3. of Great Britain in 1840; and the temUnder the alliance of 1787 between Austria porary stipulations of Hunkiar Skelessi and Russia, war was made on Turkey in the (1833), by which the Straits of the Darfollowing year, with a view to the total sup- danelles were closed in the interest of Ruspression of the Ottoman Empire, and to the sia, were replaced by the permanent Treaty partition of its territories jointly by those of the 13th of July 1841-the last diploPowers. From this danger, indeed, Turkey matic act of the Melbourne Administration. was delivered, through the mediation of But the past stipulations, extending from Great Britain and Paussia, under the Treaty the Peace of Kainardji to the Peace of Adof Sistova and the Treaty of Jassy (1791 and rianople, continued necessarily to work their 1792.) 4. By the latter of these stipulations, influence on the Ottoman Empire: a policy the Russian dominion was extended to the of peace, though directly designed to counline of the Dniester, which the Treaty of tervail the aggressive policy of Russia, could Kainardji had already fixed as the bound- only proceed upon a recognition of anteceary of the Turkish sway. The alliance of dent facts. Great Britain and Prussia, in this juncture, Thus, therefore, in 1854, the aggression of alone withheld Russia from demanding and the Court of St. Petersburg, after the lapse usurping the whole of the Trans-Danubian of eighty years, began to press upon six provinces of Turkey. By the same treaty, cardinal elements of the Turkish system Russia gained similar advantages over the with intolerable force. 1. In virtue of sucAsiatic, with those which she had already se- cessive treaties, of the whole European seacured over the European Christians of Tur- board of the Euxine, stretching from the key. 5. Under the Treaty of Bucharest Cimmerian to the Thracian Bosphorus, one(1812), her frontier was extended from the half had been alienated from Turkey, and Dniester to the Pruth; and the Czar once been annexed to Russia. 2. The gradual more demanded Wallachia and Moldavia in infraction of the political, proportionately addition to the spoil which he thus secured with that of the territorial, integrity of the in the accession of Bessarabia to his domin- Empire, had practically subordinated, in its ions. 6. The succeeding Treaty of Akkerman Christian Principalities, the authority of the (1826), in addition to the cession, for which the Sultan to the authority of the Czar. it stipulated, of important Asiatic fortresses 3. The prosecution of the same policy to Russia, gave a regular organisation to the in the Caucasian provinces of Asia, after interference of that State in the Principalities morally alienating their population from of the Danube, which threatened a dissever- the Porte, actually alienated the terriance of their relations with the Government tories which they inhabited. 4. The vast of Constantinople. 7. The Treaties of St. elements of commerce displayed by Turkey Petersburg and London (1826 and 1827) ini- in the possession of the Lower Danube had tiated an interference in the affairs of Greece, been neutralized, and the Russian Governwhich Turkish misgovernment had neces- ment had nearly monopolized the trade of sitated, and finally established the independ- the Euxine. 5. The insidious policy of the ence of the Greek peninsula, which (although same Power, by fomenting the influence of inevitable in the attitude of the Porte) a pol- internal misgovernment, dissevered the icy of conciliation by that Government to- Greek peninsula from Turkey. 6. The wards Greece might even then have averted. naval armaments to which these aggressions 8. Finally, the Treaty of Adrianople (1829), had given birth, established the maritime in surrendering to Russia the islands interven- supremacy of Russia in the Black Sea, which ing between the Danubian mouths, choked supplied the means for an immediate exthe great artery of the Sclavonian races of tinction of the Government at Constanthe south. Such was the territorial and poli- tinople. tical declension of the Ottoman Empire, dur The Treaty of Paris, therefore, in repre senting the successful opposition of Western himself to notions of legal construction at Europe to the traditionary aggression of which Westminster Hall and the Court of Russia, constitutes the basis of the whole Session would stand aghast. He would prospective system of the East. The double then have seen that the Russian claims aim of that Treaty rests in the consolidation rested upon international Conventions wholly of the Turkish Empire, against the arm at distinct from civil Firmans. Those claims, once of eternal violence and of eternal re- moreover, have since been distinctly abolishvolution. In the terms of this negotiation ed in the new Treaty. In regard to the we include the civil concessions of the Porte second objection, it happens that, instead of towards the Christian subjects; for those a joint-right of interference being henceforth concessions were dictated by the direct soli-vested in Russia, it is expressly provided by citation of the Western Powers, rather than the Treaty that-with the exceptions of the by the spontaneous liberality of the State.* three Principalities-there shall be no right The course of policy by which the interests of interference whatever. of Eastern Europe were to be secured, clearly Two opposite extremes of opinion, it is rested,—first, in a dissociation of the Chris-known, are not only entertained in the public tian populations of Turkey from the sur- mind, but also divide the ablest statesmen of rounding states, into whose despotism they the present age, in reference to the fate of would otherwise, either actually or morally, the Ottoman dominion in Europe. By one be absorbed ; and secondly, in the establish class of politicians, that dominion is held to ment of a reciprocity of interest between be irrevocably declining; by another, to be the dominant and the subject population. in a stage of development and progress. By these means the Ottoman Empire gained But it happens that this difference of opinion the two essential conditions of future inde- is inapplicable as a test of the general satispendence, arising respectively from territorial faction in arrangements tending immediately integrity and from internal cohesion. This to the consolidation of the Turkish Empire. twofold basis of the future organisation of For, whether or not that empire really Turkey presupposed, of course, the destruc- possesses the elements of durable recontion of the maritime supremacy of Russia struction, it must at least be our interest to in the Euxine; and the obvious necessity, at maintain its existence, as the nucleus of this hour, of such a postulate to any scheme alien races too repugnant to form a union of Ottoman independence, only raises the in themselves, and as the protector of rising national admiration for the foresight and con- populations too weak to assert their indivisistency of those who finally effected the dual independence. The question, then, fall of Sebastopol. On this double founda- must remain, during a long future period, tion, then, it will be the policy of England not between a Sclavonic and an Ottoman to raise a superstructure in the social devel-supremacy, but between the qualified slavery opment of the Christian races. of the Christian population under Russia, and their qualified independence under the Turkish rule. It is here necessary to notice two singularly illogical objections, assailing in limine these principles of Turkish reconstruction, and We now pass to a consideration of the lately put forth by an eminent quarterly prospects and condition of the Ottoman journal, which is regarded as an organ of Empire under the reconstruction of its govHer Majesty's Opposition. We are there ernment, and the changes which have taken told-first, that the new Firman, in confirm- place in its various relations during the ing former concessions to the Christians, hostilities and the negotiation of the last must thereby confirm the former claims of two years. With this view we shall discuss Russia to interference; and secondly, that the immediate and prospective results of the Russia will, by the terms of the Treaty war in the fourfold character which they itself, gain a general right of interference in present. These may be resolved into-1st, their behalf, jointly with the Allied Powers. the Territorial and military results, as affectIf the author of the elaborate criticism on ing the external security of the Turkish the Government had ever perused the Treaties concluded between Russia and the Porte, he would scarcely have committed * Lord Derby's endeavour, in his speech on the Treaty of Peace, on the 5th of May, to dissociate these civil concessions from the policy of the English and French Governments-and therefore to represent them as the pure dictate of Turkish policy-was altogether unsuccessful. Empire. 2d, The political results, as affecting the relations of the Christian principalities. 3d, The civil results, as affecting the co-ordinate rights of the different religions, and therefore in great degree the social equality of the different races. 4th, The commercial results, as affecting the development of Christian enterprise under the territorial stipulations in regard to the banks of the Danube, and the maritime and fiscal stipulations in regard to the coasts of the | Ottoman dominion in Europe, to regard its Black Sea. continuance as a problem depending upon the relative strength of the Mussulman and Christian population of Turkey in that continent alone.* 1. It will be necessary, in the first place, briefly to advert to the general principles on which the Ottoman dominion is based, and to the general relations of the Mahometan The supremacy of the Ottoman element, to the Christian population. On this subject at once over the Sclavonians in the west, there are several important considerations to and the other Turkish races in the east, of be entertained, and some popular miscon- the Empire of Constantinople, rests in its ceptions to be dispelled, in order to consti- political and geographical centralisation-in tute a point of view from which the great the tradition of conquest and the fact of change which is now taking place in the in-possession. That element is, in every sense, ternal organisation of Turkey, and the great as much the nucleus of the Turkish Empire, change which has already arisen in its inter- as the purely Austrian element is of the national relations, can be justly appreciated Austrian Empire, or as the Muscovite elein their influence on the future of that Em- ment of the Russian. In a political point pire. of view, indeed, there are certain qualifica The principal feature of the Ottoman tions of this analogy. On the one hand, dominion in Europe may be defined to con- the exclusive spirit of the Mahometan syssist in the aggregation of sections of two tem has hitherto rendered the Sclavonic immense nationalities, of which the one has Rayas by much less serviceable than that extensive relations in Europe, and the other population under the systems of Austria has extensive relations in Asia. The Turkish and Russia, in the development of the cenEmpire, in this continent, thus mainly rests tral power. On the other, this difference in the conflict or combination of the extreme has been countervailed in Turkey, by the westerly Turks with the extreme southerly fact that the distinction of national superiSclavonians. In no sense, therefore, either ority is practically a distinction not of race physically or morally, can these component but of religion. The spirit of national parts of the Ottoman system in Europe be aristocracy, which we find so strongly deaccounted isolated races. But the relation | veloped among the German and Muscovite of the Sclavonic Turks to the great Sclavon- populations respectively of the Austrian ian body which constitute the greater portion and Russian Empires, takes the form in both of the Austrian and Russian Empires, Turkey of a religious aristocracy. It conthough by nature similar, is in fact by far sequently happens that that portion (which is less close than the relation of the European far from inconsiderable) of the Sclavonic to the Asiatic Turks; or, to speak more cor- race, which has embraced the Mahometan rectly, of the Ottoman to other branches of religion, is as effectually detached from the the great Turkish family. The sympathy rest of that race, as though it had owned no subsisting between the European and ultra- community of origin; and is as effectually European Turks, is consequently by much amalgamated with the Turkish population, stronger than that which subsists between as though it had originally fought the battle the Turkish and and ultra-Turkish Sclavon- of Asiatic domination on the Bosphorus. It ians. If the sympathy of the one rest is true that, under the reforming policy of upon a common love of political indepen- the Central Government a quarter of a cendence, strengthened by the traditionary sense tury ago, bitter animosities were developed of a common oppression, that of the other between the Sclavonic Mussulmans of Bosis maintained by a common religious fanati-nia and Albania and the Turkish Mussulcism, and a common conviction of an inevi-mans of Roumelia. But this incidental table conflict yet to transpire between the hostility only proves the truth of the genetwo races. If, therefore, in any general ral proposition; for the conflict which was struggle against the principle of super- then threatened between the different national supremacy-as it is maintained in branches of the Mahometan population of the east of Europe by the Muscovite, the Austrian, and the Ottoman populations-the Turkish and the extra-Turkish Sclavonians would be allied; much more, in any struggle involving the alternatives of dominion or extermination to the Mahometan cause, would a similar combination immediately arise between the European and the Asiatic servations, to the causes which have compromised We have adverted, in a later part of these obTurks. It involves, consequently, a com- the natural or moral unity of the great Sclavonic plete misapprehension of the basis of the family. European Turkey, arose from the fact that the Sclavonic part of that community insisted upon the maintenance of the ancient Mussulman principles, which the Ottoman reformers of Roumelia were beginning to |