“Civilizing Mission”: Preliminary Views on Gypsies (Roma) and Late Ottoman Govermentality Research on marginality in Islamic history in general and Ottoman history in particular itself still occupies a marginal status in modern Islamic historiography. Thus, the purpose of this paper research is to explore how the late Ottoman State (1839 -1922) and mainstream society dealt with Gypsies and how, if, and when Gypsies negotiated their "marginal" status. Exploring Gypsies in the late Ottoman Empire is particularly interesting because it was a period when the center itself was rapidly changing. To observe, therefore, what was happening on the margins while the center itself was changing is both fascinating and instructive. My preliminary readings of Ottoman archival sources (particularly documents catalogued under Cevdet Tasnifi in the Ba?bakanl?k Ar?ivi in Istanbul) demonstrate that the nineteenth and early twentieth century Ottoman government was, first of all, extremely concerned about establishing the population breakdowns of the Gypsies --both Muslim and Christian, both settled and nomadic. These population breakdowns, it seems, were the basis of new taxation regulations that was introduced in the 1850s. Perhaps the most significant concern of the late Ottoman state was to sedentarize and reform (?slah) the Gypsies. In this regard, we see the government asking local authorities to prepare memorandums (layihas) on how to educate and make Gypsies useful, appointing imams to Gypsy communities, as well as introducing them to new techniques of agriculture. All these new measures offer glimpses not only into late Ottoman “governmentality” but also its definition of "subjecthood." Therefore, through close readings of two layihas written in 1890 by a college professor and provincial governor, respectively, this paper will attempt to explore the ways and techniques through which late Ottoman government produced and governed the Empire’s subjects but also offer glimpses upon how, if, and when these subjects, in our case Gypsies, resisted, negotiated or accommodated their marginal status. The history of people who were marginal in their societies is not just important for its own sake but for what it reveals about the nature of the societies in which they lived. Thus, my research will not only shed light upon the history of marginal groups but will also make an original contribution to the active debates in Ottoman historiography about the functioning of the late Ottoman society through looking at one of its most despised segments.