MARRIAGE AS STATUS: PRESERVING THE EXISTING SOCIAL HIERARCHY IN THE OTTOMAN CONTEXT This paper examines the Islamic principle of equality in marriage (kaf?'a) and its reflections in the Ottoman context from the 16th to the 18th centuries. According to the principle of equality in marriage, men have to measure up to their partners in wealth, occupation, lineage, knowledge and piety. As evidence I cite the compilations of ?eyhülislam fatwas - El-Muhtarat Minel Fetava (originally dated 1525), Fetava-y? Ebussuud Efendi (o. dated 1574), Fetava-y? Ali Efendi (o. dated 1692), Fetava-y? Feyziye me'an-nukul (o. dated 1703), Fetava-y? Abdurrahim (o. dated 1715), Behçetü'l-fetava (o. dated 1743), and Neticetü'l-fetava me'an-nukul (o. dated 1800)- as well as several works of Ottoman moral literature and court records. Through an examination of the various criteria that the muftis proposed with respect to the equality between partners, I argue that the kaf?’a principle contributed and reinforced the safety of the existing social hierarchy. Considering the criteria proposed, I show that marriages between the members of similar socioeconomic status groups were much more common compared to those between people of different socioeconomic statuses, thereby little room was allowed for social mobility. Parallel to this, I draw attention to the point that the marriage patterns prescribed in the rulings of the muftis were on the same wavelength with the exhortation by Ottoman literati towards preserving the existing social hierarchy by keeping people in their proper place. Being aware of the theoretical feature of fatwas, i.e. the possible gaps between mufti’s responses and the practice of the applicants, I also consult court records to see the degree to which muftis’ legal responses were carried out by the applicants and I show that court records also present similar marriage patterns and confirm the socioeconomic concerns attached to marriage. As one of the least studied sources of Ottoman history, fatwa compilations have not been analyzed in a way to reveal the signs of social status and social hierarchy reflected in them. The present study can be considered as an attempt to make a contribution in this regard.

The aim of this paper is to trace the evolution of 'Alawi society and particularly of the 'Alawi ayan (local notable) class in the province of Tripoli in a comparative framework. Generally ignored in both Ottoman imperial and Arab provincial history, the notable landowning or land-controlling families of north-western Syria shared many socio-political features with, and faced similar economic challenges as, the classes categorized as nobility, Landadel, gentry, etc. in northern and Mediterranean Europe in the early modern period. Beginning with the so-called "crisis of the aristocracy" of 1560-1640, which was marked by the military decline of the feudal cavalry, inflationary pressures and the systematic indebtedness of provincial office holders vis-à-vis an increasingly centralized fiscal bureaucracy, the history of the provincial landed elite throughout Europe and the eastern Mediterranean has been one of struggle, redefinition and adjustment to the new realities of the modern state. The first part of this paper will exploit Ottoman tax censuses (Tahrir Defterleri) to show how the Ottoman state attempted to assert fiscal sovereignty in the region after the initial conquest, both through the imposition of discriminatory taxes on the ‘Alawi population but also by co-opting local tribal leaders as government intermediaries. The second part will draw on both the tax farming records of the provincial administration of Tripoli and Ottoman executive orders (Mühimme Defterleri), so as to showcase the venality of government office, the recruitment of brigand bands by the notable families and the rise of a new class of ennobled gentry in north-western Syria not as a phenomenon unique to the 'Alawite community, but rather as expressions of fundamental structural changes in the shared political economy of early modern European and the Middle East.

The present study explores the role of the Davud Pasha court in the lives of late eighteenth-century Ottoman Istanbulites, particularly between 1782-1840. Situated in intra muros Istanbul, the court’s records were destroyed by a massive fire in 1781. The remaining documents indicate its unique position as a space for resolving matters related to marriage, divorce, and the family. ?nalc?k, who wrote on the functions of the shari’a court in the Ottoman capital, stated that certain courts specialized in a particular subject matter in the early modern era. For instance, the Eyüp court was where suits concerning the city’s water distribution were conducted due to the court’s location and proximity to water distribution channels. In Davud Pasha, the accumulation of matrimonial suits, and the attendance of claimants from both adjoining and distant neighborhoods illustrate the possibility of such a specialization. The paper traces the history of this specific court over the course of sixty years through an evaluation of how individuals strategized their usage of this space. The plaintiffs’ relationship to the court and its urban backdrop comprise an integral part of the inquiries that will be dealt with in the presentation. Thus, the objective of this study is twofold: while examining the unofficial yet specialized role of Davud Pasha court in the attendees’ lives, I will also explore the collective character of neighborhoods, and how ordinary individuals positioned themselves within specific networks that strengthened their solidarity. For instance, quite a number of women from the same neighborhood have registered their divorce in the same court, within days from each other. This kind of action seems to be triggered by either women speaking to each other, or hearing about each other from others. Hence the court becomes the very space where dynamics extent within these networks is revealed. Certain questions that will be problematized in the paper include the practice of using the court; how the communal identity of the neighborhood affected gender relations both at the level of individuals and families? Was there a specific code of conduct that defined each neighborhood? Who made the rules and broke them, and were they ever transformed through agency of petitioners? Through an analysis of case-specific shari’a court records of Davud Pasha, I will further discuss the multi-dimensional role of this court in late eighteenth-century Istanbul.