Diverse views on the legitimacy of the Ottoman sultanate among Greek chroniclers of the early modern period

Official URL: http://192.168.1.20/record=b1379285 (Table of Contents)

Much research has been done on ways that the Ottoman sultanate sought to boost its legitimacy among its subjects. The degree to which non-Muslims considered the sultanate to be legitimate, however, has not been thoroughly investigated. Rather it has been assumed in literature on the topic that non-Muslims could not fully endorse the legitimacy of the Ottoman sultanate because of religious antagonism. This thesis addresses this question in depth by assessing the views of nine Early Modern Greek chronicle writers regarding the legitimacy of the Ottoman sultanate. The introduction of this thesis provides intellectual contextualization through brief discussions of Byzantine and Ottoman political theory. It is followed by a second chapter that describes the views of Greek chroniclers who did not consider the Ottoman sultanate to be legitimate. The third chapter analyzes the views of one chronicler who accepted the legitimacy of the Ottoman sultanate without justifying his views. Finally, the fourth chapter analyses two groups of chroniclers who crafted legitimizing discourses in support of the Ottoman sultanate. The thesis ends with consideration of the nine chronicles audiences and with questions about the degree to which intellectuals influenced each other across linguistic and religious borders in the Eastern Mediterranean of the Early Modern Period. In sum, this thesis shows that Early Modern Greek chronicle writers had diverse views on the legitimacy of the Ottoman sultanate and that some of them crafted legitimizing discourses in support of their Muslim rulers. A translation of the Patriarchal History of Constantinople appends the thesis.