Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T14:09:04.746Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International law for survival: teaching international law in the late Ottoman Empire (1859–1922)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 November 2014

Mustafa Serdar Palabıyık
Mustafa Serdar Palabıyık*
Affiliation:
Department of International Relations, TOBB Economics and Technology University, Ankara
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article analyses the teaching of international law in the late Ottoman Empire. It argues that the Ottomans were interested in teaching European international law to equip Ottoman bureaucrats with the skills necessary for evaluating and regulating the complex interrelation between the Ottoman Empire and the European states, to defend the vital interests of the Empire against European legal penetration via extraterritoriality, and to understand the legal basis of the European system of which the Empire had officially been accepted as a part by the European Great Powers since the conclusion of the Treaty of Paris in 1856. The article focuses on the courses, scholars and textbooks in the field of international law in the Ottoman Empire during three periods. The preliminary period (1859–76), witnessed the emergence of the first courses, scholars and literature on international law; in the Hamidian period (1876–1908) these courses were stabilized and systematized in line with higher education reforms in the Ottoman Empire; and finally, in the post-Hamidian period, the opening of new schools of law in the countryside and the reformation of existing schools allowed the teaching and literature of international law to flourish.

Keywords

International lawOttoman EmpireHigher education in the Ottoman EmpireSchool of Civil Service (Mekteb-i Mülkiye)School of Law (Mekteb-i Hukuk)
Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 78 , Issue 2 , June 2015 , pp. 271 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © SOAS, University of London 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For instance, see Chiu, H., “The development of Chinese international law terms and the problem of their translation into English”, Journal of Asian Studies 27/3, 1968, 485–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lillich, R.B., “The teaching of international human rights law in US law schools”, American Journal of International Law 77/4, 1983, 855–61Google Scholar; Tieya, W., “Teaching and research of international law in present day China”, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 22/1, 1983, 77–82Google Scholar; Orford, A., “Citizenship, sovereignty and globalisation: teaching international law in the post-Soviet era”, Legal Education Review 6/2, 1995, 251–61Google Scholar; Lobban, M., “English approaches to international law in the nineteenth century”, in Craven, M., Fitzmaurice, M. and Vogiatzi, M. (eds), Time, History and International Law (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2002), 65–90Google Scholar; Lee, E.Y.-J., “Early development of modern international law in East Asia – with special reference to China, Japan and Korea”, Journal of the History of International Law 4/1, 2002, 42–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Butler, W.E., “On the origins of international legal science in Russia: the role of P.P. Shafirov”, Journal of the History of International Law 4/1, 2002, 1–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar. One of the rare contributions concerning the interrelation between the Ottoman Empire and European international law is a comparative study by Horowitz, R.S., “International law and state transformation in China, Siam, and the Ottoman Empire during the nineteenth century”, Journal of World History 15/4, 2005, 445–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 See Bilsel, C., “Devletler hukuku mu? Devletler arası hak mı?” [International law or rights between states?], İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Mecmuası [Journal of Faculty of Law of Istanbul University] 6/4, 1940, 631–44Google Scholar; Meray, S.L., “Devletler hukukunda bazı terim meseleleri” [Some terminological issues in international law], Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi [Journal of Faculty of Political Sciences of Ankara University] 11/4, 1956, 52–74Google Scholar; Aral, B., “An inquiry into the Turkish ‘school’ of international law”, European Journal of International Law 16/4, 2005, 769–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Shaw, S.J., Between Old and New: The Ottoman Empire under Sultan Selim III, 1789–1807 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971), 145–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For educational reform in the Ottoman military, see İ. Tekeli and İlkin, S., Osmanlı imparatorluğu'nda eğitim ve bilgi üretim sisteminin oluşumu ve dönüşümü [The Transformation of Systems of Education and Knowledge Production in the Ottoman Empire], 2nd ed. (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, 1999), 60–62Google Scholar.

4 For Ottoman alliances with Sweden and Prussia, see Şükrü Hanioğlu, M., A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008), 48Google Scholar. For the full text of the treaty of alliance with Sweden, see Cevdet Efendi, Ahmed, Tarih-i Cevdet, 12 Volumes (Istanbul: Takvimhane-i Amire, 1273 [1858]), Vol. 4, 289–91Google Scholar. For the full text of the treaty of alliance with Prussia, see ibid., 348–55.

5 Kürkçüoğlu, Ö., “The adoption and use of permanent diplomacy”, in Yurdusev, A.N. (ed.), Ottoman Diplomacy: Conventional or Unconventional? (London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), 134–5Google Scholar.

6 Paker, S., “Turkish tradition”, in Baker, M. and Saldanha, G. (eds), Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd ed. (London: Routledge, 2009), 551–2Google Scholar.

7 Berkes, N., Development of Secularism in Turkey, 2nd ed. (London: C. Hurst & Co., 1998), 101Google Scholar.

8 For Mahmud II's educational reforms, see Somel, S.A., The Modernization of Public Education in the Ottoman Empire, 1839–1908: Islamization, Autocracy, and Discipline (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 1–13Google Scholar. For a detailed account of the transformation of the Ottoman education system, see Fortna, B., Imperial Classroom: Islam, the State and Education in the Late Ottoman Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002)Google Scholar.

9 Aynî, M.A., Darülfünûn tarihi [The history of Darʿül fünūn], transliterated and edited by Kazancıgil, A. (Istanbul: Kitabevi Yayınları, 2007), 8Google Scholar.

10 Avi Rubin's study on the Ottoman legal reform in the nineteenth century is a valuable contribution; however, instead of focusing on international law, it examines how a dual legal structure emerged, one secular and one religious, not competing with each other but acting as entwined components of a single judicial system (Rubin, A., Ottoman Nizamiye Courts: Law and Modernity, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also see Miller, R.A., Legislating Authority: Sin and Crime in the Ottoman Empire and Turkey (London and New York: Routledge, 2005)Google Scholar; Toprak, Z., “From plurality to unity: codification and jurisprudence in the late Ottoman Empire”, in Frangoudaki, A. and Keyder, Ç. (eds), Ways to Modernity in Greece and Turkey: Encounters with Europe, 1850–1950 (London: I.B. Tauris, 2007), 30–33Google Scholar.

11 Tekeli and İlkin, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda Eğitim, 70.

12 Demirel, F., Adliye Nezareti'nin Kuruluşu ve Faaliyetleri [The Establishment and Activities of the Ministry of Justice] (Istanbul: Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2007), 100Google Scholar.

13 Çankaya, A., Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi ve Mülkiyeliler [A New History of the School of Civil Administration and Its Students], 8 vols (Ankara: Mars Matbaası 1968–69), Vol. 1, 30–31Google Scholar.

14 Timur, T., Toplumsal Değişme ve Üniversiteler [Social Change and Universities] (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi, 2000), 104Google Scholar. For the curriculum of Mekteb-i Sultānī, see Mekteb-i Sultānī Ders Programı [The Curriculum of the Imperial School] (Dersaʿādet: Matbaʿa-i Āmire, 1327 [1909])Google Scholar.

15 İhsanoğlu, E., Darülfünun: Osmanlı'da Kültürel Modernleşmenin Odağı [Darʿül fünūn: The Center of Ottoman Cultural Modernization], 2 vols (Istanbul: İslam Tarih, Sanat ve Kültür Araştırma Merkezi, 2010), Vol. 1, 141Google Scholar.

16 Tekeli and İlkin, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda Eğitim, 77–96; Ergin, Osman, Türk Maarif Tarihi [History of Education in Turkey], 5 vols (Istanbul: Eser Matbaası, 1977), Vols 3–4, 1116Google Scholar.

17 İhsanoğlu, Darülfünun, Vol. 2, 659–61.

18 İhsanoğlu, Darülfünun, Vol. 1, 72.

19 Kürkçüoğlu, “The adoption and use of permanent diplomacy”, 140–43.

20 Kayaoğlu, T., Legal Imperialism: Sovereignty and Extraterritoriality in Japan, the Ottoman Empire, and China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 18CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 On Ottoman discontent over extraterritoriality, see Çiçek, N., Young Ottomans: Turkish Critics of the Eastern Question in the Late Nineteenth Century (London: I.B. Tauris, 2010), 109–71Google Scholar.

22 For the full text of the treaty in Turkish, see Muʿāhedāt Mecmūʿāsı [The Compilation of Treaties], 5 vols (Istanbul: Cerīde-i Askeriye Matbaʿası, 1293 [1877]), Vol. 4, 242–58Google Scholar.

23 For the full text of the report, see Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 1, 31–2.

24 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 1.

25 Initially, the period of education in the MM was two years. Ergin, Türk Maarif Tarihi, Vols 1–2, 599.

26 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 1, 82–3.

27 In 1868, the period of education became three years. Ibid., Vol. 1, 99.

28 Zeki Pakalın, Mehmed, Sicill-i Osmanî Zeyli [Addition to the Ottoman Registers], 19 vols (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, 2008), Vol. 5, 99Google Scholar.

29 Ergin, Türk Maarif Tarihi, Vol. 3–4, 1097.

30 Pakalın, Sicill-i Osmanî Zeyli, Vol. 5, 100.

31 İhsanoğlu, Darülfünun, Vol. 1, 140.

32 Ayni, Darülfünun Tarihi, 32.

33 İhsanoğlu, Darülfünun, Vol. 1, 147.

34 Timur, Toplumsal Değişme ve Üniversiteler, 115.

35 Emerich de Vattel, Hukūk-u Milel, National Library of Turkey, 06 Mil Yz A 1275, 1255 [1839].

36 Later, in the 1860s, the eminent Ottoman man of letters and journalist İbrahim Şinasi partially translated Vattel's treatise and published these translations in his Tasvīr-i Efkār [the Description of Ideas] newspaper, thus making Ottoman intellectuals aware of Vattel and his treatise. Mardin, Şerif, The Genesis of Young Ottoman Thought, 2nd ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), 261Google Scholar.

37 Killy, Walther, Vierhaus, Rudolf and von Engelhardt, Dietrich (eds), Dictionary of German Biography, 10 vols (Munich: K.G. Saur, 2001–2006), Vol. 8, 698Google Scholar.

38 Schlechta, Ottokar, Hukūk-u Milel (Vienna: Darüʾt-Tıbaʿātü'l-imparatoriye, 1264 [1848])Google Scholar; Schlechta, Ottokar, Hukūk-u Milel (Istanbul: El Cevā'ib Matbaʿāsı, 1295 [1878])Google Scholar.

39 For instance, see Hakkı, İbrahim, Medhāl-i Hukūk-u Beynʾed-düvel (Istanbul: Karabet ve Kasbar Matbaası 1303 [1886]), 1Google Scholar.

40 Tevfik, Mahmud, Muʿāmelāt-ı Düvel (Istanbul: Dar'üt-tıbaʿāt-ı Āmire, 1291 [1874]), p. 2Google Scholar.

41 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 1, 120–21.

42 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 1, 147.

43 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 1, 242.

44 Salnāme-i Nezāret-i Maʿārif-i Umūmiye (Istanbul: Matbaʿā-i Āmire, 1316 [1898]), 76–7Google Scholar.

45 Salnāme-i Nezāret-i Maʿārif-i Umūmiye, 81–2.

46 This manuscript has recently been published by the Turkish Historical Society. Nazım, M., Mekteb-i Hukuk Günlerim [Days of My Life in the School of Law], transliterated and edited by Yörük, A.A. (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 2012)Google Scholar.

47 Salnāme-i Nezāret-i Maʿārif-i Umūmiye, 78–9; 1899 version, 77–9; 1900 version, 76–7.

48 Nazım, Mekteb-i Hukuk Günlerim, 86–7.

49 Ibid., 114, 181–2.

50 These student protests emerged after Mehmed Emin had declared a Greek Orthodox student the holder of the highest grades, even though a Muslim student had the same marks. Although Mehmed Emin preferred the Greek Orthodox student for his better mastery of the French language, the students noted the Christian origins of the director, arguing that the Greek Orthodox student was preferred for his religion. Given these protests the Minister of Justice, Ahmed Cevdet Paşa, dismissed Mehmed Emin. Ergin, Türk Maarif Tarihi, Vol. 3–4, 1102–3.

51 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 3, 945–6. Although Ali Şehbaz justified this conversion using his extreme admiration of Islam following his studies on the virtues of this religion, Mehmed Nazım argued that he was excommunicated by the Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul for marrying a woman other than his wife, and included the patriarchal document of excommunication dated 22 June 1887. Nazım, Mekteb-i Hukuk Günlerim, 81.

52 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 3, 1068.

53 Pakalın, Sicill-i Osmanī Zeyli, Vol. 16, 39–51.

54 Pakalın, Sicill-i Osmanī Zeyli, Vol. 8, 101–3.

55 Pakalın, Sicill-i Osmanī Zeyli, Vol. 7, 136–47.

56 Pakalın, Sicill-i Osmanī Zeyli, Vol. 11, 18–23.

57 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 3, 1021–3.

58 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 3, 129–30.

59 Bluntschli, J.C., Hukūk-u Beynʾed-düvel Kānūnu, translated by Ziya, Y. (Istanbul: Vakit Gazetesi Matbaʿāsı, 1297 [1880])Google Scholar.

60 Said, K. and Gregor, C., Hukūk-u Düvel (Istanbul: Matbaʿā-i Ebüzziyā, 1299 [1882]), 101Google Scholar.

61 Fehmi, H., Telhīs-i Hukūk-u Düvel (Istanbul: Matbaʿā-i Osmaniye, 1300 [1883]), 8–9Google Scholar.

62 Hakkı, İ., Medhāl-i Hukūk-u Beynʾed-düvel (Istanbul: Karabet and Kasbar Matbaʿāsı, 1303 [1886]), 1–2Google Scholar.

63 Hakkı, İ., Tarih-i Hukūk-u Beynʾed-düvel (Istanbul: Karabet and Kasbar Matbaʿāsı, 1303 [1886]), 3Google Scholar.

64 Hakkı, İ., Hukūk-u Düvel, compiled and edited by İrfan, İ. (İstanbul: Matbaʿā ve Kütübhāne-i Cihān, 1327 [1911])Google Scholar.

65 Şehbaz, A., Hukūk-u Düvel, 2 vols (Istanbul: Mülkiye-i Şāhāne Litoğrafya Destgāhı, 1306–07 [1889–90])Google Scholar.

66 [Şehbaz, A.], Hukūk-u Düvel (Kandiye: Matbaʿā-i Maʿārif, 1310 [1893])Google Scholar. The extremely limited Turkish literature on international law failed to identify the author of this edition. However, another Ottoman scholar of international law, Osman Sermed, wrote that it was Ali Şehbaz's edition. Sermed, O., Hukūk-u Umūmiye-i Düvel (Selanik: Asır Matbaʿāsı, 1324 [1908]), 1Google Scholar.

67 Şehbaz, A., Hukūk-u Düvel, compiled and edited by Adil, M. (Istanbul: Bağdadlıyan Matbaʿāsı, 1324 [1908])Google Scholar.

68 Şehbaz, A., Mufassal Hukūk-u Düvel, compiled and edited by Adil, M. (Istanbul: Jirayir ve Keteon Matbaʿāsı, 1325 [1909])Google Scholar.

69 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 1, 348.

70 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 1, 348–50.

71 Aynî, Darülfünun Tarihi, 37.

72 Aynî, Darülfünun Tarihi, 57.

73 Dölen, E., Türkiye Üniversite Tarihi [History of the University in Turkey], 5 vols (Istanbul: Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2009), Vol. 1, 166Google Scholar.

74 Meray, S.L., Lozan'ın Bir Öncüsü: Prof. Ahmet Selahattin Bey (1878–1920) [A Pioneer of Lausanne: Prof. Ahmet Selahattin Bey (1878–1920)] (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, 1976), 91Google Scholar.

75 Meray, Lozan'ın Bir Öncüsü, 121–2.

76 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 3, 963–5.

77 Pakalın, Sicill-i Osmanī Zeyli, Vol. 2, 50–56.

78 One of the rare records regarding his political and academic activities was his speech to the Ottoman Parliament in 1909, in which he spoke against the right to strike. His mastery of Ottoman laws and regulations, as demonstrated in his speech, creates the impression that he had an advanced legal education. See Meclīs-i Mebʿusān Zabıt Ceridesi [The Journal of Proceedings of the Ottoman Parliament], 104th plenary meeting, 18 June 1325 (1909), http://www.tbmm.gov.tr/tutanaklar/TUTANAK/MECMEB/mmbd01ic01c005/mmbd01ic01c005ink104.pdf (Last access: 10 December 2012)

79 Çankaya, Yeni Mülkiye Tarihi, Vol. 3, 761.

80 BOA.MF.MKT/1136/19, 26 Ra 1319 (13 July 1901).

81 İhsanoğlu, Darülfünun, Vol. 2, 655–63. Unfortunately, scholars of international law of the Baghdad Law School and the Beirut Law School could not be determined from the archival documents.

82 Sermed, Hukūk-u Umūmiye-i Düvel, 2–3.

83 Bonfils, H. and Fauchille, P., Manuel de droit international public (Paris: A. Rousseau, 1894)Google Scholar.

84 Ālī, Hukūk-u Düvel (Istanbul: Cihān Matbaʿāsı, 1324 [1908]), Vol. 1Google Scholar; Ālī, Hukūk-u Düvel (Dersaʿādet: Ahmed Saki Bey Matbaʿāsı, 1325 [1909]), Vol. 2Google Scholar.

85 Hüsrevyan, H., Hukūk-u Umūmiye-i Düvel ([Istanbul]: Matbaʿ-ā-i Kütübhāne-i Cihān, 1325 [1909])Google Scholar; Şuayb, A., Hukūk-u Umūmiye-i Düvel, compiled and edited by Talat, A. and Tahir, H.M. (Istanbul: Matbaʿā-i İkbāl, 1328 [1912])Google Scholar; Nusret, M., Hukūk-u Düvel (Istanbul: Mekteb-i Mülkiye Matbaʿāsı, 1336 [1920])Google Scholar.

86 Esad, M., Hukūk-u Düvel (Istanbul: Merkez Matbaʿāsı 1326 [1910])Google Scholar; Esad, M., Hukūk-u Düvel (Istanbul: Hilal Matbaʿāsı, 1326 [1910])Google Scholar; Esad, M., Hukūk-u Düvel (Istanbul: Matbaʿā-i Osmaniye, 1326 [1910])Google Scholar.

87 Bonfils, H. and Fauchille, P., Hukūk-u Umūmiye-i Düvel, ed. and trans. Selahaddin, A. and Cemil, M., 8 vols (Istanbul: Matbaʿā-i Jirayir ve Keteon, 1326–1329 [1910–13])Google Scholar.

88 Bonfils and Fauchille, Hukūk-u Umūmiye-i Düvel, Vol. 1, 1–6.

89 Meray, Lozan'ın Bir Öncüsü, 91.

90 Arifi, Vakt-i Harbde Hukuk-u Milel (Istanbul: Keteon Bedrosyan Matbaası, 1327 [1911])Google Scholar.

91 Stockton, C., Bahriye Zābitānına Mahsūs Hukūk-u Düvel, ed. and trans. Vahid, A. (Istanbul: Matbaʿā-i Bahriye, 1328 [1912])Google Scholar; Hayri, M., Hukūk-u Harbiye-i Düvel [International Law of War] (Istanbul: Araks Matbaʿāsı, 1330 [1914])Google Scholar; Zābitāna Mahsūs Hukūk-u Harbiye-i Düvel. Muhārebāt-ı Berriye Kavānīn ve Ādābına Müteʿallik Lahey Nizamnāmesi Şerhi [International Law of War for the Use of Soldiers. A Commentary on the Hague Convention on the Laws and Customs of War on Land], ed. and trans. M. Hayri (Istanbul: Araks Matbaʿāsı, 1330 [1914]).

92 See Selahaddin, A., Hukūk-i Beynʿedd-üvelin Mukaddemāt-ı Nazariye ve Safahāt-ı Tekāmüliyesi [Theoretical Premises and Phases of the Evolution of International Law] (Istanbul: Kanaat Matbaʿāsı, 1331 [1915])Google Scholar; Sırrı, H., Hukūk-u Düvel Nokta-i Nazarından Osmanlı-İtalya Muhārebesi [The Ottoman–Italian War from the International Law Point of View] (Istanbul: Matbaʿā-i Ebüzziya, 1330 [1914])Google Scholar; Adil, A., Lahey Konferansı yāhūd Taknīn-i Hukūk-u Düvel [The Hague Conference or the Codification of International Law] (Istanbul: Matbaʿā-i Ebüzziya, 1331 [1915])Google Scholar.

93 Nuri, C., Kendi Nokta-i Nazarımdan Hukūk-u Düvel (Istanbul: Osmanlı Şirketi Matbaʿāsı, 1330 [1914])Google Scholar.