Intermediaries in Empire: The Ottoman and Roman Examples

...

The intermediaries in these two respective empires also portrays how the Ottomans and Romans went about governing different people differently. In the Ottoman example, the millet system was key in assessing this. The millet system was a structure in which the Ottomans provided their diverse population with the opportunity to be, “under the legal authority of their own communities’ leaders”(Burbank and Cooper 140). With these leaders serving as local intermediaries between their communities and the empire, the muftis were able to pass fatwas or decisions on matters concerning their families or religion(Burbank and Cooper 143).This was important in the functioning of the empire in that an empire as diverse as the Ottoman, by allowing these community to leaders make their own rulings the Sultan had granted them with power. But just like that of the cases of the devshirme and the harem, the power was directly tied back to the sultan as the community leaders had ties to the Sultan. In return for their loyalty to the Sultan these leaders were granted with benefits such as tax exemption and access to revenue sources( Burbank and Cooper 143). However, in secular matters otherwise known as Kanoon law Ottoman law and judgements passed by Qadi’s (judges) were supreme(Burbank and Cooper 144). The constant motif of all power deriving from the Sultan is one that has been woven into various aspects of the Ottoman Narrative of empire. In the Roman case, the principle of citizenship was a key in terms of the politics of difference. The Romans wished to show the conquered locals the splendour of the empire such so that they may further Romanize and assimilate the people (Woolf 125). This methodology in governing is in line with roman role of intermediaries as those wishing to assimilate the people of the new territories into the Roman way as well as the desire of those people to join roman society as well. The primary medium through which Rome had emphasized inclusion of different peoples in society was through the advent of citizenship(Burbank and Cooper 42). Another such way of ruling different people, was the Roman “temple of the whole world”(Burbank and Cooper 38). This practice of assimilating the gods of foreign lands into the Roman religious ideologies mirrored the Roman hope that the conquered peoples would in turn find it easier to assimilate into Roman society. While the institutions through which both the Ottomans and Romans engage in the politics of difference varied, there is a mixing of some aspects in regards to assimilation of communal law into society in the Ottoman case, and local religion into Roman practices in regards to the roman Empire.

Ultimately the use of intermediaries was a vital component in the development of empire. Aside from diagramming the intermediary problem of empires itself, understanding the roles of intermediaries in an empire can be used to better analyze various other aspects of that very empire such as that of the empire’s repertoires of rule as well as its politics of difference. Such is the case with the Ottoman and Roman empires. The Ottoman ideology of consolidating power in the hands of the Sultan and limiting all other challenges to power through the previously mentioned factors was a key principle in understanding the narrative of the Ottoman Empire. In the Roman case the empowering of elites to promote the spread of culture and assimilation in conquered lands was vital. Given so, the role of intermediaries in empire while in itself is a major theme throughout the history of empire, has also been vital in affecting various other aspects of empire itself and is crucial in the understanding of both the Ottoman and Roman Empires.

Works Cited

"Further Schemes of Dumnorix" from Caesar's War Commentaries, ed. John Warrington.

Greg Woolf, "An Imperial People," in Woolf, ed., Cambridge Illustrated History of Rome, 68-89.

Greg Woolf, "The Creation of Gallo-Roman Cities," in Becoming Roman: The

Origins of Civilization in Gaul, 112-26.

Jane Burbank and Frederick Cooper, Empires in World History: Power and the Politics

Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010, paperback 2011.