首页> 外文学位 >The Ottoman court records and the making of 'urban history', with special reference to Mudanya sicils (1645--1800).
【24h】

The Ottoman court records and the making of 'urban history', with special reference to Mudanya sicils (1645--1800).

机译:奥斯曼帝国法院的记录和``城市历史''的产生,特别提到了穆丹亚(Mudanya sicils)(1645--1800)。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The sicils (Ottoman court records) have been utilized as a 'historical source' in studying different areas of Ottoman history since 1930s. Many historians have seen them very fruitful source to construct history of the Ottoman State and Society from 'below' considering the lively language of the records that take place in the sicils. At this point, it can be claimed that the process of making and utilizing the sicils as a 'historical source' go hand in hand with the tendencies developed in historiography thorough the making social and micro history.;Historians who approach to the sicils from this perspective with no doubt contributed great deal to historical studies that focused on the Ottoman state and society. They at least presented to other historians daily experiences, though in a limited scope, of very different geographies located in the Ottoman territory. But many historical studies that are based on the sicils have neglected to a certain extent the questioning of historiographical side of their issues and of the sicils' ability to reflect the 'fact or truth' of the information they gave and to represent the 'local' in which they are placed.;In this context, the present study questions, first, the relationship between historiography and a historical source and, second, the above-mentioned representation/reflection problem in the case of four sicil defters of Mudanya (Bursa).;In short, this study asks questions rather than giving answers to them. In general it suggests that the sicils, being just one source for certain problematique, should be read as a "text" and evaluated within a "context" in which they took place in order for their shortages to be minimized in reflecting the "truth" of information they gave and in representing the whole people and the period in which they existed.
机译:自1930年代以来,这些格子(奥斯曼帝国的法院记录)就被用作研究奥斯曼帝国不同领域的“历史资料”。许多历史学家认为,从“下层”开始,考虑到井筒中记录的生动语言,他们成为建构奥斯曼国家和社会历史的非常有用的资料。在这一点上,可以断言,将作为“历史来源”进行制造和利用的过程与史学在社会和微观历史的整个形成过程中发展起来的趋势是并驾齐驱的。毫无疑问,视角对专注于奥斯曼帝国和社会的历史研究做出了巨大贡献。他们至少向其他历史学家介绍了奥斯曼领土上千差万别的地理区域的日常经验。但是许多基于锡克尔的历史研究在一定程度上忽略了对其问题的史学方面的质疑以及锡克尔反映其所提供信息的“事实或真相”并代表“本地”的能力的质疑。在这种情况下,本研究首先对历史学与历史渊源之间的关系提出质疑,其次对上述四个Mudanya(Bursa)的锡西尔·德弗瑟斯的代表/反思问题提出质疑。简而言之,本研究提出问题而不是给出答案。总的来说,它表明,作为某些问题的一个来源的词条应被理解为“文本”,并在其发生的“上下文”中进行评估,以最大程度地减少短缺以反映“真相”。所提供的信息,并代表整个人民及其生存时期。

著录项

  • 作者

    Ugur, Yunus.;

  • 作者单位

    Bogazici Universitesi (Turkey).;

  • 授予单位 Bogazici Universitesi (Turkey).;
  • 学科 History Middle Eastern.
  • 学位 M.A.
  • 年度 2001
  • 页码 265 p.
  • 总页数 265
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号