Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:28:39 EDT
From: <PXP111@psuvm.psu.edu>  Andronikos Romanos
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek,soc.culture.turkish
Subject: Re: To M.Hubey (About the "genocides" & "Ottomans")

Dear Mark,
you told me in your personal that you would  make a presentation over
the Ottomans  so I commented on all the postings in good faith adding
this post context -as you present it in Message <Jul.23.00.15.05.1992.
21198@pilot.njin.net>:
>>
>> Do not do repeat this "flood" again, or at least give some warning
>> (more explicit that the one you gave me).
>> That was is a joke! I did not expect 6-7 postings!
>
> The postings were not directed at you, Andronikos.  It's not good to
> think that the world revolves around you, even if you are Greek.:-)..
> And I wasn't aware that I had to ask permission.
> And now that you asked, I'm going to post another flood :-)..
> (and not for you, Andronikos).

So I leave the others to Judge who is the one who tries to be nasty.


> And I will keep it in s.c.t. so that no one will have cause to comp-
> lain that they're being invaded!  :-)..

If it concerns other groups  it  might  be wise to be presented in the
respective SC's as well.  Do not pretend that the whole issue is about
someone feeling "invaded". There are no such sensitivities in the SC's
any more HBM Era.
My point was about someone  going on  talking about genocides (plural!)
and not even refuting other netters's arguments/explanations over these
events. Disingenuously not Accusing his/her own people having done even
more awful things to the Jews,Greeks etc.

As far as the rest of your reply is concerned on the Ottomans you obvi-
ously missed the point of me  agreeing  on what you try to convey and
--> I told you that Greek sources confirm them.
--> I never said that Turkish,Bulgarian,Italian perspectives should not
    be used in the compilation of Greek history  ( and that is at least
    laughable. I think I've proven the opposite in all my postings till
    now)
--> I did not say that YOU were wrong about the springs,the roads,medi-
    cine etc. I commented on the information presented.  It was obvious
    that you were copying it.  This does not mean that one can not com-
    ment giving also references from Herodotus etc.
-->

Anyway, you reply to my text:
>>
>> I'd agree that  "Commentators like Busbecq & Bodin were perhaps more
>> concerned to  promote reforms at home than to provide a wholly accu-
>> rate picture of Ottoman customs.They represented nevertheless an im-
>> portant section of minority opinion which refused to be stampeded in
>> to conventional hysterical abuse".
>
> Thank your for your  agreement  with a historian.  Somehow it doesn't
> surprise me that you agree with this part. :-).
>>
>> I may not have time to post texts etc.. but I AGREE on the neglect &
>> the evident decline in the personal qualities of the line of Ottoman
>> sultans after Suleiman the Magnificent (Mourad IV left Nero been re-
>> garded as a simple psychopath!),  the growth of bureaucracy, the ja-
>> nissary and other troop's reactions,the significance of the converts
>> in the functions of the Empire  and the apparent state of catalepsy,
>> blind conservatism, vanishing social order, of the Ottoman world as
>> observed until well past the middle of the 19th ce...
>
> I'm glad that you do agree to something again :-)..
> Actually,   I know beforehand what parts some people will agree with
> and what parts to which they will object.
> Experience  :-)..

And the distortion/butchering of my text is quite apparent... Your pre-
disposition & irony was everywhere as if there was some sort of contest
one should win for you somehow skipped the gist of my neighboring para-
graphs:                                    ::::

>>  The Greeks  g o t  to know the Turks VERY WELL and NEVER NEEDED the
>> Pope of the Hapsburgs,myths & paintings of the devil to have a feel-
>> ing of the Osmanlis as you say.  Other  northern nations maybe.  Not
>> the Greeks. I don't think you can trace anything to the  "elderly of
>> Sion". It was probably directed to other, more distant nations.
>>
>>  Let me alleviate one more of your perseptions though...  right here
>> in this network: Contrary to what you or some others believe..  your
>> account of events was  VERY CLOSE   to what  the Greek History books
>> teach.   Perhaps, if you missed less paragraphs I would "accuse" you
>> of copying one of them.
>>    :::::::
>>  You may feel as sorry as you want that  I have  no translation from
>> Greek text books to add...
>>                  :: :::
>> Probably they will become more  accessible  with the new division of
>> Greek Studies in Turkish Universities;  and the Turks  will convince
>> themselves that whenever the Greeks  strongly  insist  on aspects of
>> the Ottoman Empire,  it does not mean that they haven't been exposed
>> to the OTHER information...
>>        :::::
>> NO! Of all the rest Europeans they know that. On the other hand, un-
>> derstandably the focus is on resisting re-writing everything  as the
>> Turks want it to be known.
>>
>>  You say: "The Turkish military and economic systems provided men of
>> obscure origin with  avenues of  rapid social and political advance-
>> ment, whereas Europe did not..To 'turn Turk' did not necessarily me-
>> an the end of all friendly contact with one's homeland." This is VE-
>> RY  WELL  KNOWN   in this era  and the Greeks have been taught these
>> things. On the other hand there was a particular "catch" with islam-
>> ization etc...  And yes!  Even the Grand Vezir was a figure that the
>> next day could not have his head steady on his shoulders...

I will put the obligatory nature of these things aside for I don't care
about them right now. The whole reply was arguing things that (with all
the respect Mark)  had a puzzling irrelevant attitude. Had you read the
whole text of mine,  the majority of your Advise were not holding water
at all  (unless they were directed to KELLY and Mutlu).