Slavery and Loyalty: the Russian and Ottoman Empires

在奥斯曼帝国和莫斯科帝国争夺黑海附近居民忠诚的斗争中，奴隶制和解放的关系是什么？从1475年到1700年，高加索和匈牙利之间地区的奴隶掠夺和贸易将200万到300万人聚集到主要是南部的市场。莫斯科通过加强草原边境，国家赞助的赎金和奴隶解放的扩张性意识形态来对抗人口流失;它雇用穆斯林臣民来实现这些目标。从早期开始，穆斯林帝国就给予奴隶有限的权利，以发展主人、奴隶和国家之间的忠诚关系。在奥斯曼帝国，忠诚往往是由奴隶训练的，他们受益于自由流动或契约解放。在这些两极之间有许多过渡：调解人，商人，外交使者，神职人员，翻译和哥萨克人，他们的忠诚是救赎的决定性因素。返回的奴隶、被解放的奴隶或逃跑的奴隶自己也沿着这些跨奥斯曼的过境点，这些过境点的背景特别重要，因为大多数以前的奴隶仍然和他们的奥斯曼主人在一起。该项目从莫斯科人的角度看待这些交叉，并从Transottomanica项目中可访问的奥斯曼背景中获益。尽管穆斯林对他们有着广泛的影响，但莫斯科是如何确保返回的俘虏和被绑架者是忠诚的？莫斯科是如何试图激发穆斯林鞑靼人的忠诚的，他们与草原另一边和草原中的同教信徒进行了广泛的交流？在方法方面，该项目使用了最近基于马克斯·韦伯和格奥尔格·西梅尔社会学的忠诚研究所提供的工具箱。通过这种方式，将分析迄今为止被认为不值得关注的关于赎回奴隶的调查档案。此外，申请人早期的档案之旅发现了大量的奴隶叙述，谈到了过渡和离开奥斯曼帝国的原因。含蓄地说，他们把通常不言而喻的期望传递给奴隶主，他们的奴隶没有自主的声音。编年史、圣徒履历、壁画以及教堂仪式和戏剧将莫斯科维奇的意识形态表述为新以色列，将沙皇表述为新摩西，他将东正教奴隶从埃及奴隶制中解放出来，成为曾经的以色列。在Hesychasm和苏菲神秘主义的基因共同的图案，如智慧或共同的圣徒和先知有助于平稳过渡之间的帝国。与此同时，诸如救赎之类的中心教义也标志着可接受性的限度，因为来世的救赎以救赎奴隶为条件。为此，与S. Conermann已经同意研究话语之间的关系奥斯曼帝国的镜子王子，manummissions和他们的批评在莫斯科来源。最终，莫斯科专制主义作为解放意识形态的一个附属品出现。

What is the relation of slavery and liberation in the contest between the Ottoman and Muscovite Empires for the loyalties auf populations in the vicinity of the Black Sea? Slave raids and trade in the region between the Caucasus and Hungary from 1475 to 1700 corralled between two and three million people to markets mainly in the south. Muscovy fought this population drain by fortifying the steppe frontier, state sponsored ransom and expansionary ideologies of slave liberation; it employed Muslim subjects to achieve these ends. From early on, Muslim empires offered limited rights to slaves in order to develop loyal relations between masters, slaves and the state. In the Ottoman Empire, loyalty was often trained already by slaves, who benefited from free movement or contractual manumission. Between these poles there were many transitions: mediators, merchants, diplomatic emissaries, clerics, translators and Cossacks with far reaching connections, whose loyalties were decisive for redemption. Returning, manumitted or fleeing slaves themselves transited along these Transottoman crossovers, the contexts of which were especially important since most former slaves remained with their Ottoman masters. The project looks at these crossovers from the Muscovite point of view and profits from Ottoman contexts accessible in the Project Transottomanica. How did Muscovy make sure that returning captives and kidnapped persons were loyal, despite extended Muslim influences on them? How did Moscow try to inspire loyalty in Muslim Tatars who communicated extensively with their coreligionists on the other side of the steppe and in it? In terms of method, the project uses the tool box made available by recent studies of loyalty which are based on Max Webers and Georg Simmels sociologies. In this way, archival troves of investigations about redeemed slaves hitherto deemed unworthy of attention will be analysed. Moreover, earlier archival trips of the applicant unearthed extensive slave narratives speaking about the transitions and reasons for leaving the Ottoman Empire. Implicitly, they transport normally unspoken expectations to slave holders, whose slaves had no autonomous voice. Chronicles, saints vitae, murals as well as church rituals and plays formulated the ideology of Muscovy as New Israel and the tsar as the new Moses, who liberates Orthodox slaves as once Israel from Egyptian slavery. Genetically common motifs in Hesychasm and Sufi mysticism such as Wisdom or common saints and prophets helped to smooth transitions between empires. At the same time, central doctrines such as redemption marked the limits of acceptability, since salvation in the beyond was conditioned to redeeming slaves. To this end cooperation with S. Conermann has been agreed to study discursively the relations between the language of Ottoman mirrors of princes, manumissions and their critique in Muscovite sources. Eventually, Muscovite autocracy appears as an appendix of liberation ideology.