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人口的忠诚时，奴隶制和解放之间的关系是什么？1475年至1700年间，高加索地区和匈牙利之间的奴隶掠夺和贸易将200万至300万人聚集在主要位于南部的市场上。莫斯科通过加强草原边境，国家资助的赎金和奴隶解放的扩张意识形态来对抗人口流失；它雇佣穆斯林臣民来达到这些目的。从早期开始，穆斯林帝国为奴隶提供有限的权利，以发展主人、奴隶和国家之间的忠诚关系。在奥斯曼帝国，忠诚通常是由奴隶培养的，他们受益于自由流动或契约派遣。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，他们有着广泛的联系，他们的忠诚对救赎起着决定性的作用。返回的、被释放的或逃亡的奴隶自己也沿着这些跨奥斯曼边境过境，这些过境的背景尤其重要，因为大多数以前的奴隶仍然与他们的奥斯曼主人在一起。该项目从莫斯科的角度看待这些交叉，并从奥斯曼帝国的背景中获利。莫斯科如何确保返回的俘虏和被绑架的人是忠诚的，尽管穆斯林对他们有广泛的影响？莫斯科是如何试图激发穆斯林鞑靼人的忠诚的，这些人与草原另一边和俄罗斯境内的宗教信仰者进行了广泛的交流？在方法方面，该项目使用了最近基于马克斯·韦伯和乔治·西梅尔斯社会学的忠诚度研究提供的工具箱。通过这种方式，迄今为止被认为不值得关注的关于被赎回奴隶的调查档案将被分析。此外，申请人早期的档案旅行发现了大量的奴隶叙述，讲述了离开奥斯曼帝国的过渡和原因。他们含蓄地将通常无法言说的期望传递给奴隶主，而奴隶主的奴隶没有自主的发言权。编年史、圣徒传记、壁画以及教堂仪式和戏剧形成了莫斯科公国作为新以色列和沙皇作为新摩西的意识形态，他将曾经作为以色列的东正教奴隶从埃及的奴役中解放出来。Hesychasm和苏菲神秘主义中共同的遗传主题，如智慧或共同的圣人和先知，有助于帝国之间的平稳过渡。与此同时，诸如救赎之类的中心教义标志着可接受性的极限，因为来世的救赎仅限于救赎奴隶。为此目的，已同意与S. Conermann合作，对奥斯曼王子镜子的语言和他们在莫斯科来源的批评之间的关系进行论述研究。最终，莫斯科的专制政体成为解放意识形态的附录。

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.