Content uploaded by Phokion Kotzageorgis
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Phokion Kotzageorgis on Aug 19, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
ÉTUDES BALKANIQUES, LІV, 2018, 3
423
CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS IN AN OTTOMAN CITY:
THE FORMATION OF THE SOCIETY OF EARLY
OTTOMAN THESSALONIKI
Phokion Kotzageorgis
Aristotle University of essaloniki
Abstract: essaloniki was the biggest city conquered by the Ottomans before Istanbul.
Furthermore, it was conquered by force. us, this city is a good example for researchers
to understand how the Ottoman state transformed a Byzantine metropolis into an
Ottoman one, starting om a zero point– in terms of the population– in 1430. is
paper, based on a meticulous analysis of the three extant Ottoman tax registers of the
rst Ottoman century and a variety of other sources, tries to discern the urban and
demographic development until ca. 1530, when the Ottomanization process had been
accomplished and essaloniki became an Ottoman metropolis, having, together with
Edirne, the highest population in the Balkans.
Keywords: essaloniki, Tahrr Deer, Early Ottoman City, Urban Development,
Population
e present paper is part of a project which aspires to study the urban
development and the societies of Ottoman cities and towns in the southern
Balkans at the time of their formation. In my sample the case of essaloniki
represents a special urban type with specic characteristics.
In the past four decades there has been a growing interest in the concept
of the “Ottoman City”. is trend was preceded by a shi in the international
academic community from a traditional orientalist approach on the notion
of the ‘Islamic city’ to a critical and skeptical view. Especially since the 1980s,
there has been a strong critique of the orientalist model, which had prevailed
since the interwar period. Town planners, architects, archaeologists, histori-
ans, sociologists and social anthropologists have contributed to this scholarly
debate with theoretical and empirical studies1. In the 1990s and especially in
1 e old view in regards to the notion of the “Islamic City” can be found in: G. von
Grunebaum, e Structure of the Muslim Town, In: Idem (ed.), Islam: Essays in the Nature
and Growth of a Cultural Tradition. London, Routledge, 1955, p. 141 – 158. e new ap-
424
the latter two decades, a separate debate has begun on whether there was a
type of ‘Ottoman city’ and, if so, what characteristics dierentiated it from
other similar cases, such as the “Islamic city”. ere are two main views in
this scholarly discussion. e rst one argues that looking for an ‘Ottoman
city’ is a chimera, because there are many types of cities, depending on the
criterion set at the time and «there is no typical Ottoman, Arabic or Islamic
city that imposes essentially unique and thus ghettoized features over in all
its urban centers and inhabitants»2. e second view is in favor of a twofold
separation of the cities in the former Ottoman territory in terms of urban
morphology. Using as a criterion the structure of urban tissue and the type of
housing, the French town planner P. Pinon distinguished two types of cities,
the “Arab-Islamic” and the “Turco-Balkan”. e geographical axis in which
the two regions intersect runs Anatolia from the Northeast to the Southwest,
with an imaginary line from Antalya to Tokat (through Muğla, Afyon Kara-
hisar, Ankara and Amasya)3. It is the “Turco-Balkan” city, which, as G. Vein-
stein notes– following Pinon’s distinction– is the typical type of “Ottoman
city”4. In fact, it is this kind of city, which had been developed in an Ottoman
environment during the very early period of its state formation, since this area,
namely the North-Western Anatolia and the Southern Balkans, was the origi-
nal territory on which the Ottoman state was founded.
Within the framework of the search for the ‘typical’ Ottoman city and
the development of Ottoman Urban Studies as a separate scientic eld, in
the last two decades scholars have turned their interest to the study of the early
Ottoman city5. eir aim is not only to nd the city model on which the Ot-
proach and a review of older bibliography can be found in: J. Abu-Lughod, e Islamic
City– Historic Myth, Islamic Essence, and Contemporary Relevance, International Journal
of Middle East Studies, 1987, N 19, p.155 – 176; Z. Çelk, New Approaches to the ‘Non-Wes-
tern’ Cty, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 2000, N 58/3, p. 374 – 381.
2 E. Eldem, D. Goman, B. Masters, Introduction: Was ere an Ottoman City?, In Ei-
dem (eds), e Ottoman City between East and West. Aleppo, Izmir, and Istanbul. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1999, p. 15.
3 P. Pinon, e Ottoman Cities of the Balkans, In: S.K. Jayyusi (ed.), e City in the
Islamic World. Leiden-Boston, E.J. Brill, 2008, v. I, p. 146 – 7.
4 G. Veinstein, e Ottoman Town (Fieenth-Eighteenth Centuries), In: S.K. Jayyusi
(ed.), e City in the Islamic World. Leiden-Boston, E.J. Brill, 2008, v. I, p. 217.
5 G. Boykov, e Borders of the Cities: Revisiting Early Ottoman Urban Morphology
in Southeastern Europe Bordering Early Modern Europe, In: M. Baramova, G. Boykov, I.
Parvev (eds), Bordering Early Modern Europe, Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz, 2015, p. 243 – 256;
Phokion Kotzageorgis
425
tomans relied to pursue their policy towards the cities, but also to understand
the basic features of the early Ottoman urban policy, since the view of the
spontaneous urban development is generally rejected by researchers6. us, it
is easy to understand why research of the cities in the Balkans has rekindled
the interest of scholars. is new trend resurfaces studies of Balkan cities from
a period of “historiographical oblivion”7.
essaloniki was the largest city of the late medieval Balkans, in terms of
physical size and population, which was conquered by the Ottomans before
Istanbul. Because of this, the urban policy the conquerors implemented in this
city draws scholars’ attention. essaloniki is one of the– presumably few–
cities of the Balkans which the Ottomans conquered by force. According to
Islamic Law, when a city was conquered by force, its non-Muslim inhabitants,
along with their land and property, were at the disposal of the Muslim conquer-
ors. As a rule, aer a conquest by force, the inhabitants of a city were enslaved
or converted to Islam and their property was conscated8. In 1432 – 33, unlike
what the Islamic law stipulated for such cases, the Ottoman sultan Murad II
acted, in a sense, ‘against the law’: he undertook a plan for the revitalization
and repopulation of essaloniki in the aermath of the city’s conquest. is
was the rst known case of such a plan. Two decades later, in 1455, sultan
Mehmed II (Murad II’s son) would implement a similar plan following the
conquest of Istanbul. As part of the plan, Murad II ransomed the native cap-
P. Kontolaimos, e Transformation of Late Byzantine Adrianople to Early Ottoman Edirne,
Journal of the Ottoman and Turkish Studies Association, 2016, N 3.1, p. 7 – 27.
6 A recent example of the searching for an urban logic as to the urban development of
the early Ottoman cities is: O. Bessi, e Topographic Reconstruction of Ottoman Dime-
toka: Issues of Periodization and Morphological Development, In: M. Hadjianastasis (ed.),
Frontiers of the Ottoman Imagination: Studies in Honour of Rhoads Murphey, Leiden, E.J.
Brill, 2015, p. 44 – 85.
7 Until the recent two decades, international scholarship of Ottoman Urban Studies,
regarding the Balkan City, had been based on the comprehensive study of N. Todorov, e
Balkan City, 1400 – 1900. Seattle, University of Washington Press, 1983. Apart from this,
the pioneer work of the Dutch Ottomanist M. Kiel is mainly focused on the Ottoman Mon-
uments in the Balkans.
8 M.J. Kister, Land Property and Jihad: A Discussion of Some Early Traditions, Journal
of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 1991, N. 34.4, p. 270 – 311. For the imple-
mentation of this tradition to two early Islamic conquests, namely Egypt and Irak, see: A.
Noth, Zum Verhältnis von Kalifaler Zentralgewalt und Provinzen in Umayyadischer Zeit:
Die “Sulh”-“ʿAnwa”-Traditionen Für Ägypten und den Iraq, Die Welt des Islams, 1973, N
14.1, p. 150 – 162.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
426
tives, or he obliged his allies– like the despot of Serbia, George Branković– to
ransom them. Moreover, he ordered the Christian inhabitants of the city who
had ed before the conquest to return and be settled in. Additionally, he al-
lowed the Christians to retain their main churches (katholikoi naoi) and did not
convert all the Christian buildings into mosques. Furthermore, the sultan or-
dered a house-by-house detailed survey of the city, in order to determine how
many houses were vacant and to prevent the Ottoman soldiers from usurping
them. is measure, as far as we know, was implemented here for the rst
time, and it was also applied by Mehmed II in Istanbul twenty years later. e
interpretation of this assimilatory policy towards the Macedonian metropolis
is given by the unique extant source for the Ottoman conquest of the city, the
Narration (in Greek Dieghesis) of the native Salonican and eye-witness of the
conquest, Ioannis Anagnostis. According to this source, sultan Murad II had
a twofold aim: rst, to protect the city from an enemy (i.e. Venetian) attack
from the sea and second, to revive its market. For the achievement of this goal,
he needed both Christians and Muslims9.
In this paper my scope is to see how an Ottoman city was formed, be-
ginning at the time of the conquest, and theoretically, from a zero point. My
working hypothesis is that, since in 1430 essaloniki had no inhabitants (at
least temporarily)– because the inhabitants were enslaved due to the city’s
forceful conquest, this city is a very good example for a researcher to study
the measures undertaken by the Ottoman authorities in order to (re)create
9 e standard work in English for the early Ottoman essaloniki, in which Ioannis
Anagnostis’ Dieghesis was meticulously studied is: S. Vryonis, e Ottoman Conquest of
essaloniki in 1430, In: A. Bryer and H.W. Lowry (eds), Continuity and Change in late
Byzantine and early Ottoman Society, Birmingham-Washingthon D.C., Centre for Byzantine
Studies, 1982, p. 281 – 321 esp. p. 288 – 304, where the contents of the source is analyzed.
For the edition of the text in Greek see: I. Anagnostae, De extremo essaloncens excdo
narrato In: I. Bekker, (ed.), Georgius Phrantzes, Ioannes Cananus, Ioannes Anagnostae. Bonn
1838, p. 483 – 528. For the history of the Ottoman essaloniki in English see: M. Ma-
zower, Salonica. City of Ghosts. Christians, Muslims and Jews, 1430 – 1950. London, Harper
Collins, 2004. In Greek see the standard work: Β. ηητριάδη, Τοπογραφία τη Θεσσαλονίκη
κατά την εποχή τη Τουρκοκρατία, 1430 – 1912. Θεσσαλονίκη, Εταιρεία Μακεδονικών
Σπουδών, 1983. Finally there are two unpublished PhD dissertations on 15th – 16th centu-
ry essaloniki based on Ottoman tax registers: A. Pala, XV. ve XVI. Yüzyıllarda Selanik
Şehri, PhD. diss. Ankara, Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, 1991; Η. Κολοβό,
Χωρικοί και οναχοί στην Οθωανική Χαλκιδική, 15ο – 16ο αιώνε. Θεσσαλονίκη, Αριστοτέειο
Πανεπιστήιο Θεσσαλονίκη, 2000, 1 – 3.
Phokion Kotzageorgis
427
a metropolis; furthermore, I intend to analyze the characteristics which the
urban development of that metropolis acquired. From this point of view, I am
interested in both the cityscape and the people and how these two elements
were intertwined. e time span of my research is the rst Ottoman century
of the city (1430-ca. 1530), aer which the Ottomanization process had been
accomplished and the prole of the new Ottoman city– in terms of society
and urban morphology– had been grosso modo formed. Since most of the Ot-
toman monuments of the time have not survived to the present, my research
material is mainly written sources. Based on a variety of sources (Ottoman,
Venetian, and Greek documents, Ottoman registers, architectural remains,
Ottoman and European narrative texts) I created a database of the Christians
and Muslims of the city, either ocials or common people, and of the monu-
ments of that particular time span mentioned in the sources. e database
includes some 8,500 Muslims and Christians tax-payers from the three extant
Ottoman tax registers, together with 164 entries from dierent sources about
Christians, 508 entries on Muslim ocials and some 350 entries on timar
holders. Additionally, I formed databases for the pious foundations (vakıfs),
the city quarters (mahalles) and the aforementioned monuments. e reason
for creating this database is that I would like to identify persons, particularly
founders of vakıfs and/or city quarters, and thus trace the evolution of the
society and the urban fabric. My main source of evidence for the analysis are
the three extant Ottoman detailed tax registers (mufassal tahrir deerleri) for
the period (of 1478, ca. 1500, and 1527)10. is material is supplemented by a
10 e rst and the third register are housed in the Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi in
Istanbul, in the Tapu Tahrir collection, under the code numbers TT 7 and TT 403. e
rst has been thoroughly studied in: H. W. Lowry, Portrait of a City: e Population and
Topography of Ottoman Selanik (essaloniki) in the year 1478, Diptycha, 1981, N 2,
p. 254 – 293 (repr. In: Idem, Studies in Deerology. Ottoman Society in the Fieenth and Six-
teenth Centuries. Istanbul, e Isis Press, 1992, p. 65 – 100). e second one is housed in the
Oriental Department of the National Library of Soa in Bulgaria under the code number
SN 16/35. A Bulgarian translation of it is published in: . (.),
, . III. 1972, . 375 – 411. TT 167 is an abridged form of
the TT 403 register (icmal deeri), compiled in 1530. See the facsimile of the register in:
Y. Sarınay (ed.), 167 Numaralı Muhasebe-i Vilayet-i Rum-ili Deeri (937/1530), v. I, Anka-
ra, Osmanlı Arşivi Daire Başkanlığı, 2003. For the tax registers of the 15th and 16th centuries
and their dating see: Φ.Π. Κοτζαγεώργη, Όψει πρώιη νεωτερικότητα. Οι διαάχε στη
χριστιανική κοινότητα τη Θεσσαλονίκη (τέη 17ου- αρχέ 18ου αι.), In: Γ. Σαλακίδη (ed.),
Τουρκολογικά. Τιητικό τόο για τον Αναστάσιο Κ. Ιορδάνογλου, Θεσσαλονίκη, Α. Σταούη,
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
428
small number of Ottoman and Greek documents, preserved in the monaster-
ies of the Mount Athos peninsula11.
Unlike almost all of the urban settlements that the Ottomans conquered
in the Balkans during the 14th and 15th centuries, essaloniki developed an
intra muros urban morphological type12. Having a trapezoid shape, the city
extends to a surface of 250 – 270 ha in addition to a 15 ha area covered by the
citadel (Acropolis). e urban tissue had been developed as early as the Hel-
lenistic and Roman periods. It was characterized by the Hippodamian system,
in which the cardo maximus (today Venizelou Street), namely the north-south
axis, and decumanus maximus (Egnatia Street), the west-east axis, formed the
main streets of the city. Archaeological research on the late Byzantine urban
morphology suggests that the northern area of the decumanus maximus street,
particularly above Aghios Dimitrios Street (known today as the “old or upper
city” area), was almost devoid of inhabitants. Because of this, in the 14th cen-
tury many monasteries had been built in that part of the city13. Estimations
by the Byzantinists regarding the population of the city vary. A recent study
suggests that a number close to 7,000 people is reasonable for essaloniki’s
population on the eve of the Ottoman conquest14. If we accept this estimation,
2011, p. 440 fn. 10. I study the three tax registers along with a fourth, dated from 1568 (TT
723, a copy of 1613), from the original. For an introduction to the study of the Ottoman
tax registers see in: S. Faroqhi, Approaching Ottoman History. An Introduction to the Sources.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999, p. 86 – 101. For the limitations these sources
impose on historians see: H.W. Lowry, e Ottoman Tahrir Deerleri as a Source for Social
and Economic History: Pitfalls and Limitations”, In: Idem, Studies in Deerology. Ottoman
Society in the Fieenth and Sixteenth Centuries, Istanbul, e Isis Press, 1992, p. 3 – 18.
11 For the Greek documents until 1500 I used the volumes in the series of Archives de
l’Athos, published by the Centre National de Recherches Scientiques in Paris. For the Ot-
toman documents I used both, published or unpublished documents, albeit not from all the
monasteries.
12 Apart from essaloniki, İznk and Istanbul were also developed intra muros, where-
as having a dierent fate from essaloniki into the Ottoman domain. All the other Otto-
man towns and cities had been formed as an extra muros type.
13 Ch. Bakirtzis, e Urban Continuity and Size of Late Byzantine essalonike,
Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 2003, N 57, p. 62-64.
14 Κ. Μουστάκα, Μεθοδολογικά ζητήατα στην προσέιση των πληθυσιακών εγε-
θών τη υστεροβυζαντινή πόη, In: T. Κιουσοπούου (ed.), Οι βυζαντινέ πόει (8os – 15os
αιώνα). Προοπτικέ τη έρευνα και νέε ερηνευτικέ προσείσει, Rethymno, Philosophiki
Scholi Panepistimiou Kritis, 2012, p. 243 – 245. Moustakas analyzes all the extant data from
dierent sources, Byzantine and European, as regards the population of essaloniki at the
Phokion Kotzageorgis
429
then the density of the city’s population was extremely low, ca. 28 persons/ha,
more than three times less than most medieval European cities15.
In order to understand the urban policy the Ottomans applied to the
city, we have to take into account the location and dispersion of Ottoman
monuments in the city and the demographic development. In terms of the
monuments, one may start his/her research with the extant ones and continue
with those mentioned in the sources (see Map 1)16. Before I embark on a
chronological-cum-topographical survey of the Ottoman monuments of the
rst century, let me refer to the limitations the sources present for compiling a
more-or-less complete chronological list of monuments.
Urban policy in the Ottoman Empire heavily depended on the vakıf (pi-
ous foundation) institution, since it constituted one of the basic elements of
the Ottoman urban environment17. is institution provided every urban set-
tlement of the Islamic world (from the biggest city to the smallest town) with
the necessary socio-economic infrastructure in terms of– at least– building
activity, either of a purely religious nature (e.g. mosques, monasteries, schools)
or of an economic one (e.g. inns, covered markets, public baths). us, the
study of the location and spatial dispersion of the vakıfs in the city can aid
our understanding of the urban development. Although the vakıfs did not
necessarily relate to buildings alone, since there also existed cash vakıfs18, the
beginning of the 15th c. He underlines the fact that the city lost most of its inhabitants during
the Venetian occupation (1423 – 1430), although many had emigrated before, due to the
turbulent period from the rst Ottoman occupation (1387 – 1403) until 1423.
15 An average of people/ha in late Medieval Europe is estimated between 100 – 115
people. See: D. Pasciuti and Ch. Chase-Dunn, Estimating e Population Sizes of Cities,
Urbanization and Empire Formation Project Institute for Research on World-Systems Uni-
versity of California, Riverside In: http://irows.ucr.edu/research/citemp/estcit/estcit.htm–
28.07.2018. If we take Aghios Dimitrios Street as a northern extreme, the whole inhabited
area is limited to ca. 170 ha, thus giving a more moderate ratio of 60 persons/ha in 1478.
16 e early Ottoman monuments, survived today in essaloniki, are as follows: the
Bey Hammam, the Bedesten, the Hamza Bey Mosque, the Alaca İmaret, the Yahudi Ham-
mam, the Paşa Hammam, and the Yeni Hammam.
17 For the role of the vakıf in the Islamic city see: R . Deguilhem, e Waqf inf the City,
In: S.K. Jayyusi (ed.), e City in the Islamic World. Leiden-Boston, E.J. Brill, 2008, vol. II,
p. 923 – 950.
18 For example, although of little cash value, six cash vakıfs are recorded in essaloniki
in 1527/30. See: TT 403, p. 1014 – 1015. For cash vakıfs see: J. Mandaville, Usurious pi-
ety: the cash waqf controversy in the Ottoman Empire,International Journal of Middle East
Studies, 1979, N10.3, p. 289 – 308.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
430
correlation between the number of pious foundations and buildings is high.
is means that the name of a vakıf corresponded with more than one (oen
many) buildings. us, one must analyze the pious foundations in order to
visualize the spatial distribution of the buildings in the city. ere are two
main problems encountered in the pursuit of this project. First, since the pi-
ous foundation documents (vakyes) of that period in essaloniki have not
survived19, it is very dicult to date the foundation of an endowment, to know
the buildings attached to it and to locate these buildings on the city map. Sec-
ond, the changes in building names during a long (or even short) time-span
causes problems in identifying and/or precisely locating a building20.
Pious foundations and buildings were closely connected with another
variable of the urban space, the city quarters (mahalles) (Table 1). Tradition-
ally in the Ottoman domain, the city quarters were named aer the main
religious buildings located in them. In other words, the names of the city
quarters were oen– though not always– the names of the buildings con-
nected with pious foundations. is relationship provides valuable insights
for the research. us, if we know the date of a building, we could roughly
date the city quarters as well and vice-versa21.
Given all the above prerequisites, I study and analyze a more or less com-
plete list of the Islamic pious foundations of essaloniki, compiled just at the
end of my research period, i.e. in the 1527/3022 (Table 2). is list not only
shows the urban infrastructure– in terms of public buildings – which had
19 For an exception see the vakye of İnegöllü İshak Paşa n: V. Tamer, Fath Devr Rca-
lnden İshak Paşa’nın Vakfyeler ve Vakıarı, Vakıar Dergisi, 1958, N 4, p. 118 – 24.
20 V. Dimitriadis, in his work on Ottoman essaloniki, has made a good eort in lo-
cating religious buildings and the Ottoman city quarters, but he based his research on the
Ottoman archival material from the late period (beginning of 20th c.). Because of this, it is
dicult to identify all names of that period with those referred to in the tax registers of the
15th and 16th centuries.
21 For example, the mosque (mescid) of Hamza Bey was built in 1467/8, hence the
quarter of Hamza Bey ought to have been formed in that period, since it was recorded in
the tax register of 1478 (TT 7, p. 531: cemaat-i Hamza bey tabı mahalle-i Kata). Likewise,
the quarter of the mescid of Hacı Hasan might be formed around 1478, since not only it is
recorded in the tax register, but the rst person mentioned in this quarter was a certain Hacı
Hasan (ΤΤ 7, p. 531). For the city quarter see: ηητριάδη, Τοπογραφία, p. 130 – 132. For
the vakıf of Hacı Hasan the merchant (el-tacir) see: TT 403, p. 1015 and Sarınay (ed.), 167
Numaralı, p. 106.
22 TT 403, p. 959 – 1017; Sarınay (ed.), 167 Numaralı, p. 99 – 107.
Phokion Kotzageorgis
431
been developed by the Ottomans by the end of the rst Ottoman century, but
also can contribute to discerning the stages of the urban development of the
city. In order to date and locate the recorded pious foundations, I used a) the
prosopographical database I created, b) the names of the city quarters as they
appeared in the two oldest tax registers (of 1478 and of ca. 1500) compared
with that of 1527/30, and c) architectural remains. My research was further
aided by the rst extant register of the city in 1478. In this source the Muslim
quarters are registered as attached to the Christian ones23. Given the fact that
the location of the Christian quarters is known, we can roughly locate the Mus-
lim ones, at least the names with which the Muslim quarters appeared in 1478.
What follows are the preliminary results of the comparative analysis of
the pious foundations, the city’s quarters and the buildings. In terms of spa-
tial organization, the Ottoman authorities followed what I call a ‘continuity
policy’. is means that they preserved the main economic nucleus and the
urban tissue of the Byzantine city. In this specic area the Muslim popula-
tion was initially settled and the rst Islamic buildings were ‘created’ (built or
converted). e main mosque, the Cuma (Friday) mosque, the result of the
conversion of the Acheropoietos church by Murad II, dominated the Otto-
man infrastructure alongside the decumanus maximus, although not on the
spot where it crossed the cardo maximus. Further along the decumanus maxi-
mus, Hamza Bey, probably a grandson of the famous warlord Gazi Evrenos
Bey24, built another mosque (initially a mescid) in 1467/8, which is preserved
today in the place where the decumanus maximus crossed the cardo maximus,
just opposite the central covered market of the city (bedesten). Furthermore,
Murad II had built a double bath in 1443/4 along the decumanus maximus, in
the area between the Friday Mosque and the spot where Hamza Bey built his
mosque. Apart from these buildings, in ca. 1460 the bedesten25 was erected.
e pious foundations and the buildings recorded in the oldest extant tax
register might have originated from the transformation of Christian churches
23 See for example the entry: cemaat-i mescid-i Kilise der Bab-i Vardar tabı-i mahalle-i
Ayo Mina (Lowry, Portrait, 256, table 1).
24 For the identication see: H.W. Lowry, e Evrenos Family & the City of Selanik
(essaloniki): Who Built the Hamza Beğ Cami’i & Why? Istanbul, Bahçeşehr Unversty,
2010, p. 1 – 21.
25 Since there is no extant inscription on the building, I rely on the dating of: M.
Cezar,Typical commercial buildings of the Ottoman classical period and the Ottoman construc-
tion system. Istanbul, İş Bankası, 1983, p. 195 – 97.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
432
into every day mosques. From the list of the twenty-seven Muslim communi-
ties (cemaats) in the 1478 register I can roughly date only eight of them (Camı,
Balaban Ağa, Hızır Ağa, Sinan Bey, Kilise in the Vardar Gate, Hacı Hasan, Ali
Paşa, Hamza Bey)26 (Map 2). Except for one of them, which seems to have
been founded in the 1470’s (that of Hacı Hasan), the others should have been
founded in the rst forty years aer the conquest. However, I am not able to
suggest the exact process of urbanization during the reigns of Murad II and
his son Mehmed II. From the quarters which I am able to locate, I conclude
that the Muslims settled in all the then inhabited area of the city, roughly from
the modern Aghios Dimitrios Street southwards, an area which extended to
the western and eastern extremes of the intra muros urban tissue, leaving the
upper city vacant. A further point which I have to underline is that at least
until 1478 there had not existed specic areas inhabited by a homogeneous
religious group. e two communities were living together in the same areas
and were organized around their religious buildings27.
Unlike the rst Ottoman decades, in the last quarter of the 15th century
and the beginning of the 16th, Islamic life blossomed. is fact is evidenced
by the doubling of the Muslim population (from 933 tax-hearths in 1478 to
1,860 in ca. 1500) and in the increase of the number of Muslim quarters (from
27 to 41) and of Islamic monuments (from one Friday mosque to three by
1530). Furthermore, the governors of the city contributed to the foundation
of vakıfs and therefore to the building activity. Cezeri Kasım Paşa, Koca Kasım
Paşa, İshak Paşa, Yakub Paşa, and İbrahim Paşa together with Sultan Bayezid
II founded pious foundations in the city and built mosques or converted
churches into mosques at the turn of the 16th century28. Non-religious public
buildings (karbanseray, hans, hammams) were also incorporated in the newly
26 For the list of the cemaats see: Lowry, Portrait, p. 258 (table 1). In the prosopo-
graphical database I have created I identied the persons, aer whom the respective com-
munities were named. I, also, compared my ndings with what Dimitriadis suggested in his
Τοπογραφία. For the Muslim quarters during the Ottoman period see the detailed analysis in:
ηητριάδη, Τοπογραφία, σ. 81 – 152.
27 e Muslim cemaats are registered in the cadastre as belonging (tabı) to a certain
Christian quarter. E.g. Cemaat-i Mescid-i Hızır Ağa der Bab-i Yalı tabı-i mahalle-i Ayo Mina
(TT 7, p. 524).
28 Except from İshak Paşa, who had built ex nihilo a mosque of the type of zaviye-imaret,
the others converted churches into mosques and had built secondary buildings (baths, inns
etc.) in order to create a complex (külliye).
Phokion Kotzageorgis
433
established pious foundations. e presence of so many governors (Paşas) in
the city was due to the fact that essaloniki was the seat of retired Ottoman
high ocials until the middle of the 16th century, when it became the capital
of a province (sancak)29.
As regards the urban tissue, in the tax register of ca. 1500, of the newly re-
corded Muslim quarters, at least seven can be located in the upper part of the
city, namely north of Aghios Dimitrios Street (Haraccı Ali, Hacı Yakub, Hacı
Ahmed Subaşı, Tarakçıoğlu nam-ı diğer Yenice, İshak Paşa, Suluca Manastır,
Hacı Mustafa veled-i Pinti Hasan) (Map 3). Moreover, in that tax register,
the rst quarter located inside the citadel area (mahalle-i kule-i Selanik) was
recorded. Basing on this data, I would suggest that Jewish immigration in the
city during the period between the two registers had been compiled resulted
in the moving of the Muslim population, either indigenous or newcomers, to
the northern part of it. As a matter of fact, by the end of the rst Ottoman
century, the development of the urban tissue had been stabilized. It is generally
considered that the Ottoman quarters seemed to have acquired a religiously
homogeneous character rather than a mixed one30. Based on this assumption,
a recent study using GIS suggests that in the beginning of the 16th century
the urban tissue consisted of Muslim quarters covering 53% of the total intra
muros city, Christian quarters covering 34% and Jewish ones covering 13%31.
e interesting and apparently suggested point is the gradual dispersion of
the Muslims in the whole intra muros area from the beginning of the 16th
century onwards, while Christians and especially Jews were restricted to a nar-
row geographic area. Although the number of Muslim quarters had stabilized
to 48 by 1527/30– and did not change in the coming centuries32– their
29 essaloniki was given to retired high-ranking ocials ber vech-i tekaüd. All of the
above mentioned Paşas were either former Grand Viziers, or former Beylerbeyis. For a list,
albeit incomplete yet, of the local governors see: Κολοβό, Χωρικοί, I, σ. 26 – 28. e rst well
known high ranking ocial, who became governor of the city, was the former Beylerbey of
Rumeli and second Vizier, Şhabeddn Paşa, mentioned in Ottoman documents from es-
saloniki between 1452 – 1457 (Κολοβό, Χωρικοί, I, σ. 27 fn. 17).
30 is is particularly obvious for the Arab cities. See: A. Raymond, Islamic City, Arab
City: Orientalist Myths and Recent Views, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 1994,
N 21.1, p. 14 – 16.
31 Σ. ηουλά and Ι. ούκα, Ανάπτυξη γεωπληροφοριακού συστήατο για τη ελέτη
τη χωροχρονική ετάβαση και εξέιξη, των παλαιών οθωανικών συνοικιών στι σηερινέ
ενορίε τη Θεσσαλονίκη, https://www.academa.edu/19625804/– 10/10/2017, σ. 9.
32 For a list of Muslim quarters in 1828 see: ηητριάδη, Τοπογραφία, σ. 86 – 88.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
434
names kept changing ; therefore the location and identication of the quarters
recorded in the registers are dicult tasks to undertake. Of the 81 dierent
names that appeared in the four tax registers of the 15th and 16th centuries33,
I was able to identify only 62 of them (quarters with double names included).
us, it is premature to suggest the way the urban tissue was transformed and/
or expanded in early Ottoman essaloniki.
e population of essaloniki increased during the century (Graph 1)34.
Setting aside the numbers for every religious group, more important for my
study is analyzing the prole of the inhabitants, Muslims and Christians, in
order to extract the characteristics and suggestive patterns of settlement in the
city35. e analysis of the 1478 tax register shows that the Muslim community
had not yet crystallized as an entity. is conclusion resulted from the term ce-
maat used by the Ottoman registrars instead of mahalle, which characterized
a recently settled population group. Moreover, the form of the personal names
of the Muslims directs me to the same conclusion. I interpret the absence of
the standard form for the registration of tax-payers in the Ottoman cadastres
(i.e. x son of y) as a sign of recording recently settled people. To begin with,
only 12% of the Muslims bore the standard form and of them almost 1/3 bore,
instead of the father’s name, the father’s occupation (e.g. Bayramlu veled-i
debbağ) or geographical origin (e.g. Mustafa veled-i Karamanlu). On the other
hand, 2/3 of the Muslims bore their own occupation or place of origin (just
cüllah or Sirozlu without other identication) instead. Using these precondi-
tions as an instrument to identify the ‘locals’ and the ‘newcomers’, I put the
numbers and the percentages in a table, in order to see if these numbers have a
meaning as regards the date the quarters had been founded. If a quarter had a
high percentage of ‘newcomers’, then it would have been a newly founded one
and vice versa (see Table 3). Due to the low numbers of residents contained
in every community, it is dicult to draw reliable conclusions. However, the
fact that at the top of the table there is a quarter (Hacı Mustafa) of which
33 I include also the detailed tax register of 1568, for which see: M. Dellbaşı, e Via
Egnatia and Selanik (essalonica) in the 16th century, in: E.A. Zachariadou (ed.), e
Via Egnatia under Ottoman Rule (1380 – 1699), Rethymno, Crete University Press, 1996,
p. 69 – 70; Κολοβό, Χωρικοί, II, σ. 22 – 23.
34 For a general demographic picture of the city see the table XI in: Lowry, Portrait,
p. 293.
35 For the settlement patterns see: Lowry, Portrait, p. 277 – 80.
Phokion Kotzageorgis
435
only 1/3 of the inhabitants are ‘locals’, gives an impression that the newcomers
constituted the majority of the Muslim population in 1478.
Muslim names of religious origin constituted as high as 65% of the total.
is fact, along with the relatively high percentage of pilgrims’ titles (elhac
or hacı, 20 %) suggest that the majority of the Muslims came from urban
centers of Anatolia or even the Balkans, where the Islamic culture had deeply
penetrated into the inhabitants. is fact has already been suggested by the
Ottomanists Heath Lowry and Ömer Lüt Barkan, who based their hy-
pothesis on the occupations of the people36. is view is also strengthened
by the Muslims’ places of origin, recorded in the tax register. Although there
are few cases in which the place of origin was recorded, I would suggest that
Anatolians (Arabs and Persians) constituted the majority of the geographical
names recorded in 1478, while a small minority of the names comes from
areas around essaloniki. e latter are mainly apprentices. (Table 4).
Having said that, one can easily answer the question of conversions to
Islam. Since the majority of the Muslims came from Anatolia, they were likely
native Muslims and not converts. In addition, a very low percentage of the
Muslims of essaloniki bore Abdullah as patronym– a characteristic of con-
verts, and another low percentage were freed slaves (about 2.5 %)37. erefore,
I would argue that most of the Muslims in 1478 came from urban centers of
Anatolia and Arab lands, while a very small minority were either converts,
freed slaves or nomads38. e latter is noteworthy, because it is known that
aer the conquest, Murad II ordered a forced transfer (sürgün) of 1,000
persons from the nearby town of Yenice-i Vardar (present day Giannitsa)39.
Keeping in mind that this town had a population composed almost exclu-
sively of Muslim nomads, who were settled there by the town’s founder, Gazi
Evrenos Bey, by 1478 they did not consist a large part of the city’s population,
or they had been urbanized. Nevertheless, Ioannis Anagnostis remarked the
unwillingness of those people to settle in essaloniki40. Most interesting
36 Ibid. p. 282 – 87 and the discussion as to the names of Christians and Muslims; Ö.L.
Barkan, Quelques observations sur l’organisation économique et sociale des villes ottomanes
des XVIe et XVIIe siècles,Recueils de la Société Jean Bodin, 1955, N 2, p. 289 – 311.
37 In fact there are recorded three brothers as veled-i kar (=son of unbelever) (TT 7,
p. 532).
38 Lowry suggests that there were two groups: those deported from Yenice Vardar in
1430, and the newcomers (Lowry, Portrait, p. 286).
39 Vryonis, Ottoman Conquest, p. 297.
40 Anagnostae, De extremo, p. 524.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
436
for the migration policy of the Ottoman state with regards to essaloniki
is another of Anagnostis’ notes: that in the period of the writing of his text
(i.e. ca. 1450), essaloniki, according to his estimations, had 1,000 Muslims
and 1,000 Christians41. If this information is accurate, then it follows that
the migration program of Murad II was not successful. Taking these gures
into account I surmise that the Muslims in the rst twenty years had been
organized around more or less 10 congregations (i.e. city quarters) and not
more, since 100 people/mahalle is a reasonable ratio in the Ottoman period
for a Muslim town quarter42. Keeping in mind that even the Muslims from
Yenice-i Vardar had unwillingly settled in the city, it is my assumption that a
massive wave of migration might have occurred during the reign of Mehmed
II, when the 1,000 Muslims grew to 4,000 (almost 1,000 tax-payers). Unfor-
tunately, there is no data or other information regarding this policy towards
essaloniki, so I cannot argue whether there was a voluntary or a compulsory
(sürgün) migration policy.
By the time of the compilation of the other two tax registers (of ca.
1500 and 1527) the urbanized prole of the Muslims had crystallized. e
presence of a steward of the city (kethüda-i şehir) or steward of the Chris-
tians of the city in both registers43 is proof of organized communal life. e
city’s quarters turned from cemaats to mahalles, the father’s names increased
compared to those of professions or place of origin (70% vs. 30%) as indica-
tors of tax-payers, the immigrants were coming from the Balkans rather than
from Anatolia, the converts increased to 4.4% of the total in ca. 1500 and
28% in 152744, while the freedmen increased to 8%. An interesting variable
appears in the 1527 register: the renters. Almost 23% of the Muslims lived
in rented places (der kira). Any correlation between the variables of living in
rent, of religious conversion and of migration would be of interest. Almost
half of the renters are supposed to be converts, since they bore Abdullah as
a patronym (136/327 or 41.6%). Of the people who were registered with a
profession– and thus probably were newcomers– one third were converts.
41 Ibid. p. 521.
42 T. Stoianovich, Model and Mirror of the Premodern Balkan City, In: La ville
balkanique, XVe– XIXe siècles, Soa, 1970, p. 96. (Studia Balcanica 3). Stoianovich said that
20 families is an average for the Muslim quarters of a Balkan city.
43 See SN 16/35, f. 2v (Hüssam, kethüda-i gebran-i Selanik), f. 3r (Hamza, kethüda-i
şehir) and TT 403, p. 544 (Kasım, kethüda).
44 In 1568 32% were registered as “sons of Abdullah” (TT 723, p. 2 – 14).
Phokion Kotzageorgis
437
However, there is no correlation between the bachelors and the converts or
the renters. From the bachelors, who constituted 13% of the total, only 1.6%
lived in rent, whereas 8.7% were converts. us, this promising correlation of
the three variables did not provide a noteworthy result.
As for the Christians, two issues are worth studying. First, according to
Anagnostis’ Dioighesis, Murad II’s intention was to repopulate the city with
Christians and in order to achieve such a goal, he ordered the resettlement
of the local population who had ed essaloniki prior to the conquest and
freed those who had been enslaved45. About 1,000 Christians had immigrated
in the city by the time Anagnostis wrote and/or completed his work (in ca.
1450). e sultan’s policy seemed to be more successful with regard to the
Christians, while this policy– as with the Muslims’ case– was repeated dur-
ing Mehmed II’s reign. According to the census of 1478, more than 1,300
tax-payers (58.6% of the total population), were Christians. Although in the
16th century there was a demographic decline of the Christians of essa-
loniki, there remained well above 1,200 Christian tax-payers46. Where did the
Christians come from? Were they manumitted slaves from essaloniki? Did
they come from the nearby countryside or from far away? A second issue is
whether we can trace the existence of a Christian elite in the city, in other
words if there were notable families which during the rst Ottoman century
were leaders of the Christian community. A similar question has to do with
the origin of those people: did they come from the Byzantine elite and/or did
they constitute a new elite?
e tax registers do not help answer such questions. Unlike for Muslims,
the Ottoman tax registers do not record the origin of the non-Muslim tax-
payers, with the noticeable exception of Jews47. e only help I could nd is
from the Byzantine sources. I compared the names of the Christians of the
three registers with those from the most complete prosopographical database
of the Byzantine period, namely the Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiolo-
45 Anagnostae, De extremo, p. 517, 521.
46 Only in 1527 the Christians were less than 1,200 tax households, i.e. 1,191 (Κολοβό,
Χωρικοί, ΙΙ, σ. 20).
47 Both in ca. 1500 and in 1527 tax registers the Jews were recorded according to their
place of origin in Europe. In the oldest the Jews were grouped between those from “Ger-
many” (taife-i Alaman) that means from the Central and Eastern Europe and those from
“Spain” (taife-i Ispanya). In 1527 they were registered in “communities” (cemaats), which
were named aer the place of origin (i.e. Ççlyan, Katalan, Aragon, Pulya etc.).
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
438
genzeit (PLP) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences48. is was not an easy
task. What I did was match, somewhat arbitrarily, some rare names, either
personal or family, according to the Ottoman registrar, with those recorded
in PLP, taking into account the region in which the name is mentioned in
the Byzantine sources. Furthermore, I compared the list of the Salonicans
recorded in the Venetian sources of the period 1423 – 143049 with the data
from the Ottoman cadastres. Finally, I used the extant Greek and Ottoman
Athonite documents, which record personal names from essaloniki. e
comparison of Greek and Ottoman sources shows, among other things, a use-
ful palaeographical conclusion, i.e. the meticulous attention with which the
Ottoman registrars wrote down Christian names, at least in the 15th and the
beginning of the 16th century cadastres, so as to be reliable for a comparison
with Greek sources.
e analysis of the family names50 shows that a considerable percent of the
Salonicans came from the pre-Ottoman local society. For example, of the y-
two noble family names mentioned in the Venetian sources of 1425 – 1429,
nineteen are recorded in the register of 1478 (36.5%). Additionally, in a survey
of the 14th and the 15th century Salonican names before 1423 conducted by
Nevra Necipoğlu and another list in Athanassia Stavrou’s dissertation51, I was
able to match 14/46 family names (30.4%), which also appeared in the register
of 1478. e majority of the personal names found in PLP came from essa-
loniki or Halkidiki, while others (such as the name Dokeianos) from the nearby
Serres area52. ere also exist names in PLP that are recorded in remote areas,
such as Salivara on Lemnos and Crete, Archonditsi in essaly, or Doxaras
48 E. Trapp et al., Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit. Vienna, Österreichis-
che Akademie der Wissenschaen, 1976 – 1996, v. 1 – 12.
49 K. Μέρτζιο, Μνηεία ακεδονική ιστορία. Θεσσαλονίκη, Εταιρεία Μακεδονικών
Σπουδών, 1947, σ. 50 – 52. e list has been reproduced in: N. Necipoğlu, Byzantium be-
tween the Ottomans and the Latins. Politics and Society in the Late Empire. Cambridge, Cam-
bridge University Press, 2004, p. 297 – 98.
50 Although Ottoman tax registers recorded as a rule the personal names and the fa-
ther’s names, as it concerns Christians in an early period and when trying to depict Byzantine
families in it, it is better to refer to family names. In addition, the Ottoman registrar of 1478
might be aware of Greek language and might be written– interchangeably– family and
father’s names aer the personal name.
51 Necipoğlu, Byzantium, p. 293 – 96; A. Stavrou, Socio-economic Conditions in 14th
and 15th century essalonike: A New Approach, PhD diss. Birmingham, University of Bir-
mingham, 2010, p. 281 – 360.
52 Cf. PLP, nos 5562 – 5578 and TT 7, p. 538 (3 persons), 548 (1 person).
Phokion Kotzageorgis
439
on Kephallonia53. Due to our poor knowledge of the migration networks of
the late medieval period, I cannot suciently interpret such phenomena.
So far my analysis shows a society “on the move”, before and aer the Ot-
toman conquest. However, there were some well established Christian elite
families, which can be traced in the Ottoman cadastres and the documents of
the rst Ottoman century. e best documentation available to me is for the
Argyropouloi family. Konstantinos and Ioannis, members of the family, were
among the notables of the city in the late 15th and early 16th century. Moreo-
ver, the former appears in one of the Christian quarters of the city as former
steward (kethüda) of the Christians of the city. Two Argyropouloi signed a
petition to the Venetian Senate in 1425 as members of the city notables54. e
Palaiologoi (not necessarily members of the Byzantine imperial family) is an-
other case. Members of this family were the tax-exempt Nikolaos Palaiologos
in ca. 1500 and the two brothers, Alexakis and Doukas, who were mentioned
in Spanish sources of the 1520s as notables of the city, and had secret contacts
with the Spanish emperor Charles V55. e Ambertoi, not documented in the
Ottoman sources, or even in PLP, are also mentioned in the Greek sources as
being among the notables of the city56. Finally, the Kaloethes (Kalothi) family
is well documented in the late 15th and early 16th centuries, having as its most
distinguished member a certain Andronikos Kalothis, deceased in 153057.
53 Cf. PLP, nos 24752 – 24755 (Salivara) and TT 7, p. 539 – 40 (3 persons); nos
1455 – 59 (Archonditzis) and TT 7, p. 539, 540, 541 (3 persons); no. 5618 (Doxaras) and
TT 7, p. 543, 548 (4 persons).
54 See respectively: Actes de Vatopédi III, de 1377 à 1500, Archives de l’Athos 23,
ed.J.Lefort, V. Kravari, Ch.Giros, K.Smyrlis and R.Estangüi Gómez (Paris: Lethielleux,
forthcoming), no. 243. Konstantinos is registered in: TT 7, 543 (Horista/Hryssi), and Ioan-
nis in: SN 16/35, 16a (Ahiropit); for the city quarter see: TT 403, 621; for the Byzantine
notables: Necipoğlu, Byzantium, 297; Stavrou, “Conditions”, 286. I thank my colleague
Prof. Kostis Smyrlis for sending to me the pages on the document from Vatopedi.
55 SN 16/35, f. 13v (Aya Pelaya); I.K. Χασιώτη, Αντιτουρκικέ κινήσει στην προ-
επαναστατική Μακεδονία, In: I.Σ. Κολιόπουλο, I.K. Χασιώτη (eds), Νεότερη και σύγχονη
Μακεδονία, Θεσσαλονίκη, Παπαζήση-Παρατηρητή, [1991], ν. Ι, σ. 438. e two brothers,
Alexakis and Doukas are registered in TT 403, p. 620 (city quarter of Ofalos) and p. 611
(Ahiropit) respectively. For the Byzantine family in essaloniki documents see: Stavrou,
Conditions, p. 323 – 37.
56 N. Oikonomides (ed.), Actes de Dionysiou, Paris, Lethielleux, 1968, no. 32 and 33;
Lefort et al. (eds), Actes de Vatopedi, v. III, no. 243 (forthcoming).
57 Dimitri Kalothi see: Oikonomides, Dionysiou, no. 44; TT 7, p. 542. Iakovos and
Ioannis Kalothi see: Vatopedi, III, no. 243; SN 16/35, 17a (cemaat-ı müteferrıka). Andro-
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
440
Next to them are some persons who, although they were attested as
possessing some posts in the local society, do not bear any recognizable family
name. Such are the cases of the steward of the Christians of the city in 1527,
Manol son of Yani, or the elders (protoyeroi) Todor son of Mihal and eotoki
son of Yorgi in 1478, along with the tax collector (oyvoda) Mihal58.
Apart from the above-mentioned cases, there are several others
which suggest mobility in the local Christian society. Some well documented
families in the later centuries, such as the Kastritsioi, or the Spandounoi, were
either absent in the rst century, or appear at a later period of time. e lat-
ter case applied to the Kastritsioi, who appeared in 1527, while the former to
the Spandounoi, completely absent during the rst century, with a noticeable
exception of Loukas Spandounis, who, however, was apparently a Venetian
subject and originated from Istanbul59.
Although this mobility is traceable in the frequent change of the
quarters of residence in the cadastres, I would suggest that the majority of
the members of the Christian elite inhabited the two city quarters of Achei-
ropoietos and Aghia Pelaghia, just in the center of the city60. is kind of
socio-economic stratication seems to be a little arbitrary, but I think we can
suggest it, especially for this period. e location of the Metropolitan Church
in those areas (i.e. Aghia Sophia) explains, in my view, why Christian notables
remained in these quarters until the massive Jewish immigration. Having said
nikos Kalothi see: E.A. Zachariadou, Ottoman Documents from Archives of Dionysiou
(Mount Athos) 1495 – 1520, Südost Forschungen, 1971, N30, p. 17 (no. 11); Oikonomides,
Dionysiou, no. 41; TT 403, p. 611; P. Schreiner,Die byzantinischen Kleinchroniken. Vienna,
Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaen, 1977, v. I, p. 567. Yani Kalothi: TT 403,
p. 614 (Kata).
58 For Manol see TT 403, p. 612 (quarter of Yani Mavriyani); TT 7, p. 537 (Bodrom
for Mihal oyvoda), p. 540 (Ayo Pelaya for Todor veled-i Mihal), and p. 544 (Asomada for
eotoki Yorgi).
59 For Kastritsioi see TT 403, p. 614 (Kata) and ηητριάδη, Τοπογραφία, σ. 257 – 58.
For Loukas Spandounis see: Χ. Μπούρα, Το επιτύβιο του Λουκά Σπαντούνη στη βασιλική του
Αγίου ηητρίου Θεσσαλονίκη, Επιστηονική Επετηί Πολυτεχνική Σχολή του Αριστοτελείου
Πανεπιστηίου Θεσσαλονίκη, 1974, 6, σ.1-63.
60 In the tax registers are recorded the following persons, who were from among the
Christian notables of the city: Acheiropoietos: Nikola Argiroplo, Dimitri Kalothi, Aleksi
Paloloğo, Yani Argiroplo, Andronik Kaloti, Kosta Argiroplo. Ayo Pelaya: Todor veled-i Mi-
hal protoyer, Nikola Paloloğo, Dimo Kalothi. Next to them, however, there were registered
common people as well.
Phokion Kotzageorgis
441
that, it does not mean that Christians did not also live in other city quarters.
In the rst century I cannot say that there was any restriction in terms of the
settlement of Christians. e whole urban tissue was inhabited by Muslims
and Christians alike, and extended from the western to the eastern extremes61.
Before I embark on the topic of spatial distribution, let me nish with the
prole of the Christians.
In absolute contrast to the Muslims, Christians registered in the cadastres
with family or father names at a percentage as high as 90%. is means that, in
theory, the immigration wave was at a low level or consisted mostly of locals.
Almost 6.4% of the Christians in 1478 have a clear indication that they were
immigrants (apprentices, wage laborers, servants etc.), while in ca. 1500 the
percentage was 3.6% and in 1527 7%. is can be corroborated by the pres-
ence of the name Xenos, which in Greek literally means ‘the foreigner’, but
it was also a personal name. e frequency with which this name appears in
the registers shows a remarkable increase. Either as a personal or father name,
Xenos’s presence in 1478 was 0.5%, in ca. 1500 1.6% and in 1527 4.9%. Taking
into account the two aforementioned remarks I would argue that at the end of
my examined period the local Christian society began changing from a locally
based society to a migration based one.
is change in the demographic synthesis of the Christians is also ob-
served in the urban dispersion. Unlike the Muslim quarters, the Christian
ones, which bore primarily Byzantine names, can easily be located62. Until
1568 there were four city quarters in which the Christians were continu-
ously registered (quarters of Bodrom, Ahiropit, Ayo Dimitri, Hrise) and four
others which had disappeared by 1527 (quarters of Ayo Pelaya, Asomada,
Ofalo, and Kata). Interesting enough is which quarters were preserved and
which disappeared. e city quarter at the southeastern extreme of the city
(Bodrom) would remain until the 19th century as the main area of residence
for Christians. Acheiropoietos, supposedly a quarter populated by wealthy
Christians, would change its name to Aghios Athanassios in the next century,
remaining an area where wealthy Christians lived. Aghios Dimitrios absorbed
Kataphyghe quarter aer 1527, as Chrysse quarter did with Ophalou quarter
in the western edge of the city. Finally, the Asomada and Ayo Pelaya quarters
61 is view has been suggested also by ηητριάδη, Τοπογραφία, σ. 24 – 5.
62 For the Christian quarters of 15th and 16th centuries see: ηητριάδη, Τοπογραφία,
σ. 47 – 54.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
442
disappeared aer 1527, the latter being due to Jewish immigration into the
area, the former for an as of yet unknown reason. Worth mentioning is the fact
that many Christians were registered either as temporary entities (cemaats),
like the former salt workers group (tuzcıyan-ı mensuh), or attached to quar-
ters with personal names (‘quarters’ of Yani Mavrokali, of Manol son Yani, of
Kosta Argiropoulo, of Moskopoulo, of Londaritou etc.). us, the naming
of the city quarters seems to have changed in the 1568 tax register, while the
dispersion of the Christians in the urban space had not changed much. For
example, the quarter of Yılan Mermeri (Marble with a snake), initially men-
tioned as Christian and later as Muslim, seems to be a new name for the old
Christian quarter of Ophalou. e former appeared for the rst time in the tax
register of 1568 with Christian inhabitants as “Yılan Mermeri-i Cedid”, while
the latter appeared for the last time in the tax register of 1527. Both of them
were located in the same area63. While I cannot locate all the quarters of 1568,
I argue that Christians were not conned only to the southeastern area of the
city, as they were for the later centuries64.
If my analysis is well-grounded, then the major change in the urban tissue
during the rst Ottoman century and beyond (until at least the end of the 16th
c.) was the Jewish immigration65. e sedentarization of the Jews in today’s
commercial center of the city, but also in the nearby port area, caused changes
to the urban space. e city quarter of Aya Pelaya stopped being one of the
centers of the Christian community, although the monasteries of Hypomim-
neskontos (Pomisko) and of Aghia eodora continued functioning in it66.
More important change was the wider dispersion of the Muslims in the intra
muros city. It was a process which began at the beginning of the 16th century
and was speeded with the Jewish immigration. I surmise that the Muslim
63 Delilbaşı, Selanik, p. 70; TT 403, 620 – 21. For the quarter Yılan Mermeri see
ηητριάδη, Τοπογραφία, σ. 31, according to whom the Christian quarter of Ophalou was
later converted into the Muslim Yılan Mermeri, Hacı İskender and Şihabeddin. On p. 121
the author says that the mosque of the quarter (of Yusuf Paşa) dated from the end of 16th
c., indirectly suggesting that it was then that the quarter began to change its character into
Muslim rather than Christian.
64 For the development of Christian quarters’ names from the 15th to the 18th centuries
see: Κοτζαγεώργη, Όψει, σ. 446 – 449.
65 From the abundant literature on the Jews of Ottoman essaloniki see the recent
book: M. Rozen, Facing the Sea. e Jews of Salonika in the Ottoman Era (1430 – 1912).
Afula 2011, p. 3 – 25.
66 See their properties in TT 403, p. 1017; TT 723, p. 1045.
Phokion Kotzageorgis
443
quarters had a low density while the Jewish ones had a high one. It is extremely
dicult to locate any pure Jewish, Christian or Muslim areas in the area south
of Aghios Dimitrios Street. e ‘religiously pure’ city quarters recorded in
the Ottoman tax registers, do not mean that the areas were inhabited by only
one religious group67. Conversely, the city quarters had a topographical-cum-
scal/religious connotation and its use by the Ottoman authorities does not
mean that the existence of one quarter excludes the existence of another in the
same area. In other words, a Christian house can be located in an area next to a
Muslim or Jewish one, and the rst one ought to belong to a Christian quarter,
the second to a Muslim quarter and the third to a Jewish one, without imply-
ing that there exists a topographical distance between them. If this sounds
reasonable, then we have to revise the view on the religious purity of urban
zones of essaloniki, at least during the period prior to the second half of the
16th centur y.
As a preliminary conclusion I would suggest that two developments can
be observed in the formation of Ottoman essaloniki. First: the society was
formed by indigenous Christians and Muslim newcomers from the urban
centers of Anatolia, the latter of whom stabilized their communal life only
at the end of the 15th century. Second: since the Muslims did not change the
urban fabric of the city, Jewish immigration caused the Muslim population
to move to the north of the city and at the end of the 15th century began the
process of urbanization of the upper city, including the citadel area. e com-
ing of the Jews would have strengthened the importance essaloniki had for
the Ottoman State as a major port city of the Balkans and a trade center of a
vast and rich hinterland.
67 For a similar view see: R. Gradeva, Soa’s Rotunda and Its Neighbourhood in Otto-
man Times, In: J. Zimmermann, Ch. Herzog, R. Motika (eds), Osmanische Eelten: Quellen
und Fallstudien. Festrschri für Michael Ursinus. Bamberg, University of Bamberg Press,
2016, p. 196.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
444
APPENDIX
TABLES
Table 1: e city quarters as they appear in the Ottoman tax registers
MAHALLE 11478 ca. 1500 1527/30 11568
Yahya Bali (mh Hirişe) X X X X
Hatib (mh Ofalo) / Koca Hatib X X X X
Hacı Kemal (mh Ofalo) X X X X
Hacı İsmail (mh Ayo Dimitri) X X X X
Kadı Abdullah (mh Kata) X X X X
Hamza Bey (mh Kata) / kızı X X X X
Hacı Hasan (mh Ahiropit) X X X X
Ali Paşa (mh Asomat) X X X X
Cami (mh Ahiropit) X X X X
Kilise der Bab-ı Vardar (mh Ayo Mina) X
Yusuf Tokmak (mh Ofalo) X
Hacı Mustafa (mh Ayo Mina) X
Diğer Hacı Mustafa (mh Ayo Mina) X
Ahmed b Kara Hacı (mh Ayo Dimitri) X
Hacı Su ? (mh Kata) X
Mehmed Dalyancı (mh Ayo Pelaya) X
Raif ? (mh Ayo Pelaya) X
Hacı Mehmed (mh Ayo Pelaya) X
Sinan Bey birader-i Saruca Paşa (mh
Bodrom)
X
Eni ? Süle (mh Bodrom) X
Hace Burhan (mh Ahiropit) X
Hazret-i Kasım Paşa (mh Ayo Sabara?) X X
Mustafa Karaferi ?/Harar (mh Hirişe) X X
Balaban Ağa (mh Kata) X X
Hacı Mustafa (mh Asomat) X X X
Phokion Kotzageorgis
445
Hızır Ağa der Bab-ı Yalı (mh Ayo
Mina)
X X
Kara Hacı (mh Hirişe) X X X
Suluca Manastır X X X
Kasimiye X X X
Kasım Paşa X X X
Sinancük X X X
Hacı Musa X X X
Haraccı Ali X X X
Balat X X X
Seyyidi Abdülmelik X X X
Saru Müderris X X X
Hızır Debbağ X X X
Hacı Mustafa veled-i Pinti Hasan X X X
Tarakçıoğlu nam-ı diğer Yenice X X X
İmaret-i İshak Paşa X X
Kule-i Selanik X X
Haraccı Kemal X X
Hacı Ahmed X
Hacı Ahmed diğer X
Hacı Yakub X
Kasım Cüllah X
Kurd Divane X
Müyid Hace X X
Aya Sofya X X
Katib Ali Bali veled-i Katib Hayreddin X X
Ali Bey veled-i Timurtaş X X
Yakub Paşa X X
Hacı İskender X X
İshakiye X X
Hüseyin Bey X X
Muslihuddin damad-ı Ömer Bey X X
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
446
Haraccı Kemal nam-ı diğer
Gazzaz Mustafa
X X
Hacı Mehmed el-tacir X
Üveys Kethüda X
Hacı Mesud X
Piri Çelebi / Yılan Mermeri X
Hacı Memi X
Musa Baba / Paşa X
Table 2: e vakıfs of essaloniki as they appear in the 1527/30 tax register
NAME MAIN
BUILDING
DATE MAHALLE
Murad II Camı 1430 Camı-ı Atık
Balaban Ağa mescid 1430 – 1444 Balaban Ağa
Hafsa bt Hamza Bey mescid 1467 Hamza Bey kızı
Bali Bey b Malkoç zaviye Bayezid
Baba
>1478 Yahya Bali
İshak Paşa imaret 1484 imaret-ı İshak Paşa
Kasım Paşa (Koca) zaviye ca. 1480 Koca Kasım Paşa
Kasım Paşa (Cezeri) Camı 1486 – 1497 Camı-ı Kasım Paşa
Bayezid II Camı 1492 Camı-ı Kasimiye
Faik Paşa imaret 1493 not in essaloniki
Mustafa Paşa Camı >1512 Hacı İsmail
Yakub Paşa Camı 1510 Yakub Paşa
Zühre Hatun mescid ? ?
İbrahim Paşa Camı 1524 Camı-ı Aya Sofya
Hüseyin Bey ? 1503 ?
Mehmed b Ahmed mescid ? ?
Mustafa Bey b İlyas
damad-ı Umur
mescid ? Mustafa v. Pinti
Hasan
Ğazzaz Hacı
Muslihuddin
mescid ? Muslihuddin
damad-ı Ömer Bey
Hacı Musa mescid beg of 16th c. Hacı Musa
Ali Paşa Bey mescid Ali Paşa
Phokion Kotzageorgis
447
Halil Paşa imaret ca. 1490 not in essaloniki
Abdi Kadı mescid beg of 16th c. Abdullah Kadı
Kethüda mescid ? ?
Haraccı Kemal mescid beg of 16th c. Haraccı Kemal nd
Ğazzaz Mustafa
Haraccı Alaeddin mescid ? Haraccı Ali
Katib Ali Bali mescid ? Katib Ali Bali b
Katib Hayreddin
Sinan Halife Katib mescid ? Sinancık
Bürhan Halife mescid >1478 Musa Halife nd
Bürhan Halife
Akçe Mescid nd
Sofılar
mescid >1478 Akçe Mescid
Hacı Yakub mescid ? ?
Hacı Ahmed mescid ? Hacı Ahmed Subaşı
Hacı Hasan el tacir mescid >1478 Hacı Hasan
Hacı Ahmed b
Kara Hacı
mescid >1478 Hacı Ahmed b Kara
Hacı
Ahmed b Ali mescid ? ?
Danişmend kuyusı kuyu ? ?
Sinan atık-ı Hacı Bali mescid ? ?
mescid mescid ? ?
Süldem ? mescid ? ?
Table 3: “Locals” in the Muslim quarters (1478)
Community (cemaat) “Locals” % of the community
Mescid-i Hacı Mustafa 5 29,4
Mescid-i Dğer- Hacı Mustafa 4 23,5
Mescid-i Balaban Ağa 3 21,4
Mescid-i Yahya Bali 7 19,4
Mescid-i Sinan Bey birader-i Saruca Paşa 11 16,9
Mescid-i Hace Bürhan 1 11
Mescid-i Ahmed b Kara Hacı 4 10,5
Mescid-i Kara Hacı 4 10
Mescid-i Camı 4 10
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
448
Mescid-i Yusuf Tokmak 3 9,6
Mescid-i Kadı Abdullah 4 9,3
Mescid-i Emni/İbni Süle 5 8,8
Mescid-i Hacı Kemal 3 8,3
Mescid-i Hacı Hasan 2 8,3
Mescid-i Kelise-i der bab-ı Vardar 2 8
Mescid-i Hatib 5 7,5
Mescid-i Hacı İsmail 5 7,35
Mescid-i Mustafa Kazzaz 2 4,5
Mescid-i Hamza Bey 2 5,2
Mescid-i Ali Paşa 1 3,2
Table 4: Places of origin of Muslims in 1478
NAME FATHER’S
NAME
OCCU-
PATION
PLACE
OF ORIGIN
COMMUNITY
(CEMAAT)
Karamanlu-
zade Mescid-i Kelise-i der
bab-ı Vardar
Gümülcinelü Mescid-i Kelise-i
der bab-ı Vardar
....lü Mescid-i Kelise-i der
bab-ı Vardar
Sirozlu Mescid-i Kelise-i
der bab-ı Vardar
Acem çöreki ? Mescid-i Hızır Ağa
der bab-ı Yalı
Arab macuni Mescid-i diğer Hacı
Mustafa
..dli cüllah Mescid-i Mustafa
Kazzaz
Anatollu Mescid-i Hacı İsmail
Mağrıbi imam Mescid-i Hamza Bey
Araboğlu kettancı Mescid-i Mehmed
Talyancı
Acem cirekçi Mescid-i Sinan Bey
birader-i Saruca Paşa
Karaman nehhas Mescid-i Hacı Mustafa
Phokion Kotzageorgis
449
Baba Davud Sirvanı ? Mescid-i Kelise-i
der bab-ı Vardar
Kara Yunus Selaniklü Mescid-i Hızır Ağa
der bab-ı Yalı
Davud Arab Mescid-i Hacı Mustafa
Hamza cüllah Dimetokalı Mescid-i Hatib
İlyas şağırd-ı
Hacı
Küçük
Manastırı Mescid-i Hatib
Ali şağırd-ı
Sığırcı
Sinan
an karye-i
Veldina ? Mescid-i Hatib
Mahmud şikal an Yenice-i
Vardar Mescid-i Yusuf
To kma k
Turh an Eğrı kara Mescid-i Yusuf
To kma k
Mustafa Anatolı Mescid-i Ahmed
b Kara Hacı
Mehmed Kütahyalü Mescid-i Hacı İsmail
Mustafa Yenişehri Mescid-i Hacı
Müezzin
Şahin Karamanı Mescid-i Hacı
Mehmed
Veys Arab Mescid-i Hacı
Mehmed
Hamza Berğamalu Mescid-i Sinan Bey
birader-i Saruca Paşa
Ahmed Berğamalu Mescid-i Sinan Bey
birader-i Saruca Paşa
Hüseyin Acem Mescid-i Hacı Mustafa
Davud Saruhanlu Mescid-i Hacı Kemal
Muhiyeddin Acem Mescid-i Hacı İsmail
Hacı
Mübarek
Arab Mescid-i Mehmed
Talyancı
Mustafa Karamanlu Mescid-i Sinan Bey
birader-i Saruca Paşa
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
450
Graph 1: e taxable population of essaloniki (1478 – 1568)
Map 1.
Phokion Kotzageorgis
451
Map 2.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
452
Map 3.
Bibliography:
Primary Sources
Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşv, Tapu Tahrr Deerler Collecton, nos. 7, 403, 723.
National Library of Bulgaria, Orientalski otdel, f. OAK, a.e. SN 16/35
Phokion Kotzageorgis
453
Secondary Literature
Abu-Lughod, J. e Islamic City– Historic Myth, Islamic Essence, and Con-
temporary Relevance, International Journal of Middle East Studies, 1987, N 19,
p. 155 – 176.
Anagnostae, I. De extremo essaloncens excdo narrato, In: I. Bekker (ed.),
Georgius Phrantzes, Ioannes Cananus, Ioannes Anagnostae, Bonn 1838, p. 483 – 528.
Bakirtzis, Ch. e Urban Continuity and Size of Late Byzantine essalonike,
Dumbarton Oaks Paper, 2003, N 57, p. 35-64.
Barkan, Ö. L. Quelques observations sur lorganisation économique et sociale
des villes ottomanes des XVIe et XVIIe siècles,Recueils de la Société Jean Bodin, 1955,
N 2, p. 289 – 311.
Bouras, Ch. To eptymvo tou Louka Spandoun st Vasslk tou Agou Dmt-
rou essalonks, Epistimoniki Epetiris tis Polytechnikis Scholis tou Aristoteleiou
Panepistimiou essalonikis [Μπούρα Χ. Το επιτύβιο του Λουκά Σπαντούνη στη βα-
σιλική του Αγίου ηητρίου Θεσσαλονίκη, Επιστηονική Επετηί τη Πολυτεχνική
Σχολή του Αριστοτελείου Πανεπιστηίου Θεσσαλονίκη] 1974, N 6, p. 1-63.
Boykov, G. e Borders of the Cities: Revisiting Early Ottoman Urban Mor-
phology in Southeastern Europe Bordering Early Modern Europe, In: M. Baramova,
G. Boykov, I. Parvev (eds.), Bordering Early Modern Europe, Wiesbaden, Harrassow-
itz, 2015, p. 243 – 256.
Cezar, M.Typical commercial buildings of the Ottoman classical period and the
Ottoman construction system. Istanbul, İş Bankası, 1983.
Cvetkova, B. (ed.), Turski izvori za balgarskata istoria [, .
] t. III, Soa, BAN, 1972, p. 375 – 411.
Çelk, Z. New Approaches to the ‘Non-Western’ Cty, Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians, 2000, N 58/3, p. 374 – 381.
Deguilhem, R. e Waqf inf the City, In: S.K. Jayyusi (ed.), e City in the
Islamic World, Leiden-Boston, E.J. Brill, 2008, vol. II, p. 923 – 950.
Dellbaşı, M. e Via Egnatia and Selanik (essalonica) in the 16th centur y,
In: E.A. Zachariadou (ed.), e Via Egnatia under Ottoman Rule (1380 – 1699),
Rethymnon, Crete University Press, 1996, p. 67 – 84.
Demoula, S, Doukas I. Anaptyx geoplroforakou systmatos ga t melet ts
horohronks metavasss ka exelxs ton palaon othomankon synokon sts sme-
rnes enores ts essalonks [ηουλά Σ., ούκα Ι. Ανάπτυξη γεωπληροφοριακού
συστήατο για τη ελέτη τη χωροχρονική ετάβαση και εξέιξη των παλαιών οθω-
ανικών συνοικιών στι σηερινέ ενορίε τη Θεσσαλονίκη], https://www.academa.
edu/19625804/– 28.07.2018, p. 1 – 15.
Dmtrads, V. Topograa tis essalonikis kata tin epohi tis Tourkokratias,
1430 – 1912 [ηητριάδη Β. Τοπογραφία τη Θεσσαλονίκη κατά την εποχή τη
Τουρκοκρατία, 1430 – 1912], essalonk, Etarea Makedonkon Spoudon, 1983.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
454
Eldem, E., Goman, D., Masters B., Introducton: Was ere an Ottoman
City?, In: e Ottoman City between East and West. Aleppo, Izmir, and Istanbul.
Cambrdge, Cambrdge Unversty Press, 1999, p. 1 – 16.
Faroqhi, S. Approaching Ottoman History. An Introduction to the Sources. Cam-
bridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Gradeva, R. Soa’s Rotunda and Its Neighbourhood in Ottoman Times, In:
J. Zimmermann, Ch. Herzog, R. Motika (eds.), Osmanische Eelten: Quellen und
Fallstudien. Festrschri für Michael Ursinus. Bamberg, University of Bamberg Press,
2016, p. 177 – 207.
Grunebaum, G. von. e Structure of the Muslim Town, In: Idem (ed.), Islam:
Essays in the Nature and Growth of a Cultural Tradition, London, Routledge, 1955,
p. 141 – 158.
Hassots, I.K. Anttourkkes knsses stn proepanastatk Makedona, In: I.S.
Kolopoulos and I.K. Hassots (eds.), Neoteri kai Syghroni Makedonia [Χασιώτη
Ι.Κ. Αντιτουρκικέ κινήσει στην προεπαναστατική Μακεδονία n Ι.Σ. Κολιόπουλο,
Ι.Κ. Χασιώτη, Νεότερη και σύγχονη Μακεδονία] essalonk, Papazsss-Paratrts
nd 1991, v. I, p. 436 – 457.
Kister, M.J. Land Property and Jihad: A Discussion of Some Early Traditions,
Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 1991, N. 34.4, p. 270 – 311.
Kolovos, E. Horko ka monaho stn othomank Halkdk, 15os – 16os ao-
nes [Κολοβό Η. Χωρικοί και οναχοί στην Οθωανική Χαλκιδική, 15ο – 16ο αιώνε]
PhD. Dss., essalonk, Arstotle Unversty of essalonk, 2000, vls. 1 – 3.
Kontolaimos, P. e Transformation of Late Byzantine Adrianople to Early Ot-
toman Edirne, Journal of the Ottoman and Turkish Studies Association, 2016, N 3.1,
p. 7 – 27.
Kotzageorgis, Ph.P. Opseis proimis neoterikotitas. Oi diamahes sti hristianiki
koinotita tis essalonikis (teli 17ou- arhes 18ou ai.), In: G. Salakides (ed.),
Tourkologika. Timitikos tomos gia ton Anastassio K. Iordanoglou [Κοτζαγεώργη, Φ.
Όψει πρώιη νεωτερικότητα. Οι διαάχε στη χριστιανική κοινότητα τη Θεσσαλο-
νίκη (τέη 17ου – αρχέ 18ου αι.), Γ. Σαλακίδη, Τουρκολογικά. Τιητικό τόο για τον
Αναστάσιο Κ. Ιορδάνογλου], essaloniki, A. Stamoulis, 2011, p. 437 – 468.
Lefort, J., Kravari V., Giros Ch., Smyrlis K, and Estangüi-Gómez, R. (eds), Actes
de Vatopédi v. III: de 1377 à 1500. Paris, Lethielleux, forthcoming.
Lowry, H.W. Portrait of a City: e Population and Topography of Ottoman
Selanik (essaloniki) in the year 1478, Diptycha, 1981, N 2, p. 254 – 293 (repr. In:
Idem, Studies in Deerology. Ottoman Society in the Fieenth and Sixteenth Centuries,
Istanbul, e Isis Press, 1992, p. 65 – 100).
Lowry, H.W. e Evrenos Family & the City of Selanik (essaloniki): Who Built
the Hamza Beğ Cami’i & Why? Istanbul, Bahçeşehr Unversty, 2010, p. 1 – 21.
Phokion Kotzageorgis
455
Lowry, H.W. e Ottoman Tahrir Deerleri as a Source for Social and Econom-
ic History: Pitfalls and Limitations”, In: Idem, Studies in Deerology. Ottoman Society
in the Fieenth and Sixteenth Centuries. Istanbul, e Isis Press, 1992, p. 3 – 18.
Mandaville, J. Usurious piety: the cash waqf controversy in the Ottoman Em-
pire,International Journal of Middle East Studies, 1979, N10.3, p. 289 – 308.
Mazower, M. Salonica. City of Ghosts. Christians, Muslims and Jews, 1430 – 1950.
London, Harper Collins, 2004.
Mertzios, K. Mnimeia Makedonikis Istorias [Μέρτζιο, Κ. Μνηεία ακεδονική
ιστορία]. essalonk, Etarea Makedonikon Spoudon, 1947.
Moustakas, K. Methodologka ztmata stn proseggs ton plthsmakon
megethon ts sterovzantns pols, In: T. Koussopoulou (ed.), Oi byzantines
poleis (8os – 15os aionas). Prooptikes tis erevnas kai nees ermineutikes prosseggiseis
[Μουστάκα, Κ. Μεθοδολογικά ζητήατα στην προσέιση των πληθυσιακών εγεθών
τη υστεροβυζαντινή πόη, T. Κιουσοπούου, Οι βυζαντινοί πόει (8ο – 15ο αιώνε).
Οι προοπτικέ τη ερήην και των ερηνευτικών προοπτικών] Rethymno, Phlosophk
Schol Panepstmou Krts, 2012, p. 225 – 251.
Necipoğlu, N. Byzantium between the Ottomans and the Latins. Politics and
Society in the Late Empire. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Noth, A Zum Verhältnis von Kalifaler Zentralgewalt und Provinzen in Umay-
yadischer Zeit: Die «Sulh»-»ʿAnwa»-Traditionen Für Ägypten und den Iraq, Die
Welt des Islams, 1973, N 14.1, p. 150 – 162.
Oikonomides, N (ed.), Actes de Dionysiou. Paris, Lethielleux, 1968.
Pala, A. XV. ve XVI. Yüzyıllarda Selanik Şehri, PhD. diss., Ankara, Ankara Üni-
versitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, 1991.
Pasciuti, D. and Chase-Dunn Ch., Estimating e Population Sizes of Cities,
Urbanization and Empire Formation Project Institute for Research on World-Sys-
tems University of California, Riverside In: http://irows.ucr.edu/research/citemp/
estcit/estcit.htm– 28.07.2018.
Pinon, P. e Ottoman Cities of the Balkans, In: S.K. Jayyusi (ed.), e City in
the Islamic World, Leiden-Boston, E.J. Brill, 2008, v. I, p. 146 – 7.
Raymond, A. Islamic City, Arab City: Orientalist Myths and Recent Views,
British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 1994, N 21.1, p. 3 – 18.
Rozen, M. Facing the Sea. e Jews of Salonika in the Ottoman Era (1430 – 1912).
Afula 2011.
Sarınay, Y. (ed.), 167 Numaralı Muhasebe-i Vilayet-i Rum-ili Deeri (937/1530),
v. I, Ankara, Osmanlı Arşv Dare Başkanlığı, 2003.
Schreiner, P.Die byzantinischen Kleinchroniken, vls. I – III. Vienna, Österreichi-
schen Akademie der Wissenschaen, 1977.
Stavrou, A. Socio-economic Conditions in 14th and 15th century essalonike:
A New Approach, PhD diss. University of Birmingham, 2010.
Christians and Muslims in an Ottoman City: the Formation of the...
456
Stoianovich, T. Model and Mirror of the Premodern Balkan City, In: La ville
balkanique, XVe– XIXe siècles, Soa, 1970, p. 83 – 110. (Studia Balcanica 3)
Tamer, V. Fath Devr Rcalnden İshak Paşa’nın Vakfyeler ve Vakıarı, Vakıar
Dergisi, 1958, N 4, p. 107 – 124.
Trapp E. et al., Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit. Venna, Österre-
chsche Akademe der Wssenschaen, 1976 – 1996.
Veinstein, G. e Ottoman Town (Fieenth-Eighteenth Centuries), In: S.K.
Jayyusi (ed.), e City in the Islamic World, Leiden-Boston, E.J. Brill, 2008, v. I,
p. 205 – 217.
Vryonis, S. e Ottoman Conquest of essaloniki in 1430, In: A. Bryer and
H.W. Lowry (eds), Continuity and Change in late Byzantine and early Ottoman
Society, Birmingham-Washingthon D.C., Centre for Byzantine Studies, p. 281 – 321.
Zachariadou, E.A. Ottoman Documents from Archives of Dionysiou (Mount
Athos) 1495 – 1520, Südost Forschungen,1971, N 30, p. 1 – 35.
Phokion Kotzageorgis
