Mediterranean encounters: trade and pluralism in early modern Galata

Abstract

Probably because cross-confessional, Mediterranean interaction is believed to have been in itself exceptional, a good deal of Ottoman history contents itself with description. The work under review goes beyond this narrow approach with an analytical, if not always problematic, quest for a casuistic view of piracy and litigation issues. White’s research is indebted to a revolutionary aspect of Ottoman history: unlike their medieval predecessors, Ottoman notarial practice was entrusted to kadis who endowed all their deeds with permanent validity and kept judicial archives. White is nonetheless aware of the limitations of Islamic court records, such as the summary transcriptions and the cumulative, chaotic character of registers, or sicils. To a greater extent, the chapter addresses one of the major problems of crossconfessional relations: the extent to which non-Muslim merchants and actors, for whom shariah presented wellknown biases and procedural obstacles, such as witnessing, made use of such courts. It also provides us with good descriptions of parallel jurisdictions such as the Kazasker and the Imperial Council. The chapter discusses a lawsuit passed before the kadi Sunullah Efendi, who later became şeyhülislam and authored the first fatwa collection dealing with piracy issues at length. We can see Sunullah at work in a 1594 case involving the Janissary Mahmud, that presented evidentiary problems and required careful handling of proof and evidence. White’s approach to court records offers more than a literal, legalistic reading. The chapter looks into the motivations and strategies of the plaintiffs, often non-Muslims, particularly for those cases where the procedural limitations of Islamic law would have made a positive outcome unlikely. Thick descriptions and a microhistorical approach substantiates one of White’s major arguments, namely, that what characterized the Ottoman Mediterranean was the actors’ awareness – be they foreign unbelievers, zimmis or Muslims – of the intricacies of Islamic law, a skill they exhibited when bringing their claims to court.