十六世纪奥斯曼大马士革撒玛利亚人的地位

IF 0.6 0 RELIGION
Kameliya Atanasova, Matthew Chalmers
{"title":"十六世纪奥斯曼大马士革撒玛利亚人的地位","authors":"Kameliya Atanasova, Matthew Chalmers","doi":"10.1017/jlr.2023.26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we explore the status of Samaritans in early modern Ottoman Damascus through a focus on a particular firman—a sultanic legal decree. The firman orders that Samaritans—a religious group that traces its origins to ancient Israel but differs from Jews in several aspects—are not to be employed as clerks by Ottoman authorities. We argue that the firman indicates Ottoman officials engaged in religious status management despite the lack of legal terminology for minority in the document. The significance of the firman regarding conceptualizing status, we suggest, is that it points to an alternative model of minoritization that is not based in modern European legal approaches to religious minority status and law but which accounts for people’s experiences of minority status before modernity.","PeriodicalId":44042,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Religion","volume":"125 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Status of Samaritans in Sixteenth-Century Ottoman Damascus\",\"authors\":\"Kameliya Atanasova, Matthew Chalmers\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/jlr.2023.26\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, we explore the status of Samaritans in early modern Ottoman Damascus through a focus on a particular firman—a sultanic legal decree. The firman orders that Samaritans—a religious group that traces its origins to ancient Israel but differs from Jews in several aspects—are not to be employed as clerks by Ottoman authorities. We argue that the firman indicates Ottoman officials engaged in religious status management despite the lack of legal terminology for minority in the document. The significance of the firman regarding conceptualizing status, we suggest, is that it points to an alternative model of minoritization that is not based in modern European legal approaches to religious minority status and law but which accounts for people’s experiences of minority status before modernity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44042,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and Religion\",\"volume\":\"125 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and Religion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/jlr.2023.26\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jlr.2023.26","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中,我们通过关注一个特殊的法令--苏丹的法律法令--来探讨撒玛利亚人在近代早期奥斯曼大马士革的地位。该法令规定,奥斯曼帝国当局不得雇用撒玛利亚人--一个起源于古代以色列,但在多个方面与犹太人不同的宗教团体--担任办事员。我们认为,尽管文件中缺乏关于少数民族的法律术语,但该法令表明奥斯曼帝国官员参与了宗教地位管理。我们认为,《教令》在地位概念化方面的意义在于,它指出了少数群体化的另一种模式,这种模式并非基于现代欧洲关于宗教少数群体地位和法律的法律方法,而是考虑到了现代性之前人们对少数群体地位的体验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Status of Samaritans in Sixteenth-Century Ottoman Damascus
In this article, we explore the status of Samaritans in early modern Ottoman Damascus through a focus on a particular firman—a sultanic legal decree. The firman orders that Samaritans—a religious group that traces its origins to ancient Israel but differs from Jews in several aspects—are not to be employed as clerks by Ottoman authorities. We argue that the firman indicates Ottoman officials engaged in religious status management despite the lack of legal terminology for minority in the document. The significance of the firman regarding conceptualizing status, we suggest, is that it points to an alternative model of minoritization that is not based in modern European legal approaches to religious minority status and law but which accounts for people’s experiences of minority status before modernity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and Religion publishes cutting-edge research on religion, human rights, and religious freedom; religion-state relations; religious sources and dimensions of public, private, penal, and procedural law; religious legal systems and their place in secular law; theological jurisprudence; political theology; legal and religious ethics; and more. The Journal provides a distinguished forum for deep dialogue among Buddhist, Confucian, Christian, Hindu, Indigenous, Jewish, Muslim, and other faith traditions about fundamental questions of law, society, and politics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信