|
Post by meltdown711 on Nov 19, 2007 21:18:59 GMT -5
Here are some quotations from the most recent and critical work on Ali Pasha: The Muslim Bonaparte: Diplomacy and Orientalism in Ali Pasha's Greece
Aid to the development of a national Greek language
Ali's links to the Ottoman body politic were tenuous, and so were his cultural ones. Whether he knew any Turkish at all is a topic of no small debate; in any event, it is clear that his Turkish, even by the most generous estimate, was not very good. His idiom was by birth Albanian, and the tongue of his courtly business and correspondence was demotic Greek. So dominant, in fact, was demotic in his official business that the language's later champions in the great language debate of the early years of the independent Greek state found their position greatly helped by the existence of a courtly, rather then exclusively folk, demotic literary tradition. In being the first to use demotic as a formal language of the state, Ali unwittingly aided the only recently regnant demoticist cause in a debate that was to see one of the philhellenism's greatest victories: the decision of the new Greek state to use katharevousa as its official tongue.
Constitutional adoptions in his state, and favoring of the west:
Deeply impressed by the Napoleonic Wars and the French Revolution, Ali in many ways sought to emulate the figure of Napoleon, at one point he even set about producing a constitution -- based on the French one -- for his own peoples. pg 23
economic betterment of Epirus and the rest of his lands: it is a clear measure of economic health that Ali, through his policies, was able to bring uniformity of economic law and freedom from piracy and banditry hitherto unseen in northern Greece and Epiros. Oppressive as his financial demands were, his overall impact saw its mark in increased trade, a more cosmopolitan and literate population, and a safer and more orderly society. Ali Pasha's rule from Ioannina corresponds to one of the most active periods in the history of the region's commercial activity. This historical context combined circumstantially with Ali's policies to make him economically influential. Many of his policies encouraged trade and promoted agricultural activity. He established a comprehensive system of revenue collection and embarked on widespread, if erratic, program of public works, building roads and khans, fostered mobility and economic growth. Characterized by Greek polemicists as a rapacious and avaricious ruler whose policies wrought nothing but economic devastation on his subjects, Ali actually enhanced the agricultural production of his territories and contributed to the growth of a robust Ioanninite mercantile class. -- page 39
Not only this, but the author goes on to say that Ali made the region he ruled one of the safest in the empire. To such as extant that the cities and villages within it saw a level of prosperity that they had never seen prior. This mercantile class established links with various cities around Europe and made Ioannina and all Epirus a stopping ground for goods going to and fro the rest of the empire. Ali also sponsored Greek merchants and made them rivals to the various merchants of Europe; and then, when he would be alienated froma certain European group, Ali would allow on those Greek merchants whom he had sponsored to trade in his area so that they became even more wealthy in turn.
Another interesting anecdote:
In 1809, when 600 Orthodox pirates were captured in the Aegean, Ali persuaded the Porte to repatriate them to his lands.
These Greeks became some of Ali Pasha's most loyal men...
Not to mention this, but Ali's personal secretary and his doctor were both members of the Filiki Eteria and he harbored these men, holding them in his kingdom. At one point he even made himself an honorary member of the organization.
What a tyrant... huh? There sure is such a great need for revenge. The people of Epirus should be kissing this mans feet, rather then insulting him...
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,587
|
Post by Kanaris on Nov 19, 2007 21:38:24 GMT -5
Close ,but no cigar.... Ali Pasha was and is still considered a tyrant... he was selfish and self centered that wanted it all..which ended with his untimely death.... One of the only reasons he looked the other way and nourished the Greeks is because they brought back a healthy tax return.. so the better he was with them the more he got back in taxes to help build more lavish palaces.... let's just say he was the lesser of the tow evils.. Although the following script was written by a Greek... I find it to be very unbiased... Ali Pasha and the Greek Revolution
Given as a Special Lecture on Greek and Balkan Cultural History, as part of the series "Seminars and Special Lectures in Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies at Oxford" on 1 February 2001
By 1800, what is now Greece had seen considerable advances in both population density and in extent and types of cultivation. A network of Greek-speaking merchants had spread across central Europe, with representatives in the centres of Hellenism - Thessaloniki, Constantinople and Smyrna, and inland. Schools were established teaching European subjects, and a strong Greek character and culture was developing even under Turkish rule. However at this date it is not clear whether any sense of Greek national consciousness existed.
The first two decades of the century were turbulent years throughout Europe, with the upheavals caused by the Napoleonic wars and their aftermath; they were also years of social upheaval for Ottoman society, as the ideas of the Enlightenment crept in. Disruptive forces were felt within, while Russia, the British and the French vied for influence and possessions in the Mediterranean. The merchant class contended for a greater share of political power.
Ali Pasha, the ruler of Epirus, was a capable, clever and dynamic leader, keeping control locally while always seeking greater independence, or perhaps even full autonomy, from the Sultan. He aimed also at the territorial expansion of his power, and the amassing of wealth. These aims included keeping tight military control over his area, and to this end he removed the task of guarding the roads from Christian irregulars and entrusted it instead to his own men. The fact that, in consequence, law and order prevailed, facilitated trade and encouraged economic growth, which enormously enhanced his power and importance, even to the European naval powers; Britain and France both sought alliance with him. He was also able to buy up land until his family ruled the entire South Balkan Peninsula, and he possessed immense flocks as well as vast reserves of gold and jewels. He surrounded his capital Ioannina with powerful walls, adding further to his local prestige, but although immensely strong these were of traditional design and vulnerable to artillery.
The definitive rift between Ali Pasha and the Sultan occurred in 1820. The Sultan had appointed a new pasha, who laid siege to Ioannina in August. Ali Pasha barricaded himself inside the city, relying on its strength and on alliances with the local warlords (although his diplomatic ties with European powers came to nothing). It was to be a war of attrition. Thanks to his military might and his vast fortune, Ali Pasha held out for fourteen months, but as his allies fell away he gave up the city and retired to a final strong point. As long as he lived, he could still hope to buy off some of his besiegers and might even have managed to win back favour with the Sultan. Had he done so, not he, but at least one of his sons or grandsons could have become pasha in his place and everything could slowly have been rebuilt.
If Ali Pasha had won the war, would he have established an independent state? This would have needed not only international recognition, but an ideological foundation, a sense of nationhood. He appears to have thought of proposing a collective form of government, a kind of European constitution, yet at the same time he was trying to reconcile with the Sultan by offering to resign in favour of his youngest son Salih. When the Greek revolution broke out in 1821, however, the first thing the revolutionaries did was to address the European states, proclaiming the independence of the Greek nation. In other words, the ultimate aim was inherent before military victories made it apparent.
But it was politics, not military victories, that finally brought about Greek independence. The Great Powers of Europe had decided on independence, and quite naturally they imposed it. The Greeks proved their determination to fight for the right to freedom; and although in the short term the Sultan overpowered them, his victory was short-lived. The Greek struggle became part of the movement for nationalism, an international movement which was gradually to win over Europe and the rest of the world. Whether illusory or not, Greek ethnicity had the wind in its favour - and that is the major difference between it and Ali Pasha's rebellion.
Ali Pasha imagined himself as a Sultan, with Ioannina as a miniature Constantinople, with palaces surrounded by high walls. But despite his tolerance towards intellectuals and their activities, his plan did not allow for setting up printing-presses to spread Greek nationalistic ideas. By contrast, in Greek communities during or even before the revolution, on many levels ideology led society and even the economy. These two attitudes, of Ali Pasha on the one hand and the Greek-speaking merchant class on the other, define the situation. Ali Pasha's profits were transformed into buildings, castles, flocks and land. In contrast, the shared Greek language held the merchant class together, wherever they happened to live, and part of the profits from trade went into the creation of schools, libraries, books and periodicals. The flourishing of intellectual activity created a strong network which brought many more people together under the same roof, while the Greek language, the mother tongue of many merchants, almost automatically forged a bond between them and the European intelligentsia. Alexis Politis University of Crete Hellenic Foundation Visiting Fellow source
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Nov 19, 2007 21:43:05 GMT -5
Everything he did was intended for his own aggrandizement, yes, but it does not change the reality that the man made Pashaluk that he ruled one of the wealthiest in the region. And it does not change the fact that hundreds of Greek merchants became very very wealthy under his rule and that it was a period when there was relative peace for the farmer. In fact, people like the Suliots and other Klephts/Kacaks were responsible for more devastation then the Ottoman govt could ever had the hope of bringing about. Ali Pasha was brutal to others, but he nonetheless brought peace to the commoner.
The paper above does not necessarily negate what I said; and Fleming goes over much of this in his own book. If you want to read a good account on Ali Pasha, read this before you come out and simply attack him.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Nov 20, 2007 1:32:24 GMT -5
Most people, let alone those in power, are atleast to an extent selfish and self-centered. You're implying, however, that he was without visions, and that his sole motive was acquiring power and accumulating wealth as well as keeping them. If he wanted to be an absolute tyrant, he wouldn't be interested in French ideals. He wouldn't have been interested in the French constitution. He wouldn't want politically conscious and educated subjects (yet he opened schools and fought analphabetism).
These facts don't agree with your assertion of Ali pasha's character. True, there was a cruel dimension to his rule. True he was a brigand once in his life. But his opressive actions were often targeted against political opponents for precisely that; political reasons. He was tolerant of other religions and ethnicities. Infact, his introduction of demotika as opposed to Albanian in the courts should, if anything, put him in some sympathetic light among you and give us a reason to despise him for undermining the Albanian language.
His death was not the result of this "greed", of which most men are characterized by to an extent, but by him choosing perhaps an unfortunate time to rebel. Nevertheless, his rebellion helped taking away focuse from the rebels in Greece., giving the Philiki Hetairia some precious time.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Dec 1, 2007 15:32:13 GMT -5
I came to think about this topic earlier when I was reading a little about Ali pasha in Kola's book about the Arvanites. Aristidh Kola does have some fantastic theories concerning our ancient past, yet nevertheless, he does provide much historical info' that is quite valuable. Above anything else, he provides a rather interesting insight into Ali's character and motives. I won't go much into that ... but rather take out some facts that will further help debunk some myths that still live on in Greek society (as if Toskaliku hasn't done enough).
Ali pasha seems, much like his Albanian contemporary Muhammed Ali pasha, to have been religiously tolerant. He provided security for Christians and dervisch sects. Ali pasha's indifference to religious fundamentalism is perhaps best attested by his marriage to a Greek Orthodox girl, Vassiliki, the subject of many Albanian songs (she was reputedly very beautiful).
Kola in his book also quotes a certain Mendel Barthold;
"Ali abolished the medieval timar system and opened the way for civilisation and a new regime."
He was very much a positive factor for all inhabitants of the Janina Pasalik, regardless ethnic or religious affiliation. The exception was those who refused to abide to the rules of stability he wished to impose. A most epic example is the Suliot one. Many have portrayed the conflict between Ali pasha Tepelena and the Suliots as an ethnic and religious conflict, one between 'Greeks' and 'Turks', that of Christians vs Muslims. With concrete facts, Kola dismisses much of these national myths that are so prevalent in Greek historiography. First and foremost, the Suliots of the early 19th century were as 'Greek' as most Orthodox Albanians, or Orthodox Slavs, Orthodox Vlachs, Orthodox Syriacs were for that matter.
Secondly, if the conflict had a religious character, it must have been improper for so many Orthodox Albanians/Arvanites to fight on Ali's side; men such as Andruco, Karaiskaqi, Vangjel Zapa, Bakola, Dhjako etc. The conflict had a far less dramatic and less attractive nature than that of an ethnic/religious war; it was a political dispute. Ali pasha had visions of creating a state encompassing the territories of contemporary Southern Albania and much of Northwestern and Northern Greece, such as Epirus and parts of Thessaly (Trikkala for example). In it, he couldn't afford having a dissident mountainous region (Suli) making its own rules, ignoring the laws set up by Ali pasha.
Not withstanding the charming character of the warlike Suliots, who's ways were reminiscent of the Spartan life, but they were really outdated. They usually embarked on piratesque campaigns against the lowlands, taking whatever cattle or item they came over on the way, killing those few brave souls who had the heart to resist. Ali pasha's endeavour to establish a modern state with modern laws did not comply with this lifestyle, and so, unable to persuade these highlanders peacefully to abandon their ways, he was forced to take drastic measures. To his aid came both his Muslim and Christian followers, including Odhisea Andruco (Odysseas Androutsos), an interesting character whom I thought is also appropriate to discuss in this thread (I do not deem it as unrelated due to Ali's connection with the Andruco family).
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Dec 1, 2007 17:00:35 GMT -5
Odhisea Andruco (Odysseas Androutsos) was an important character in the Greek Liberation War 1821-1829. His 'Greek' character is conveniently not even disputed in Greek circles. I am not going to go all philosophical on this man's political visions and national loyalties. Rather, I want to present the opposite side of the coin which Greeks are far more fancied by; that of the "bloodthirsty tourkalvanoi". The Albanian contribution to the Greek Liberation War has always been neglected; the participation of the Muslim element denied or unheard of, the Orthodox element being treated as ethnically Greek.
Odhisea's father was called Andruco Verushi. His surname's Albanian sound leaves little to be suspected. Yet let's see what the documents say as well. Andruco Verusho was a close companion of Lambro Kaçoni (Gr.Lambros Katsonis?), an Arvanites. In a testimony to the Venetians, Andruco Verushi said following;
"It is very true. For five years, I was in Syracuse. There I received the order to, in cooperation with the Russian general Ipson, recruit warriors from Turkey (read: Ottoman empire). After the deal was set, I kept my word. In Turkey, I gathered 800 Albanian warriors, they made me captain and so I served together with general Ipson, general Tamara and colonel Lambro. I fought the Turks consistently."
Simopoulos, "Foreign visitors in Greece", volume B, page 741.
Kola doesn't really get into what this war was precisely about, the motives and so. Infact, judging from what he writes, one comes to the conclusion that the Peloponesians took the Turks' side, since the main force to crush Verushi's and Kaçoni's troops were comprised by men from Mani, Argos, Mistra, Tripolitsa, Nafplion etc (this according to Panago Kavanopoulos from Maranisi in a letter adressed to man who's name in the Albanian alphabet is spelled as Zaqintho Parashqeva).
In another, rather revealing document, the governor of Ithaca, Anastasios Pilika, in a letter sent to the general superviser of these operations, Angelo Memo, wrote following;
"Even the tough Albanian, captain Andruco, succeeded in fleeing from Mani."
*Note: in the Albanian translated version of Kola's work, it says 'shqiptari i krekosur' which I translated as 'the tough Albanian'. This is not the accurate translation though. Perhaps somebody knows the English word for 'krekosur', i.e. someone who acts tough even though he necessarely isn't.
When Andruco was imprisoned in Istanbul, Ali pasha Tepelena tried to rescue him. They were vllams; the word signifies when two unrelated men adopted each other as brothers by sipping blood from one another. This tradition also existed among southern Slavs -- their word for it is pobratin. Thus Theodor Kolokotroni was an adoptive brother to Ali Farmaki, a Muslim Arvanites from Morea.
When Verushi died in Istanbul, Ali pasha took care of his son, Odhisea Andruco. Andruco served Ali pasha faithfully until the latter fell in St Pandeleimon. Then, Andruco joined the Greeks. Andruco's relation to Ali pasha Tepelena was the source of alot of badmouthing as to what Odhisea was concerned. I am not an expert on this hero's status today in Greek historiography; Kola states that he is only honored after diligent work from Andruco's kin to clear his name. But for quite some time, Odhisea was cursed by Greeks. Why?
As has been clarified earlier, initially, the Greek revolution was comprised by an alliance of Christians and Muslims, all natives of Peloponessus and the rest of Greece. However, the influential clergy with roots in Phanar, were little interested in maintaining a cosy relation with Muslims. And so the persecution and massacres on "Turks" was initiated, for which the Turks took revenge in Chios. The revolution took a religious character, the leaders became religious fundamentalists more interested in establishing a Christian state rather than an independent Hellas. Clergymen such as Father Jermanos. To a person such as Odhisea Andruco, who had previously served Ali pasha Tepelena, who was indifferent to religious fundamentalism, such a policy was incomprehensible.
And so he fell victim to alot of curses, lies and accusations, such as not being 'nationalist enough'. Thus Kordatis, whom Kola quotes, wrote following:
"In general, Odysseas was a disobediant military, who did not listen to the orders of the Supreme Court nor the temporary government. Until December 1824 he acted a "priest", yet the government understood and sent Gura to capture him in the spring of 1825."
Other authors such as Trikupis and Sourmelis attribute to Odhisea many negative epithets, such as traitor, enemy of Greece, coward etc. Why? Because, according to Kola, the man did not see eye to eye with the religious fanatism of the leading clergy and government who could not accept any cooperation with sympathizing Muslims of Albanian and Greek ethnicity.
From Aristidh Kola's book "Arvanitasit Dhe Prejardhja e Grekeve" (The Arvanites and the origins of the Greeks), chapter three, pages 392-394 & 450-455.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 1, 2007 17:10:57 GMT -5
Ali Pasha was a genius, his understanding of politics was far higher then entire Sublime Porte's. If this man had gotten complete independence from the Ottoman Empire, he would have turned his state into one that was more comparable with western Europe then the rest of the oriental Ottoman world. The only thing that kept him down was that he still had to pay the Sultan part of his wealth that went towards far lesser areas such as Anatolia.
Here is another excerpt:
Ali's gubernatorial tactics did not represent a reversion of ancient tribal politics. Instead they were a syncretism of Albanian, Byzantine, Ottoman, and modern European influences. Although Ali drew on his Albanian background of clannish warfare and brigandish activity, in his international diplomatic dealings he showed himself to be anything but provincial and naive. In fact, his diplomatic acumen in many instances outstripped that of the ottoman central government, and through his brilliant international intrigues he came closer to achieving true sovereignty than any other ruler in his region. His paradigm for power was ar broader than that provided by the categories of Ottoman politics, and in his career as a diplomat we see most clearly his pretensions not just to regional but to international importance as well. In the world of international politic Ali found the cultural andsymbolic idioms with which to express his vision of himself as an independent, non-Ottoman ruler... Ali's approach to international affairs demonstrate his self-conscious abandonment of the Ottoman Empirial ideology and the adoption of a more modernist, European-influenced understanding of statecraft and of politics.
- pp 76-77
Near the end of his life, Ali was able to bring the Suliots into an alliance with him by appealing to their Albanian origin.
Ali also promised to support the Greeks to the point where he even considered converting to Orthodoxy, just like his northern Albanian rival KaraMahmud Pasha Bushatliu promised the Austrians that he would become Christian if they supported him.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Dec 1, 2007 17:56:16 GMT -5
Karamud pasha is an interesting personality as well. Unfortunately for him, Englsih romantics did not visit his realm, and so he was doomed to be the lesser known of the two.
Ali pasha was indeed a visionary, a genious as you say, who has not been given the proper credits he deserves. I believe one of his greatest mistakes was to raise such immoral and coward sons. They had none of their father's admirable qualities. It was so long ago I read about Ali's demise that I cannot remember which son/s betrayed him in the crucial confrontation with the Ottomans prior to Ali's death. But it does not matter much; the fact that a son betrays his father says alot, regardless of what his name is or in what order he came. It's also interesting how their indulgence in immoral activities, such as paying visits to brothels leading to wide scandals, aided Greek revisionists in their continuous endeavour to demonize Ali as a brutish tyrant unable to compromise. I am speaking of the Lady Frosini episode.
Lady Frosini was portrayed by Greek revisionists as a Christian martyr who fell victim to Ali pasha's cruelty. In reality, she was a prostitute, a 'bussineswoman' who ran her own brothel with many employes (several of whom were married). Among her lovers was Myhtar, Ali pasha's son, who gave Lady Frosini his wedding ring. His wife, the daughter of Ibrahim pasha of Berat (Ali's ally) found out, as did her sister, who's husband (Ali's other son) had also visited Lady Frosini. And so the sisters protested violently, demanding retribution for having been dishonored. They threatened with returning to Berat, to their father, an ally Ali deemed not good to loose. And so, the sisters' demands but also the customs of those days, which saw prostitution as a great sin (all three religions did), demanded the execution of Lady Frosini and her employees.
This havoc lead to Ali's dilemma; on one side, he did not want to execute these women. On the other hand, he risked political chaos and social unrest. He took a middle way. Forced to execute them, he came with the proclamation that any relative or husband who wanted to free these women were free to do so by coming forth. But none came, except for one; a Vlach man, who's wife had been employed by Lady Frosini. Sarcastically, Ali pasha reputedly asked the man whether he was able to live with an unfaithful woman. The man replied 'yes', after which Ali released her. But the rest he was forced to execute; Lady Frosini and some 17 other women. This is what one Hughes writes;
"Many days went on without the tyrant giving his fatal order. It seemed his conscious made him hesitate. They say he wanted to buy some time in order to finally pardon them."
The whole episode was taken out of context by some Greeks who misportrayed everything and gave it other colors. Typical.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 1, 2007 20:10:31 GMT -5
Its pretty interesting to see just how pro-reform the Albanians were in the empire. Men like KaraMahmud and Ali saw the inherit problems of the empire and sought out ways to try and break free from that particular decline and instead push into modernization. I think this mentality also transfered over to figures like Ali Pasha of Egypt along with a number of other men. Most of Albania's leading nationalists were at one point high figures of the Ottoman system and pushed towards reform, often being punished for it(Abdyl Frasheri was imprisoned in Anatolia for 5 years and was only freed because of Sami Frasheri's influence in the High Porte, while Ismail Qemali was imprisoned for proposing Democratic reforms). Hasan Prishtina made a famous speech in Istanbul where he attacked various figures of the Ottoman state and claimed that "things can only work together if he are accepted as as one. This empire is one made up by the figures that inhabit it, be he Turk, Albanian, Greek, Armenian... This is the only way to make it work"(not actual quote, very very much paraphrased). Sami Frasheri pushed for western style secular reforms in the system whereas AbdylHamid and his entourage pushed for heavier Islamism.
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,587
|
Post by Kanaris on Dec 2, 2007 2:22:15 GMT -5
Why would I need a source to prove a guy named Ali Pasha , who was in a very high position within the Ottoman echelon..was Albanian?
1-Turk name 2-Muslim 3-Very high position in Ottoman framework..
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Dec 2, 2007 6:20:17 GMT -5
Vinin nga gjiri i popullit !
They had the same mentality as most of their kinsmen in regards to religion. They were more susceptible of modern ideas and ideals. This put them at odds with many others, and so, they were forced to make use of their gifts to survive. Ali used his wits, Karamahmud pasha his strength (the latter survived two Ottoman sieges).
It most certainly did. Muhammed Ali pasha of Egypt was very much a reformist. He wanted to build a modern Egypt in all senses. A very good example is the reformation of the Egyptian army. The Egyptian fellahin (farmers) had been the subject of ridicule when one wanted to joke about men without freedom, strength and courage. Muhammed Ali pasha made them into a fighting force worthy of admiration, hence victories such as at Konya. This by introducing western style warfare and discipline.
I'm currently reading M.Sabry's work on Muhammed Ali pasha. The Albanian translated version's title reads; "Mehmet Aliu: Dhelpra Dhe Luani I Lindjes". In it, M.Sabry describes Muhammed Ali's tolerant treatment of the Greeks of Egypt at the dawn of the revolution 1821. He made religiously tolerant laws and fought the Wahhabis by sending troops commanded by his very young son, Tosun. There's also alot interesting in the book when we Albanians are concerned. We discussed his national consciousness before. Here is what a French consul who met Ali face to face and discussed with him, had to say;
"I asked Muhammed Ali one day why he so oftenly mentioned he was Albanian. He answered that he was one and that he spoke Albanian. He asked me whether I had not heard when he gave orders in Albanian to the guards. 'I am an Albanian and I will die as one, although I have tried to be a good Egyptian.' Muhammed Ali was a handsome man, not of great stature, with blue eyes and with a sharp and intelligent expression."
p.134
Despite his successes and Albanian awareness, I am not a great fan of this man. Kudos to him for bringing Egypt out of the mud. But he should have aided Ali pasha Tepelena. Helped his nation. And he would have succeeded. The man would have sacked Istanbul after the victory at Konya had it not been for the intervention of the Great Powers.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 2, 2007 13:28:44 GMT -5
A British scholar put it very well. He stated that Albanians, even though Muslims, were never integrated into the empire. Men like Ali Pasha and KaraMahmud may have been high standing figures, but they remained outsiders in the imperial system and ideology. They did not share the heavily conservative mentality and generally saw the status' they achieved as ways to further themselves. I mean, consider the fact that Ali Pasha rose to power through a falsified office that the Ottomans created in order to accommodate this position in his society. Ali Pasha was never trained into the Ottoman system. Therefore, although Muslims, they were neither Turks nor orientals and did not perceive themselves as something that was part of the system. This allowed them to have very progressive views towards the system.
I think the biggest proof for this is the way that Albanian Muslims saw themselves as brothers with the Albanian Christians, even though they were of different religions. Ali Pasha made alliances with various Albanian Christian groups in Epirus, while KaraMahmud swore on both the Kuran and the Bible.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Dec 3, 2007 8:43:37 GMT -5
Not to mention that Karamahmud pasha didn't see any troubles in frequent cooperation with both the French and the Austrians. His army was also to a great part comprised by the Catholic Albanian highlanders of Shkodra who provided the main core of Karamahmud's army that invaded Montenegro on two occasions. He had good relations with Catholic Mirdita too.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 3, 2007 17:57:53 GMT -5
We would likely have more. It was the Ottomans that stopped Alb expansion into what is today Greece(even Hammond recognizes that Alb kings controlled territory as far down as Thessaly and Attica. After the Theodore Bua Shpata beat the Despotate of Epirus at the battle of the Achuloos, Epirus was pretty much open for Albs to take. It was the subsequent Ottoman annexation of the region that allowed enough stability for the displaced Greeks to return. In northern Albania, Albs had already established control over regions of Shkoder and Kosova(Leke Dukagjin and his family held regions in Kosova and montenegro). Not to mention the fact that Albania would have never suffered the population losses that it did due to the wars against mehmed II.
All in all, the geography of Albania might look a little different, but we also might not have suffered the assimilation of so many Christian Alb groups due to the millet system of the Ottomans which put them under Greek and Slav church hands.
And even if we did gain lands under the ottomans. Whats wrong with that? Nothing. Empires are empires and people win and lose in them. Lol, once again the perverted notion of history returns. You cant escape it, but what can I say, ignorance does a lot of wrong, this is one of them. You say that what I write is falsified? Im only quoting from scholars; and you, from nothing.
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,587
|
Post by Kanaris on Dec 3, 2007 18:25:34 GMT -5
Scholars have opinions and some of them a distorted point of view.
You are trying to put some of these Albanians on thrones.....
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,587
|
Post by Kanaris on Dec 3, 2007 19:33:42 GMT -5
Look how sad is the text below... "The founder of the modern Egyptian dynasty, lasting for over 100 years can be contributed to an Albanian named Muhamet Ali. Ali was born in 1769, in the Ottoman province of Albania. He arrived in Egypt in 1798 in an effort to fight off a French invasion there. Using the exceptional skill of the mostly Albanian army that he had created, he succeeded in gaining Egypt in 1801, and being named Pasha of Egypt in 1805. The excellent statesmanship that followed has been considered one of the most efficient in world history. He was able to transform an undeveloped Egypt into a modern competitor. He set up reforms in Egypt's irrigation system, introduced new crops like cotton, and established many Western-style schools. His many achievements in industry and agriculture turned Egypt into a modernized society. Yet his genius did not stop here. Muhamet Ali displayed the skill of his superior Albanian army in aiding the sultan to suppress numerous rebellions, and between the years of 1838 and 1841, he challenged, with much success, the power of the sultan in creating a greater independent Egypt. He had invaded the Sudan and founded the city of Khartoum by this time. Yet when his powers stretched in the suppression of Greek affairs, Europe stepped in and overwhelmed his army. Still, he was granted the rule of Egypt and Sudan, and with this empire he created an exceptionally efficient dynasty that ensured Egypt's success for the next 100 years. The achievements of this revolutionary ruler and statesman serve as just another example validating the historical importance of Albania. " source
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 3, 2007 19:51:42 GMT -5
The Sultan needed help and promised Ali the whole Peloponnese if he stopped the rebels. had Europe not stepped it, you Greeks would have been crushed. keep in mind the reforms his son did in Crete. The man married a Greek woman and didnt force her to convert as many Turks would do. he also granted privileges to the Christian Cretans over the Muslim Cretans. Those were Hobhouses' words, not mine... genius.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 3, 2007 19:55:28 GMT -5
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,587
|
Post by Kanaris on Dec 3, 2007 20:00:06 GMT -5
Zaganos..belongs in the same group as the other backstabbers and collaborators......
Thank God.... a lot of Christian Albs stepped in to help and crush these fuks....
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 3, 2007 20:09:00 GMT -5
Btw, they were Albanians because the revolt that lead to Mehmet Ali's seizure was an Albanian mercenary revolt. Their leader, Mehmet Ali, was an Albanian and used this fact to gain their respect and become their leader. What resulted was a war between Albanians, Turks, and Mamluks. Albanians, being numerically weaker, entered into an alliance with the Mamluks and so they could move against the Turks. The Turks were defeated eventually. Following this there occurred a fall out in Albanian-Mamluk relations and Albanians, now in the hands of Ali, in turn managed to defeat them too.
LOL. This started a lot earlier then Zaganos. Much of the Byzantine nobility in anatolia turned on the Byzantines and Turkincized. Many many times of their own will...
|
|