Porta na Kongresu u Karlovcu (1698.–1699.): kraj ad hoc diplomacije
Porte at the Karlowitz Congress (1698–1699): The end of ad hoc diplomacy
Апстракт
Istraživanje se bavi izdvajanjem krucijalnih momenata vezanih za kongres u
Karlovcu, njegovo sazvanje, utvrđivanje principa rada i pre svega ponašanjem
osmanskih predstavnika (opunomoćenika), sa ciljem da se odredi generalni stav
Porte prema potpuno novom fenomenu u njenoj diplomatskoj istoriji. U radu su
korišćena neobjavljena dokumenta iz Državnog arhiva u Beču i Nacionalnog arhiva u Londonu. Ova građa, sa nesumnjivo najvećom vrednošću za istraživanje,
dopunjena je zbirkama objavljenih dokumenata i onovremenim istorijama, čiji
su tvorci savremenici dešavanja pre i tokom rada kongresa u Karlovcu.
Karlowitz Congress represents a step forward for the diplomatic practices of the Ottoman
state, when a drift of the Porte separated itself, which saw peace as a necessity for the survival
of the Ottoman state. Political situation in Europe was good for this decision, because after
Ryswick, France stopped being a useful ally. In the organisation of the congress, Porte used
some of its familiar devices (in terms of equipping of mission and selection of representatives).
But, in organisation of, and during negotiations, it seems that they complied with orders of
the other side. Venetian and Habsburg representatives belonged to a society with more sense
for negotiations, and their experience from XVII century, when first bilateral and multilateral
congresses had been organised, qualified them for this task. No sources of western origin (including Italian) mention any initiative of Porte’s representatives during the preparation or in
the course of the congress.
For Porte, Karlowit...z peace represented a loss, because they had to renounce a part of their
territory, which was directly opposed to ideology represented by Shariat. This was met by a
serious opposition in the society, which culminated in Edirne in 1703. But, its representatives
were led by situation in which their state was at the moment, and which called for immediate peace in order to preserve inner stability. The Ottoman public did not come to terms with
this loss easily, and this fact is confirmed by official historiography and its most important
representative, Naima, who nevertheless tried to provide a justification for Porte’s acceptance,
also mentioning the Shariat. The most significant consequence, however, is the fact that in
Karlowitz Porte officially renounced unilateral diplomacy, founded on the forcing its will upon
the other side, implemented from the emergence of the Ottoman state.
Кључне речи:
Karlovac / Leopold I. / Karlo Rucini / Aleksandro Mavrokordato / Vilijem Padžit / Karlowitz / Carlo Ruzzini / Alessandro Maurocordato / William PagetИзвор:
Historijski zbornik, 2015, 68, 1, 15-30Издавач:
- Zagreb,Društvo za hrvatsku povijesnicu
Финансирање / пројекти:
- Модернизација западног Балкана (RS-MESTD-Basic Research (BR or ON)-177009)
Институција/група
Istorija / HistoryTY - JOUR AU - Kocić, Marija AU - Samardžić, Nikola PY - 2015 UR - http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/4894 AB - Istraživanje se bavi izdvajanjem krucijalnih momenata vezanih za kongres u Karlovcu, njegovo sazvanje, utvrđivanje principa rada i pre svega ponašanjem osmanskih predstavnika (opunomoćenika), sa ciljem da se odredi generalni stav Porte prema potpuno novom fenomenu u njenoj diplomatskoj istoriji. U radu su korišćena neobjavljena dokumenta iz Državnog arhiva u Beču i Nacionalnog arhiva u Londonu. Ova građa, sa nesumnjivo najvećom vrednošću za istraživanje, dopunjena je zbirkama objavljenih dokumenata i onovremenim istorijama, čiji su tvorci savremenici dešavanja pre i tokom rada kongresa u Karlovcu. AB - Karlowitz Congress represents a step forward for the diplomatic practices of the Ottoman state, when a drift of the Porte separated itself, which saw peace as a necessity for the survival of the Ottoman state. Political situation in Europe was good for this decision, because after Ryswick, France stopped being a useful ally. In the organisation of the congress, Porte used some of its familiar devices (in terms of equipping of mission and selection of representatives). But, in organisation of, and during negotiations, it seems that they complied with orders of the other side. Venetian and Habsburg representatives belonged to a society with more sense for negotiations, and their experience from XVII century, when first bilateral and multilateral congresses had been organised, qualified them for this task. No sources of western origin (including Italian) mention any initiative of Porte’s representatives during the preparation or in the course of the congress. For Porte, Karlowitz peace represented a loss, because they had to renounce a part of their territory, which was directly opposed to ideology represented by Shariat. This was met by a serious opposition in the society, which culminated in Edirne in 1703. But, its representatives were led by situation in which their state was at the moment, and which called for immediate peace in order to preserve inner stability. The Ottoman public did not come to terms with this loss easily, and this fact is confirmed by official historiography and its most important representative, Naima, who nevertheless tried to provide a justification for Porte’s acceptance, also mentioning the Shariat. The most significant consequence, however, is the fact that in Karlowitz Porte officially renounced unilateral diplomacy, founded on the forcing its will upon the other side, implemented from the emergence of the Ottoman state. PB - Zagreb,Društvo za hrvatsku povijesnicu T2 - Historijski zbornik T1 - Porta na Kongresu u Karlovcu (1698.–1699.): kraj ad hoc diplomacije T1 - Porte at the Karlowitz Congress (1698–1699): The end of ad hoc diplomacy EP - 30 IS - 1 SP - 15 VL - 68 UR - https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4894 ER -
@article{ author = "Kocić, Marija and Samardžić, Nikola", year = "2015", abstract = "Istraživanje se bavi izdvajanjem krucijalnih momenata vezanih za kongres u Karlovcu, njegovo sazvanje, utvrđivanje principa rada i pre svega ponašanjem osmanskih predstavnika (opunomoćenika), sa ciljem da se odredi generalni stav Porte prema potpuno novom fenomenu u njenoj diplomatskoj istoriji. U radu su korišćena neobjavljena dokumenta iz Državnog arhiva u Beču i Nacionalnog arhiva u Londonu. Ova građa, sa nesumnjivo najvećom vrednošću za istraživanje, dopunjena je zbirkama objavljenih dokumenata i onovremenim istorijama, čiji su tvorci savremenici dešavanja pre i tokom rada kongresa u Karlovcu., Karlowitz Congress represents a step forward for the diplomatic practices of the Ottoman state, when a drift of the Porte separated itself, which saw peace as a necessity for the survival of the Ottoman state. Political situation in Europe was good for this decision, because after Ryswick, France stopped being a useful ally. In the organisation of the congress, Porte used some of its familiar devices (in terms of equipping of mission and selection of representatives). But, in organisation of, and during negotiations, it seems that they complied with orders of the other side. Venetian and Habsburg representatives belonged to a society with more sense for negotiations, and their experience from XVII century, when first bilateral and multilateral congresses had been organised, qualified them for this task. No sources of western origin (including Italian) mention any initiative of Porte’s representatives during the preparation or in the course of the congress. For Porte, Karlowitz peace represented a loss, because they had to renounce a part of their territory, which was directly opposed to ideology represented by Shariat. This was met by a serious opposition in the society, which culminated in Edirne in 1703. But, its representatives were led by situation in which their state was at the moment, and which called for immediate peace in order to preserve inner stability. The Ottoman public did not come to terms with this loss easily, and this fact is confirmed by official historiography and its most important representative, Naima, who nevertheless tried to provide a justification for Porte’s acceptance, also mentioning the Shariat. The most significant consequence, however, is the fact that in Karlowitz Porte officially renounced unilateral diplomacy, founded on the forcing its will upon the other side, implemented from the emergence of the Ottoman state.", publisher = "Zagreb,Društvo za hrvatsku povijesnicu", journal = "Historijski zbornik", title = "Porta na Kongresu u Karlovcu (1698.–1699.): kraj ad hoc diplomacije, Porte at the Karlowitz Congress (1698–1699): The end of ad hoc diplomacy", pages = "30-15", number = "1", volume = "68", url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4894" }
Kocić, M.,& Samardžić, N.. (2015). Porta na Kongresu u Karlovcu (1698.–1699.): kraj ad hoc diplomacije. in Historijski zbornik Zagreb,Društvo za hrvatsku povijesnicu., 68(1), 15-30. https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4894
Kocić M, Samardžić N. Porta na Kongresu u Karlovcu (1698.–1699.): kraj ad hoc diplomacije. in Historijski zbornik. 2015;68(1):15-30. https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4894 .
Kocić, Marija, Samardžić, Nikola, "Porta na Kongresu u Karlovcu (1698.–1699.): kraj ad hoc diplomacije" in Historijski zbornik, 68, no. 1 (2015):15-30, https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4894 .