著者

今澤 浩二

出版者

公益財団法人史学会

雑誌

史學雜誌 (ISSN:00182478)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.99, no.3, pp.309-344, 456-455, 1990-03-20

---

This study attempts to examine early relations between Bayezid the Thunderbolt and Timur in the Five-Years' Campaign (1392-96) by means of considering several situations in Anatolia and Syria, and then analyzing a letter written by Timur to Bayezid. In studying this subject, the author use Bazm u Razm, an Anatolian source, which is little-known in Japan, as well as Ottoman and Timurid sources. The Bazm u Razm proves that Timur's intention for his Five-Years' Campaign was not only to recover the sovereignty of Il-khanid in Iran, but also to rule eastern Anatolia, namely, the former territory of Seljuqid of Rum, which submitted to Il-khanid. With this in mind Timur succeeded in ruling the whole of Iran, but fell into a difficult situation in Anatolia and Syria on account of the resistance of Barquq, the Sultan of the Mamluk Empire, Qadi Burhan al-Din Ahmad, the ruler of Sivas and Toqtamish, the Khan of the Golden Horde. It was in order to deal with such a situation that Timur wrote a letter to Bayezid in March, 1395 that proposed the establishment of friendly relations between the two. Therefore the conventional opinion should be corrected that Timur wrote to Bayezid in order to protect his back in carrying out an expedition to China after the Five-Years' Campaign. And he did not change his attitude toward Bayezid in the Seven-Years' Campaign (1399-1404), either. That is to say, Timur continually tried to seek the friendship of Bayezid and avoid struggling with him. On the other hand, Bayezid was extending his influence over Anatolia, but from the middle of 1393 he began to turn his attention to the situation on the Balkan peninsula, which had developed rapidly by the maneuvers of Venetia and Hungary, and in the beginning of 1394, he moved to Balkan. Under the circumstances Timur appeared in eastern Anatolia. And when Barquq and Burhan al-Din formed an alliance against him, Bayezid also joined it, refusing Timur's offer and strengthening relations with the anti-Timur nations. It is clear, therefore, that Bayezid intended to be hostile to Timur, and moreover, continued taking such an attitude in the Seven-Years' Campaign. But he also concentrated on strengthening his sovereignty over Balkan without taking measures against Timur during his approach, in contrast to Barquq and Burhan al-Din. This leads us to think that Bayezid adopted an intentional policy for Anatolia and Balkan. As for this supposition, however, we must carry out a further examination. In conclusion, we can say that the first relations established between Bayezid and Timur in the Five-Years' Campaign, lasted much longer after that.

著者

今澤 浩二

出版者

一般社団法人 日本オリエント学会

雑誌

オリエント (ISSN:00305219)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.56, no.2, pp.65-82, 2014-03-31 (Released:2017-04-03)

参考文献数

72

---

This paper attempts to examine the development of the vizierate in the Early Ottoman Empire, through analyzing the origins, careers and activities of the viziers of the period. Initially, the Ottoman vizierate comprised a single individual, but the number seems to have increased during the reigns of Murad I and Yildirim Bayazid. During the earlier period, the vizier had power over both administrative and military affairs. However, it is likely that after the number of viziers increased, the second and third viziers of the military class took charge of military affairs, the military authority held by the Grand Vizier of the ulema class gradually becoming diminished until the title was merely nominal. Although the Grand Viziership was thought to have been held exclusively by the ulema class, this paper makes it clear that individuals from the Turkish military class held the office for an extended period during the reigns of Mehmed I and Murad II. During the reign of Murad II, palace slaves (kuls) assumed the offices of second or third vizier, a few of them concurrently holding the post of Rumeli Beylerbeyi. Owing to the severe and continuous struggle between viziers of kul and ulema backgrounds during this period, viziers other than Grand Viziers changed frequently. Although the limitation of this era is reflected in the fact that the kul viziers could not advance to the Grand Viziership, Fatih Mehmed, who had succeeded to the throne for a time during this period, must have realized the effectiveness of having kul viziers. Thus, after the conquest of Constantinople, he strengthened his position as absolute monarch by appointing kul viziers, such as Zaganos and Mahmud Pashas, to the Grand Viziership. From this standpoint, the reign of Murad II was a quite important era, paving the way for the coming age.

著者

今澤 浩二

出版者

桃山学院大学総合研究所

雑誌

人間文化研究 = Journal of Humanities Research,St.Andrew's University (ISSN:21889031)

巻号頁・発行日

no.14, pp.271-305, 2021-03-16

著者

今澤 浩二

出版者

桃山学院大学総合研究所

雑誌

人間文化研究 = Journal of Humanities Research,St.Andrew's University (ISSN:21889031)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.14, pp.271-305, 2021-03-16

著者

今澤 浩二

出版者

一般社団法人 日本オリエント学会

雑誌

オリエント (ISSN:00305219)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.33, no.1, pp.113-123, 1990-09-30 (Released:2010-03-12)

著者

今澤 浩二 Koji Imazawa

雑誌

国際文化論集 = INTERCULTURAL STUDIES (ISSN:09170219)

巻号頁・発行日

no.44, pp.1-27, 2011-06-14

著者

今澤 浩二

出版者

一般社団法人 日本オリエント学会

雑誌

オリエント (ISSN:00305219)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.37, no.1, pp.121-136, 1994

---

Kemalpasazade (1468-1534) was born in a military family, but afterwards changed over to the <i>Ulema</i>. He served in Bayezid II, Selim I and S&uuml;leyman the Magnificent, and was promoted to the <i>Seyh&uuml;lisl&acirc;m</i>, the highest rank of the Ulema. His chronicle in the fluent and elegant Ottoman-Turkish style, <i>Tev&acirc;r&icirc;h-i &Acirc;l-i Osm&acirc;n</i> was composed in the form that each volume (<i>defter</i>) was assigned for one of the Ottoman sultans, and 8 volumes for the reigns from Osman I to Bayezid II were dedicated to Bayezid II in 916/1510-11. After that by the request of S&uuml;leyman, 2 volumes for Selim and S&uuml;leyman were added, and thus the so-called <i>&ldquo;Kemalpasazade Tarihi&rdquo;</i> came into existence in 10 volumes. This work, however, was not appreciated in those days and forgotten by the later Ottoman chroniclers. Since in the latter half of this century Prof. Dr. Serafettin Turan published <i>Kemalpasazade Tarihi</i>, vol. 1, 2 and 7, the importance of this work has been gradually appreciated.<br>This paper deals with <i>Kemalpasazade Tarihi</i>, vol. 4 for the reign of Yildirim Bayezid (1389-1403), which still remains a manuscript. The contents and the order of description of this work is fundamentally based on Nesr&icirc;'s <i>Kitab-i Cihan-n&uuml;m&acirc;</i>, and also made use of the chronicles in the early ages of the Ottoman Empire, Oruc b. &Acirc;dil's and the anonymous Tev&acirc;r&icirc;h-i &Acirc;l-i Osm&acirc;n, etc. On the other hand, however, <i>Kemalpasazade Tarihi</i>, vol. 4 contains much information of its own, which the above-mentioned works do not, and in this point we can say that this work has the great value as historical source. It fully describes the important events, for example, of the murder of Kadi Burhaneddin, the ruler of Sivas, by Kara Y&uuml;l&uuml;k Osman, the founder of the Aqqoyunlu Empire, and of the refuge of Aqtav, the influential <i>amir</i> of the Golden Horde, to the Ottoman Empire. And also there are valuable accounts for the activities of Bayezid's son Ertugrul and the generals of the marches (<i>uc beyi</i>).<br>From now on, if we make use of these accounts which did not come down to the later historical works, carrying out a further examination of them and confirming their reliableness, it has no doubt that <i>Kemalpasazade Tarihi</i>, vol. 4 is the essential source as well as Aslkpasazade, Nesr&icirc; and so on, for the reign of Yildirim Bayezid, the important age for the development of the Ottoman Empire.

著者

今澤 浩二

出版者

日本オリエント学会

雑誌

オリエント = Bulletin of the Society for Near Eastern Studies in Japan (ISSN:00305219)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.56, no.2, pp.65-82, 2013

著者

今澤 浩二

出版者

一般社団法人 日本オリエント学会

雑誌

オリエント (ISSN:00305219)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.56, no.2, pp.65-82, 2014

---

This paper attempts to examine the development of the vizierate in the Early Ottoman Empire, through analyzing the origins, careers and activities of the viziers of the period.<br> Initially, the Ottoman vizierate comprised a single individual, but the number seems to have increased during the reigns of Murad I and Yildirim Bayazid. During the earlier period, the vizier had power over both administrative and military affairs. However, it is likely that after the number of viziers increased, the second and third viziers of the military class took charge of military affairs, the military authority held by the Grand Vizier of the <i>ulema</i> class gradually becoming diminished until the title was merely nominal. Although the Grand Viziership was thought to have been held exclusively by the <i>ulema</i> class, this paper makes it clear that individuals from the Turkish military class held the office for an extended period during the reigns of Mehmed I and Murad II.<br> During the reign of Murad II, palace slaves (<i>kuls</i>) assumed the offices of second or third vizier, a few of them concurrently holding the post of <i>Rumeli Beylerbeyi</i>. Owing to the severe and continuous struggle between viziers of <i>kul</i> and <i>ulema</i> backgrounds during this period, viziers other than Grand Viziers changed frequently. Although the limitation of this era is reflected in the fact that the <i>kul</i> viziers could not advance to the Grand Viziership, Fatih Mehmed, who had succeeded to the throne for a time during this period, must have realized the effectiveness of having <i>kul</i> viziers. Thus, after the conquest of Constantinople, he strengthened his position as absolute monarch by appointing <i>kul</i> viziers, such as Zaganos and Mahmud Pashas, to the Grand Viziership. From this standpoint, the reign of Murad II was a quite important era, paving the way for the coming age.