|
Abstract:
|
This paper explores the impact of Qajar -Ottoman diplomacy on issues of identity and sovereignty during the late nineteenth century as addressed in the Treaties of Erzurum of 1828 and 1848 . Through these treaties , the Qajars and the Ottomans introduced notions of imperial identities , extraterritoriality , and extended their imperial spheres of influence . The Treaties of Erzurum defined subjecthood and sovereignty over subjects based on place of origin , not current location . This radical change in international politics created a new , bureaucratic method of identification . Focusing on the Qajar perspective , this paper proposes that although Qajar subjects had always travelled to the Ottoman Empire for religious or economic reasons , the Treaties of Erzurum in 1828 and 1848 changed Middle Eastern geopolitics by legally allowing the Qajar government to exercise sovereign rights over its subjects .
To better understand the consequences of these new imperial identities and labels , this paper looks at different communities in the Ottoman Empire that shared special relationships with the Qajars . Each of these chapters focuses on their affiliation with the Qajars and how the Treaties of Erzurum affected them : first , the Qajar travelers , second , the Qajar expatriates , and third , the Ottoman Shi’is . The examination of Qajar government documents , Persian travelogues and newspapers reveals complicated relationships between the Qajars and these communities . Analysis of each provides insight on the Qajar Empire’s efforts in fostering a relationship with these communities , as made possible by the Treaties of Erzurum .
This study contributes to a number of narratives involving the Qajar Empire . First , it challenges the weak imagery surrounding the Qajar government and shows the Qajar extension of power outside its borders . Furthermore , this paper engages in the issue of identity , a crucial concept for understanding nascent , pre -nationalist sentiments . Discussion of the Treaties of Erzurum in conjunction with nationalism or imperial power remains overwhelmingly neglected . Although previous scholars have alluded to extraterritoriality in their research , the discourse on subjecthood and identity beyond imperial borders has been ignored in the Middle Eastern context . This study serves as a starting point for future research on the subject . |