#The Brief History Of Ottoman Empire

[secular-jew]

While there were periods of coexistence with Jews in the Levant, let this brief history disavow you of the notion, being promulgated all over the internet (and especially my inbox) that Jews were treated "well" by Muslims.

Similar in many ways to the dehumanization and murder at the hands of European Christianity, the Jews in Muslim-controlled lands, starting with Muhammad (exemplified in Islam as not just a prophet, but the "perfect example of human being") suffered continuous waves of ethnic-cleansing pogroms and massacres, culminating in the Massacres in southern Israel on October 7th.

This is a short list:

622 - 627: Ethnic cleansing of Jews literally from Mecca and Medina, (Jewish boys with pubic hair were executed along with the men). Over 800 adult males were killed by beheading. Women were forced into sexual slavery, and the children were given to Islamic Jihadis as slaves. Mohammad force-married Safiyyah, after murdering her husband and father.

629: 1st Alexandria Massacres of Jews, Egypt.

622 - 634: Exterminations of Arabian Jewish tribes.

1106: Ali Ibn Yousef Ibn Tashifin of Marrakesh decrees death penalty for any local Jew, including his Jewish Physician, and as well as his Jewish military general.

1033: 1st massacre of Jews in Fez, Morocco.

1148: Almohadin of Morocco gives Jews the choice of converting to Islam, or expulsion.

1066: Granada Massacre of Jews, Muslim-occupied Spain.

1165 - 1178: Jews of Yemen given the choice (under new constitution) to either convert to Islam or die.

1165: Chief Rabbi of the Maghreb was publicly burnt alive. The Rambam (Maimonides, Moses ben Maimon), forced to flee Spain to Egypt.

1220: Tens of thousands of Jews massacred by Muslims Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, after being blamed for Mongol invasion.

1270: Sultan Baibars of Egypt resolved to burn all the Jews, a ditch having been dug for that purpose; but at the last moment he repented, and instead exacted a heavy tribute, during the collection of which many perished.

1276: 2nd Fez Pogrom (massacre) against Jews in Morocco

1385: Khorasan Massacres against Jews in Iran

1438: 1st Mellah Ghetto massacres against Jews in Morocco.

1465: 3rd Fez Pogrom against Jews in Morocco, leaving only 11 Jews left alive.

1517: 1st Safed Pogrom in Muslim Ottoman controlled Judea

1517: 1st Hebron Pogrom in Muslim-controlled Judea, by occupying Ottomans.

1517: Marsa ibn Ghazi Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Libya.

1577: Passover Massacre throughout the Ottoman Empire.

1588 - 1629: Mahalay Pogroms of Jews in Iran.

1630 - 1700: Yemenite Jews considered 2nd class citizens and subjugated under strict Shi'ite 'dhimmi' rules.

1660: 2nd Judean Pogrom, in Safed Israel (Ottoman-controlled Palestine).

1670: Expulsion of Mawza Jews in Yemen.

1679 - 1680: Massacres of Jews in Sanaa, Yemen.

1747: Massacres of the Jews of Mashhad, Iran.

1785: Pogrom of Libyan Jews in Ottoman-controlled Tripoli, Libya.

1790 - 92: Tetuan Pogrom. Morocco (Jews of Tetuuan stripped naked, and lined up for Muslim perverts).

1800: Decree passed in Yemen, criminalizing Jews from wearing clothing that is new or good, or from riding mules or donkeys. Jews were also rounded up for long marches naked through the Roob al Khali dessert.

1805: 1st Algiers Massacre/Pogrom of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Algeria.

1808: 2nd Ghetto Massacres in Mellah, Morocco.

1815: 2nd Algiers massacres/pogroms of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Algeria.

1820: Sahalu Lobiant Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Syria.

1828: Baghdad massacres/pogroms of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Iraq.

1830: 3rd massacre/pogrom of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Algiers, Algeria.

1830: Ethnic cleansing of Jews in Tabriz, Iran.

1834: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Hebron, Judea.

1834: Massacre/pogrom of Safed Jews in Ottoman-controlled Palestine/Judea.

1839: Massacre of the Mashadi Jews in Iran.

1840: Damascus Affair following first of many blood libels against Jews in Ottoman-controlled Syria.

1844: 1st Cairo Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Egypt.

1847: Dayr al-Qamar massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Lebanon.

1847: Ethnic cleansing of the Jews in Jerusalem, Ottoman-controlled Palestine.

1848: 1st Damascus massacre/pogrom, in Ottoman-controlled Syria.

1850: 1st Aleppo massacre/pogrom of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Syria.

1860: 2nd Damascus massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Syria.

1862: 1st Beirut massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Lebanon.

1866: Massacre of Jews by Ottomans Kuzguncuk, Turkey.

1867: Massacre of Jews by Ottomans in Barfurush, Turkey.

1868: Massacre of Jews by Ottomans in Eyub, Turkey.

1869: Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Tunis, Tunisia.

1869: Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Sfax, Tunisia.

1864 - 1880: Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Marrakesh, Morocco.

1870: 2nd Alexandria Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Egypt.

1870: 1st Istanbul massacre of Jews in Ottoman Turkey.

1871: 1st Damanhur Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Egypt.

1872: Massacre of Jews by Ottomans in Edirne, Turkey.

1872: 1st Massacre of Jews by Ottomans in Izmir, Turkey.

1873: 2nd Damanhur Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Egypt.

1874: 2nd Izmir massacre of Jews in Turkey.

1874: 2nd massacre of Jews in Istanbul Turkey.

1874: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Beirut, Lebanon.

1875: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Aleppo, Syria.

1875: Massacre of Jews in Djerba Island, Ottoman-controlled Tunisia.

1877: 3rd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Damanhur, Egypt.

1877: Masaacres of Jews in Mansura, Ottoman-controlled Egypt

1882: Masacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Homs, Syria.

1882: 3rd Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Alexandria, Egypt.

1890: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Cairo, Egypt.

1890: 3rd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Damascus, Syria.

1890: 2nd massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Tunis, Tunisia

1891: 4th massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Damanahur, Egypt.

1897: Targeted murder of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Tripolitania, Libya.

1903 &1907: Masaacres of Hews in Ottoman-controlled Taza & Settat, Morocco.

1901 - 1902: 3rd set of massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Cairo, Egypt.

1901 - 1907: 4th set of Massacres of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Alexandria, Egypt.

1903: 1st massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Port Sa'id, Egypt.

1903 - 1940: Series of massacres in Taza and Settat, Morocco.

1907: Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Casablanca, Morocco.

1908: 2nd Massacre of Jews in Ottoman-controlled Port Said, Egypt.

1910: Blood libel against Jews in Shiraz, Iran.

1911: Masaacre of Jews by Muslims in Shiraz, Iran.

1912: 4th massacre in Ottoman-controlled Fez, Morocco.

1917: Baghdad Iraq Jews murdered by Ottomans.

1918 - 1948: Yemen passes a law criminalizing the raising of a Jewish orphan in Yemen.

1920: Massacres of Jews in Irbid Jordan (British mandate Palestine).

1920 - 1930: Arab riots resulting in hundreds of Jewish deaths, British mandate Palestine.

1921: 1st Jaffa (Israel) riots, British mandate Palestine.

1922: Massacres of Jews in Djerba, Tunisia.

1928: Jewish orphans sold into slavery, and forced toonvert to Islam by Muslim Brotherhood, Yemen.

1929: 3rd Hebron (Israel) massacre of Jews by Arabs in British mandate Palestine.

1929 3rd massacre of Jews by Arabs in Safed (Israel), British mandate Palestine.

1933: 2nd Jaffa (Israel) riots, British mandate Palestine.

1934: Massacre of Jews in Thrace, Turkey.

1936: 3rd riots by Arabs against Jews in Jaffa (Israel), British mandate Palestine.

1941: Masaacres of Jews in Farhud, Iraq.

1942: Muslim leader Grand Mufti collaboration with the Nazis, playing a major role in the final solution.

1938 - 1945: Full alliance and collaboration by Arabs with the Nazis in attacking and murdering Jews in the Middle East and Africa.

1945: 4th massacre of Jews by Muslims in Cairo, Egypt.

1945: Masaacre of Jews in Tripolitania, Libya.

1947: Masaacre of Jews by Muslims in Aden, Yemen.

2023: Massacre, rape, torture and kidnapping of ~1,500 Israelis (mostly Jews) by Muslims in numerous towns throughout southern Israel.

#secular-jew #israel #jewish #judaism #israeli #jerusalem #diaspora #secular jew #secularjew #islam #pogroms #massacres #massacres of Jews #Jewish massacres #Jewish pogroms #Hebron massacre #Hamas #Isis #Mohammad #Safiya #jew #jihadi #Judea

[helianthus-tarot]

What would you think about showing your support for Palestine?

I don't understand the question. What would I think? What do I think about showing my support specifically, or about other people showing their support?

I support Palestine of course. Below are some links:

🟡 Information

If you know nothing about the history of the Palestine-Israel conflict, you can start with Decolonize Palestine website; particularly the Palestine 101 section. It won't take much time. Also the myths section; the myths address most of the typical zionists' arguments.

Palquest also seems good if you want to understand the chronology of what has happened on the land since the Ottoman Empire, it was set up by the Institute for Palestine Studies and the Palestinian Museum. But I haven't explored everything yet since it's massive.

If you think those are too biased or whatever, you can supplement them by googling more info yourself about things such as The First Zionist Congress, Balfour Declaration, Great Palestinian Rebellion, Nakba, 1948 Arab–Israeli War, creation of Hamas, etc. Read multiple websites for each one of these. Compare and contrast the info.

I also suggest you watch videos from anti-zionist jews on tiktok; search #jewsagainstzionism #antizionistjew.

🟡 October 2023

You can refer to this post, there are links that talk about the recent October events. This is also a brief summary on how Hamas-Israel October 7 impacted Gaza.

To get recent updates:

People: Motaz Azaiza (a photographer who provides video updates of what's happening in Gaza). Plestia Alaqad (a journalist who also provides updates in Gaza). Click on their IG stories.

News: AlJazeera English, Eye On Palestine.

Others: Chris Kunzler, Subhi.

That list is not comprehensive of course, but you can use those as a starting point. You can also follow the #palestine or #gaza tags on tiktok and tumblr. I suggest tiktok since news travel a lot faster there.

🟡 What can you do

Rallies: Join Palestine solidarity rallies in your country if you can; this is a list of rallies from October 28 to November 5. But make sure you read guidelines and know how to behave during a rally, also pay attention to what is lawful and what isn't in your country.

Demand a ceasefire: For those who are in the USA, in the UK. I don't live in those countries so I don't know much, feel free to explore the tags. Americans really have a reason to be mad, your gov use your tax money and army to help the IOF kill kids. I don't even want to begin talking about Britain.

Boycott: Refer to BDS Movement to know what main brands to boycott, there are several like HP and Siemens. There are also other brands, you can find the info on tiktok; but from what I know people are currently focusing on Starbucks, McD and Disney.

Donate: This is long-term help, since people can barely get aids into Gaza at the moment (except for the recent 20 trucks). But some of them are still taking donation, so check. Palestine Red Crescent Society, Palestine Children's Relief Fund, Medical Aid for Palestinians, Baitulmaal, Alkhidmat Foundation Pakistan.

🟡 Others

I haven't tried these yet for personal reason but these are highly recommended by people.

Life in Occupied Palestine documentary by Anna Baltzer, who is a Jewish-American.

The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine book by Ilan Pappé, an Israeli historian and socialist activist. He has also written an article about what happened recently.

Another list of published books you can read to learn more. Edit: I couldn't link it. Go to tiktok and next to tiktok(.)com/, paste this: @book.butch/video/7293673677256903982?lang=en

Double check the info and the links. I might have missed something, so if there's wrong info or any correction needs to be done, kindly let me know.

If you have questions about the conflict, don't ask me; follow the links and people I've listed above. I am dealing with fatigue and emotional exhaustion, the issue has been triggering anxiety attacks.

Zionists do not interact.

#palestine #gaza

[curioushabitforarivergod]

dark(ish) academia books that I don't see recommended enough

I read a lot, both fiction and non-fiction, and a lot of the stuff I've read over the past 2-3 years has had underlying academic tones. I've tried to include books I've at least enjoyed, although there are a few 3 star ratings. All of these books are ones I haven't really seen mentioned in compiled dark academia lists (mainly because some of them fall outside the general scope and are more ✨vibes✨). Feel free to add more less well-known books. I've included my own blurbs of the books but I've got shit memory and some I read like 2 years ago so yeah

Fiction

"Let us read, and let us dance; these two amusements will never do any harm to the world." Voltaire

To the Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf

Takes place over 10 years and explores family and the destruction left behind after WWI. It discusses the feminine vs. masculine in art and while it can be a little slow to read (took me close to 3 weeks!) theres some really beautiful passages and also some funny ones as well — the characters spend several chapters at a dinner party convinced everyone hates them and constantly hating other people too.

The Dark is Rising (series) by Susan Cooper

Okay, yes this is a kids book series from the 70s/80s but it explores English, Cornish and Welsh mythology and has really good characters and world-building. Even though chronologically the series goes: Over Sea, Under Stone; The Dark is Rising; Greenwitch; The Grey King; Silver on the Tree, it's best to read The Dark is Rising first and return back to Over Sea, Under Stone. Anyway, I love this series and I read The Dark is Rising every Christmas because it corresponds pretty much with the days and is easy to place and that's kind of what makes it feel very cozy and academic. Also, theres some brief moments of time travel to the past.

The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova

This is a beautiful written masterpiece set across the 20th century featuring plenty of train rides across Europe and vampires. It explores some of the history of Walachia and Dracula, as well as the Ottoman Empire and European politics of the time. It's a hefty read but I loved it because it combines history, dark academia, fantasy and vampires.

Macbeth by William Shakespeare

My favourite of Shakespeare that I've seen so far and honestly murder is so dark academia I don't need to talk any further. Strangely, I don't see this recommended enough.

Hamnet by Maggie O'Farrell

This was quite popular a year or two ago, and honestly for good reason. I think it's only really academic because it's linked to Shakespeare and explores the less well-known lives of Shakespeare's family, but it's very good and I thought I'd include it anyway.

Piranesi by Susanna Clarke

This one feels really light academia to me, but I think it's mainly because of setting. It's set in this fantastical old and crumbling mansion that goes on forever. It's filled with statues and it floods and only two people live in the world. The story is told entirely through diary entries, but it's so well-written because it defamiliarises the reader entirely. It was a light and easy read for me, which is probably why I'm associating it with light academia rather than dark academia.

The Book of Goose by Yiyun Li

This book kinda mixes chaotic academia and cottagecore academia and is a reflection of girlhood and youth spent in the French countryside in the 50s. There's a toxic relationship between two friends who write a book together before one of them attends prestigious girls' school in England. Also the opening lines are amazing: "You cannot cut an apple with an apple. You cannot cut an orange with an orange. You can, if you have a knife, cut an apple or an orange. Or slice open the underbelly of a fish. Or, if your hands are steady enough and the blade is sharp enough, sever an umbilical cord."

Brideshead Revisited by Evelyn Waugh

Another classic! I love Waugh, and Brideshead revisited is amazing and my favourite of what I've read of his. The book is quite homoerotic — explicitly so at times, which is fascinating for something published in 1945 — and deals with romanticisation. It nestles quite snugly between Picture of Dorian Grey and Secret History in terms of a dark academic literary canon.

Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen

This is more gothic than dark academia, but it's also a satire of the gothic genre so I feel like it counts. It's definetly not as well known as some of Austen's other works and feels much more raw, particularly because its her first work (although not published until after her death). It's not my favourite Austen, but I love it all the same, especially because of its commentary on warning the romanticisation of other peoples lives and the gothic/dark academia. Although dark academia wasn't a thing in Austen's day!

Possession by A. S. Byatt

I love the main story but because its so metafictive and explores the relationship between two made-up poets (one of whom is bi and cheats on her gf with the second) from the perspective of modern academics, it can get quite hard to read sometimes. It's also really long, but definitely worth reading.

Non-Fiction

I feel like non-fiction is pretty over-looked when it comes to the academia aesthetic which really says something, given that its… kinda the whole point of academia?? Anyway, I read a lot of history books, but I only put down the ones which I found interesting or easy to read, so they're more popular histories than academic histories. Also; essays.

The Year 1000: What Life Was Like At the Turn of the First Millennium by Robert Lacey

This explores early medieval life in England based on the Julius Work Calendar, an Anglo-Saxon manuscript believed to date to 1020BCE. It's honestly a really light and interesting read and it talks about what everyday life was like, which I think is important in history. It's in a narrative style so it's quite easy to read even if you don't consume history often.

Oh, to Be a Painter! by Virginia Woolf

This is actually a short, published collection of Virginia Woolf essays on art. I read the essays all in one sitting because they're quite short, but if you're into art and art academia, I'd highly recommend. There's also an essay on the cinema which provides some interesting insights into todays world particularly as Woolf was writing at the time when cinema was only just becoming widespread and an industry in its own right.

A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift

This is a satirical essay on attitudes towards the poor and it suggests that poor people might sell their children as food for the rich, highlighting the callousness of the upper classes. It's available free online and very much relevant today, despite being written close to 300 years ago.

The Time Traveller's Guide to Elizabethan England by Ian Mortimer

Very useful if you ever find yourself stuck in the Elizabethan period! It's read as a sort of travel guide but includes plenty on history as well, providing a picture of what England looked like in the late-Tudor period. Also people will think you're a time-traveller if you carry it around, which adds to your intrigue and mystery.

A Memoir of Jane Austen by James Edward Austen-Leigh

If you like Jane Austen and haven't read this memoir, you should. It's written by her nephew, so it's quite biased and it's not amazing in any way, but it provides a lot of context to her life and is a good light-read or coffee table book. Also my copy was pale pink so win.

Thats it folks. Feel free to include your own less well-known book recs that follow dark/light/chaotic, etc. aesthetics! I'd love to compile a huge list and read more outside my comfort zone.

#dark academia #light academia #chaotic academia #art academia #cottagecore academia #books and reading #book reccomendation #book reccs #books

[gemsofgreece]

Hello! When looking at the history of greek turkish relations I have recently come across turkish people pointing out violence that the greek army has committed againt turks. Specifically during the war of independence. Although I feel uneasy cause that information seems to always be coupled with a underestimation of the greek genocide and the ottoman occupation. From what I have seen from brief research, there were massacres against turks of the Peloponnese at least during the war of independence. So I guess my question is, do you think that it is wrong to celebrate march 25th, or to be so upset with the history of what the ottomans and/or turks have done to greek people if there were also massacres against turks (although maybe not as many)?

Maybe this is a dumb question, but I get uncomfortable and confused when i hear these things.

I hope that makes sense and if you answer this thank you so much in advance!

Hello! The Greek war of independence was a violent movement against an established conqueror reigning over the indigenous people. All wars are violent but the motives of the wars are in fact not created equal. There are wars, such as the defensive and independence wars, that are generally more justified than the conquests, the civil wars and most other types.

I remember the Greek history post series I made a few years ago - I started the Revolution post with a note saying something like “it is viewed as a time of glory for the Greek history but be warned that it was not a walk in the park”. It definitely wasn’t. You should take into consideration that it had little chance to be anything other than a violent revolt - it was the uprising of a small bunch of people, with no military training except for their few commanders who had been either missionaries or bandits, no resources, not much hope, against a vast empire. This was a war that mathematically could not happen with diplomacy or any sort of political or financial leverage as there was nothing Greeks could offer in return for their freedom that could ever tempt the Ottomans to agree. The Greek revolution which started from the Peloponnese, was in fact part of the trio of planned revolts, the other two in the Danubian Principalities and Constantinople. These two were suppressed by the Ottomans in time. Furthermore, a little known fact is that for all the 350 years - give or take - of Ottoman hegemony over the Greeks, a revolt sprang on average every three years in some place of Greece. Make the math for how many efforts these people did over the centuries. And these were all suppressed. So when the Peloponnesian revolt worked, almost against all odds, this was a development that took even the victors by storm and in the early months of the war, those masses of vengeful irregular rebels at times lost sense of right and wrong.

I am talking of course about the Sack of Tripolitsá, as I bet you mostly mean as well and as I know this to be the Turks’ favourite mantra. However, an important difference between Greek and Turkish wrongdoing I have observed is that Greeks do not gloss over or revise or deny the atrocities of Tripolitsá. Not only that, but what happened there was fast condemned by the Greek warriors themselves and was in fact sobering, as for the remaining years of the war Greeks were definitely more restrained in their dalliances with the enemy. What happened in Tripolitsá is known to have happened by the masses in the absence of the general commander (Dimitrios Ypsilantis), who rushed back when he heard of it, and the at least distancing from it even by some of the most fearsome warriors, such as Theodoros Kolokotronis. Kolokotronis, in his memoirs, seemed to be aware that the Greeks will storm into the city and kill non-Christian civilians, and made pacts to protect some Albanians, which he honoured. But he entered the city late and what he saw far exceeded what he expected to happen. He expressed reproach for the atrocities, which however he explained was actually somewhat mollified when they led him in front of a tree in the city square which was used specifically to hang Greeks.

When I entered Tripolitsa, they showed me a plane tree in the market-place where the Greeks had always been hanged. I sighed. "Alas!" I said, "how many of my own clan – of my own race – have been hanged there!" And I ordered it to be cut down. I felt some consolation then from the slaughter of the Turks. ... [Before the fall] we had formed a plan of proposing to the Turks that they should deliver Tripolitsa into our hands, and that we should, in that case, send persons into it to gather the spoils together, which were then to be apportioned and divided among the different districts for the benefit of the nation; but who would listen?

- from Kolokotronis’ memoirs

The death toll varies for Tripolitsá, somewhere between 8,000 - 15,000 gruesomely slain according to contemporary historians. Kolokotronis himself is open and real enough to number them at 30,000, but according to historians this was a miscalculation on his part. The point is that this gruesome bleak time in Greek history is not denied by me, you, Kolokotronis himself who was a symbol of this war, the Greeks, nobody. Nobody takes pride in it. And this is not the reason we celebrate the independence war.

Reasons to celebrate the independence war were clear, unspoiled and hard victories such as those of Dervenakia, Alamana, Gravia and numerous others and some reasons to commemorate the Greek revolution are, say, the Sortie of Missolonghi:

Or the essentially permanent destruction of Psará:

Or the massacre of Chios:

Or the treatment of Greek Cypriots:

Ever heard a Turk analyse these (and many more) and view them through an introspective critical light? Nope. Maybe there are but I haven’t seen any yet. The best most understanding thing I have heard is “the past is in the past”. And well this is 200 years stuff. What about 100 years stuff??? Like you said, Turkey officially denies the Greek, the Armenian and the Assyrian genocides, plus all the progroms against the Greeks which were happening till the freaking 50s.

*The Armenian genocide counts 1.5-2 million victims.

Should they justify themselves for how the Greeks - indigenous of Asia Minor and having majorities in the coasts even a hundred years ago - have ended up being 3,000 in all this massive country? They do. They give a range of answers from “no, Greeks weren’t indigenous here” to the fantastic “they deserved it”, I don’t know which one is better. For Constantinople alone:

My dear Anon, Greeks HAD to revolt against the Ottoman Empire. We do not know how history would unfold if the Greek revolution didn’t happen, the Ottoman Empire would most likely fall again, but since the Greek independence weakened it earlier than it otherwise would, and if the revolution hadn’t happened, a lot more Greeks would have ended up assimilated before the fall. And I believe we would be so very different. We all know that we all still face issues due to the feudal and corrupted system of the empire that has infiltrated Greek politics still. Imagine if all that stuff was a few decades fresh. No European Union. And of course no Northern Greece. Things would be sooo different at our expense, if things didn’t happen in the way they did back then. I am frankly weirded out by a few Greeks - usually young and of certain political views which have turned into their entire identity - (not talking about you and not at all against the political views, I am only criticising the lack of moderation) who are really trying to deconstruct and renounce the Greek revolution, with arguments such as that;

a) Greeks fought because they thought they would live better and be richer if they were independent, so they also did it for themselves and for the spoils and not just for the nation (yes and? You just described all humans on the planet who think that they can prosper better in their own sovereign state, so what exactly is your problem with that?????)

b) Greeks had a great time in the Ottoman Empire because the Rum Millet was governed by the Greek Patriarch and they were allowed to be Christian (yes which is why they attempted 100+ revolts to which Turks always retaliated with thousands of killings. Fun times indeed. It was also so great to have no education and sense of your heritage unless you were a rich merchant in Constantinople or became a tax collector taking taxes from Christians and giving them to Turks or converted to Islam and spoke Turkish and got a a Turkish name so ESSENTIALLY DEGREEKED YOURSELF, the very definition of freedom, quite right.)

Those types of Greeks, they frankly baffle me. History itself shows that Greeks overall wanted out of the empire. In fact, most if not all subject nations in the Balkans and the Arabic ones in Middle East and North Africa at several points revolted against the Ottoman Empire. Subjects wanted OUT of it. Even Muslims wanted out of it. Could they all be unfair to the nice empire? Just because a few ones had managed to prosper through diplomatic relations with the Ottoman officers or just because some didn’t want to partake in the wars because they obviously dreaded their failure and what it would cause to them (all very human, normal concerns) it doesn’t mean they had a great time in the empire. I am so weirded out by such arguments when they don’t come from Turks. And of course, if you have to change name, religion and language in order to prosper, then immediately the argument of freedom and equality falls apart on its own!!! “Greeks were privileged in the empire because they could prosper if they converted to Islam and spoke the Turkish language” So, Greeks were privileged if they stopped being Greeks. Nice. Are those people proof-reading the things they write? I wonder. Next thing, they will start apologizing for gaining independence.

In the end, the Greeks of the 19th century were products of the Ottoman society they lived in. They rebelled violently against an - ultimately - violent state. It would be hard to be accustomed to drinking tea in pretty china and killing enemies only with the sharpness of your words as a subject in the Ottoman Empire. That revolt was harsh indeed - and it was frankly what was needed to succeed. Unfortunate but true. Nobody - certainly not the Greeks - ever takes up arms cheerfully. We grieve for our wrongdoings in Tripolitsá, well at least I do, but heck no I don’t feel bad for the War of Independence, I feel proud of it and I feel like I ought to acknowledge the sacrifice of people, who were hardened humans far from perfect, few of whom could also have their own motives, but did have a hope for their descendants to be who they are now with their opinions on the Internet in their sovereign state in their geographically and historically indigenous lands. I found this insistence of certain young Greeks to strip those Greeks as a whole - from the biggest warriors to the unknown soldiers - from all sorts of noble ideals offensive and disgraceful. The Society of Friends were indeed inspired by their ideals. Even foreign Philhellenes were inspired by ideals enough to come here and fight! So why are these Greeks now dying to argue that all Greeks were ready to die along with their families for the chance of some spoils?! It doesn’t even make much sense! Some would be corrupt or desperate enough for that, and some would not. People are people and there are all sorts of them. It comes down to the fact though that the Greek revolution succeeded because people believed it was the right time, and the right mentality had been formed, and it spread from the three initial members of the Society of Friends (Xanthos, Tsakalof and Skoufas) to a great part of Europe. It was never a little thing and it was not an era fallen from grace. It was an important era with its undoubtedly bleak moments. As it happens with all important eras that change history, including the other two revolutions of the romantic period; the American and the French.

Meanwhile, the Turks happily celebrate annually the Sack of Constantinople inside Hagia Sophia. They have the sack as an annual anniversary. The SACKING. The Fall of Constantinople. Like, the CONQUEST. You understand? The invasion. Seizing the foreign city and celebrating this 600 years later inside the biggest landmark of the defeated inhabitants. Have you ever seen another nation celebrating such a thing in 2023?! Not a liberation, not an independence, A CONQUEST. 600 YEARS LATER. Beating up the corpse! STILL!

So, I personally am not confused at all. My heart aches for all those non-Christian women and children and peaceful civilians who were lost, maybe gruesomely, certainly unfairly. But it also aches for so many Christians who had the exact same fate without ever being the attacker first. Confused overall about the Greek revolution? Heck no! For all the evil Greeks have ever done, Turks have managed to outdo them in retaliation or in advance every time somehow. This is a feat in its own right, I guess. I can not be guilt trapped by anyone who speaks only of Greek war crimes in relation to their affairs with the Turks. I am laughing. Think about it, and perhaps you will start laughing too.

#history #Greek history #modern Greek history #Greek revolution #Greek war of independence #anon #ask #Greco-Turkish relations #long post #long text #tw long #tw long post

[qqueenofhades]

Bon soir. Do you have resources/recommendations for understanding the Israel/Palestine conflict as it related to American media coverage and American anti-semitism?

I do not have any particular content resources, but as I said on WhatsApp, I am willing to write you a brief (ha) primer of this whole mess, its historical context, and the political issues/positions that inform how it is currently covered and talked about in America and the West. Obviously this will not cover everything, but it will hopefully give you some sense of where this is all coming from and why.

The modern state of Israel was founded in 1948, on territory that is historically associated with the ancient/biblical "Israel." Obviously, this took place in the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust and the attempt to wipe out European Jewry. It was felt that the world at large owed reparations to Jews for that "yet again, we tried to kill all of you, our bad" thing. One might say, understandably so.

However, this was controversial because there were already people living in that territory, and overnight they found themselves stateless, or otherwise long-term/deliberately excluded from the new Israeli state apparatus. The Israeli government has long since promoted an image of the (secular) Israeli citizen as also (religiously) Jewish, even though there are many Middle Eastern Christians, Muslims, Arabs, etc etc., who may not identify with this particular ethnic-religious model of Israeli citizenship.

The Middle East has long been a geopolitically/militarily contested area (dating all the way back to the crusades) due to its huge symbolic importance to the three major Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, exemplified by the incredibly sensitive issue of who gets to lay claim to the city of Jerusalem and how). In the nineteenth century, European colonial powers also occupied and exploited the region, particularly Britain in Egypt and Syria, France in Lebanon, and others.

The Ottoman Empire was also in conflict with its European imperial rivals, further increasing the instability and resulting in the development of various nationalist, religious, separatist, and other proxy groups. This all informed the situation at the time Israel was created in 1948, especially as the Middle East and Northern Africa entered the postwar period of decolonization/independence in the 1950s/60s. Pan-Arab nationalist leaders like President Nasser of Egypt portrayed the creation of Israel as yet another crass imposition of European colonial/imperial interests, rather than any kind of merited settlement/feeling bad about the Holocaust. Many Arab states still refuse to recognize Israel, or have any diplomatic relations with it, as a result.

Because Jews have experienced political, religious, and genocidal persecution throughout history (the manifestation of anti-Semitism), the idea of having an actual territorial homeland, where they can be safe from that, is obviously an important protection. There is a very big difference between religious Judaism and political Zionism, defined as the state of Israel's political activities and agendas. However, legitimate criticism of Israel as a nation-state, the same as any other nation-state in the world, is often coded in implicitly (or wildly explicitly) anti-Semitic dogwhistles. Zionism and Judaism are also often deliberately conflated, used interchangeably, or without any attempt to separate them.

Jews of the diaspora, i.e. those in America and Europe, often find themselves ambushed with criticisms of Israel's political and military excesses, and asked to explicitly renounce any allegiance to Israel in order to be seen as "good Jews." Which is a heaping helping of problematic stereotypes all at once. Many Jews in America are liberal, Democratic voters, members of Reform congregations etc, and do legitimately oppose the militaristic and seemingly apartheid-esque actions of the Israeli nation-state. But when your choice is "totally renounce the homeland for your people that was created in the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust and intended to provide very real and very needed shelter against future atrocities of this type, or be subject to more anti-Semitic vitriol," that is... not good.

The U.S. has long supported Israel as a political entity for various reasons. One, because it is often antagonistic or in opposition to the largely Muslim nation-states in the Middle East, and sees Israel as a more natural ally (so yes, institutional Islamophobia does play a role). Two, because the evangelical Christian right-wing wackjobs think that it's important to support Israel because one day Jesus will come back there and start the Rapture (true story).

Right-wing Republicans are often extremely anti-Semitic because they're Christian nutjobs, and left-wing tankies are ...also extremely anti-Semitic, because they paint Israel as just an extension of the American imperial regime and it should therefore be destroyed/delegitimized. (Remember, everything is America's fault somehow and other countries have no agency and never act independently, just as dumb American puppets!) As usual with tankies, they make no effort to understand the sensitive historical, religious, and identity issues around the necessity of a Jewish homeland and why it happened in the first place.

All that said, Israel as a nation, culture, and military (not Judaism as a religion) has often behaved appallingly toward the Palestinians who also live there, and has rejected any idea of a two-state or power-sharing solution. This is where Palestine would also have the right to organize itself as a state and exert the same level of influence/defend itself from what often reads as deliberate ethnic cleansing of Palestinian Arabs and attempts to set up an apartheid state where only religious/ethnic Jews have full citizenship rights.

This is exemplified by the fact that Benjamin Netanyahu took a brief vacation, a few undistinguished caretaker far-right PMs occupied the chair for a year, and then he came back.

Almost every player in this situation has an interest in promoting themselves as fully blameless and their enemies as fully and even demonically in the wrong, which complicates any complete or objective assessment. There are Palestinian militant groups, i.e. Hamas and Hezbollah, who are painted as obvious terrorists and extensions of al-Qaeda, especially in the wake of 9/11 and the start of more U.S.-led wars in the Middle East. This assessment neatly serves the purposes of both American and Israeli political agendas and should be scrutinized, especially considering that all sides are engaging in armed violence at all times.

Israel often engages in the same kind of imperialistic "we're only attacking our enemies defensively in order to preserve our own survival as a state" rhetoric as, say, Russia, and has been notably slow about providing weapons or assistance to Ukraine, in contrast to other western allies. However, unlike Russia, which is not under legitimate threat from anything except Putin's wild revanchist delusions of grandeur, Israel does have plenty of other nations (particularly Iran) that would like to wipe it off the map, if it was at all possible to do. This does not excuse the terrible things its powerful military apparatus has repeatedly done to Palestinian civilian populations, but it, again, makes it more complicated.

As the basic realities currently stand, the conflict does not have any obvious short-term or long-term end. Israeli gives no indications of shifting its extreme-assimilationist political and military policy, there will continue to be violent friction between the political and religious Abrahamic factions that lay claim to Jerusalem and its larger symbolic legacy, and the wider world will continue to be invested in promoting and using particular depictions of the conflict for its own domestic and international purposes.

So yeah.

#daisyyydaisyyydaisyyy #ask #history #jewish history #modern history #history of religion #israel palestine conflict

[apilgrimpassingby]

Actually enslaving people is wrong because it’s a fucked up thing to do, and for centuries Christian’s didn’t get the memo on that one so realizing it’s a fucked up and horrible thing to do doesn’t come from ‘Christian ethics’

Also your blog is a complete eyesore

Slavery is f*cked up? That would have been news to the Greco-Roman world, many African societies throughout history, the Chinese well into the 20th century, the Ottoman Empire and most other Muslim societies, India in many periods of its history, the Norse, many Native American peoples and quite a few people today.

Slavery is so abhorrent to us that we don't realise that the correct question isn't "why does a given society have slavery"? Having slavery is the default for societies. Rather, we should ask why we don't have it.

Christianity, in large part.

Gregory of Nyssa, 4th century bishop and theologian, was the first known person to propose the abolition of slavery. While the other Church Fathers saw that as a pipe dream due to how pervasive it was, they almost all thought that slavery was a symptom of a fallen world and would disappear in the New Creation (and it largely did in the Byzantine Empire, the heartland of eastern Christianity). Whereas to the Greeks and Romans it was just an inherent and indisputable fact of life.

Over in the West, the Norse slave trade was primarily opposed by Christian clergy, and mainly on the religious grounds that it was immoral to treat fellow Christians like this (keep in mind that in their ideal world, everyone would be Christian). When slavery was revived by the Spanish, it was consistently opposed by a Dominican friar, Bartolomé de las Casas, using arguments based on the image of God and the works of Thomas Aquinas. When the Spanish crown agreed to a debate on slavery between him and fellow clergyman Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda, Casas stuck to his arguments from the Christian tradition and Sepúlveda primarily argued from Aristotle.

With the transatlantic slave trade most people are familiar with, the opposition primarily came from Quakers and Evangelicals using arguments based on the image of God in all people. And they eventually succeeded, and Britain hence used its naval muscle to suppress slavery in the colonies and coerce the Ottomans into abolishing it; the sense this created of an Islamic institution being uprooted by foreign infidels led to the rise of Islamic fundamentalism (as such, it's hardly surprising that Islamic State have reinstituted it).

Whenever I have not provided a link, it came from one of the following three books, chiefly the first of them - Dominion: The Making of the Western Mind by Tom Holland (the classicist, not the actor), A Brief History of Life in the Middle Ages by Martyn Whittock and The Bright Ages: A New History of Medieval Europe by David M. Perry and Matthew Gabriele.

I agree my blog could probably do with more of a visual component. If anyone has any suggestions please let me know.

#answered asks #history #christianity #seriously #every adult should read “dominion” #regardless of what you believe #this book will make you think

[ohsalome]

The battles over the fate of Kyiv gave birth to one of the most influential texts of the premodern Russian Empire, the first printed "textbook" of Rus' history, published at the Cave Monastery under Gizel's supervision. The book had а long, baroque title: Synopsis, or а Brief Compendium of Various Chronicles About the Origin of the Slavo-Rossian Nation and the First Princes of the Divinely Protected City of Куіv and the Life of the Ноlу, Pious Grand Prince of Куіv and All Rus: the First Autocrat, Volodymyr. lt appeared in 1674, when Kyiv was preparing for an Ottoman attack and the Poles were demanding it back from Muscovy. ln the Synopsis, Kyiv figured as the first capital of the Muscovite tsars and the birthplace of Muscovite Orthodoxy-a city that simply could not be abandoned to infidels or Catholics. References to the Slavo-Rossian nation, which, according to the authors of the Synopsis, united Muscovy and the Cossack Hetmanate in one political body, further sup­ported this argument. This was the foundation of the myth still accepted by most Russians today about the Kyivan origins of their nation. ln the seven­teenth century, however, the Muscovite elites were not yet thinking in terms of national affinity. Russian empire builders would fully appreciate the inno­vation of the Kyivan monks, who treated the inhabitants of Muscovy and Ukraine as one nation, only in the nineteenth century.

____________________________

Serhii Plokhy. The Gates of Europe

#ukraine #war in ukraine #russia #history #ukrainian history #serhii plokhy #russian history #hetmanate #cossacks #christianity #historical myths

[g0th1cc4ndl3s]

HOW TO HELP PALESTINE

Hello! To help Palestine win against Israel, you can do many things, even from home! I’ll be listing the things YOU can do to support Palestine.

Boycott companies supporting Israel

Stop buying from companies supporting Israel

Protest

Sign campaigns against companies supporting Israel with money (ex. is #NoTechForApartheid, you can go visit the website at notechforapartheid.com, it’s free and it’s easy, it’s close to its goal of 87000, currently at 85566)

Spread information about the ethnic cleansing, genocide, Palestine history, etc. either online or offline (yes, even if you have a small platform, do it, each person talking about it counts.)

Donate to charities for Gaza and Palestine

Contact your member of Congress and call for an immediate ceasefire

Lift up Palestinian voices

LEARN MORE ABOUT GAZA, PALESTINE AND SHARE

History of Palestine and Israel history (sourced from Quora by Ghassan Khalid Barghouti, a Palestinian, edit: this post was published four years ago):

“First of all, let me give you a brief history of Palestine. Palestine was originally a province of the Ottoman empire akin to a US state or a Canadian province and then got occupied by the British when the Ottoman empire lost in WW1. Current independent countries such as Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon were more or less a part of the Ottoman empire. While each of these countries share similar culture and social make up, their exist some difference, and the people of these countries that were mentioned got independence from the British empire expect for Palestine.

Palestine has an Arab and Islamic majority and a sizable Jewish minority. Some of those Jews lived peacefully in Palestine for generations, some even go back to the Kingdom of Israel. But the larger portion of those Jews came from Europe to escape persecution. They came to Palestine as refugees and they largely lived side-by-side with Mulisms and Christians.

Everything good so far? Now, unfortunately things from there on weren’t as good. Because the world sympathized with Jews as a result of the Holocaust, they decided to grant them a country in Palestine (which didn’t even have a Jewish majority). So naturally the Arabs rejected those move, because for them, it didn’t make sense that you should lose your lands just because another group of people suffered by another group of people were not even part of your continent. So they resisted. Unfortunately for them, the extremist Jewish militias were more organized, and they killed lots of simple farmers and villagers and forced others to flee, and denied them the chance to come back to their homeland after the war was over.

Now forward to the present. You have Jewish-European state sitting upon a land that once had a Mulisms, Christians, and Jews living on it, who were Arabs and many of them identified as “Palestinians”. These Palestinians are now either, second-class citizens in Jordan, or living a very uncomfortable life in the Westbank with checkpoints all over the place, walls separating territories, and extremist settlers living in among them, and sometimes abusing or burning their victims alive.

What do Palestinians want? They want justice as a start. They need to have their land back, and not being refugees anymore.”

I am so sorry that this is a short stamp but these are general things to know on what to do/the history of Palestine and I hope you help, listen, and support. I hope that the Palestinian people are saved and given their beautiful country back.

If I made any mistakes with this post, please let me know so I can correctly share it. Thank you for reading and supporting, I hope you have a good day.

#stand with gaza #i stand with palestine #stand with palestine #palestine #free gaza #gaza #free palestine

[autumnmobile12]

In 1462, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, Mehmed the Conqueror, decided to try his luck expanding his lands into Europe, invading through Wallachia.  In the past, many of Vlad III Dracula’s predecessors would have either stood aside and let the Ottoman forces pass through their land unhindered, or they might have committed Wallachian soldiers to the invasion force out of self-preservation.  Dracula instead chose to resist and, in the face of the Ottoman’s significantly larger and better trained army, he conscripted every able-bodied citizen he could.  This included men, women, and children aged twelve and older.  Making use of terrain they knew better than their enemies, the Wallachians resorted to guerrilla war tactics, scorched earth, and even early germ warfare.  When Wallachian soldiers became ill, they were often sent into enemy camps in an attempt to spread the disease and weaken the Ottoman forces.

In the brief glimpse we have of Isaac’s past, we see his tormentor wears a white tunic with a red cross, the Cross of St. George, which is famously associated with Europe’s Crusades against Islam.  As if his life wasn’t miserable enough, Isaac was likely born in a frontline Ottoman province and was captured/enslaved, and possibly orphaned, by Christian soldiers.  Yikes.

The ruler of Wallachia was known as a voivode, which we often translate as ‘prince,’ but a more accurate meaning is military governor or warlord.  Serving under him was a council of boyar lords and advisors known as the princely council, or sfatful domnesc.  These officials, the dregători, managed everything from court logistics to military endeavors to lawmaking.  Whether or not the Judge was a direct member of the council or an assistant to one of the members is up for interpretation.  As for his reference to ‘doing just well enough that he was sent back to Lindenfeld,’ the Judge maybe, on account of the voivode and other claimants to Wallachia’s throne consistently overthrowing/murdering the shit out of each other, found himself on the wrong end of a regime change and found it prudent to skip town while the going was good.  Or, you know, before somebody important found out about his ‘little pleasures.’

Straying into headcanon territory with this one, but a lot of it is backed up by historically accurate presentations of how a medieval household was generally managed.  Firstly, a medieval household was huge, and an estate of this size would have been maintained by a large staff, including but not limited to:  the steward, a stable master, one or more groundskeepers, a cook, laundresses, personal attendants of family members, page boys running messages all over the estate, and one or more nursemaids watching over the infants and younger children.  This is broad speculation, but I will point out that in England around the same time, it was common for high-ranking nobles to employ an average of 240 to 500 people.

In a Wallachian household, the education of a boyar’s son would have been handled largely by the women of the house, as well as the occasional tutor for more specified subjects.  This would have included etiquette, penmanship, arithmetic, politics, history, etc.  So Trevor’s domestic education likely would have been overseen by his mother, aunts, and possibly his grandmother.  Combat training would have been supervised by his father and uncles.

In short, I like to imagine some of the people from Dănești were survivors from his family’s estate and knew him as a child.

#castlevania #medieval wallachia #trevor belmont #castlevania netflix #historical post #medieval europe #wallachian politics and the history lesson no one asked for #isaac castlevania #alucard castlevania #sypha belnades #medieval romania #the ottoman empire #dracula's war #dracula #historical context #danesti #danesti characters #danesti village

[council-of-beetroot]

HELLO!!!!! :D!!!!!!

This isn't about the recent ask game you posted but a general ask. Im wondering about how you see Poland’s relations!! Like who are his besties and what are some relations he has that are more complicated? Does he have any blood relatives? You get the gist. :]

Ooh this is fun! Alright Feliks is pretty complicated with his relations so let's get started. It will be somewhat brief though or I could go on forever.

⚠️Obligatory Disclaimer ⚠️

I am not an expert on the international relations involving Poland. Two some is based on history irl, some is based on the characters personalities in the series. This is after all an anime so keep that in mind. For example, Feliks and Natalya, is different to me compared to irl relationship of the countries of Poland and Belarus if that makes sense.

His Blood Relatives

Either Czechia or Slovakia I can see as a cousin or close relative of Feliks. Since they are canonically a couple I would probably make Slovakia related by blood and Czechia related by marriage (or whatever they had going)

I could see Belarus and Ukraine being cousins as well

And perhaps he has other relatives

Ukraine and Belarus

He gets along well with Ukraine in modern day and despite issues in the past they definitely enjoy the other's company and Feliks would enjoy the welcoming homey atmosphere that Ukraine provides.

Feliks is the type to just hang out in her home and just end up staying there for hours consuming every jar of pickles and doing crafting with Ukraine

Belarus, he is a tad more distant with and I think they would bicker a lot with Natalya generally finding Feliks annoying

Now Everyone Else

Hungary

Very good friends! as the saying goes they are besties in battle and drinking.

Probably one of Feliks most trusted friends and allies

Purely platonic though (but I think people forget the power of a strong platonic friendship

France

Feliks definitely looks up to and admires Francis but it's not a huge relationship to Francis despite Feliks looking up to him. It's kinda like those cool kids in school you would do anything to hang out with but then realize they don't really think too much about you.

Britain

Someone he probably has mixed feelings about him as Arthur probably doesn't hold him in high regard and the whole Polish British treaty thing is definitely a sore spot. I think Arthur would generally look down upon Feliks in a way.

Romania

Good friend much to Hungary's dismay

Germany

Definitely a rough spot for the two of them but with Ludwig, he is the type to try and make amends and the two are amicable now . but Feliks keeps his distance as it's really difficult for him in general to really ever feel truly trusting towards and comfortable around him.

Estonia and Latvia

Close friends as they both have close relationships with Lithuania. I discussed this in a post that I will link once finish typing this.

Italy

Veneziano is like that friend you meet at vacation bible school or at least what i think that is like. They have other friends but they were stuck with each other for a while and they quickly became acquainted and generally are chaotic together. Definitely a friend who Feliks doesn't see much but definitely has a good time whenever he does.

Austria

Feliks probably finds Roderich annoying but he doesn't hate him, he just really finds him obnoxious.

Pianos i need to elaborate on this but I gotta think a little bit

I just see him annoying Roderich and Hungary being like oh he's fine

Turkey

Sadık is shown to respect anyone who can kick his ass which Poland has.

The ottoman empire didn't recognize the partitions of Poland

I think it's a solid relationship of mutual respect

Vietnam

These two don't have any canon interaction

But irl the two countries have an interesting relationship

So they aren't super close but they have a good relationship

I headcanon Feliks to have a love of Vietnamese food

America

I think Feliks would have an idealized view of America in general

Lithuania

It's complicated but in the end they can't ignore the shared experiences they've had

Prussia

They've got an interesting relationship of back and forth that I wish I was more familiar with

In modern day they get along okay you know those mutual relationships where you don't dislike someone but your entire relationship is trying to irritate them and compete with them that's kind of it.

Japan

Reading up on Japanese- Polish relationships and dang is it entertaining

Russia

Generally don't get along

Feliks sees through Ivan's justifications for his actions

They are good foils

#aph poland #hws poland #hetalia headcanons

[theoutcastrogue]

I found your recent post on wine legality under Ottoman rule very interesting. I have tried to make a study of Ottoman history(I am mostly familiar with it's history from the 19th century onwards and have done deep dives into the rebellions in Greece and Egypt, I could talk all day about either Ali Pasha). Unfortunately since then I've had trouble finding good books on Ottoman history. I was excited by your mention of the book Crime and Punishment in the Ottoman Empire. I was wondering if you had any other books on Ottoman history that you could recommend?

Sure! Keeping in mind that I’m not a historian or an educator of any kind, I just read history for fun (and I’m mostly into rogues and cities, which may show), here’s what I got. Highlights in bold, links are to excerpts I’ve occasionally posted:

Caroline Finkel, Osman’s Dream: The History of the Ottoman Empire (2005) [this is a decent single book, narrative and accessible; I’m a big fan of having an easy-to-read introduction that covers a large period as a starting point, and taking it from there; I’m also a big fan of wikipedia]

Halil İnalcık & Donald Quataert, An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire (1997) [this is nitty gritty but I think essential, 2 volumes, pass once and keep handy for references]

Halil İnalcık, The Ottoman Empire: Conquest, Organization and Economy (1978) [essay collection]

Halil İnalcık, The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600 (1973)

Suraiya Faroqhi, The Ottoman Empire and the World Around it (2007) [I like things in context; for the Ottomans you always gotta keep in mind what was going on with Venice, Persia, the Arabs, the Hapsburgs, etc]

Suraiya Faroqhi & Kate Fleet, The Ottoman Empire as a World Power, 1453–1603 (2006)

Suraiya Faroqhi, The Later Ottoman Empire, 1603-1839 (2006) [these two are volumes from the Cambridge History of Turkey]

Donald Quataert, The Ottoman Empire: 1700-1922 (2005)

M. Şükrü Hanioğlu, A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire (2008)

David Fromkin, A Peace To End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East (1989)

The Law and lack thereof

Colin Imber, The Ottoman Empire, 1300-1650: The Structure of Power (2004)

Sam White, The Climate of Rebellion in the Early Modern Ottoman Empire (2011)

Uriel Heyd, Studies in Old Ottoman Criminal Law (1973)

Karen Barkey, Bandits and Bureaucrats: The Ottoman Route to State Centralization (1996)

Erol Ozan Yilmaz, Militarizartion of Ottoman Rumelia: The Mountain Bandits (1785-1808) (2016, thesis)

“Banditry in the Ottoman Empire”

Haim Gerber, State, Society, and Law in Islam: Ottoman Law in Comparative Perspective (1994)

Joshua M. White, Piracy and Law in the Ottoman Mediterranean (2017)

Cities

John Freely, Istanbul: The Imperial City (1998) [a joy to read, not really the product of rigorous research, but written by a well-read guy who’s in love with the city, and I think that accounts for something]

Ebru Boyar & Kate Fleet, A Social History of Ottoman Istanbul (2010)

Fariba Zarinebaf, Crime and Punishment in Istanbul 1700-1800 (2010)

Zeynep Çelik, The Remaking of Istanbul: Portrait of an Ottoman City in the 19th Century (1986)

Mark Mazower, Salonica, City of Ghosts: Christians, Muslims and Jews 1430-1950 (2004)

Heghnar Zeitlian Watenpaugh, Image of an Ottoman City: Imperial Architecture and Urban Experience in Aleppo in the 16th and 17th Centuries (2004)

Nikolai Todorov, The Balkan City, 1400-1900 (1983) [very nitty gritty, you can’t read this for fun, but it’s got demographics and stuff you won’t find elsewhere]

Ulrike Freitag et al, The City in the Ottoman Empire: Migration and the Making of Urban Modernity (2011)

Biray Kolluoğlu & Meltem Toksöz, Cities of the Mediterranean: From the Ottomans to the Present Day (2010)

Etc

Suraiya Faroqhi et al, Living in the Ottoman Ecumenical Community (2008)

Robert Dankoff & Sooyong Kim, An Ottoman Traveller: Selections from the Book of Travels of Evliya Çelebi (2010)

Robert Dankoff, An Ottoman Mentality: The World of Evliya Çelebi (2007)

Mark Alan Epstein, The Ottoman Jewish Communities and their Role in the 15th and 16th Centuries (1980)

Dror Ze’evi, Producing Desire: Changing Sexual Discourse in the Ottoman Middle East, 1500–1900 (2006)

Stephen Ortega, Negotiating Transcultural Relations in the Early Modern Mediterranean: Ottoman-Venetian Encounters (2014)

Douglas Scott Brookes, The Concubine, the Princess, and the Teacher: Voices from the Ottoman Harem (2008)

Madeline C. Zilfi, Women and Slavery in the Ottoman Empire (2011)

Dana Sajdi, Ottoman Tulips, Ottoman Coffee: Leisure and Lifestyle in the 18th Century (2007)

Sevket Pamuk, A Monetary History of the Ottoman Empire (2007)

#books #ottomans #correspondence

[plutobxbyyyyy]

I feel like alot of people aren’t understanding this war did not begin on Oct 7. It began DECADES ago. I’ve compiled a brief overview of the Origins of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict has its roots in the early 20th century, the conflict's historical origins can be traced back to the British-French division of the land and its impact on the Ottoman Arabs.

British-French Division (1916-1918): The conflict rose during World War I, when the British and French governments engaged in negotiations resulting in the Sykes-Picot Agreement. This agreement was a secret treaty created to divide the territories of the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East. Under this arrangement, the British gained control over areas that would later become Israel, Jordan, and southern Iraq, while the French were tasked with administering modern-day Syria and Lebanon.

The Balfour Declaration (1917): Concurrent with these political developments, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration in 1917. This declaration was created to support the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. This commitment was viewed as a promise of land for both Jewish immigrants and the Arab population already residing there. The British-French division of the land and the Balfour Declaration caused the Ottoman Arabs to react to these developments. The Arab population decided to revolt, known as the Great Arab Revolt. These revolts had a goal of achieving independence on their own land by challenging both the Ottoman and British rule in the region.

Following World War I, the League of Nations, which was an international organization established after the war to promote peace and cooperation among nations, assigned Britain with a mandate to govern Palestine. This essentially meant that the League of Nations authorized Britain to govern the region. During this period, there was a significant increase in the number of Jewish immigrants relocating to Palestine. This influx of Jewish immigrants sparked the existing tensions and resulted in violent clashes between the Jewish and Arab communities in the region. In essence, the League of Nations granted Britain the authority to govern Palestine, and this era marked a turning point in the history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

The situation continued to evolve, and in 1947, the United Nations introduced a plan to partition Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, with international administration over Jerusalem. Although this plan received acceptance from the Jewish leadership, it was met with rejection by Arab states, precipitating the First Arab-Israeli War. The 1948 war resulted in the establishment of the State of Israel, with Palestinian territories coming under Israeli control.

These historical events continue to shape the present situation. The conflict has claimed tens of thousands of lives and displaced millions of Palestinians. In recent years, the conflict has consisted of recurring violence, with Israel launching military and implementing a blockade in the Gaza Strip, resulting in deaths and destruction. Today, tensions in the region remain high, with violence and ongoing political disputes.

#palestine #free palestine

[dan6085]

Here's a timeline of Serbian history with key details:

- 7th century: The Slavs settle in the Balkan Peninsula, laying the foundation for the Serbian people's emergence.

- 9th century: The Serbian state begins to form under the leadership of Vlastimir, marking the early stages of Serbian statehood.

- 10th century: The medieval Serbian state is established, with the Nemanjić dynasty becoming prominent rulers.

- 1166: Stefan Nemanja founds the Serbian Orthodox Church and becomes the Grand Župan (prince) of Serbia.

- 1346: The Serbian Empire, led by Stefan Dušan, reaches its zenith, encompassing much of the Balkans.

The Serbian Empire in 1346, also known as the Empire of Stefan Dušan, was a medieval Serbian state that reached its zenith under the rule of Stefan Dušan, a remarkable Serbian monarch. Here are some key details about the Serbian Empire at that time:

**1. Stefan Dušan's Ascension:** Stefan Dušan, also known as Dušan the Mighty, became the ruler of Serbia in 1331 as the King of Serbia, succeeding his father, Stefan Dečanski. He expanded his authority over various regions, including parts of modern-day Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, and Greece.

**2. Coronation as Emperor:** In 1346, Stefan Dušan elevated his status to that of Emperor, adopting the title "Emperor of Serbs and Greeks." This move signified his ambition to establish a multi-ethnic and multi-religious empire.

**3. Territorial Expansion:** Under Dušan's rule, the Serbian Empire expanded significantly. It reached its territorial peak, encompassing a vast area of southeastern Europe. His conquests included regions inhabited by Serbs, Greeks, Albanians, and Bulgarians.

**4. Legal and Administrative Reforms:** Dušan implemented a legal code known as the "Dušan's Code" or "Dušan's Law," which was a comprehensive set of laws and regulations. It aimed to create a unified legal framework for his diverse subjects and to consolidate his rule.

**5. Religious Policy:** Despite the empire's religious diversity, Dušan supported the Serbian Orthodox Church and worked to strengthen its influence. He saw himself as the protector of Orthodoxy and sought to establish the Serbian Patriarchate under his rule.

**6. Cultural Flourishing:** The Serbian Empire under Stefan Dušan saw a flourishing of culture, art, and architecture. Notably, he commissioned the construction of the Monastery of the Holy Archangels in Prizren, which remains a significant cultural and historical site.

**7. Decline and Succession:** Despite its initial success, the Serbian Empire faced internal and external challenges. Stefan Dušan died in 1355, and his empire began to weaken due to internal conflicts and external pressures from the Ottoman Turks and other neighboring powers.

**8. Fragmentation:** After Dušan's death, the empire fragmented into smaller states and principalities, including the Serbian Despotate, which continued to exist for several decades. The Ottoman Turks gradually expanded their influence in the region, eventually leading to the fall of Serbian medieval states to Ottoman rule in the late 14th and early 15th centuries.

In summary, the Serbian Empire of 1346, led by Stefan Dušan, represented a brief but significant period in Serbian history when the country reached the height of its territorial and political influence. Dušan's ambitious rule left a lasting impact on the region's history and culture, even though the empire's decline was inevitable in the face of external threats and internal divisions.

- 1389: The Battle of Kosovo takes place, with Serbian forces led by Prince Lazar facing the Ottoman Empire. Though a tactical draw, it marks the beginning of Ottoman dominance in the region.

- 15th-19th centuries: Serbia remains under Ottoman rule, enduring centuries of struggle for independence.

- 1804: The First Serbian Uprising against the Ottoman Empire begins, eventually leading to autonomy for Serbia.

- 1835: The Convention of Akkerman grants Serbia expanded autonomy under Ottoman suzerainty.

- 1878: The Congress of Berlin recognizes Serbia as an independent nation, free from Ottoman control.

- 1914: The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary in Sarajevo triggers World War I, during which Serbia faces significant hardships.

- 1918: The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes (later Yugoslavia) is formed, uniting South Slavic peoples under King Alexander I.

- 1941-1945: Yugoslavia is occupied by Axis powers during World War II, leading to the formation of the Yugoslav Partisans resistance movement.

- 1945: Yugoslavia becomes a socialist federation under Marshal Tito's leadership.

- 1991: The disintegration of Yugoslavia begins with the secession of Slovenia and Croatia.

- 1999: NATO intervenes in Kosovo, a province of Serbia, leading to the end of hostilities in the Kosovo War.

- 2003: The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia transforms into the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro.

- 2006: Montenegro holds a referendum and gains independence, leaving Serbia as the successor state.

- 2008: Kosovo unilaterally declares independence from Serbia, which Serbia does not recognize.

- 2019: Aleksandar Vučić is elected as Serbia's president, continuing his leadership.

This timeline offers a snapshot of Serbia's complex history, marked by periods of independence, Ottoman rule, socialist federation, and the challenges of the breakup of Yugoslavia in the late 20th century. Serbia remains a key player in the Balkan region today.

[mallarimira]

ISRAEL VS. PALESTINE

The Israel-Palestine conflict is a long-standing and complex dispute over territory, identity, and sovereignty in the Middle East. Here's a brief overview of its historical background:

1. RELIGION

In the Israeli-Palestinian context, religious movements are prime actors stoking and sparking escalation.

Israel is a nation perennially swept up in religious fervor and conflict. And yet, strikingly, a large portion of its population is secular, and even its insular ultra-Orthodox community loses a steady stream of members who tire of its strict religious rules.

The country is home to about 7 million Jews, almost half of the global Jewish population. But Jewish identity is a complex blend of religious and ethnonational identity; most Israeli Jews are not diligent observers of Judaism.

2. BORDER

More than 75 years after Israel declared statehood, its borders are yet to be entirely settled. Wars, treaties and occupation mean the shape of the Jewish state has changed over time, and in parts is still undefine The land which would become Israel was for centuries part of the Turkish-ruled Ottoman Empire. After World War One and the collapse of the empire, territory known as Palestine - the portion of which west of the River Jordan was also known as the land of Israel by Jews - was marked out and assigned to Britain to administer by the victorious allied powers (soon after endorsed by the League

3. TERRITORY

Israel is a nation perennially swept up in religious fervor and conflict. And yet, strikingly, a large portion of its population is secular, and even its insular ultra-Orthodox community loses a steady stream of members who tire of its strict religious rules.

The country is home to about 7 million Jews, almost half of the global Jewish population. But Jewish identity is a complex blend of religious and ethnonational identity; most Israeli Jews are not diligent observers of Judaism.

4. RESOURCES

As of 2017, more than 96% of Gaza’s coastal aquifer – the main source of water for residents of Gaza – has become unfit for human consumption. The reasons include over-extraction because of Gaza’s extremely dense population, contamination with sewage and seawater, Israel’s 12-year old blockade, and asymmetrical wars which has left Gaza’s infrastructure severely crippled and with a near-constant electricity shortage.

5. ORIGIN OF THE PEOPLE

Many Palestinians trace their collective ancestry to the Canaanites(civilization or region of southern levant in the Asian near east during in the late 2nd millennium bc), and consider the concept of "Arab" to be pre-Islamic (including the Quranic and Biblical patriarchs). This identity was described in the early 20th century by writers such as Tawfiq Canaan, Abdallah Frangi and Akram Zu'aytir.

6. NOVA MUSIC FESTIVAL

Israel's Supernova festival celebrated music and unity. It turned into the deadliest concert attack in history

During a music festival near the Gaza border in southern Israel, thousands of young people were enjoying music and dancing. Environmental volunteers, like Maya Alper, were present, promoting sustainability by collecting trash and providing free vodka shots to those who reused their cups. However, the event was disrupted when air raid sirens blared and rockets were launched overhead during the DJ's performance at dawn. Panic ensued as festival-goers attempted to flee. Tragically, the situation escalated into violence with gunshots, resulting in injuries and fatalities.

The attack on the Tribe of Nova music festival, which took place during a Sukkot celebration near the Gaza border, is considered the deadliest civilian massacre in Israeli history. Approximately 260 people lost their lives, and an unspecified number were taken hostage. The incident involved dozens of Hamas militants.

7.ARE YOU PRO ISRAEL OR PRO PALESTINE?

I am pro Israel because according to the word of gods the Israel is the promise land of Jerusalem. This passage from 2 Chronicles 6:5-6 quotes King Solomon as saying that God chose Jerusalem as the city in which His name would reside and David to be the leader of the people of Israel, rather than selecting any other city or ruler from among the tribes of Israel. It highlights the special significance of Jerusalem in God's plan for the Israelites.

[troybeecham]

Today the Church honors St. Dositheus, Martyr.

Orate pro nobis

The Christian country of Georgia came under Muslim Persian vassalage beginning in AD 1502, and under intermittent Muslim rule and suzerainty since 1555, and had become de facto independent after the disintegration of the Iranian Afsharid dynasty in 1796. In this brief interval of self-rule, the Georgian king Erakle II (1762-1798) made a peace agreement with Russia. The new ruler of Persia, Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar (14 March 1742 – 17 June 1797), also known by his regnal name of Agha Mohammad Shah, was the founder of the new Qajar dynasty of Persia, ruling from AD 1789 to 1797 as Shah.

For Agha Mohammad Khan, the resubjugation and reintegration of Georgia into the Muslim Persian Empire was part of the same process that had brought other territories, such as Shiraz, Isfahan, and Tabriz, back under his rule. Finding an interval of peace amid their own internal quarrels and with northern, western, and central Persia secure, the Persians demanded the Georgian monarch Erakle II renounce his treaty with Russia and re-accept Muslim Persian suzerainty, in return for peace and the security of his kingdom. The Ottomans, Persia's neighboring rival, recognized Persia's rights over Kartli and Kakheti for the first time in four centuries. King Erakle II appealed then to his theoretical protector, Empress Catherine II of Russia, pleading for at least 3,000 Russian troops, but he was not listened to, leaving Georgia to fend off the Persian threat alone. Nevertheless, Erakle II still rejected the Khan's ultimatum.

Thirty-five thousand Persian soldiers marched toward Georgia in the year 1795. Erekle II and his two thousand soldiers declared war on the invaders as they were approaching the capital city of Tbilisi. The Georgians offered a desperate resistance and succeeded in rolling back a series of Iranian attacks on 9 and 10 September, but most perished in the fighting. The enemy was shaken and was preparing to flee the battleground, when several traitors reported to Aqa Muhammed Khan that King Erekle had lost nearly his entire army. This betrayal decided the fate of the battle: the one hundred fifty soldiers who remained in the Georgian army barely succeeded in saving the life of King Erekle, who had willed to perish on the battlefield with his soldiers.

All of Tbilisi was engulfed in flames. The plunderers murdered the people, set fire to the libraries, and vandalized the churches and the king’s palace. They slaughtered the clergy in an especially cruel manner. The Iranian army marched back laden with spoil and carrying off some 15,000 captives.

Unfortunately, history has not preserved the names of all those martyrs who perished in this tragedy, but we do know that a certain Metropolitan Bishop Dositheus of Tbilisi was killed because he would not abandon his flock. While the invaders simply killed most of the clergymen, from Saint Dositheus they demanded a renunciation of the Christian Faith. In the aftermath of the battle, a group of Qajar soldiers found the elderly Dositheus at the Sioni Cathedral kneeling before the icon of Virgin Mary. They commanded him to defile the True and Life-giving Cross of our Lord. But the holy hieromartyr Dositheus endured the greatest torments without yielding to the enemy, and he joyfully accepted death for Christ’s sake. The invaders slaughtered Christ’s devoted servant with their swords and threw his body into the Kira River.

Saint Dositheus was martyred on September 12 in the year AD 1795.

Almighty God, by whose grace and power your holy martyr Dositheus triumphed over suffering and was faithful even to death: Grant us, who now remember him in thanksgiving, to be so faithful in our witness to you in this world, that we may receive with him the crown of life; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, forever and ever.

Amen.

#father troy beecham #christianity #jesus #god #saints #salvation #peace #martyrs #faith

[irregularincidents]

Sir Basil Zaharoff, known to his friends as Zedzed, was called many things prior to his death as one of the richest men in the world in 1936: an industrialist, a confidence trickster, an arsonist, a bigamist, a “mystery man of Europe“, but it’s in his capacity as the “Merchant of Death“ that he really made his name, as arguably one of the most impactful arms dealers in history, who included the likes of British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, Greek Prime Minister Eleftherios Venizelos and Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II among his many clients.

Originally Greek, Basil was born around 1845 in what is now Turkey, in a province of the Ottoman Empire. After a brief spell in Russia, where his family were forced to flee due to a pogrom targeting the Greek community (it being here where they changed their name to Zaharoff) Basil’s first job was as a tour guide in the Galata district in Istanbul... the job he took afterwards being that of being an arsonist, where he worked with firefighters to burn down the homes of wealthy people so they could split the fee the rich would pay the firemen to rescue their expensive possessions.

After a brief time working for his uncle’s form in London (after which he had to flee back to Greece under an assumed name due to accusations of embezzlement), he befriended a Greek political journalist by the name of Stefanos Skouloudis, who put him touch with a Swedish sea captain who acted as an agent for the arms manufacturer Thorsten Nordenfelt. As the sea captain was leaving that line of work, they suggested that Nordenfelt hire Basil, and in 1877 he signed up with the organisation...

In a career he didn’t fully commit to initially, despite the unstable political situation in the Balkans proving lucrative for his new business. Instead he got an additional job selling railway cars in America as well as posing as a fake Greek prince, "Prince Zacharias Basileus Zacharoff, under the guise of which he married Philadelphia heiress, Jennie Billings... Only to have to go on the run from Dutch police after a British man recognised Basil as having already gotten married to a woman in Bristol back in the early 1870s.

Once finally actually focusing on his career as an arms dealer, Basil would go on to sell weapons to Britain, German, Japan, the United States, the Russian and Ottoman Empires, Spain, and Greece. Despite his reputation for corruption and for selling weapons to both sides in a conflict (conflicts he often had a hand in starting in the first place), a move he called “the Systeme Zaharoff“, he nonetheless became an instrumental figure in international politics due to his connections to the arms trade.

For one such example, of this allegedly being the case of the faulty Nordenfelt I steam-powered submarine. Now, this instance seems to involve sources referencing each other, but his scam basically went like this. Despite the submarine having a reputation for not working correctly, Basil sold one to the Greeks under the agreement of special payment terms. He then turned to the Ottomans, and told them that the Greeks were buying submarines, so they better buy some as well to defend themselves from their increased threat... And then turned to the Russians after that sale concluded to get them to buy some subs from him too, as the increased threat of Turkish submarines in the Black Sea meant that Russia needed to buy some from Basil as well to defend themselves too from this OBVIOUS sign of aggression.

As time progressed and his influence grew (helped by his purchasing several newspapers, such as the French paper Excelsior, to print editorials about how great the arms industry was), Basil would eventually make millions selling weapons and equipment to the Allies. Additionally he was eventually called upon to use his by now considerable influence to first get Greece to enter the war on the Allies side and then to establish peace talks with the Ottomans to get them to exit the war (he paid them £10 million in gold to leave on the authorisation of the British Prime Minister, in negotiations that would eventually lead to the establishment of Israel decades later).

Following the war, France recognized his services by making him a grand officer of the Legion of Honour, and Britain honoured him with a knight grand cross of the Order of the Bath (the King of England knighted him on the insistence of the prime minister, Lloyd George, despite George V’s vocal disgust at Basil entire deal). In the 1920s, he personally funded a Greek war to occupy territory from a badly weakened Turkey, a move that ultimately proved to be unsuccessful. What was ultimately more successful was his moving into the oil and gas industry, something he saw a lot of potential in, resulting in the incorporation of the company that would eventually become British Petroleum.

Now, you’d think that after a lifetime of evil Basil would be aware that he had something of a public relations problem... And you’d be right, with his attempting to use his literal billions to try and whitewash his legacy with some philanthropy, most of which tying into his fascination with the newly created field of aviation, but others including bizarrely more whimsical things. Such as his donation of £20,000 to refurbish Paris Zoo's monkey house (initially treated as a hoax by Zoo staff who left the cheque in a drawer for two months).

This did nothing to lesson his negative reputation, however, with his being cited as a direct inspiration for the James Bond supervillain Ernst Stavro Blofeld, among many other depictions in pop culture. Another such example being in the Tintin comic The Broken Ear, which has weapons trader Basil Bazaroff, who sells to both parties of a single conflict that he helps provoke in South America. Tintin creator Herge notable drew his fictional Basil to mirror his inspiration just to make it clear who he was based on, with the company he worked for being a play on Vickers, one of the arms firms the real Basil also worked for.

In 1924, at the age of 74, Basil married yet again, to María del Pilar Antonia Angela Patrocinio Fermina Simona de Muguiro y Beruete, 1st Duchess de Villafranca de los Caballeros, former wife of the cousin of King Alfonso XII of Spain. Reportedly one of the richest women in Spain, she promptly died of an infection 18 months into their marriage.

Following Maria’s death, Basil moved into semi-retirement in Monte Carlo, having purchased the debt-ridden public company that ran the Casino Monte Carlo, the main source of income for the principality. This arrangement seemingly being agreed upon through his association with Prince Louis II of Monaco, the understanding that Basil could get the Casino in exchange for him using his influence to prevent the French from eroding the tiny nation’s rights in the Treaty of Versailles.

He would also insist that people address him as Sir Basil, which was technically against the rules as he was by this point a naturalised French citizen (his previously also having been British, his marriage to the woman in Bristol having been suggested by some as a means of obtaining a passport), but he was evidently a snob on top of everything else.

Basil would eventually die in Monte Carlo at the age of 84 of a heart attack. Curiously, despite being incredibly wealthy at the time of his death (he had made $1.2 billion from the Great War alone, and his assets including a palace outside of Paris formerly owned by the infamous Prince Leopold II of Belgium that he filled with art and statues), Zaharoff’s will was proved at just £193,103, rather less than $1 million at the time. Considering his death prompted his servants to quickly burn a ton of his documents, it’s curious to think where all of his ill-gotten gains disappeared to.

Personally? I hope that his servants stole it from him on the downlow. Was no less than he deserved.

#irregular incidents #crime #history #world war one #tintin #james bond