Cyprus-Forum.com

[Murtaza]

In 1878 when the Ottoman Turks gave Cyprus to the British, the Turkish Cypriots were 25% of the population. Of course you have to take into consideration that many Greek Cypriots vanished or emigrated from Cyprus during the 300 years of Ottoman Turkish oppression due to the hard ships, torturing and mass murders by the Ottoman Turks.

Any Proof? I mean if Ottoman mades that much mass murder, Arent Greeks too much in land now? Just have a proof about this murders? Or link ? want to learn about this mass murders and torturings. I mean a link show proofs not words. I dont know if they did or not. But Ottomans were not like of genocide. I will be happy if you show me proof.

I agree they were not for genocite. That was an exageration. What they were actually having was for a network of governing system, based on very heavy taxation and de-juicing.The system usually provided for harsh punishments to those who were not abiding (usually death). The oppression included many forms as for example getting the beatiful daughters or even wives of the people by force into the harems. It was not uncommon for a pasa to take off some heads, when he would smell "danger" of "revolt" or even hear some "complains". That helped "secure" the system. You can make your own research in the internet about the Ottoman era to see that what kept the "order" of the Ottoman system was the "cutting of heads".
The final result was that the sultans and pasas were living like kings by dejuicing the people. So yes they were not doing genocide, because who would they dejuice then, but this does not mean they were reluctant in taking heads off at all.

By the way don't be mistaken that the Ottomans were onlly oppressing the Greeks.The Turks themselves were considered filthy peasants and they were equally oppressed.One pasa (of Croatian origin) massacred thousands of Turks who revolted in just one day. When you read the poem of Rigas Phereos (thourios tou Riga) you will clearly see that he WAS NOT calling only the GREEKS to revolt.He was calling everybody even the TURKS to revolt.

About the number of "TCs" you can refer to the Cyprus conflict web site
http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/narrative-main.htm

In there you can see that immediately after the British took over the number of "mouslims" in Cyprus started diminishing very fast. The writter attributes this to the fact that many Christians were simply "mouslims" on paper to avoid heavy taxation.So after the new ruler came they reverted to their original religion and this dropped down the number of "TCs" to 18% where it remained steady until 1974.

by the way Mutraza here is where you can find proof.
http://www.google.com/
Write the words "Ottoman attrocities" in the search box and then press "SEARCH". You will be reading for days or even weeks....


PS.Do you know that the Ottomans actually contributed to modern science through their barbaric methods? You want to know how?

Great at least Genocide word is no more. And second I dont know any Ottoman rules about to taking someones wifes or brothers forcefully. If they did this is what they did. Not The what ottoman becamed.
About the very heavy taxation issue, what I read at our one sided books, The tax ottoman put is less than what venedic put. If you can investigate this in cyprus I will be realy happy.
And I will ask a question again Ottomans are barbarian acording to this age? or acording the age they lived. (You should not forget at that age , exterminating a city call a normal act.Like crusader did in jerusalem)
Another question will this greeks prefer ottomans or venedics(or whatever it is?

[garbitsch]

Mike:

I am not going to justify the Ottomans and I am not going to argue that they were angels.

1- It is true that non-Muslims were paying more taxes than Muslims (Kelle Vergisi). But paying this extra tax they were exempted from military duty. So while a poor Anatolian Muslim Ottoman was forced to fight and die in a place he doesn't know, the Non-Muslim Ottoman could stay at his home and pursue his own business (Why were the Armenians, Jews and Greeks in Istanbul so rich??)

2- It is true that Ottomans took Non-Muslim babies or children from their families and raise them as Muslims for becoming Jannisaries. Jannisairies were in the highest rank in Ottoman hierarchy. They were rich and highly respected. But later they abused this position and Jannisaries became a very big burden on Ottoman economy, and even Jannisaries had revolted against Sultan Osman and eventually killed him. Later this was abolished by Sultan Mahmut 2.

3- Cutting the heads. Excuse me but this was a fasion in the rest of Europe. Does the word "Guillotine" recall you something? Did you know that France used this until 1977?

The guillotine was from then on the only legal execution method in France until the abolition of the death penalty in 1981, apart from certain crimes against the security of the state, which entailed execution by firing squad. The last execution was of Hamida Djandoubi and took place on September 10, 1977.

Again you are prejudicing against Turks without evaluating historical facts in the context they occured. You are comparing Ottoman Empire with today's state system.

[gabaston]

garbitsch


were these Janisseries the "Young Turks"?

[garbitsch]

Nope. they were "yeniceri"s. Young Turks were formed towards the end of 19th Century I think.

[garbitsch]

Devshirmeh (Turkish devşirme) refers to the system used by the Ottoman sultans to tax newly conquered states, and build a loyal slave army and class of administrators: the Janissaries. The word literally means "gathering" in Turkish.

The devshirmeh system was similar to a system used by earlier Islamic dynasties, such as the Abbasids who used slaves to build armies that were thought to be loyal to the ruler and thus provide a steady pool of manpower that was outside of local politics. These descendents of these slaves would form the Mameluk dynasties.

Despite the intentions of the Abbasid rulers, the Mameluks would eventually grow in power, reducing the caliph to a virtual puppet.

The devshirmeh was an outgrowth of this system, but it also proved to be more efficient and effective at achieving its goals. Under the Ottomans, the system was first instituted by Murad II who needed a large pool of manpower from which he could build armies to fight in seemingly never-ending wars.

Under the Ottomans, newly conquered lands were "taxed" of their youth, with each province ordered to present a certain number of boys to the Sultan. Initially, these boys came from Christian families. The boys would not be forced to convert to Islam, but their children would be Muslims, and thus their children would not be allowed to enter the devshirmeh. This was intended to keep the system from generating a hereditary class, such as the Mameluks.

Boys were collected every year, from lands in the Balkans by a janissary. From here, they were taken to the sultan if deemed fit, or sent to other families where they would train until they reached adulthood. Upon reaching adulthood, they were sent to different units of the Janissaries. Again there were two paths open, they could end up as cavalry soldiers and eventually hope to attain the rank of an officer, or they could remain in the court of the Sultan and possibly become the grand vizier.

Training itself involved physical preparation in the arts of war, as well as the study of culture, such as calligraphy, theology, literature, law and languages. Despite the rigors of training, while students, the devshirmeh were not allowed to leave the palace.

The devshirmeh began to decline in the 17th century. This was due to a number of factors, including the inclusion of free Muslims in the system. Despite the devshirmeh being slaves, it was actually considered an honor as it would lead to a relatively prestigious position in Ottoman society, and allowed many to leave lives of poverty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirmeh

[Murtaza]

So there were not taking someones wife or brother?

And just I said that taxes are not more heavy than venedic want.
Also I dont think heavy tax can be named barbarious act,mass killing or genocide.
Just give true name pls.

[gabaston]

cheers.

hey i just google searched young turks, and at number three was an Armenian site......would you believe it. How many hits could that possibly have, and how many Armenians would research the topic by searching under "young turks"?

unbelievable.

[garbitsch]

Murtaza, there is no such thing called "Venedics". We Turks call them "Venedikliler" and in English they are refered " Venetians". Just for your info.

[Murtaza]

Murtaza, there is no such thing called "Venedics". We Turks call them "Venedikliler" and in English they are refered " Venetians". Just for your info.

Hehe I know Venedikliler but dont know venetians:) So just made it:P

[Kifeas]

3- Cutting the heads. Excuse me but this was a fasion in the rest of Europe. Does the word "Guillotine" recall you something? Did you know that France used this until 1977?

The guillotine was from then on the only legal execution method in France until the abolition of the death penalty in 1981, apart from certain crimes against the security of the state, which entailed execution by firing squad. The last execution was of Hamida Djandoubi and took place on September 10, 1977.

Again you are prejudicing against Turks without evaluating historical facts in the context they occured. You are comparing Ottoman Empire with today's state system.

Cutting the heads? Only? You would be very lucky if this was the method of your execution by the Ottoman Turks. I do not know about other places but in Cyprus they had some of the most cruel-some methods a human mind can ever imagine in order to execute the Cypriots.