Soc Vio Freq Rel Grp List
A viewset for viewing and editing Social Violence Against Religious Groups.
GET /api/rt/frequency-of-societal-violence-against-religious-groups/?format=api&page=23
{ "count": 222, "next": null, "previous": "https://seshatdata.com/api/rt/frequency-of-societal-violence-against-religious-groups/?format=api&page=22", "results": [ { "id": 550, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "description": "“Notably, there was also intracommunal tension within the empire. For instance, Jews and Christians often encountered problems. Yet another journalist wrote in Serez in the Balkans, ‘Whenever a priest passed by, the Jews shouted that he did so in black with worms coming out of his mouth. In the frequent fights between the Jews and the Rum, the latter referred to as ‘Grekaya’ were always destined to lose. The Bulgarians were known as bullies while Albanians were trusted… As for the Turks, they were home owners from whom one held off.” §REF§ (Gocek 2015, 79) Gocek, Fatma Muge. Denial of Violence: Ottoman Past, Turkish Present, and Collective Violence Against the Armenians, 1789-2009. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/FZM8F5IE\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: FZM8F5IE </b></a> §REF§ “One should not, obviously, ignore the powerful evidence for the mutual contempt and hostility that could be projected across the religious divides – the janissaries who beat a Christian arms merchant to death in the market, shouting ‘Why are you an unbeliever? So much sorrow you are!’; the Jewish householders who mocked Christian worshippers during holy festivals; the stuffed effigies of Judas burned with much glee by the Orthodox during Easter. (Muslims were occasionally mocked in public too, but only by those who wished to become martyrs).” §REF§ (Mazower 2006, 65-66) Mazower, Mark. 2006. Salonica City of Ghosts: Christians, Muslims and Jews 1430-1950. New York: Vintage Books. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/JX5W2B2S\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: JX5W2B2S </b></a> §REF§ “On July 15, 1858, a native mob at Jeddah fell upon the Christians in their midst; among their victims were the French consul and the British vice consul. A Franco-British squadron bombarded the town eleven days later. This incident had repercussions later beyond Jeddah for it increased the fanatic zeal of the Christians, especially the Maronites of Mount Lebanon, who had been promoting a second civil war using money received by the Europeans in the first civil war to buy firearms and ammunition. In the months preceding the massacre, the European consul engaged Bishop Tobia, whose sinister influence as a promoter of the clashes against the Druze was notorious, as a missionary. This confirmed the Druze and Muslim suspicions of a conspiracy formed by the Christians, in particular the Maronite clergy, backed by interested European governments, to despoil them of their land and goods. The Maronites initiated disturbances, though the Druze, who were far superior in military tactics and discipline, retaliated as ferociously as their opponents […] Consular reports from the months of May, June, and July 1860 mention the looting and burning of villages; the sacking of monasteries, churches, and mosques; a number of forced conversions; the slaughter of children, women and older people; and the rape and abduction of women and young girls.” The following quote refers to conflict in the Ottoman Balkans “In early May 1876 an upheaval took place in the Ottoman province of Rumelia when bands of insurgents killed Ottoman officials and Muslim civilians.” §REF§ (Rodogno 2012, 98, 146) Rodogno, Davide. 2012. Against Massacre: Humanitarian Interventions in The Ottoman Empire 1815-1914. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ICHJHS7B\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: ICHJHS7B </b></a> §REF§ “Acts of violence perpetrated by the Turkish element of the island had let to a rise in tension. On 11 May killings and looting were carried out against the Greeks of Chania and quickly spread to the countryside around, and especially to the villages of the provinces of Kydonia and Kisamos. Similar incidents also took place in Heraklion and in the villages of Pediada. On 26 June 1896 the Turks slaughtered the monks of the monastery of St. John in Anopoli in the province of Pediada and laid waste the villages of the district.” §REF§ (Detorakis 1994, 362) Detorakis, Theocharis. 1994. History of Crete. Iraklion: University of Crete. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/SRAR2RBX\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: SRAR2RBX </b></a> §REF§ “The Muslims gathered in downtown Chania to protest these developments. On the same day, when the cavass of the Russian Consulate, accompanied by four Christians, was on his way to Halepa, he was confronted by a gendarmerie officer who told him that it was not advisable to leave for Halepa. Angry words were exchanged. The Russian cavass fired his revolver, wounding the gendarmerie officer and killing an Arab. Immediately afterwards, the Russian cavass was killed by Muslims who just happened to be there. This incident caused panic and fear among the people and street-fighting broke out between the Muslims and the Christians of Chania. Many people from both sides were killed within a very short time. Houses were burnt and plundered, olive gardens and farms were set of fire, and mosques and churches were destroyed. Every single shop in the bazaar was closed and no one was to be seen of the streets.” The following quote discusses the Cretan revolt of 1897. “Although the causes given for the outbreak of this revolt may have differed from one source to the other, what is clear here is that the Christian insurgents took the arms of the Muslims and used them on their previous owners. Christian insurgents attacked Muslim villages and the Muslim women and children who took refuge in the mosques. In almost all the villages of Sitia, the Muslims were methodically surrounded by the Christians and massacred. The Muslim med had few arms to defend themselves. After a while, these arms were handed over to the Christian insurgents. Then the mosques were set of fire by the insurgents and most of the Muslims who gathered in the mosques were killed. Some of them took refuge in caves. The insurgents plundered the Muslim villages and sacked and burnt all their houses and other properties. Certain Muslim girls were also forcibly converted to Christianity.” §REF§ (Senisik 2011, 113-114, 156) Senisik, Pinar. 2011. The Transformation of Ottoman Crete: Revolts, Politics and Identity in the Late Nineteenth Century. London: I.B. Tauris. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/626NBKFI\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: 626NBKFI </b></a> §REF§ “Not only the Armenians, but also other Christian minorities had such complaints. For example, the Assyrian Patriarch, Mar Rouil Shimon, wrote an official letter to the Russian tsar, dated May 14, 1868: ‘…We are a poor nation; my people have not enough grain to provide themselves with bread…The Kurds have forcibly taken many of our Churches and convents, the constantly abduct our virgins, brides, and women, forcing them to turn Moslems…The Turks are worse, they do not protect us, demand military taxes, poll taxes, also the Kurds take our money for they consider us as ‘Zirr Kurr’ (slaves – being Christians…) …Now, such being our condition, we beseech your mightiness, for the sake of Jesus, His Baptism, and cross. Either to free us from such a state or to procure us a remedy…” §REF§ (Shirinian 2017, 24-25) Shirinian, George. 2017. ‘The Background to the Late Ottoman Genocides.’ In Genocide in the Ottoman Empire: Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks 1913-1923. Edited by George N. Shirnian. Oxford: Berghahn. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/PHUNFGK9\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: PHUNFGK9 </b></a> §REF§", "note": null, "finalized": false, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "expert_reviewed": false, "drb_reviewed": null, "name": "Soc_vio_freq_rel_grp", "coded_value": "mftvr", "polity": { "id": 177, "name": "TrOttm5", "start_year": 1839, "end_year": 1922, "long_name": "Ottoman Empire IV", "new_name": "tr_ottoman_emp_4", "polity_tag": "LEGACY", "general_description": "", "shapefile_name": null, "private_comment": "", "created_date": null, "modified_date": "2023-11-20T10:36:18.319606Z", "home_nga": { "id": 11, "name": "Konya Plain", "subregion": "Anatolia-Caucasus", "longitude": "32.521164000000", "latitude": "37.877845000000", "capital_city": "Konya", "nga_code": "TR", "fao_country": "Turkey", "world_region": "Southwest Asia" }, "home_seshat_region": { "id": 43, "name": "Anatolia-Caucasus", "subregions_list": "Turkey, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan", "mac_region": { "id": 11, "name": "Southwest Asia" } }, "private_comment_n": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" } }, "comment": null, "private_comment": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" }, "citations": [], "curator": [] }, { "id": 554, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "description": "VERY_RARELY_COMMENT: The following quote suggests that factional disputes within Sunnism caused civil violence. “The Seljuks are traditionally characterised by their avid support for Sunnism. This formed a key part of Seljuk propaganda, end even today continues to influence scholarly and popular perceptions of the dynasty. While older scholarship suggested that the Seljuks spearheaded a ‘Sunni revival’ after the domination of the Shi’ite Buyids, more recently this had been replaced with a view of the eleventh and twelfth centuries as witnessing a process of ‘recentring’ of Sunnism – which, its is argued, the ‘ulama’ sought to make increasingly homogenous, not least through institutions like the madrasa. At the same time, Sunnism was polarised by bitter disputes between adherents of the three law schools (madhhabs) of the Islamic east: the Hanbalis, Hanafis and Shafi’is. These madhhabs lent their name not just to factional disputes among the katibs, but to bitter rivalries that split communities in virtually every town in the Seljuk domains, frequently erupting into fitna (civil disorder). Although Ismailism was widely perceived by Sunnis in the Seljuk lands as a nuisance and a threat (Twelver Shi’ism rather less so). Shi’ites of either variety represented a minority in most areas of the Seljuk realm (parts of Arab Iraq, the northern Jibal between Sawa and Qumm, and Aleppo being the major exceptions with significant or majority Twelver populations). The greatest challenge to public order was posed rather by these factional disputes within Sunnism.” […] “Muhammad’s reign may be an aberration for it seems that while on a popular level there was plenty of anti-Shi’ite prejudice, it did not generally feed into Seljuk policy, despite the widely repeated allegation that ‘being a Shi’ite is on the way to being a heretic (rafidiyi dhiliz-i mulhidist).” […] While the following quote does not give a specific example of societal violence against a religious group it does however speak of the intense prejudices between different Sunni schools of thought. “Sometimes, these imported Hanafis were intent on stirring up sectarian prejudice, with al-Balasaghuni, the Seljuk qadi of Damascus, declaring that Shafi’is were infidels and should pay the jizya, the poll tax reserved for non-Muslims.” […] The following quote suggests that there might have been societal tension or violence. “It was not for another ninety years that a second anti-Ash’ari mihna occurred. After Sanjar ceded Rayy to Mas’ud in 537/1142-3 in the wake of his defeat by the Qarakhitay, the western Sultan entered the city and forced leading Shafi’is to disavow Ash’arism publicly. At the instigation of Hanafi ‘ulama,’ Mas’ud took further measures against Ash’arism in Baghdad and Isfahan over the next three years. Isfahani notes that as a result, ‘a group joined the madhhab of Abu Hanifa, seeking personal advancement and out of fear, not because of God [i.e., belief].” […] The following quote suggests intense social tension not necessarily violence. “Relations between the two groups was virtually unheard of. The situation was doubtless exacerbated by the fact that the Muslim authorities recognized the Nestorian Catholicus as the representative of all Christian communities, Melkites and Jacobites included. Like the Exilarch, the Catholicus owed his office to caliphal appointment, and was responsible for gathering the jizya, the poll tax.” §REF§ (Peacock 2015, 249-250, 264, 268, 282) Peacock, A.C.S. 2015. The Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/37ZDZWAR\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: 37ZDZWAR </b></a> §REF§ <br> MORE_FREQUENTLY_THAN_VERY_RARELY_COMMENT: The following quote suggests that factional disputes within Sunnism caused civil violence. “The Seljuks are traditionally characterised by their avid support for Sunnism. This formed a key part of Seljuk propaganda, end even today continues to influence scholarly and popular perceptions of the dynasty. While older scholarship suggested that the Seljuks spearheaded a ‘Sunni revival’ after the domination of the Shi’ite Buyids, more recently this had been replaced with a view of the eleventh and twelfth centuries as witnessing a process of ‘recentring’ of Sunnism – which, its is argued, the ‘ulama’ sought to make increasingly homogenous, not least through institutions like the madrasa. At the same time, Sunnism was polarised by bitter disputes between adherents of the three law schools (madhhabs) of the Islamic east: the Hanbalis, Hanafis and Shafi’is. These madhhabs lent their name not just to factional disputes among the katibs, but to bitter rivalries that split communities in virtually every town in the Seljuk domains, frequently erupting into fitna (civil disorder). Although Ismailism was widely perceived by Sunnis in the Seljuk lands as a nuisance and a threat (Twelver Shi’ism rather less so). Shi’ites of either variety represented a minority in most areas of the Seljuk realm (parts of Arab Iraq, the northern Jibal between Sawa and Qumm, and Aleppo being the major exceptions with significant or majority Twelver populations). The greatest challenge to public order was posed rather by these factional disputes within Sunnism.” […] “True, the highest echelons of the bureaucracy were occupied by Sunnis, Kunduri and Nizamal-Mulk. However, Tughril’s occupation of Baghdad seems to have been welcomed by the Imami population of Karkh, perhaps inspired by the long-standing Imami belief that the Turks were the soldiers of the mahdi, the saviour at the end of time. Kunduri even intervened to stop the Hanbalis from daubing Karkh with Sunni slogans at the instigation of the fanatical Hanibali caliphal vizier, Ibn Muslima. The attacks on the prominent Imami scholar Abu Ja’far al-Tusi also seem to have been orchestrated by the Hanbali masses of Baghdad, not the Seljuk officials, and the new Shi’ite centre of Najaf appears to have been allowed to flourish unmolested.” […] “Muhammad’s reign may be an aberration for it seems that while on a popular level there was plenty of anti-Shi’ite prejudice, it did not generally feed into Seljuk policy, despite the widely repeated allegation that ‘being a Shi’ite is on the way to being a heretic (rafidiyi dhiliz-i mulhidist).” […] While the following quote does not give a specific example of societal violence against a religious group it does however speak of the intense prejudices between different Sunni schools of thought. “Sometimes, these imported Hanafis were intent on stirring up sectarian prejudice, with al-Balasaghuni, the Seljuk qadi of Damascus, declaring that Shafi’is were infidels and should pay the jizya, the poll tax reserved for non-Muslims.” […] The following quote suggests that there might have been societal tension or violence. “It was not for another ninety years that a second anti-Ash’ari mihna occurred. After Sanjar ceded Rayy to Mas’ud in 537/1142-3 in the wake of his defeat by the Qarakhitay, the western Sultan entered the city and forced leading Shafi’is to disavow Ash’arism publicly. At the instigation of Hanafi ‘ulama,’ Mas’ud took further measures against Ash’arism in Baghdad and Isfahan over the next three years. Isfahani notes that as a result, ‘a group joined the madhhab of Abu Hanifa, seeking personal advancement and out of fear, not because of God [i.e., belief].” […] The following quote suggests intense social tension not necessarily violence. “Relations between the two groups was virtually unheard of. The situation was doubtless exacerbated by the fact that the Muslim authorities recognized the Nestorian Catholicus as the representative of all Christian communities, Melkites and Jacobites included. Like the Exilarch, the Catholicus owed his office to caliphal appointment, and was responsible for gathering the jizya, the poll tax.” §REF§ (Peacock 2015, 249-250, 264, 268, 282) Peacock, A.C.S. 2015. The Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/37ZDZWAR\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: 37ZDZWAR </b></a> §REF§", "note": null, "finalized": false, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "tag": "IFR", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "expert_reviewed": false, "drb_reviewed": null, "name": "Soc_vio_freq_rel_grp", "coded_value": "mftvr", "polity": { "id": 364, "name": "IrSeljq", "start_year": 1037, "end_year": 1157, "long_name": "Seljuk Sultanate", "new_name": "ir_seljuk_sultanate", "polity_tag": "LEGACY", "general_description": "The Seljuks were a Turkic dynasty from east of the Aral Sea §REF§ (Bosworth 2001) C. E. Bosworth, 'Turks, Seljuk and Ottoman' in The Oxford Companion to Military History eds. Richard Holmes, Charles Singleton, and Dr Spencer Jones (2001) (al-Rahim 2010) Ahmed H. al-Rahim, 'Seljuk Turks' in The Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages ed. Robert E. Bjork (2010) §REF§ who ruled a relatively decentralized empire across Central Asia, Persia and Mesopotamia - with perhaps the exception of the powerful viziership of Nizam al-Mulk. §REF§ (Peacock 2015, 48) Peacock, A C S. 2015. The Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh University Press Ltd. Edinburgh. §REF§ .<br>The Seljuk Empire (1037-1157 CE) did not have a single political center as it was divided into western and eastern halves §REF§ (Peacock 2015, 6) A C S Peacock. 2015. The Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh University Press Ltd. Edinburgh. §REF§ ; the east had \"connotations of seniority in Turkic culture\" §REF§ (Peacock 2015, 41) Peacock, A C S. 2015. The Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh University Press Ltd. Edinburgh. §REF§ and Nizam al-Mulk himself started his career in the Seljuk bureaucracy in Balkh. §REF§ (Peacock 2015, 48) A C S Peacock. 2015. The Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh University Press Ltd. Edinburgh. §REF§ The western territories were known as the Sultanate of Iraq §REF§ (Peacock 2015, 7) A C S Peacock. 2015. Edinburgh University Press Ltd. Edinburgh. §REF§ and altogether there may have been 12 million under Seljuk rule in 1100 CE.<br>Nizam al-Mulk \"strove to suppress abuses, to introduce reforms, to initiate his still uncultured Saljuk masters into the arts of Perso-Islamic statecraft, and to provide competent and reliable theologians, judges, and secretaries for the state religion and administration.\" §REF§ (Bagley 1964, xxviii-xxix) F R C Bagley. trans. Huma'i, Jalal and Isaacs, H. D. eds. 1964. Ghazali's Book of Counsel for Kings (Nasihat Al-Muluk). Oxford University Press. London. §REF§ \"Nizam al-Mulk was particularly concerned with the construction and maintenance of trade routes, caravanserais, and bridges; the appointment of trustworthy market inspectors and tax collectors; and the appointment of spies throughout the realm - policies crucial to rooting out corruption and fostering confidence in local and long-distance trade.\" §REF§ (Lindsay 2005, 20) James E Lindsay. 2005. Daily Life in The Medieval Islamic World. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. Indianapolis. §REF§ <br>Within the Seljuk system of rule the caliph was the ultimate religious authority §REF§ (al-Rahim 2012) Ahmed H. al-Rahim, 'Seljuk Turks' in The Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages ed. Robert E. Bjork (2010) §REF§ §REF§ (al-Rahim 2012) Ahmed H. al-Rahim, 'Seljuk Turks' in The Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages ed. Robert E. Bjork (2010) §REF§ and the sultan was the head of secular power §REF§ Findley, Carter V., The Turks in World History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), P.69. §REF§ supported by a vizier of the diwan-i a'la. §REF§ (Peacock 2015, 333) A C S Peacock. 2015. The Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh University Press Ltd. Edinburgh. §REF§ Seljuk maliks (princes) ruled provinces with an atabeg (supervisor) and a small court bureaucracy overseen by a vizier. §REF§ (Peacock 2015, 194-195) A C S Peacock. 2015. The Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh University Press Ltd. Edinburgh. §REF§ <br>As an independent state the Seljuk Empire came to an end when it was defeated by the Mongols and the Sultan had to pay them tribute.", "shapefile_name": null, "private_comment": null, "created_date": null, "modified_date": "2023-10-30T18:00:53.813428Z", "home_nga": { "id": 9, "name": "Susiana", "subregion": "Levant-Mesopotamia", "longitude": "48.235564000000", "latitude": "32.382851000000", "capital_city": "Susa (Shush)", "nga_code": "IR", "fao_country": "Iran", "world_region": "Southwest Asia" }, "home_seshat_region": { "id": 45, "name": "Iran", "subregions_list": "Iran", "mac_region": { "id": 11, "name": "Southwest Asia" } }, "private_comment_n": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" } }, "comment": null, "private_comment": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" }, "citations": [], "curator": [] } ] }