Problems in the Study of the Crimean Court Registries of the 17th–18th centuries »

Zolotoordynskoe Obozrenie. 2016;4(3):602-615

 

Journal Homepage

Journal Title: Zolotoordynskoe Obozrenie

ISSN: 2308-152X (Print); 2313-6197 (Online)

Publisher: State Institution «Sh.Marjani Institute of History of Tatarstan Academy of Sciences»

Society/Institution: Shigabutdin Marjani Institute of History of Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Tatarstan

LCC Subject Category: Auxiliary sciences of history: History of Civilization

Country of publisher: Russian Federation

Language of fulltext: Russian, English

Full-text formats available: PDF

 

AUTHORS

O.D. Rustemov (Ardahan University Ardahan 75000, Turkey)

EDITORIAL INFORMATION

Peer review

Editorial Board

Instructions for authors

Time From Submission to Publication: 20 weeks

 

Abstract | Full Text

The first mention of the Crimean court registries – sijils – belong to the 1800s. At that time, translations of some texts were made, the content of these monuments was relatively minutely described and their historical and philological significance was evaluated. However, separate volumes of presented documents still have not been published. Neither comprehensive linguistic study nor description of terminology and style of these texts have not been made. Research objectives: study of the Crimean court registries of the 17th–18th centuries. One of the problems lying on the surface of this field of study of the Crimean Tatar language history and the right is the question about the compilers of these judicial materials. Whom we can consider the author or scribe of a court registry? How competent is an assertion that these books are kadiaskers books? Research materials: the court registries, kadylyk, kadiasker defters. The paper also raised the question of authenticity of the Crimean law and the two sources of the entire justice system of this Eastern European Turkic state: Sharia and actual Turkic law – Töre implemented subsequently in various legislative compilations, such as the Yasa of Chinggis Khan. Another issue of research of these monuments is the question of their content. Fedor Lashkov identified the Crimean records of Sharia courts as a sort of land records’ acts. Research results and novelty: As a result of a detailed study, the author found that its own jurisdiction and its own laws, which did not always coincide with the laws of the Ottoman Empire, functioned in the Crimean Khanate. Despite their historical and philological value as well as more than a century of study, Crimean court registries still contain many blank spots. This again points to the need for their early reading, translation into modern Turkish language and publication, which should be carried out in the Crimean Tatar and Russian languages.