Sınırlar Karıştığında: Geç Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Köy Ortak Ormanlarının Tahdidi

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 23 Sayı: 43, 1475 - 1495, 31.07.2022

Zeynep Akan Yetişir

https://doi.org/10.21550/sosbilder.1067564

Öz

16 Ocak 1905’te Priştine’ye bağlı Kaymarofça Köyü’nün muhtarı, köy ihtiyar heyetinden iki üye ile birlikte Rumeli Müfettişliği’ne hitaben bir şikâyet mektubu yazdılar. Şikâyetlerinin nedeni Prizren’e bağlı Kraçiçe Köyü ahalisinin köy baltalıklarını “fuzûlî zapt” etmiş olmasıydı. Aslında şikâyet ilk bakışta klasik bir ortak arazi anlaşmazlığıydı. Ancak anlaşmazlığa bölge nizamiye mahkemesi ve yerel meclisler gibi farklı kurumların müdahale etmesi durumu karmaşık bir hale getirmişti. Bu çalışma köy baltalıklarının tahsisi ve tahdîdi meselesini iki köy arasında yaşanan bir baltalık anlaşmazlığı üzerinden tahlil etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışma erken yirminci yüzyıla tarihlenen ilgili anlaşmazlık üzerinden kurumlar arası yetki uyuşmazlığı başta olmak üzere çözüm süreçlerinin yöntemlerine, aktörlerine ve potansiyel sonuçlarına odaklanacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Osmanlı İmparatorluğu, ortak araziler, baltalık, idarî meclisler, nizamiye mahkemeleri

WHEN BORDERS BLURRED: A SAMPLE OF DEMARCATION PROCESS OF THE COMMON FORESTS IN THE LATE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

Öz

In 16 January 1905 the village headman of the Kaymarofça (Priştine) and two members of the village councile wrote a petition to Inspectorship of Rumeli Province on behalf of village people, and lodged a complaint with neighbouring villagers of Kraçiçe (Prezrin) along of their encroachment to the village coppice. This was an usual plaint at first blush, however the actual situation was more complex for the case was intervened two different offices: the courts and local councils. In such a context, I propose that to whom belongs village forests and how their borders define in case of controversy constituted main tensions between neighbouring villages. In this paper, on the basis of a conflict story, I will first discuss the problem of jurisdictional question in the Ottoman Empire concerning village forests. Secondly, I will scrutinize the process of trial and demarcation, by focusing on their actors, methods and potential outcomes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ottoman Empire, common lands, village coppices, local councils, nizamiye courts

Kaynakça

• Akyalçın Kaya, D. (2014). Question of property rights over commons: Marshlands of lapsista in the late nineteenth century. 21th CIEPO Symposium, Budapest, 7-11 October 2014.
• Ali Haydar (1321). Şerh-i cedîd li-kanun’il-arazî. Şirket-i Mürettibiye Printing Press.
• Aytekin, E. A. (2006). Land, rural classes and law: Agrarian conflict and state regulation in the Ottoman Empire, 1830s-1860s. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). New York: Binghamton University State University.
• Barkan, Ö. L. (1940). Türk toprak hukuku tarihinde Tanzimat ve 1274 tarihli arazi kanunnamesi. Maarif Printing Press.
• Barkan, Ö. L. (1980). Türkiye’de toprak meselesi. Gözlem Press.
• Berki, A. H. (1959). Mecelle. Güzel İstanbul Printing Press.
• Birben, Ü. & Güneş Y. (2014). The cibal-i mübaha: A special type of forest available for public use in the Ottoman Empire period. H. Kola, P. Herbst, R. Sulek (Ed.), In 15th International Symposium on Legal Aspects of European Sustainable Development, (pp. 26-32), Technical University in Zvolen.
• Blomquist, W. & Ostrom, E. (1985). Institutional capacity and the resolution of a commons dilemma. Policy Studies Review, 5(2), 383-393.
• Cin, H. (1981). Tanzimat’tan sonra Türkiye’de ormanların hukuki rejimi. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, (35), 311-379.
• Demsetz, H. (1967). Toward a theory of property rights. American Economic Review, 57(2), 347-359.
• Dursun, S. (2007). Forests and the state: History of forestry and forest administration in the Ottoman Empire. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). İstanbul: Sabancı University Institute of Social Science.
• Dursun, S. (2013). The fisheries management in the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century. The Seventh Biennial Conference of the European Society for Environmental History (ESEH), 20-24 Agust, Munich.
• Dursun, S. (2017). Forest commons and property right in the Late Empire and Early Turkish Republic. International Conference on the Environmental History of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey, 27-28 October, Hamburg.
• Dursun, S. (2019). Dispossession by concession: Forests commons in The Ottoman Empire and Early Turkish Republic. O. İnal, Y. Köse (Ed.), In Seeds of Power: Explorations in Ottoman Environmental History, (pp. 260-284) The White Horse Press.
• Gerber, H. (1987). The social origins of the modern middle east. Lynee Rienner Publishers.
• Gibson, C. C., Ostrom, E., Ahn, A. K. (2000). The concept of scale and the human dimension of global change: A survey. Ecological Economics, 32(2), 217-239.
• Halis Eşref (1315). Külliyat-ı şerh-i kanun-i arazi. Yovanaki Panayoditis Printing Press.
• Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3895), 1243-1248.
• İnalcık, H. & Quataert D. (1997). An economic and social history of the Ottoman Empire: 1300-1600. 1, Cambridge University Press.
• Kenanoğlu, M. (2002). 1858 arazi kanunnâmesi’nin Osmanlı siyasal ve toplumsal yapısı üzerindeki etkileri. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Ankara: Ankara University Institute of Social Science.
• Koç, B. (1999). Osmanlı Devleti’ndeki orman ve koruların tasarruf yöntemleri ve idarelerine ilişkin bir araştırma. Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi (OTAM), (10), 139-158.
• Koç, B. (2005). 1970 Orman Nizamnâmesi’nin Osmanlı ormancılığına katkısı üzerine bazı notlar. Tarih Araştırmaları Dergisi, (24), 231-257.
• Köprülü, M. B. (1949). Cibal-i mübaha ve sahih vakıflara ait ormanlarla baltalıkların H. 1274 tarihli arazi kanunnamesine nazaran hukuki durumları. İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Mecmuası, (2-3), 705-726.
• Lewis, T. R. & Cowens, J. (1983). Cooperation in the commons: An application of repetitious rivalry. University of British Columbia.
• Onar, S. S. (1944). Türk hukukunda âmme emlâki teorisi, Ebül’ula Mardin’e armağan. Kenan Printing Press.
• Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing to commons. Cambridge University Press.
• Öncel, F. (2014). Legal and social contestations over pastures in the Late Ottoman Empire. 21th CIEPO Symposium, Budapest, 7-11 October.
• Stevenson, G. G. (1991). Common property economics: A general theory and land use application. Cambridge University Press.
• Surlu, M. H. & Cin, H. (2000). Türk hukukunda mera yaylak kışlaklar ve mera kanunu şerhi. Seçkin Press.
• Terzibaşoğlu, Y. (2004). Land disputes and ethno-politics: Northwestern Anatolia, 1877-1912. S. Engerman, J. Metzer (Ed.), In Ethno-Nationality, Property Rights in Land and Territorial Sovereignity in Historical Perspective, (pp. 152-180), Routledge.
• Terzibaşoğlu, Y. (2013). A very important requirement of social life: Privatization of land, criminalisation of custom, and land disputes in the nineteenth-century Anatolia. V. Guignard (Ed.), In Les Acteurs des Transformations Foncieres Autour de la Mediterranee au XIXe Siecle, (pp. 25-48), Karthala and the Maison Mediterraneenne des Sciences de l’Homme.
• Welch, W. P. (1983). The political feasibilty of full ownership property rights: The cases of pollution and fisheries. Policy Sciences, (16), 165-180.