why didn't the Ottomans convert people?

Everyone, the original topic of the thread was on whether or not the Ottomans converted people in the context of their early modern era empire.  Please return to that topic.  If you are going to post sources, make sure they pertain to points you are making (on topic) and that you sufficiently comment on them yourself.

Edited by Byzantine Emperor - 25-May-2008 at 21:33

Originally posted by Parnell What do you mean by that?

My friend eaglecap is notorious for indulging in right wing islamophobia influenced media.

Here is the english translation of the oath of Mehmet II to Bosnian Christians dated to 1463.

Originally posted by Bulldog Eagle Cap#s article has nothing to do with the post, I think it should be a new topic or removed from this post.

Bulldog - out of respect for you I deleted it and will keep with the Ottomans. It is true that most Christians were not forced but life under Islamic rule for no Muslims was not good and eventually producded the Greek revolutions and freedom for other Balkan people. This does not mean there were not some forced conversions. I brought up the Roman Catholic Church only to point out that Islam is not the only religion to do this but this does not make me a Catholic hater.

honestly, chill with the censorship. There is no need to 'enforce' how a discussion should occur on a thread.

Ah, sorry for that then.

One example of forced conversion by the Ottomans
The Devshirme or the system of taking a male child, forcing conversion and using them in Adminstrative duties or as a jannisary warrior was found only amongst the Ottoman Turks. Spero Vyronis states that it was not accepted amongst many non Turkish Muslims- especially forced conversion as a child. I will put his quote in later. Vyronis does demonstrate that a system similar to the Devshirme began with the Seljuk Turks.

Some cities were exempt from this horrible human tax usually because they surrendered their city or community to the Ottoman Turks. Some Christians embraced it as a way for their children to move up the social ladder but Vyronis seems to indicate that most resented it. Some even wrote to the west for support, sent their children to a sanctuary city or even across the border to Christian lands. Some even revolted with bad consequences.

Edited by eaglecap - 02-Jun-2008 at 22:08

No? The points of conflicts were Papist vs mahomedan vs Orthodox etc. The Bulgarians and Romanians and the Serbs and the Greeks didn't really hate each other. Romanians helped the Serbs for example in 1389 for example and they liberated several cities south of the Danube during some of the years.

That initself is not forced though. And for some reason people find it hard to believe that a lo of people may just be converting for the sake of converting as in actually liking the theology and the religion. That also did happen. I find it too cynical to think that everyone who ever converted to Islam or Christianity for that matter too just did it out of some economical gain.

First of all Bosnians are not Serbs. Second of all there were almost barely any Orthodox Christians within Bosnia proper, there were Orthodox Christians within Herzegovina at the time. Orthodox Christians were moved into Bosnia proper only after the Ottoman conquest of Bosnia as a milita in the north. Most of those were Vlachs not Serbs, other Slavic Orthodox were moved in too throughout time. Just a question where did you get this fallacious conclusion that Bosnians are Serbs? The mainland was Catholic - and Krstjani - a breakaway Christian sect influenced both by bogomils and Catholicism. Thus in a long shot you could say they were Croats, but that would be too something fallacious. To actually summarize the Slavic incursions into Serbs and Croats is oversimplifying a migration that took two or more centuries and happened in hundreds of waves. From a few families to larger groupings. As far as your claims that Bosnians called themselves Turks - that too is fallacious. Sevdah - or sevdalinke - the local folk music popular throughout Yugoslavia - and in origin attributed to Bosnians and about Bosnia in general would prove you wrong. That is a primary source as those songs were written in the period and are reflections of state of affairs often. Usually the ones that are attributed to events such as the wars in the region - where Bosnian men were conscripted - those songs affirm a strong Bosnian identity. Aside from that there was a Bosnian dictionary compiled in the 17th century. Furthermore, a set of Bosnian writers who wrote in Turkish and Persian and their native Bosnian affirm a longing for that place, but also their identity. What is true is that there was a blending of Turkish culture and genetics with Bosnians counterexamples to provide you with the modern day "Bosnia" culture and peoples. I have Turkish heritage in the fact that parts of my family moved to Bosnia from Turkey and were Turkish. However, Bosniaks as a whole share a common culture with Turkey, but to denote them all calling themselves Turks is asinine.