XVIII. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Üsküdar Vakıflarının Gelir Kaynakları

ÖZET Bu makalede 18. yüzyılda Hudâvendigâr Sancağı'nda yaşayan vakıf reayası Yörüklerin taşra yönetim düzeni içindeki konumları analiz edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Yapılan araştırmada sancaktaki Yörük nüfusun büyük bir kısmının vakıf reayası olduğu ve malikâne-mukataa sistemi içinde yer aldıkları tespit edilmiştir. Bu yapılanma ve onları yerleşik reayadan ayıran konargöçer kimlikleri hukukî, idarî ve dolayısıyla malî olarak içinde bulundukları yönetim düzeninin de belirleyicisi olmuştur. Makalede hem bu düzenin teorik yapısı hem de pratikte Yörük cemaatleri açısından nasıl işlediği ele alınmıştır. Öncelikle sancaktaki Yörük grupları ve yaşam alanlarının tespiti ile onlar üzerinde idarî yetkileri tasarruf edenlerin tanımlanması gerekmiştir. Bu alt başlıklardan sonra Yörükler ve taşradaki görevliler arasında temelde " serbestiyyet statüsü " etrafında şekillenen ilişkiler incelenmiştir. Çalışmanın başlıca kaynağını ise 18. yüzyıl Bursa Kadı Sicilleri içinde, sancak genelinde yaşayan Selâtin ve Haremeyn-i Şerifeyn Evkafı Reayasıyla ilgili kayıtların toplandığı defterler oluşturmaktadır.

Edirne'de kurulan vakıflar Osmanlı Devleti'nin Rumeli'de Türk-İslam nüfusunun artması ile beraber uygulanan iskân politikası ile yakından ilgilidir. 17. ve 18. yüzyıllarda Edirne'de vakıf kurucularının toplumsal statülerine ilişkin bazı tespitleri konu alan çalışma dört kısımdan oluşmuştur. Çalışma, Vakıf Kayıtlar Arşivi'nde bulunan vakfiye kayıtlarının analizine dayanmaktadır. Çalışmanın ilk kısmında 17. ve 18. yüzyıllarda Edirne şehrinde vakıf kurucularının toplumsal statüleri genel olarak ele alınmış; ikinci ve üçüncü kısımlarda bu statüler, ele alınan dönemde Osmanlı toplum yapısı doğrultusunda askerî ve reaya sınıfları başlıkları altında değerlendirilmiştir. Bu değerlendirmeler hazırlanan tablolarla da desteklenerek, bu sınıfların yüzdelik dilimler içerisindeki oranları, özellikleri ve farklılıkları dile getirilmiştir. Bu bağlamda her bir sınıf için rastgele seçilmiş bazı örneklere de yer verilmiştir. Dördüncü bölümde ise, vakıf kurucuları menşe'lerine göre kısaca ele alınmış, ayrıca cinsiyetlerine göre de gruplandırılmıştır. Sonuç bölümünde ise, ulaşılan bilgiler ışığında bazı değerlendirmelere yer verilmiştir.

ULUSLARARASI ÜSKÜDAR SEMPOZYUMU IX 11-13 Kasım 2016 BİLDİRİLER I, 2017

Giriş Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda yabancıların mülk edinmeleri süreci, 7 Safer 1284/M. 10 Haziran 1867 tarihli Nizamnâmeyle 1 birlikte yasal bir düzenlemeye kavuştu. Fakat imparatorluk idaresi yabancıların arazi ve emlak alımlarını kontrol altında tutmak için, bu nizamnâmeye ilave olarak "ek bir protokol" de ilân etti. 2 Bu çer-çevede ilk olarak İngiltere, Fransa, Belçika, İsveç, Avusturya, Danimarka, Prusya ve İspanya'nın "Tasarruf-ı Emlak Mazbatasını" imzaladı. İmparatorluk,"İstimlâk Nizamnâmesiyle" yabancıların mülk edinmelerine bir takım sınırlamalar da ge-tiriyordu. Yabancılar, artık özellikle hicaz bölgesi haricinde tebaadan olanlar gibi belli kurallar dâhilinde emlak ve arazi edinebileceklerdi. İstanbul ve havalisi de bilindiği üzere payitaht olması hasebiyle bu hususta özel-likle itina gösterilen bölgelerden biridir. Gerek idari ve gerekse de sosyo-kültürel bakımdan cezbedici özelliği nedeniyle pek çok yabancının mesken haline getir-diği imparatorluk başkentinde, yabancıların mülk edinmeleri konusu Üsküdar ve çevresinde rastlanılan örnekler çerçevesinde ele alınacaktır. Bölgede ilk olarak Maltepe, Kartal, Adalar, Kireç Burnu, Bostancıbaşı ve Kilyos havalilerinde bazı yabancıların mirî arazi ve bazı vakıf arazilerini sahte tapularla elde etmeleri yö-nündeki uğraşlarına rastlanılmıştır. Buna karşılık imparatorluğun, Dersaadet'e

Türk Kültürü İncelemeleri Dergisi (49), 2023

This study is based on the funerals of orphans whose possessions were taken by different institutions within the context of beytülmal, and those who died without an heir. Within this framework, firstly it was tried to determine which institutions and individuals administered the beytülmal incomes in Üsküdar where was selected as a sample. Then, how the orphan funerals were carried out was examined. In this regard, these questions are tried to be answered; who were the orphans of Üsküdar, who organize their funerals, how many orphans died in a year, how the expenses were financed and who buried these people? The common feature of the orphans was that they had no relatives. However, there were many differences among them such as where they were born and raised, how they lived, and under what circumstances they died. Therefore, the dead orphans were divided into two groups: those who left inheritance sufficient to pay for their funeral and those who were called as garib. The orphans who had sufficient property to at least pay for their funerals, were called as “bilâ-vâris” juristically after their death. On the other hand, those who did not have enough inheritance to pay for their funeral were called as “garîb” and “fakîr”. The adjective “bilâ-vâris” which is frequently found in the Ottoman documents, is a legal definition. If an orphan died in a place where he had resided for many years and it was known that he had no heir or if there were documents supporting this situation, he was definitely an orphan. The “bilâ-vâris” adjective, otherwise, described this situation in the short period after death because it was not possible to determine exactly in a short time whether he had an heir or not, especially in such periods when transportation and communication opportunities were limited. Therefore, it was often recorded that they had no “vâris-i maʻrûf” when the legal process about the orphanhood is carried out. People who died by being named as “Bilâ-vâris” could have a certain number of inheritances. Beytülmal mukataas were established precisely for this reason, that is to say, to transfer the inheritance of the orphans, who died without an heir, to the state treasury. A classification was made by looking at who these orphans were and what amount of properties they left behind. In this direction, if the orphan was from the military, his inheritance (tereke) was belong to the hâssa beytülmal mukataas. If he was a civilian and his inheritance was less than 10.000 akçe, the inheritance belonged to the âmme beytülmal mukataas. In this respect, beytülmal was a finance unit. The beytülmal revenues were assigned to different individuals and institutions throughout the Ottoman Empire with various rights and privileges. Therefore, all beytülmal revenues were planned as mukataa and all of them were not transferred to the treasury. For example, waqfs could have the administration of the beytülmal revenues where they were established or where their incomes come from. Likewise, the beytülmal of Janissary, was a separate unit from the beytülmal mukataas. In addition, the beytülmal revenues of non-muslim clergy belonged to the metropolitan bishops, and the inheritances of some lodge members belonged to the sheiks under certain conditions. It is possible to give many examples like that. It shows the scope of the beytülmal revenues in the Ottoman Empire. Therefore, when an orphan died, he would be included in a beytülmal region based on many variables such as where he lived and died, whether he was a countryman or military, her profession, and his religion and sect. The administration of the inheritance belonged to those who responsible within the mentioned scope. The most important obligation of the beytülmal administrators who had the privilege of using inheritance, was to pay the funeral expenses from the inheritance. In this regard, a circumstance emerged that brought all the orphans together within the scope of beytülmal. As mentioned before, there was a garîb/fakîr group who did not have enough money to pay for the funeral. The responsibility of these funerals was with those who administer the beytülmal revenues. Hence, some of the revenues acquired from the orphans, were spent on the funerals of the poor orphans who did not have enough inheritance even for met their funeral expenses. The funerals of orphans who died in Üsküdar were planned by looking at who they are, where they died and whether they left an inheritance or not. Where they died and who they were represented which beytülmal was responsible for the process. Their inheritance determined how the funeral costs would be met. There were the beytülmal zones allocated to various institutions in Üsküdar. These institutions were Üsküdar Zeʻameti and Tevâbiʻi Mukataası, Atik Valide Sultan Waqf, Selami Ali Efendi Zaviyesi Waqf, Aziz Mahmud Hüdayî Waqf, Bostancıbaşı Abdullah Ağa Waqf, İvaz Fakih Waqf, Fazlullah Paşa Waqf, Mihrimah Sultan Waqf, Yavuz Sultan Selim Waqf ve Orhan Gazi Waqf. Apart from these waqfs, the inheritances of the no-heir members of Seyyid Feyzullah Hindî lodge in the Solak Sinan neighborhood belonged to their sheiks. The inheritances of priests and monks in the villages within Üsküdar were under the control of the metropolitan bishops. Since the Janissary beytülmal constituted a separate unit, the inheritances of the Janissaries who died in Üsküdar were transferred there. An independent beytülmal was also established for the humbaracı (grenadier) and lağımcı (sapper) at the end of 18th century. The mutasarrıf of the beytülmal regions, whose privileges are mentioned above, had the right of controlling the inheritances of the orphans and one of their major duties was to meet the funeral cost. A certain amount of the properties was kept for funeral expenses. There was no standard amount for these expenses. The funeral cost market of the period varied by the mukataa mutasarrıf and whether there was an heir or not. Special measures were taken for the garibs who died within the scope of mukataa. The empire and waqfs were reserving a certain amount of money from their revenues for those who died without enough inheritance to meet the expenses. In this study, the funerals of orphans in the Ottoman Empire within the scope of Üsküdar example were examined. Since the responsibility of the beytülmal mutasarrıfs began with the death of orphan, firstly, the scope of Üsküdar beytülmal was tried to be determined. Then, the funerals of those who did not have enough inheritance to meet the funeral cost were examined. Finally, it was tried to reveal how the funerals of the orphans, who did not have enough inheritance for cost, were conducted. In this context, it is seen that a special budget was allocated for the funeral expenses of the orphans by the mukataa and institutions. It is clear that this last duty was complementary to various aids given to them during their lifetime. Important data on the places of death of the orphans and their position in life emerged. It was observed that both garibs and orphans mostly lived in rooms for singles, bathhouses, different parts of külliyes and various places. The documents prepared based on funerals show that although the meaning of garib refers only to those who don’t have enough property for the funeral expenses, its scope was much wider in reality. It was determined that the funeral costs had increased throughout the century. The plague and increase in the death of garibs coincided with each other and the related information about this, is important because they draw attention to a type of source which has been neglected in studies about epidemics. There is no doubt that studies that will be prepared in the same direction by focusing on the big cities, enabled more comprehensive evaluations. In this regard, more comprehensive comparisons can be made by determining many variables such as the factors that effected the distribution of garibs in the cities, and the roles of the places and their numbers and functions. Besides, the comparability of the scopes of beytülmal and the number of deaths between cities; the differences in the waqf-mukataa balance and the determination of migration, population increase, and social life will reveal interesting results. Such evaluations that across beyond the limits of this study, will only be possible with the increase of similar studies. Consequently, this study will be more valuable by drawing attention to similar studies which is also one of the first aims of the study.