452

Keywords: the Düzoğlu family, the Amiras, sarrafs, Imperial Mint, Armenian
community
This thesis is a study of the group of leading Armenian moneylenders and officials
of the Ottoman state in Istanbul. These prominent individuals, as intermediaries
between the Armenian community and the Ottoman state, played crucial roles in
the political, social, and economic spheres of the Armenian community and the Ottoman
state over the eighteenth and the nineteenth centuries. Also known as the
Amiras, they wielded significant power in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries. Their power began to be challenged in various moments of the nineteenth
century and throughout the century they began to disperse among different professions.
Approaching these changes from the perspective of transformation rather
than a story of rise and fall, is the primary focus of this thesis. In doing so, this
transformation is observed through one of these Amira families, the Düzoğlu family.
The Düzoğlus, who worked in the Imperial Mint between 1762-1850 and acted as
officials in leading Ottoman administrative councils of the second half of the nineteenth
century, serves in this thesis as a case study to display the socio-economic
transformation of the Amiras in the nineteenth century.
iv
ÖZET
ONDOKUZUNCU YÜZYILDA OSMANLI İMPARATORLUĞU’NDA ERMENİ
CEMAATİ: TOPLUMSAL DÖNÜŞÜMLER VE DÜZOĞLU AİLESİ

Anahtar Kelimeler: Düzoğlu ailesi, Amiralar, sarraflar, Darbhâne-i Âmire, Ermeni
cemaati
Bu çalışma İstanbul’da Osmanlı yönetiminde önde gelen Ermeni sarraf ve devlet
memuru grubunu ele almaktadır. Aracı konumundaki bu kişiler, onsekizinci ve ondokuzuncu
yüzyıllarda Ermeni cemaati ile Osmanlı yönetimi arasında siyasal, sosyal
ve ekonomik alanlarda önemli rol üstlenmiştir. Amira olarak bilinen bu kesimin
gücü onsekizinci yüzyılın sonu ile ondokuzuncu yüzyılın başında sürmüştür. Güçleri
ondokuzuncu yüzyılın ikinci yarısından itibaren zayıflayan Amiralar çeşitli meslek
gruplarına dağılarak faaliyetlerini sürdürmüştür. Bu tezin ana amacı; Amiraların
yaşadığı değişimi, yükseliş ve düşüş yaklaşımından ziyade, bir dönüşüm olarak ele
almaktır. Bu dönüşüm, bir Amira ailesi olan Düzoğulları perspektifinden gözlemlenmiştir.
Darbhâne-i Âmire’de 1762-1850 yılları arasında çalışan ve Osmanlı yönetim
kademelerinde ondokuzuncu yüzyılın ikinci yarısında bürokrat olarak görev alan Düzoğulları,
bu çalışmada Amiraların sosyo-ekonomik dönüşümlerini yansıtmaktadır.
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
In the course of researching and writing this thesis, I benefited from the support
and assistance of various individuals. I owe a debt of gratitude to several mentors
and teachers.
First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor, Ayşe
Ozil who opened up the doors of History for me four years ago during my first MA
degree. Our priceless intellectual exchanges and her inestimable support kept me
motivated all the time. I consider myself very lucky to be her student. I would
also like to thank Tülay Artan, for her endless support and encouragement with
my decision to proceed my studies in history. I also thank Ferenc Péter Csirkés for
motivating and supporting me in various ways during my studies.
I would like to thank my thesis defense jury Yaşar Tolga Cora and Selçuk Akşin
Somel for their insightful comments and criticism. Their comments helped me to
see the macro view of my thesis and incented me to widen my research from various
perspectives.
I would like to express a special appreciation to my Armenian teacher, Muraz
Sarangil for his patience, and motivation and for guiding me through the process of
language learning.
Seven Taştan has been a great companion for me since the first day I stepped into
the corridors of Sabancı. I am forever grateful for her friendship, and our many latenight
brainstorming sessions. She read this thesis many times and always provided
me with constructive comments. I would also like to thank Talha Murat and Furkan
Işın, for their support and for being there to listen when I needed an ear.
I am indebted to Richard Antaramian for generously offering thoughtful comments
and insights about my project.
Finally, I would like to express my heartfelt and sincere thanks to my family; Zafer,
Fatma, and Ekin. Without their patience, love, and support this thesis could not
have been completed.
vi
To Zafer, Fatma, Ekin
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1. The Amiras as Leading Economic and Social Actors:
The Case of the Düzoğlu Family. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2. Scholarship on the Amiras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3. Scholarship on the Düzoğlu Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4. Research Questions and the Aims of the Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.5. Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.6. Overview of the Chapters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2. AMIRALIK AND AMIRAS: SETTING THE SCENE . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.1. Armenian Elites and Ottoman Society until the Eighteenth Century . 15
2.1.1. Hocas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1.2. Çelebis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2. The Establishment of Amira Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.3. Characteristics of theAmiras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.4. The Amiras: In the Service of the Ottoman State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.4.1. Tax Collection and Moneylenders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.4.2. Roles in the Imperial Mint and the Imperial Powder Works . . 25
2.5. The Amiras: In Service of the Armenian Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.6. Maneuverings between the Ottoman State and the Armenian Community:
Amiras’ Dual Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.7. Changing Times, Changing Positions: The Transformation of the
Amiras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.8. A Discussion of the Term “Amira” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3. THE ROLES OF THE DÜZOĞLU FAMILY IN THE OTTOMAN
STATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.1. The Düzoğlu Family Before Becoming Amiras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.2. The Düzoğlu Family as an Amira Family. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
viii
3.3. The Düzoğlu Family, the Armenian Catholic Church, and Falling out
of Favor with the Ottoman State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.4. A New Period for the Düzoğlu Family after the Gülhane Edict: Directors
of the Imperial Mint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4. A BREAK FROM THE PAST: THE TRANSFORMATION OF
THE DÜZOĞLU FAMILY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.1. Enduring Services from the Past: Directors of the Imperial Mint . . . . . 48
4.2. Departure from Tradition: The Düzoğlu Family as Galata Bankers . . . 52
4.3. Commercial and Industrial Activities of the Düzoğlu Family . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.4. The Düzoğlu Family in the Ottoman Bureaucracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
4.5. The Düzoğlu Family in the Social Sphere and their Cultural Activities 58
5. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
APPENDIX A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
ix
1. INTRODUCTION
“If you become a sarraf, you would be an Amira. If you become an
ekmekcibaşı, you would [would be nothing],” said the people from Eğin.1
The Armenian community experienced profound social and political transformations
in the nineteenth century due to both changes within the Armenian community and
developments in the Ottoman Empire as a whole. As a group of moneylenders,
merchant elite and officials of the Ottoman state, the Amiras emerged as important
agents of these large-scale processes in the late eighteenth century. In the early
nineteenth century, the Amiras continued as a powerful moneylender and merchant
group that was intricately linked to the Ottoman state elite. Through a series of administrative
and bureaucratic reforms on the one hand and economic change on the
other hand, a shift occurred in the position of the Amiras towards the mid-nineteenth
century and eventually they became a part of modern administrative institutionalization.
In terms of their economic position, they began to take up professions in
different business ventures such as banking and industry. This thesis investigates the
emergence of the Amiras in the late eighteenth century and the changes they went
through during the nineteenth century. From a broader perspective, in an attempt
to reimagine the Ottoman Armenian community, this thesis endeavors to integrate
the history of the Amiras into that of the late eighteenth- and nineteenth-century
Ottoman Empire.
The Amiras demonstrate a segment of the multifaceted structure of the Armenian
community. The Düzoğlu family, one of the Amira families that was of long-term
service to the Imperial Mint, will serve in this thesis as a case study to demonstrate
the transformation of this socioeconomic elite group. In understanding the role of
these actors, the Düzoğlu case sheds light on their significance for the Ottoman Em-
1Hagop Mıntzuri, İstanbul Anıları 1897-1940, trans. Silva Kuyumcuyan (İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları,
1993), 18.
1
pire and the Armenian community. Through an examination of the Düzoğlu family
using both Ottoman archival material and contemporary Armenian sources, the thesis
will situate the history of the Amiras within broader changes in the Armenian
communal and Ottoman imperial spaces.
1.1 The Amiras as Leading Economic and Social Actors:
The Case of the Düzoğlu Family
The Amiras were an economically powerful Armenian group in the late eighteenth
century and early nineteenth century.2 They rose to prominence through the accumulation
of mercantile capital in provinces such as Eğin, Divriği, and Van. After
moving to Istanbul in the early eighteenth century, they began working in service
of the Ottoman state in the late eighteenth century. As important moneylenders
and merchants, the Amiras obtained a pivotal role in the Ottoman economic and
financial sector. At the same time, their possession of wealth helped them become
powerful actors in the Armenian community.3
As this thesis demonstrates through the case study of the Düzoğlu4 family, numerous
families within the Amiras held crucial positions in the Ottoman state service.
The Düzoğlu family served in the Ottoman upper administration as moneylenders,
imperial jewelers, and officials of the Imperial Mint.5 From 1750 until the second
half of the nineteenth century, the Düzoğlu family occupied various positions in
the Imperial Mint such as ifrâzcıbaşılık and mübâyaacılık.6 The family’s capabil-
2There are different interpretations of when the Amiras emerged. This shall be addressed in the forthcoming
chapters.
3Gerard Jirair Libaridian, “The Ideology of Armenian Liberation: The Development of the Armenian
Political Thought Before the Revolutionary Movement (1639-1885)” (Unpublished PhD Thesis, University
of California, Los Angeles, 1987), 96-102; Hagob Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul”
(Ph.D. Thesis Columbia University, 1980), vi.
4In Armenian, the family name is Düzyan. Since this thesis utilizes Ottoman archives, the name will be
referred to as it appears in the Ottoman archives: the Düzoğlu family. I have followed a simplified system
of transliteration for Armenian, where appropriate I have preferred the common rendering of Armenian
names that have appeared in Turkish.
5According to Cezar, the word “sarraf” is explained as “a person who practices the job of exchanging
precious gold or silver coins. In the Ottoman Empire, which did not have banks and whose economy was
based on precious metals, they played an important role in monetary and financial history.” Yavuz Cezar,
“Economy and Taxation: The Role of the Sarrafs in Ottoman Finance and Economy in the Eighteenth
and Nineteenth Centuries,” in Frontiers of Ottoman Studies: State, Province, and the West., ed. Colin
Imber, Keiko Kiyotaki, and Rhoads Murphey (New York: I.B. Tauris, 2005), 61.
6The staff who provide precious metals to the Imperial Mint and process these metals to be minted are
categorized as Darbhane Tüccar Sınıfı by Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire. The
person who holds the top administrative position in the tüccar sınıfı is called ifrazcıbaşı. Mübâyaacı is the
person who bring the precious metals to the Imperial Mint. They work under the ifrazcıbaşı. It is however
important to note that the Darbhane Tüccar Sınıfı is not an official rank in the Ottoman Imperial Mint,
2
ity to mobilize credit during times of crises or economic downturns is considered
to be one of the keys allowing for their continuous appointments to the Imperial
Mint.7 A number of features of the Düzoğlu family help shed light on the position
of the Amiras in the Armenian community and the Ottoman state in the nineteenth
century.
First and foremost comes their role in the Imperial Mint and the family’s transformation
from a family of moderate significance in the early eighteenth century to that
of significant prestige in the nineteenth century. The Imperial Mint was considered
a pedestal of economic prestige in the Ottoman state, and the fact that they had
long occupied various positions in the Imperial Mint placed them in a significant
position in the Ottoman state. In terms of their transformation, the Düzoğlu family
increased their area of interest by seeking professions outside the Imperial Mint, such
as in banking, and family members came into prominence as more economically independent
actors from the mid-nineteenth century onwards. At the same time, they
went through a transformation as they occupied positions in the top administrative
councils of the Ottoman bureaucracy in the second half of the nineteenth century.
The second feature that highlights their position in the Armenian community and
Ottoman Empire stems from the fact that they were Catholic Armenians. The first
decade of the nineteenth century was a period in which there was an increase in the
conversion to Catholicism, as well as one of confessional turmoil. Like many other
Armenian Catholics, the Düzoğlu family was also directly affected by the political
turmoil. In an attempt to overhaul this plight, the Armenian Catholic Church was
recognized by Mahmud II in 1830. The hesitancy but also as the reconciliatory
attitude towards the Catholics and the Düzoğlu family sheds light on the empire’s
political and social life in the first half of the nineteenth century.8 Through the lens
of the Düzoğlu family, we can observe the way religious identification is intertwined
with politics and economic power.
rather it is a term coined by Ömerül Faruk Bölükbaşı. For detailed information on why he uses this term
see Ömerül Faruk Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire (Istanbul: Istanbul Bilgi
Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013), fn. 194.
7Şevket Pamuk, “The Evolution of Financial Institutions in the Ottoman Empire, 1600–1914,” Financial
History Review Cambridge University Press 11, no. 1 (2004): 23.
8For more information on anti-Catholicism in the Ottoman Empire, see Cesare Santus, “Sheykh ül-islam
Feyzullah Efendi and the Armenian Patriarch Awetik‘: a case of entangled confessional disciplining?,” in
Entangled Confessionalizations? Dialogic Perspectives on the Politics of Piety and Community-Building
in the Ottoman Empire, 15th-18th Centuries, ed. Tijana Krstić and Derin Terzioglu (Piscataway Gorgian
Press, 2022); Sebouh Aslanian, “The Great Schism of 1773: Venice and the Founding of the Armenian
Community of Trieste,” in Reflections of Armenian Identity in History and Historiography, ed. Houri
Berberian and Touraj Daryaee (UCI: Jordan Center for Persian Studies, 2018).
3
1.2 Scholarship on the Amiras
Traditional historiography about the Amiras has had a tendency to situate them
within the frame of their professions and is often silent about including the Ottoman
Empire in the picture. While the works written with this approach emphasize their
roles in state institutions such as the Imperial Mint, the Imperial Powder works,
and architecture, they are devoid of the ways in which the Amiras integrated into
the Ottoman Empire.9
Another tendency is to consider the Amiras as paragons of success in the Armenian
community by emphasizing their alleged notable origins and prosperity and highlighting
their personal ties with the Sultans and their material belongings. Such an
approach also considers the Amiras as a bourgeois class, a view that fits into the
national history paradigm. Nonetheless, this approach fails to analyze the Amiras
as intermediaries between the Armenian community and the Ottoman state. Works
focusing on the Amiras’ prosperity and lavish lifestyle often bring their princely qualities
forward and depict them as well-mannered, educated intellectuals who lived in
palace-like mansions by the shores of the Bosporus.10 The emphasis on the prosperity
did not necessarily have positive connotations. As numerous cases demonstrate,
the Amiras were condemned for being stalwart servants of the Ottoman state and deriving
their power from the Sultans who cared about nothing but their own wealth.11
The condemnation was not only limited to the traditional Armenian historiography.
The scholarship addressing the interplay of the Amiras and the Ottoman Empire
9Such a clear-cut approach towards the Amiras can be seen in: Anahide Ter Minassian, Ermeni Kültürü
ve Modernleşme: Şehir, Oyun, Mizah, Aile, Dil (Istanbul: Aras Yayıncılık, 2006) 95-115; Pars Tuğlacı,
The Role of the Balian Family in Ottoman Architecture (Istanbul: Yeni Çığır Bookstore, 1990) 5; Harutyun
G Mırmıryan, Masnagan Badmutyun Hay Medzadunneru [Special History of Armenian Magnates]
(Constantinople, 1909); H. Gabriel Menevişyan, Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants [Genealogy of the Noble
Düzyan House] (Venice: Mkhitarian Dparan, 1890).
10Arsen Yarman and Ara Aginyan, Sultan II. Mahmud ve Kazaz Artin Amira (Istanbul: Surp Pırgiç Ermeni
Hastanesi Kültür Yayınları 2013); Richard Hovhannisian and Simon Payaslian, “Armenian Constantinople,”
in Armenian Constantinople, ed. Richard Hovhannisian and Simon Payaslian (USA: Mazda Publishers,
2010), 3; Pascal Carmont, for example, talks about the potential linkage between the Amiras and
the authentic princely group, the Nakharars. While the book places an emphasis on the nobility, even
the book’s name suggests that the Amiras were single-handedly considered to be the leading Armenians.
Pascal Carmont, The Amiras: Lords of Ottoman Armenia (London: Taderon Press, 2012), 25-26. In line
with Carmont, scholars of Armenian historiography refer to the several Amira families as “dynasties” who
solely lived in mansions and palace-like manors, Ter Minassian Ermeni Kültürü ve Modernleşme: Şehir,
Oyun, Mizah, Aile, Dil, 95-105; Sarkis Balmanoukian, “The Balian Dynasty of Architects,” in Armenian
Constantinople, ed. Richard Hovhannisian and Simon Payaslian (USA: Mazda Publishers, 2010), 265-86.
Such exaggeration sometimes paved the way for entrenched misunderstandings or misuse of certain concepts.
For example, numerous studies mistakenly consider the Düzoğlu family as the superintendents of
the Imperial Mint. Likewise, some highlight that the Amiras were able to construct their own chapels and
churches all from the beginning. Minassian, Ermeni Kültürü ve Modernleşme: Şehir, Oyun, Mizah, Aile,
Dil, 105.
11Harutyun Mırmıryan for example, condemns the Amiras as being a selfish, self-centered group of people
who looked after nothing but their own wealth and power. Quoted in Hayr Simon Yeremyan, İstanbul
İzlenimleri, ed. Ragıp Zarakolu (Istanbul: Belge Yayınları, 2018).
4
began to proliferate with the trendsetting work by Hagob Barsoumian. His work
follows a comparative approach and integrates the Ottoman Empire within a macro
view perspective. His thesis, The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul, highlights
the importance of the Amiras, their forerunners, their emergence, the professions
they pursued, and the ways in which they managed to establish their credibility
among the Ottoman state elite.12 Before Barsoumian, several studies had been
conducted on the Amiras relying on Armenian literature, particularly focusing on
their professions and families.13 However, Barsoumian’s work provides one of the
first attempts to bring forth a multi-dimensional examination of the Amiras.
In his article, “The Dual Role of Amiras,” Barsoumian takes his observations one
step further.14 Discussing their role as a bilateral entity between Armenian society
and the Ottoman state elite, he concludes that “the trajectory of the rise and fall
of the Amiras is a direct response to the needs of the Ottoman state” and thus
positions the Amiras in the political and economic system of the Ottoman Empire.
15 Barsoumian’s academic works, one of the most extensive and complete literature
on the Amiras, further inspired scholars such as Pascal Carmont, Onnik Jamgoçyan,
and other scholars who rely heavily on Barsoumian’s works and on the same archival
material that he used.
Pascal Carmont’s book The Amiras: Lords of Ottoman Armenia provides a comprehensive
treatment of the Amiras and an attempt to understand the importance of the
Amiras in general.16 In this regard, his work constitutes a timeline for the history
of the Amiras, where he addresses their emergence from the Eğin region in northeastern
Anatolia, their migration to Istanbul, and the ways in which they obtained
their dual role within the Armenian community and the Ottoman state. Apart
from this chronology, his book is essential in understanding various details about
the Amiras from a social and historical perspective. In addition to Barsoumian’s
account, Carmont provides detailed information of the well-known Amiras and some
of the Amira families.
12Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul.”
13Several examples of the scholarship written on the Amiras prior to Barsoumian: Menevişyan, H. Gabriel.
1890. Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants. Venice: Mkhitarian Dparan; Azadyan, Toros. 1930. Dadyan
Kertasdanı. Viyana; Azadyan, Toros. 1951. Harüramya Hopelyan Bezciyan Mayr Varjarani, Kumkapı,
1830-1930. Istanbul; Pamukciyan, Kevork. 1971. Harutyun Amira Bezciyani Kertastanı Pazmaveb. No.
3-4, 303-313.
14Hagob Barsoumian, “The Dual Role of the Armenian Amira Class Within the Ottoman Government and
the Armenian Millet (1750-1850),” in Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire, ed. Benjamin Braude
and Bernard Lewis (New York, N.Y.: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1982).
15Barsoumian, “The Dual Role of the Armenian Amira Class,” 181.
16Carmont, The Amiras, 76-112.
5
Onnik Jamgoçyan’s book, Les finances de l’Empire Ottoman et les financiers de
Constantinople (1732-1853) [Moneylending in the Ottoman Empire: Greeks, Jews,
Franks and Armenians (1650-1850)], provides a general perspective of the activities
of moneylenders (sarraf ) in Istanbul from the seventeenth to the nineteenth
centuries.17 From a broader perspective, Jamgoçyan’s book is important because it
shows appreciation for how vital moneylenders were to the state economy. Throughout
the book, he provides information about their economic activities, their power in
the Ottoman state, and their relations with the state elite. His book contributes to
the understanding of how power shifted towards the Armenian community after the
decline of Jewish and Greek moneylenders in the early nineteenth century. Finally,
Jamgoçyan’s study provides further insight into the interdependent relationship between
the Amiras and the state.
While the literature above does not include the Ottoman state perspective, various
more recent studies have laid out a comparative framework that incorporates the
usage of the Ottoman state archives. Araks Şahiner’s unpublished MA thesis, “The
Sarrafs of Istanbul: Financiers of the Empire,” devotes most of its attention to
exploring the role of moneylenders in the Ottoman economy and administration.18
She builds her research on the moneylender Amiras in the Ottoman Empire by
utilizing Ottoman state archives and also incorporating Armenian primary sources
to provide a multidimensional understanding. Her findings illustrate the ways in
which the Amiras transformed their wealth into administrative and institutional
power. Of particular significance is the transformation from the power networks of
the Amiras to their rise as a new modern elite in the mid-nineteenth century.
While Vartan Artinian and Aylin Koçunyan’s works are not directly concerned with
the Amiras, they mention the shifts in the balances of power and transformations of
the Amiras in the second half of the nineteenth century, particularly in the period
paving the way for the 1863 constitution.19 While the Amiras actively participated
in the constitution-making process at first, as demonstrated by Artinian and
Koçunyan, their presence in the constitutional assembly was further outnumbered
17Jamgoçyan’s Ph.D. thesis titled, “Les finances de l’Empire Ottoman et les financiers de Constantinople
(1732-1853)” (Ph.D. Thesis, Pantheon-Sorbonne University, 1988). The thesis was translated into Turkish
and published by Yapı Kredi Publications. See Onnik Jamgoçyan, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık:
Rumlar, Museviler, Frenkler, Ermeniler (1650-1850), (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2007).
18Araks Şahiner, “The Sarrafs of Istanbul Financiers of the Empire” (Unpublished MA Thesis, Boğaziçi
University, 1995).
19Vartan Artinian, “A Study of the Historical Development of the Armenian Constitutional System in the
Ottoman Empire, 1839-1863” (Brandeis University, 1970); Aylin Besiryan, “Hopes of Secularization in the
Ottoman Empire: The Armenian National Constitution and The Armenian Newspaper, Masis 1856-1863”
(Unpublished MA Thesis, Boğaziçi University, 2007). Artinian’s thesis was translated into Turkish and
published by Aras Publications. See Vartan Artinian, Osmanlı Devleti’nde Ermeni Anayasası’nın Doğuşu
1839-1863, (Istanbul: Aras Yayıncılık, 2004.)
6
by artisan guilds made up of esnaf s (artisan and small tradesmen), a body against
the Amiras’ domination over the Armenian community.20 Artinian and Koçunyan’s
research demonstrates the separation of the Armenian constitutional process from
the Amiras.
Richard Antaramian’s Brokers of the Faith: Armenians and the Politics of Reform
in the Ottoman Empire analyzes the state centralization efforts of the nineteenth
century and locates the Armenian Patriarchate and the Imperial state as allies in it.
He relates to the role of the Amiras in centralization and considers the relationship
of the Amiras with the Church and the guilds—both within the context of their
influence in the reform period of the Ottoman Empire and within the perspective
of Armenian modernization.21 Antaramian’s perspective is indeed crucial to understand
the reorganization of the Armenian community and the separation of the
Armenian Patriarchate from the Amiras’ dominance.
1.3 Scholarship on the Düzoğlu Family
Scholarship analyzing the Düzoğlu family often touches upon themes emphasizing
the family’s institutional roles in the Imperial Mint. The central focus is on the
demise of the Jewish and the Greek community and the advent of the Düzoğlu
family to the Imperial Mint, as well as the execution of family members in the
aftermath of corruption allegations. Another theme revolving around the Düzoğlu
family is their creedal controversies.22
Several studies of which the main focus is on the economic and financial history of
the Ottoman Empire dedicate certain parts to the Düzoğlu family. Yavuz Cezar
and Şevket Pamuk’s studies on the economic and financial history of the Ottoman
Empire include several references to the Düzoğlu family, particularly about the family’s
roles as moneylenders and their practices in the Imperial Mint during times of
20According to Artinian, the Amiras often provided monetary support for schools until the nineteenth century.
In the nineteenth century, the esnaf s had begun to play an active role in financially supporting educational
institutions. For more detailed information on the esnaf s and their difference from the Amiras see, Artinian,
“A Study of the Historical Development of the Armenian Constitutional System in the Ottoman Empire,
1839-1863,” 24-30.
21Richard E. Antaramian, Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire: Armenians and the Political Reform in the
Ottoman Empire. (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2020), 29-32.
22Artinian, “A Study of the Historical Development of the Armenian Constitutional System in the Ottoman
Empire, 1839-1863;” Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul;” Charles A. Frazee, Catholics
and Sultans: The Church and the Ottoman Empire 1453-1923. (Cambridge University Press, 2006).
7
financial crises.23 Ömerül Faruk Bölükbaşı’s book attributes significant importance
to the Düzoğlu family in the Imperial Mint.24 He focuses on the period when the
family worked in the Mint and provides details about their professions. In utilizing
the Ottoman state archives, he attempts to correct the recurring misconceptions on
the context of their work in the Imperial Mint, such as the consideration of the Düzoğlu
family as the “directors of the Imperial Mint.” In her thesis, Fatma Nur Aysan
focuses on the Düzoğlu family’s property ownership records (muhallefat defterleri)
in the aftermath of the period when the Ottoman state confiscated their properties.
25 Aysan’s thesis reveals the fact that the property ownership records compiled
after the confiscation and auctioning of their properties shows that the family was
among the wealthiest families in Istanbul.
Within the framework that challenges the tendency to consider the Düzoğlu family
solely as being made up of people who worked in the Imperial Mint, several studies
make way for further studies. For example, Edhem Eldem’s book, İftihar ve İmtiyaz,
is an important book that reveals another major duty of the Imperial Mint, which is
the design and minting of the orders, medals and imperial seals.26 In his MA thesis,
Jacob Olley provides a well-depicted analysis of the transformation of the Düzoğlu
family in the Ottoman Empire. Olley discloses a critical role of the Düzoğlu family
by delving into the family’s assistance in forming the Hampartsum notation.
Additionally, his thesis provides an important account of the Düzoğlu family and
their confessional ties with the Mkhitarist congregation. Hence, his study is particularly
insightful in understanding the Düzoğlu family, their social activities, and
their social ties.27
There is a developing scholarship focusing particularly on the confessional ties of
the Armenian community, the Düzoğlu family’s confessional ties, and the struggles
that evolved around it. These topics have not received the scholarly attention they
23Cezar, “Economy and Taxation;” Yavuz Cezar, Osmanlı Maliyesinde Bunalım ve Değişim Dönemi: XVIII.
Yüzyıldan Tanzimat’a Mali Tarih, vol. 62 (Istanbul: Alan Yayıncılık, 1986); Şevket Pamuk, Osmanlı
İmparatorluğu’nda Paranın Tarihi, 3 ed. (Istanbul: Türkiye İşbankası Kültür Yayınları, 2017); Şevket
Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 8 ed. (Istanbul: Türkiye İşbankası Kültür Yayınları, 2020);
Pamuk, “The Evolution of Financial Institutions in the Ottoman Empire, 1600–1914.”
24Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 40, 54, 55, 57-72, 115.
25Fatma Nur Aysan, II. Mahmud Döneminde Dersaadette Bir Ailenin Muhallefatı: Düzoğulları, 2013, Unpublished
MA Thesis, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İstanbul Araştırmaları Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul Üniversitesi
Istanbul.
26Edhem Eldem, “Capitulations and Western Trade” in The Cambridge History of Turkey: The Later Ottoman
Empire, 1603-1839, ed. Suraiya Faroqhi (Cambridge University Press, 2006); Edhem Eldem, İftihar
ve İmtiyaz: Osmanlı Nişan ve Madalyaları Tarihi (İstanbul: Osmanlı Bankası Arşiv ve Araştırma Merkezi,
2004).
27Jacob Olley, “Writing Music in Nineteenth-Century Istanbul Ottoman Armenians and the Invention of
Hampartsum Notation” (Unpublished MA Thesis. King’s College London, 2018).
8
deserve until relatively recently. Flora Ghazarian’s forthcoming Ph.D. entitled “On
the Edge of the Center of Political Power: Informal Politics of Catholic Armenians in
Early Nineteenth-century Istanbul” is a seminal attempt to close this vacuum in the
scholarship.28 In her thesis, Ghazarian attempts to provide a detailed account of the
period when the Düzoğlu family’s members were disfavored, executed, and exiled
because they were Catholics. By using Armenian and Ottoman archives, Ghazarian’s
thesis displays the hesitancies of the Ottoman state toward the Armenian
Catholics.
Against the tendency to study Düzoğlus within the confines of the Imperial Mint,
the approaches of Ghazarian, Olley, and Eldem expose lesser-known factors about
the family. In short, while there is an emerging body of high-quality scholarship on
the importance of the Düzoğlu family as well as the politics around Catholicism, the
family’s transformation in line with the changes the Ottoman Empire experienced
remains largely unexplored in the literature.
Although plenty of works have been conducted on Armenian families such as the
Dadyan and Balyan families, the Düzoğlu family has not been given as much consideration
in the scholarship.29 Such a lack of attention is indeed thought provoking
because they held leading positions in one of the most prestigious institutions of
the Ottoman Empire, and they did so as Armenian Catholics in a time that was
politically turbulent for Catholics.
1.4 Research Questions and the Aims of the Thesis
In hopes of understanding what happened after the Amiras lost their significance,
historiography on the Amiras has focused primarily on the decline and fall of the
Amiras.30 While acknowledging that the Amiras dispersed among different profes-
28Flora Ghazarian, “On the Edge of the Center of Political Power: Informal Politics of Catholic Armenians
in Early Nineteenth-century Istanbul” (Ph.D. Central European University, Forthcoming). I would like
to thank Flora Ghazarian for sharing her valuable insights, suggestions, and resources about the Düzoğlu
family.
29Alyson Wharton, The Architects of Ottoman Constantinople: The Balyan Family and the History of
Ottoman Architecture (New York: I.B. Tauris, 2015); Ter Minassian, Ermeni Kültürü ve Modernleşme;
Tuğlacı, The Role of the Balian Family in Ottoman Architecture. Büke Uras, Balyanlar: Osmanlı Mimarlığı
ve Balyan Arşivi (Korpus Yayınları, 2021). Paolo Girardelli, “Religious Imprints Along the Grand Rue:
Armenians and Latins in Late-Ottoman Istanbul.” (paper presented at the Christian Art under Muslim
Rule, Istanbul, May 11/12 2012).
30Barsoumian, “The Dual Role of the Armenian Amira Class;” Carmont, The Amiras; Şahiner, “The Sarrafs
of Istanbul Financiers of the Empire”; Razmik Panossian, The Armenians: From Kings and Priests to Merchants
and Commissars (New York: Columbia University Press, 2006); Boğos Levon Zekiyan, Ermeniler
ve Modernite: Gelenek ve Yenileşme, Özgüllük ve Evrensellik Arasında Ermeni Kimliği, (Istanbul: Aras
Yayıncılık, 2001); Mırmıryan, Masnagan Badmutyun. Yarman and Aginyan, Sultan II. Mahmud ve Kazaz
9
sions in the latter part of the nineteenth century, such an approach refers to this
period as the “decline” or “fall” of the group. As the case of the Düzoğlu family
demonstrates, following their long years of service in the Imperial Mint in the nineteenth
century, they began to deviate from their traditional role in the Ottoman
state and work in different professions such as banking, industry, and bureaucracy.
Therefore, this thesis questions the validity of the decline/fall approach, an approach
that is commonly employed in the literature. This thesis is primarily concerned with
this transformation of the Amiras from the vantage point of the Düzoğlu family. In
doing so, in the macro view, this thesis is an attempt to better understand the
Amiras through the changes that took place during the nineteenth century.
The first set of questions that this thesis focuses on revolves around the roles of the
Düzoğlu family in the Imperial Mint. Members of the family entered the Ottoman
service in 1758 and until the transformation of the institution under the name of
Meskûkât-ı Şâhâne İdaresi (Imperial Coinage Administration)31 some of the family
members obtained high positions such as ifrazcıbaşıs,32 sarraf s, and kuyumcubaşıs.
Given their prominent roles in the institution, would it be possible to place them as
influential in the transformation from the traditional period to the modern period of
the Imperial Mint? More specifically, how did the Düzoğlu family become essential
agents of the change in the Imperial Mint? What were their contributions to the
development of the Imperial Mint?
Another related point to consider is that the nineteenth century is considered to be
a crucial milestone for the Ottoman Empire and the communities it embodied as a
larger unit. Within this period, modern banks and companies were established, the
Empire was in search of attaining a position in the developing capitalist system, and
steps were taken toward modern bureaucracy and institutionalization. The impact
of the Düzoğlu family in setting about these institutional and bureaucratic shifts
and transformations is clearly observable within each institution and period. In
other words, the impact of these crucial changes can be seen when examining the
professional positions the family attained from the early nineteenth century onwards.
Hence, the transformation of the Düzoğlu family should be understood alongside the
developments within the Ottoman Empire as a larger unit. How did the family’s
symbiotic relationship with the Ottoman state and the changing circumstances of
Artin Amira, 47. Kevork B Bardakjian, “Hagop Baronian’s Political and Social Satire” (Unpublished PhD.
Thesis, University of Oxford, 1979), 27-28; Libaridian, “The Ideology of Armenian Liberation,” 97.
31“Finance in Ottoman Finance,” History of Istanbul,accessed April 3, 2022, https://istanbultarihi.ist/571-
finance-in-ottoman-istanbul.
32“Sorters of metals in the Imperial Mint, makers of coins.” “İfrazciyan,” in The Redhouse Dictionary
Turkish/Ottoman-English (Istanbul: SEV Yayıncılık Eğitim), 516.
10
the Ottoman Empire enable the family’s transformation? How and in what ways
did they place themselves in the Ottoman economic sphere? How did they place
themselves in the Ottoman Empire’s bureaucratic modernization in the nineteenth
century? These are the second set of questions this thesis asks to understand the
Armenian community’s internal dynamics and the Ottoman state’s attitudes towards
the Armenian community in the nineteenth century.
1.5 Sources
Observing the transformations that took place in the position of the Amiras in
society and in the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century from the vantage
point of the Düzoğlu family requires a multilayered outlook and the use of numerous
types of sources. To provide the multilayered outlook, the following types of sources
compare and contrast the narrations about the family’s transformation from simple
jewelers to bureaucrats in the second half of the nineteenth century: the Ottoman
archives in Istanbul, first-person narratives such as travelogues and ruznâmes, and
contemporary Armenian sources.
The Ottoman state archives (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivleri, BOA) are of particular
importance in tracing the transformation the Düzoğlu family underwent and the
family’s transformation from the early eighteenth century to the nineteenth century.
The Ottoman archives do not only provide formal and professional documents about
the family, but it helps to trace the changing dynamics of the family ranging from
the social crises they faced to their increasing importance for the Ottoman state.
Looking at the archives at the beginning of the eighteenth century, the BOA includes
documents written about basic jewelry making, depicting the preparation of precious
jewelry for the Sultan’s entourage or that of the state elite (children, wives, and
other family members). Throughout the century, although they kept their title
as kuyumcubaşıs (Imperial jeweler), the documents about simple jewelry making
are outnumbered by related documents such as Ceyb-i Hümayun ve Harc-ı Hassa,
Müfredat Defteri, Muhalefat Defterleri,33 and documents related to ifrazcıbaşılık
and mübâyaacılık.34 These documents often include information about monetary
transactions, debt collection, the provisioning of precious metals, and coin minting.
From the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century onwards, they were also
responsible for the craftsmanship of the gifts intended for the Sultan, foreign kings,
33Documents about the Sultan’s personal expenses and the Imperial Palace’s expenses.
34BOA, C..DRB.7/320, H.20.02.8204/ 1789
11
or state officials.35 Through the second half of the nineteenth century, the role of
Düzoğlu family members in various other industries can be seen, such as their role
in the silk trade and the construction of a paper factory.36 Likewise, an increase
in the documents related to rewards and concessions given to the Düzoğlus can be
observed throughout the nineteenth century.
In addition to Ottoman primary sources, Armenian published books written by
Gabriel Menevişyan and Harutyun Mırmıryan provide examples of how the biographies
and activities of the Düzoğlu family along with several other important Amiras
can be understood.37 The Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants [Genealogy of the Noble
Düzyan House] is a biography of the Düzoğlu family, including information about
the members of the family who served in the Ottoman state as well as the other
most prominent family members.38 The Masnagan Badmutyun Hay Medzadunneru
[Special History of Armenian Magnates] written by an Armenian historian named
Harutyun Mırmıryan covers the biographies of and important information about
wealthy Armenian families between the fifteenth and twentieth centuries. Although
there are limited references to the Düzoğlu family, the work is still important for
obtaining information on other Amira families.39
One final book that must be mentioned is perhaps one of the most important Armenian
published books. The book is authored by Arsen Pakraduni, a Catholic
Mkhitarist Armenian historian who was hired by the Düzoğlu family as the children’s
tutor. During his tenure as the tutor, he wrote the family’s genealogy, which
is currently located in the Mkhitarist Monastery of Venice, which houses a library.40
Additionally, the thesis will rely on eyewitness accounts and travelogues such as
35“Rusya İmparatorlu için Düzoğlu’na imal ettirilen sorgucun yapımında kullanılan elmas ve tüy parasının
Laleli Vakfı fazlasından karşılanması” BOA HAT, 1649/18 H.29.12.1205/ 1790; “İrade gereğince İngiltere
kralıyla oğullarına Düzoğlu ’na yaptırılan meç ve kılıçlar için elmas alınmak üzere iki yüz elli kese akçe
verilmesine dair.” BOA, HAT, 113/4511 H.29.12.1201/ 1786; “Fransa cumhuru tarafından gelen bir zabite
verilen ve Düzoğlu marifetiyle iştira kılınan bir adet mücevher kutunun bahası olan yedi yüz beş kuruşun
miriden itası” BOA, C..HR..139/6904, H.29.01.1219/ 1804; “Padişah için Düzoğlu Hoce Karabet bezergan
marifetiyle kılıç yapmak için Harbiye anbarında mevcut yumurtalardan yumurta itası” BOA, C..SM..36.
1299/1814, H.06.06.1256/1840.
36“Hereke Fabrika-i Hümayûn’a lazım olan ipek Düzoğlu Hoce Agob tarafından tedarik edildiği ve bedelinin
Darbhâne-i Amire’den ödenmesi” BOA, A.} MKT.19/51 H.129.12.1260/ 1844; “Düzoğlu Hoce Agob’un
kurmak istediği kağıt fabrikası hakkında tezkere” BOA, A.} MKT.19/51, H.29.12.1260/ 1844
37Mırmıryan, Masnagan Badmutyun; Menevişyan, Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants. Although Barsoumian
particularly criticized these books for being scattered, disorganized, and superficial, they are helpful for
understanding the biographies of the family members (Barsoumian, The Armenian Amira Class, 7).
38Menevişyan Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants.
39Mırmıryan, Masnagan Badmutyun.
40Arsen Pakraduni, Azgabanutiun Nshanavor Antsits Aznuazarm Tann Diuzeants [Genealogy and History of
Major Events of the Noble Diuzian Dynasty] (St. Lazzaro Venice: Mekhitarist Congregation 1856).
12
those written by Georg Oğulukyan and Charles MacFarlane.41 In his words, Oğulukyan,
who provides an eyewitness account, was a scribe in the Imperial Mint
working in service of Düzoğlu family: “Kronolojik sırası ile yazdıklarımın çoğunu
ben, katib Oğulukyan Georg, Darbhane’de Düzoğlu Çelebilerin hizmetinde bulunmaklığım
sayesinde, gözümle görmüş, kısmen de başkalarından tahkik etmişimdir.”42
Throughout the narration, Oğulukyan refers to a period in 1819 in which the Düzoğlu
family had experienced a setback. MacFarlane, on the other hand, displays a
detailed account of the situation of the Catholics in the first half of the nineteenth
century in his eyewitness account. As exaggerated as these accounts may be, they
are indeed important to comprehend the approaches towards Catholic Armenians
as well as to historicize these approaches.
1.6 Overview of the Chapters
This study has three chapters organized based on the changes in the Düzoğlu family’s
professional life as well as the Ottoman Empire’s social and political transformations,
including numerous bureaucratic and institutional transformations.
The first chapter initially narrates the macro view of the thesis by examining the
terms Amira and Amiralık and what lies behind these broader terms. It also answers
questions such as: Who were the predecessors of the Amiras? How did the Amiras
amass and invest the capital they obtained in a particular region? How did the
groups we identify as Amira emerge from these coalesce of factors? The chapter
narrows the lenses down to solely the roles of the Amiras in the Ottoman state
service as well as in the Armenian community. One key point on the study of
the Amiras is the necessity to connect this topic to larger discussions, such as the
discussion on the term itself. Therefore, the chapter closes with a discussion section
on the term “Amira” and the term’s validity.
The second chapter delves into a narration on the actual protagonists of the thesis,
the Düzoğlu family. The chapter attempts to locate the changing professions of
the family in the Ottoman state from simple jewelers to Imperial Jewelers and to
detail how they eventually became ifrazcıbaşıs in the Imperial Mint. This chapter
41Charles MacFarlane, The Armenians: A Tale of Constantinople, vol. 1 (Carey and Lea, 1830); Charles
MacFarlane, Constantinople in 1828: A Residence of Sixteen Months in the Turkish Capital and Provinces:
with an Account of the Present State of the Naval and Military Power and of the Resources of the Ottoman
Empire, vol. 2 (Saunders and Otley, 1829).
42Georg Oğulukyan, Georg Oğulukyan’ın Ruznamesi: 1806-1810 İsyanları, ed. Hrand D. Andreasyan (İstanbul:
İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Basımevi, 1971).
13
is important for understanding how the contours of this economically independent
family began to emerge in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.
The third and perhaps the most crucial chapter of the thesis tries to delineate the
transformation of the Düzoğlu family by displaying the ways in which it managed
to separate itself from the Ottoman state service and emerge as an economically
independent actor in the mid-nineteenth century. As the Düzoğlus became more
economically independent, they managed to channel their wealth into numerous
social activities within the Armenian community. The final part of the third chapter
delves into their social activities related to Armenian education and the Armenian
social sphere.
Lastly, the concluding section tackles the notion of the decline and fall of the Amiras
and suggests other ways in which the transformation can be understood in the context
of the Düzoğlu family’s professional standing in the bureaucratic modernization
of the Ottoman Empire. As a final remark, the chapter closes with a series of ideas
for further research opportunities.
14
2. AMIRALIK AND AMIRAS: SETTING THE SCENE
2.1 Armenian Elites and Ottoman Society until the Eighteenth Century
The Amiras, a group of Armenian moneylenders, tradesmen, superintendents, and
financiers, rose to prominence in the second half of the eighteenth century in the
Ottoman Empire.1 The Armenian community itself used Amira to refer to the community’s
chiefs and used the term with an intention on placing an emphasis on the
prestige of the role.2 The Ottoman officialdom also sometimes addressed esteemed
moneylenders and merchants as Amira. Amiralık was not an official designation
of rank—that is, it was not a profession such as bezirgânbaşılık or sarrafbaşılık.
The influence of the Amiras lasted until the second half of the nineteenth century.
Many Amiras, if not all, were originally from Agn (Eğin, modern-day Kemaliye) and
emerged as an economically powerful group in the eighteenth century by means of
engaging in trade. Approximately in the early eighteenth century, they moved to
Istanbul, where they used their accumulated capital to initiate business ventures.
Engaging in certain occupations ranging from moneylending and trade to architecture,
the Amiras maintained their prosperity and emerged as a group with a
powerful, privileged identity in the city.3
To have a deeper understanding of what the term stands for, this chapter will
initially narrow its focus to Armenian elites and their place in the Ottoman state
in order to bring their influence on certain professions into sharper view. Here, the
central focus will be on the groups considered to be the predecessors of the Amiras.
Further, the term Amira and its historical context will be addressed. Finally, the
1The word Amira is derived from the Arabic word emîr, which stands for a prince, chief or commander
in English. “Emir”, in The Redhouse Dictionary Turkish/Ottoman-English (Istanbul: SEV Yayıncılık
Eğitim), 338.
2Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 49-50.
3Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 70-74.
15
historical context includes their emergence as a group and their services within the
Ottoman state and the Armenian community. The final part of the chapter will
discuss the term Amira within a critical framework, focusing on the controversies
the term embodies.
2.1.1 Hocas
Armenians are often associated with monetary professions.4 Considering their interest
in moneylending, trade, gold/silversmithing and coin minting in the early
modern period, such an assumption should not come as a surprise. As predecessors
of the Amiras, Armenian hocas and çelebis were dominant actors when it came
to trade. Although Barsoumian lists numerous groups as predecessors of the Amiras—
namely hocas, çelebis, mahdesis, and iskhans—he argues that, among these
groups, only hocas and çelebis had maintained an important role within Ottoman
governance, albeit a limited one.5 Although not expressed in precise terms, these
were titles granted by the Sultan to individuals who had rendered services to the
Ottoman state.6
Hocas were, first and foremost, a group of merchants most active in the seventeenth
century who operated as moneylenders, kürkçübaşıs7 and bezirgânbaşıs.8 Their
wealth was derived from trading silk and other raw materials.9 Both Armenian
and Ottoman archival documents used the term. As documents in the Ottoman
State Archives and Court Registers indicate, hocalık is often associated with merchants
and traders.10 The earliest encounter of the term hoca was recorded in the
fifteenth-century Armenian colophons to indicate a group of Armenian merchants.11
In the case of the Court Registers, the earliest accounts are recorded in the sixteenth
4Sebouh Aslanian, From the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean (University of California Press, 2011), 338;
Panossian, The Armenians, 77.
5Iskhan, stands for the word prince. Mahdesi, is a word derived from Arabic, mukaddesi and it is used to
indicate a person who went on Hajj. Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 41.
6Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 38.
7Servant in charge of Sultan’s fur coats. “Kürkçübaşı,” in The Redhouse Dictionary Turkish/Ottoman-
English (Istanbul: SEV Yayıncılık Eğitim), 698.
8Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 38.
9Libaridian, “The Ideology of Armenian Liberation,” 51-54.
10“Kürkçü hoce Kapril,” “cevâhirci hoce Aslan.”
11Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 39.
16
century.12 Although people who came to the forefront with their professional success
were addressed as hoca by the Ottoman state, the term was also often used to
indicate successful merchants.13
In terms of the eastern Mediterranean trade, hocas actively supplied broadcloth,
cotton textile, indigo, raw silk, and woolen textiles to Europe, especially England.14
Hocas were an integral part of this trade route as they set up the infrastructure for
long-distance trade.15 Although merchant-hocas often engaged in the textile, silk,
and coffee trade, Chaudhuri argues that these people were prepared to deal with any
commodity they considered profitable regardless of what type of commodity it was.16
The hocas’ competence in trade contributed to expanding Armenian trade networks
even further.17 As noted by the seventeenth-century traveler Tournefort, their web
of networks spanned from Livorno to Iran and from the farthest edge of India to
the Philippines.18 At the turn of the nineteenth century, the extensive Armenian
trade network began to be replaced by local trade networks, allowing merchants to
accumulate their capital in certain regions. Eğin and environs eventually provided
a solid ground for the Amiras’ empowerment since they accumulated a lot of capital
through the Armenian merchants’ incipient local trade.19 The localization of trade
for the Armenians and the rise of the Eğin region, and environs might be to the
growing dominance of the British and French in international trade.20
When it comes to the presence of hocas in the service of the Ottoman state, they often
took roles ranging from personal moneylenders of the grand viziers and Sultans to the
chief architect, hassa mimarı, or the furrier, kürkçübaşı. One of the relatively well-
12Üsküdar Mahkemesi n. 403 v.70, p.114, r.146 (H. 1154-1155 / M. 1740-1742); ÜM, n.403v.70, p. 144, r:
213 (H. 1154-1155 / M. 1740-1742)
13According to Redhouse dictionary, Hoca is recorded as Muslim teacher. “Hoca,” in The Redhouse Dictionary
Turkish/Ottoman-English (Istanbul: Istanbul). On the other hand, TDV Encyclopedia offers an
extended definition of Hoca, which includes their association with monetary professions. “Hoca,” TDV
İslam Ansiklopedisi, accessed July 7, 2022, https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/hoca. Barsoumian, "The Armenian
Amira Class of Istanbul," 53.
14Vahe Baladouni and Margaret Makepeace, “Armenian Merchants of the Seventeenth and Early Eighteenth
Centuries: English East India Company Sources,” Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 88,
no. 5 (1988): xv.
15Baladouni, V. Makepeace, Margaret. 1998. “Armenian Merchants of the Seventeenth and Early Eighteenth
Centuries,” xv.
16Kirti N. Chaudhuri, The Trading World of Asia and the English East India Company, 1660-1760 (New
York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 49.
17Zekiyan, B.L. 2001. Ermeniler ve Modernite. Aras Publications, Istanbul 72.
18Joseph de Tournefort, Tournefort Seyahatnamesi ed. Stefanos Yerasimos (2005), 200-02.
19Tournefort, Tournefort Seyahatnamesi 200-02.
20Aslanian, From the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean, 41.
17
known faces in the Ottoman state was Ruhican Hoca, who worked as the kürkçübaşı
of Murad IV and sarrafbaşı of Hüsrev Paşa.21 Additionally, Hoca Asdvadzadur was
the personal sarraf of Nasuh Paşa; he was later appointed as the hassa mimarı by
Murad IV.22
Through their success in trade, the hocas who often resided in the provinces contributed
to Armenian capital accumulation, which also helped them to become
prominent figures in Armenian society.23 They often took on the role of the financial
aides of the community by financing educational activities and paying to repair
churches and monasteries. Hocas endeavored to disseminate new ideas through the
printing press, and they also engaged in copying and spreading ancient Armenian
manuscripts throughout Anatolia.24
2.1.2 Çelebis
Hocas were not the only leading group of the Armenian community in the early
modern period. Çelebis, too, attained a similar position in the Ottoman state and
the Armenian community. Çelebis often emerged amongst the artisans and merchants
in Istanbul and often engaged in moneylending and banking.25 Although
they often resided in Istanbul, çelebis were also proven to be important actors of
trade. Perhaps one of the most upfront çelebi merchants was Andon Çelebi. As
demonstrated by Eremya Çelebi Kömürciyan, he maintained outstanding success
in the Mediterranean and Indian Ocean trade and as a result, he accumulated a
reputation as well as capital:
Andon Çelebi’nin şöhreti o kadar büyüktü ki o. Osmanlı Sarayından
başka, Frenk ve İran memleketleri gibi uzak yerlerde de tanınmış bir
kimse idi.26
21Mırmıryan, Masnagan Badmutyun,1.
22Vartan Artinian, Osmanlı Devleti’nde Ermeni Anayasası’nın Doğuşu (1839-1863.) (Istanbul: Aras
Yayıncılık, 2004), 35.
23Hovhannesyan, A. Trvagner Hay Azadakragan Mtki Badmutyan, Yerevan. 1959, 2:38.
24Panossian, The Armenians, 67-85.
25Libaridian, “The Ideology of Armenian Liberation,” 53.
26Eremya Çelebi Kömürciyan, İstanbul Tarihi: XVII. Asırda İstanbul, ed. Kevork Pamukciyan, trans. Hrand
D. Andreasyan (Istanbul: Eren Yayıncılık ve Kitapçılık. , 1988), 236-39.
18
In contrast to hocas, çelebis constitute a rather more educated segment of the community
who derived their fortunes from their close ties with the Ottoman sultans.27
At their apex in the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries, Abro/Abraham Çelebi
and Mağakya Çelebi were known to be important figures due to their roles in the Ottoman
state and the Armenian community. After 1644, Abro Çelebi was appointed
to Crete as the imperial supplier by Sultan İbrahim. In the following years, he continued
his service in the Ottoman state under Köprülüzade Fazıl Ahmed Paşa as his
personal sarraf.28 In the Armenian community, he was an important figure in terms
of his cultural activities. He gathered the other potent çelebis of his time and took
initiative to accomplish the long-sought wish to make Istanbul the sole religious and
administrative center of Ottoman Armenia.29 He also endeavored to copy Armenian
manuscripts and renovate the Armenian churches in his active years.30 Although
the information on Mağakya Çelebi is limited, sources indicate that he worked as
the personal sarraf of Melek Ahmed Paşa.31 He was considered to be an important
figure for the Armenian community.32
2.2 The Establishment of Amira Communities
The newly emerging Armenian socioeconomic force gained strength in the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries. Subsequently, Istanbul emerged as a permanent
center along with Tbilisi.33 Within these diaspora centers, especially in Istanbul, a
moneylender elite—alias the Amiras—emerged as the important figures of the Armenian
community. The Amiras’ accumulated capital in the Eğin region and their
professional advancement helped them settle and further prosper in the Ottoman
capital.34 When it comes to the eighteenth century, the Amiras consolidated their
position in Istanbul by means of entering certain business ventures and working as
27Libaridian, “The Ideology of Armenian Liberation,” 53; Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of
Istanbul,” 30-31.
28Y. Gamidas Çarkçıyan, Türk Devleti Hizmetindeki Ermeniler (Istanbul: Köprü Kitapları, 2016), 48.
29Çarkçıyan, Türk Devleti Hizmetindeki Ermeniler, 48.
30Çarkçıyan, Türk Devleti Hizmetindeki Ermeniler, 48.
31Çarkçıyan, Türk Devleti Hizmetindeki Ermeniler, 48.
32Detailed information about Mağakya Çelebi can be found in Kömürciyan, İstanbul Tarihi: XVII. Asırda
Istanbul, 24, 186-187.
33Panossian, The Armenians, 77.
34Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 70-72
19
benefactors for the well-being of the Armenian community. Upon their arrival in
Istanbul, certain families began specializing in numerous professions and some of
the families dominated one particular venture for a long time. For example, the
Dadyans dominated the Imperial Powder works, the Allahverdiyans (Allahverdioğlu
or Hüdâverdioğlu) worked as moneylenders,35 the Düzoğlus worked in the Imperial
Mint for over a century, and the Noradunkyans took control of bread provisioning
in the Imperial city.36
Consisting of approximately 186 members, most of the Amiras, if not all, originated
from Eğin.37 Other regions of origin include Sivas, Divriği, Tokat, Van, and Erzurum,
as well as the places surrounding it. The area, which included an abundance
of merchants, came into prominence during the early modern period. Even though
scholars do not offer a conclusive explanation of the region’s peculiarity in terms of
trade networks, two arguments are asserted.38
Firstly, due to strategic reasons, the first inhabitants of Eğin settled in the mountainous
region. Given its geographical disadvantage specifically due to the lack of
arable land, the region’s economic activities were limited, and the inhabitants often
were left needing to engage in trade. The bezirgâns of Eğin often set out on long
journeys and supplied the region with goods brought from centers such as Aleppo,
Istanbul, and Europe.39 They brought goods such as silk and cotton and sold them
or or bartered them in exchange for other goods such as fruits and vegetables or
grains.40 Thus, the Amiras accumulated their capital through long-distance trade
over a long period of time.41 In explaining the professions of Armenians, Jean Henry
Ubicini notes:
35Tolga Yaşar Cora, “Transforming Erzurum/Karin: The Social and Economic History of a Multi-Ethnic
Ottoman City In the Nineteenth Century” (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis University of Chicago, 2016) 87.
36Artinian, “A Study of the Historical Development of the Armenian Constitutional System in the Ottoman
Empire, 1839-1863,” 22.
37Quoting from Mikayel Çamiçyan, Barsoumian notes that as a village, Eğin became a migration hub for
a group of Nakharar (Armenian elites) who escaped from the Seljuks at the end of the eleventh century.
Çamiçyan Mikayel Batmutyun Hayots [History of the Armenian People], 3 vols. Venice, 1784-1786.
38Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 70-72; Ali Yaycıoğlu, “Perdenin Arkasındakiler:
Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflar ve Finans Ağları Üzerine Bir Deneme,” Journal of Turkish Studies
51 (2019): 3.
39Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 70-72; Zeki Arıkan, “Eğin Kasabasının Tarihsel
Gelişimi,” Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi OTAM 12, no. 12 (2001): 35.
40Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 70-72.
41Antaramian. R. 2020. Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire: Armenians and the Politics of Reform in the
Ottoman Empire. Stanford University Press. 29.
20
“[Armenians] are most directly concerned in the maintenance of their
empire. Much of the commerce and industry of the country is in the
hands of Armenians. Since reform in Turkey, their condition has become
greatly improved, their wealth is no longer in danger of spoliation, and
[they] are the last to desire a change.”42
Secondly, a more recent explanation to the question of what made Eğin the center
for the Amiras was presented by Ali Yaycıoğlu. Yaycıoğlu has demonstrated the
insufficiency of the former explanations by shedding light on the underground treasures
of the Eğin region and its surroundings. Namely the upper Euphrates region
consisting of Kemah, Erzincan, Divriği, Arapgir, and Harput were well-equipped
with gold and silver mines.43 The Amiras played a crucial role in developing and
exploiting these resources.
2.3 Characteristics of theAmiras
From 1750, and especially from 1780 onwards, the title Amira eclipsed that of hocas,
çelebis, mahdesis, and iskhans.44 The Amiras practiced and further developed and
changed their professions and duties from those of their predecessors.45 Their economic,
financial, and institutional differences set their predecessors apart from the
Amiras. The hocas’ mobile capital enabled them to move around and establish themselves
in different places, and due to their long-distance trade, they became known
for their mobile characteristics.46 Although the hocas were not held accountable for
state institutions, the Amiras, who were immobile and located in Istanbul, had ties
directly with the Ottoman state. In the Ottoman state service, the Amiras worked
in prominent state institutions such as darbhâne and baruthâne, making them responsible
for tax collection. Such features made them more stable; thus, they were
rather focused on local investment.
42Jean Henri Abdolomyne Ubicini, Letters on Turkey: An Account of the Religious, Political, Social, and
Commercial Condition of the Ottoman Empire, vol. 1 (John Murray, 1856), 341.
43Yaycıoğlu, “Perdenin Arkasındakiler,” 6.
44Although the usage of these names was outdated by the usage of Amiras, archival material suggests that
people kept using them, as seen in the examples of Hagob Çelebi Düzyan, Hoca Bedik Çelebi, Amira
Hoca Boğos Düzyan, and so on. Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 41-45.; Kevork
Pamukciyan, Biyografileriyle Ermeniler vol. IV, Ermeni Kaynaklarından Tarihe Katkılar, (Istanbul: Aras
Yayıncılık, 2003), 212.
45Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 47-48.
46Panossian, The Armenians, 68.
21
In light of such information, it is crucial to look at the prominent characteristics of
the group. The first defining characteristic of the Amiras is that they were not an
institutionalized group. For example, Amiralık constituted a status for Armenians
who had proven themselves to be successful moneylenders, state officials, and merchants.
47 Studies highlight that their privileged status can be understood through
their exemption from tax obligations, sartorial regulations, and weapon-wielding
restrictions.48
Secondly, amiralık was not a hereditary title where sons inherited the titles of their
fathers. For a person to be referred to as Amira, that person needed to attain
certain accomplishments in service of the Ottoman state. These individuals needed
to be leading economic and social figures in the Armenian community, as Amira
was a title accepted by the community to refer to a person’s high-status position
in the community.49 An attainment of the Amira title could be the result of a
person’s responsiveness to community-related matters, which could be in the form
of financial support, establishing certain institutions, or looking out for society’s
interests in other ways. From the Armenian community’s perspective, the Amiras
needed to acquire power by serving the Ottoman state. They needed to use the
power they wielded for the well-being of the Armenian community.
2.4 The Amiras: In the Service of the Ottoman State
The Amiras served the Ottoman state in several occupations by administering and
working in various state institutions as moneylenders, manufacturers (charged with
overseeing essential state industries or overseeing the delivery of public goods), and
architects. Apart from their institutional roles, which will be addressed, they managed
the state elite’s personal savings (padişah sarrafı). By virtue of their professions,
these people maintained close ties with the Ottoman state elite, and on rare
occurrences, even with the Sultans. Hence, they were at the center of the social
and institutional sphere of the Ottoman Empire and were at the same time rather
marginalized actors. The forthcoming paragraphs will delve into the institutional
professions of the Amiras in the Ottoman state.
47The member recruitment process worked within a master-apprentice relationship where newcomers from
Anatolia were trained to become masters. Panossian, The Armenians, 90.
48Such as, Artinian, “A Study of the Historical Development of the Armenian Constitutional System in the
Ottoman Empire, 1839-1863” 20-24; Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul.”
49Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 49-50.
22
2.4.1 Tax Collection and Moneylenders
Moneylending for tax collection was an important profession in the Ottoman Empire
that was conducted heavily by non-Muslims.50 This role was often reserved for
the economic elite and later for the Armenians and Greeks.51 In the sixteenth
century, to regulate the iltizam system, the Ottoman Empire relied heavily on the
moneylenders.52 Although they were important economic actors in the Ottoman
financial sector, the importance of the moneylenders increased significantly in the
eighteenth century.53 According to Yavuz Cezar, the reason behind their increasing
importance was the development of new taxes in cash, increased money circulation,
and the Ottoman Empire’s inability to cope with the reformation of the financial
institutions.54 Through their European trade network, the moneylenders provided
short-term loans at times of crisis and actively sought out trading opportunities on
behalf of the Ottoman state.55
During the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries when predecessors of the
Amiras were active agents of trade, members of other non-Muslim communities,
namely Greeks and Jews, mostly engaged in moneylending.56 These moneylenders
crucially supplied the empire’s financial system.57 This period came to be known as
the “golden age for the sarraf s” in the secondary literature.58 These moneylenders
were responsible for lending money to the Ottoman state stratum.
Due to the close relations Jews had with the janissaries, the influence of the Jews
on finance and trade began to decrease as of the late eighteenth century, making
way for Greek and Armenian control in the moneylending business. However, both
the Jews and the Greeks were caught in between the conflicting expectations of the
Ottoman Empire. Together with Greek war of independence in 1821, Armenians
50Minna Rozen, “The Ottoman Jews” in The Cambridge History of Turkey: The Later Ottoman Empire,
1603-1839, ed. Suraiya Faroqhi (Cambridge University Press, 2006), 256-59.
51Rozen, “The Ottoman Jews” 256-59.
52Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 192; Yaycıoğlu, “Perdenin Arkasındakiler,” 5
53Cezar, “Economy and Taxation.” 61-68
54Cezar, “Economy and Taxation.” 61-68
55Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 193.
56Since Sharia law formally prohibits moneylending, members of non-Muslim communities were often engaged
with moneylending. Yavuz Ercan, Osmanlı Yönetiminde Gayrimüslimler: Kuruluştan Tanzimat’a Kadar
Sosyal, Ekonomik ve Hukuki Durumları (Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi, 2001), 223; Jamgoçyan, Osmanlı
İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık, 32.
57Cezar, “Economy and Taxation,” 65-66.
58Cezar, “Economy and Taxation,” 65.
23
established a monopoly over the finances of the empire.59 Thus, with the decline of
the Greek and Jewish moneylenders,60 the Amiras eventually became the arbiters
of the finance and moneylending business.61
In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the sarraf -Amiras were prominent
tax collectors who were responsible for collecting the customs duty (gümrük
vergisi) in Istanbul, Izmir, Aleppo, and Erzurum.62 After the first abolishment
of the iltizam tax in 1840 the Amiras were brought to the head of tax collecting
companies, specifically the Anatolia and Rumelia Companies (Anadolu ve Rumeli
Kumpanyaları).63 Each company was assigned the task of collecting the remittance
of the revenues of the whole Empire and giving it to the treasury.64
Besides collecting the customs duty taxes, the moneylender Amiras also worked as
the personal sarraf s of the Ottoman state elite, namely the Sultans, grand viziers,
and pashas. They were responsible for taking care of the personal fortunes of the
state elite. Amira Artin Kazzaz (Harutyun Amira Bezciyan), the advisor and personal
sarraf to Mahmud II, comes first among several other Amiras who had personal
ties with the Sultans.65 At times of financial crises, the Amiras were present to lend
money to the state authorities or to the people serving in the upper echelons of the
state.66
By serving as tax collectors and personal sarraf s to the state elite, the Amiras
managed to penetrate into state affairs and their influence provided them with a
network enabling them to form relations with other high-powered people in the
Ottoman state.67
59Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 142.
60As a result of Greek War of Independence in 1821 and the close relations between Jews and the janissaries,
these communities were disfavored by the Ottoman state, elevating the Armenian moneylenders. For
further details on the changing balance of power of the moneylending profession, see Jamgoçyan, Osmanlı
İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık, 16, 59-61.
61Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 142.
62Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 97.
63Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 96.
64Barsoumian, “The Dual Role of the Armenian Amira class” 174; document about the abolishment of the
companies, BOA, İ..MVL.285/11275, H.19.12.1269/ 1852.
65Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 131.
66Perhaps one of the most controversial and well-known moneylending case of an Amira was when Mıgırdiç
Amira Cezayirliyan lent money to Kavalalı Mehmed Ali Paşa. For detailed information on the issue, see.
Erdem Kabadayı, “Mkrdich Cezayirliyan or the Sharp Rise and Sudden Fall of an Ottoman Entrepreneur,”
in In Merchants in the Ottoman Empire, ed. Suraiya Faroqhi and Gilles Veinstein (Leuven: Collection
Turcica Peeters, 2008).
67Antaramian, Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire, 30.
24
2.4.2 Roles in the Imperial Mint and the Imperial Powder Works
The Darbhâne and Baruthâne were among the Ottoman state’s most prominent
institutions. Certain Amira families such as the Düzoğlu family and the Dadyan
family governed these institutions for generations and thus had a monopoly over
them.
The Imperial powder works was among the key institutions of the Ottoman state,
as it was the place responsible for providing gunpowder to the Empire. Powder
mills during the reign of Selim III became a part of the Baruthâne Nazırlığı. Upon
its establishment by Selim III, Dad Arakel was brought to the head of the Imperial
powder works as the barutçubaşı. In the following generations, the Dadyans
continued to be in charge of the administration of the Imperial powder works.68
The Imperial Mint’s organization, governance, and importance varied significantly
from period to period. During times of financial and military crises, it acted as a
safe to financially support the imperial expenses. In addition, it functioned as a taxcollecting
body or the unit responsible for designing the Imperial seal on some other
occasions.69 As the forthcoming coming chapters delve into the details of the role
of the Düzoğlu family in the Imperial Mint, it suffices here to say that Darbhâne-i
Âmire was one of the most important institutions of the Ottoman Empire since
it was the place for coin minting and since it represented the prosperity of the
state.70 Moreover, in the eighteenth century, the Imperial Mint became the center
for regulating the mukâtaas.71
Additionally, the Imperial Mint was important for the empire’s fiscal policies, such as
the debasement (tağşiş) of the Ottoman coinage (sikke).72 Engaging in manipulation
of the sikkes at times of crisis helped the Ottoman economy to prevent possible
economic crises.73 Up until the Düzoğlu family took over its administration in the
second half of the eighteenth century, it was under the monopoly of the Jewish
community. The Düzoğlu family worked at the head of Imperial Mint between
68“Baruthaneler,” in Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi (İstanbul: Kültür Bakanlığı ve Tarih Vakfı,
1994), 68-69.
69I would like to thank Ömerül Faruk Bölükbaşı for sharing his comments and ideas on the Imperial Mint.
70Emre Dölen, “Darphane,” in Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: Türkiye Ekonomik ve
Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı, 1993), 552; Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 7.
71“A farming out of public revenue; rent paid to the Evkaf for cultivated land turned into building land
or gardens.” “Mukataa,” in the Redhouse Dictionary Turkish/Ottoman-English (Istanbul: SEV Yayıncılık
Eğitim), 796.
72Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 128-29.
73Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 128.
25
approximately 1758 and 1880. By bringing new technologies of coin minting from
Europe, the Düzoğlu family transformed the Imperial Mint in the first half of the
nineteenth century.74 Pamuk brings to our attention the devaluation maneuvers of
Amira Kazzaz Artin to supply the Ottoman economy during the 1828-1829 Ottoman
Russian War.75
2.5 The Amiras: In Service of the Armenian Community
After the conquest of Constantinople by the Ottoman Empire, the Armenian Patriarchate
of Bursa, Hovagim, was appointed as the milletbaşı by Sultan Mehmed
II.76 Being milletbaşı granted the Patriarchate the jurisdiction and authority over
the community and allowed it to preside over a wide range of matters concerning
religious to societal issues such as inheritance, marriage, and divorce.77 Thus in
Braude’s words, the “patriarch was responsible to the state for his community and
to his community for the state.”78 Considering such a sovereign position, it would
not be far-fetched to assume that whoever asserted power over the Patriarchate possessed
the means to control the society. As the Amiras were drawing their power
from the Sultans and the Ottoman state stratum, such power brought them the
ability to carve their social and economic place in the Armenian community.
Having proven themselves to be the masters of their domain within the state elite
granted the Amiras a somewhat more prominent and sovereign position in the Armenian
community. From the late eighteenth century onwards, the Amiras gained
power over the Armenian Patriarchate by attaining a prevailing status in the upper
echelon of the Armenian community. They attained such power through their services
to the Ottoman state and by using their power on the behalf of the Armenian
community. Projecting themselves as staunch actors of both the Ottoman state
and the Armenian community, the Amiras also enjoyed the powerful position they
held as intermediary actors. They were successful in encouraging the Patriarchate
74Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 74.
75Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 128.
76“İstanbul Ermeni Patrikanesi,” TDV İslâm Araştırmaları Merkezi, last accessed February 10, 2022,
https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/istanbul-ermeni-patrikhanesi; Kevork B. Bardakjian, "The Rise of Armenian
Patriarchate in Istanbul," in Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire, ed. Benjamin Braude
and Bernard Lewis (New York, N.Y.: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1982).
77Şahiner, “The Sarrafs of Istanbul Financiers of the Empire.” 22.
78Benjamin Braude, “Foundation Myths of the Millet System,” in Christians and Jews in the Ottoman
Empire, ed. Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis (New York, N.Y.: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1982).
69.
26
to appoint them as mütevelli to the Armenian Church properties in the Ottoman
Empire.79 Up until the second half of the nineteenth century, the Amiras asserted
significant influence over the election and dismissal of the Patriarchates within the
community. The ensuing paragraphs will focus on the role of the Amiras in service
of the Armenian community, and the major focus will be on their philanthropic
activities.
In terms of philanthropy, the Amiras took steps to support important institutions in
the community such as churches, schools, and hospitals.80 Religion and Armenian
culture historically developed in an interrelated manner. Thus, church construction
was of great importance to the wealthy Armenians within the Armenian community.
The Amiras, as the wealthy part of the society, further maintained the tradition of
church construction in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.81
There were two main obstacles to the construction of the churches. The construction
of the new churches could only be achieved by means of reconstruction.82 Firstly,
to put the reconstruction or renovation into motion, one needed the approval of the
Sultan, and this process was rather a slow one.83 At this point, the Amiras undertook
measures to accelerate the process. The second barrier was the financial burden of
this process. Such a process required a labor force and a substantial amount of
money; for that matter, certain Amiras made donations to the Patriarchate to cover
the expenses.84
Being aware of the importance of education, they established schools and provided
financial assistance to these schools. By establishing a foundation under a specific
school, they were able to ensure lasting income for the schools through the association’s
activities.85 The number of schools established between 1802 and 1823
79Antaramian, Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire, 30.
80At this point, it is indeed important to think about what philanthrophy means. Essentially, and especially
in this context, it can be considered a form of social and political control. While philanthropic
activities constituted great importance to the Armenian community, it was also critical for seeing the
ways in which Amiras increased their power. For more studies on non-Muslim community and their philanthropic
activities, see: Haris Exertzoglou, Osmanlı’da Cemiyetler ve Rum Cemaati: Dersaadet Rum
Cemiyet-i Edebiyesi, 1861-1912, (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 2004); Ayşe Ozil, “100. Kuruluş
Yıldönümünde Zoğrafyon Tarihinden Bir Bölüm,” Tarih ve Toplum, no. 237 (2003).
81Antaramian, Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire, 130.
82Gülnihal Bozkurt, Alman-İngilizce Belgelerinin ve Siyasi Gelişmelerin Işığı Altında Gayrimüslim Osmanlı
Vatandaşlarının Hukuki Durumu (1839-1914), (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1989), 22.
83Alyson Wharton’s book gives detailed information about the process of receiving permission from the
Sultan. It also gives a number of Ottoman state documents granting permission for renovations. Wharton,
The Architects of Ottoman Constantinople.
84Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 155.
85Surp Nersesyan school is an important example of such process. Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class
of Istanbul,” 146-47.
27
reached up to forty-two.86 However, these activities did not remain limited to Istanbul:
the Amiras also contributed to the spread of education in Izmir and Izmit.87
Apart from the construction of schools, the Amiras also provided scholarships to
bright students in the Armenian community and sent them to Europe in order to
receive training in the 1840s.88
One of the Amiras’ most important spheres of activity was care for the sick. As
of 1743, the Amiras established three hospitals. In 1743, they obtained permission
to establish hospitals in Narlıkapı and Pera. In 1832, Surp Pırgiç Hospital89 (Surp
Pırgiç Azkayin Hivantanots) was established with the support of sarraf Amira Kazzaz
90 (Harutyun Bezciyan) and kalfa Amira Garabed Balyan.91 The Surp Pırgiç
Hospital was of great importance as it included a shelter for the elderly, orphans, and
psychiatric patients. Since the Amiras endeavored to provide financial assistance to
needy people, they also established relief funds for the poor, homeless, orphans, and
crippled.92
2.6 Maneuverings between the Ottoman State and the Armenian
Community: Amiras’ Dual Role
The Amiras played a crucial role in the Ottoman state institutions, maintained close
ties with the state elite, and also actively sought out ways to provide philanthropic
activities within Armenian society. Being favored by the state, their position helped
them attain an intermediary role between the Sublime Porte and the Armenian
community.93 As Razmik Panossian notes, “[the Amiras’] wealth was translated
into power in the Armenian community.”94
86Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 146-47.
87Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 146-47.
88Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 187-88.
89Surp Pırgiç Hospital is still a running hospital today. Arsen Yarman, Osmanlı Sağlık Hizmetlerinde Ermeniler
ve Surp Pırgiç Ermeni Hastanesi Tarihi, (Istabul: Surp Pırgiç Ermeni Hastanesi Vakfı, 2001).
90In return of his service to the Armenian community during the establishment of the hospital, Artin’s
picture was printed on the tobacco papers being sold at the Surp Pırgiç Hospital. For the document see,
BOA, DH.İD..112/19, H.24.07.1331/ 1912.
91Barsoumian,“The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 142-43.
92Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 140-44.
93Antaramian, Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire, 28.
94Panossian, The Armenians, 85.
28
Straddling the thin line between the Ottoman state and the Armenian community,
the power of the Amiras was essential for the community’s needs and for societal
matters that required Imperial decrees and the Sultan’s approval.95 Such societal
matters often included receiving permission to renovate or construct state institutions
such as hospitals, churches, and schools. Having close ties with the state often
granted the Amiras easier access to make requests to the Sultan or the state elite
directly. This increased the dependency of the Patriarchate on the Amiras, and by
virtue of this mutually advantageous position, the Amiras’ power increased.
2.7 Changing Times, Changing Positions: The Transformation of the
Amiras
As linear as the timeline of the Amiras’ rise to power may appear, the process in
which they were weakened was far from being a straightforward process. The status
of the Amiras throughout the empire and especially in Istanbul began to be
challenged because of the changing dynamics of the Ottoman Empire as well as the
balance of power in the Armenian community. The Amiras may were not a homogenous
group. There was a severe monopolization among the Amiras based on their
professions and patronage networks. Hence, the power each Amira exercised over
their profession and network determined which Amira would get the largest share
of the pie. Often sarraf -Amiras got the biggest share due to their personal relations
with the Sultans and state elite. By maintaining close relations with the Ottoman
state, these people also became actors for the Armenian Patriarchate since they had
the means to provide for the expenses of the Patriarchate.96 Such unequal power
possession eventually caused discrepancies among the Amiras. The clear dominance
of the sarraf -Amiras over the Patriarchate and over the Armenian community raised
concerns among the other Amiras such as the Düzoğlu family, the Tıngıryans, the
Dadyans, the Balyans, the Serveryans and the Allahverdiyans.97
The establishment of the Cemaran Boys’ school in the Üsküdar region of Istanbul
in 1838 marks a milestone for the already existing discontent for the Amiras. As a
result of a gathering that took place in the Istanbul Armenian Patriarchate in 1836,
95Antaramian, Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire, 28-29.
96Antaramian, Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire, 28-29.
97Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 175-78.
29
the decision to construct a boy’s school in Üsküdar had already been agreed upon.98
The Amiras agreed to support the students financially and in 1838, they welcomed
the school’s first cohort.99 Nonetheless, upon the opening of the school, the Amiras
announced that they would cut off their financial support due to financial issues.100
This unexpected move from the Amiras reverberated widespread discomfort among
the Armenian community.
Meanwhile, in order to continue to support the education at Cemaran, a group of
esnaf s gathered and formed an association called Miagam Ingerutyun and offered to
take over the responsibility of providing the financial support that was abandoned
by the Amiras.101 As a result of education acquired through the Amiras’ endeavors,
a new educated group emerged within the Armenian community. This educated
group was mostly made up of the students the Amiras previously financed and sent
to Europe for training, as well as students from the missionary schools established in
various places in the Ottoman Empire. Along with esnaf s, these groups presented
themselves as having an allegiance to the Amiras, yet in reality actually challenged
this notion and endeavored to detach the Patriarchate and the Armenian community
from the Amiras.102
To that end, in 1841, after the promulgation of the Tanzimat Edict, the esnaf s sent a
petition to Grand Vizier Halil Rifat Paşa arguing that they would no longer recognize
and tolerate the dominance of the Amiras.103 In the forthcoming years, the esnaf s
managed to possess the power the Amiras once had and Amiras therefore could not
increase and further spread their influence. Nonetheless, their efforts and moves to
dismantle the Amiras clearly demonstrated the economic and social fluctuations the
Amiras went through.
Apart from the criticism they received from the Armenian community, one of the
most important factors paving the way for the weakening of the Amiras was the
Crimean War (1853-1856) and the promulgation of the Islahat Edict in 1856. Two
types of resources had been wrested from the power of the Amiras in this period:
their intermediary role between the Ottoman state and the Armenian community
98The construction of the school was planned and designed by the Amiras. Antaramian, Brokers of Faith,
Brokers of Empire, 30.
99Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 175-76.
100Antaramian, Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire, 30.
101Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul.” 177.
102These intellectuals also eventually worked their way to the spread of liberal ideas throughout the society,
partaking in the constitutionalization process of the Armenian community.
103Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 178-79.
30
and their financial role within the Armenian community, which was replaced by
bankers. The outbreak of the Crimean War and the aftermath of the war caused a
shift in the balance of power in the Ottoman Empire. With the spread of European
financial actors such as moneylenders and merchants and their penetration into the
Ottoman economy through banking, the already-delicate position of the Amiras was
put in jeopardy.104
As a result of these changes, the Amiras dispersed among different occupations.
Industry and bureaucracy are two of the most significant directions the Amiras
dispersed to. For example, the Dadyans took active roles in the establishment of
factories in various locations. On the other hand, the Noradunkyans and the Düzoğlus
also occupied various positions related to Ottoman bureaucracy. Therefore,
it is important to note that there were numerous families and individuals that one
can examine to discern the transformation of the Amiras.
2.8 A Discussion of the Term “Amira”
This thesis uses the term Amira as a general reference to the Ottoman Armenian
group of merchants, moneylenders and officials of the Ottoman state. However,
Amiras were neither a homogenous entity nor a united social class. Furthermore, the
term Amira is intertwined with controversies and doubts. The controversy associated
with the term Amira stems from several issues with its definition and its usage.
Such controversy becomes blatant when one examines the conflicting definitions and
narratives provided by scholars whose research focused on the Amiras. In 1970 in his
Ph.D. thesis, Vartan Artinian argues that it was the Ottoman Sultan who bestowed
the esteemed individuals with the title Amira.105 In 1982, Anahide Ter Minassian
too argued that the Sultans rewarded certain people with the title Amira.106
Barsoumian, in his Ph.D. thesis, defines Amira as a word used by the Armenian
community to praise someone for his prominence.107 In another work, Barsoumian
104Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 108; Antaramian, Brokers of Faith, Brokers of
Empire, 34.
105“Beginning in the second half of the eighteenth century, [çelebis and hocas] came to be known as [A]miras,
a title given by the [S]ultan only to those Armenians who were financially connected with, or directly
employed by, the Ottoman government.” Artinian, “A Study of the Historical Development of the Armenian
Constitutional System in the Ottoman Empire, 1839-1863,” 20.
106Ter Minassian, Ermeni Kültürü ve Modernleşme, 57.
107According to Barsoumian, between 1800 and 1850, the title became the highest attainable title in the community
and its application became a matter of “tacit communal agreement.” Barsoumian, “The Armenian
31
notes, “[O]f the great merchants, only those connected with the palace were named
[A]mira; [these] merchant [A]miras [were called] bezirgân.”108 As well as Barsoumian,
Pascal Carmont too argues that the title Amira was granted to individuals by the
Armenian community and has the meaning of vox populi.109
The scholarly works presented above were written in approximately similar periods.
Looking at the contrasting descriptions, the question remains as to the origins of
the usage of the term Amira. In the Ottoman State Archives, these people were
registered according to their professions110 such as “sarraflar kethüdası Aznavuroğlu
Hoca Karabet” or “kuyumcubaşı Begos Bey”.111 When examining the Armenian
primary sources, it can be seen that the Amiras are being addressed as Amira, such
as in the cases of “Aznavuryan Garabed Amira” or “Garabed Kalfa Amira”.112 In
this case, there are two possible deductions to make. On the one hand, the use
of Amira in the Armenian primary sources may indicate that the Armenians put
forward this usage. On the other hand, the limited reference to the Amiras in
the state archives does not support the idea that the bestowment of this term by
the Sultan had an official and institutional connotation, but rather that it may be
thought of as a verbal salutation or as a part of oral tradition.
To follow up on the discussion above, another controversy emerges: looking at the
Ottoman archives, one can come across the usage of hoca by specific merchants in the
Armenian community in the seventeenth century. Thus, the presence of the Amiras’
predecessors in the state archives adds another dimension to the controversy about
amiralık. Although further research is needed on this issue, the reasons behind this
notion can be traced to the issue of mobility. Hocas are known to have maintained a
more mobile lifestyle due to their active role in the Indian Ocean trade.113 For this
reason, the hocas may not have constituted a threat thought to be able to undermine
the Ottoman state authority. As a result, the Ottoman state likely approached this
conglomeration over which they did not have control over as a group. Yet, this
was not the case for the Amiras, as they maintained their lives in Istanbul. In
addition to being immobile, Amiras were at the head of two of the most prominent
Amira Class of Istanbul,” 64.
108Barsoumian, “The Dual Role of the Armenian Amira Class,” 175.
109Şahiner, “The Sarrafs of Istanbul Financiers of the Empire,” 89.
110When detecting whether they were called as Amira or not, I used the lists provided by Armenian sources.
111BOA, 1199/ 55, H.01.01.1222/1807; BOA, İ..DH..558/38903, 21.03.1293/1877.
112Mırmıryan, Masnagan Badmutyun, 11, 107-08.
113Aslanian, From the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean, 338.
32
state institutions, the baruthâne, and the darbhâne. The institutional relations of
the Amiras (going beyond the limits of the term’s usage as an epithet) might have
deterred the Ottoman administration from specifying the Amiras as a collective unit
or group within the larger Armenian community and Ottoman society.114
While çelebilik and hocalık were of importance to the Armenian community in the
Ottoman Empire, it should be noted that these terms are not devoid of their own
constraints. Barsoumian notes that Catholic Amiras often used çelebi as their titles.
In the case of the Catholic Amiras, Barsoumian’s list includes both the titles of hoca
and çelebi. However, as Cora demonstrates, the Allahverdiyans were also Catholic
Amiras and were not referred to as çelebis in the Ottoman archives.115 While Armenian
sources refer to the Düzoğlu family as çelebi,116 in the Ottoman archives,
members of the Düzoğlu family are only recorded with the title hoca. Why then
did Barsoumian argue that Catholics were given the title çelebi? Such clear-cut
assumptions complicate the matters more by creating a discrepancy and creating an
implication to assume that hocalık is the title solely used by the apostolic community.
The fourth controversy is related to the issue of generational continuity. In her
definition, Ter Minassian represents amiralık as a hereditary status, whereas Barsoumian
argues the opposite.117 Although several Amiras share the same surname,
amiralık was not an inheritable title.118 The examples in the literature are either a
result of a case where sons happened to earn the same title as their fathers or of a
case where sons inherited the same professions as their fathers.119
All things considered, a final question arises as a result of the presence of hocas in
the Ottoman archives while there is limited reference to the Amiras. As previously
suggested, the forerunners of the Amiras held similar professions with the Amiras
acting as intermediaries between the Ottoman state and the Armenian community.
What might set the Amiras apart from their predecessors could be that they built
their success on the foundation of what their pioneers accomplished (trade networks,
114Braude, “Foundation Myths of the Millet System,” 71.
115Cora, “Transforming Erzurum/Karin: The Social and Economic History of a Multi-Ethnic Ottoman City
In the Nineteenth Century,” 42.
116According to Mırmıryan: Hoca Mikayel Çelebi Düz. Mırmıryan, Masnagan Badmutyun, 34.
117There are various examples where both father and son were granted with the status. Such as son of Kaspar
Aznavoryan, Garabet Aznavoryan; son of Sarkis Cezayirliyan Mıgırdiç Cezayirliyan; Pilibos Çerazyan and
his sons Krikor, Minas, Kevork, Kaspar, Bağdasar Amira. Pamukciyan, Biyografileriyle Ermeniler, IV, 78.
118Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 60.
119Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 111-20.
33
commerce, and service for the Ottoman state). As addressed in the previous paragraphs,
the hocas and çelebis were not institutionalized; instead, they were devoid of
formal power and therefore did not have accountability in any sort of institutional
body. As mentioned in the examples of Ruhican Hoca and Mağakya Çelebi, the
predecessors of the Amiras were often held accountable to the people they worked
for. Hence, their power was often defined within the limits of their personal ties
with the state elite such as through their roles as personal sarraf s, bezirgânbaşıs
of the sultans, and viziers, through trade, and through their activities in the Armenian
community. Yet, when looking at the position of the Amiras, it is clear
that they were held accountable for governing several of the most prominent state
institutions such as the darbhâne, the baruthâne, and tax collection. Considering
that the Amiras’ professions were rather institutionalized compared to those of their
predecessors, they presented a somewhat more prominent group identity than those
who came before them. One can trace the reason behind this prominence back to
the transformation period in the nineteenth-century Ottoman Empire and Armenian
community.
34
3. THE ROLES OF THE DÜZOĞLU FAMILY IN THE
OTTOMAN STATE
From the late eighteenth century to the first half of the nineteenth century, the
Düzoğlu family was made up of people who were important actors in the Ottoman
state service. Within this period, they worked as state officials, and they were economically
and socially dependent on the Ottoman state. Throughout the nineteenth
century, they became more independent as social and economic actors. This chapter
devotes most of its attention to portraying the Düzoğlu family’s service in the Ottoman
state between the late eighteenth century and the first half of the nineteenth
century. While doing so, the chapter focuses on the family’s arrival in Istanbul and
their entrance into the state service. The chapter also seeks to depict the changing
balances of power that occurred in the midst of profound changes taking place in the
Ottoman Empire and how these changes affected the family’s social and professional
position.
The Düzoğlu family was a Catholic Armenian Amira family who served 1 in the
Ottoman state in various positions between 1758-1880, primarily in the Imperial
Mint.2 Although it is far from clear, it is assumed that the family became Catholic
in the seventeenth century under the influence of the Catholic Teaten priests. The
Düzoğlu family, both through intermarriages and marriages with other Catholic
Amira families such as the Tıngıryans and the Allahverdiyans (also known as the
Hüdaverdioğlu family) grew as a family throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth
1The Düzoğlu family members are often referred to as “superintendents” of the Imperial Mint with the
Turkish translation being emîn. However, as Ömerül Faruk Bölükbaşı demonstrates, both emîn and
“superintendent” are mistakenly used in the literature. According to Bölükbaşı, in principle, the “superintendent”
of the Imperial Mint had to be Muslim. Although Düzoğlu family was not at the head
of the Imperial Mint on paper, they were indeed very influential in terms of the transformation of the
institution. They were often addressed as ifrazcıbaşı, darbhâne mübayaacısı, ifraz mukataası mutasarrıfı,
darbhane ifrazcısı and hazine-i âmire mübayaacısı. In light of the aforementioned caveat, I will be using
the term “director” as used by Haris Exertzoglou, “Greek Banking in Constantinople 1850-1881” (PhD.
King’s College London, 1986), 125. to avoid creating contextual ambiguity. For a detailed analysis of the
misusage of the term, see Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 54-58.
2Except for the period during which members of the family were exiled.
35
centuries.3 As can be seen from the case of the oldest known ancestor Hacı Harutyun
(seventeenth century), members of the Düzoğlu family initially began working as
jewelers in the seventeenth century. It was later generations that began to work in
service of the Ottoman state as moneylenders and subsequently in various positions
in the Imperial Mint until the second half of the nineteenth century.4
3.1 The Düzoğlu Family Before Becoming Amiras
Information regarding the arrival of the Düzoğlus to Istanbul and their service in
the Ottoman state is somewhat scattered and limited. However, it is known that
the family’s oldest known ancestor, Hacı Harutyun, emigrated from Divriği in the
seventeenth century and became a jeweler in Istanbul.5 Jewelry continued to be
practiced in the family in the next generations.6
Hacı Harutyun’s son Sarkis7 was appointed as the Imperial Jeweler (kuyumcubaşı)
of the Imperial Palace in 1721.8 The Ottoman Sultans often cherished the Armenian
jewelers and appealed to members of the Düzoğlu family when it came to crafting and
engraving presents for foreign state officials, their family, or their entourage. Gold
and silver gifts prepared for Napoleon Bonaparte were among the most prominent
examples of the Düzoğlu family’s work. Selim III himself directly asked the Düzoğlus
to prepare these gifts for Napoleon,9 which were presented to Napoleon Bonaparte
during Halet Efendi’s visit to France.10 According to an archival document from
1791, Sultan Selim III gave a certain member of the Düzoğlu family the responsibility
of engraving the Russian empress’s topknot (sorguç) with precious metals, diamonds,
3For a detailed analysis of the Allahverdiyan family and their roles, see Cora, “Transforming Erzurum/Karin:
The Social and Economic History of a Multi-Ethnic Ottoman City In the Nineteenth Century,” 89.
4Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 101.
5Sivas-Divriği: Divriği is a small town located in Sivas in the Central Anatolia region. Vahan Zartaryan,
Hişadagaran, Hay Yerevelineru, Lusanıgarnerı, Tzerakirnerı Krutyunnerı Yevayln 1512-1933, trans. Photographs
Memoirs: Biographies, Manuscripts and Writings of Famous Armenians, 2 vols., vol. 1 (Kahire:
Hagob Papazyan Dbaran, 1933), 33 fn.
6Zartaryan notes that the Hacı Harutyun (also known as Kılıci(?) oğlu, was among the well known jewelers
of Divriği. As Zartaryan highlights, he would collect the precious metals and smelt them and further trade
the final product. Zartaryan, Hişadagaran, 1, 34 fn.
7Armenian primary literature addresses Sarkis as “Serkis Mahdesi.” See Menevişyan Azkapanutyun Zarmin
Düzyants 55.
8Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 61.
9Osep Tokat, Armenian Master Silversmiths (Istanbul: Aras Yayıncılık, 2010), 260-61.
10BOA, HAT 139/5764, H.29.12.1218/ 1803 “Taraf-ı saltanat-ı seniyyeden Fransa cumhuru(?) devleti
tarafına büyük elçilik ile gönderilen Mehmed Said Hâlet efendi ile irsâl olunan hedayâ-yı hümayûn [. . . ]”
36
and gold.11 In another example, Sultan Selim III asked a member of the Düzoğlu
family to prepare swords for the King of England and sons in 1796.12
The Düzoğlu family, began working in the Imperial Mint in 1762, replacing the
former ifrazcıbaşı Yako Bonfil with Devlet and Hovhannes Düzoğlu.13 Although
not much information about Devlet and his profession can be found in the record,
Hovhannes, like his father Sarkis, continued to work as a jeweler for the Ottoman
state.14 Sometime after the death of Hovhannes Düzoğlu in 1744, the family members
working in the Mint became known as Amiras.15
3.2 The Düzoğlu Family as an Amira Family
The late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries were when the Amiras began to
gain importance in the Ottoman Empire and the Armenian community,16 coinciding
with the period in which the Düzoğlu family began to hold secondary17 positions
in the Imperial Mint as ifrazcıbaşıs, sarraf s and tüccars.18 Onnik Jamgoçyan notes
that in the Imperial Mint, six of the directors out of the ten who worked between
1758 and 1890 were from the Düzoğlu family, highlighting that this family served in
the upper echelons of the Ottoman state.19 Hovhannes’ children were the first to be
11“cânib-i hümayûn-ı mülûkâneden hâlâ Rusya imparatoruna olmak üzere Düzoğlu kulları maarifetiyle yapılan
sorgucun elmas ve tüy-i bahl ve mesârif sâiresiyle seksenbeş bin dörtyüz seksen dört guruşa belîğ olmağla
[. . . ] BOA, HAT 1649/18, H.29.12.1205/ 1790.
12“[. . . ] İngiltere kralına ve oğullarına Düzoğlu maârifetiyle imâl ettirilmekde olan meç ve kılıç [. . . ]” BOA,
HAT 113/4511, H.29.12.1210/ 1795.
13Tokat, Armenian Master Silversmiths, 260-61.
14Tokat, Armenian Master Silversmiths, 260-61.
15According to the list compiled by Barsoumian, the understanding of the Düzoğlus as Amiras begins with
Mikayel Düzoğlu (1724-1783.) Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 225. Barsoumian,
“The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 49-87.
16Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 49-87.
17In the period before the Tanzimat, positions darbhane emini and sahib-i ayar were the highest ranks
in the Imperial Mint, often occupied by Muslims. For more information see, Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın
İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire; "Darbhâne-i Âmire’de Ermeniler, “Marmara Üniversitesi Türkler ve
Ermeniler,” https://turksandarmenians.marmara.edu.tr/tr/darbhane-i-amirede-ermeniler/.
18Similar to the way many other occupations were organized, the surety system (kefalet sistemi) was often
used as the medium of employment in the Imperial Mint. In this system, various generations of the same
family continued a craftsmanship. For the document indicating the surety system in the Imperial Mint,
see: “. . . terbiye kerdeleri olan evlâdları dahi işbu ustabaşıları ve babaları mısillü sadâkat ve istikâmet ile
fünûn ve sanayilerini tahsil ve gördükleri kaide üzre yoluyla gelüb hidemat-ı lâzimelerine tâyin ve bu vecihle
hidmete dâhil olagelenleri deeb-i kadim” BOA, D.DRB.d/120, H. 19.2.1259/1843; Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın
İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 25.
19Jamgoçyan, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık, 179.
37
recorded as Amira in the list compiled by Barsoumian, as each one of them worked
in the Imperial Mint in various positions including those of darbhâne kuyumcusu or
the ifrazcıbaşı.20
One of the most critical reasons explaining the Düzoğlu family’s rise to prominence
stemmed from Ottoman political and administrative changes. The year 1762 can
be considered a milestone for the future of the Imperial Mint and the professional
careers of the family members. Up until 1758, the ifrâzçıbaşı of the Imperial Mint
had been Jewish, and thus the Jewish community was responsible for provisioning
the necessary precious metals to the Imperial Mint.21 The Ottoman state’s perception
of Jews, most likely caused by the close relations of prominent Jews with the
janissaries led to the replacement of Yako Bonfil, the ifrazcıbaşı until 1758, with
Mikayel Çelebi Düzoğlu by Mahmud I.22
After 1762, various members of the family served in succession as the ifrâzçıbaşı
of the Imperial Mint until 1850.23 The first holder of this position was Hovhannes
Düzoğlu’s son Mikayel Çelebi (Hoca) Düzoğlu (1723-1823). Mikayel Çelebi was
appointed as the Imperial Jeweler by Mahmud I. What matters the most was his
appointment to the Imperial Mint as the ifrâzcıbaşı. The appointment of Mikayel
Çelebi Düzoğlu as the ifrâzcıbaşı of the Imperial Mint marked the beginning of the
influence of the Düzoğlus and the demise of that of the Jews in the Imperial Mint.24
Mikayel Çelebi Düzoğlu is considered by later scholars to be the first Amira among
the Düzoğlu family.25
In the ensuing years, Mikayel Çelebi served as the Imperial Jeweler under the Sultans
Mahmud I, Osman III, Mustafa III, and Abdulhamid I. Mikayel Çelebi Düzoğlu’s
son, Hovhannes Çelebi Düzoğlu (1749-1812)26 who worked as the Imperial Jeweler,
was appointed as the ifrâzcıbaşı of the Imperial Mint by Selim III. G. Menevişyan
20Amira Düzoğlu, according to Barsoumian, Mikayel (1724-1783), Hovhannes (1749-1812), Krikor (1774-
1819), Sarkis (1777-1819), Garabed (1779-1855), Mikayel (1786-1819), Hagob (1793-1847), Boğos (1797-
1871), Mihran (1817-1877), and Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 225.
21Bölükbaşı, “Darbhâne-i Âmire’de Ermeniler.” Marmara Üniversitesi Türkler ve Ermeniler, accessed May
1, 2022, https://turksandarmenians.marmara.edu.tr/tr/darbhane-i-amirede-ermeniler/.
22Jamgoçyan, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık, 179.
23With the exception of corruption allegations and the execution and exile that came as an aftermath of them.
Within this period, Kazaz Artin temporarily took over the positions previously held by the Düzoğlu family
in the Imperial Mint. Bölükbaşı 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 56-57; Barsoumian, “The
Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 102; Jamgoçyan, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık, 57.
24According to the lists provided by Jamgoçyan, upon the dismissal of Yako Bonfil from the Imperial Mint,
members of the Armenian community worked as the ifrazcıbaşı in the Imperial Mint. See Jamgoçyan,
Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık, 179.
25Menevişyan, Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants, 10.
261749-1812 according to Pamukciyan, Biyografileriyle Ermeniler, IV, 212.
38
notes that Hovhannes worked closely with Sultan Selim III.27 After the deposition of
Selim III, Hovhannes continued to maintain close relations with the palace, specifically
with Sultan Mahmud II.
Hovhannes Çelebi (1749-1812) was a crucial figure for the Imperial Mint, as he
was the father of five sons who further improved and changed the technology in
the Imperial Mint in the years to come.28 Among these, three of them, Garabed
Çelebi, Hagob Çelebi, and Boğos Çelebi, worked in the service of Sultan Mahmud
II. Hovhannes Düzoğlu’s son Krikor Çelebi Düzoğlu (1774-1819), along with his
brother Sarkis Çelebi (1777-1819), continued working as the Imperial Jeweler and
the ifrâzcıbaşı of the Imperial Mint under Mahmud II. Boğos Çelebi Düzoğlu was
responsible for drawing, designing, engraving, and minting the official seals, and this
position put him in a rather particular position compared to other members of the
institution.29
3.3 The Düzoğlu Family, the Armenian Catholic Church, and Falling
out of Favor with the Ottoman State
The nineteenth century was a period of immense contrast for the Düzoğlu family. It
was a period in which anti-Catholicism became highly pronounced in the Ottoman
Empire through deportations and suppression.30
Previously, in the aftermath of the controversies between Eastern Christianity and
Catholicism in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, the state authorities
took measures to prevent further conversions.31 Later, Catholic converts were
ordered to revert to their original faith by an imperial decree executed by Sultan
Ahmed III.32 Ubicini describes the milieu as:
“The Porte declared that it recognized only one Armenian nation and
27Menevişyan, Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants, 45.
28Krikor, Sarkis, Garabed, Mikayel, Hagob, and Boğos.
29Eldem, İftihar ve İmtiyaz, 90-110.
30Cora, “Transforming Erzurum/Karin: The Social and Economic History of a Multi-Ethnic Ottoman City
In the Nineteenth Century,” 64; Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 155.
31Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 155.
32Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 155.
39
Armenian religion. All separatists and schismatics were therefore invited
to abjure their errors and conform to the laws by returning to the bosom
of their church and nation, on which this condition alone they would be
pardoned.”33
Therefore, until Sultan Mahmud II’s recognition of the Catholic Church in 1830,
converts to Catholicism were compelled to conduct Catholic sermons out of sight
in private.34 Once again, the issue of Catholicism erupted in the first half of the
nineteenth century. In tandem with the increasing missionary activities in Anatolia
and the continuous spread of Catholicism in the Empire, this perceived problem
became a matter of exigency both in the eyes of the Ottoman state as well as in those
of the Armenian Apostolic Church.35 Although the Ottoman state took measures
to prevent further conversions to Catholicism, there were important moneylenders
in the Catholic community who had vast networks and important ties with foreign
states.36
Therefore, up until 1820, regardless of its antipathy towards Catholicism, the Ottoman
state often turned a blind eye to the affiliations of Catholics in order to benefit
from the profit they brought to the empire. As the spread of Catholicism continued,
the puritan wing of the Apostolic Church became more determined to end the bifurcation
in the community and thus, the creedal tension grew within the Armenian
community. Played out violently on the streets, the rebellion against the leadership
of the Apostolic Church by an anti-Catholic movement made an impact, and antipathy
towards Catholics took a stiff turn.37 A group of staunch anti-Catholics accused
the Armenian Patriarch Boğos of developing benign attitudes towards Armenian
Catholics. In the light of the ongoing crisis of Catholicism, Mahmud II wanted this
matter settled; he took initiative and argued that the rebellion was not something
he could disregard: “Re’âyâ makûlesinin böyle cemiyet ile kenisa basmaları devletce
hazm olunan hâl değildir.”38 To surmount this crisis, Mahmud II ordered the exile
33Ubicini, Letters on Turkey, 1, 262.
34As explained in the third chapter, the Düzoğlu family hired Mkhitarist priests as their personal confessors.
35Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 156.
36Catholic Armenians were particularly known to have closer ties with the European residents in Istanbul
in comparison to their Orthodox counterparts. These ties did not only develop through the means of the
roles of Armenian Catholics as translators and traders. Up until the recognition of the Armenian Catholic
Church,Armenian Catholics went to church with Europeans. Thus, their relations developed through
their overlapping social sphere and their interactions in it. Kemal Beydilli, II. Mahmud Devri’nde Katolik
Ermeni Cemâati ve Kilisesi’nin Tanınması (1830), vol. 24 (Harvard University, Near Eastern Languages
and Civilizations, 1995), 4-5; Olley, “Writing Music,” 57; Paolo Girardelli, “Architecture, Identity, and
Liminality: On the Use and Meaning of Catholic Spaces in Late Ottoman Istanbul,” Muqarnas, 22 (2005)
37Beydilli, II. Mahmud Devri’nde Katolik Ermeni Cemâati ve Kilisesi’nin Tanınması (1830), 24, 5.
38Beydilli, II. Mahmud Devri’nde Katolik Ermeni Cemâati ve Kilisesi’nin Tanınması (1830), 24, 5.
40
of the Catholics, and likewise, their possessions were seized by the Ottoman state.39
Hence, the Sultan’s actions eventually caused another wave of anti-Catholic sentiment
to break out, paving the way for the eviction of Catholic Armenians from the
capital:40 “Ermeni milletinden katolik takımlarının Dersa’âdet’den def’ine devletçe
teşebbüs olundu.”41 In his well-known novel Akabi Hikayesi, Vartan Paşa touches
upon the raging anti-Catholicism of the nineteenth century by bringing up the exile
of the Catholics to Ankara and portraying people leaving the Ottoman Empire in
desperation:
“Katoliklerin pek çoğu dışarı memleketlere sürgün oldular ise, burada
kalanlar dahi Bey oglunde sakin olmaye ruhsatleri olmayub Samatia,
Ortaköy ve Beşiktaşe tevcih olduklarınde, [bende] her gün sürülme korkusu
eksik deyil idi. Çünki Katoliklerin pek çoğu Anadolude Engüriye
menfi olduler”42
Charles Edward MacFarlane provides insight regarding the panorama of one of Istanbul’s
most important regions, Pera, in his eyewitness account after the dislocation
of Catholic Armenians:
“I was astonished at the melancholy, depopulated aspect of the place
[. . . ] I observed that nearly every third door had been newly painted
red. ‘Those’ I was told, ‘were the houses of exiled Catholic Armenians;
they have been sold by the government which permitted none but Turks
to become purchasers.”43
39Beydilli, II. Mahmud Devri’nde Katolik Ermeni Cemâati ve Kilisesi’nin Tanınması (1830), 24, 180. For
a detailed analysis of the archival documents on anti-Catholicism, see Beydilli, II. Mahmud Devri’nde
Katolik Ermeni Cemâati ve Kilisesi’nin Tanınması (1830), 24, 109-280.
40In his book, Frazee provides a full-fledged account of the repressive responses to Catholicism. For more
information, see Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 214-223.
41Ahmed Lûtfi, Vak’anüvis Ahmed Lütfi Efendi Tarihi, vol I, Tarih Vakfı-Yapı Kredi Yayınları (1999), 202.
42Vartan Paşa, Akabi Hikayesi. (1991, 102) quoted in Beydilli, II. Mahmud Devri’nde Katolik Ermeni
Cemâati ve Kilisesi’nin Tanınması (1830), 24, XI.
43MacFarlane, Constantinople in 1828, 2, 293, 493; MacFarlane also includes a conversation between him
and a Catholic Armenian: “I praised the beauty of Kiathane: ‘Yes’, said he, with a long sigh, ‘the valley is
beautiful, but that won’t prevent us all catching the fever!’ I did not like this information and generalizing
and requested him to explain. ‘Why, sir, we are Catholic Armenians, the Turks have shut up about five
hundred of us in the miserable little village. We have been driven from our houses in Pera and Galata.’
MacFarlane Constantinople in 1828, 512.
41
Robert Walsh’s eyewitness account also touches upon the political turmoil caused
by the Ottoman state’s anti-Catholic actions.44 In his second visit to Istanbul,
Walsh recorded that Mahmud II played an active and brutal role in suppressing any
sort of Catholicism, particularly in Istanbul, by allowing for the seizure of property
and the exile of Catholic merchants and priests, as well as common Armenians that
converted to Catholicism.45 Walsh goes on to add that the Ottoman state eventually
sought reconciliation with the Catholics, albeit unwillingly and due to the ongoing
intervention of the English and French ambassadors.46
Meanwhile, the Düzoğlu family, too, suffered their share of problems from this tense
political environment. The family’s Catholic affiliations grabbed the attention of
others, who did not hesitate to spread a rumor aimed to harm the family on the
grounds of their conduct of Catholic sermons and their corruption.47 In response,
Sultan Mahmud II appointed a board to investigate the family. Eventually, a chapel
was discovered in their house and the individuals involved were ordered to be beheaded.
48
Corruption allegations added another layer of complexity to this plight. Although
there are different interpretations about the actual story of the corruption incident
on which the rumor was based, four scenarios on the Düzoğlu family’s possible
involvement in corruption come to the fore. One suggestion is that it was Halet
Efendi who spread the rumor. According to Georg Oğulukyan’s ruzname, Halet
Efendi owed a debt to the Düzoğlu brothers (Krikor and Sarkis). Being unable
to pay his debt, Halet Efendi found an alternative to paying, which was accusing
the Düzoğlu family of corruption.49 During one of the regularly held inspections,
İbrahim Sârım, who was the surveyor appointed by the state, recorded a budget
44Robert Walsh, İrlandalı Bir Vaizin Gözüyle II. Mahmud İstanbul’u, ed. Çağatay Anadol, trans. Zeynep
Rona (Istanbul: Kitap Yayınevi, 2021), 526.
45Walsh, İrlandalı Bir Vaizin Gözüyle II. Mahmud İstanbul’u, 526-27.
46Walsh, İrlandalı Bir Vaizin Gözüyle II. Mahmud İstanbul’u, 526-27. A similar observation was also made
by Ubicini, who notes that “the Roman Catholic powers of Europe did not remain indifferent spectators of
this attack on their co-religionists. M. Guilleminot the ambassador of France, interfered most energetically
on behalf of the united-Armenians, and by pointing out the loss, not to say ruin, which must ensue to
commerce, and indeed to government itself, if this proscription of so many of its wealthy subjects, especially
the Armenian bankers, should be persevered in, succeeded at last in producing in the mind of the Sultan
convictions.” Ubicini, Letter IV, 262.
47Ubicini Letter IV, 262.
48“Darbhane’den yirmibin keseden fazla akçeyi zimmetlerine geçiren ve evlerinde hususi kiliseler inşa ederek
alenen icra-yı ayin eden Düzoğulları’ndan Kirkor, Serkis ve Mikail ile kardeşlerinin oğlu Mığırdıç’ın katl
ve idamları.” BOA, C..ML..468/19037, H.13.04..1235/ 1819; Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of
Istanbul,” 102-06.
49Oğulukyan, Georg Oğulukyan’ın Ruznamesi, 15; Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 257.
42
deficit in the treasury of the Imperial Mint.50 Another narration suggests that a
particular Jew started the rumor due to being resentful that the Düzoğlus were
prosperous in the positions that Jews used to hold.51 Also, Lütfî Efendi suggests
that it was Kazzaz Artin (Harutyun Bezciyan) who spread such rumors against the
Düzoğlu family so that he could secure his own position in the Imperial Mint:
“Bunların yerine Ermeni milleti mutaassıblarından Kazaz Artin darbhâne
ve ceyb-i hümâyûn sarraflığını yakalayarak zahirde devlete sadâkat
ma’nâda hem-mezheblerine hidmet ve hem de mesnedini tekrâr Düzoğulları
familyasından teb’îd fikri ile o esnâda Memâlik-i Mahrûsa’da
baş göstermekde olan katolik âyinine giren Ermenilerin altından girip
üstünden çıkmağa sermâye-i makderetini sarf eyledi.”52
MacFarlane also considered Kazzaz Artin to be the person of interest in terms of
understanding the origins of the corruption allegations.53 However, on a different
occasion, he tellingly corrects himself and argues that it was the Tıngıryan family,
a fellow Catholic Armenian Amira family, who set the rumors against the Düzoğlus
out of competing interest:
“I have stated that the ruin of the Tinghir-Oglus [Tıngıryan] had been
hastened by the intrigues of Cazes-Artine [Kazzaz Artin], but I have been
recently informed by a friend who resided many years in Constantinople,
and was intimately acquainted with the parties, that this was not the
case, and that Cazes-Artine is innocent of the charge. I correct my
mistake with that willingness with which I would correct any other,
particularly when personal character is implicated.”54
As limited as the evidence may be, archival evidence affirms that the Düzoğlus
fell into disgrace and lost their esteemed positions in society and the Ottoman
state. Mahmud II found the family members guilty of corruption charges; three
50Oğulukyan, Georg Oğulukyan’ın Ruznamesi, 15; Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 257.
51Çarkçıyan, Türk Devleti Hizmetindeki Ermeniler, 73.
52Lûtfi, Lütfi Tarihi, I, 202.
53MacFarlane’s consideration of Kazzaz Artin as person of interest is indeed interesting because as Oğulukyan
narrates, Patriarch Ormanian believed it was Kazzaz Artin who saved Hovhannes Düzoğlu during the
Kabakçı Mustafa Revolt. In light of the given scenarios, it may be misleading to assume that there was
hostility between the two of them. For detailed information, see Mağakya Ormanyan, Azkabadum Hayots
Yegeğetsin vol. 3 (Yerusalem: Surp Hagopyants Matbaası, 1927), 1912-27, 3436.
54MacFarlane, Constantinople in 1828, 2, 145-46.
43
of them—Krikor, Sarkis, and Mikayel—were sentenced to death, and the rest of the
family members were exiled in 1819.55 When their punishments were executed, all
their personal belongings and possessions were retained and further seized by the
order of Sultan Mahmud II.56
Meanwhile, although Mahmud II managed to execute his plan to prevent the spread
of Catholicism, his further plans were interrupted when in 1828, a war broke out
with Russia. On the onset of the Ottoman-Russian War, France articulated its
concerns regarding the situation of Catholics in the Ottoman Empire through the
French Embassy.57 Mahmud II was left in a position in which the Ottoman Empire
had to seek reconciliation with France.58 Due to consecutive warnings coming from
both France and Austria, the Ottoman Empire was compelled to end its persecution
against Catholics.59 This reconciliation paved the way for the official recognition of
the Armenian Catholic Church in 1830.60 Thus, the establishment of the Armenian
Catholic Church was a byproduct of the necessity of allying with France.61 As
archival evidence suggests, in 1822 and 1823, just before the establishment of the
Church, the incriminated members of the family were pardoned62 and restored to
their positions in the Imperial Mint.63
After the Düzoğlu family members were pardoned and the Armenian Catholic
Church was officially recognized by Sultan Mahmud II, Hovhannes’ (1749-1812) children
(Hagob and Garabed) and Sarkis Çelebi’s (1777) son Mihran Bey continued
their family business as the ifrâzcıbaşı at the Imperial Mint.
55MacFarlane, The Armenians, 1, 146; BOA, C..ML..468/19037,H.13.04.1235/ 1819
56BOA, C..ML.396/16239, H.29.04.1235/ 1819.
57“Françe devletinin dahi bu bâbda cevâbı şu vechledir ki, bir iki-üç Katolik kabahat etmiş olsun, iki bin, on
bin, beş bini birden kabahatlü olur mu? Devlet-i aliyye Françe devletiyle akdeylediği mu’ahedâtta yalnız
menâfi-i asliyye müşâhedesini iddia ve usûlünde ısrâr eylediği hâlde Françe devleti beyne‘n-nas azîz olan
mevâdı verüb, mu ‘âhede etmediğünü âleme isbât içün bilâ-ifâte-i dikkat o makûle muâhedâtını fedâ edeceği
muharrerdir.” BOA, HH. 32/ 43280-C, M. 28.05.1828; Beydilli, II. Mahmud Devri’nde Katolik Ermeni
Cemâati ve Kilisesi’nin Tanınması (1830), 24, 197.
58Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 258.
59For the letters written by Austria, see BOA, Ali Emirî. II. Mahmud 9973, quoted in Beydilli, II. Mahmud
Devri’nde Katolik Ermeni Cemâati ve Kilisesi’nin Tanınması (1830), 24, 203. On the complete and official
restoration of the Catholic Church in the Ottoman Empire, see Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 259.
60The reason why Catholicism was legalized only for the Armenians is indeed noteworthy, considering the
presence of Melkites (Greek Catholics) and Syriac community. This requires further study. For a recent
study on the Syriac community and its relation with the Armenian community, see Henry Clements,
“Documenting Community in the Late Ottoman Empire,” International Journal of Middle East Studies
51, no. 3 (2019).
61Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, 259.
62“İşledikleri suçlar dolayısıyla ileri gelenleri idam edilip taallukatı da çeşitli yerlere sürülmüş olan zimmi
ailelerden Düzoğulları ailesinin cezalarını yeteri kadar çektiklerinden affedilmeleri” BOA, HAT1562/16,
H.10.09.1238.
63Barsoumian, “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul,” 102-06.; BOA, HAT1563/4, H.10.01.1239/ 1804.
44
3.4 A New Period for the Düzoğlu Family after the Gülhane Edict:
Directors of the Imperial Mint
As a part of the reform period after the promulgation of the Gülhane Edict, the
Imperial Mint underwent administrative and bureaucratic revisions that enabled
non-Muslims to hold administrative positions in the top echelons of bureaucracy
regardless of their ethnoreligious affiliations.
Thus, the promulgation of the Gülhane Edict marks another milestone in Düzoğlu
family’s professional career in the Imperial Mint, as it caused an essential shift in
the balance of power.64
The Ottoman Imperial Mint was indeed a crowded institution. Although far from
clear, it is estimated that the population in 1843 was over 1,300 people.65 When
Hagob Düzoğlu was active in the Imperial Mint as ifrazcıbaşı in 1844, a revision took
place in the administration of the Imperial Mint. The main reasons for this change
were to speed up the money printing process and to cut back the expenses made
for the workers.66 Upon Abdülmecid’s request, Hagob Çelebi Düzoğlu gathered a
committee and sent them to London so that they could return with information on
the British money printing procedures. Therefore, with the help of the examination
committee, the Düzoğlu family adopted the English technology of steam power
to meet the Sultan’s requests to accelerate the money printing process with fewer
workers.67 Krikor’s brother Garabed was the Imperial Mint’s moneylender, and he
was responsible for registering all the expenses made under the body of the Imperial
Mint.68 Towards the end of his career, he was granted beylik in 1850 and worked as
sarraf of the Sultan’s mother until his death.69
64Bölükbaşı “Darbhâne-i Âmire’de Ermeniler” <https://turksandarmenians.marmara.edu.tr/tr/darbhane-iamirede-
ermeniler/>
65Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 24.
66Menevişyan, Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants, 36-39.
67Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 24.
68Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 62.
69Menevişyan, Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants, 41-42.
45
The efforts of the family to develop the Imperial Mint were seen as worthy of respect
and thus, Abdülmecid granted them an imperial medal, nişan, and order of
distinction, imtiyaz nişanı.70
Upon Hagob’s death and Garabed’s retirement in 1847 and 1848 respectively, Sarkis
Düzoğlu’s son Mihran was appointed as the ifrazcıbaşı to the Imperial Mint. Mihran
Düzoğlu received chemistry education in France and therefore was able to implement
new practices and methods of money printing.71
Mihran Bey’s term in the service of the Imperial Mint can be divided into two
periods: initially he served as ifrazcıbaşı, and later as of March 3,1850, he became
the director of the Imperial Mint.72 In 1850, the professions of ifrazcıbaşılık
and mübayaacılık were gathered under one larger, all-encompassing role, Meskûkatı
Şahâne Müdürlüğü (Imperial Coinage Administration.) Therefore, the Düzoğlu
family’s former titles of ifrazcıbaşı, mübâyaacı, or darbhâne sarrafı during the eighteenth
and early nineteenth centuries , began to be recorded as the director of the
Imperial Mint (darbhâne müdürü) in the Ottoman state archives from the February
1, 1850 onwards.73 Therefore, until 1850, Mihran Bey worked as the ifrazcıbaşı, and
in the latter period, he became the first director of the Meskûkât-ı Şâhâne İdaresi.
With this new arrangement within the Imperial Mint, the money printing procedure,
which was formerly a much slower process that required more human power, became
a more dynamic and less costly process.74 Upon Mihran Bey’s retirement, the
Düzoğlu family’s 118-year-old career in the Imperial Mint reached an end.
In light of the previously stated information, it can be concluded that the Düzoğlus,
who formally held secondary positions at the Imperial Mint as ifrazcıbaşıs, ameles,
sarraf s, and tüccars in the second half of the nineteenth century, made their way
to the upper echelons of the hierarchy within the Imperial Mint. While this major
change took place, family members also began to direct their attention to different
professions.
70BOA, A.}DVN.MHM.10/44, H.20.08.1269/ 1852; BOA, İ..DH..66/8708, H.08.03.1264/ 1847;
A.}AMD.11/60, H.05.12.1265/ 1848.
71Bölükbaşı, “Darbhâne-i Âmire’de Ermeniler,” <https://turksandarmenians.marmara.edu.tr/tr/darbhanei-
amirede-ermeniler/>
72Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 55.
73Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 55. “Hazine-i Hâssa,” 1998, accessed
25.02.2022, https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/hazine-i-hassa.
74Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 55.
46
4. A BREAK FROM THE PAST: THE TRANSFORMATION OF
THE DÜZOĞLU FAMILY
As much as the nineteenth century was a period of major change for the Ottoman
Empire, economic activities likewise accelerated and diversified throughout the century.
1 The previous chapter already noted the importance of the moneylenders in
supplying the empire’s financial system. Through the course of the nineteenth century,
their role and importance was transformed into banking. In this period, the
Düzoğlu family began to disperse among different professions, such as bureaucracy
and industrialization. After their long-term service to the Imperial Mint, in this
period, they began to project themselves as more economically and socially selfsufficient
actors. As a part of their economically independent position, they also
intensified their social activities. Thus, their economic capital began to manifest
itself as social capital.
This chapter will focus on the changes in the Düzoğlu family’s established pattern of
activities to depict their transformation in the nineteenth century, a period when the
Ottoman Empire and the Armenian community experienced significant milestones.
Initially, the chapter provides information about the organizational and institutional
changes that took place in the Imperial Mint as a part of the reform period after
the promulgation of the Tanzimat Edict. While doing so, it devotes most of its
attention to the ways in which the family adapted to the new system. Secondly, this
chapter will address the changing professions of the Düzoğlu family by focusing on
the circumstances that helped them separate themselves from state service. Finally,
reaching a certain economic standing and focusing on social activities are important
patterns that must be noted in order to comprehend the trajectory of the Düzoğlu
family’s transformation. Therefore, the chapter will be concluded with the social
activities of the family.
1Halil İnalcık and Donald Quataert ed, An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire 1300-1924
(Cambridge University Press, 1994), 759-61.
47
4.1 Enduring Services from the Past: Directors of the Imperial Mint
One of the major catalysts of the transformation of the Düzoğlu family was tied
to the Ottoman Empire’s administrative, political, and institutional trajectory in
the nineteenth century. On the one side of the coin, together with the widespread
global changes that caused a gradual increase in worldwide European influence, the
nineteenth century was renowned for the major restructuring of the Ottoman institutions
that took place, especially those that were brought by Tanzimat and Islahat
Edicts. A series of administrative, legislative, and educational reforms aiming to
create a more powerful and expanded central state apparatus were among the profound
impacts of the reform process of the nineteenth century. The other side of
the coin, however, displays yet another picture. Ever-changing institutional organizations,
continuous wars, and economic constraints created an economically and
socially turbulent period in the nineteenth century.
In this period, as a part of the modernization process and in response to the economic
crises, important regulatory and administrative changes took place in state
institutions as well as in the Imperial Mint. Regulatory changes were related to the
adoption and implementation of new techniques and practices, whereas the latter
focused on the administrative structure of the institution.2
One of the most crucial changes for the Imperial Mint was the debasement (tağşiş)
practice.3 The debasement practice became widespread in the Ottoman state to
be able to finance wars in the second half of the eighteenth century. The practice
continued during the reign of Selim III and intensified even more during the
reign of Mahmud II (known as the great debasement).4 However, with each debasement,
monetary problems of the empire that were already concerning intensified,
causing inflation and triggering further economic and political crises in the 1830s.
The problems debasement caused were not only limited to internal financial crises.
Since debasement caused instability in the Ottoman economy, trust in the Ottoman
coinage also decreased, which eventually deteriorated trade relations with European
states concerning their investments in the empire.
2Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire; Cezar, Osmanlı Maliyesinde
Bunalım, 62; “Darphâne,” TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, accessed April 19, 2022,
https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/darphane; Terzi, “Hazine-i Hâssa,” TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, accessed
April 19, 2022, https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/hazine-i-hassa
3Changing the silver content of the coin. For more on reasons and consequences of the debasement see,
Pamuk, The Evolution of Financial Institutions in the Ottoman Empire, 1600–1914, 103.
4Pamuk, The Evolution of Financial Institutions in the Ottoman Empire, 1600–1914, 19.
48
Hence, Europeans urged the Ottoman state to terminate the debasement practice
for the good of their bilateral relations as well as for the good of the future of the
Ottoman economy.5 As of 1844, the debasement practice was terminated with the
Correction of Standards (Tashih-i ayar or Tashih-i Sikke) regulations.6
Tashih-i Sikke brought several changes to the Ottoman monetary system, including
changes in the minting technology. Edhem Eldem notes that 1844 was “revolutionary”
from the perspective of the quality of coinage.7 One of the important factors
affecting the quality of the coins was the technology brought from London ahead
of the implementation of the Tashih-i Sikke regulations. As mentioned above, in
the 1840s under the direction of Sultan Abdülmecid, Hagob Çelebi Düzoğlu was
sent to England to bring and implement steam-powered machinery (vapur çarhı)
in the Imperial Mint.8 Additionally, a mechanical engineer from the Imperial Mint
of London was invited to Istanbul to operate the machinery.9 The introduction of
this technique to the Imperial Mint escalated the coin minting process, and the coin
minting process became much easier and quicker.
Differences in coin minting techniques and procedures brought certain changes to the
responsibilities of family at the Mint.10 The eighteenth- and the nineteenth-century
Ottoman wars brought frequent military defeats and financial impediments caused
by the need to fund the wars. The Ottoman Empire began to drain most of its
resources to finance the wars, even during times of economic crises, and to develop
solutions for the financial repercussions of the wars.11 In doing so, the Imperial
Mint often undertook the role of ihtiyat hazinesi, the status of the Treasury of
Capital Reserve, leaving the family responsible for various activities outside of coin
minting.12
5Sevket Pamuk, A Monetary History of the Ottoman Empire (Cambridge University Press, 2000), 88.
6Pamuk, Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları, 120-29.
7Edhem Eldem, “Chaos and Half Measures: The Ottoman Monetary ‘System’of the Nineteenth Century,”
The Economic Development of South-Eastern Europe (1830–1914) (2006): 251-305.
8BOA, HAT596/ 29288, H.29.12.1249/ 1833; Menevişyan, Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants, 37; “Darbhane-i
Amire,” Büyük İstanbul Tarihi, accessed April 1, 2022, https://istanbultarihi.ist/208-darphane-i-amire.
9Metin Erüreten, Osmanlı Madalyaları ve Nişanları (Istanbul: Destination Management Company 2001,)
55.
10Bölükbaşı, “Darbhane-i Amire.” Antik Çağ’dan XXI. Yüzyıla Büyük İstanbul Tarihi, accessed 01.04. 2022,
https://istanbultarihi.ist/208-darphane-i-amire.
11Fatma Müge Göçek, Rise of the Bourgeoisie, Demise of Empire (New York: Oxford University Press,
1996), 45-46.
12Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 10.
49
Within this period, the institution was also responsible for administering the personal
treasury of the Sultans, ceyb-i hümayûn.13 Therefore, while technological
developments made the Mint more efficient, these regulations expanded the responsibilities
of the Mint, as well as the workload. The Imperial Mint continued as an
ihtiyat hazinesi after the İrâd-ı Cedîd treasury was abolished in the aftermath of
the dethronement of Sultan Selim III, which led to the Imperial Mint collecting the
revenues of the treasury. Additionally, the Imperial Mint also became responsible
for organizing the hazine-i amire and tershane hazinesi.14
Thereby, the Imperial Mint not only became an important agent of coin minting
but also became an important actor in countering the financial inefficiencies of the
Ottoman financial sector.15 Although within this period the Imperial Mint became
a very crucial and important institution for the Ottoman Empire, the responsibility
of organizing various treasuries and fulfilling coin minting duties at the same time
was not easy and created instability in the institution.16 In this regard, in 1844,
activities other than coin minting and administering the mukâtaa ceased to exist in
the Imperial Mint.17
In terms of the administrative changes, the institutional body of the Imperial Mint
was reorganized. In 1850, ifrazcıbaşılık and mübâyaacılık, which were in charge of
bringing the precious metals to the Imperial Mint, became a subdivision of the
newly established Imperial Currency Administration (Meskûkat-ı Şâhâne Müdürlüğü)
18 that was a Directorate of the Ministry of Finance (Maliye Nezâreti).19 These
changes were among the bureaucratic and institutional reform processes that took
place in the Ministry of Finance in the aftermath of the Tanzimat Edict. This administrative
change in the Imperial Mint eliminated the rule that necessitated the
directors to be Muslim, therefore making it easier for the Düzoğlu family to become
13Halil Sahillioğlu, “Ceyb-i Hümayun,” (TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.) https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/ceybi-
humayun.
14Bölükbaşı, 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire, 10.
15Ali Akyıldız, Tanzimat Dönemi Osmanlı Merkez Teşkilatında Reform (1836-1856) (Istanbul: Eren
Yayıncılık, 1993), 97-98.
16Akyıldız, Tanzimat Dönemi Osmanlı Merkez Teşkilatında Reform (1836-1856), 97-98.
17Bölükbaşı, “Darbhane-i Amire.” Antik Çağ’dan XXI. Yüzyıla Büyük İstanbul Tarihi, accessed April 1,
2022, https://istanbultarihi.ist/208-darphane-i-amire.
18“Darbhâne mubâyaacılığı isminin değiştirilerek Meskûkat Müdürlüğü’ne çevrilmesi ile orada çalışan
Mihran ve Bogos’a nişan ihsânı.” BOA, A.}AMD.22/57, 29.11.1266/ 1849; “Darbhâne-i amire
mubâyaacılığının meskûkat müdürlüğüne tahvili ile Düzoğlu hoce Mehran ve kuyumcubaşı ihsan olunması.”
BOA, A.}AMD.22/ 64, 29.11.1266/ 1849.
19Cezar, “Economy and Taxation,” 67-68.
50
the directors of the Meskûkât-ı Şâhâne.20 Additionally, the transition from Imperial
Mint to Meskûkât-ı Şâhâne Müdürlüğü and changes in technology decreased the
workforce. The number of workers in the institution was reduced significantly and
mostly only workers who were close to the family or family members maintained
their jobs in the institution.21 Eventually, this facilitated the Düzoğlu family’s
dominance in the institution. Hence, the family’s former secondary positions in the
Imperial Mint as ifrazcıbaşı and darbhane sarrafı acquired another dimension in the
mid-nineteenth century as they reached the hierarchically highest possible rank.22
In 1847, Mihran Çelebi Düzoğlu began his service as ifrazcıbaşı in the Imperial Mint
and continued working from where Hagob Çelebi Düzoğlu left off to apply European
techniques to the coin minting process. Upon the newly established administrative
body, in the midst of his career as ifrazcıbaşı, Mihran Bey became the first and
the last Düzoğlu to be employed as director of the Meskûkât-ı Şâhâne Müdürlüğü.
As will be given in more detail below, after Mihran Bey, members of the Düzoğlu
family often sought various other professions within the Ottoman bureaucracy, and
more members of the Düzoğlu family could be traced within the lists of bureaucratic
positions throughout the century.
Although the administrative body of the Imperial Mint changed with the introduction
of the Meskûkat-ı Şâhâne, some of the family members maintained their
positions as the Imperial Jeweler (kuyumcubaşı), such as Boğos Bey Düzoğlu who
was working as the Imperial Jeweler in the Mint, particularly engaging in drawing,
designing, and minting medals (nişan).
As the previous paragraphs emphasized, during the transformation of the Imperial
Mint and changes in the Ottoman financial system, the Düzoğlu family not only
adapted to the changing circumstances but also contributed to the changes. Considering
the continuous changes taking place in the Ottoman state, the Düzoğlu
family maintained their influential positions.
20Bölükbaşı, “Darbhane-i Amire.”
21For a detailed analysis of the surety system (kefalet sistemi) in the Imperial Mint, see chapter 2.
22Bölükbaşı, “Darbhâne-i Âmire’de Ermeniler,”accessed May 1, 2022
51
4.2 Departure from Tradition: The Düzoğlu Family as Galata Bankers
In the meantime, while the changes were taking place in the Imperial Mint and
throughout the Ottoman state bureaucracy, the Düzoğlus did not remain in the
confines of the Imperial Mint and managed to expand their area of influence by
participating in and pursuing other professions. They became involved in trade,
bureaucracy, banking, and industry.23
One of the other changes the nineteenth century welcomed was the advent of the
banking system, which was a novelty for Ottoman finance. Before the introduction
of banking to the Ottoman financial system, the sarraf s were among the actors
managing the economy of the empire. More specifically, from the eighteenth century
onwards, critical financial operations of the state were entrusted to the sarraf s. Ottoman
society, especially high bureaucrats, relied on the skills of the sarraf s for any
sort of monetary matter.24 Such dependency led to the emergence of the sarraf s as
important actors in the money market in the eighteenth century. However, due to the
changing dynamics of the Ottoman economy, the sarraf s no longer managed to meet
the needs of Ottoman finance. Instead, the European bankers in Istanbul worked
their way into the monopoly of the sarraf s.25 The sarraf s of the eighteenth century
transformed into Galata bankerleri, bankers in the nineteenth century.26 The Galata
bankerleri were basically a group of non-Muslim bankers—mostly Greek, Armenian
and Jewish—who had offices in and around the Galata region from the 1850s onwards.
Throughout the first half of the nineteenth century, the Galata bankerleri
were the actors who maintained the financial relations with the West in cooperation
with the demands of the Ottoman financial system. In tandem with increasing
budget deficiency, the government’s reliance on the Galata bankers increased. The
Galata bankers followed the Western stock markets in Paris and London and maintained
personal ties with those who worked in those institutions. The empire’s
integration into the capitalist world economy, the introduction of foreign loans, the
expansion of cultivation of certain cash crops, and the breakout of the Ottoman
financial crisis of the 1840s required a more complex financial system which acted
23The information known about Boğos’ activities outside the Imperial Mint is limited aside from the fact that
he worked at the council of Bank–ı Osmanî and that he was a silk merchant. “Hereke Fabrika-i Humayun’a
lazım olan ipek Düzoğlu Hoce Agob tarafından tedarik edildiği ve bedelinin Darphane-i Amireden ödenmesi.”
BOA, HAT 38/1931, H.29.12.1221/ 1806; Also Boğos Bey Düzoğlu, was granted with the achievement
medal by the Prussian state. BOA, HR.SYS 1896/ 34, M.26.04.1858/1274.
24Cezar, “Economy and Taxation,” 67-68.
25Cezar, “Economy and Taxation,” 61-68.
26Pamuk, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Paranın Tarihi, 140.
52
as an important catalyst leading to the introduction of banking.27
The first initiation of banking in the Ottoman Empire under the leading role of
Emmanuel Baltazzi began in 1847 and lasted until 1852.28 Despite its insufficient
capital, the bank managed to stabilize the value of the money against the pound;
this early attempt, however, was followed by bankruptcy of the bank in 1852.29 As
a result of this initial experience, under the initiation of a Parisian banker Trouve-
Chauvel, banking in the Ottoman Empire moved into another era. Under the leadership
of Trouve-Chauvel and the twelve local bankers and capital owners who became
members, the Ottoman Bank (Bank-ı Osmanî or Banque Ottomane) was established
in 1856.30 Compared to the former banking attempt, the Bank-ı Osmanî had more
capital and power.31 The founders and council of the Bank-ı Osmanî were limited
to twelve members and the foreign partners were limited to only three.32 Additionally,
among this cadre of twelve people, there were the most prominent members of
the financial affairs, including the Düzoğlu family. As Jamgoçyan notes, the family
members involved were Mihran Bey Düzoğlu (Head of the Imperial Mint, Darbhane
Müdür-i Umûmîsi), Boğos Düzoğlu (Imperial Jeweler of the Sultan, Sultan
Kuyumcubaşısı) and Diran Aleksanyan-Düzoğlu, the Mint’s director responsible for
the supply of gold and silver.33
Although the first banking attempts were unstable and insufficient for the modernization
of the Ottoman financial system, Mihran Bey’s influence in the institution
mattered. Edhem Eldem highlights Mihran Bey’s significance in the establishment
of the Bank-ı Osmanî in 1856.34 According to Eldem, Donon and Co., a French
bank that was one of the Bank-ı Osmanî ’s potential founders, wanted to get to
know Mihran Bey Düzoğlu and insisted on his presence in the project.35
27Eldem, Edhem. Osmanlı Bankası Tarihi. Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 2000. 108-109;119-120;
Kazgan 1997, 36-41; Eldem, Edhem. “The Imperial Ottoman Bank: Actor or Instrument of Ottoman
Modernization.” In Modern Banking in the Balkans and West-European Capital in the Nineteenth and
Twentieth Centuries, edited by Kostas P. Kostis. (Ashgate 1999); Pamuk, Şevket. Osmanlı Ekonomisi Ve
Kurumları. Istanbul: Türkiye İşbankası Kültür Yayınları, 2020.
28Edhem Eldem, Osmanlı Bankası Tarihi, 21-23.
29Eldem, Osmanlı Bankası Tarihi, 23.
30Eldem, Osmanlı Bankası Tarihi, 23.
31Eldem, Osmanlı Bankası Tarihi, 24.
32BOA, A.}DVN.MKL.72/30, H.29.12.1269/ 1852; BOA, HR.MKT.578/21, H.12.02.1284/ 1867; Eldem,
Osmanlı Bankası Tarihi, 24.
33Jamgoçyan, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık, 107.
34Eldem, Osmanlı Bankası Tarihi, 59.
35Eldem, Osmanlı Bankası Tarihi, 59.
53
4.3 Commercial and Industrial Activities of the Düzoğlu Family
One of the earliest ways to trace the Düzoğlu family’s activity outside the Imperial
Mint at the beginning of the nineteenth century was to examine their commercial
and industrial activities. In terms of their commercial activities, the Düzoğlu family
maintained trade relations with Baghdad, Trieste, Venice, Livorno, and India
(through their trading partners the Babikyan.36 In their commercial building Serposyan
Hanı located in Galata, the Düzoğlus worked with the Levant Company,
one of the major English trade companies and particularly worked with the English
ambassador Robert Adair.37
According to Pascal Carmont, Hovhannes Çelebi Düzoğlu had a monopoly over the
silk industry of the empire and Artin Bezciyan (who later became a person of interest
when the family were disfavored) worked under him.38 In 1802, Hovhannes Çelebi
Düzoğlu was responsible for collecting custom dues from the Istanbul silk trade.39
In the first half of the nineteenth century, in terms of their industrial activities,
Hovhannes Çelebi Düzoğlu’s son, Hagob Çelebi, also participated in the industrial
sector and pioneered opening up a cloth and paper factory in Istanbul and Izmir.
Although archival evidence is limited on the cloth factory, considering the involvement
of Armenian traders, hocas, and çelebis in the textile trade in the eighteenth
and the nineteenth centuries, it would not come as a surprise that they maintained
their engagement with the textile trade and industry.40
When it comes to the establishment of the paper factory, it can be seen in the
archival material in the Ottoman state archives that the factory was constructed
and opened under the initiation of Hagob Bey and the financial assistance of Mihran
Bey and Garabed Düzoğlu in 1843.41 The paper produced there was named eseri
cedîd, and beginning in 1848, the usage of paper made in Izmir was required
36Jamgoçyan, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık, 73-74.
37They maintained their trade networks through the commercial houses they owned in the Galata region.
According to Schmitt, the Düzoğlu family owned a commercial house called “Kievork bey Han” located
in Yüksek Kaldırım, Galata region. Baruh, Lorans Izabel. “The Transformation of the ‘Modern’ Axis of
Nineteenth-Century Istanbul: Property, Investment and Elites From Taksim Square to Sirkeci Station”
Unpublished PhD Thesis,(Boğaziçi University, 2009) 251; Olley “Writing Music,” 62; Jamgoçyan, Osmanlı
İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık, 73-74.
38Carmont, The Amiras, 106.106
39Olley, “Writing Music,” 60.
40Suraiya Faroqhi, Osmanlı Kültürü ve Gündelik Yaşam (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları 2002 ), 82.
41The tezkire about the opening of the paper factory is located at BOA, A.}MKT.19/51,H.29.12.1260/ 1844
54
for official correspondences.42 In 1851, due to the decrease in the quality of the
paper, the factory received a warning from the Sultan.43 Presumably the regulatory
and economic problems of the factory increased, which led to the factory’s owners
changing and the factory later being shut down.44
According to the nineteenth-century court historian Ahmed Lütfî Efendi, the opening
of this factory by Hagob Bey Düzoğlu was crucial as it decreased the dependency
of the Ottoman Empire on foreign capital.45 However, the factory was established
when the cost of paper production decreased radically in Europe. Therefore, being
unable to compete with the lower prices, the factory could not maintain itself and
was shut down due to economic shortages. As non-durable as it may be, Ahmed
Lütfî Efendi also contends that although the factory failed to compete with European
capital and paper factories, for a while it played a role in helping the Ottoman
state with its financial upkeep.46
4.4 The Düzoğlu Family in the Ottoman Bureaucracy
Ottoman bureaucracy underwent a period of reform in the early nineteenth century,
paving the way for the promulgation of the Tanzimat Edict and its aftermath.
The changes affecting the Düzoğlu family often took place in the Ministry of Finance
(Mâliye Nezâreti), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Hariciye Nezâreti), and
the Legislative Council (Meclis-i Vâlâ-yı Ahkâm-ı Adliye).
In 1843, the Zirâ’at Meclisi was established. The formation of a Zirâ’at Meclisi was
requested by the Ministry of Finance in 1843 in order to encourage agriculture and
trade and to increase production in the Ottoman Empire. Hagob Çelebi Düzoğlu
was among the members of the unit.47
The Hariciye Nezâreti was one of the initial positions highly occupied by Düzoğlu
family members outside the Imperial Mint. As the archival evidence suggests, Serpus
42BOA, A.}AMD. 2/92, H.03.01.1264/ 1848
43BOA, A.}MKT.MVL45/85, H.28.11.1267/ 1850.
44BOA, A.}MKT.UM..392/7, H.29.06.1276/ 1859
45BOA, A.}MKT.UM..392/7, H.29.06.1276/ 1859.
46BOA A.} MKT.19/51 H.29.12.1260/ 1844; “Kağıt,” TDV Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, 2001,
2022, https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/kagit.
47Akyıldız, Tanzimat Dönemi Osmanlı Merkez Teşkilatında Reform (1836-1856), 282.
55
Düzoğlu began working as a dragoman in the Tercüme Kalemi in 1839.48 Looking
at another archival document, in 1840, he was working in the Meclis-i Tahaffuz49
as a dragoman.50
In 1837, the Meclis-i Vâlâ-yı Ahkâm-ı Adliye was established as a higher legislative
body.51 Including the president, the members of the body were often required to be
former members of the state elite.52 Starting in January 1856, in order to be able
to discuss matters concerning non-Muslim communities, non-Muslim members were
appointed to the body, with the limitation of only being able to serve one year. The
selection criteria of the body required applicants to be successful, reliable, loyal, and
staunch defenders of the Tanzimat regime. Since Mihran Bey Düzoğlu was one of
the members of the body, it can be argued that he managed to attain a high position
in the Ottoman bureaucracy due to his status as a member of the Düzoğlu family.53
In 1868, Meclis-i Vâlâ-yı Ahkâm-ı Adliye was divided into two branches. One of its
branches, the Şûra-yı Devlet (Council of State), had many non-Muslim members.
Armenian Catholics were well represented in the Şûra-yı Devlet, making up the
largest group of non-Muslim councilors.54 Members of the Düzoğlu family were also
among the council of Şûra-yı Devlet. Archival material includes documents related
only to Mihran Bey’s positions in the Ottoman state bureaucracy. Nonetheless, as
the forthcoming paragraphs will display, there are several indications that there were
several lesser-known members of the family who worked in the Ottoman bureaucracy.
Mihran Bey Düzoğlu was a member of the Meclis-i Vâlâ-yı Ahkâm-ı Adliye before
the promulgation of the Tanzimat Edict. Upon the division of the council into two,
in 1873 Mihran Bey Düzoğlu was appointed as a member of the Şûra-yı Devlet
during the presidency of Yusuf Kamil Paşa.55 From 1868-1874, Mihran Bey’s son,
Sarkis Düzoğlu, occupied the same position as his father did as a member of the
48BOA, HAT 647/ 31727, H.15.10.1254/ 1838.
49For detailed information on Meclis-i Tahaffuz, see, Gülden Sarıyıldız, “Karantina Meclisi’nin Kuruluşu ve
Faaliyetleri,” Belleten 58, no. 222 (1994), https://belleten.gov.tr/tam-metin/2303/tur.
50BOA, İ..MVL.13/204, H.24.10.1256/ 1840.
51Akyıldız, Tanzimat Dönemi Osmanlı Merkez Teşkilatında Reform (1836-1856), 189-92.
52Akyıldız, Tanzimat Dönemi Osmanlı Merkez Teşkilatında Reform (1836-1856), 210.
53Akyıldız, Tanzimat Dönemi Osmanlı Merkez Teşkilatında Reform (1836-1856), 210.
54Roderic H Davison, Reform in the Ottoman Empire, 1856-1876, (Princeton University Press, 1968), 104.
55“Mihran Bey’in şura-yı devlet azalığına dair” BOA, İ..DH..658/45763, H.10.08.1289/1872 Şûrâ-yı devlet,
Council of State, established in 1868. See “Şûrâ-yı Devlet,” 2010, https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/surayi-
devlet.
56
Şûra-yı Devlet.56 From a petition written by Sarkis to the Sultan in 1891, it can be
understood that Sarkis continued working in the Şûra-yı Devlet.
The nineteenth-century Ottoman reform period took yet another turn with the promulgation
of the Reform Edict in 1856. The reform process, which was stimulated
by the Islahat Edict, included reforms on the education system of the empire. Up
until the promulgation of the Islahat Edict, the education sector was under the
domination of the clergy, which was the case for both Muslims and non-Muslim
communities.57 The promulgation of the Islahat Edict created a broad legal and administrative
space for non-Muslim communities to establish their own schools in an
effort to liberalize and modernize education.58 Such novelty in the education system
necessitated the creation of a mixed council to serve as a body to bring together
the representatives of the non-Muslim communities. To that end, a body called the
Mixed Educational Council (Meclis-i Muhtelit-i Maârif ) was established in 1856.
This council reserved the rights to determine the quality of the schools, formulate
the schools’ curriculums, and appoint professors.59 Mihran Bey was appointed as a
member of the Meclis-i Muhtelit-i Maarif on behalf of the Armenian community in
1857.60
After the presence of Mihran Bey, the archival material does not provide any hints to
trace any other forthcoming members of the Düzoğlu family. It is known that Mihran
Bey Düzoğlu had six children and that three of the last descendants of Mihran Bey
were his sons Sarkis, Herasez Bey, and Hrand Bey. According to Carmont, Sarkis was
born in Istanbul in 1889 and died in Paris in 1982,61 whereas based on the limited
information available, it is only known that Herasez Bey was born in Istanbul in
1862.62 Hrand Bey Düzoğlu also was born in 1861 in Istanbul, but again, the time
and place of his death is unknown.63 Upon completing his high school education in
56Çarkçıyan, Türk Devleti Hizmetindeki Ermeniler, 160-61.
57Selçuk Akşin Somel, “Kırım Savaşı Islahat Fermanı ve Osmanlı Eğitim Düzeninde Dönüşümler” (Savaştan
Barışa: 150. Yıldönümünde Kırım Savaşı ve Paris Antlaşması (1853-1856), Istanbul, 2006), 62.
58Selçuk Akşin Somel, “Osmanlı Ermenilerinde Kültür Modernleşmesi, Cemaat Okulları ve Abdülhamid
Rejimi,” Tarih ve Toplum 5 (2007): 70-71.
59Selçuk Akşin Somel, The Modernization of Public Education in the Ottoman Empire 1839-1908: Islamization,
Autocracy and Discipline (Brill, 2021), 43.
60BOA, A.}DVN.122/85, H.20.08.1273/ 1856. In the aftermath of the promulgation of the Islahat Edict, a
council called the Meclis-i Muhtelit-i Maarif was formed to improve the education throughout the empire
regardless of religious and ethnic differences within society.
61Carmont, The Amiras, 110.
62BOA, DH.SAİDd...89/155, H.29.12.1278/ 1861.
63Tacettin Kayaoğlu, Osmanlı Hariciyesinde Gayr-i Müslimler (1852-1925) (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu
Yayınları, 2013), 131.
57
Paris, he continued his studies in Agricultural Engineering in Paris.64 In 1897, he
worked in Matbûât-ı Ecnebiye Kalemi and in the following year, he entered Hâriciye
Nezâreti Umûr-ı Şehbenderî Kalemi where he eventually became Baş Şehbender for
Mesenye (now Kalamata, Greece).65
4.5 The Düzoğlu Family in the Social Sphere and their Cultural
Activities
The Düzoğlu family channeled their interests to enhance their living standards as
well as to benefit the social and cultural sphere of the Armenian community. Seeing
the family’s presence in the social sphere is important to understand how the
family was perceived in society. In terms of the social sphere, the Düzoğlu family
maintained close ties with the Sultans, facilitated by their roles as officials of the
Ottoman state.66 The Düzoğlu family rose in rank from being simple jewelers to
eventually enjoying the privilege of being directly in touch with the Sultan himself.
Cevdet Paşa provides a typical example of such a relationship in a segment of Boğos
Bey Düzoğlu’s dialogue with the Sultan Abdülmecid. According to Cevdet Paşa’s
narration, Düzoğlu Boğos was summoned before Sultan Abdülmecid, and assigned
to fix his dagger:
“Düz-oğlu Deli Boğos’u çağırıp ‘bunu çabuk aptır. Zirâ benim beşinci
kadına emniyetim yoktur. [Anın için] bu kamayı taşıyorum’ dedikte
Deli Boğos ‘efendim o dağdan gelmiş [niçin] size ha‘in olsun. Hem kimin
ne haddine size su’-i kasd eylesin. Siz padişahsınız’ demek Hünkâr ‘sen
kadının tarafındasın’ gibi sözler söylemiş. [Sonra] Hünkâr beşinci kadının
yanına varıp ‘sen ne kâfiresin. Deli Boğos bile bugün geldi. Bir kama var
idi sivriltti. Beşinci kadına emniyet olunmaz [deyu] bana nasihat etti’
demiş. Binâen-aleyh Kadın efendi Deli Boğos hakkında kin bağlayıp
[ona] Düz-oğlu kamayı iyi sivrilttin mi. Bunu iyi belle. Bu senin yanına
kalmaz.”67
64Kayaoğlu, Osmanlı Hariciyesinde Gayr-i Müslimler (1852-1925) 131.
65Kayaoğlu, Osmanlı Hariciyesinde Gayr-i Müslimler (1852-1925), 131.
66With the exception of the period when they were disfavored.
67Ahmed Cevdet Paşa, Tezâkir, ed. Cavid Baysun, vol. 13-20 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1986), 132.
58
Having close ties with the Sultans should not necessarily be portrayed as solely
positive, as they had to be aware of and watch out for the delicate power relations
within the dynasty. On a different account, Sultan Abdülmecid reflects his dispraise
for Boğos as he prepared an engraved the design of a pistol for Aziz Efendi:
“Ben seni şimdiye kadar kendime sâdık ve hayr-hâh bilirdim. Sen ise
Aziz efendi’ye bir çift tabanca yaptırıvermişsin. Ol tabancaları o beni
öldürmek için yaptırıyor biliyor musun’ diyicek Deli şaşırmış hemen and
içerek vuku’u hâli beyân u îzâh ederek güç hâl ile kandırmış olduğu
mahremâne haber alınmıştır.”68
As the excerpts above suggest, members of the family managed to carve a place for
themselves in the social sphere, which was facilitated by their ties to the state elite.
In time, the family’s connection with the Ottoman state and their economically
powerful position raised the issue of their social position vis-à-vis the Armenian
community starting in the late eighteenth century. The position they held in the
eyes of society was not always one of praise; in fact, their lifestyle often grabbed people’s
attention in a negative way. The nineteenth-century court historian Şânîzâde
Mehmed Atâullah Efendi displays their prosperity as follows:
“Üç mâh ‘ale’d-devâm Bey-oğlu ve Boğaz-içi’nde menâzil-i müte’addide
ve İstanbul’da ekser hânlarda büyüt-i müteferrikada muhallefât fürûht
olunarak, her birinde zuhur eden eşyây-ı nâdîde-i behâ-dâr ve tuhaf u
tefârîk-ı naşenîde-i bî-şümâr ilâ hâze’l-vakt ne bir vezîr ve ne bir kibâr
metrukâtında müsâdif-i a’yün-i nüzzâr olmuş [. . . ] Düz-oğulları’nın her
birinin mute‘addid hâne ve sâhil-hâneleri derûnlarında cemî’ âlât ve
mâlzeme ve üstâd ve hademesiyle birer mahsûs ütücü dükkânı mevcûd ve
hammâm ve memşâ na’leynlerinin tasmaları a’la ve zümürrüd ve yakut
ile müzeyyen idüği, merûkâta gidenlerin cümlesine re’ye’l-‘ayn meşhûd
idi.”69
According to Şânizâde, members of the Düzoğlu family had many possessions ranging
from a house to a bathhouse (hamam) to an ironing shop (ütühâne), and one
could see their fondness for luxury even by simply looking at their emerald- and
ruby-engraved shoes.
68Ahmed Cevdet Paşa, Tezâkir, 13-20, 132.
69Şanizade Mehmet Ataullah Efendi, Şanizâde Tarihi: 1223-1237/1808-1821, vol. 2 (Istanbul: Çamlıca,
2008), 943.
59
Şânizâde’s account may not be an exaggeration; in fact, in agreement with Şânizâde’s
narration, a yearbook of Kuruçeşme Surp Haç Church also confirms that the Düzoğlu
family often threw crowded balls and gatherings in their mansion in the Kuruçeşme
region that members of Ottoman state elite (such as Halet Efendi), as well as wellknown
figures from the Armenian community (such as the Allahverdioğlu family),
attended.70 According to Boré, “The family entertained with splendid parties, illuminations
and feasts, [and] an unprecedented luxury of etiquette.”71 Another account
notes that the “Dooz Ouglou’ [Düzoğlu] family ’built splendid palaces on the
Bosphorus, laid out magnificent gardens, [and] gave large festivals to his numerous
connections, thirty or forty boat loads at a time.”72
Nevertheless, the Düzoğlu family did not only use the power they attained to enhance
their living conditions and have a prosperous lifestyle. Alongside their attentiongrabbing
lifestyle, their benefaction and their cultural and social commitments were
also exclusively noteworthy. The Düzoğlu family’s economic and institutional power
enabled them to create cultural capital by means of investing in printed material
and circulating knowledge.
As Olley notes, the Düzoğlu family acted as the patrons of education and Armenian
culture in Istanbul and the wider Armenian diaspora by “[using] their economic and
social capital to support intellectual activities throughout the Armenian community.”
73 As Catholics, their cultural and social activities had socially entrenched
motivations.
The Düzoğlu family contributed to the activities of the Catholic Armenian community,
the Mkhitarist Congregation, through financially supporting schools and
publications. The schools they financially supported included the ones in Galata
(Lusavorçyan Mektebi), Kartal, and Moda.74 The family’s support for the Mkhitarist
Congregation was not limited to solely financial assistance, but rather the
family also employed numerous Mkhitarist scholars as personal confessors or tutors.
As Menevişyan notes, historian Arsen Bagraduni and Minas Pjikyan worked as the
private tutors of the family.75
70Badmagan Hişadagaran Yerevman Surp Khaç Yegeğetsvo Kuruçeşmei, [Yearbook of the Surp Haç Church,
Kuruçeşme] (Istanbul: H. M. Setyan Matbaası 1934).
71Boré 1838, 58. Quoted in Olley, “Writing Music,” 69; BOA, HR.MKT.138/15, H.26.06.1272/ 1855.
72Porter 1835, 128. Quoted in Olley, “Writing Music,” 70.
73Olley, “Writing Music,” 48.
74For detailed archival documents on the Mkhitarist school (Muhitarist Mekteb, as used in the Ottoman
Archives) established in Moda, Kadıköy, see BOA, Y..PRK.ZB..18/111, H.30.12.1314/ 1896; BOA,
MF.MKT.503/30, H.13.01.1318/ 1900. 503-30; BOA, DH.TMIK.M..27/16, H.23.08.1314/ 1896.
75Rouben Paul Adalian, From Humanism to Rationalism : Armenian Scholarship in the Nineteenth Century,
60
One of the most prominent social activities of the family was their support of the
establishment of the Arşarunyants Ingerutyun or the Arşarunyants Association. Established
by the Armenian Catholic historian Hayr Vartabed Ğugas İnciciyan in 1802
in Venice, the Arşarunyants Ingerutyun was a cultural association with an aim of
disseminating knowledge about Armenian history through a publication campaign.76
The publication campaign aimed to spread literacy among the Armenian community,
most often through books and newspapers.77 In 1812, Hovhannes Çelebi, Hagob,
and Mıgırdiç Düzoğlu financially supported the association.
In 1812, the association published a weekly newspaper called Tidak Püzantiyon
(the Observer of Byzantion 1812-1816).78 Hagob Düzoğlu also financially supported
the publication of a journal called Evropa (Europe).79 Additionally, the association
also published Yeğanak Püzantiyon (the Season of Byzantion) as a yearbook
including prominent political and social events in the Armenian community. In
addition to journals, Hagob Düzoğlu and his brother Garabed had several other linguistic
projects, such as the compilation of a Persian-Armenian dictionary, Pararan
Parsegeren-Hayeren (1826), and a French-Armenian dictionary.80
Perhaps one of the most enduring cultural activities of the Düzoğlus, apart from
their involvement in the Mkhitarist community and the Arşarunyants Ingerutyun,
was their contribution to the composition of the Hamparsum notation. The Düzoğlus,
especially Andon and Hagob Çelebi Düzoğlu, exerted a strong patronage
influence on the ability of Hamparsum Limonciyan’s reputation to spread nationwide.
81 Olley notes that during the festivities organized by the family in their mansion
in Kuruçeşme, Limonciyan was brought to perform for the guests. After his
reputation grew in the Armenian community, Limonciyan was also summoned before
Sultan Selim III, who allegedly claimed patronage over the works of Limonciyan.
Their assistance to Hamparsum Limonciyan was exclusively essential for theorizing
and disseminating the Hamparsum notation throughout Istanbul and Venice.82 The
University of Pennsylvania Armenian Texts and Studies, (Atlanta, Ga: Scholars Press, 1992), 41.
76Olley, “Writing Music,” 67.
77Olley, “Writing Music,” 67.
78The Mkhitarist library of Vienna recently (from December 2021 onwards) shared their digital library with
open access at https://mechitaristlibrary.org.
79Olley, “Writing Music,” 67.
80Olley, “Writing Music,” 66-67. Teotoros Lapçinciyan, Baskı ve Harf: Ermeni Matbaacılık Tarihi, ed.
Osman Köker, trans. Sirvart Malhasyan and Arlet İncidüzen (İstanbul: Birzamanlar Yayıncılık, 2012), 93.
81Repertoire of Hamparsum Limonciyan can be found at BOA, TRT Müzik Dairesi Defterleri (TRT.MD.d.)
82Olley, “Writing Music,” 73.
61
Hamparsum notation brought a novelty to Ottoman music, as well as to Armenian
music.
The Düzoğlu family’s sociocultural activities were indeed remarkable and had a longlasting
effect on both the Ottoman Empire and the Armenian community. Recalling
the tensions against the Catholics at the beginning of the nineteenth century, the
family formed ties with the Mkhitarist Congregation and partook in establishing the
Arşarunyants Ingerutyun. The beginning of the nineteenth century also corresponds
with period of the family members’ execution and exile, which lasted until 1820.
Conducting such activities presumably at the period where tensions culminated
towards Catholic Armenians of the empire opens the ground for further research
with regard to the Catholicism of the family and its political and cultural effects.
62
5. CONCLUSION
The Amiras emerged as a mixed group of moneylenders and craftsmen in the eighteenth
century. Until the mid-nineteenth century, the Amiras occupied various positions
in the Ottoman state service. Though they were barred from wielding formal
political power, their role was pivotal for the exercise of state power, arguably until
the beginning of the Tanzimat era. The Amiras did so primarily as important actors
who strengthened the domestic economy while financing state policies. Within
this period, they became a group of leaders in the Armenian community. Through
the power they attained in the state service, they managed to place themselves as
crucial intermediaries between the Armenian community and the Ottoman state.
The Amiras were witnesses of the broad changes that took place in the nineteenthcentury
Ottoman Empire and Armenian community. They were affected by these
changes as they themselves contributed to them, more specifically to new economic
and administrative developments. This thesis endeavored to display the shifting
trajectories within the Amiras and highlight that they did not lose their significance
by the mid-nineteenth century as historiography often claims. I argue that the
changes the Amiras experienced can be understood as a transformation rather than
a decline or a sudden disappearance. This thesis intended to display the trajectory
of this transformation through the case of the Düzoğlu family.
First, the Amiras amassed their capital in the provinces in the eighteenth century
and later migrated to Istanbul. Upon their arrival, they projected their long-pursued
interests and skills in certain business ventures ranging from jewelry, trade, and moneylending
to administrative professions such as those in the Imperial Mint and the
Imperial Powder works. The Düzoğlu family’s case provides an example of an Amira
family involved in craftsmanship, monetary-lending activities, and commercial pursuits
that connected the family to the Ottoman state since they held these positions
in the service of the Ottoman state.
63
Second, how did these Amiras transform themselves to be able to work in state
positions? The moment Greek and Jewish moneylenders were pulled back in the
1820s, the Düzoğlus as an Amira family began to replace them as moneylenders,
through which they were able to increase their pivotal role in the Ottoman economy.
Third, the role of the Amiras as well as that of the Düzoğlu family in the Ottoman
economy weakened following the promulgation of the Tanzimat Edict and
the Crimean War (1854-1856) with the advent of European bankers and moneylenders
to the Ottoman economy. However, the Tanzimat marked the beginning of a
series of administrative and bureaucratic reforms in which the Imperial Mint became
the Meskûkat-ı Şâhâne Müdürlüğü. As a result of these modernization and
bureaucratization efforts, the Düzoğlu family also came to the forefront in these
transformations and obtained the highest ranks that were possible to obtain.
Fourth, around the mid-nineteenth century and afterwards the family members began
to disperse among different professions such as industry, banking, and modern
administrative bureaucratization.
In tracing and contextualizing the transformation of the Amiras, the Düzoğlu family
is situated as a case study that offers a complicated, multidimensional approach that
allows one to observe the internal dynamics and complexities of the Amiras. The
case of the Düzoğlu family contributes to our understanding of the Amiras, as well
as their transformation in the nineteenth-century Ottoman Empire.
Indeed, one of the outcomes of this thesis is to demonstrate the overlapping worlds
the Düzoğlu family belonged to. Starting out as simple jewelers, the Düzoğlu family
rose to prominence upon their entrance to the Imperial Mint. Due to their identity
as Catholics, the Düzoğlu family also experienced a setback in 1819, one from which
they recovered from when they were restored into their previous positions. Subsequently,
as a result of changing circumstances in both the Armenian community and
the Ottoman state, they separated themselves from the Ottoman state and emerged
as more socially and economically independent actors. This transformation can be
observed through their banking and industrial activities and their roles during the
bureaucratic modernization of the Ottoman Empire.
This thesis has touched upon a topic that requires further research. The Düzoğlu
family was not the only family through which the transformations of the Amiras
can be discerned. The notion of transformation can be observed in different families
and individuals. Considering their long service to the Ottoman state in one of the
Empire’s most prestigious institutions, this study approached the transformation
from the viewpoint of the Düzoğlu family. Observing the other Amira families such
64
as the Dadyans, the Tıngıryans, the Bilezikçiyans, and the Noradunkyans in parallel
with the notion of transformation requires further studies to understand the Amiras.
From a broader perspective, these studies would also shed light on elite groups, as
well as the administrative and economic networks in the Ottoman Empire.
Yet another important aspect that needs further clarification is the Düzoğlu family’s
Catholic identity and ties with the Mkhitarist Congregation. The fact that they
were Catholics also necessitates further research on family’s relations with France
and cultural, political and economic implications of such relation.
More broadly, an exploration of the family’s intellectual engagements would demonstrate
that there was an entanglement between Venice, Vienna, and Istanbul as the
family searched for a broader audience to disseminate their publications. Such an
exploration would also add yet another dimension to the scholarship on the literacy
culture and intellectual history of the Armenian community. Employing these
studies would help scholars gain a fuller picture of the Armenian community and
lesser-known aspects of the Ottoman state.
65
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Archival Sources
Cumhurbaşkanlığı Devlet Arşivleri Başkanlığı (BOA)
Cevdet: Dahiliye; Hariciye; Maliye
C.HR 39/6904
C.ML 468/19037
C.ML C.ML 468/19037
C.ML C.ML 396/16239
Cevdet Darbhâne
C.DRB 7/320
Dahiliye Nezâreti Tesrî-i Muamelat ve Islahat Komisyonu Muamelat
DH. TMIK.M 27/16
Dârbhane Defterleri
D.DRB.d/120
Divan Kalemi Evrakı
A.DVN 122/85
Divan-ı Hümâyûn Mühimme Kalemi
A.DVN.MHM 10/44
Hariciye Nezareti Siyasi Kalemi; Mektubî Kalemi
HR.SYS 1896/ 34 HR.MKT 578/21 HR.MKT 138/15
Hatt-ı Hümayun
HAT no. 1649
HAT no. 113
HAT no. 139
HAT no. 1649
HAT no. 1562
HAT no. 1563
HAT no. 647
HAT no. 38
Hazine-i Hassa Defterleri
HH. 32/ 43280-C
66
Dahiliye
DH.İD 112/19
İ. DH 558/38903
İ. DH 1194/93420
İ. DH 66/8708
İrade Meclis-i Vâlâ
İ.MVL 285/1127
İ.MVL 13/204
Maârif Nezâreti Mektubî Kalemi
MF.MKT.503/30
Mukâvelenameler
A. DVN.MKL 72/30
Sadaret: Umum Vilayet Evrakı; Nezaret ve Devair Evrakı
A.MKT 19/51
A.MKT.MVL 45/85
A.MKT.UM 392/7
Saray Âmedî Kalemi
A.AMD 11/60
A.AMD 22/57
A.AMD 22/ 64
A.AMD 2/92
Saray Mesalihi
C.SM 36/1814
Sicill-i Ahvâl Defterleri
DH.SAİDd 89/155
Yıldız Perakende, Zabtiye
Y. PRK.ZB 18/111
67
2. Primary Sources
Ahmed Cevdet Paşa. Tezâkir. Edited by Cavid Baysun. Vol. 13-20, Ankara: Türk
Tarih Kurumu, 1986.
Badmagan Hişadagaran Yerevman Surp Khaç Yegeğetsvo Kuruçeşmei. [Yearbook of the
Surp Haç Church, Kuruçeşme]. Istanbul: H. M. Setyan Matbaası 1934.
Kazım, Musa. Darphane’nin Ahval-i Dahiliyyesi. Vol. 9: TOEM 1911.
Kömürciyan, Eremya Çelebi. İstanbul Tarihi: XVII. Asırda Istanbul. Translated by
Hrand D. Andreasyan. Edited by Kevork Pamukciyan. Istanbul: Eren Yayıncılık
ve Kitapçılık. 1988.
Lütfi, Ahmed. Vak’anüvis Ahmed Lütfi Efendi Tarihi, vol.I Tarih Vakfı-Yapı Kredi
Yayınları (1999).
MacFarlane, Charles. The Armenians: A Tale of Constantinople. Vol. 1: Carey and
Lea, 1830.
———. Constantinople in 1828: A Residence of Sixteen Months in the Turkish Capital
and Provinces: with an Account of the Present State of the Naval and Military Power
and of the Resources of the Ottoman Empire. Vol. 2: Saunders and Otley, 1829.
Menevişyan, H. Gabriel. Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants. [Genealogy of the Noble
Düzyan House ]. Venice: Mkhitarian Dparan, 1890.
Mırmıryan, Harutyun G. Masnagan Badmutyun Hay Medzadunneru. [Special History of
Armenian Magnates]. Constantinople, Istanbul, 1909.
Oğulukyan, Georg. Georg Oğulukyan’ın Ruznamesi: 1806-1810 İsyanları. Edited by
Hrand D. Andreasyan. İstanbul: İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Basımevi,
1971.
Ormanyan, Mağakya. Azkabadum Hayots Yegeğetsin Vol. 3, Yerusalem: Surp Hagopyants
Matbaası, 1927.
Pakraduni, Arsen. Azgabanutiun Nshanavor Antsits Aznuazarm Tann Diuzeants [Genealogy
and History of Major Events of the Noble Düzyan Dynasty]. St. Lazzaro
Venice: Mekhitarist Congregation 1856.
68
Şanizade Mehmet Ataullah Efendi. Şanizade Tarihi: 1223-1237/1808-1821 Vol. 2: Istanbul:
Çamlıca, 2008.
Tournefort, Joseph de. Tournefort Seyahatnamesi. Edited by Stefanos Yerasimos. Istanbul:
Kitap Yayınevi. 2005.
Ubicini, Jean Henri Abdolomyne. Letters on Turkey: An Account of the Religious,
Political, Social, and Commercial Condition of the Ottoman Empire. Vol. 1: John
Murray, 1856.
Walsh, Robert. İrlandalı Bir Vaizin Gözüyle II. Mahmud İstanbul’u. Translated by
Zeynep Rona. Edited by Çağatay Anadol. Istanbul: Kitap Yayınevi, 2021.
Yeremyan, Hayr Simon. İstanbul İzlenimleri. Edited by Ragıp Zarakolu. Istanbul: Belge
Yayınları, 2018.
Zartaryan, Vahan. Hişadagaran, Hay Yerevelineru, Lusanıgarnerı, Tzerakirnerı Krutyunnerı
Yevayln 1512-1933.[Photographs Memoirs: Biographies, Manuscripts and
Writings of Famous Armenians.] 2 vols. Vol. 1, Kahire: Hagob Papazyan Dbaran,
1933.
3. Secondary Sources
Adalian, Rouben Paul. From Humanism to Rationalism : Armenian Scholarship in
the Nineteenth Century. University of Pennsylvania Armenian Texts and Studies.
Atlanta, Ga: Scholars Press, 1992.
“Finance in Ottoman Finance” History of Istanbul, accessed April 3, 2022,
https://istanbultarihi.ist/571-finance-in-ottoman-istanbul.
“Şûrâ-yı Devlet” TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, accessed June 1, 2022,
https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/sura-yi-devlet.
Akyıldız, Ali. Tanzimat Dönemi Osmanlı Merkez Teşkilatında Reform (1836-1856).
Istanbul: Eren Yayıncılık, 1993.
Antaramian, Richard E. Brokers of Faith, Brokers of Empire: Armenians and the Political
Reform in the Ottoman Empire. Stanford California: Stanford University Press,
2020.
Arıkan, Zeki. "Eğin Kasabasının Tarihsel Gelişimi." Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama
Merkezi Dergisi OTAM 12, no. 12 (2001): 1-64.
69
Artinian, Vartan. Osmanlı Devleti’nde Ermeni Anayasası’nın Doğuşu (1839-1863). Istanbul:
Aras Yayıncılık, 2004.
———. “A Study of the Historical Development of the Armenian Constitutional System
in the Ottoman Empire, 1839-1863.” PhD. Thesis Brandeis University, 1970.
Aslanian, Sebouh. From the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean. University of California
Press, 2011.
———.“The Great Schism of 1773: Venice and the Founding of the Armenian Community
of Trieste.” Chap. 81-132 In Reflections of Armenian Identity in History and
Historiography, edited by Houri Berberian and Touraj Daryaee: UCI: Jordan Center
for Persian Studies, 2018.
Aysan, Fatma Nur. “II. Mahmud Döneminde Dersaadette Bir Ailenin Muhallefatı:
Düzoğulları.” 2013. Unpublished MA Thesis. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İstanbul
Araştırmaları Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul Üniversitesi Istanbul.
Baladouni, Vahe, and Margaret Makepeace. “Armenian Merchants of the Seventeenth
and Early Eighteenth Centuries: English East India Company Sources.” Transactions
of the American Philosophical Society 88, no. 5 (1988).
Balmanoukian, Sarkis. “The Balian Dynasty of Architects.” In Armenian Constantinople,
edited by Richard Hovhannisian and Simon Payaslian. USA: Mazda Publishers,
2010.
Bardakjian, Kevork B. “Hagop Baronian’s Political and Social Satire.” Unpublished
PhD. Thesis, University of Oxford, 1979.
Bardakjian, Kevork B. “The Rise of Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul.” In Christians
and Jews in the Ottoman Empire, edited by Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis,
89-101. New York, N.Y.: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1982.
Barsoumian, Hagob. “The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul.” PhD Thesis, Columbia
University, 1980.
———. “The Dual Role of the Armenian Amira Class Within the Ottoman Government
and the Armenian Millet (1750-1850).” In Christians and Jews in the Ottoman
Empire, edited by Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis. New York, N.Y.: Holmes
and Meier Publishers, 1982.
“Baruthaneler.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi İstanbul: Kültür Bakanlığı ve
Tarih Vakfı, 1994.
Baruh, Lorans Izabel. 2009. “The Transformation of the ‘Modern’ Axis of Nineteenth-
70
Century Istanbul: Property, Investment and Elites From Taksim Square to Sirkeci
Station” Unpublished PhD Thesis, Boğaziçi University.
Besiryan, Aylin. “Hopes of Secularization in the Ottoman Empire: The Armenian National
Constitution and The Armenian Newspaper, Masis 1856-1863.” Unpublished
MA Thesis Boğaziçi University, 2007.
Beydilli, Kemal. II. Mahmud Devri’nde Katolik Ermeni Cemâati ve Kilisesi’nin Tanınması
(1830). Vol. 24: Harvard University, Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations,
1995.
Bölükbaşı, Ömerül Faruk. 18. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Darbhane-i Amire. Istanbul:
Istanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013.
———.“Darbhane-i Amire.” Antik Çağ’dan XXI. Yüzyıla Büyük İstanbul Tarihi, accessed
01.04. 2022, https://istanbultarihi.ist/208-darphane-i-amire.
———.“Darbhâne-i Âmire’de Ermeniler.” Marmara Üniversitesi Türkler ve Ermeniler,
accessed May 1, 2022, https://turksandarmenians.marmara.edu.tr/tr/darbhane-iamirede-
ermeniler/.
Bozkurt, Gülnihal. Alman-İngilizce Belgelerinin ve Siyasi Gelişmelerin Işığı Altında
Gayrimüslim Osmanlı Vatandaşlarının Hukuki Durumu (1839-1914). Ankara: Türk
Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1989.
Braude, Benjamin. “Foundation Myths of the Millet System.” In Christians and Jews
in the Ottoman Empire, edited by Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis. New York,
N.Y.: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1982.
Carmont, Pascal. The Amiras: Lords of Ottoman Armenia. London: Taderon Press,
2012.
Cezar, Yavuz. “Economy and Taxation: The Role of the Sarrafs in Ottoman Finance
and Economy in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries.” In Frontiers of Ottoman
Studies: State, Province, and the West, edited by Colin Imber, Keiko Kiyotaki and
Rhoads Murphey. New York: I.B. Tauris, 2005.
———. Osmanlı Maliyesinde Bunalım ve Değişim Dönemi: XVIII. yy dan Tanzimat’a
Mali Tarih. Vol. 62: Istanbul: Alan Yayıncılık, 1986.
Chaudhuri, Kirti N. The Trading World of Asia and the English East India Company,
1660-1760. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Clements, Henry. “Documenting Community in the Late Ottoman Empire.” International
Journal of Middle East Studies 51, no. 3 (2019): 423-43.
71
Cora, Tolga Yaşar. “Transforming Erzurum/Karin: The Social and Economic History
of a Multi-Ethnic Ottoman City In the Nineteenth Century.” Unpublished PhD.
thesis, University of Chicago, 2016.
Çarkçıyan, Y. Gamidas. Türk Devleti Hizmetindeki Ermeniler. Istanbul: Köprü Kitapları,
2016.
“Darphâne” TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, accessed April 19, 2022,
https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/darphane.
Davison, Roderic H. Reform in the Ottoman Empire, 1856-1876 : Princeton University
Press, 1968.
Dölen, Emre. “Darphane.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi. Istanbul: Türkiye
Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı, 1993.
Eldem, Edhem. “Capitulations and Western Trade ”. In The Cambridge History of
Turkey: The Later Ottoman Empire, 1603-1839, edited by Suraiya Faroqhi: Cambridge
University Press, 2006.
———.“Chaos and Half Measures: The Ottoman Monetary ‘System’of the Nineteenth
Century.” The Economic Development of South-Eastern Europe (1830–1914)2006:
251-305.
———.İftihar ve İmtiyaz: Osmanlı Nişan ve Madalyaları Tarihi. İstanbul: Osmanlı
Bankası Arşiv ve Araştırma Merkezi, 2004.
———.Osmanlı Bankası Tarihi. Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 2000.
“Emir” The Redhouse Dictionary Turkish/Ottoman-English. Istanbul: SEV Yayıncılık
Eğitim.
Ercan, Yavuz. Osmanlı Yönetiminde Gayrimüslimler: Kuruluştan Tanzimat’a Kadar
Sosyal, Ekonomik ve Hukuki Durumları. Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi, 2001.
Erüreten, Metin. Osmanlı Madalyaları ve Nişanları. Istanbul: Destination Management
Company, 2001.
Exertzoglou, Haris. “Greek Banking in Constantinople 1850-1881.” Unpublished PhD.
Thesis, King’s College London, 1986.
———.Osmanlı’da Cemiyetler ve Rum Cemaati : Dersaadet Rum Cemiyet-i Edebiyesi,
1861-1912. Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 2004.
Faroqhi, Suraiya. Osmanlı Kültürü ve Gündelik Yaşam. Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları
2002.
72
Frazee, Charles A. Catholics and Sultans: The Church and the Ottoman Empire 1453-
1923. Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Ghazarian, Flora. “On the Edge of the Center of Political Power: Informal Politics of
Catholic Armenians in Early Nineteenth-century Istanbul.” Ph.D. Thesis, Central
European University, Forthcoming.
Girardelli, Paolo. “Architecture, Identity, and Liminality: On the Use and Meaning
of Catholic Spaces in Late Ottoman Istanbul.” Muqarnas 22 (2005): 233-64.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25482430.
———.“Religious Imprints Along the Grand Rue: Armenians and Latins in Late-
Ottoman Istanbul.” Christian Art under Muslim Rule, Istanbul, May 11/12 2012.
Göçek, Fatma Müge. Rise of the Bourgeoisie, Demise of Empire. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1996.
“Hazine-i Hâssa” TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, accessed February 25, 2022,
https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/hazine-i-hassa.
“Hoca” The Redhouse Dictionary Turkish/Ottoman-English. Istanbul: Istanbul.
“Hoca” TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, July 7, 2022, https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/hoca.
Hovhannisian, Richard, and Simon Payaslian. “Armenian Constantinople.” In Armenian
Constantinople, edited by Richard Hovhannisian and Simon Payaslian. USA.:
Mazda Publishers, 2010.
“İfrazciyan” The Redhouse Dictionary Turkish/Ottoman-English. Istanbul: SEV
Yayıncılık Eğitim.
İnalcık, Halil, and Donald Quataert. An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman
Empire 1300-1924. UK: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Jamgoçyan, Onnik. “Les finances de l’Empire Ottoman et les financiers de Constantinople
(1732-1853).” Ph.D. Thesis, Pantheon-Sorbonne University 1988.
———. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflık: Rumlar, Museviler, Frenkler, Ermeniler
(1650-1850). ed. Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2007.
Kabadayı, Erdem. “Mkrdich Cezayirliyan or the Sharp Rise and Sudden Fall of an
Ottoman Entrepreneur.” In Merchants in the Ottoman Empire, edited by Suraiya
Faroqhi and Gilles Veinstein, 281-89. Leuven: Collection Turcica Peeters, 2008.
73
“Kağıt” TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, accessed, April 21, 2022,
https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/kagit.
“Kürkçübaşı” The Redhouse Dictionary Turkish/Ottoman-English. Istanbul: SEV
Yayıncılık Eğitim.
Kayaoğlu, Tacettin. Osmanlı Hariciyesinde Gayr-i Müslimler (1852-1925.) Ankara:
Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, 2013.
Lapçinciyan, Teotoros. Baskı ve Harf: Ermeni Matbaacılık Tarihi. Translated by Sirvart
Malhasyan and Arlet İncidüzen. Edited by Osman Köker. İstanbul: Birzamanlar
Yayıncılık, 2012.
Libaridian, Gerard Jirair. “The Ideology of Armenian Liberation: The Development of
the Armenian Political Thought Before the Revolutionary Movement (1639-1885).”
Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, 1987.
Mıntzuri, Hagop. İstanbul Anıları 1897-1940. Translated by Silva Kuyumcuyan. İstanbul:
Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 1993.
“Mukataa” The Redhouse Dictionary Turkish/Ottoman-English. Istanbul: SEV
Yayıncılık Eğitim.
Olley, Jacob. “Writing Music in Nineteenth-Century Istanbul Ottoman Armenians and
the Invention of Hampartsum Notation.” Unpublished PhD., King’s College London,
2018.
Ozil, Ayşe. “100. Kuruluş Yıldönümünde Zoğrafyon Tarihinden Bir Bölüm.” Tarih ve
Toplum, no. 237 (2003): 16-23.
Özcan, Nuri. “Limonciyan, Hamparsum.” In TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, accessed, March
31, 2022, https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/limonciyan-hamparsum.
Pamuk, Sevket. A Monetary History of the Ottoman Empire. Cambridge University
Press, 2000.
Pamuk, Şevket. “The Evolution of Financial Institutions in the Ottoman Empire,
1600–1914.” Financial History Review Cambridge University Press 11, no. 1 (2004).
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0968565004000022.
———. Osmanlı Ekonomisi ve Kurumları. 8 ed. Istanbul: Türkiye İşbankası Kültür
Yayınları, 2020.
———. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Paranın Tarihi. 3 ed. Istanbul: Türkiye İşbankası
Kültür Yayınları, 2017.
74
Pamukciyan, Kevork. Biyografileriyle Ermeniler Ermeni Kaynaklarından Tarihe
Katkılar. Vol. IV, Istanbul: Aras Yayıncılık, 2003.
Panossian, Razmik. The Armenians: From Kings and Priests to Merchants and Commissars.
New York: Columbia University Press, 2006.
Rozen, Minna. “The Ottoman Jews.” In The Cambridge History of Turkey: The Later
Ottoman Empire, 1603-1839, edited by Suraiya Faroqhi: Cambridge University
Press, 2006.
Sahillioğlu, Halil. “Ceyb-i Hümayun.” TDV İslam Araştırmaları Merkezi, accessed May
1, 2022, https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/ceyb-i-humayun.
Şahiner, Araks. “The Sarrafs of Istanbul Financiers of the Empire.” Unpublished MA
Thesis, Boğaziçi University, 1995.
Santus, Cesare. “Sheykh ül-islam Feyzullah Efendi and the Armenian Patriarch Awetik‘:
a case of entangled confessional disciplining?”. In Entangled Confessionalizations?
Dialogic Perspectives on the Politics of Piety and Community-Building in the Ottoman
Empire, 15th-18th Centuries, edited by Tijana Krstić and Derin Terzioglu,
233-54: Piscataway Gorgian Press, 2022.
Sarıyıldız, Gülden. “Karantina Meclisi’nin Kuruluşu ve Faaliyetleri.” Belleten 58, no.
222 (1994). https://belleten.gov.tr/tam-metin/2303/tur.
“İstanbul Ermeni Patrikanesi.” TDV İslâm Araştırmaları Merkezi, accessed, February
10, 2022, https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/istanbul-ermeni-patrikhanesi.
Somel, Selçuk Akşin. “Kırım Savaşı Islahat Fermanı ve Osmanlı Eğitim Düzeninde
Dönüşümler” Savaştan Barışa: 150. Yıldönümünde Kırım Savaşı ve Paris Antlaşması
(1853-1856 ), Istanbul, 2006.
———.The Modernization of Public Education in the Ottoman Empire 1839-1908: Islamization,
Autocracy and Discipline. Brill, 2021.
———.“Osmanlı Ermenilerinde Kültür Modernleşmesi, Cemaat okulları ve Abdülhamid
Rejimi.” Tarih ve Toplum 5 (2007): 71-92.
Ter Minassian, Anahide. Ermeni Kültürü ve Modernleşme: Şehir, Oyun, Mizah, Aile,
Dil. Istanbul: Aras Yayıncılık, 2006.
Tokat, Osep. Armenian Master Silversmiths. Istanbul: Aras Yayıncılık, 2010.
75
Tuğlacı, Pars. The Role of the Balian Family in Ottoman Architecture. Istanbul: Yeni
Çığır Bookstore, 1990.
Uras, Büke. Balyanlar: Osmanlı Mimarlığı ve Balyan Arşivi. Istanbul: Korpus Yayınları,
2021.
Wharton, Alyson. The Architects of Ottoman Constantinople: The Balyan Family and
the History of Ottoman Architecture. New York: I.B. Tauris, 2015.
Yarman, Arsen, and Ara Aginyan. Sultan II. Mahmud ve Kazaz Artin Amira. Istanbul:
Surp Pırgiç Ermeni Hastanesi Kültür Yayınları 2013.
———. Osmanlı Sağlık Hizmetlerinde Ermeniler ve Surp Pırgiç Ermeni Hastanesi Tarihi.
Istanbul: Surp Pırgiç Ermeni Hastanesi Vakfı, 2001.
Yaycıoğlu, Ali. “Perdenin Arkasındakiler: Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Sarraflar ve Finans
Ağları Üzerine Bir Deneme.” Journal of Turkish Studies 51 (2019).
Zekiyan, Boğos Levon. Ermeniler ve Modernite: Gelenek ve Yenileşme, Özgüllük ve
Evrensellik Arasında Ermeni Kimliği. Translated by Altuğ Yılmaz. Istanbul: Aras
Yayıncılık, 2001.
76
APPENDIX A
Figure A.1 The Düzoğlu Family Tree
77
Compilation of the Prominent Düzoğlu Family Members.
Figure A.2 A list is complied with biographical information provided in Mırmıryan,
Masnagan Badmutyun; Menevişyan, Azkapanutyun Zarmin Düzyants; Barsoumian,
“The Armenian Amira Class of Istanbul;” Pamukciyan, Biyografileriyle Ermeniler,
IV; Ottoman Archives (BOA).
78