Several times, the Ottoman authorities considered changing the system of government in these three provinces. There were discussions about placing them directly under the control of Turkish Pashas, instead of allowing them to be ruled by local Christian princes. This change would have gone against the original agreements, or capitulations, made when these provinces first accepted Ottoman rule.
According to those early agreements, the provinces were allowed to keep a certain level of self-government under their own princes, as long as they paid tribute and remained loyal to the Sultan. However, over time, some Ottoman leaders thought it might be better to rule them more directly.
In the end, they decided not to make this change. The existing system was seen as more profitable and more useful for the interests of the empire Private Tours Balkan.
Christians Governing Christians
Under the current system, Christian princes ruled over Christian people, but these princes were appointed and controlled by the Ottoman Empire. This arrangement had certain advantages for the Turks. When oppression or heavy taxation took place, it was often carried out by a Christian ruler against his own people.
In this way, Christians became the instruments of suffering for their own brothers. Outrages, heavy taxes, and acts of injustice could be carried out more boldly. The Ottoman authorities could also send Turkish officers on profitable missions whenever they wished. These officials often found opportunities for personal gain.
Because the local prince had limited power and depended on the Sultan for his position, he was more likely to collect heavy taxes and demand payments in order to secure his own wealth and favor.
Why a Pasha Was Not Appointed
If a Turkish Pasha had been appointed as governor, the situation might have been different. A Pasha, as an official of the Ottoman state, would have considered it his duty and honor to protect the people under his rule. His reputation and authority would have been connected to their safety and order.
In that case, the provinces might have suffered less from extortion and violence. A Pasha might have acted as a true protector and patron. This could have reduced some of the misery and injustice.
However, from the Ottoman point of view, the present condition was more beneficial. As long as the provinces remained weak, divided, and dependent, they were easier to control. The people were allowed to imagine that direct Ottoman rule under a Pasha would be gentler and more just. But in reality, they were kept in a state of hardship, which better served the political and financial interests of the empire.
Thus, the system remained unchanged, not for the good of the people, but for the advantage of the state.