In this passage, the author expresses surprise at reading books that praise the honesty and justice of the Turks and describe them as people with strong moral virtues. Some writers, according to the author, admired their discipline, order, and moral behavior. From this praise, a few even suggested that moral life and good behavior were not limited to Christians, and that other societies could also show strong ethical values.
However, the original writer disagrees with this view. He argues that those who praise the Turks too highly may not have carefully studied their history, religion, or daily life. In his opinion, such writers form their judgments without full knowledge. He believes that when people do not understand a culture well, they may create overly positive or overly negative descriptions based on limited information.
In simple terms, this part of the text shows how historical authors often judged other nations through their own religious and cultural beliefs. It also reminds us that historical writings can reflect personal opinions rather than objective facts Guided Istanbul Tour.
The Religion of the Turks in General
Unity of Civil Law and Religion
The text then moves to a general description of the religion of the Turks. It explains that, in their system, civil laws and religious laws were closely connected and often treated as one single body of rules. This means that political authority and religious authority were seen as coming from the same source.
According to the passage, the people believed that their civil laws were given by God through their prophet, just as much as the religious teachings were. Because of this belief, obedience to the law was not only a political duty but also a religious obligation. Citizens were expected to follow the laws of the state with the same seriousness as they followed religious commands.
Historical Comparisons with Other Lawgivers
The author compares this system with earlier lawgivers in history, such as Numa Pompilius and Solon. These figures, according to the text, also connected law with religion in order to strengthen obedience among the people. By presenting laws as sacred, rulers could create a stronger sense of duty and responsibility in society.
The passage suggests that this method of combining religion and law was used in different civilizations, not only among the Turks. It was seen as a way to create social order and stable government.
Laws, Justice, and Divine Authority
The article also states a broader philosophical idea: that all laws related to justice and good government ultimately come from God. The author argues that political authority, whether in Christian, pagan, or other societies, exists under divine permission. Therefore, rulers and governments are part of a larger moral order.
This idea leads to the conclusion that people are expected to obey the laws of their country, even if their rulers are imperfect or harsh. According to the text, obedience is not cancelled simply because a ruler is unjust or because the laws are not perfectly reasonable. Instead, the stability of society depends on respecting authority and maintaining order.
A Historical Perspective
Overall, the corrected article explains that the original text mixes religious, political, and philosophical ideas. It reflects the mindset of an earlier time, when writers often judged other religions and governments through their own beliefs. Today, such texts should be read as historical documents that show how people in the past understood law, religion, and political power, rather than as neutral or fully accurate descriptions of any society.