TURKEY, an extensive empire which comprehends some of the richest portions of Asia, Africa, and Europe, extends nearby 35° from east to west, and above 20° from north to south, and embraces within its limits various separate states, having each its own political and natural boundaries, and differing from each other in laws, language, customs, and religion.
As the modern divisions of this empire, esta blished by the Turks, are altogether artificial, and ill adapted for geographical purposes, it has been considered expedient to adhere to its ancient divi sions in the progress of this work, and we conse quently refer our readers to the articles in the fol lowing table.
Moldavia, Morea, Wallachia, Cambs., Bulgaria, Natolia, Sonia, Caramania, Bosnia, Armenia, Croatia, Georgia, Dalmatia, Curdistan, Albania, Diarbekir, Epirus, Syria, Romania, Palestine, Macedonia, Cyprus, Thessaly, Egypt.
It may, however, be proper to exhibit tables of its modern divisions and population, which we have abridged from M. Malte Brun's Universal Geo graphy.
" It would be vain," says M. Mahe Brun, " to expect a near approximation to the truth in any conjectures which we might indulge respecting the population of a state in which registers and a regu lar census are unknown. Some writers estimate that of European Turkey at twenty-two, while others have reduced it to eight millions, and both assign equally plausible grounds for their opinion. Re specting Asiatic Turkey, the uncertainty, if not still greater, is at least more generally acknowledged. Supposing the houses to be as thinly scattered as in the less populous parts of Spain, the population of all Turkey in Europe, Asia, and Africa, may amount to twenty-five or thirty millions, of which one-half belongs to Asia. Under the want of any thing like positive evidence, we shall not deviate far from probability in allowing to Anatolia five millions; to Armenia two; to Koordistan one; to the pachalics of Bagdat, Mosul, and Diarbekir one and a half; and to Syria 1,800,000, or at most two millions." The Turks can scarcely be said to have a coun try. Since their first establishment in Europe until the present day, they have never almost in any de gree intermixed with the nations which they over came; but have continued a distinct and separate people, oppressing their vanquished subjects with cruelty and scorn, and regarding them as a degraded class, unworthy of exchanging with their conquer ors the civilities of social life. Except in Asia „Mi nor and in Constantinople, the Turks throughout this extensive empire can be regarded only as mili tary colonists. They form the garrisons in the for tresses, or live on their incomes or pay from the government, or on the money which they are con tinually extorting by force,from the unhappy unbe lievers. Thus while the other nations of Europe have been gradually advancing In civilization, in science, and in letters, this people, wrapped up in their own self-sufficiency, despise every improve ment that does not minister to their arrogance and sensuality.
The government of the Turks is a pure despot ism. Both the executive and legislative authorities essentially reside in the sovereign. His spiritual rule, as successor of the caliphs, is implied by the title of (pontiff of Mussulmans), and Padishah Islam (emperor of Islamism) indicates his temporal power. He is the sole fountain of ho nour, for here birth confers no privilege. He raises and debases whom he wills, and disposes of the lives and properties of his subjects. His actions are regarded as prescribed by inevitable fate; and his subjects suffer with resignation, believing that they have neither right nor reason to complain. Indeed it is esteemed an honour, and a passport to paradise, to die by his hand; and some of his mi nisters are said to have courted this martyrdom as the last reward of their faithful services. The Turkish casuists declare, that the sultan is above the law, and attribute to him a character of holi ness which no immoral conduct can destroy. This power is supposed to be balanced in some degree by that of the grand mufti and ulema; but, as Ba ron de Tott observes, though they can interpret the law as they please, and animate the people against their sovereign, he, on the other hand, can with a single word depose and banish the mufti, with as many of the ulema as may fall under his displeasure. The restraints of law and custom form but a feeble barrier against the sallies of pas sion, pride, and selfishness, supported by unlimited power; and hence the sultan is styled by his sub jects yoularsiz arslan, unmuzzled lion." The only effectual check to tyrannical conduct on the part of the sultan is the mob of Constantinople, who freely vent their complaints. Individual petitions are presented to the sultan while on his way to the mosque, where he goes every Friday; but when the complaint is of a general nature, the popular dis content is shown by setting fire to different parts of the city. The sovereign is obliged to appear in person to assist in extinguishing the flames, and then lie is compelled to listen to the public voice, and to hear truths which none of his ministers had dared to breathe. These tumultuous movements, however, seldom stop with the redress of griev ances, but are not unfrequently followed by the deposition or execution of the monarch himself. Hence it is a great object of the government to keep the capital and other great cities in good hu mour; and consequently the price of provisions is always kept at a low rate within their walls, though the provinces should starve to furnish the supply.