THE PHANARIOTE SYSTEM IN MOLDAVIA AND WALLACHIA UNDER THE OTTOMAN RULE

. Dobruja, Moldavia and Wallachia remained under the Ottoman sovereignty for more than 400 years. Dobruja was inhabited mostly by Turks and Muslims, and was administered by Muslim-Turkish governors assigned directly from the Sublime Porte. However, Wallachia and Moldavia were inhabited overwhelmingly by Christian-Orthodox people and were governed by local voivodes designated by the Ottoman Sultans. These voivodeships were autonomous entities in their internal affairs but were dependent to the Ottoman State in their foreign affairs. Upon the betrayal of the Moldavian prince during the Pruth River campaign of 1710-1711, the Ottoman authorities were compelled to implement the Phanariote System which lasted until 1821. Following the abolition of the Phanariote System, the Ottoman authorities returned to the previous method of appointing local princes which, in turn, lasted until the independence of modern Romania. Upon the independence of Romania in 1878, the Ottoman Empire had to switch to a new form of relationship with this newborn state. As a result, these two states resumed their relations through diplomatic means and, in its modern sense, the Turkish-Romanian diplomatic relations were established.


Introduction
The first Turkish settlers arrived in the Balkans in the 4 th century through migrations and wars [1]. i Contrary to the first Turkish settlers who inhabited the region temporarily, the Ottoman Empire transformed the Balkans, as a result of its conquest and settlement policies, to a permanent homeland. When the Ottoman Empire started to rule the Dobruja, Wallachia and Moldavia, the Turkish-Romanian relations gained new dimensions in political, administrative and economic terms. Especially within the scope of the settlement policy pursued in Dobruja, the Muslim-Turkish population in this region became dominant and, as a result, the Dobruja region was governed directly by Muslim-Turkish administrators appointed from the capital. On the other hand, Wallachia and Moldavia which were inhabited overwhelmingly by Christian-Orthodox people were administered through the local voivodes (also named as hospodar) [2] ii appointed by the Sublime Porte. These two principalities were considered autonomous entities in their internal affairs, but were subject to the Ottoman State in their foreign affairs. This autonomous status of voivodeships continued until the independence of Romania in 1878.
In the first part of this article, the historical background of the Ottoman rule in Dobruja, Wallachia and Moldavia will be explained and, in this context, their different administrative status will be assessed. In the second part, the transition to the Phanariote System in Moldavia and Wallachia, and subsequently the dissolution of the Phanariote System in the principalities will be explored. Ottoman archive sources on Moldavia and Wallachia are primarily utilized within the framework of this study. This article aims to bring clarity to the relation between the Phanariote System and the Turkification process of the Ottoman foreign bureaucracy.

The Status of Dobruja, Wallachia and Moldovia Under the Ottoman rule
The Ottomans granted different administrative status to communities with different ethnic and religious identities and developed a flexible administrative management mechanism. Dobruja, inhabited mostly by Muslim-Turks, was directly attached to the capital and Muslim governors were assigned to Dobruja by the Sublime Porte. On the other hand, Wallachia and Moldavia which were densely populated by Christian-Orthodox people were governed as autonomous principalities. Local boyars, [3] iii native Christian-Orthodox nobles, were appointed by the Sublime Porte as rulers to these principalities. Within the framework of this autonomous status, Wallachia and Moldavia were free in their internal affairs but dependent in their foreign affairs. These voivodeships appear as autonomous units that collectively pay taxes to the Ottoman Empire and contribute to the Ottoman army in wartimes.

Dobruja: A Region Directly Attached to the Sublime Porte
Dobruja [4] iv has been strategically an important region throughout the history. The shortest land route from Rumelia to the steppes of Ukraine and Russia, as well as from Russia and Ukraine to Rumelia, and therefore to Istanbul, passes through Dobruja [5]. v The Ottomans utilized this strategic region in their expeditions to Poland and Russia, and also for their cooperation with the Crimean Khanate. The Dobruja region served also as a buffer zone for the Ottoman Empire against the European powers and Russia. Dobruja passed to the Ottoman rule in 1394 during the reign of Yıldırım Beyazıt [6]. vi After the conquest of Dobruja, Yıldırım Beyazıt brought the nomad Turks (Yoruk) from Anatolia and the Tatars from the north of the Black Sea, and settled them in the region. These settlement processes were pursued during the reign of Beyazıt II and Yavuz Sultan Selim as well [7]. vii As a matter of fact, the most intensive Ottoman settlement activities in the Balkans were implemented in the Dobruja region [8]. viii The Dervishes (Muslim clerics), forefront military groups (Akıncılar) and nomadic Turks were the main settler groups. In addition to these groups, the tribes that caused trouble in various parts of Anatolia were also exiled to and resettled in this region. Accordingly, the Muslim-Turkish population in Dobruja had increased and become dominant. The censuses conducted in the 19 th century reveals that most of the villages in Dobruja and Deliorman, especially in the northeast of the Balkans, had Turkish names [9] ix and their populations were predominantly composed of Muslims [10]. x The Dobruja region was directly attached to the mainland and was administered by Muslim governors appointed from the Sublime Porte. The military and civil administrative structures were organized in line with the Ottoman mainland's system. As a result of this, Ottoman cadastral registers were kept and judges (kadı) were assigned to solve judicial problems among Muslims. In 1850, Dobruja was composed of Silistra and Varna sandjaks [11]  Populated largely by Christian-Orthodox people, the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia, named also as "Memleketeyn" [23], xxiii were granted autonomous status within the Ottoman Empire. Unlike Temeşvar, Budin, Aegean Islands and Bosnia, these two principalities were not ruled by Muslim administrators appointed from the Sublime Porte [24]. xxiv Instead, they were ruled by voivodes who shared the same faith and ethnicity with the local people. The Ottoman Empire did not directly intervene in the internal affairs of Wallachia and Moldavia, did not pursue a settlement policy towards these two voivodeships, did not try to Islamize its people, and did not allow Turks to buy land and build mosques in these territories [25]. xxv In return for this autonomous status [26], xxvi the voivodes of Wallachia and Moldavia agreed to regularly pay taxes to the Ottoman Empire, to grant commercial concessions, to supply basic agricultural products and to provide military support in time of war [27]. xxvii The voivodes were kept in their positions as long as they preserved their loyalty to the Ottoman State and paid their taxes regularly. After the decease of a voivode, mostly his son or his brother was appointed to replace him [28]. xxviii The Ottoman State developed also a hostage mechanism within the scope of the voivode nominations. Accordingly, those who were appointed as voivodes left their sons or close relatives as hostages to the Ottoman palace [29]. xxix This mechanism was developed as a precautionary method to prevent the probable treason attempts of voivodes. Although the Ottoman Empire resorted to such measures in order to thwart the betrayal of voivodes, the increasing influence of Russia and the changes in the regional power balances pushed the voivodes to seek new alliances. When the Wallachian and Moldavian princes collaborated with the Russians in the Pruth campaign of 1710-1711, the Ottoman authorities decided to revise the nomination procedure of the voivodes.

The Phanariote System: the Assignment of Ottoman Officers with Orthodox-Greek Origins Instead of the Local Princes
The Ottoman Empire, for almost three centuries, pursued the policy of designating local princes to administrate Wallachia and Moldavia. This policy was in compliance not only with its multi-cultural and multi-national structure but also with its traditional tendency to recognize an autonomous status to the communities which adhere to different religions and ethnicities. However, the Ottoman authorities were compelled to amend this policy and invent a new system to administrate these two principalities.
The Ottoman authorities' trust in the local princes was deeply shaken when it was revealed that the Wallachian and the Moldavian voivodes had collaborated with the Russians during the Pruth War. Due to the betrayal of local princes, the Ottoman State developed a new method of nomination for these principalities, which would be called later the "Phanariote System". In this new system, the Greeks of Phanar (a district of Istanbul and historical center of the Orthodox Patriarchate) were assigned as administrators to Wallachia and Moldavia. The Ottoman authorities opted for this new system because the Ottoman subjects of Phanar were being employed for a long time as dragomans (translator) in the bureaucracy and therefore they were deemed reliable and loyal officers to the state. In addition to this, the Greeks of Phanar [30] xxx shared the same religion and sect with the people of Wallachia and Moldavia. This aspect also played a crucial role in the adoption and implementation of this new assignment system.

Transition to the Phanariote System
The Moldavian voivode Dimitrie Cantemir [31] xxxi who collaborated with Russians against the Ottomans during the Pruth War sought refuge in Russia. After this incident, the Ottoman authorities were aware that they could no longer trust in local princes. The Ottoman State deemed it an urgent necessity to take measures against the possible betrayal of local princes and sought an alternative solution to designate the successor of the Moldavian voivode. In this context, the Ottoman capital appointed Ioan Mavrocordat, the Phanariote Greek translator of the Divan-ı Hümayun (Ottoman Council of Ministers), as voivode to Moldavia in 1710. Mavrocordat was urgently dispatched to the city of Iasi in accordance with the Sultan's ferman (imperial edict), and thus the Moldavian principality had begun to be administered by the aforementioned Phanariote Greek officer [32]. xxxii After Ioan Mavrocordat's temporary assignment, his elder brother Nicolae Mavrocordat was permanently assigned to Moldavia. The Phanariote system, which the Ottoman Empire considered more reliable and trustworthy, was thus in the process of institutionalization in Moldavia as of 1711 [33,34]. xxxiii After Cantemir's treason, the Ottoman authorities were suspicious about the loyalty of the Wallachian voivode Constantin Brancoveanu as well. But, as they were not fully convinced yet on Brancoveanu's disloyalty, they preferred to closely watch his acts. In 1714, when it was finally revealed that he was colluding with the Russians, he was removed from office. He was arrested and brought to Istanbul with his four sons. They were executed in Istanbul in the same year [35,36]. xxxiv Mirahor Mehmed Ağa who was ordered to execute the sentence of Brancoveanu was given a ferman to appoint a voivode on site. In the imperial edict, the name of the voivode was left blank and Mirahor Mehmed Ağa was granted the authorization to

Dissolution of the Phanariote System
As of 1750s and afterwards, the Phanariote Greek rulers of Wallachia and Moldavia, in cooperation with the Phanar Greek Patriarchate, sought to revive Byzantium, and in this respect, tried to spread Greek and neo-Byzantine nationalism. The political, intellectual and economic environment of the Phanariote-led principalities constituted an ideal atmosphere for the dissemination of these ideas [39]. xxxvii Although the Ottoman Empire tried to take various measures against these nationalist activities, its influence remained limited due to the interventions of Russia. With the conclusion of the Küçük Kaynarca (today a town in Bulgaria) Treaty in 1774, the Ottoman Empire accepted to consult the Russians with regard to the nomination of voivodes to Wallachia and Moldavia. The Russian Tsardom received also the right to open consulates in the principalities and to conduct free trade with them. The Ottomans were troubled with the Russian interference to the principalities. During the 19 th century, Russia continued to expand and further consolidate its sphere of influence in the region. Upon the shifts in the regional power equilibrium and the Pan-Slavist policies pursued by Russia, the Phanariote rulers became more prone to collaborate with the Russians. In August 1806, when the Ottoman authorities decided to dismiss pro-Russian Phanariote rulers Alexandre Mourouzi (in some texts Mouzuri) and Constantin Ipsilanti (in some texts Ypsilanti) [40], xxxviii respectively rulers of Wallachia and Moldavia, Russia immediately displayed its firm reaction to these revocations. Upon the pressure and war menace of Russians, the Ottoman State was compelled to reinstate Mourouzi and Ipsilanti [41]. xxxix Despite their reinstatement, Russia launched a surprise attack [42,43] xl against the Ottoman Empire in November 1806. The Russian troops crossed the Dniester River and occupied Wallachia and Moldavia [44]. xli The Ottoman-Russian war (1806-1812) which lasted for six years ended with the signing of the Bucharest Treaty in 1812. According to this treaty, Akkerman, Kili and Bender which were located in the eastern part of Moldavia were left to Russia, in return for ending its occupation in Wallachia and Moldavia [45]. xlii Nevertheless, Russia continued to be influential on the Phanariote Greek rulers and to abuse the Orthodox population in Wallachia and Moldavia as an alibi to intervene in the internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire. The latter which lacked the required capacity to control effectively the principalities assessed that the Phanariote system should be dissolved definitively [46]. xliii The uprising led by Tudor Vladimirescu [47] xliv against the Phanariote rulers in 1821 was considered an opportunity to put an end to the Phanariote era [48]. xlv Thus, the Phanariote system was eventually dissolved and the previous method, more precisely the designation of local princes, was revitalized [49]. xlvi The Phanariote system which was initiated during the reign of Ahmet III was abolished in 1821, during the reign of Mahmut II.
On the other hand, it should be noted that the Greek revolt which started in the Peloponnese peninsula in the same year was also determinant on the decision of the Ottoman authorities because the Phanariote rulers in Wallachia and Moldavia were striving for the independence of Greece and supporting the Greek nationalist movements. Upon these evolutions, apart from the dissolution of the Phanariote order, the Greeks were also deposed from the dragoman duties. In 1821, a separate and new translation office, composed of Muslim-Turks, was established for the Sublime Porte. Yahya Naci Efendi, professor at Mühendishane-i Hümayun (Imperial Engineering School), and his son Ruhiddin Efendi were assigned as directors to this new translation office [50]. xlvii They were entrusted with the task to manage and reorganize the translation office which would be the nucleus of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the future. As a result, the dissolution of the Phanariote system accelerated the Islamization and Turkification process of the Ottoman foreign affairs bureaucracy [51,52]. xlviii

Conclusions
Wallachia and Moldavia, the two principalities which were granted autonomous status under the Ottoman rule, were initially governed by local Orthodox voivodes. However, when it was revealed that the local voivodes had collaborated with the Russians during the Pruth War, the Ottoman authorities decided to appoint Phanariote Greeks to replace them. The Greeks of Phanar had been employed for long time as dragomans in the Ottoman bureaucracy. In that sense, they were considered reliable and loyal Ottoman subjects. Besides this, they were Christian-Orthodox and shared the same faith with the local people of Wallachia and Moldavia. Thus, as of 1711 in Moldavia and as of 1715 in Wallachia, the Phanariote era began in the Memleketeyn.
However, in the 1750s, the Phanariote Greek rulers started to support the Greek nationalist movements and to finance Greek revolutionary activities in the Ottoman lands. They also sought covert alliances with the Russian Tsardom which was becoming more influential in the region. With the conclusion of the Küçük Kaynarca Treaty in 1774, Russia became an important factor in the process of the nomination of the Phanariote Greeks to Wallachia and Moldavia. The Russian interference on the issue was further consolidated with the Bucharest Treaty of 1812. Finally, the Ottoman authorities were compelled to reconsider the Phanariote system. The Ottoman State abondoned the Phanariote system in 1821 and returned to the policy of appointing local princes.
Both under the rule of local princes and the Phanariote Greeks, Wallachia and Moldavia maintained their autonomous status. They were free in their internal affairs but dependent on the Ottoman Empire in their foreign relations. During these two consecutive periods, the relationship between the Ottoman State and the principalities was characterized by the subordination of the latter. Therefore, it is not possible to qualify this relationship as a diplomatic relation in its modern sense.
On the other hand, the Phanariote System had crucial consequences on the Ottoman foreign affairs bureaucracy in long term. The collaboration of Phanariotes with the Russians demonstrated to the Ottoman authorities the importance of having Muslim-Turkish officers in the foreign affairs bureaucracy. Upon the dissolution of the Phanariote System and the Greek revolt of 1821, a new translation office was founded for the Sublime Porte. This new translation office was managed by Muslim-Turks and its employees were mainly Muslim-Turks. Thus, the Phanariote System triggered the Turkification of the Ottoman foreign affairs bureaucracy.