【摘要】：19世紀(jì)對于奧斯曼帝國是意義非凡的，在之前的歲月里，帝國所處的國內(nèi)外環(huán)境發(fā)生了天翻地覆的變化。歐洲列強(qiáng)通過改革與革命紛紛走上了資本主義道路，他們將奧斯曼帝國視為首要的瓜分對象。面對不斷強(qiáng)大的歐洲侵略勢力，帝國內(nèi)部的改革卻困難重重，先有蘇丹謝里姆三世想通過軍事改革加強(qiáng)集權(quán)，卻被守舊的近衛(wèi)軍團(tuán)與烏里瑪勢力聯(lián)合趕下臺(tái)，后有馬赫穆德二世雖然通過強(qiáng)硬手段摧毀禁衛(wèi)軍團(tuán)恢復(fù)了權(quán)威，但在內(nèi)憂外患面前舉步維艱，后來，人亡政息改革夭折。盡管如此，在帝國內(nèi)部穆斯林社會(huì)和非穆斯林社會(huì)都在經(jīng)歷著深刻的變化，這種變化一方面促使中東的各方面都朝著現(xiàn)代化方向發(fā)展，另一方面改革也引起了叛亂、起義和獨(dú)立運(yùn)動(dòng)，帝國的政權(quán)在風(fēng)雨中飄搖。帝國改革的方向在哪里？是需要繼續(xù)不斷樹立君主權(quán)威，還是要效仿西歐實(shí)行分權(quán)民主改革？在對未來迷茫之際，帝國迎來了最深刻的一次變革“坦齊馬特”。 面對越來越嚴(yán)峻的國際壓力和國內(nèi)危機(jī)，1839年奧斯曼帝國蘇丹阿卜杜勒·麥吉德一世登基并頒布敕令，宣布改革。坦齊馬特改革內(nèi)容涉及奧斯曼帝國軍事、政治、經(jīng)濟(jì)、宗教、教育等多個(gè)方面。改革分為前后兩個(gè)階段，前期由穆斯塔法·拉希德帕夏主持，后期由阿里和梅赫邁德·福阿德帕夏領(lǐng)導(dǎo)。從坦齊馬特的諸多法令上，我們能看到這次改革十分重視民主建設(shè)以及政策法令的規(guī)范化，如確保臣民生命、財(cái)產(chǎn)的安全，保障臣民的榮譽(yù)和尊嚴(yán)；正確分配和征收稅收；實(shí)施正確的征兵方法并確定服役期限；廢除沒收財(cái)產(chǎn)的做法；法律面前人人平等。這些條令可以說很大一部分是為了改變“非正�！钡募瘷�(quán)措施。因?yàn)樵谔过R馬特之前的馬赫穆德二世時(shí)期，為加強(qiáng)中央集權(quán)政府采用了許多非常手段。坦齊馬特時(shí)期政府頒布政策的目的在于使政令制度化，從而將改革轉(zhuǎn)入正軌。雖然坦齊馬特時(shí)期許多政令都遭到反對派的阻撓與反對，改革進(jìn)行的非常艱難，但是確實(shí)起到了一定的鞏固奧斯曼帝國統(tǒng)治的作用。改革的各方面成績斐然，，這些成果滿足了土耳其資產(chǎn)階級的部分要求，促進(jìn)了資本主義因素的發(fā)展，也造就了新的一批社會(huì)進(jìn)步力量--青年土耳其黨。但改革也有局限性，它并未觸及帝國最根本的傳統(tǒng)政治制度。蘇丹仍然大權(quán)在握，當(dāng)他發(fā)現(xiàn)這種自上而下的改革嚴(yán)重的損害到他的權(quán)力，就是塞繆爾·亨廷頓所提到的君主成為自己成就的犧牲品時(shí)，原來領(lǐng)導(dǎo)改革主張進(jìn)步的蘇丹轉(zhuǎn)而走向了改革的對立面。坦齊馬特時(shí)期分權(quán)民主的發(fā)展并沒有能充分制衡君主的權(quán)力，這次改革結(jié)束幾年后憲政改革失敗，奧斯曼帝國走向滅亡。由此我們得出結(jié)論：在傳統(tǒng)的高度集權(quán)化君主專制國家，想要不改變君主專制而通過自上而下的改革進(jìn)入現(xiàn)代化是很難實(shí)現(xiàn)的。
[Abstract]:The 19th century was of great significance to the Ottoman Empire, where the circumstances at home and abroad had changed dramatically in previous years. European powers have embarked on the capitalist path through reform and revolution, and they see the Ottoman Empire as the primary object of division. In the face of the ever-stronger forces of European aggression, the reform within the empire was fraught with difficulties. First, Sultan Sherim III tried to strengthen centralization through military reform, but was driven out of power by the old guard corps and the Ulima forces. Later, although Mahmud II destroyed the guard corps through hard-line means to restore authority, but in the face of internal and external difficulties, later, the death of the political reform aborted. Nevertheless, both Muslim and non-Muslim societies within the Empire are undergoing profound changes that, on the one hand, have contributed to the modernization of all aspects of the Middle East and, on the other hand, the reform has led to a rebellion. Uprisings and independence movements, the imperial regime fluttered in the wind and rain. Where is the direction of imperial reform? Is it necessary to continue to establish sovereign authority, or to emulate the democratic reform of decentralization in Western Europe? At a time of confusion about the future, the empire ushered in one of the most profound changes, "Tanjimat." Faced with growing international pressure and domestic crisis, the Ottoman Empire Sultan Abdul Mejid I ascended the throne in 1839 and issued a royal decree announcing the reform. The reform involves military, political, economic, religious, educational and other aspects of the Ottoman Empire. The reform was divided into two stages, led by Mustafar Rashid Paxa and later by Ali and Mehmead Foad Pasha. From the many decrees of Tamimat, we can see that the reform attaches great importance to the construction of democracy and the standardization of policies and decrees, such as ensuring the lives of subjects, the safety of property, the protection of honor and dignity of subjects, the correct distribution and collection of taxes; Implement proper methods of conscription and determine the duration of service; abolish confiscation of property; equality before the law. These rules can be said to be in large part to change the "abnormal" centralization measures. Because during the period of Mahmud II before Tanzimat, many extraordinary means were used to strengthen the centralised government. The purpose of the government's policy during the Tamtsmat period was to institutionalize the decree, thus putting reform back on track. Although many of the decrees were blocked and opposed by the opposition, the reform was very difficult, but did play a role in consolidating the Ottoman Empire. The achievements in all aspects of the reform have met some of the requirements of the Turkish bourgeoisie, promoted the development of capitalist factors, and created a new force of social progress, the Al-Shabaab Turkish Party. But reform also has its limitations, and it does not touch upon the most fundamental traditional political system of the empire. The Sudan is still in power, and when he finds that this top-down reform has seriously undermined his power, that the monarch mentioned by Samuel Huntington has been the victim of his own achievements, Sudan, which originally led reform advocates of progress, turned to the opposite of reform. The development of decentralization and democracy did not fully balance the power of the monarch. The constitutional reform failed a few years after the end of the reform, and the Ottoman Empire went to ruin. From this we draw a conclusion: in the traditional high-centralization monarchy, it is very difficult to achieve modernization without changing monarchy and through top-down reform.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：K376.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 張星久;亨廷頓的政治發(fā)展與政治穩(wěn)定思想述評[J];江漢論壇;1997年04期

2 錢乘旦;奧斯曼帝國自我改造的失敗及其原因[J];歷史教學(xué);1999年10期

3 王新剛,于淑云;淺論近代奧斯曼帝國三次改革的歷史背景[J];內(nèi)蒙古民族師院學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)漢文版);1997年01期

4 楊增耀;淺論奧斯曼帝國近代的三次改革[J];西北大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1989年04期

5 劉云;;土耳其政治現(xiàn)代化的歷史軌跡[J];西北師大學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年01期

本文編號：2459201