In Ottoman – British Commercial Relations Efforts to Increase Cotton Production in Smyrna and Its Surroundings (1855–1870)

ABSTRACT

During the mid–19th century, cotton production and trade became increasingly important in and around Smyrna. This was due to a combination of factors, including favourable climate conditions, fertile plains in the region, and international demand from England and other European countries. These countries were unable to purchase American cotton due to the American Civil War, which made cotton produced in Smyrna even more valuable and in demand. The purpose of this study is to examine the changes and developments in cotton production and trade in Smyrna between 1855–1870, with a particular focus on the general course of Anglo—Ottoman commercial relations during this period. The sources used for this study include the Ottoman Archives, British Press, official publications, and reports. This study aims to shed light on the economic and commercial history of Smyrna during this period, by analysing the factors that contributed to the growth of cotton production and trade in the region. By examining the primary sources available, we can gain a better understanding of the social, political, and economic context in which cotton production and trade took place, and the impact it had on the local and international economy.

KEYWORDS:

• Ottoman empire
• cotton production
• international trade
• Great Britain
• Western Anatolia

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

[1] Laura Panza, ‘Globalization and the Near East: A Study of Cotton Market Integration in Egypt and Western Anatolia’, The Journal of Economic History, 73(3), 2013, p. 847

[2] Ö. Teoman and M. Kaymak, ‘Commercial Agriculture and Economic Change in the Ottoman Empire During the Nineteenth Century: A Comparison of Raw Cotton Production in Western Anatolia and Egypt’, The Journal of Peasant Studies, (35)2, 2008, pp. 321–322.

[3] Wyndham Dunstan, Report on Agriculture in Asia Minor, no. 578, London, 1908, pp. 1–17.

[4] Reşat Kasaba, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu ve Dünya Ekonomisi, Belge Press, İstanbul, 1993, p.77; Melih Gürsoy, ‘Son Yıllarda İzmir’de Ekonomi’, in N. Ülker, ed, II. Uluslararası İzmir Sempozyumu– Tebliğler, İzmir, 1998, p. 81.

[5] Dunstan, op. cit., pp. 1–17.

[6] Leeds Mercury, 9 November 1858, p. 1.

[7] Zeki Arıkan, ‘Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda İhracı Yasak Mallar (Memnu Meta)’, Prof. Dr. Bekir Kütükoğlu’na Armağan, İstanbul, 1991, pp. 279–280.

[8] Osmanlı Ziraat ve Ticaret Gazetesi, 23 April 1907.

[9] Dunstan, op. cit., pp. 1–17.

[10] ‘İzmir’de Pamuk Ziraati’, İzmir Ticaret Müdüriyeti, İzmir, 1922, p. 6; However, during the 19th century, people in Smyrna and its hinterland preferred local cotton planting more, as it was easier to collect them. Dunstan, op. cit., pp. 1–17; İzmir Ticaret Müdüriyeti, op. cit., p. 7.

[11] İzmir Ticaret Müdüriyeti, op. cit., p. 6.

[12] Animals that were harmful to cotton production also affected production. In particular, crickets from insects were the most harmful animals of cotton seedlings. Mole cricket was also damaging the seeds. Animals such as rabbits, hares, field mice, lambs and goats were among the other animals that damaged cotton seedlings. Many kinds of plant worms were also adversely affecting the cotton crop. The most important of these was the cotton worm, which damaged the cotton seedlings and the shells of the cotton bolls. ‘Pamuk Ziraati’, Matbaa–yı Amire, İstanbul, 1911, pp. 23–24; The heavy rains that occurred in 1865 caused great damage to the farmers planting cotton in Smyrna and its surroundings, and one third of the cotton products became unusable. Due to this natural disaster, roads were damaged, and transportation was disrupted. Farmers planted cotton instead of grain that year, but soon those crops were also badly damaged by the spring rains. Accounts and Papers, 59, Smyrna, 1866, p. 598; The farmers who planted more grain in their fields instead of cotton in 1866 were less affected by the strong winds that took place in July that year and the villagers who continued to plant cotton lost nearly half of their crops due to these winds. Accounts and Papers, 68, Smyrna, 1867, p. 228. While the flood disaster in 1868 caused the rivers to overflow and the settlements to be flooded, the Gediz river changed its flow in the past years, causing landslides, and left the agricultural workers in a difficult situation. Accounts and Papers, 74, Smyrna, 1870, p. 84.

[13] İzmir Ticaret Müdüriyeti, op. cit., p. 7.

[14] Ibid., p. 31.

[15] Mehmet Başaran, Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e Tire, İzmir, 2000, p. 151.

[16] Accounts and Papers, 78, Smyrna, 1883, p. 1052.

[17] Dunstan, op. cit., p. 1–17.

[18] Arıkan, op. cit., p.279–280; Meanwhile, cotton continued to be an important subsistence item throughout the 19th century, not only in European markets, but also throughout the Ottoman Empire. Even at the beginning of the 20th century, 85,000 okas of cotton sent from Adana and Aydin were used in Fabrika–yı Hümayuns, which produced tents for the Ottoman army. The importance of Smyrna and its hinterland in agricultural production was great for Constantinople. If the fleece wool and cotton production is delayed, 2000 workers in the factories in Constantinople will be unemployed, so an official letter about paying attention to timely dispatch reveals this importance. BOA. Y. MTV 250/37 (1903).

[19] In the sultan’s palace, it is the supreme decision institution that includes the sultan, viziers and some other statesmen.

[20] Daniel Goffman, İzmir ve Levanten Dünya (1550–1650), İstanbul, 1995, p. 6, 26 and 31.

[21] Leeds Mercury, 9 November 1858, p. 1.

[22] Olcay Pullukçuoğlu Yapucu, Modernleşme Sürecinde Bir Sancak: Aydın, İstanbul, 2007, pp. 203–211.

[23] Mehmet Bulut, ‘Osmanlı Ekonomi Politiği’ne Yeniden Bir Bakış’, Bilig, 62, 2012, p. 77.

[24] Orhan Kurmuş, Emperyalizmin Türkiye’ye Girişi, Savaş Press, Ankara, 1982, p. 122.

[25] E. F. Syrett, ‘İzmir’de Pamuk ve Kumaş Ticareti’, in Ç. Keyder and F. Tabak (eds), Osmanlı’da Toprak Mülkiyeti ve Ticari Tarım, Tarih Vakfı Yurt Press, İstanbul, 1998, p. 101–102.

[26] Leeds Mercury, 09 November 1858, p. 1.

[27] Dunstan, op. cit., pp. 1–17.

[28] Syrett, op. cit., p. 101.

[29] Glasgow Herald, 21 August 1862, p. 2.

[30] Syrett, op. cit., p. 101.

[31] Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 61.

[32] Until the 1840s, cotton production in Anatolia remained around 8 thousand bales, of which only 2 thousand 3 thousand bales were exported, while the rest was consumed in the Ottoman domestic market. As the amount of exported cotton decreased, cotton prices increased. Saint James’s Chronicle, 12 November 1861, 8.

[33] Gürsoy, op. cit., p. 53.

[34] Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 28 and 61.

[35] Yapucu, op. cit., pp. 88–95.

[36] For detailed information see. Gürsoy, op. cit., p. 120. Also see. Reşat Kasaba, ‘Sivil Toplumun Ekonomik Temelleri: Batı Anadolu Ticaretinde Rumlar’, Dünya, İmparatorluk ve Toplum, Dünya, İmparatorluk ve Toplum, İstanbul, 2005, p. 77.

[37] Murat Baskıcı, 1800–1914 Yıllarında Anadolu’da İktisadi Değişim, Turhan Press, İstanbul, 2005, p. 130–131.

[38] BOA. A. MKT. MHM. 3/5 (1848).

[39] Bernard Collas, 1864’te Türkiye, İstanbul: 2005, p. 167.

[40] BOA. MKT. UM. 213/ 87 (1855).

[41] Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 60.

[42] Kasaba, op. cit., p. 77. Lancashire cotton mills needed abundant and cheap cotton to sustain their production. In order to find new cotton production areas, British companies started to operate all over the world and especially in the Aegean. While the Manchester Cotton Supply Association was looking for ways to increase cotton production, a survey was made through the consulates to determine this issue on the spot. One of the most promising answers came from the Smyrna consulate. According to the report, it was stated that cotton production could increase drastically if American cotton seeds and practical help could be provided to producers. Gürsoy, op. cit., p. 53.

[43] Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 82.

[44] Ibid., p. 62.

[45] Tevfik Güran, ‘Ziraî Politika ve Ziraatte Gelişmeler 1839–1876’, in H.D. Yıldız (ed), 150. Yılında Tanzimat, Ankara, 1992, p. 225.

[46] C. Duru and K. Turan and A. Öngeoğlu, Atatürk Dönemi Maliye Politikası, vol. 1, TISA Press, Ankara, 1982, p. 122.

[47] Daily News (London), 5 October 1858, p. 2.

[48] Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 62.

[49] Leeds Mercury, 9 November 1858, p. 1.

[50] Daily News (London), 5 October 1858, p. 2.

[51] BOA. İ. HR 160 / 8533 (1858).

[52] Daily News (London), 5 October 1858, p. 2.

[53] London Evening Standard, 30 October 1861, p. 7.

[54] Glasgow Herald, 21 August 1862, p. 2.

[55] Dundee Courier, 30 August 1864, p. 4.

[56] Panza, op. cit., p. 850; Dunstan, op. cit., pp. 1–17.

[57] Baskıcı, op. cit., pp. 130–131.

[58] Morning Post, 11 November 1861, p. 8.

[59] Saint James’s Chronicle, 12 November 1861, p. 8.

[60] BOA. A. MKT. MVL 144/58 (1861); Panza, op. cit., p. 855.

[61] Glasgow Herald, 21 August 1862, p. 2.

[62] Daily News (London), 25 August 1862, p. 2.

[63] Morning Chronicle, 6 January 1862, p. 5.

[64] Daily News (London), 13 August 1864, p. 6.

[65] BOA. İ. HR. 196/ 11165 (1862).

[66] ‘Pamuk Ziraatinin İlerletilmesi Hakkında Talimat’, Düstur, 1(2), 1862, p. 437; Panza, op. cit., p. 856.

[67] Düstur, op. cit., p. 437.

[68] BOA. İ. MVL 487 /22071 (1280) 1863.

[69] Bülent Varlık, 19. Yüzyılda Emperyalizmin Batı Anadolu’da Yayılması, Ankara, 1976, p. 50.

[70] BOA. A. MKT. MHM 292 /34 (1280) 1863; BOA. A. MKT. MHM 294/ 71 (1280) 1863.

[71] Daily News (London), 17 September 1863, p. 8.

[72] Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 107; Melih Gürsoy, ‘İzmir Sanayisinin Geçmişi ve Bugünü’, in T. Baykara, ed, Son Yüzyıllarda İzmir ve Batı Anadolu Sempozyumu Tebliğleri, İzmir, 1993, p. 128.

[73] Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 67.

[74] Mübahat Kütükoğlu, ‘Tanzimat Devrinde Yabancıların İktisadi Faaliyetleri’, in H.D. Yıldız (ed), 150. Yılında Tanzimat, Ankara, 1992, p. 107.

[75] Kurmuş, op. cit., pp. 109–111.

[76] İzmir Ticaret Müdüriyeti, op. cit., p. 11–12.

[77] Kurmuş, Emperyalizmin, p. 109–111.

[78] Kurmuş, Emperyalizmin, p. 108.

[79] BOA. İ. MVL 504 / 22829 (1280) 1863; BOA. İ. MVL 516 /23260 (1281) 1864.

[80] Glasgow Herald, 5 August 1864, p. 6.

[81] Beverley and East Riding Recorder, 3 September 1864, p. 2.

[82] South London Chronicle, 3 September 1864, p. 3.

[83] Abdullah Martal, Değişim Sürecinde İzmir’de Sanayileşme, Dokuz Eylül Press, İzmir, 1999, p. 110. The reasons for the gradual decrease in production and thus in exports were tried to be explained in the same way by the writers of the period. For example, according to Namık Kemal, the villagers described the government’s measures to encourage cotton production as a new trick of the Ottoman government, and did not give due importance to cotton production, thinking that they would eventually regret their actions. According to A. Bonne, the Middle Eastern villagers had a deep sense of distrust towards the Government. ‘According to the peasants, every new affliction of the government is either a trick to get more taxes or a deception aimed at a goal that may be more detrimental to the peasants’. For more information, see. Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 68.

[84] Pontypool Free Press, 20 July 1867, p. 2.

[85] Baskıcı, op. cit., pp. 130–131.

[86] BOA. İ. HR 219 /12721. (1865); BOA. İ. DH 533 / 36960. (1864).

[87] BOA. A. MKT. MHM 325 /2. (1864).

[88] ‘Ziraat Müdürlerinin Vezaifine Dair Talimat’, Düstur, 1(2), 1864, p. 435.

[89] Glasgow Herald, 29 August 1864, p. 6.

[90] Daily News (London), 13 August 1864, p. 6.

[91] Kasaba, op. cit., p. 77 and 79.

[92] H. Şölen and A. Gökbel, Aydın İli Tarihi, 1, Aydın, 1936, p. 18.

[93] If the cotton seed that should come from Aydin to Gemlik does not come, agriculture cannot be done in the places where the relevant seed will be given, and the issue of the supply of cotton seeds to be brought from Aydin has been reported to Aydin twice, since no response has been received yet, if this situation continues, the places that will plant cotton seeds in Aydin will not be able to cultivate cotton, because 5000 oka cotton seeds should be sent to Gemlik within 10 days at the latest, when the time to sow the seeds has started to pass. BOA. A. MKT. MHM. 296/ 80. (1864); This situation remained unchanged until the end of the century. These fine cottons of Aydin attracted great interest, especially from Russia and Greece, and even cotton bales from Aydin and Söke were sold more expensive than cotton from other towns and centres in the Western region of the Ottoman Empire. Hizmet, 24 June 1891.

[94] İzmir Ticaret Müdüriyeti, op. cit., p. 4.

[95] Baskıcı, op. cit., p. 130–131.

[96] Accounts and Papers, 60, İzmir, 1864, p. 123.

[97] BOA. A. MKT. 303 /7 (1281). 1864.

[98] BOA. İ. MVL 571 / 25664 (1283) 1866; By 1870, 34 factories had emerged, all of them located in cities on the railroad. Almost all of these factories, which used more than 700 cotton gins, were powered by steam. Gürsoy, op. cit., p. 54–55; Technical developments in cotton production in Smyrna and its surroundings were also followed closely by the British public. In the middle of 1874, some newspapers shared the following information about the situation of cotton cleaning factories in and around Smyrna: ‘Works on the cotton spinning factory planned to be built in Smyrna continue at full speed. The Muslim population in Bergama is against the cotton spinning mill, such attempts undermine their business. A Greek merchant in Bergama got permission to establish this factory in the region where Muslims live. The Turks came together and declared that they would use force if necessary to prevent the construction of this factory. The local government refuses to revoke the factory’s building permit. Even though the Muslims removed the workers working in the construction of the factory from the construction site, the construction continues. Because of public order, pressure started to occur among the Christian elements in the region, Rugby Advertiser, 26 September 1874, p. 2; Manchester Evening News, 24 September 1874, p. 4; It is understood from an official state statistic of the end of the 19th century that the industrialization efforts of non–Muslims in Smyrna and its surroundings, related to cotton production, were successful. In these statistics, which shows the official censuses of the Ottoman state, Çamurcuoğlu Eftim and his partner and Pamukçu Hristo and his partner Murino have separate cotton factories of 7 and 12 horsepower in Bergama. In addition, Boskovic Çamuroğlu Piraşküve, İstilyo and his partner in Kınık, the Dutch Hifter in Tire, Perikli, Vagıç, Corci Orfanos, in Bayındır under the management of Vasil Pandeli, owned by Kasapoğlu Eniste, Haci Andon and Vayteman in Menemen, Balyozzade Karabet and Matyos, Hacı Sarandi and his brother Hacı Kokuli in the center of Manisa, Bedus Ditalidi, Damustini from Smyrna, Paraşkuli, Yendiyadi, Baracuni in Kasaba, Hikem Yango in Soma, Ohannes and his partner in Kırkağaç, İstavraki Lazupolu was also operating in Nazilli [Atça]. Local Muslim capital owners were also quick to seize this profitable business opportunity. Hacı Şeyhzade Hacı Ahmed is in Nazilli, Hacı Hüseyin Ağa and Uzunoğulları are in Bergama were the owners of a steam cotton cleaning factory. Salname–i Vilayet–i Aydın, 1891, pp. 758–761.

[99] Dunstan, op. cit., p. 1–17.

[100] Şölen and Gökbel, op. cit., p. 18.

[101] Glasgow Herald, 17 July 1867, p. 3.

[102] BOA. Y. PRK. TŞF. 5/ 78 (1898).

[103] Murat Baskıcı, ‘Osmanlı Tarımında Makineleşme: 1874–1914’, Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 58(1), January–March, 2003, p. 32; After this briefing, in the last thirty years of the 19th century, the British bought quite large lands from Smyrna and its hinterland to engage in agricultural production and trade related to agriculture. G. Meredith, 12,000 decares from Aydin, J. Aldrich, 6,000 decares from Aydin, Asia Minor Cotton Company, 36,800 decares from Nazilli, C. Gregoriades, 5,160 decares from Ayasuluk, J. H. Hutchinson, 1556 decares from Tire, F. Whittall, 18,868 decares from Tire, A. S. Perkins, 16360 decares from Bornova, A. Edwards, 80,000 decares from Buca and Baltazzi had purchased 82,000 decares of land from Bergama. Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 80.

[104] Liverpool Mercury, 21 July 1863, p. 6.

[105] Newcastle Courant, 8 May 1863, p. 8.

[106] Freeman’s Journal, 8 May 1863, p. 2.

[107] Kurmuş, op. cit., p. 65.

[108] Accounts and Papers, 66, Smyrna, 1871, p. 357.

[109] İlhan Tekeli, ‘Ege Bölgesinde Yerleşme Sisteminin 19. Yüzyıldaki Dönüşümü’, Ege Mimarlık, 3(4), İzmir, 1992, p. 80; Martal, op. cit., p. 111.

[110] Gürsoy, op. cit., p. 128.

[111] Cevat Sami and Hüseyin Hüsnü, İzmir 1905, in E. Serçe (ed), İzmir, 2000, p. 23; Cotton production in and around Smyrna became more dependent on the foreign market at the end of the 19th century and cotton production in the region decreased to 40,000 in the early 1890s and to 33,000 bales in the last years of the 19th century. Yapucu, op. cit., p. 123; This situation continued at the beginning of the 20th century. The cultivated areas in and around the port of Smyrna, whose export balances change frequently according to the demand of Europe, started to use the lands they planted for grain and fruit trees in the beginning of 1908, due to the decrease in the demand for cotton. In Turgutlu and Bergama, the people started to give more importance to viticulture and fruit production as they found vine and fruit trees more profitable. Dunstan, op. cit., pp. 1–17.

[112] Martal, op. cit., p. 110.

[113] Charles Issawi, The Economic History of Turkey (1800–1914), The University of Chicago Pres, London, 1980, p. 245.

[114] Accounts and Papers, 59, Smyrna, 1868, p. 479; Accounts and Papers, 64, Smyrna, 1870, pp. 82–83.

[115] Accounts and Papers, 65, Smyrna, 1873, p. 1149; By 1880, about 40 percent of the cotton was exported to England, while the rest was sold to France, Germany and Austria. Varlık, op. cit., p. 51; The most prominent buyers of cotton seed exported from Smyrna port in the early 1880s were England, Malta and Aegean Islands. Accounts and Papers, 86, Smyrna, 1887, p. 12.

[116] Karl Von Scherzer, İzmir–1873, trans. İ. Pınar, İzmir Municipality Press, İzmir, 2001, p. 65.