Şer’iye Sicillerine Göre XVIII. Yüzyılda Ankara Damga Mukataası
Abstract
Osmanlı maliyesinde mukataaların ömür boyu kaydıyla gerçek kişilere satışı olarak tanımlanabilecek malikâne uygulamasına 1695 yılında başlanmıştır. Ankara Damga Mukataası 17. yüzyıl sonlarına kadar havass-ı hümayuna ait olup bilahare sadaret haslarına dahil edilmiş ve nihayet 1717-1718 (1130) yılında malikâneye dönüştürülmüştür. 18. yüzyıl sonuna doğru kısmen İrad-ı Cedid Hazinesi, bir müddet sonra da tamamen Darbhane-i Âmire tarafından zabt edilmeye başlanmıştır. Bu yıllarda mukataanın ¼ hissesi halen malikâne olmakla beraber idaresi artık malikâne mutasarrıfları tarafından yapılmamaktadır. Damga Mukataası “hassha-i tamga-i Ankara ve simsariye ve zarar-ı kassabiye ve boyahane ve cenderehane ve tevabii”ni kapsamaktadır. Şer’iye sicillerinden mukataanın malikâne olarak sahipleri ve mal/muaccele meblağları yanısıra mukataaya müteallik hususların işleyişi ile ilgili bilgiler de sağlanmaktadır. Buna göre her şeyden evvel sof dokumada kullanılan ham tiftik ihracı yasaktır. Böylece hammaddelerin Ankara dışına çıkarılarak iplik ve sof fiyatlarının artması engellenmek istenmiştir. Sof dokumada kullanılan ipliklerin satışı üreticileri tarafından mahalle ve sokak aralarında yapılmakta, buradan artanlar iplikçi esnafına satılmaktadır. Sof satışı ise yalnız bedestanda ve ilgili esnaf tarafından yapılmakta, dokuyucular soflarını esnafa aracısız olarak vermektedir. Simsarlık yalnız yabancılar için söz konusudur. Sofla ilgili bütün işler emin gözetim ve iznine tâbi olarak yapılmaktadır. Bu bağlamda boyahane, eminin tekelinde olup özel kişilerin veya esnafın oluşturduğu her türlü “ittihad”, “inhisar” olarak adlandırılarak yasaklanmıştır.
Keywords
The Ankara Damga Mukataası (Stamp Tax) in the 18th Century
Abstract
The practice of malikâne (state lands held by a private owner) that could be defined as mukataa (state-owned source of revenue) sold the real persons and held for life in Ottoman finance began in 1695 (1106-1107 AH). The Ankara damga (sales tax) mukataası belonged to the Sultan untill the latter part of the 17th century, later it was converted to a malikâne. Around 1800-18001 it began to be administered by the İrad-ı Cedid Treasury and around 1809-1810 by the Darbhane-i Amire (Imperial Mint). In these years, although a ¼ share of the mukataa was a malikâne, it was no longer administered by the owners of the malikâne. The sales tax mukataa included the “hassha-i tamga-i Ankara ve simsariye ve zarar-ı kassabiye ve boyahane ve cenderehane ve tevabii” (Ankara’s sales tax domains, broker’s comissions, the tax for
the Janissariers’ meat rations, dyer’s shops, mohair cloth presses and their dependents). Information relating to the owners of mukataa regarded as malikâne, the yearly payments (mal), cash value (muaccele) and the discussion of the particulars is obtained from the şer’iye sicilleri (registers kept by the qadıs). Above all, according to these records, the export of the unprocessed fine wool used in the weaving of mohair was forbidden. By taking these row materials out of Ankara it was hoped to prevent an increase in the price of yarn and mohair. The sale of yarns used in the weaving of
mohair was carried out by the manufacturers in the neighborhoods and streets; from here the remaining amount was sold to the yarn sellers’ guild. Broker’s fees were only applicable to foreigners. All activities connected with mohair were conducted under the supervision and with the permission of an emin/mültezim (one responsible for
the mukataa or its administrator, but not its ownwer). In this context a dyer’s shop was in the monopoly of an emin and calling any kind of “union” (ittihad) formed by private citizens or guild a “monopoly” (inhisar) was forbidden. The şer’iye sicilleri provide us with information on both the subject of malikâne and conflicts among them. Again, we can learn from the şer’iye sicilleri about orders of mohair made for the palace; the collection of the “exit tax” (çıkar bacı) on mohair yarn leaving Ankara; the requirement for mohair yarn whose tax was unpaid or mohair tax without sales tax
to be seized in the name of the state; factors that lead to the dispersal of a mukataa’s subjects; the problems that arose when more than one mukataa owner in the same area appeared; the price increases that occured through goods secretly collected from the market smuggled abroad and how state revenue was effected by this.
Keywords
