Journal article Open Access

Dragomans and "Turkish Literature": The Making of a Field of Inquiry

Rothman, E. Natalie

DataCite XML Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<resource xmlns:xsi="" xmlns="" xsi:schemaLocation="">
  <identifier identifierType="URL"></identifier>
      <creatorName>Rothman, E. Natalie</creatorName>
      <givenName>E. Natalie</givenName>
      <affiliation>University of Toronto</affiliation>
    <title>Dragomans and "Turkish Literature": The Making of a Field of Inquiry</title>
    <subject>scholarly networks</subject>
    <subject>trans-imperial subjects</subject>
    <date dateType="Issued">2013-01-01</date>
  <resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="Text">Journal article</resourceType>
    <alternateIdentifier alternateIdentifierType="url"></alternateIdentifier>
    <relatedIdentifier relatedIdentifierType="DOI" relationType="IsIdenticalTo">10.1163/22138617-12340023</relatedIdentifier>
    <rights rightsURI="">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International</rights>
    <rights rightsURI="info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess">Open Access</rights>
    <description descriptionType="Abstract">&lt;p&gt;Theories of cultural and linguistic mediation have tended to posit intermediaries as conduits through which one culture/language either enters another unproblematically, or gets “distorted” due to intermediaries’ incompetence or self-interest. Both these perspectives presuppose stable, well-bounded, and coherent cultures/languages as what intermediaries purportedly mediate. Instead, this paper proposes an understanding of cultural and linguistic mediation as a process that constitutes its objects, that is, as an essential dimension of all acts of cultural and linguistic boundary-making. It focuses on dragomans (diplomatic interpreters) who operated at the interface between the Ottoman government and foreign diplomats to the Porte throughout the early modern period. The paper suggests how dragomans’ practices of knowledge production were profoundly collaborative, involving a range of Ottoman and Venetian interlocutors. Such practices thus belie any facile distinction between “local” and “foreign,” but rather challenge us to consider the emergence of “Oriental” studies as a dialogical project that necessitated ongoing recalibrations of prior knowledge through a multiplicity of perspective, where diplomatic institutions and epistemologies played a key role.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <description descriptionType="Other"></description>
Views 182
Downloads 266
Data volume 164.8 MB
Unique views 173
Unique downloads 259


Cite as