When I first came to the Başbakanlık Arşivi at its old location in the İstanbul Provincial Governorship's Vilayet Bahçesi in 1956, opportunities for research were extremely limited. The only collections that were readily available were the Mühimme and Mühimme-i Mısır registers of Imperial fermans, themselves not entirely complete, the mass of financial registers heaped together in the Kâmil Kepeci collection, and the thousands of documents brought together in the Ali Emin, Ibn ul-Emin, Cevdet and Fekete collections.

The history of the USSR under the period of the Stalin regime today is connected first of all with the anti-lawful acts of mass repressions. Historians and politologists apply to these acts of lawlessness that brought about a guiltless condemnation and the destruction of millions of peoples. From the viewpoint of the ethnographic science a special attention should be given to the existing-in-those-years policy of compulsoy migration that resulted in the fact that entire peoples, ethnic and ethographic groups were moved by force off the historical places of their dwelling to other regions of the country.

One of the oldest, most persistent and important problems in European History and İnternational Law is the "Question of the Straits". More than twenty treaties in modern times mention the Turkish Straits. Five of these treaties were made exclusively to regulate passage through these waters: The London Agreement, 1841; Paris Straits Convention, 1856; London Convention, 1871; Lausanne Straits Convention, 1923; and the Treaty of Montreux, 1936. Phillipson and Buxton affirm that one of the causes of the First World War was the Straits problem.

The editor of these almost sensational inscriptions has been unanimously praised for his conscientious, thoroughgoing, and in many ways exemplary presentation, and for the rigorous and well organized commentaries. But a recognition due to an excellent work meritoriously executed does not obviate the necessity of further study and discussion. The purpose of the present undertaking is a reassessment of certain aspects of the original edition, a critical evaluation of the restorations already proposed, and on various parts of the texts proposing a number of my own instead. In other words my aim is essentially to produce a reasoned and more or less settled contribution, partaking of the character of a comprehensive new edition. Since the texts themselves are rather too long to be displayed in integro it will be necessary to peruse these pages with the original publication constantly before the reader's eyes.

Although the term Ottoman Archives should in fact include any archive that once fell within the boundaries of the Ottoman Empire, it only reminds us of the Başbakanlık (Primeministerial) Archives and that of Topkapı Palace in Istanbul. Furthermore the Ottoman archival material whether found in the National Archive of Cairo or in Ragusa Archive of Yoguslavia are of no lesser importance than those found in Başbakanlık Archive although not as abundant. The scholars of the Balkan states such as Albania, Bosnia, Bulgaria and Hungary have not only taken interest in the Ottoman archives in their own countries, but also in the Primeministerial Archive of Istanbul, and have studied and published many documents -especially the ones pertaining to their own countries- from these archives. Unfortunately the Turks and the Arabs have only recently started taking interest in these archives and particularly the Arab scholars in this field are very scant. There is no doubt that these archives are not only important for the Muslim countries but also for the world history. The report prepared by Unesco in 1982 makes this point very clear.

Following the establishment of regular diplomatic relations between the Ottoman Empire and foreign states in the sixteenth century, the Ottomans began to face what came to be known as the protégé system, which later proved to be the most dangerous threat to the very existence of their empire. This was the notion of foreign protection for the non-Muslim subjects of the Ottoman Empire.

This paper is designed to explain the general characteristics of the Ottoman State policy during the XVIIth and the XVIIIth centuries. Two factors made this essential. The first was the effects the late XVIIIth century socio-economic and cultural changes of the world had on the Ottoman Empire. The second was the chain of developments which extended from 1683 through 1918. These dramatic developments joined with one another and resulted in the collapse of classical empires of the world, Ottoman Empire being one of them. In other words, the First World War ended monarchical empires of classical structures. Hence, new and independent states were formed in various regions of wide-spread territories which once were under sovereignty if a single administration recognized as "pax ottomana".

The sancak of Amid (today known as Diyarbakır) has been ruled by the Byzantines, Arabs, Selçukids, Artukids, Ayyubids, Akkoyunlus and Ottomans. Therefore the sancak has been exposed to the cultures of these states. Thus the province had undergone a great cultural impact which can clearly be traced in the personal and place names used in the sancak. The place and personal names recorded in the 1518 Ottoman cadastral survey of the sancak of Amid are the basis of some pointers made in this article.

Most of the buildings referred to in this study are located around Lake Van, but a few are located in Harput and Pertek in the province of Elazığ and I will start to begin by discussing these. The Sâre Hatun Mosque in Harput is mentioned by Evliyâ Çelebi, who describes this mosque as being without a minaret. The name is spelt similarly in the "Ma'muretü l-'Azîz Salnâme (Elazığ Almanac) and by A.Gabriel. Most modern writers spell the name as Sara Hâtun or Sârâ Hâtun. The local people pronounce it as "Sara Hatun" with all four short vowels, and also refer to the mosque as the Uzun Hasan Oğullari Camisi. According to local hearsay the sons of Sultan Uzun Hasan built the mosque.

The sources and literature on the medial history of Diyarbekr region are limited as it is the general case with the medieval history of Anatolia on the whole. Apart from few sources which are, however, directly related to the area there are othere sources from which indirect infirmation can be derived to study the history of the area. Inorder to avoid confusion, however, no such classification will be made, rather they will be treated under original or primary sources, secondary literature and Armenian and Syriac sources. Before examining them, nevetheless, it would perhaps be better to briefly mention few works and bibliographies in which there can be found a good literature on the area.