Negotiating the Law of War in the Ottoman Empire: Neutrality, Subjecthood, and Prisoners of War, 1787–92

What does it mean to be a prisoner of war? This legal category of captivity is embedded in modern conceptions of international law and military practice, but its history has been rarely studied—especially outside the Atlantic world. This paper sheds light on that history from the Ottoman Empire’s perspective, by examining negotiations between captives, the Ottoman state, and foreign diplomats.

The setting is the 1787-1792 war between the Ottomans, and the Russian and Habsburg Empires.  The Russian and Habsburg army and navy contained many mercenaries, recruited on the pan-European military labor market. Some originally hailed from states that had signed treaties of friendship and commerce (Capitulations) with the Ottomans. The Ottomans captured over 200 such mercenaries, raising new legal questions about sovereignty and states’ ties to their subjects—with profound consequences for individuals’ lives and freedom.

The paper traces the several captives’ stories, ranging from well-connected naval officers to enlisted men. Many mobilized the Capitulations in an attempt to gain release. The result, throughout the war, was a series of negotiations between captives, Ottoman officials (including Sultan Selim III) and foreign diplomats. The states, largely ignoring captives’ interests, worked out new customary rules. Neutral states, they agreed, were obliged to prevent their subjects from entering service with the Ottomans’ enemies, and if such subjects were captured, they would be held until the conflict ended, just like enemy subjects. In this, the Ottomans foreshadowed important developments in the international law of war, usually seen as an exclusive product of the Atlantic world.

The paper thus illuminates the evolution of the “prisoner of war,” and the Ottoman state’s agency—and to a limited extent, that of captives—in charting the concept’s boundaries. This history is especially relevant in light of current debates over the law of war and captives’ rights.