N. A. Zherlitsina. French-Ottoman Rivalry in Maghreb from 1830 to 1848, Based on Russian
and Turkish Archival Materials // Petersburg Historical Journal, no. 1, 2026, pp. 119–130.

DOI: 10.51255/2311–603X_2026_1_119

Abstract:

The article is devoted to the study of the formation of French colonial policy towards Maghreb
countries, as well as the analysis of the Ottoman Empire’s policy to protect its North African provinces from European encroachments. The work examines the entire period of the July Monarchy in France, that is, from 1830 to 1848, which allows us to draw conclusions about the goals, objectives and methods of colonial expansion of the French authorities in Maghreb. An analysis of the policy of the Ottoman Empire towards its Maghreb provinces during the period under study shows that the Sublime Porte was not indifferent to the events on its western outskirts and played a much more active role than has been previously believed in historiography in attempts to resist the European powers. The novelty of the study also lies in identifying the methods used by each of the empires in attempts to attract the Maghreb countries into their orbit of influence. France and the Ottoman Empire resorted to both violent methods and the policy of “soft power”, as well as provocations and intimidation. The article examines not only the policy of the great powers, but also the position of the object of this policy — the authorities of the province of Tunisia. The analysis of the documents shows the desire for independence of the Husseinid dynasty of Tunisia, an attempt to achieve it by playing on the contradictions between the great powers. The author comes to conclusion that the period 1830–1848 prepared the ground in Maghreb for French expansion in the following decades.

Key words: history of colonialism, rivalry of empires, Ottoman Empire, France, Maghreb, Tunisia, Algeria, Tripoli, centralization, colonial conquest.

Author:

Zherlitsina, Natalia Aleksandrovna — Dr. of Sci. in History, Chief Researcher, Institute for
African studies, Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow, Russia).
E-mail: ns_inafr@mail.ru
ORCID: 0000-0001-8647-9419

References:
Aksan, V. H. Ottoman Wars, 1700–1870. An Empire Besieged. New York, Routledge, 2014. 624 p.

Bdira, M. Relations internationales et sous-développement. La Tunisie 1857–1864. Uppsala, University; Stockholm, Almqvist & Wiksell international (distr.), 1978. 194 p.

Blili, L. La Régence de Tunis, 1535–1666: Genèse d’une province Ottomane au Maghreb. Cairo; New York, American University in Cairo Press, 2021. 264 p.


Brown, C. L. Tunisia of Ahmad Bey. 1837–1855. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1974. 409 p.
Dulina, N. A. Osmanskaya imperiya v mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniyakh (30–40-e godi 19 veka) [The Ottoman Empire in International Relations (1830s–1840s). In Russ.]. Moscow, Nauka publ., 1980. 196 p.

Gürkan, E. S. The Centre and the Frontier: Ottoman Cooperation with the North African Corsairs in the Sixteenth Century. In Turkish Historical Review. 2010. No. 1, рр. 125–163.

İlter, A. S. Şimâlî Afrika’da Türkler. İstanbul, 1937.

Karpat, K. Studies on Ottoman Social and Political History. Leiden, Brill, 2002. 860 p.

Lafi, N. L’Empire ottoman en Afrique: perspectives d’histoire critique. Cahiers d’histoire. Revue d’histoire critique. 2015. No. 128, рр. 59–70.

Ling, D. Tunisia from Protectorate to Republic. London, Indiana university press, 1967. 273 p.

Moala, A. The Regency of Tunis and the Ottoman Porte, 1777–1814. New York, Routledge, 2005. 200 p.

Frary, L. J., Kozelsky, M. (eds.). Russian-Ottoman borderlands: the Eastern question reconsidered. Madison, The University of Wisconsin Press, 2014. 363 p.

Tanshina, N. P. Sredizemnomorskaya politika iyul’skoy monarkhii [The Mediterranean Policy of the July Monarchy. In Russ.]. In Frantsuzkii ezhegodnik. 2017, pp. 162–187.

Tarle, E. V. Ocherki istorii kolonialnoi politiki zapadnoevropeyskikh gosudarstv (konets XV — nachalo XIX vekov) [Essays on the History of Colonial Policy of Western European States (late 15th — early 19th Centuries). In Russ.]. Moscow, Leningrad, Nauka publ., 1965. 427 p.

Zwierlein, С. Imperial Unknowns. The French and British in the Mediterranean, 1650–1750. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016. 412 p.

Similar Posts

PHJ № 1 (49) 2026 — S. V. Bukalova. MEMORIES OF V. N. GINEV

This publication features autobiographical notes by S. V. Bukalova, a university teacher from Orel, about V. N. Ginev as her academic advisor and her research under his supervision, from her undergraduate coursework to her doctoral dissertation. The memoirs reflect both the mundane details of the educational process at a regional university and V. N. Ginev’s methodological approaches to organizing research, based on the requirement for rigorous argumentation of conclusions, a comprehensive source base, and objective interpretation of data. Spanning a quarter of a century, the memoirs touch upon changes in the academic community — the digitalization of sources, the emergence of publication requirements, and the formation of professional communities. Of particular note is V. N. Ginev’s connection to the emergence of new research areas in the history of the First World War.

|

PHJ №1 (45) 2025 — S. N. Iskiul. REVIEW OF THE COLLECTIVE MONOGRAPH: KANDAKOU D., STROEV A. LES RUSSES À PARIS AU XVIIIE SIÈCLE SOUS L’OEIL DE LA POLICE. PARIS: L’HARMATTAN, 2024. 736 P.

The present review is devoted to a critical analysis of the aforementioned collective monograph, which was authored by professors of general and comparative literature at the Sorbonne Nouvelle University (Paris). The authors of the monograph are D. Kondakov and A. Stroev, and the title of the monograph is Les Russes à Paris au XVIIIe siècle sous l’oeil de la police (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2024. 736 p.).

PHJ № 1 (49) 2026 — A. A. Ivanov. AN ACCIDENTAL DIPLOMAT: ALFRED WILL KLIEFOTH AND THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION OF 1917

The revolutionary events of 1917 had an impact not only on domestic political, economic, socio-cultural institutions and international processes, but also significantly influenced the worldview of the participants. For some of them, the rise of the Bolsheviks and the subsequent civil war became a traumatic experience that led to a significant shift in their system of values. At the same time, the internationalization of the military-political confrontation in Russia allowed foreign military personnel, intelligence officers, and diplomats to gain practical experience in dealing with socialist parties and develop their skills in countering them, which became a factor in their career advancement. It was the experts who served together in the American Embassy in Russia during the Revolution and in the American Military Mission during the intervention who later formed the core of the divisions responsible for analyzing relations with USSR in the U. S. Department of State. One of these specialists was Alfred Will Kliefoth, whose career allows us to understand many of the implicit aspects of the Soviet-American confrontation in the early years of Soviet rule. This article explores the evolution of the beliefs of A. W. Kliefoth during the early stages of his diplomatic career — from pacifism to anti-Bolshevism. The research is based on the documents of American government agencies, writings and interviews by A. W. Kliefoth, as well as the works of Russian and foreign historians.

PHJ № 1 (49) 2026 — M. V. Druzin. “EVERYTHING WORSHIPS ONLY POWER…”: NOTE BY PRINCE S. S. ABAMELEK-LAZAREV ON MEASURES TO SUPPRESS THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT IN RUSSIA (AUGUST 1906)

The published note by Prince Semyon Semyonovich Abamelek-Lazarev is one example of the notes and petitions from 1905–1906 received from right-wing and Black Hundred organizations and individuals of like views, proposing a wide variety of measures to the emperor and government to suppress the revolutionary movement. S. S. Abamelek-Lazarev, a well-known entrepreneur, mine owner, and Russia’s largest landowner, was not politically savvy. However, he saw the approaching revolution as a direct threat to his holdings and capital, and therefore, the fear of losing everything compelled him to write a “political” note annually from 1905–1907. While the note from the summer of 1905 was distinguished by its length, verbosity, and overall calm tone, the note from August 1906, published here, is practically hysterical, with the prince demanding that rebels and pogromists be killed on the spot, tried by military courts, and exiled to Siberian penal servitude along with their families. The note demonstrates that S. S. Abamelek-Lazarev, having embraced and exploited the economic benefits and opportunities of the new post-reform capitalist order, rejected and failed to understand the need for political change in the social order.

PHJ № 1 (49) 2026 — A. V. Chirkova. DOCUMENTS OF THE DOGES OF VENICE FROM THE 14TH TO THE FIRST HALF OF THE 16TH CENTURY COLLECTED BY NIKOLAY P. LIKHACHEV: ON THE HISTORY OF THE COLLECTION

In the West European Section of the Archive of the St. Petersburg Institute of History, Russian Academy of Sciences, there are 64 original charters from Venetian doges dating from the 14th to the first half of the 16th century: 18 sentences (ducali maggiori) and 46 letters (ducali minori). They originate from the collection of Academician N. P. Likhachev and were purchased for his Museum of Palaeography, where the history of writing was represented from the turn of the 3rd–4th millennium BC, primarily through documentary monuments. The documents were acquired between 1892 and 1914 at European auctions and through correspondence with other collectors. Thanks to Likhachev’s annotations on the covers of the charters, it is possible to establish the time and place of acquisition for 20 documents: private collections of Gabriele Fantoni (4) and Alexander Posonyi (2, by the Friedrich Cohn auction), auctions of Pio Luzzetti (7), Tammaro De Marinis (3), Gabriel Charavay (1), Sotheby’s (1), “Gilhofer und Ranschburg” (2). Through the analysis of owners’ inscriptions on the covers and on the charters themselves, the provenance of the documents is traced back to the collections of Gian Carlo Rossi (10), Luigi Azzolini (2), presumably Luigi Arrigoni and Amilcare Ancona (1), and two unattributed collectors (4 and 2). The analysis of the provenance shows that before being accumulated in Likhachev’s collection, these ancient acts changed hands multiple times.