Osmanlı tarihinde “Celali” ayaklanmaları sosyolojik anlamı olan başkaldırılar düzenidir. Bu nedenle, gelip-geçici bir olaylar zinciri değildir. Çoğu kez, resmi tarihimizde gözlediğimiz ayaklanmalar -deyim yerinde ise- “haydutluk” kategorisinde ele alınmış, olayların nedenleri, ilişkiler sistemi ve hedefleri üzerinde gereken bilimsel duyarlılık gösterilmemiştir. Oysa, tarihimizin önemli aşamalarına damgasını vuran Celali ayaklanmaları, merkezi sistemle alt gruplar arasındaki “eşkıyalık” kültür kalıplarının ötesinde, toplumsal sorunların alt yapısını oluşturur. Kültür tarihimizde, Celali ayaklanmaları, kurucu kültürün asli unsurunu temsil etmelerinden, dinsel inançlarına olan umursamazlıktan ve yönetimin yabancı soylulara terk edilmesinden ötürü merkeze muğberdirler. Nitekim, dönemin resmi tarihçisi Mustafa Âli, yönetime Etrak (Türkler) ve Ekratın (Kürtler) alınmadığını, Osmanlı Devletiyle Türklük arasında hiçbir bağın kurulmadığını yazıyordu. Bu husus, dönemin önemli bir tarihçisi tarafından objektif bir şekilde ileri sürülmüş gerçek bir yaklaşımdır. Günümüzde senyör tarihçilerimiz de: “Devletin en yüksek mevkilerinin artık Devşirmelerin elinde olduğunu” önemle vurguluyorlardı. Doğal olarak bu tür bir yapılaşma, merkezin mozaikleşmesi sonucu, Anadolu halkının tepkilerine yol açıyordu. Böylece, 16. yüzyılın ilk yarısından itibaren, Carter V. Kindley’in de yerinde tespitiyle, “Patrimonial Osmanlı Devleti (Hanedanı Hümayun), Patrimonial Devşirme biçimine dönüşmüş oluyordu”.** XV. yüzyıldan itibaren merkezin bu yapılaşmasına

“Jalali” riots in the Ottoman history is a system of uprisings having a sociological meaning. Therefore, it isn’t a chain of temporarily events. Many times, riots we observed at the official history are considered namely in the category of “banditry”, there hasn’t been necessary scientific sensitivity on the causes of the events, relationships of the system and their goals. However, Jalali riots marked the important stages of our history formed infrastructure of social problems beyond cultural patterns of “banditry” between the central system and sub-groups. In our cultural history, Jalali riots are disgruntled to the center since they represent the fundamental element of the founding of culture, are disregardful for their religious beliefs and since the management was given up for foreign nobles. Indeed, Mustafa Ali, the official historian of the period, writes that Turks and Kurds hasn’t been accepted for the administration and that any link between the Ottoman State and Turkishness hasn’t been installed. This matter is a real approachment suggested by an important historian of the period. Today, the senior historians also highly emphasized that “the highest positions of the state are now in the hands of “devshirmes”. Naturally, such a construction, as a result of fragmentation of the center led to reactions from the people of Anatolia. Thus, from the first half of the XVIth century, as Carter V. Kindley saying correctly, “Patrimonial the Ottoman Empire” (Dynasty Imperial) was being transformed into “Patrimonial Ottoman Devshirmes”. From XVth century the masses of people representing nativeness prefer to riot rather then pay military and tax obligations against such constructions of the center. Therefore Jalali movements represent uprising forms of the environment against the cosmopolitan constructions of the center. This kind of structuring of the Ottoman Empire became an arena of mutual conflicts in constant (Jalali movements). Ottoman Empire has continued its feature until it was disappeared from the history. The Republic has taken the first step for the historic protest for the Ottoman model pulling the principle of “populism” in to the center. However, the process of transforming modernization into westernization and secularism into anti religionism prepared the ground for the traditional center to play again the historical role. Returning from one-party system to pluralist system prepared the ground for the tendencies of the layer of people-peasant towards the center. Ergenekon and its derivatives side has entered into a formation which claims to the center and blocks the trends of beliefs and westernization of the environment as well. Turkish society is in chaos today. We hope that the cosmos is born out of this chaos.