The Middle East: The Rise Of The Ottoman Empire

While taking the class of Early Modern European History there was two states that really stuck out and peaked my interest the most. They were the Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe. If you compare and contrast both the Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe during the 16th Century through the 18th Century, you will see that there are a number of similarities as well as differences when you look at the expansion of the states. You will also see many of these contrasts as well when you look in terms of each states military and commerce. Although the Ottoman Empire existed before the 16th century and continued to exist past the 18th century and in great decline until the early 20th century, when looking at the state as a whole the time

In the 1900's at the twilight of a fresh new century in the 700th year of its presence the Ottoman E, moire started to die a brutal, climatic death. The team that damaged this elder and once powerful state launched the Middle East, Europe, and the world, but this enhanced instability and chaos. The Ottoman Empire was one of the most triumphant empire in the Middle East until WW1, thats where it all began. During WW1 the Ottoman Empire took the side of the Central Powers, and they were against the Allied Powers. As the war went on the Central Powers were losing and continued to lose. So the war ends and the ryAllied Powers came out with the victory, and this leads to the Ottoman Empire being weakened strongly. However, after WW1 Britain and France went on to dividing the Empire,

Europe’s role in the decline of the Ottoman Empire was large and began to affect the Ottomans in the 16th century. Europe garnered massive wealth thanks

We know that the middle east was created by the Ottoman empire. This big empire ended after world war I. The middle east saw changes and had a massive impact after world war I. After the Europeans finished off the Ottoman empire they came for the middle east. They continued their takeover with some territories of the middle each such as Syria, Palestine, Iraq, and even Lebanon. There are many conflicting factors that led from the Ottoman empire and how it soon shaped the middle east. One of the biggest roles in these conflicts was played by the British, they made 3 agreements that they had to standby. The result was a huge mess that divided up a pretty big part of the Muslim world.

Ottoman Turkey never developed extensive industry, though the lands it controlled had extensive natural resources. There were no universities or technical schools that could teach either the basic skills or the theoretical knowledge needed for an industrial revolution and a modern economy. Banks could not develop because of the Muslim prohibition on interest. Turkish guns and ships and railroads had to be purchased from France, Germany and Britain, who vied with each other for the lucrative trade. The Ottoman Empire did not produce much that could pay for these purchases and eventually went bankrupt, forcing its rulers to conclude disadvantageous terms with its European creditors.

Throughout Middle Eastern history there have been many great empires but two stand out, the Ottoman Empire and the Qajar Kingdom; both have had long-lasting effects on what the Middle East looks like today. When looking at the Islamic Republic today and their form of government it is important to understand how they reached this level through examining their history and the lingering effects that WWI and Western Imperialism have left behind. The Ottoman Empire which stretched as far as modern-day Austria were a great military power but just like the Qajars were brought down by a combination of force and economic troubles. In order to understand the modern Middle East, we must be able to understand its history and what brought down both the Ottoman Empire and the Qajar Dynasty.

A good point to start with is Iraq during the Ottoman Empire. In that tenure, there were five grounds in which have raised the sectarian animosity among the Iraqis. 1. The Ottoman to favor the Sunnis' at the expense of the Shia, due to the religious proximity of Shia in Iraq to the Safavid Empire, and due to the fact that the Ottoman envisaged the Safavid as a political rival; thus, this erupted the Ottoman to marginalized the Shia and considered them as an existential threat to the empire. 2. Tribe and Klan, which were profound incentives for the Ottoman, were an excellent way for the Ottoman to grant loyalty out of the tribes. The Ottoman permit the tribes to act individually "semi-autonomous" to collate taxes and ensure populace loyalty

The Ottoman Turks emerged on the periphery of the Byzantine Empire and the Saljuk Turks. Under a Turkish Muslim warrior named Osman, raids were conducted in western Anatolia on Byzantine settlements and a vast number of Turks were united under his banner. Those Turks who flocked to Osman's banner and followed him into the history books came to be called the Ottomans. The word Ottoman, fits these Turks well as it roughly translates from Turkish as "those associated with Oman."

World One also caused the collapse of four empires. The treaties that were signed because of World War One forced some empires to collapse and others collapsed because riots. Ottoman Empire, The Austro-Hungarian, The German Empire, and The Russian Empire. The Ottoman Empire came to an end around 1922. The Ottoman Empire had lasted around six hundred years and covered mos of southeast Europe. When the Ottoman Empire came to an end it split into the Turkish Republic. The Ottoman Empire collapsed because many of its territories were controlled by other European countries. The region grew very unstable. Many of the government officials in the Turkish left the country and fled to Germany. The had fled the country because

The Ottoman Empire was one of the major political forces in the South Eastern Europe who has shaped the history of the continent. The empire exists from 14th century to the beginning of the 20th century and it was one of the largest political organizations in the Europe at that time. Later on, the empire was replaced by the Turkish republic and various other states in the south Eastern Europe (Quataert, 2005).Calligraphy is an Islamic art form which is developed from the Nabatean script. During the Ottoman period, the art of Calligraphy reached its zenith period and many different developments occurred in the present form and later on “Turkish calligraphy” form had been established. Ottoman Turks produce different Arabic scripts which were considered as one of finest creation in the Arts. As Turks migrated to different parts of the Asia and expansion of Islam has helped in spreading the Arabic language. Ottoman Turks produced several varieties of Scripts, all the various branch or art of calligraphy. It was loved by ottoman Turks and the main centre of the art was ottoman capital Istanbul. The first two names asserting the Turkish calligraphy are Sultan Bayezid II and prince Korkut, both of them taught by sheikh Hamdullah. Calligraphy was practiced for 500 years, during 19th and 20th century the art was at its zenith (Derman, 2007).

The Ottoman empire reached its peak during the !6th century and slowly began its descend. By the 19th century, the empire was riddled with incompetent rulers which allowed for power struggles within. Rival ministers, religious experts, and the commanders of the Janissary corps competed, further eroding effective leadership. There was no control over the vast resources and great population of the empire. The Provincial officers and the landowning class, ayan, took the opportunity to control taxes, and skimmed revenues. The corruption of the bureaucracy depleted the resources need to maintain a large land empire. Additionally, the artisans could not keep up with imported manufactured goods from Europe. This led to artisan riots with guild members

For the Ottoman to progress further it needed a new national mantra for legitimacy in order to earn the respects of its subjects, in addition the empire had to mold a new national ethos . As said before that if “the Empire was to survive in the modern world, it could no longer be a group of disparate communities held together by force and obedience to a ruling family; it needed a unity of consciousness, which would create an active moral link between rulers and the ruled” (Hourani 1991: 52). In this sense the old ways of cementing authority were no longer valid during the mid-nineteenth century. Another country that faced this dilemma was Russia, which ironically, was a longtime rival of the Ottoman Empire for influence in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea, yet just like the Ottoman Empire it also faced the challenges of reconciling the increasingly outdated notion of absolute monarchy to modern civic values. For Russia its answer was to turn to an ideology that would seemingly be a unifying factor for the Slavic peoples in Europe with the Czar as its head similar to that of Pan-Islam followed by Abdul-Hamid. In the Russian case it would follow three principles: Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality. This notion was formulated by the late Russian education minister Sergei Uvarov who stated these principles in an 1832 report outlining the future direction of Russian education.

In the Article, “The Rise of the Ottoman Turks and Its Historical Background”, William L. Langer and Robert P. Blake precisely discuses to readers the progression of one of the most phenomenal empires in history, The Ottomans. To go along with that they also speak upon any of its historical backgrounds. The information that is provided in this article comes from two authors that have worked with history for multiple years. The first author is William L. Langer; Historian, ex-chairman of the history department at Harvard University, and a specialist in diplomacy. He also has worked on many books in his past, but mainly dealing with European History. The second author, historian, and also a professor from Harvard, Robert P. Blake mainly has a past with focusing on the Byzantine Empire. So they are both very reliable sources when

Prior to the arrival of Nationalism and nationalist movements in the 19th century, Ottoman suzerainty over its non-Muslim subjects in the Mediterranean and its European territories (Balkans and Caucasus) rested on religious identification as the cornerstone of society within the Ottoman Empire. The success and resilience of the empire derived its legitimacy from the flexibility and willingness to accommodate and respect local customs and religions in exchange for taxes (Jyzhia) and pledges of loyalty.

Towards the mid 19th century, the main cause of the problem had already been revealed and mechanisms were put in place by the new rulers to save the empire. The internally developed social, political and military changes which were imported from the other European countries by default led to the establishment of the New Ottomans. However, interventions were too late and the new empire depended on the support of European powers (Johnson, p 4).