Category: Ottoman Empire

Basic Facts

• The Ottomans are one of the greatest and most powerful civilizations of the modern world (Hooker, 1996, para.1)
• The moment of glory  the sixteenth century.
• Islamic Empire. The largest and most influential of the Muslim empires (Hooker, 1996, papa.2).
• Period of Existence: 1299-November 1, 1922.

Richard Hooker (1996) calls the Ottomans one of the greatest and most powerful civilizations of the modern world (para.1). The researcher stresses the importance of the moment of glory that was in the sixteenth century and it was the time when the Ottoman Empire was the perfect example of human creativity, optimism, and artistry (Hooker, 1996, para.1).

In fact, the Ottoman Empire had the ground for boasting. It was an Islamic empire that was rightfully called the largest and the most influential of the Muslim empires of the Modern period (Hooker, 1996, para.2).

As for the whole period of the existence of the Ottoman Empire, it covered seven centuries from 1299 to 1922.

The Territory of the Ottoman Empire

The whole territory captured and controlled by the Ottoman Empire during the military campaigns they undertook included Western Asia, southeastern European regions, as well as large territories of Eastern Europe, Anatolia (modern Turkey), the Caucuses, and the territories in Middle East to Iran. The Northern regions of Africa also belonged to the territory of the Ottoman Empire.

Thus, it is possible to state that during the age of expansion and prosperity, the Ottoman Empire set its power on three continents at the same time.

It is evident that it was a very hard task to establish strict and continuous control over such a vast territory and this was one of the main factors that caused rebellious mood of the peoples who belonged to the Ottoman Empire due to its military victories, but not traditionally . The center of the Ottoman Empire was in Anatolia, the control over other regions was the result of the policy of aggressive expansion.

Due to a number of regions that were traditionally alien to Anatolia in many aspects (for example, religion as the Ottoman Empire included religiously diverse regions, suck as Christian), even the Golden Age, the period of rise of the Empire can be characterized by internal conflicts that resulted in rebellions against the Empire.

The Rebellions During the Age of Rise of the Ottoman Empire

The revolt lead by Sheikh Bedrettin (Bedreddin): 1416.

Reasons:

• Military reason: The Battle of Ankara
• Political reason: Fratricide between the sultans.
• Social reasons:
  • taxation
  • exploitation of people

Sheikh Bedrettin, or Bedrettin was a prominent figure in the history of the Ottoman Empire of the fifteenth century as he was the person who organized and lead the most significant internal revolt of that century. There were several reasons and circumstances that in complex created a favorable ground for his revolt.

The Battle of Ankara of 1402 brought defeat to Bayazid who was captured and died in captivity. An interesting idea was offered by Singh (2000) who said that the end of this battle paved the way to the rise of Europe (p.11). As the result of Bayazids defeat, there started a fratricide between the sultans, it became impossible to rule and govern the Empire accordingly. The sultans were trying to capture power and their attempts were so violent that the cases of fratricide became common.

Since the sultans had no time to take care of the well-being of the people and the Empire, the people suffered from enormous taxes imposed on them by the central Ottoman government and local representatives of the government were strict in the matter of tax extraction from the exploited people.

Since common people were deprived of land, Sheikh Bedrettin wanted to stop their exploitation by with the help of the division of land among all citizens. However, the revolt was suppressed and the leader and his companion were crucified and hung.

The Revolts During the 16th-17th Centuries

The Serb Uprising in Banat, 1594.

The Holy War

Reasons:

• Taxation pressure
• Plundering of the monasteries
• Religious pressure
• Noblemen wanted to get their privileges back (Circovic, 2004).

The notion of the Holy War presupposes that the main reasons for the war have religious nature, people who start such a war are either trying to protect their own religion or impose it on the other people.

On the whole, the nature of the Serb uprising in Banat in 1594 corresponded to the definition of the Holy War. A bright fact is that the Serbs struggled under the flags that had the image of Saint Sava (that can be seen in the picture). If the main reason for Bedrettdins revolt was tax pressure of the people, it also remained among the reason for this very rebellion since Serbian people were under great taxation pressure imposed by the Ottoman Empire.

Besides, the list of reasons for the rebellion was extended by religious pressure that the Orthodox Serbian church suffered from the Muslim Ottomans. Among the main claims of the chieftains were that the Turks had to give back everything they had seized from the Serbian monasteries and let them retain their revenues again.

Also, the chieftains of the revolt were noblemen, they wanted to get their estates, privileges, titles back (Circovik, 2004). This shows that all social layers of the conquered Serbian people were under pressure and this was the reason why they disapproved of the Ottoman rule.

Jelali Revolts

• Place: Anatolia
• The rebels  Turkmen clans
• Participants: sekbans, sipahis.

Reasons:

• Social and economic crisis
• Depreciation of currency
• Heavy taxation
• Decline in the devsirme system
• Admission of Muslims into the army
• Increase of the Janissaries (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2002, p.525).

Jelali revolts started when the Ottoman Empire started to lose its authority gradually. This process started in the 16th century. It took place in Anatolia, the rightful territory of the Ottoman Empire, not the one they captured. As for the rebels, they were the Turkmen clans that feat that they were deprived of influence on their land.

The relolts based on the sekbans that were irregular troops of musketeers and the sipahis  the cavalrymen that were maintained by land grants (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2002, p.525). It is necessary to mention that the people who took part in the revolts had no intention to attack the government of the Ottoman Empire. Instead, the people decided to take aggressive measure because they were not satisfied with economic situation in the Empire.

Such factors as depreciation of national currency, heavy taxes impose on the peasant population and bad living conditions that were their results caused unrest and peoples dissatisfaction with life they lead.

Decline in the devsirme system that was levy of the young men and boys that came from Christian families and the increase of admission of Islamic men into the army also contributed to unrest of the Turkmen clans and Kurdish nomands (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2002, p.525).

The increase of the Janissaries, elite troops, which can be seen in the picture, was one more reason for the revolt. These troops were very important and prestigious in the Ottoman Empire and it turned out that they could even influence the government. Also, Janissaries used their power and influence to make themselves richer as they could become landlords and own vast lands as well as took part in trade and became well-off people. All these factors caused Jelali revolts.

Internal Rebellions in the 19th Century

Serbian Revolution (1804-1835)

Main Events:

1. The First Serbian Uprising
2. Second Serbian Uprising
3. Recognition of Serbian State

Serbian Revolution (1804-1835) is a perfect example of resistance of the part of the Ottoman Empire to the rule imposed on the Serbian people. The revolution included three main uprisings: the first Serbian uprising, the Second Serbian Uprising and the Recognition of Serbian State. It is necessary to consider the reasons for these two main revolts during the time of the Ottoman occupation of Serbia.

The First Serbian Uprising

General reason: The desire for national emancipation (Trbovich, 2008, p.67).

Concrete Reasons: False promises

• Proclamation of firmans
• Introduction of knezes
• Freedoms: religion and trade.

The First Serbian Uprising followed the annexation of Belgrade Pashaluck to the Ottoman Empire as the result of the Austro-Turkish War of 1787-1791.

After 400 years of the Ottoman occupation Serbs started a fight for their rights on their land. A general reason for that was The desire for national emancipation (Trbovich, 2008, p.67). However, it is possible to define the concrete reasons for the beginning of the First Serbian Uprising.

Sultan Selim III (that is shown in the picture) promised autonomy to Serbia. He introduced firmans in 1793, 1796 and they granted additional rights to Serbs (Inc Icon Group International, 2008). In addition, the Sultan promised to introduce knezes, which were local rulers inSerbia. Also, freedom of religion and trade was promised to the population of Serbia. However, Selim III was powerless, he was too weak in comparison with the Janissaries who revolted against his rule and acted by their own will. Thus, Serbia did not get what was promised.

Reasons: The Janissaries atrocities

• increased taxes
• itlu
  enje (labor by force)
• The Slaughter of the Knezes

The Janissaries disobeyed Selim III and invaded Serbia. Again, the factors that provoked the Serbs revolt were doubled taxes introduced in the country, a new form of oppression of people, called 
itlu
enje that meant forced labor.

However, the final event that turned out to be the factual reason for the revolt was the Slaughter of the Knezes or Dukes that was the massive execution of the Serbian noblemen ordered by the head of the Janissaries.

Karaore Petrovi was the man who headed the revolt. As for the outcome of the revolt, it cannot be called a successful one, though it created the ground for the Second Serbian Uprising. Besides, Serbia got assistance and support of Russia that helped to put recognition of Serbian state into practice.

Bosnian Revolt (1831)

Introduction of new reforms:

• Increase of the nizam
• Introduction of new taxes
• The Ottaman bureaucracy

Though according to historic tradition, Bosnia was not a disadvantaged part of the Ottaman Empire, and enjoyed certain privileges in comparison with other European states included into the Empire, the beginning of the nineteenth century turned out to be stressful for Bosnia.

It was the time when Sultan Mahmud II (see the picture on the slide) was in power. The Ottaman Empire experienced awful decline that could be seen by the numerous revolts of that time. Sultan, as the power-bearer, had to take measures. However, these measures turned out to be the reasons for dissatisfaction of the Bosnians. Especially strict were the military reforms, the reforms of the nizam that was the name of the army that was centrally controlled, though new taxes and bureaucracy were also harmful for the Bosnian population.

So, nizam turned out to be the extension of the autocrats ideological existence, it gave the rule the opportunity to dominate his subjects by force and extract the funds for the Ottoman rule. Brutal and annihilating tactics of the nizam was outrageous for Bosnian people (Hovannisian, 1992, p.24).

Cretan Insurrection (1866-1869)

Reasons for Insurrection:

• relative freedom,
• mountain regions,
• Christianity.

The outcome: Open way to local administration.

The time of the Cretan uprising covers three years, from 1866 to 1869. It is necessary to mention that among the Ottoman territories Crete was the last of all Greek-speaking regions to be occupied by the Ottomans. It happened in 1669. Due to the landscape of Crete that covered great mountainous territories, it was difficult for the Empire to control them.

As for the reasons for the uprising, this relative freedom due to weak military control of the Ottoman army was one of the reasons for the desire to be free. Those people who lived a free life in the mountains inspired the population that was under the Ottoman Empire to revolt and set themselves free.

The Greek Revolution was one more reason why the people of Crete who were Christians joined Greece in its war of liberation fro the Ottoman oppression. Their main aim was unity with Greece. However, the revolt was suppressed though Turkish government open Cretan Christians the way to local administration of Crete that was a valuable achievement.

Two Epirus Revolts

The First Revolt (1854)

Reasons:

• Military reason: the Crimean War (1854-1856).
• Memories of the recent War of Independence
• Support given by Russia
• Religious motives.

Suppression of the revolt. Greek world that was under the rule of the Ottoman Empire wanted liberation as it was suggested by the Greek War of Independence in 1821-1829.

The middle of the nineteenth century was the perfect time to start a revolt at historic situation favored such actions. The main reason for the revolt was that Russia was in the state of war with the Ottomans and since Russia was a powerful Empire at that time Greeks felt that the War was a chance to get the territory where Greek people lived but the territory did not belong to Greece.

Also, people remembered the help of Russia during the Greek War of Independence and they hoped for such help. Religious motives also inspired the revolt taking into consideration the same religion (Orhtodox) practiced in Russia. Unfortunately, the revolt was doomed due to numerical superiority and British and French support of the Ottoman Empire.

The Second Revolt (1878)

• Reason for its breaking out  the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878)
• Reason for the failure  absence of centralized support

The first revolt in Epirus was followed by the second one as soon as the situation became favorable. Such a frequent occurrence of revolts is a perfect sign of the doom of the Ottoman Empire due to its lost of power and influence of the world arena it used to dominate in the past. So, the reason for the revolt was the same as for the previous revolt described by us. Since Russia started the Russo-Turkish War in 1877, it inspired Epirus to the act of liberation again.

However, though that it was clear that the Ottoman Empire was at its last grasp and its defeat was evident, the Greek government chose to stay aside. They did not provide centralized support for the revolt and it was the main cause for it suppression.

The Herzegovinian Revolt (1875-1878)

Reasons:

• Lean year + growing taxes
• Bad treatment of the Christian population by aghas
• Ignoring of reforms of Sultan

Abdulmecid

Result: Contribution to the Russo-Turkish War.

Herzegovina was one more part of the Ottoman Empire and its life under occupation was as unbearable as the life of other nations or even worse. The population suffered from unjust taxes and cruel treatment of the Bosnian aghas, the people who bore military or civil titles granted by the Ottoman Empire.

It so happened that 1875 was a lean year that brought poor harvest but the taxes remained the same and were even raised. It proved to be awfully unjust and the Herzegovinians could not bear such treatment.

Though Sultan Abdulmecid made changes in the Herzegovinian laws as he abolished the part of taxes and reorganized the system of taxes, the reforms were ignored by the landlords who continued their oppression of the peasants.

The revolt occurred when the Ottoman Empire was almost dead and its enemies (Russia) experienced rise. This is why the Ottoman Empire could not cope with the revolt that became one of the factors that inspired the Russo-Turkish War.

Conclusion

Reasons for the revolts inside the Empire:

• Too large territories
• Tax oppression of the population
• Weakness of the Empire
• Growth of nationalism
• Strength of the Empires enemies
• Weak and powerless Sultans
• Corruption of the local authorities
• Religious diversity

By means of concluding, let us sum up the main reasons for the decay of the Ottoman Empire that eventually lead to its collapse:

• Too large territories
• Tax oppression of the population
• Weakness of the Empire
• Growth of nationalism
• Strength of the Empires enemies
• Weak and powerless Sultans
• Corruption of the local authorities
• Religious diversity

All these reasons in complex with constant military aggression instead of cooperation with the people under the rule of the Empire resulted in the eventual disappearance of the Ottoman Empire.

Reference List

Cirkovic, SM 2004, The Serbs. Willey-Blackwell, Malden, MA.

Encyclopedia Britannica, 2002, Encyclopedia Britannica. The University of Michigan, Michigan.

Hooker, R 1996, The Ottomans. Web.

Hovannisian, RG 1992. The Armenian Genocide: History, Politics, Ethics. Palgrave Macmillan, NY.

Inc Icon Group International, 2008, Sultans: Websters Quotations, Facts, and Phrases. ICON Group International, USA.

Singh, NKr 2000, International Encycolaedia of Islamic Dynasties. Anmol Publications PVT. LTD, New Delhi .

Trbovich, AS 2008, A Legal Geography of Yugoslavias Disintegration. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Ottoman Empire embraced a distinct appearance at the time Mehmed II took control. Mehmed II reigned over Ottoman Empire for two separate periods where one was considerably shorter than the other as it started from fourteen forty-four to fourteen forty-six. The other period was a bit longer which started from fourteen fifty-one and lasted for thirty years, ending in fourteen eighty-one.

Throughout his entire ruling, Mehmed was outstandingly active and his main mission was to conquer empires as well as cities where he employed his military proficiency to invade the regions at ease. The conquest of Constantinople is considered the most significant of his invasions since his predecessors efforts to conquer it had failed. Together with other conquests, Mehmed managed to considerably increase the region covered by Ottoman Empire.

Introduction

Ottoman Empire originated from a Turkish principality that has its roots in Asia. This empire arose in the late thirteenth century at a time when the Empire of Byzantine was in the process of crumbling and the Seljuk Turks Empire had already collapsed. The name Ottoman came from Osman I who was crowned the outstanding royal empires initiator. The area covered by Ottoman Empire stretches from Asia Minor otherwise known as modern Turkey to North Africa, Middle East, and Southeastern Europe to Egypt.

Mehmed II carried out his ruling in Ottoman Empire outstandingly to a point that he was recognized as a legend for his contribution to the army. When Mehmed was aged twenty-one, he went out to lead young men that comprised an army into a war where they had the privilege of capturing Constantinople which is currently known as Istanbul. Since then his name and personality have been upheld as he is credited for being the first ruler in Ottoman Empire to portray such a high level of imperialism. Goffman (2002 pp 28-32)

Mehmet II Portraits

Mehmet IIs two portraits give a description of his appearance which was very unique and according to a scholar known as Philip; Mehmet IIs appearance was quite terrible. Philip recognized some features of Mehmet IIs face that were quite striking and those that made him so outstanding as they were in line with his dictatorial character. These features were a curved nose that was raised at the middle extending to the mouth section and shifty eyes. Some of Mehmet IIs portraits were found in Paolos museum who claimed that one of the portraits was original and that it was painted by Gentile Bellini who lived during Mehmet IIs reign.

From this portrait; Mehmet II also had eagle-like eyes, a small mouth, and a circular chin which formed part of the characteristic appearance whose effect was felt even in his style of ruling. Another of Mehmet IIs portraits that have some form of Gentile originality is the Layard picture which is found in the National gallery. In this particular portrait, Mehmet II is less energetic which shows that the portrait represents his appearance at the age of fifty-two, the age he died at. However, his unique appearance is still evident in the same way his outstanding character persisted all through his reign. Gray (1932 pp.4-6)

Conquest of Constantinople

Before Mehmed took over the reign of the Ottoman Empire, his predecessors had managed to conquer lands that surrounded Constantinople city, and the land on which the city lay was the only one they had not managed to conquer. Constantinople was conquered during Mehmed IIs reign in the year fourteen fifty-three and its entire capture was led and supported by Mehmed II. This was among the most significant events that characterize Ottoman Empire during Mehmed IIs reign. Conquering Constantinople took place in a very systematic manner where the first step was to block the city to control the fighting appropriately.

Mehmed led his men to Hagia Sophia which was previously a church, where he established a fighting operations base. Muslims also made a significant contribution to this practice where they made use of cannons, very big guns, which were powerful weapons to attack their rivals. Muslims employed their cannons to attack Constantinoples walls to a point that they destroyed them completely. After they had conquered the city, they proceeded to make some adjustments in the way it operated with the first change being the conversion of the previously Christian city to a city of Islam. Ottomans main objective was to have a completely new appearance of Constantinople which made it necessary to enlarge and mark the Empires border correctly.

Therefore, the Ottomans connected the continent of Africa to that of Asia which allowed the Empire to cover a wider area than before. This was followed by several other conquests by the Ottomans where they subsequently overpowered Christians. The conquest of the Balkan Peninsula was among the subsequent invasions led by Mehmed II where he took possession of Bosnia, Aegean islands as well as Greece.

This caused him to have several friends including Khan who offered to collaborate with him as he carried out his invasions. Trebizond Empire which is in Asia was also seized by Mehmed II during his ruling. It is during this particular time that Mehmed dissolved all independent empires that existed in Turkey to come up with only a single empire namely Ottoman Empire. The ruling families of Turkish Empires were subdued by being put to death which was aimed at eliminating any of their traces that would erupt thereafter in protest. Kennedy (2004 p.69-75)

Trade treaties within Ottoman Empire under Mehmeds reign

Several agreements were initiated by Mehmed II at the time when Constantinople fell including trade agreements with the leaders of the Genoese colony which had fallen together with Constantinople. This particular agreement allowed leaders and citizens of Genoese colonies to retain several trading privileges that they previously enjoyed. Several parties were not happy with the Ottomans series of conquests among them being Western contemporaries who were particularly concerned with Byzantines invasion which they considered an extraordinary tragedy.

Latin contemporaries also analyzed the losses incurred from the citys destruction where they regarded them as death that had occurred to a learning center. Holy places, as well as great churches, were also considered to have been destroyed during the citys invasion by Mehmed IIs army. Constantinoples fall was considered a very significant event and that was symbolic in a unique manner as it marked the absorption of a large part of Byzantine territory to a point that it was only left with a very small portion under its name. Duiker (2006 85-86)

Some misleading inferences have concluded that the invasion by Ottoman marked the point where Latin trade which was conducted in the territory of Turkey began its declination. This is referred to as a misleading inference since no evidence is available to confirm that the main aim of invading the city was to terminate trading relations that had been previously agreed upon between Latinos and Ottomans. Contrary to the inferences, the economic policy of the Ottoman portrayed a situation where trade agreements were to be a continuation from his predecessors which showed that he would not have a good reason to terminate a long-term agreement.

The policy also showed that trade relations with Latinos were of great importance to Ottoman and would not equally have any interest in having them destroyed. Genoese, which was part of the empires attacked by Mehmed IIs army maintained good relations even after being conquered. The only interruptions that took place were during the time merchants were moving to Aegean islands where they were to investigate developments after which trade operations went back to normal. Duiker (2006 87-88)

Ottoman Empire Administration under Mehmed II

Mehmed made several adjustments to Ottoman Empires administration and also to other empires that he had managed to conquer. Among the empires that he made administrative adjustments to is old Byzantine where he combined its administrative operations with that of the Ottoman state to enable him to control Byzantine more closely.

His first step in making adjustments within Byzantine was to introduce politics in Byzantine where political factors may have previously prevailed but Caesars who were in control had not referred to their actions as political. Mehmed established a court where he assigned Greek Scholars as well as Italian humanists several duties that added to the operational court staff. The church was allowed to proceed with its functions only that patriarchs were ordered to embrace the Turkish faith and abandon the Christian faith.

Furthermore, Mehmed asked one of the gentiles to make his portrait and paint it accordingly which was aimed to indicate that he had taken over the city and that he was in full control as his portrait would replace those of former leaders of Byzantine. The invasion efforts portrayed by Mehmed were so intense as he was determined to conquer powerful empires including the Roman Empire which was evident when he showed interest in becoming the ruling Caesar of the Roman Empire. At this particular time, Mehmeds main intention was to capture both Italy and Rome which he did not succeed as his plans were realized before he took action. The two empires took defense before they could be attacked by Mehmeds army.

Muslim artists were also integrated into Mehmeds court which he had established in Constantinople where he wanted to have full representation of each empire that he conquered. This would enable him to rule those empires appropriately. New infrastructure was set up in Byzantine as some of the previous ones had been destroyed during invasion where new infrastructure included a university, waterways as well as mosques. Quataert (2000 p.17)

Mehmed employed a very unique method in his conquest mission where he was particularly concerned with the religious status of his conquests. He ensured he did not only conquer the empires and cities but also significantly influenced their religious status. In this case, Mehmed attempted to transform Christians into Muslims which was the faith he supported. He took young Christians from the already conquered regions and recruited them as part of his army.

After being recruited, Mehmed ordered for the young men to be separated where some were assigned duties in Sultans court while the other group was integrated with his army. Mehmed ensured that he gained the favor of Christians by appointing one of the Patriarchs to govern them though he was to be directly answerable to him. This allowed him to comfortably introduce the citys remodeling where he converted Byzantine to Turkish capital in which the dominant religion was to be Islamic.

The main interest of Mehmeds adjustment of administrative operations in the Ottoman Empire was to tighten his control which also made him make considerable adjustments in areas he conquered as they were incorporated into Ottoman Empire. This enabled Mehmed II to have his ruling power centralized in one main operating system from where he would be able to directly or indirectly control his Empire. By the time Mehmed was through with his reign, he had managed to extend the region covered by Ottoman Empire to great lengths as it covered Asia, the African region as well as European regions. Faroqhi (1994 pp 59-60)

Conclusion

It is clear; that Mehmed II was a unique Ruler who conducted his ruling in a very outstanding manner. Mehmed II employed his military competency to undertake invasions where he conquered cities and Empires. The already conquered regions were integrated into Ottoman Empire and appropriate adjustments were implemented to enable Mehmed II to control them. Mehmed II was not comfortable with the Christian religion and he made efforts to influence Christians to abandon their faith.

They were encouraged to join Islam but in cases where they objected, he forced them into Islamic. Administrative operations were also adjusted to a form that would favor Mehmed IIs ruling. This included incorporating scholars and artists to his court operations where they were allocated duties that concerned their Here, he ensured that the governors he appointed were directly answerable to him, which made him chose persons who were familiar to the specific regions but not those from the former ruling. Faroqhi (1994 pp 61-64)

References

Duiker W. World History: Cengage Learning, 2006 pp85-88.

Faroqhi S. An economic and social history of the Ottoman Empire: Cambridge University Press, 1994 pp59-64.

Goffman D. The Ottoman Empire and early modern Europe: Cambridge University Press, 2002 pp28-32.

Gray B. Two portraits of Mehmet II: The Burlington Magazine Publications, Ltd, 1932 p 4-6.

Kennedy P. The rise and fall of the great powers: Vintage Books, 2004 pp. 69-75.

Quataert D. Article on the Ottoman Empire: Cambridge University Press, 2000 p17.

Introduction

Ottoman has been the largest and powerful empire in history which was inspired by Islam. The empire was most successful at the time of Suleiman who had ruled for forty six years. However, the empire was faced by a very drastic decline in 1571 after it lost the battle of lepanto. Further decline was accelerated by World War I. However; the empire had experienced a great transformation in between the golden age and the time of the decline. This period was referred to as the Tanzimat which was basically a period during which the Ottoman Empire was reorganized and reformed starting from the early eighties.

The main idea of the transformation was to bring about development in the empire through tax revenue collection for military support in order to ensure complete control of its territory and prevent colonization by the powerful nations. The reformations made became the major root of Ottomanism among the majority ethnic groups in the empire which led to formation of nationalists movements. One main attempt of the reformations was to bring together non-Muslims and non-Turks and incorporate them into the Ottoman social believes and norms. They were to get liberty to allow them to exercise equal right to the Turks (Goodwin 1).

Government and administration

The Ottoman Empire experienced some changes in the government and its way of administration which was, in fact one of the major reasons for the decline of the empire. The sultanate administration failed during that period. Previously, the sultanate was a very strong institution from which the sultan was expected to point out a successor. However, the sultanate became weak with time and since it was the strong hold of the empire, its decline had strong contribution its decline. Although the great Suleiman had led the empire into great success during its golden age, he later became weak and this resulted to his less involvement in the affairs of the empire as he was getting old. In addition, he was executed by some of his successors leaving the sit for Selim II who, despite living in the palace for long, had no experience in running the state.

He generally neglected his governing responsibilities and rather paid much attention to personal matters such as physical pleasures. However, during the transformation, governance and administration changed completely to strong and central monarchies across the empire. Constitution reforms were also done during this period. A parliament was formed which had representatives from all the provinces to allow all citizens take part in the running of the state through their representatives who acted as their voices. Local governments were formed too and the sultan was deprived of his powers which were described as dictatorship. Electric administration was introduced for diplomatic purposes (Chambers, 2010, p. 1).

Military

Initially, the Ottomans military unit simply consisted of several tribesmen but later became complex as the empire advanced. The whole process of modernization in the empire was initiated by the military where the sultan of the time got rid of the Janissary corps that existed before and instead he formed a modern army for the empire. The modern army was even given then name of the new order to describe the change. The army also began recruiting foreigners and started training its officers in western countries through the foreign experts on the field. The officers sent for training came back and formed the young-turks organization which was inspired by the education they got in the European countries.

Basically, these transformations contributed largely to the expansion of the empire as internal territories and as part of the European continent. However, the power of the military to control the empires deals with the European countries later declined. However, the empire became unable to sustain and maintain the military following economic distractions. However, shortly after, the Ottoman air force was established which was one of the worlds greatest organization in combat aviation. This was followed by establishments of pilots and planes for the military officers which enabled the empire to organize its own flights for its officers. An air academy was also established and it increased the rate at which the military advanced on the aviation program. The number of people enrolling in the military increased as specialized programs for training was being developed.

Economy

The Ottoman government had established an economical policy which focused on the development of Bursa which led to the expansion of capital and other commercial centers. The economic policy of the empire was initially based on the societal concept where the empire had the goal to expand its resources through extending its rulers power to other states. The empires main aim was to obtain revenue for the empire and to keep the social and traditional norms intact as well. Of all the Islamic states, Ottoman had the most developed treasury organization which acted as a body through which training and development of professionalism could be achieved. Due to its gepgraphical location, the empire used its powers to control the link between the west and the east.

It prevented the route between the two regions especially where export of certain economic goods would cause great risks to the economy of the empire. The Ottoman also took control over the vasco da gamma route to enable the state have easy access to trade and market links (Nosotro, 2010, p. 1). Soon the economy of the empire had extended to several continents around the world. The Anglo Ottoman treaty opened the doors for the empire to engage in creates markets in England and France. Besides improving commercial routes, the empire also ensured increased cultivation of land as well as engagement in international trade. These concepts led to improved economic functioning of the state. The economic and political interest went hand in hand during these transformations.

Conclusion

The Tanzimat period had very useful changes especially in the economical and governance concepts. Other developments such as in revenue generation and service delivery by the state have been of great help in bringing equal civilization and modernization in all the communities. It was therefore a great move by the Ottoman society to realize that it had lagged behind and to accept help and modernization from the western nations. The social life of the Ottomans society as a whole changed to the better with the introduction of modern schools since quality education is the key to a better life. However, the governance and administration part of the empire can be said to control all the other aspects of the state especially those that came about following the transformation period. The military was equally important since it played a great role in providing people with the opportunity to explore resources without any problems.

Reference List

Chambers, R. (2010). The ottoman empire. Web.

Nosotro, R. (2010). The decline of the ottoman empire. Web.

Typically, the majority of empires have a remarkably similar way of development: firstly, they rise from a small or weak state, then they prosper, and sooner or later, the decline begins, and eventually, an empire comes to an end. However, it is also apparent that every particular case has its own specific characteristics. In order to exemplify this assumption, the Ottoman and Safavid empires will be compared and contrasted in this paper.

Academic sources on the topic will be referenced. The timeframe covered by this paper is considerably large since the Safavid empire ceased to exist in 1722 while the Ottomans lasted until 1922. This essay is organized in the following way: in two paragraphs, the countries under discussion are analyzed separately, in order to use the synthesized and analyzed information for the comparison of these two empires. A comprehensive conclusion will be provided as well.

The Ottoman Empire

The Ottoman Empire is known as one of the largest as well as the most long-lasting political powers in the Islamic world. As it is mentioned in the profound study by Quataert, the empire grew from a small state, which existed from around thirteen century, until its official elimination in 1922. Given the fact that the empire had enlarged immensely over time, the typical problem, which is experienced by the majority of kingdoms, arose. The Ottoman Empire became so large that it became considerably difficult to control and coordinate the centralized power in different regions of the state. Accordingly, in the nineteenth century, the Ottomans experienced an evident decline that was largely determined by the changing balance of powers in Europe.

The Safavid Dynasty

The Safavid empire is known as the longest-lasting Persian dynasty in the past thousand years as it ruled Iran from 1500 to 1722. The state is also known as one of the primary rivals of the Ottoman Empire since both countries were in the same region and strived for prosperity by relatively similar methods. The rise of the Iranian dynasty was largely dependent on the leadership of its most recognized rulers, namely Shah Ismail I and Shah Abbas, as the country did not have much economic resources. The inheritors of the dynasty did not succeed in maintaining the power of the empire.

Comparison of the Two Selected Empires

It is difficult to compare these two countries as they were closely related in terms of their political goals, methods of expansion, and other aspects. However, it could be stated with certainty that the rivalry of the Ottoman and Safavid empires represented the controversy between two primary branches of Islam, which are Suni and Shi respectively. The use of the military power to expand westward and spread the faith of Islam could be considered as common characteristic of both countries.

However, it is possible to mention that the Safavid empire fell due to the fact that the rulers who came to power after Shah Abbas did not have the same level of ambition and they also lacked understanding of how to develop the country. The Ottoman Empire came to decline as well, but it prospered for a considerably longer time, and its fall was largely determined by the pressure of political powers in Europe.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is essential to state that both countries under discussion represented very important political powers of the Islamic world, which had a considerable impact on the European and Middle-East history. The comparison of the two empires shows that the success of the Safavid dynasty was largely dependent on the leadership qualities of its founders. In this respect, the Ottoman empire could be considered as a much more powerful state. However, it also eventually came to its end due to the changing balance of European political powers.

Bibliography

Foran, John. The Long Fall of the Safavid Dynasty: Moving beyond the Standard Views. International Journal of Middle East Studies 24, no. 2 (1992): 281-304.

Matthee, Rudi. The Decline of Safavid Iran in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Persianate Studies 8, no. 2 (2015): 276-308.

Quataert, David. The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

One of the most outstanding cultural outputs of the Islamicate world is Ottoman architecture. This architecture emerged after the formation of the Ottoman Empire in 1300. The pioneer locations of this architecture were Edirne and Bursa. The Ottomans specialized in creating inner spaces under huge domes, and such a thing had not happened in the Islamicate world before. Hitherto, most buildings and especially mosques as they were important aspects at the time, entailed mainly ordinary buildings, but highly decorated.

However, with the entry of the use of domes and vaults, which were common with the Ottoman architecture, both inside and outside space, was redefined. Mosques were redesigned from the earlier dark chambers to beautifully constructed domes with well-defined light and dark areas. Across the entire Asia Minor, different forms of mosques emerged based on the Ottoman architecture.

This emerging form of architecture was well received across the region with Mimar Sinan at the helm whereby he came up with numerous ideas concerning this form of art. With such revolutionary architectural wave sweeping across Asia Minor, other regions became interested and adopted it. The classical Ottoman architecture was widely accepted in Tunisia, Hungary, Algiers, and Egypt. The west did not receive the classical version of this architecture, but with modernization, this form of art slowly penetrated the west as explored next.

With modernization and peace, the Ottoman Empire started to form bilateral associations with western countries. France was the first country to associate with the Ottoman Empire. Consequently, the Ottoman architecture started influencing its French counterpart.

However, architects from France modified the classical Ottoman architectural designs and incorporated the Rococo and Baroque trends, which were popular across Europe. The most outstanding product of the modification of the classical Ottoman architecture is the renowned Divrigi hospital. The key architect of the Baroque-Ottoman architecture in France was Mellin, and he traveled to Istanbul, where he cemented his interests in this newly found form of art.

During the Tulip period, the modernized Ottoman architecture spread widely across Europe. Even back in Turkey where it originated, different places hitherto preserved for the elites were opened for the ordinary citizens to visit. Therefore, the architecture became common across Asia Minor, where public recreational areas like Kagithane were constructed using this form of architecture.

Baroque-Ottoman architecture became popular between 1757 and 1808 during the Baroque period. During this time, the architectural designs spread to Italy and other major European countries. Ultimately, the Ottoman architecture underwent a revolution during the National Architectural Renaissance, which occurred in the latter years of the 19th century.

Modern structural techniques started taking root, and this move brought revival to the classical Ottoman architecture. Architects started using modern materials like glass and steel. However, even though the materials changed, the new designs borrowed heavily from the classical architecture of the 12th century. The reception of the new modified classical Ottoman architectural designs was good as people across Europe and Africa embraced the architecture and started incorporating it in their constructions.

In conclusion, the Ottoman architecture emerged after the birth of the Ottoman Empire in 1300. It replaced the conventional architecture, which mainly entailed ordinary buildings with intense beautification. This new form of architecture specialized in creating both inside and outside spaces. The architecture experienced good reception beyond Turkey where it emerged. France became the first country to incorporate the Ottoman architecture in its designs with modifications under the influence of the Baroque designs.

Since the beginning of civilization, people have always ruled each other, usually through a monarch, but monarchs were overthrown often due to their response to internal and external factors. Different rulers all over the world responded to factors that threatened their rule in different ways, most rulers used violence and force, while others tried to peacefully resolve the conflict. During the post-classical period, many civilizations were interacting profusely which led to a spread in culture and ideas that sometimes challenged the societal norms in an empire and forced rulers to respond in order to maintain power. The Yuan Dynasty in China and the Ottoman Empire both had to respond to many external and internal factors like the spread of foreign religions in their empire, power gaps, and revolts, but both responded differently to their situations.

Both the Yuan Dynasty and the Ottoman Empire had to respond to foreign religions like Christianity. The Ottoman Empire was mostly tolerant of other religions but made them pay taxes to practice. According to the article ‘Ottoman Empire’ “Those who weren’t Muslim were categorized by the millet system…millets paid taxes”. The millet system was how minorities in the Ottoman Empire were able to rule themselves, but if they did not pay the tax they would lose their rights. The Ottomans also used the devshirme system, but it only required Christians to send their kids to serve the state and convert to Islam. Some converts held powerful positions in the Ottoman government and military. The Yuan emperors however preferred foreign religions over Chinese religions and allowed them to be practiced freely which allowed them to grow. In the article ‘The Yuan Dynasty’ it states that “they were receptive and tolerant of all religions, fostering a period of growth and expansion for many faiths, including Christianity”. Before the Yuan dynasty, Christians in China did not have many rights and Christianity was even outlawed at one point, but once the Yuan dynasty came to power the Pope was able to send diplomats to China, which led to Christians receiving more rights and the spread of Christianity. The Yuan dynasty also protected other religions like, Tibetan Lamaism which allowed it to prosper in China. The Ottomans and Yuan dynasty both experienced the spread of foreign religions in their empires, but both reacted very differently.

In the past, life expectancy was very low so when a leader died the power gap left would lead to wars, but some empires had a policy to prevent the war before it started. The Ottomans did not have a rule of succession, so when a sultan was crowned his brothers were killed to prevent a war over the throne. In the article ‘The History of fratricide in the Ottoman Empire. Part 1’ it states “Any of my sons ascend the throne, it acceptable for him to kill his brothers”. The Ottoman Empire had experienced many wars over power, one of the biggest being the Ottoman Interregnum, a civil war over the throne, which may have led to the creation of the Conqueror’s Law of Governance by Sultan Mehmed II. Many people were skeptical about this law which killed innocent men, but the law was backed by the Quran, but as time went on the sultan, imprisoned his brothers instead of killing them. Like the Ottoman Empire, the Yuan Dynasty did not have a rule of succession after the death of Kublai Khan, but unlike the Ottomans, there was no law established to prevent wars over power. According to the article ‘The Mongol Dynasty’, “Without an accepted rule of succession, the death of an emperor caused violent conflict among the different would-be rulers”. After the death of Kublai Khan, China became chaotic and in the span of 25 years China had 8 emperors, the Mongols spent too much time warring overpower, which led to a weaker dynasty. The weakened dynasty eventually fell to Zhu Yuanzhang and led to the establishment of the Ming dynasty. The Ottomans and Yuan dynasty are both violent when there is a power gap, but the Ottomans had a plan to prevent the wars for power, unlike the Yuan dynasty.

During the classical period, many empires were experiencing change which led to revolts both the Ottoman Empire and the Yuan Dynasty had revolts that weakened the empire, but the response the government had was different and the people that revolted were usually not the same in both empires. In the Ottoman Empire, most revolutions and coups were started or planned by the brothers of the sultan. According to the article ‘OTTOMAN INTERREGNUM’, “The Interregnum lasted for 11 years until Mehmed Çelebi emerged as victor”. After the Sultan Bayezid I died one of his sons was crowned sultan, but his other sons did not acknowledge his authority so they revolted and a civil war began over the throne until only Mehmed was alive. Also, when the Sultan Selim I came to power his brother planned a coup to overthrow him and was backed by some high ranking officials, but he was caught and executed before the coup occurred. Unlike in the Ottoman Empire, the revolts in the Yuan dynasty were usually started by ordinary Chinese people and as a result, the Yuan dynasty would reduce the rights of all the Chinese in the country. As stated in the article ‘The Yuan Dynasty’ it states: “Li Tan…instigated a revolt against Mongol rule in 1262. After successfully suppressing the revolt, Kublai curbed the influence of the Han Chinese advisers in his court”. Li Tan, a normal Chinese man started the revolt in 1262 as a result of the revolt, Kublai Khan was afraid the Han Chinese in his government would use their power to weaken his authority and overthrow him. As a result, a social system was created with the Han at the bottom and the advice of many Han Chinese advisors was also ignored. The Ottoman Empire usually had revolutions started by members of the royal family which resulted in their death but the revolutions in the Yuan Dynasty were started by ordinary Chinese people and resulted in the Chinese losing many rights.

In conclusion, the Ottoman Empire and the Yuan Dynasty were two important empires that shaped the regions they occupied and the culture in those regions. Both empires had many factors that they had to respond to in order to maintain control of their empire though they did not respond similarly both used their power to deal with the factors and help their empire grow and expand. Both the Ottoman Empire and the Yuan Dynasty had to deal with the spread of foreign religions in their empire, power gaps, and revolts all of which have contributed to the fall of empires throughout history, but both managed to last for multiple generations.

State and non-state are distinguishable, generally based on the construction, organization, and military. Nonetheless, the methods of payment and taxation in state societies vary. When trying to make a historical understanding the structure and institutions are critical to consider. This paper focuses on the socio-economic typology in regards to Ottoman empire, particularly examining the socio-economic history of the empire, and most importantly the multiplicity of socio-economic systems commonly classified into two significant systems: cash-based and fief-based systems, which lead to the empire’s growth into a vast Middle Eastern Power. Through the example of this empire, this paper explains how the two systems work.

Fief system broadly was based on the giving of a conditional land grant to collect the agrarian taxes on that piece of land, as a substitute for a cash salary. The fief-holder is conditioned to answer upon being called for service as an exchange for being given the ground to collect taxes from the fief. In principle in all possible sources of revenue belong to the king or the ruling, where they are responsible for parceling out the land to each group in exchange for military and political support and service. On the contrary, cash-system collects cash-based taxes and pays salaries in cash. From the army, bureaucracy, judiciary, education, purchases, investment to all kind of state-sector salaries. This system demanded a highly-monetized economy, and communication technology as a transfer mechanism, which was not available until the early modern era.

Ottoman Empire was one of the longest-lasting dynasties and one of the most remarkable states in global history, emerging in the Anatolian highlands built by Turkish tribes around c.1300 enduring until the World War I. Starting as a semi-tribal principality, then evolved into a state, and later on, evolved into an empire. The multi-ethnical, multi-linguistic and multicultural empire built their rich and powerful state through building a synthesis that welcomed newcomers. The Ottoman empire was said to be having the wealthiest and the most powerful state system due to the aspects that constructed their empire. The enormous agrarian sector based on small production, and also international trade the ancient trade routes such as Silk Route and Spice Route, that provided a cash flow, consequently an urban economy.

Essentially, the whole revenue from every source is in the possession of the sultan. The sultan exercised royal domain or royal eminent right (rakabe). However it was not possible to manage the lands owned by the ottoman empire, therefore the land was distributed to people. Ottoman lands were classified into three. Öşri lands that belonged to Muslims they had freedom and property rights, but they were giving tax of tithe (öşür). In the same way, non-Muslims had the same rights and they were giving tax of ‘haraç’ for their lands. The larger parts of lands belonged to the state. These lands were called as ‘Miri’ demesne lands.

As it is seen, Ottoman Empire began the timar tax system at the foundation of the it. The Timar system depended on conquests. Ottomans constantly gained lands and timar system was broader and the number of soldiers increased gradually. Consequently, a huge military power and the key to Ottomans’ success. In the second half of the sixteenth century, when there was a growing shortage of money, created by the trade of precious stones, and a growing scarcity of land distributable under the timar, as the Ottoman expansion came to an end that’s when the traditional timar system started falling apart. Another reason was the weakened power of the sultans. Because of all these factors, the central authority was weakened, the wars could not be won and the economy of the state was destroyed. As a result, taxes were increased. In addition to this, Sultans started to distribute the Miri lands falsely. To supply the need of money, the state started to rent lands as a trade product which is called iltizam. In time this system changed into the manor system. In 1831, after Tanzimat, the timer system was finally abolished. In the course of the dissolution of the timar system, the private possession of estates (ciftlik) became official. Only in the second half of the nineteenth century did a capitalist change take place in the Ottoman economic system. First, in agricultural sectors, labor were hired, the primary means of the capitalist system of production, and then to a larger extent until it collapses with the coming of the Turkish Republic.

All in all, the adoption of the timar system mainly due to fiscal-military considerations, aimed at the economic guarantee of military reforms. The government was able to bring together most of the land under its power in the form of state domains. The institutional change that took place described key factors of events in the history of the Ottoman Empire. However, it can be seen that institutional change isn’t always effective, as exemplified the institutional changes that took place were merely to reform distribution and not production growth, or economic growth. An important dimension is that regardless of the amount of money circulation in the empire, it still didn’t have enough to be a cash-based modern state, but rather party cash-based until the 19th century and when there was a change of system into cash-based. Although there was a significant success and military strength in the empire, it still Vanished in 1992.

The Ottoman Empire included a large area that included much of the regions contiguous to the eastern and southern Mediterranean. Ottoman rule stretched for a period of around 700 years and at its height. As a result, the character of Ottoman architecture has undergone multiple changes over the course of this long period. The architectural heritage of the Ottomans can be divided into three phases, starting with the early formative phase, the classical era, followed by a late period marked by more ornate decorations and a growing influence of Western architecture. The character of Ottoman architecture varies as the gap rises from the center of the Ottoman Empire in western Anatolia and Thrace, and so exceptions are made to local architectural normality for buildings designed in the Ottoman provinces.

Polychrome glazed ceramic tiles, such as the famous Eznek tiles, dominated by white and blue, are commonly used as wall coverings and mostly substitute marble as a sheathing medium. Wood is used both as a building medium and as a decoration material. It is the primary material for the houses of Istanbul, Ottoman capital.

The architecture of the Ottomans, particularly after the early formative period, is mainly made of stone. In fact, Ottoman architecture is renowned for the very high quality of its masonry. Still the mixture of brick and stone is very common, and brick is used for arches, domes, and vaults. Lead is used to cover domes and minaret caps.

The predominance of the central dome in early Ottoman mosques, which covers a large portion of the prayer hall is a crucial aspect. With the emergence of the classic Ottoman period, this central dome rises significantly in size and is frequently paired with a series of half-domes and small domes cascaded from the central dome, with the overall structure fitting into the pyramidal contour.

A few mosques have one, two, or four half-domes to support the central dome. The domes in the Ottoman architecture have a flat semi-circular outline. The arcaded courtyard typically flanks the prayer hall along the façade opposite the qibla wall.

Typically, a huge imperial Ottoman religious complexes have a large variety of services, which in addition to a mosque, can include a soup kitchen, a school, a public bath, a hospital, and shops. The Ottoman Mosque is well-known for its simple elegant pencil-shaped minaret with lead-coated ends, elongated conical hat. These minarets are a direct indicator of Ottoman-sponsored buildings in the Ottoman Empire. The minarets may have anywhere from one to three balconies, typically on vaults. Royal mosques have more than one minaret, varying from two to six.

Muqarnas are used selectively in such regions, such as the underside of the minaret balconies or above the windows and portals. Calligraphy, typically featuring multiple scripts, is an important part of the decorative program of many houses. Applied surface decoration in the Ottoman architecture of the classical era is more restrained than in the early Ottoman periods, as well as in the later Ottoman era. Ottoman architecture reflects the influences of a variety of traditions, including those of the Anatolian Seljuqs and Byzantines, all of which prevailed in Anatolia before the Ottomans came to power. More precisely, the Imperial Ottoman Mosques of the Classical Era display the strong influence of the Byzantine church of Hagia Sophia in the mid-6th century AD.

This investigation explores the question: To what extent was the defeat of the Ottoman Empire at the Battle of Sarikamish (1914-1915) the main factor contributing to the Armenian Genocide (1915-1923)?

The first source which will be evaluated in depth is Karekin Pastermadjian’s book Karekin Pastermadjian’s book Why Armenia Should Be Free written in 1918 and is relevant because it highlights the conflicts which occurred between the Armenians and Turks which encompasses the Battle of Sarikamish.

One limitation to the origin is that Pastermadjian was an Armenian nationalist activist so he may have been sympathetic toward his people’s plight. The origin of this source is valuable because Pastermadjian was likely to have access to classified information since he was the ambassador of Armenia to the United States at the time. Furthermore, the date of publication of this source,1918, strengthens its value because the genocide was ongoing and allowed the author to acquire contemporary information regarding the incident.

The purpose of this source was to persuade the international community to side with Armenia in her efforts to achieve independence. A value of the purpose is that Karekin reasons that the Battle of Sarikamish was a. However, the purpose is limited because Pastermadjian tends to overstate the Armenians’ contribution during the First World War.

The content is limited because the language exaggerates the war efforts of Armenians as seen from sentences such as “This was the invaluable service rendered to the Russian army…….” and “This great service of Armenians to the Russian army…….”. The content is valuable because it allows readers to evaluate whether the events at Sarikamish had ultimately caused the genocide.

The second source evaluated in depth is a book titled Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire by Benjamin Braude in 2014. This source is relevant as gives insight into how Armenians were treated in the Ottoman Empire prior to the genocide.

One limitation of the origin of the source is an American historian may include their own political views in their work. The origin of this source is valuable because Braude is a professor of history at Boston College, specializing in Ottoman history, indicating that he has profound knowledge on this topic. The date of publication, 2014, further strengthens its value because, Braude, benefitting from hindsight, was able to consult a wider range of historical sources.

The purpose of the book is to show the attitude of Turkish people toward the Armenians. The purpose is valuable because it allows one to evaluate whether it had a significant impact on causing the Armenian genocide. The purpose is less valuable because the source spans many centuries of Middle Eastern history so there could have been a change in attitudes within the Muslim community.

A value in the content is that Braude has analyzed many different perspectives as a diverse range of resources (Ottoman, Arabic, Greek) were used. The content is limited because some vital information could have been lost in translation.

Section 2: Investigation

The Battle of Sarikamish (1914-1915) marked one of the most devastating defeats for the Ottoman Empire during the First World War (1914-1918). Many historians such as Ronald Grigor Suny and Benjamin Braude would agree that the defeat at Sarikamish was a main factor that caused the Armenian genocide, as it was ensued almost immediately by the Armenian genocide. However, historians such as Vahakan Dadrian refute this viewpoint and argues that it does not look at long-term and short-term factors such as religious tensions and discriminant policies of the Ottoman Empire which may have been greater contributors towards the eventual outbreak of the genocide.

The defeat of the Ottoman Empire at the Battle of Sarikamish had played a significant role in the genocide as it made the Turkish Government uncertain of the loyalty of their Armenian subjects. This is because Armenian volunteer troops had aided the Russians during the clash and according to Pastermadjian, the roles played by these Armenian soldiers were paramount to the success of the Russians at Sarikamish; this particular feat was announced even by Enver Pasha (high ranking Ottoman military officer) himself during his return from the war. The Turks feared that the Armenians would use guerrilla tactics and hold uprisings throughout Anatolia that would lead to further complications amidst their already formidable war efforts against Russia. Hence, the Ottomans saw the genocide as a means of solving this problem. This school of thought holds great similarity with another which credits the Armenian genocide in having a significant role in causing the genocide as the defeat because it had successfully instilled the fear of having to suffer more territorial losses within the hearts of the rulers of the Ottoman Empire. This view is supported by historian, Taner Akcam, who believes that the genocide was ideal in an attempt of preventing more territorial losses. This was because the Balkan Wars (1912-1913) had left the Ottoman Empire devasted, it witnessed the great loss of her territories in the Balkan Peninsula during that time. Historian Benjamin Braude believes that the triumvirate [referring to Mehmed Talaat Pasha, Ismail Enver Pasha, and Ahmed Djemal Pasha who were high-ranking officials that ruled the Empire] feared that Russia would compel the Armenians to start a massive revolt within Anatolia that would lead to the disintegration of the great Ottoman realm and therefore resorted to the murder of the Armenians to eliminate the possibility of such a threat.

However, this perspective pays too much close attention to the events that occurred at Sarikamish and has been challenged by historians because the Turkish government would have carried out the purging of the Armenian populace regardless of the outcome of the Battle of Sarikamish. It was only by pure coincidence that the Armenians would be the main targets of such exterminations because the government had previously made attempts to reduce the population of non-Muslim minority, notably through the Hamidian massacres (1894 – 1896), the Assyrian Genocide (1914-1924) and the Greek genocide (1913-1922). This view is supported by historian, Ugur Umit Ungor, who believes that the main goal of persecution of the Armenian people was to create a minority population that could be easily governed. Moreover, the Ottoman armies were only marching towards impendent doom when they embarked for Sarikamish in 1914. According to Pastermadjian, the Ottomans approached Sarikamish half-heartedly as they did not take into consideration the extreme weather conditions surrounding Sarikamish and brought insufficient food supplies as a result, the Turks had suffered more casualties from the cold rather than from fighting the Russians. Upon a closer scrutiny, it can be seen that the circumstances were favorable for the Ottomans as the Armenians were at the immediate vicinity of the events at Sarikamish and it would only be reasonable for the Turkish government to lay the blame of their defeat on the Armenians as it gave them a good opportunity to carry out the exterminations knowing that they would not face global backlash.

However, there are also short-term reasons that are more credible for the outbreak of the Armenian genocide such as the desire of the Turkish Government to build a Pan-Turkic state. Historian Raymond Kevorkian subscribes to this perspective, saying that the Turkish government executed the Armenian genocide in hopes of accomplishing its goal of creating a complete Turkish state. Since the Committee of Union and Progress came into power in 1908, the new government often promoted and advocated for ideologies such as Pan-Turkism or Pan-Turanism which called for the unification of the Turkic peoples. Through means of spreading propaganda, the government hoped to develop widespread hatred of Armenians within the Muslim population of the Ottoman Empire. Enver Pasha himself expressed desire to carry out ethnic cleansings and mass murders to remove non-Muslims from the Ottoman Empire and build a pan-Turkic state. Thus, the defeat at Sarikamish merely exacerbated anti-Armenian sentiments but did not contribute greatly to the outbreak of the Armenian genocide.

However, it is important to note that discrimination did not necessarily warrant for genocide, more attention should be given to long-term causes such as the build-up of religious tension prior to the events of the First World War. Historian, Moshe Ma’oz supports this view, saying that Christians and Jews were seen as alien to the Muslim community in the Ottoman Empire. Traditionally, the Ottoman Empire viewed itself as the sworn protector of the religion of Islam, seeing it as a duty to preserve the Islamic faith throughout all of her territories. While on the other hand, Armenia was the first nation to have Christianity as its official religion at 4 A. D, which may have been the earliest beginnings of the animosity between these states. Furthermore, the Armenians were a Christian minority living in an Islamic nation, they shared religious freedoms like no other and were given the status of ‘dhimmi’, meaning protected by the state. Turkish citizens were infuriated by this because they thought that a minority (Armenians) were undeserving of their privileges and that they should be revoked of them. This animosity worsened when the Young Turks came into power, they aimed to strengthen the prevalence of Islam more so than the leaders before them. These new leaders would often blame the suffering of the Turkish Muslims on the Armenians and have anti-Armenian propaganda promulgated in the sermons of Muslim mullahs and by town cries, which spread the word of the treachery and infidelity of Armenians. The Balkan Wars had also contributed to this hatred towards Christians since the Balkan states were largely Christian and the huge territorial losses for the Ottoman Empire dealt a great blow to the pride of the Turks. As historian Vahakan Dadrian argues, the Armenian genocide mainly occurred due to the negative perception of the general Turkish population towards the Armenian peoples that were present long ago, the genocide was a result of prolonged resentment towards Armenians and was not solely caused by the defeat at Sarikamish.

It, therefore, seems that the Battle of Sarikamish was not the main factor but merely just a trigger for the outbreak of the Armenian genocide, it had only served to add on to the pre-existing fear of the Ottomans towards the disloyalty of their Christian subjects. It can be said that the genocide occurred more so due to the long-term causes and the foundations it lay for the emergence of the short-term causes. The long-term causes coupled with the short-term causes was able to fester resentment within the Turkish people for many years and these feelings of hatred reached their climax during the years of the First World War, allowing one defeat out of many that were suffered by the Ottoman empire, to dictate the fate of the Armenian people.

Section 3: Reflection

By conducting this investigation into the importance of the Battle of Sarikamish in determining the Armenian genocide, I have become more familiar with the methods used by historians and also learn about some of the obstacles that are likely to be faced by historians in carrying out their investigations. I have learned that being able to reach a plausible conclusion from a different set of perspectives is an essential skill that is required of all historians. In order to proceed with the investigation, I had to read books written by historians that specialize on the subject, read official reports, as well as public addresses regarding the topic which I realized, are also common methods used which are used by historians.

One obstacle that I found when gathering primary resources was that sources that span over many years only show the stance of a nation at that particular time only. An example is a book that was written by Benjamin Braude which highlights the treatment of the Ottoman Empire towards the Armenians. The book mentions how cruelly the Armenians were treated by the Turks. However, new sources have surfaced, revealing that there were Muslim leaders who were against the carrying out of the Armenian genocide, showing that the book may have some inaccuracies due to an evolution in the attitudes of people.

Furthermore, the Armenian genocide is a sensitive topic up to this date and the Turkish government is still denying that such an incident has ever taken place to this date. It was challenging to find resources that showed the Turkish perspective of the causes of the genocide as most of the sources were written by Armenian authors which may be potentially biased. Therefore, I realized that historians often have a lack of perspectives to consult when investigating a sensitive matter. In order to overcome this problem, historians often have to ‘fill in the gaps and be critical in uncovering the information which may have been omitted or exaggerated. This particularly applied to when I was reviewing Karekin Pastermadjian’s book which was filled with language that tried to bring the Armenians to a heroic light. Therefore, I deemed this primary source as less valuable as it is aimed to persuade people.

As a whole, this investigation has enabled me to take on the challenges faced by historians and utilize effectively the methods used by historians to carry out historical investigations.

Introduction

Ibn Khaldun (Abu Zayd Abd al- Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn Khaldun al- Hadhrami) was a 14th-century Arab historiographer and historian credited of laying foundation to the specialized field of Ilm al- Umrān (Sociology) , who was considered in his Muqaddimah of Kitab al Ibar that, every zenith had a downfall having a central theme of his creative writing is why nations rise to power and what causes their decline. Ibn Khaldun stressed on studying the realities of human society and attempted to draw conclusions based on observation, rather than trying to reconcile observation with preconceived ideas. Therefore, drawing an inference from the work of the renowned Ibn Khaldun assessing the causes of the decline of the Ottoman.

1.1 An overview of the decline of the ottomans

Prior dealing to with the causes of decline, first of all having a cursory look at the developments that took place in Europe at that time provided Europe with a position of strength. An eminent scholar has nicely analyzed these developments by observing that during the period sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, Europe experienced the thrust towards modernization, ushering in:

• (a) the scientific and philosophical revolution,
• (b) the cultural and theological revolution,
• (c) the political and democratic revolution, and
• (d) the technological and industrial revolution.

The industrial revolution brought with its revolution in technology, production processes, the generation of energy, transport, the markets, agricultural revolution, urbanization, and all-around commercial expansion. The Ottomans allowed penetration of European commerce into their empire which had a crippling effect on the native craft industries, shifted the balance of trade against the Ottomans, and made them dependent on European traders. The grant of capitulations to various European countries not only gave them commercial privileges but made the residents of those countries subject to the jurisdiction of their country’s law (not the Ottoman law) and they could claim a right of hearing in a consular court. All this gave a relative superiority to the West.

The eighteenth-century defeats on the battleground placed Turkey on the defensive; a general decay was apparent; loss of military glory had resulted in loss of political importance, and loss of power had demoralized the nation. Intellectual life had been affected too. It appeared as if the Ottomans have lost their absorptive and expansionist power. It was Tsar Nicholas I of Russia who in 1833 described the Ottoman Empire as ‘the Sick Man of Europe.’

Ottoman society on the other hand was extremely traditional with a legitimized hierarchy comprising the Sultan, the Ulema, the army, and the administrative elite at the top. Occupational groups like peasants, craftsmen, and tradesmen formed the lower stratum of society. That society had a totalitarian and centralized state which controlled the whole socio-economic and cultural-political life from above. In such a set-up of society, decay at the top gradually led to the disintegration the entire system.

However, the decline of the Ottoman Empire actually as a result of very complex factors. By putting the decline of the Ottoman Empire into an international context, identifying five key areas which stand out as explanations for the decline and fall of the Ottoman Empire. These five factors were:

1. the moribund nature of the Ottoman government and its relative decline economically,
2. the spread of nationalism in the Balkans;
3. the attempts to revive Turkey by the ‘New Ottomans’ and ‘Young Turk’,
4. the German attempts to generate a sphere of influence in the Middle East,
5. the impact of the Balkan wars.

Based on the five key areas above, it should be noted that the conservatism of the privileged ruling elite in Constantinople, corrupt military leaders, and the decline of their economy, resulted into the broken state. Particularly if we compare it with the rising of the industrial power in the West, it conditions placed the Ottoman in a backward position. Besides that, the rising inflation which was worsened by financial mismanagement, misappropriation of state revenue, and fierce competition from the West, also reduced the empire’s vitality. All of the economic problems lead the increasing costs of the state. Due to the concentration of the internal problems, the Ottoman Empire became less intended toward their provincial lands. Accordingly, the Empire felt difficult to protect the frontiers of the empire was rendered obsolete by the European advance. Finally, when Napoleon Bonaparte landed an invasion force in Egypt in 1798, he defeated the army of the Ottoman decisively. Ironically, in the face of this new competition, instead of finding a strategic way, the conservative leaders fell back on their faith in the ‘inherent superiority of Islam. This solution did not result in a victory, but the Ottomans lost any effective power over the periphery of their empire.

World War I led to the complete end of the Ottoman Empire, and the birth of a Turkish nation as aftermath of the defeat in the war. It further accompanied by the occupation of the Western powers to the Ottoman Empire territory. Then, after a nationalist struggle that ended the occupation, and also a brief civil war between nationalists and the Ottoman dynasty, the Turkish Republic was proclaimed by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. The events of 1919 and 1920 vividly demonstrated the strength of the nationalist tide sweeping through Anatolia. Although the Sultan’s government was supported by the Allies, the condition proved unable to withstand the nationalists under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal. Then, in 1920 he was elected President of the Embassy, and by the end of 1922, he had defeated the Greeks and expelled the Allies. Further declaring the abolishment of the Caliphate in 1924 and the emergence of the modern state of the Republic of Turkey.

1.2 Transition from empire to nation (1908–1923)

July 23, 1908, brought a dawn with the restoration of the constitution of 1876, put at bay nearly 30 years before by the then Sultan Abdul Hamid. It became the moment of significance, considering it would alter their life beyond expectation. Thus in reality it was a dawn, the credit of such drastic change owes to the series of movements likely; Tanzimat, Young Turks. The leaders of the religious-ethnic communities welcomed the restoration of the constitution, they were quite sure that the end of absolutism would enhance their own power and influence. They were very optimistic in their view. Their expectation was to be a part in sharing political power in both the cabinet and the assembly in accordance to their demographic and material strength in the empire. Their influence can be greater if authority be decentralized thus, they vehemently supported the liberal faction of the Young Turks led by Prince Sabahuddin who had been the key exponent and speaker favouring the ‘decentralization and private initiative’.

The transition phase of the Ottoman Empire also witnessed an important development, the emergence of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) in 1889, it was the progressive group that were the supporters of the political regime or in other words, they were the constitutionalist and having the same ideology like that of the Liberals (i.e. the Young Turks or the upper class of the Ottoman Society). Unionists viewed to overthrow the autocracy, the first step toward the social and economic transformation that the constitutional government was expected to carry out. They lack faith in the laissez-faire policies popular among the earlier reformers. The Unionists were immensely inspired by Germany and Japan, optimistically expected the new state to bring about ‘union and progress’ in the empire. They favoured curbing of power of the Palace and the Porte and vesting authority in the assembly which they envisioned to control after elections were held.

The Unionists basically belong to the lower middle class, the class which had suffered the consequences of the progressive integration into the world market due to the erosion of the indigenous economy. The transitional period also witnessed a latent struggle for power between the sultan, supported by conservatives and reactionaries, the high bureaucrats, supported by the Liberals, and the Unionists who relied on their organizational strength in the army and society at large. Elections were held in November-December 1908, leading to the victory of the Committee (CUP), but very soon dramatic episodes occurred leading Grand Vizier Mehmed Kamil Pasha to dissolve the ministry, and appointing his own men to the key positions. Later the Charismatic Unionist leader Enver Bey, played vital role leading to the fall of the Grand Vizier Mehmed Kamil Pasha through vote of no confidence.

The following timeline can clearly indicate the transition from the Empire to Nation :

• 1912 A national uprising against rule in Albania launches a full-scale Balkan War.
• Turkey, beset by troubles elsewhere, cedes to Italy her north African province of Libya.
• An Albanian uprising against the Ottoman empire is so successful that the Albanians are able to capture Skopje in Macedonia.
• By a prearranged pan Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia together launch the First Balkan War against Turkey.
• 1913 Bulgaria launches Second Balkan War, in the end to the great detriment of Bulgarian interest.
• The Balkan states and the Ottoman empire agree an armistice in Bucharest, ending the Second Balkan War.
• A coup led by Enver Pasha brings the Young Turks to power in Istanbul.
• 1914 Germany and the Ottoman empire sign a secret treaty of alliance.
• Turkey, launches an attach on Russian ports in the Black Sea, enters the war on the German side.
• Russia declares war on the Ottoman empire.
• Britain and France declare war on the Ottoman Empire.
• 1916 Sharif Hussein, the emir of Makkah, proclaims himself the leader of the Muslim world, thus launching an Arab revolt against the Ottoman empire.
• 1918 an armistice was signed between Turkey and the Allies on the warship Agamemnon in the Greek port of Mudros.
• 1920 A punitive peace treaty, negotiated at Sevres, is designed to dismember the Ottoman empire.
• The Sultan of Turkey signs the Treaty of Sevres with the Allies but it is rejected by the new nationalist government.
• 1922 The nationalist government in Turkey abolishes the sultanate and the last Ottoman emperor, Mehmed VI, goes into exile.
• 1923 The Treaty of Lausanne, with more favorable terms than those negotiated at Sevres, finally bring peace between Turkey and the Allies.
• Turkey becomes a republic with Ataturk as president and Ankara as its new capital.

1.3 An era of one-party democracy (1923-45)

Mustafa Kemal – lovingly known as Kemal Atatürk – emerged as a leading figure of stature. Atatürk’s model of Turkish nationalism was quite different from the pan-Turkic ideas of stalwarts like Enver Pasha. Kemal believed that the once-great Ottoman Empire had become burdensome on the Turkish people, who now needed a homeland of their own. He and his supporters sought to establish a new Turkish state based on Anatolia, where most of the empire’s Turkish population had traditionally lived.

Later onwards Turkish attitudes began to harden; the interim Ottoman government came under increasing pressure from the Allies to suppress the nationalist groups. In the end, they were reluctantly forced to act. In the face of this crackdown, on 23 April 1920, the nationalists convened a Grand National Assembly in Ankara, deep in central Anatolia. They elected Mustafa Kemal as its first president, effectively establishing an alternative government.

The proclamation of the republic brought tensions between Kemal and his military rivals to a head. There were even rumors of a general’s plot against him. In order to neutralize their power in the army, Kemal had the Assembly pass a law obliging officers who wanted to be in politics to resign their commissions. Some Kemalist generals left the Assembly and returned to their military commands; the dissidents who wanted to continue their opposition to Kemal in the Assembly resigned their commissions thereby severing their links with the army. The long-term result of this law was to disengage the army from politics for the next generation.

It was during this period that Mustafa Kemal felt threatened to his authority which came from within his own party. He had not as yet carried out measures such as state intervention in the economy, protectionism, or even secularist reforms though such measures were under discussion. With rivals actively exploiting the very real economic discontent then widespread in the country, it would be virtually impossible to enact any radical legislation, legislation which the Kemalists considered vital for transforming Turkey. Kemal first considered dealing harshly with what he described as a counterrevolutionary threat. But he was dissuaded by moderates in the party to refrain from such action and persuaded instead to appease liberal opinion by replacing Ismet (Inönü), who was generally viewed as a hardliner, with Fethi (Okyar), the de facto leader of the liberal wing of the ruling party. Thus further crushing the Progressive Republicans.

Later in around the 1930’s the ideology of Kemalism was launched, adopting the six ‘fundamental and unchanging principles of (1) Republicanism, (2) Nationalism, (3) Populism, (4) Statism, (5) Secularism, and (6) Revolutionism/Reformism. These principles of Kemalism became part of the constitution of Turkey in 1937. The Constitutional Article reads as: ‘The Turkish State is a Republican, Nationalist, Populist, Statist, Secularist, and Revolutionary-Reformist.’

The death of Mustafa Kemal ‘Ataturk’ on November 1938, tended toward the process of thinking toward a Multi-Party system, it due to the success of the Ataturk could not maintain the cohesive bond within the party. It further paved way to the end of the party’s control over the bureaucracy so that party officials would no longer hold state office.

The World War II period was of difficulty for Turkey and the government could not control the ongoing unrest, and the introduction of the ‘Capital Tax Law’ was a deadly blow to the public, thus further causing unrest and heading towards the end of the One-Party Rule in 1945.

Although many political parties were established between 1945 and 1950, only the Democratic Party was successful., the first party was the National Development Party, a religious conservative party. It was established by Nuri Demirbas, Huseyin Avni Ulas, and Cevat Rifat Atilhan on July 18, 1945, but they did not achieve to be a part of the democratic system.

The member of the RRP, on January 7, 1946, Adnan Menderes, Celal Bayar, Fuat Koprulu, and Refik Koraltan led to the establishment of The Democratic Party. It grew rapidly in a very short time, with the election of 61 deputies in the 1946 elections. The eighth Assembly (1946) was the first real multi-party Assembly, but the first completely free and openly contested election in Turkey was not achieved until 1950. The period of 1946-50 could be named as the ‘Transitional Period’ to the multi-party system.

The Democratic Party won the election with 53.35% of the popular vote and 83.57% of the Grand National Assembly seats while RPP gained 39.78% of the votes and 14.40% of the seats. The populist politics, good weather conditions, inflationary economic policies, and foreign capital brought social and economic welfare for the people. Menderes’ Democratic Party won a splendid election victory in the 1954 elections.

Adnan Menderes’ despotic and neurotic behavior and politics led to his downfall and his party’s end by the 27th May 1960 overthrow. Menderes’ deviation from democracy, privilege given to his own supporters, and declination from Kemalist principles, all together, was an invitation to young patriots and Kemalist soldiers.

A new constitution was prepared and this Constitution was very civilized and radical. Under the 1961 Constitution, Turkey enjoyed a greater degree of freedom than ever before. People had more civil rights, the universities had greater autonomy, and students were given the freedom to organize their associations. Workers were given the right to strike.

By the 1960s Turkey had been thoroughly politicized and ideological politics were permitted. In those years the ultra-nationalist and neo-fascist National Action Party (NAP) and the Socialist Workers Party (WPT) had been founded. The Socialist Workers Party would get 16 seats in Parliament in the 1960s. It was the first and the last great success of the Turkish Socialists in Turkish modern history. The Islamist movement had also become quite powerful.

Two new political parties were formed as the inheritors of the Democratic Party in 1961: the New Turkey Party (NTP) and the Justice Party (JP), for the first election realized under the new election law. The two biggest parties were RPP and JP in all the elections during this period. The 1960s could be named the period of coalition governments.

As a result of high inflation, high political tension, rising unemployment, and rapid social-political change, Turkey dissolved into chaos. The Islamist movement had become more aggressive and its party, the National Order Party, openly rejected Ataturk and Kemalism. On account of this, the generals presented a memorandum to the President and the chairmen of the two chambers in 12 March 1971. The Generals demanded the formation of a strong, credible government capable of implementing the reforms envisaged by the constitution.

Nihat Erim constituted the government in 1971. According to Erim and the Military High Command, the liberal constitution of 1961 was a luxury for Turkey. They started an operation against civil rights and liberties. Political terrorism had become a regular feature of Turkish social life. There was a fundamental difference between the terrorism of the left in the early 1970s and the terrorism of right and left in the mid/late 1970s: In the first period, the action was against imperialism, western influences and capitalism whereas in the second period, the aim was to create chaos and demoralization.

In 1977 Ecevit established a minority government but he could not get a vote of confidence. This was the beginning of one of the darkest periods of Turkey in her modern history which would eventually bring the 12 September 1980 Coup D`etat. Enabling the Junta to set up the National Security Council (NSC) under the chieftainship of the chief of Staff Kenan Evren. The other members of the National Security Council were the chiefs of the armed forces that were army, navy, air force, and gendarmery. They ruled Turkey until November 1983. They attempted to change all areas of social life except foreign policy and the economic stabilization program which had been in place since 24 January 1980. In the first place, they suspended the Constitution and dissolved Parliament, then they closed down the political parties, detained their leaders, and suspended the professional associations and confederation of trade unions. The 1980s created a society of a society of haves and have-nots’ in Turkey.