You should of pointed out that when the Europeans found new trade routes to asia that was basically the beginning of the end for the ottomans Because the silk road was not needed which generated a lot of wealth for the ottomans and basically eventually led to the ottomans becoming irrelevant in all right

@ekesandras1481

Жыл бұрын

when the Portuguese reached the Persian Gulf from the other side and even threatened them in the Red Sea, the Ottoman trade model had basically gone worthless within a single moment. As a side effect also the trade model of Venice and Genoa had become worthless. The Portuguese managed to reroute the whole trade with India, Indochina, China and East Africa towards the Cape of Good Hope and further to Lisbon. By that they also killed the silk road and the whole Islamic world, from North Africa to Central Asia drifted into economic decline and later total economic insignificance. With coffee and sugar cane planted in the Caribbean and Brazil even that trade was lost for the Islamic world. Later cotton from the Americas did the rest.

@BajanEnglishman51

Жыл бұрын

@@ekesandras1481 this ^^^^^^

@Killzoneguy117

Жыл бұрын

Hardly. The Ottomans continued to be the European Hegemon all the way up to the 18th Century. The Europeans discovered ways around the Ottomans as early as 1488, while the Ottomans didn't hit their stride until the 1600s.

@wingslider

Жыл бұрын

@@Killzoneguy117 it did help to their downfall tho

@therefep9723

Жыл бұрын

This isn’t true

You can still feel the effects of the fall.

@LookBackHistory

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely, across the Balkans and the Arab world in particular.

@tonikeirouz7347

2 жыл бұрын

id rather be at war for 2000 years than be under the ottomans for one year. ALLAH W LEBNEN🇱🇧🇱🇧🇱🇧

@savagedarksider5934

2 жыл бұрын

@@tonikeirouz7347 Ok

@bosbanon3452

2 жыл бұрын

@@tonikeirouz7347 don't you know the bad ottoman came later?.

@tonikeirouz7347

2 жыл бұрын

@@bosbanon3452 i do. ottomans were cool until the young turks came to power. today most turks are fascists who follow kemalism or are neo-imperialists who follow enver pasha’s genocidal ideals

This guy deserves more subscribers and views. Don’t give up man just keep uploading and eventually the algorithm will work out.

@tonit4233

2 жыл бұрын

He needs to find a big KZreadr who is willing to collaborate.

@LookBackHistory

2 жыл бұрын

Definitely no plans on giving up here!

@NoNo-oi7zj

Жыл бұрын

No he doesn’t dude, he sucks. His information is weak and misleading, along with constantly painting half pictures with the ideas he’s attempting to convey.

@lui5149

Жыл бұрын

@@NoNo-oi7zj yeah dude I was wrong, unsubscribed few weeks after this comment.

@dsxa918

Жыл бұрын

How do you find these observations? This is some history I'm not as informed on and the main page suggested so I clicked it and will watch some other stuff, maybe read if I can find a particular book, but I appreciate seeing these comments if only to remind myself that many sources are needed, to really understand.

Amazing video, the quality of the animation only gets better everytime! 💗🤞✨

@LookBackHistory

Жыл бұрын

Haha thanks, that's the goal!

Another wonderful informative video

@LookBackHistory

2 жыл бұрын

Glad you think so!

Keep em coming.

amazing video pal, keep it up

Keep your content up, man, I hope you'll give History Matters a run for his money.

Could you please inform me what editing software you use? Also, what do you use to make the maps? Much thanks, your videos are amazing.

Great video 👍🏿

@tarihseverturk6354

Жыл бұрын

Paşam nasılsınız

Great video bro

@LookBackHistory

2 жыл бұрын

Glad you enjoyed!

Good video. Loss of trade, due to European sailors, was important too

Ottaman : In the 18 the century, the Ottoman Empire began to establish permanent diplomatic missions in London, Paris, Vienna and Berlin. As a result of these contacts all things Turkish became exotic, not least the dress fashion, “turquoisie”. Sultans and pashas were often portrayed as noble and enlightened people in contrast to European rulers. At the Prussian and Saxon courts, feasts, processions and weddings were held á laTurc and Turkish manners became a way for the upper classes to distance themselves from common people. Turkish kiosks were erected in Swedish manorial parks too and Gustav III built a Turkish pavilion at Haga Park. In the 18 th century, Ignatius Mouradgea, a translator (dragoman) of Armenian origin at the Swedish Embassy in Istanbul, contributed to spreading knowledge and a positive image of Turkey in Europe through his encyclopaedic volume entitled Tableau Général de l’Empire Ottoman. He was later knighted by Gustav III acquiring the name d’Ohsson and was for a time head of the Embassy in Istanbul. Turkish Janissary music inspired among others Mozart and Schubert to compose music à la turca. And with the age of enlightenment and Romanticism there was increased interest in the exotic and greater tolerance of and curiosity about other religions and cultures, which was reflected in the image of the Turk who now came to be regarded in many quarters as the “noble savage”. Article : The Turks as a threat and Europe's " other " Author : lngmar karlsson

@anon2427

Жыл бұрын

Seems like massive Turkish cope to me

@froglifes6829

Жыл бұрын

@@anon2427 it literally is lol

As an Indonesian muslim i knew some muslim in my country joined hizbut tahrir , they're against nationalism , and caused many controversies

I only just realised this isnt one of the big channels. production quality could have fooled me.

nice vid

great job once again

@LookBackHistory

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks, I'm glad you keep coming back!

@micahistory

2 жыл бұрын

@@LookBackHistory yeah no problem, I like your channel

8:35 boy, what a painting!

Curious you omitted the Siege of Vienna, 1683. Stopped the advance of Ottoman forces west.

Might seem like a dumb question But how do I make these maps For a killer presentation at college Great job btw enjoying the content

@LookBackHistory

2 жыл бұрын

It's not a dumb question as they're quite tricky to do. However, you're going to have to figure it out for yourself.

@shahedamere6976

Жыл бұрын

Is it on the maps for mappers website

I watched both your videos about Ottomons and Saudi Arabia. As it is claimed, were Muhammad bin Saud and his religious partner Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab subject of Ottomons and did they revolt against Ottomons? Appreciate if you can explain that point.

A bit of a let down to ignore the achievements of the Ottoman Empire from 1878-1908 under sultan Abdulhamid ii. The longest reigning ottoman sultan in the late period doesn’t get any attention: How he managed to save the empire for another 30 years during a time of war and fragility is remarkable . He built railroads , schools, hospitals, military academies paid off 90% of the £200,000,000 ottoman debt which had ravaged the empire since 1880 and earlier as well as single handedly defeated Greece in 1897. Formed a strong alliance with Germany as well as invested a lot on the army through the German Krupp company. The moment he is dethroned by the young Turks the empire collapses within 10 years.

@TurbanLeDurban

2 жыл бұрын

I never realized this, thanks for the info

@invalidnoun4746

2 жыл бұрын

He is the sultan who lost most territory in Ottoman history.

@MH-jg6vk

2 жыл бұрын

@@invalidnoun4746 “Drang nach Osten'in nihai başarısızlığının nedenlerini ararken, Temmuz 1908'deki Jön Türk devriminin stratejik çöküşünü gözden kaçırmamalıyız. Ortaya çıkan siyasi kargaşa ve Sultan Abdülhamid'in otoritesinin zayıflaması Almanlara iki yıla mal oldu. Bağdat demiryolu - ve İtalyan ve Balkan savaşlarını devrimden doğan Osmanlı zayıflığının meyvesi olarak görürsek, muhtemelen beş. Daha da zarar verici olanı, Jön Türklerin Abdülhamid'in Nisan 1909'da zorla tahttan indirilmesiyle açılan ve Arap isyanında Şerif Hüseyin tarafından bu kadar vahim bir şekilde ifşa edilen İslam dünyasındaki uçurumdu - Hicaz demiryolunun Mekke'ye kadar uzatılması düşünülemezdi. Padişahın tahttan indirilmesi olmasaydı kesinlikle olurdu. İyi ya da kötü, Abdülhamid'in düşüşü Türkiye'yi, Bağdat demiryolunu ve Sünni Müslüman dayanışmasını Kaiser-Oppenheim kutsal savaşının ayaklarını kesmeye yetecek kadar zayıflattı." Alıntı Berlin-Bağdat Ekspresi: Osmanlı İmparatorluğu ve Almanya'nın Dünya Gücü Hedefi Sean McMeekin

@Baysal_Alisan

Жыл бұрын

He sold territory and licked british boots in order to not get into the war

@MH-jg6vk

Жыл бұрын

@@Baysal_Alisan “he sold territory” he lost the arm to save the body. How about your profile picture where he lost the Libyan war, the Balkan wars and World War One… then decides it’s time to flee and leave whatever’s left of the empire in flames 👏🤣 he tarnished the term Turk and still to this day turkey hasn’t recovered from his stupid inexperienced decisions. Complains about Abdulhamid who at the very least kept the state going and improving whereas Enver pasha , no he’s good for losing a whole empire within a decade

I'm Saudi but i'd really say that the ottomans Empire has a great history of course any country has some issues but I still like how that many countries were against them just because they were powerful and the good thing that they rule by the Islamic law they don't force people to be learning their language or stuff other Empires would do to force people.🇸🇦🇹🇷

@Jack-he8jv

Жыл бұрын

nope, united arab league is the only way forward, multiculturalism is trash just like equality.

@froglifes6829

Жыл бұрын

They did. Ottomans forced islam and their rule onto many. After all do you think the balkans was part of the ottomans by choice? LOL dont make me laugh. Ottomans went around the world converting and genociding. Why do you think albania and Bosnia are muslim? By choice? LOL

Implying that the Hagia Sofia is a cultural marvel and product of the Ottomans is intellectually dishonest.

@LookBackHistory

Жыл бұрын

Believing that that building was the Hagia Sophia is intellectually lazy.

@Gamesbozz

7 ай бұрын

It wasn’t that mate tho was it

Excellent.

Another factor in the decline was a financial one. See when they captured Constantinople in 1453,it did 2 things: 1. It gave them control over all trade between the Black and Mediterranean Seas. and 2. It gave them control over all the overland trade routes to Asia(ie China, India, and the Spice Islands). Both of those meant that the Ottomans could tax shipping as they controlled the only routes available at the time. So the European powers had one of 3 options: 1. Cut a deal with the Ottomans,like Venice did,so you could continue trade. 2. Find a new route to Asia 3. Say "screw Asia altogether" and find a new market to exploit Most European powers did a combination of 2 and 3. This had a cumulative effect on the Ottomans as once it was realized you didn't need their shipping routes to get to Asia,it hit them in the pocket book

Some maps are in some parts a bit wrong, no hate

These eyes :)

I would honestly cite 1683, when the Ottomans failed for a second time to capture Vienna,as the true start of their decline. I'll argue that the period from 1571, after Lepanto,to 1683, before the second attempt to take Vienna, as a period of stagnant expansion. What I mean by that is even during the period I referred to earlier,the Ottomans were still expanding, just not at the aggressive level they were prior to Lepanto.

It's important to note that the economic capitulations given to European powers and the shifting of the trade routes caused the Ottoman economy to absolutely crash. It is one of the main reasons as to why the empire's power had diminished. The janissaries only started out as a solely European slave force, later on Turks started to push their children to join the corps as well. Also, you shouldn't have included Hatay as part of the map when you said Arab World etc as it is Turkish.

@hansolo5912

Жыл бұрын

He actually depicted territories that were in control of the Ottomans in 1918 and in the more than just Hatay is in red

The Young Turk Revolution Of 1908 was not only why Bulgaria became independent, but also why Austria-Hungary was able to annex Bosnia/Herzegovina as well.

The Ottomons were too little too late to the Roman Empire larp game.

Napoleon's Invasion of Egypt and his popularization of Nationalism Ended the Ottoman Empire.

The proposed Bulgaria, following the Treaty Of San Stefano,was a bridge too far for the powers of Europe: 1. France,Britain, and probably the Ottomans didn't want Russia to have access to the Mediterranean Sea as they feared it would make Russia a threat in North Africa. 2. Austria-Hungary was against it because they feared it gave Russia too much influence in the Balkans.

According to most historians, the decline of the Ottoman Empire began in 1683 when they failed to capture Vienna. Even after Lepanto in 1571,there was still some expansion of the Ottoman Empire. Was it the aggressive expansion before Lepanto? No,but there was still expansion. Vienna in 1683 pretty much put the brakes on Ottoman expansion in Europe for good

@ChezzyDRMlol

Ай бұрын

Nah I personally see the government at fault. It’s was a mess which led to foreign powers taking advantage and it then just crumbles down

@colindaniels945

25 күн бұрын

​@@ChezzyDRMlolThe incompetence of the Ottoman central government was definitely a factor

Bosnias where muslims and still are Muslims

Holy Shit!!! if i drinked a shot every time he says "Empire"" in the video i would be DRUNK right now!! Lol

They were not called Caliphs, they tried to claim the title, only two actually tried to claim it, but there's no solid historical ceremonies of such important title being transformed to them. They themselves called themselves Sultans. Two called themselves caliphs just for a political game nothing more.

@youravaragetoxicmasculinem9508

11 ай бұрын

They ''were'' Calips and did not just claim it, Ottoman Empire was the last great age for Islam, Calpihate is not something that passes through ceremonies, a caliph is a person charged with being the imam of the Muslims and the guardian of the Shari'a and Sultans of the Ottoman Empire was exactly that, to be honest there wasn't even a closer nation to claim the title.

@zgoodt

11 ай бұрын

​@@youravaragetoxicmasculinem9508 They were not in any way representatives of the true faith, they were SUFIS, they didn't even do Hajj. they ruined the Islamic world and lead to its demise and fall into corruption, diseases, and the disappearance of knowledge. They didn't call themselves Caliphs, they called themselves sultans, except for two cunts, one Selim the horrible who invaded Egypt and the levant and his armies burnt down libraries, and committed massacres similar to that the Mongols did in Baghdad, and the second one was Abdulhamid the second when he was facing Russia, trying to provoke the Muslims within Russian lands to join him. If that title was easily claimed, why didn't every single Muslim sultan/king claim to be caliph of their own respective group??? MAMLUKS who were the protectors of the Abbasid Caliphate and hosted the Caliph in Cairo after the fall of Baghdad, never ever claimed that title nor even tried to take it from the Abbasid Caliph, heck they even tried to reestablish the Abbasid Caliphate again in Baghdad. The Ottomans are the one and only reason the Muslim world is no longer in its former glory, and they are the main and the only reason why the title of Caliph is no longer that important, because they destroyed it with their brutal invasion of the levant and then Egypt. Now look at the descendants of the ottomans, allying themselves with Israel, are members of the NATO, and helped destroy Syria, Iraq and Libya. they even tried to ruin Egypt AGAIN. Never have I ever witnessed a nation so arrogant and so full of itself such as the ottomans, and they were and are still very racist and envious of the Arabs specifically.

The video describes very religiously HOW the Ottoman empire ended... but not why.

As far as I know it was the Russians which attacked Ali Pasha, not the Brits...

Man of Otto Imperium

The fall of the Ottoman Empire was caused by Large minorities,no modernisation ( Led to the defeat of both the Balkan and Italian - Turkish war and a unstable government) The fact is if the government was strong and had the same level of nationalism as the people we could see that the the Ottoman Empire may still have existed or dissolved after ww2 instead

Muhammad Ali pasha of Tepelena and Muhammad Ali pasha of Egypt both 🇦🇱

Dr yasir qadhi has a great presentation on the fall of the Ottoman Empire called 1914. Its on KZread

“The Ottomans weren’t stupid” Well….history would say otherwise

@ChezzyDRMlol

Ай бұрын

It was 50/50 some were stupid and some weren’t. And the stuff the stupid ones did caused the end. Military wise they were smart

this empire deserved to fall

@guywithacreativename5134

4 ай бұрын

Maybe it didn't deserve to fall, they were literally the Muslim version of Rome for some period of time before they got incomponent and became oppressive. It explains why the Orthodoxs backed Ottomans during the Ottoman Civil War and never attempted to revolt.

@ChezzyDRMlol

Ай бұрын

@@guywithacreativename5134I agree Ottomans were actually starting to intergrate the rest of the empire if it was successful with a strong government we could see a united empire in the Middle East

the ended of ottoman isyoung turk.UK/Russia and all cristian govt in euro fighting islam because of nwo

World war 1

Pl read this peace message: " The Ottamans set such a good example as pacific conquerors that they won the confidence of many former Byzantine subjects . For example , when Nicaea fell , Orhan allowed all who wanted to leave the city to depart freely , taking with them their holy relics , but few availed themselves of the chance . No reprisals were taken against those who had resisted , and the city was left to manage its internal affairs under its own municipal government . BOOK : Encyclopaedia of the Ottoman Empire . AUTHOR : Gabor Agoston and Bruce Masters . Edition : 2009 page -109 .

Pl go through this history ; ( i ). " The main reason for Ottaman success , however , was the development of stable and permanent institutions of government that transformed a tribal polity into a workable state ". ( ii ) " The Ottamans utilized all human resources in their emirate and quickly learned skills in bureaucracy and diplomacy ........ They also did not slaughter every Christian in their path ; rather , they encouraged the Christian inhabitants of the countryside and the towns to join them . Islamic law and tradition declared that enemies who surrendered on demand should be treated with tolerance . ( iii ). " The Christians of Bithynia were obliged to pay the ' harac ' , or capitation tax , for the privilege of being tolerated , but this was no more burdensome than the taxes they had paid to the Byzantine government , which had neglected their interests . Once they had made the decision to surrender or defect , the Byzantine population resigned to their fate ". " Some Christians converted to Islam upon joining the Ottamans ; however, this was not demanded . Many local Christians even participated in Ottaman raids against Byzantium ". BOOK : Encyclopaedia of the Ottoman Empire . AUTHOR : Gabor Agoston and Bruce Masters . Edition : 2009 page -109 . "Existing sources , such as the 25th century Ottoman census records , suggest that the earliest converts to Islam in the Balkans came from the ranks of the Balkan nobility and military elite that could supply the Ottomans with the manpower ............. BOOK : Encyclopaedia of the Ottoman Empire . AUTHOR : Gabor Agoston and Bruce Masters . Edition : 2009 page -146 .

Good video but 2 mistakes: 1. The Ottomans didn’t sign the Treaty of Sevres. They did sign with the diplomats but to make it active they had do accept it in the parliament, which never happened 2 Mustafa Kemal Pasha didn’t found the Turkish National Movement. The movement was civilian organized with little help of the Ottoman government, they send Mustafa Kemal Pasha as general to take the place of leader of this already existing movement.

That cultural marvel shown wasn't built by the Ottomans

@LookBackHistory

Жыл бұрын

You're not the first person to comment this, and you're not the first person to be wrong.

@benjaminv6039

Жыл бұрын

@@LookBackHistory you are correct my sincere apologies.

They built the Hagia Sophia?

@LookBackHistory

Жыл бұрын

Nope.

@superpangamer

Жыл бұрын

It was Justinian of the Christian Eastern Roman empire in the 6th century who built it

@jam1087

Жыл бұрын

What building was that in the beginning when you mentioned the marvelous things they built?

@chronikhiles

Жыл бұрын

That's the Blue Mosque bro.

@jam1087

Жыл бұрын

Thank you

what ended the reign of the ottomans? sofas.

😭😭😭

The Turkish were wise (and also lucky) to stay out of WW2.

@LookBackHistory

Жыл бұрын

I don't know much about WW2-era Turkey, but given the destruction that was endemic across the rest of Europe at the time, you're probably right.

@iron-non

Жыл бұрын

@@LookBackHistory Mustafa Kemal Atatürk actually noticed the war aproaching in his deathbed and with his words from before ( war if not needed is genocide ) Turkey stayed away

@peteland2919

Жыл бұрын

@@iron-non to be fair it wasn’t difficult to see another war was coming

Greece ended it…that’s what ended it!

@mertroll1

Жыл бұрын

Greek wet dreams, the greeks got their independence in 1821, and the Ottoman empire continued to exist until 1918, you guys ended nothing lmao

@jjgreek1

Жыл бұрын

@@mertroll1 you shrank and we expanded….we control 2000 islands and the entire Aegean Sea is a Greek lake. We liberated Thessaloniki and Kavala, and soon Imvros and Tenedos, you are encircled by Greece, we control the entrance to the Dardanelles. You are a weak autocratic Arab statelet ..no wonder they call you turkeys 🦃

@shaq6976

Жыл бұрын

@@mertroll1 well their Independence was the beginning of the End. It showed that the Empire wasn’t strong enough anymore, and the Europeans realized that they could use it as they like, by Using the National Problems in the Empire

@cerebrummaximus3762

Жыл бұрын

@@shaq6976 The beginning of their end was the Russo-Turkish war. And that wasn't even the beginning of the beginning.

@emreiris114

3 ай бұрын

From war wise, it was Russian and British empires. From economical reasons, Ottoman did not colonize and collect resources from vassal states. Other empires gained sucking Africa and Asia since Ottoman did not do it.

You can feel the effect on the world the arabs the balkans and north africa before everyone was good after death and failded states

@copiusgrimus6671

2 жыл бұрын

@@marshallsilverstar9636 the balkans started ww1 3 balkand war greece in hell of alot in debt egypt population and population density

@copiusgrimus6671

2 жыл бұрын

@@marshallsilverstar9636 algeria tunis tripolie iraq syria

@copiusgrimus6671

2 жыл бұрын

@@marshallsilverstar9636 when the ottomens held the middle east it was calm no terrorism and extremists and for that time that standard of living was good a few hundrad years ago it was acceptable for you not to bath Yoy cant compare that time to now in morals and living standards laws etc

@copiusgrimus6671

2 жыл бұрын

@@marshallsilverstar9636 ye

@copiusgrimus6671

2 жыл бұрын

@@marshallsilverstar9636 i will argue with you tomorrow i am going to sleep

Islam

Here is my take on the matter of Sultans being Caliph, Ottoman sultans rarely referred to themselves as Caliphs unless they needed to galvanize muslim population around them because they know they can’t be Caliphs since they are not of Quraysh Tribe which prophet Mohammed to belongs to and he declared that rulers should be from that specific Tribe. Thats why ISIS in an effort to gain legitimacy, they appoint their “Caliph” from a supposed Qurayshi linage. Moreover, Ottomans are actually the ones who ended Caliphate from at least theoretical standpoint since Last Abassite de Jure Caliph was captured by Ottomans and forced to relinquish his honorary powers to them, so after that point, No defacto muslim ruler needed approval of a phony Caliph.

Ottoman empire remained backward thanks to Islam . a region that is still backward today. and would be in an even worse state if not for oil. the sharia law made minorities inferior to their muslim overlords and stopped all incentives or initiatives. the last lash out - the Armenian Genocide, which Turkey has never accepted responsibilty for ( imagine if modern Germany still denied the Holocaust!?) - showed it had not reformed at all and deserved to be torn down. thankfully the British Empire put the Ottomans out of everyone's misery.

@Gamesbozz

7 ай бұрын

Let’s not blame Islam here as many gulf countries are Muslim also but don’t lack like the ottomans did, the ottomans were backwards and hypocrites they were Muslim but confused ones it was their own polices which brought them down not Islam

Rip Ottoman Empire

Best empire in history 😍

@jjgreek1

Жыл бұрын

It’s dead forever

@turkishemir5735

Жыл бұрын

It was abolished by Ataturk, islamophobia followed afterwards.

@jjgreek1

Жыл бұрын

@@turkishemir5735 Turkey suffers from christianophobia

@MikaelLV

Жыл бұрын

Best at what exactly?

@noriantiri9310

Жыл бұрын

It commited a genocide against armanians

Skill issue

Ottomans

0:06 >cultural marvels >added pillars to a church they didnt build

@LookBackHistory

Жыл бұрын

That's not the Hagia Sophia.

@shaq6976

Жыл бұрын

The shown building is the Blue mosque. If you watched closely instead of talking Bs then you might notice something

@cerebrummaximus3762

Жыл бұрын

That was the good choice. Imagine if they had knocked down the Church. Instead of destroying history, beauty, religion and culture, they repurposed it. The one good thing they did.

@doyouwantthetotalwar

Жыл бұрын

It's the Blue Mosque. Occidental dunning-krugerism at its finest.

Lazy boy recliner

Shame you ignored the Armenian Genocide which killed 1-1.5 million innocent Armenians (and others Christians eg Greeks, Assyrians). Would you make a video on Nazi Germany and ignore the Holocaust?

@lucyadam9128

Жыл бұрын

Wait why did they kill the assyrians even though they were muslims Did they kill everyone who wasn't Turkish

@AG-vb6vv

Жыл бұрын

@@lucyadam9128 No, they killed every Christian ethnicity, after all Christians were seen as disloyal as they were second class citizens, and wouldn’t be loyal to the Caliph. Also, many Assyrians are Christians.

@lucyadam9128

Жыл бұрын

@@AG-vb6vv no actually they killed everyone who wasn't Turkish they also killed Arab muslims especially after the Arabs rebelling against them so it was more of an ethnic genocide Also it wasn't the sultan and caliph who did it , it was the young Turks nationalist You watched the video right, the caliph was just a puppet for the secret society at that point So the ottomans were just used as a scape goat by the Turkish nationalist to escape from responsibility

@AG-vb6vv

Жыл бұрын

@@lucyadam9128 No, they didn’t kill Arab Muslims, have you not read on the Armenian Genocide. Back then, they were trying to build an Ottoman identity - amongst the Muslims of the empire. It’s only when that failed, did Turkish become their focus. They only killed/genocides those considered disloyal to the empire ie the kaffir, Christians, no Muslims were deported to the desert to die.

@lucyadam9128

Жыл бұрын

@@AG-vb6vv no they also killed Arab, I know it might sound surprising to you but Turks world rather die than be called arabs They killed Armenian Greek and Syrian but mostly Armenians

Hmm yes what if the Ottomans colonized

Libya and Balkan territories were lost win the young Turks were rulers. Abdul Hamid stood against Europe 33 years and he let the empire live for 33 years.

Fun fact the ottomans didn't call themselves the ottomans they saw themselves as Romans

@Younghype-

Жыл бұрын

The word ottoman came from the name osman. They called themselves the ottomans. Only sultan (unless you can prove me wrong) who called himself Caesar was sultan mehmed II

@papazataklaattiranimam

Жыл бұрын

😂😂😂

@papazataklaattiranimam

Жыл бұрын

@@Younghype- Osman is actually islamized version of otaman/ataman also

@HierophanticRose

Жыл бұрын

They didn't call themselves Rome, nor did they call themselves Ottomans, but called themselves Devlet-i Aliyye, "That Most Grand State"; sometimes called as "That Most Grand State of Osman". The Emperors (Padishahs, meaning Shah of all), held many titles among them was Kayser-i Rum. Caesar of Rome. However, this is as a tradition from the Medieval Eras, of conquering Emperors and rulers, not just Ottomans, but everyone back then, collecting the titles. Thus, after the conquest of Constantinople, Mehmed II "Fatih" took on the name of Kayser-i-Rum, in that tradition. But Ottoman sultans had many other titles they held simultaneously - Sultan (denoting both "de facto" {although with a war with Karaman} inherited Seljuk crown and the later added by conquest Ayyubid crown of Baghdad and "Sham" (Levant)), Shah of All (Padishah), King of all Vojvode, Shah of Shahs, Caliph of Muslims, and oldest of the titles they held and often put at the end of their entire nomer, Khan. TLDR: Yesn't

@lucyadam9128

Жыл бұрын

@@HierophanticRose when ibn batuta a Moroccan traveler visited the empire he described it as home of the rum So yeah

Good riddance! It was only the inevitable and the Turks tried to delay and failed! 🇸🇾🇵🇸☦️

Reasons: 1-Ottomans were not imperialist and their economy was based on tax revenues. When reached to natural borders (deserts) and strong empires (Russians and Holy Roman) expansion of revenues stopped. 2-No industrial revolution and it's been weaken century by century 3-French Revolution, rise of nationalism and lose of European regions

@treyhall9138

Жыл бұрын

The ottomans absolutely were imperialist. I’m not even sure how you could make that claim.

@cerebrummaximus3762

Жыл бұрын

1. The Death of Suleiman left the empire out of its golden age of culture. 2. Holy League's coalition against the Ottoman navy left them weakened. Not necessarily weak, just stagnated progress post--Golden age. The Ottomans did briefly manage to hold onto their lands, but: 3. Ottoman empire was diverse, and contained many peoples that were conquered and didn't want to be, so: 4. The Ottoman Empire gave diverse in ethnic or religious region some autonomy. This was good, however made the Empire decentralised and with some regions having too much unique power, it was hard to govern. 5-6. Many Ottoman leaders also had the tendency to seize a lot of power for themselves. As you said, the empire was built on tax revenue, so if it reached a natural border, desert, or foreign power, ability to extend, specifically into places that tax revenue can be gained began to be limited. 7. After 1768-74 Russo-Turkish war, huge consequences were met, and the Ottomans, who were having trouble balancing already, were pushed off of the limit. Post--loss of Crimea and Greece, it was clear Ottomans were losing might against Europeans. Eastern Question!

1821 end it

With death of Mustafa its all over