What went wrong with the Ottoman Empire that caused its downfall?
why don't you read the wiki article on it, follow some links, watch some videos, form a foundation of knowledge
THEN we can discuss the details
you are asking people to spoon feed you the summary of the situation without doing any work
oh wait, you did download a picture of the map
good job!
Heavy reliance upon Janissaries, failure to culturally assimilate the subjugated states and overall decentralization of the Empire.
>>596619
Here's a start, OP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-SUlb4rwls
The Law of Impermanence.
No seriously, I might be semi-joking but it is factually correct to say that all things will eventually end.
>>597067
Thanks anon
>>596619
multiculturalism. Hear me out, I hate /pol/ as much as the next guy. But honestly, there was no concept of a unified identity among Ottomans. There were Turks, Armenians, Arabs, Kurds, Bosnians, etc. with nothing to really unite them into a common identity. By the advent of Nation-states and nationalism in the 19th century, the Ottomans were doomed to fail. The problem was that they were using a classical roman style of empire governance well into the industrial age. Of course, as part of the reforms, they tried to promote "Ottomanism"- which sounded as ridiculous now as it did then .A court bureaucracy does not a modern nation-state make.
>>597067
So black markets and bureaucracy ruined them?
>>596619
how exactly did the ottamans govern their territories
2 liberal on other cultures. never tried to assimilate. didn't build a wall to stop the mexicans
>>596619
A refusal to accept the enlightenment by its intelligentsia. If they did accept it, I imagine the Middle East would be so much better off today
>>597217
So what, all empires are destined to fail due to their very nature of being multicultural?
>>597298
>So what, all empires are destined to fail due to their very nature of being multicultural?
Yeah, basically.
Liberalism and attempting to integrate their society into more European virtues.
>>597298
They are destined to fall but not necessarily because they are multicultural.
>>597298
well "empires" at least within the classical model were the antithesis of the modern nation state. So yes. they were doomed to fail by the turn of the last century. hence why there aren't any empires today.
>>596619
The Greeks with their revolution inspired others to revolt, the only reason Turkey still exists now, is because of foreign support.
>>597313
All things end with time.
>>596619
>Never managed to cope with the economic changes prompted by the discovery of the New World and alternate routes to the East.
>Were completely wrecked by the rise of Russia, who played a critical role in breaking Ottoman power in the Balkans, Caucusus, and Crimea.
>Agreed to horrible loans and capitulations that meant that Western bankers and merchants took an obscene amount of the empire's income.
>Failed to assimilate conquered nations to a unified Ottoman culture or identity, which meant that they had no loyalty to the state with the advent of the age of nationalism
>>597217
>I hate /pol/ as much as the next guy
Thanks for letting us know that you're a faggot
>>596619
Overextension and trying to keep on getting more territory when they really weren't doing that great a job of controlling what they already held.
>>596637
Why discuss anything here when we can all just read?
>>596637
tard
>>597098
You might think your post is interesting or deep
But it's just pseudo-intellectual
>>596619
Got involved in ww1
>>596619
It stopped conquering.
>>597217
It's a lot more nuanced than that. The presence of these groups was not nearly as destructive as you make out (and in fact played an important economic role), and the idea of a shared Ottoman identity is not nearly as absurd as you make it out to be. There was immense optimism among minority populations in the empire with the adoption of the initial constitution, and much of the ethnic strife that followed had to do with Abdul Hamid II's suspension of the constitution and promotion of a strong Muslim identity. Even if we regard ethnic conflict as inevitable in the face of nationalism, the Turks did a pretty good job of genocide Armenians et al, and if it hadn't been for WWI I doubt those groups would have posed a serious threat to the empire's existence. While nationalism certainly did not aid the unity of the state, it certainly didn't spell its inevitable doom.
A more serious answer to OP's question is that it was a variety of things. The Ottomans occupy a very central location with a variety of important resources and trade routes. The relative decline of their military power during the 17th and 18th centuries, paralleling the growth of European imperialism, left them open to intervention and territorial loss. They had an underdeveloped bureaucracy and economic policy, which, combined with the reliance on local notables and the corruption of the Janissary corps lead to economic stagnation. Efforts to modernise in the 19th century left them with crippling debt and the capitulations to European powers greatly reduced their ability to compete with western powers economically. then they picked the losing side in a war which ended up dismantling the losing empires. it's basically a case of "shit was going bad for them when it was going good for their enemies." I don't think we have to accept their destruction as an inevitability.
>>597948
do you know a lot about the ottomans
Militarily Ottoman advancement was stopped on Sea at Lepanto, on ground the Ottoman Empire faced logistical problems and couldn't really grab hold of what they did in Balkans and Hungary.
>>597587
Good points.
>>597276
Elayets led by pashas. The title was not heritable and the Sultan could revoke it any them, hence little incentive to develop their own regions and lot of incentive to rob its wealth for their pockets.
The Sultanate of Women.
Who the fuck thought it would be a good idea to put a harem full of East European slave women in charge of an empire?
>>599586
Most of the ruling women did a pretty good job though. It was basically complacency after their succes and also the loss of monopoly on spices etc .
>>596619
Everything. It was actually a miracle it even got that far. What the Ottoman Empire lacked was a strong core-ethnicity. The Turks were only ever a fraction of the Empire, they didn't even constitute the majority of the professional military (sipahis and janissaries).
I don't mean to be hateful or /pol/, but they were Turks, people of short statue best suited to ride horses and shoot arrows. Ethnic Turks were not made for the battlefields of Europe. Just look at human height today - and consider that back in the day it was even more in favor of the Europeans. Short people can't win swordfights.
The map you posted is very optimistic. Whenever Europeans stopped fighting amongst themselves and turned to fight the Ottomans, the Ottomans were driven back. Every battle the Ottomans won - it was won by Janissaries, European slaves. The only way the Ottoman Empire could have succeeded in Europe, was to become European - i.e. convert to Christianity and include Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs and Hungarians as their chief people.
And before people say I'm writing bullshit: Read the reports of all the Battles the Ottomans lost, the same thing happens over and over again: Sipahi cav meets European cav on an even battlefield and "gets routed surprisingly fast".
>>596619
Also
>Montenegro, part of Ottoman Empire
shiggdy diggy
>>599927
The Ottoman cavalryman in that pic actually looks pretty awesome. Any more pics of them?
>>599927
Are you meaning that the reason for the empire's fall was that the core ethnicity constituted too little of a part of the empire's population, or that the core ethnicity was not physically strong enough for battle? If the former, it might have been the factor, but not enough to explain a fall, look at the British Commonwealth for example. If the latter, you are writing enormous fucking bullshit, mate. It's not hateful or /pol/, just simply silly. I don't know what exactly was the reason behind the empire's fall. I guess it's the usual stuff. I.e. it surpassed it's actio radius, obsolete centralised political leadership couldn't keep the thing together, failed to keep up with the times, rivals got far stronger via their naval/colonial empires etc. The fall of an empire is a much more complicated topic than lost wars as long as said wars don't lead to their annihilation. But even then, wars are won by equipment, economy, good strategic leadership and a thousand other factors, the stature of soldiers being of absolutely minuscule importance.
>>597898
But is it not true?
>>596619
Poor institutions, which lead to an inability to embrace commercial society. Lepanto wouldn't have been such a major loss if they had the economic engine to replace those ships, but they didn't. They had poor institutions and a factionalized government all of which promoted rent-seeking over productivity.
>>600830
I hate that pic so much.
>>599927
>people of short statue best suited to ride horses and shoot arrows.
Turks are virtually the same height as their neighbors (Greeks, Armenians, Circassians, Bosnians, Serbs, etc). Unless you're talking about Turco-Mongol tribes in Central Asia, which certainly were not a main racial component in Anatolia by the time of the Ottoman expansion into Europe.
Also horse archers were pretty much unstoppable in the premodern era until the advent of massed gunpowder infantry tactics (see: Genghis Khan, Attila the Hun)
>Short people can't win swordfights.
Swordfights have no impact on actual battles. This isn't a Hollywood movie. Swords were never a primary weapon. Bows, muskets, artillery, and polearms (like the spear, pike or halberd) were the primary weapons of premodern warfare.
>>601569
that guy knows nothing. he fucking claims ottoman empire fell because they were shit at battle, and ignores every other reason.
>>596619
>What went wrong
Why does "something have to go wrong" for a social order to cease?
>>596619
They couldn't cope with the changes in the worlds economy after the discovery of the new world which changed the transferring of goods. With that, no multicultural nation can truly unify to get through economically hard times.
I also believe their overall views on religion had a big impact. They weren't very religious at the beginning, and then went full Islam retard in the end.
>>597043
What's wrong with Yeniçeries?
>>597217
I think it was more to do with its rising European neighbors.
>>601677
the were Christians taken from the blakans to form an elite military corps for the ottoman amry and civil administrator for the upper echelons of the empire.
thing is the janissaries' started wanting more privileges because they were kind of forced into the position these privileges eventually led to serious decadence and when people in such position s stop giving a shit the empire took a serious blow in addition to all the other stuff.
>>596619
To bypass nobility the sultan created a corp of professional soldiers called the Janissary, these guys got so much power they could make or break a sultan much like the Roman legions of old.
Succession law was essentially "The first guy to kill all his siblings gets the throne" which as you can imagine caused some shit.
>>597773
verification of what's been read and explanation of deeper content. Or in the case of religious posting, to get an "on the ground" look at how the tradition is practiced in reality as opposed to a book.
>>599927
>Short people can't win swordfights.
Yeah, but anyone can hold a pike.
>>601605
Let's draw it down to what he actually said:
The ottoman empire fell because it's constituents were short people.
Fuck that he claims shit about battle -- he's literally chalking it all up to them being short. That in and of itself is discrediting.
>>596619
some guy in england invented a cloth weaving machine, and everything went from there...
tl;dr the ottomans couldn't into industry.
>>596619
Kurdish Warriors
>>597422
Time doesnt end
>>602042
>some guy in england invented a cloth weaving machine
It was actually spinning mate.
>>602051
The spinning wheel?
>>602060
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_jenny
>>597067
Thanks for the video anon, I know CaspianReport. His history of Islam series is worth checking out if you liked this.
>>602087
The Ottomans were done for way before that. Death penalty for users of the printing press to begin with.
>>596619
They were turks.
>>600830
What cunt is the pighead left of Germany supposed to be?
>>600830
But Russia and China are G20 members?
ppl are thinking with their 21st century head here too much
>there was no common identity
they didnt have that when they were conquering either
moreover
the Habsburgs didnt have that either, and they stopped them, then eclipsed them
but i could cite any other kingdom of a dynasty
they relied on conquest, they stopped expanding, filling up coffins from successfull campaigns
they used their own administration, military organization which simply had an action radius
>every major campaign starts from konstantinople
>starting may, ending in october
>at their peak, to reach the borders the army marched for 3 months+ leaving only 3 or even less for actual conquest
>>602010
>"The first guy to kill all his siblings gets the throne"
Actually, empire's best rulers came out of that system, it started to decline when people stopped doing that.
>>596619
No printing press
No transmission of enlightenment ideas
No economic modernisation
Vested interests
Corruption
These are all well and good if you're fighting medievally armed enemies, bedouins and equally poorly armed neighbours, but fatal against enemies who embrace modernity where you reject it.
Also, vested interests within your state are easy to coopt by foreign powers if you're reasonably cosmopolitan and immensely corrupt.
ww1 ended the ottoman empire not any non sense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIBO-meEtC8
>>603792
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36sO84Hq6kw
>>600830
They actually replaced those ships easily the seasoned seamen lost during lepanto were hard to find though.
Being a backwards shithole is what caused it.
>discovery of the New World making the silk road marginal
>no renaissance, no industrial revolution, no nothing
>Janissaries gaining so much power they pretty ruled even over the Sultan himself
>failing to assimilate the Arabs and the Balkanites into turkdom
>>603452
maybe Israel? Idk
>>596619
>What went wrong with the Ottoman Empire
Vienna.
It's funny that the only reason the Ottoman empire survived passed the 19th century was because of the UK, even the Egyptians would have forced the Ottoman empire into collapsing if not for the Brits.
>>605486
Israel isn't G20 though
>>601669
yeah, that second point was sort of a problem. The Ottoman state was very much built on flexible unorthodoxy to maintain its fractured population, which to some extent worked. The attempt to forge a united Islamic identity to counteract growing tensions was probably the stupidest attempt at a solution, and only made things worse.
>>605993
The Eternal Anglo strikes again.
