Ottomans in 1500 AD

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
21

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT: *

.....Ottoman's ...enemies (the italian states and the Hapsburgs) all had their navies in the eastern mediterranean ....

[/QUOTE]

Correct. Ottomans were "cornered" in the Eastern Mediterranean. Superior naval powers from Europe were now at Ottoman’s shores.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT: *
....In the century that followed Lepanto, the Ottomans' strategic objectives, retaining the Balkans and dealing with the threat of Persia, were areas that could be dealt with without needing naval might and so their fleet was used to merely ward of Venetian ...
[/QUOTE]

Ottoman watched helplessly as the emerging new powers completely circumvented their control. Soon Portuguese (later Spanish, and Dutch) were the big guys ready to plow the South Atlantic and Indian ocean. Ottomans saw the reduction in tax collection and tried the novel plan of digging Suez Canal.

If successful, they would have brought the trade back in their territories. Unfortunately Ottoman project failed due to many reasons including: lack of will, poor technology, and the shortage of funds needed for the canal. The same canal was later built by the Europeans.

Ottomans also tried to emulate Europe when they hired European professors and opened the "School for Mathematics". The school was mostly filled with army students trying to learn European art of gunnery.

MAToo hold on Khalifa was so severe that such efforts of introducing science, mathematics, and arts failed. The result was a steady decline in every aspect of Ottoman society.

22

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by antiobl: *
Correct. Ottomans were "cornered" in the Eastern Mediterranean. Superior naval powers from Europe were now at Ottoman’s shores.

[/quote]

That is a misleading way of phrasing it. The Ottoman navy's interests were always predominantly in the Eastern mediterranean and 6 months after Lepanto .... their Eastern mediterranean interests were still not threatened. The Ottomans still had a large enough fleet that a naval invasion of their territory was never attempted in the Eastern Mediterranean theatre until 1915, at Gallipoli (which the Khalif's general, Mustafa Kemal Attaturk, crushed).

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by antiobl: *
Ottoman watched helplessly as the emerging new powers completely circumvented their control. Soon Portuguese (later Spanish, and Dutch) were the big guys ready to plow the South Atlantic and Indian ocean. Ottomans saw the reduction in tax collection and tried the novel plan of digging Suez Canal.

If successful, they would have brought the trade back in their territories. Unfortunately Ottoman project failed due to many reasons including: lack of will, poor technology, and the shortage of funds needed for the canal. The same canal was later built by the Europeans.

Ottomans also tried to emulate Europe when they hired European professors and opened the "School for Mathematics". The school was mostly filled with army students trying to learn European art of gunnery.

MAToo hold on Khalifa was so severe that such efforts of introducing science, mathematics, and arts failed. The result was a steady decline in every aspect of Ottoman society.
[/QUOTE]

All that is the period of decline in the 1700s onwards, which I already stated occured.

23

A slight side track in the conversation towards Ottoman Naval policy. As a rule of thumb, Muslim interest in expanding power navally was never as great as Europeans because they already had a monopoly over the Spice trade. Consider the Mughals didn't bother constucting a navy at all, but you can't even say it was Muslim specific, the Chinese and Japanese didn't either.

As a rule most people consider the 16th century as a second Golden age in Muslim history, you had Suleiman the magneficient. I think Shah Abbas of Persia, Baber/Sher Shah Suri and Akbar the Great in India. Lets not forget that the Kazan Khanate essentially dominated most of the areas south of Ukraine as well, at least for half of the 16th century.

If you want a time of real decline, realistically one should look at the 18th century, the death of Aurenzeib, the defeat of the Ottomans at the hands of the Austrians and Russians and the push by the Dutch to occupy modern day Indonesia all started in that century.

24

Maddy and Zakk, the threads is about the Mullah and Ayat Ullah’s in 1500 AD, as if the Mullah (Muslim Clergy) were in control of any sort of governing or were in any form or shape in political leadership. As far as I can recall the only religious leaders who were in control as political and religious leaders were the Holy prophet and the Khulafia-Rashedeen. Never again in Islamic history religious scholars became so strong to become in power. The fate or all Imams (Shai and Sunni) are well known and documented. The poster either considers all muslims to be Mullah and Ayat Ullah’s or he thinks that Mullah and Ayat Ullah’s were in control of Islamic ummah in 1500AD.

25

It hardly seems like a religious discussion.

26

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by MiniMe: *
Maddy and Zakk, the threads is about the Mullah and Ayat Ullah’s in 1500 AD, as if the Mullah (Muslim Clergy) were in control of any sort of governing or were in any form or shape in political leadership. As far as I can recall the only religious leaders who were in control as political and religious leaders were the Holy prophet and the Khulafia-Rashedeen. Never again in Islamic history religious scholars became so strong to become in power. The fate or all Imams (Shai and Sunni) are well known and documented. The poster either considers all muslims to be Mullah and Ayat Ullah’s or he thinks that Mullah and Ayat Ullah’s were in control of Islamic ummah in 1500AD.
[/QUOTE]

Islamic scholars were very influential under the midevil Muslim rulers, especially the Ottomans, in fact. The Ottomans were in fact more susceptible to influence by Islamic scholars due to the factthat the Ottoman Sultan claimed Khilafat, and thus could be (and often were) deposed if the scholars could persuade the masses in Istanbul that he was not ruling by Islam. Indeed, very often the Grand Vizier (Wazir-ul-Azam in urdu) would be an Islamic scholar and have an enormous amount of control over the wheels of power.

During the creation of the Ottoman Empire, very literalist and militant scholars held much influence, continually granting religious licence to the Sultan's invasions and raids. From around 1400-1600, less literalist scholars generally had the upper hand, though there were often swells of support for literalist scholars rivalling them. (Just as today, you get very literalist scholars and less literalist scholars).

Generally, less literalists scholars dominated Ottoman government until around 1600. Literalists scholars preached to the masses and the state machinery was often used to surpress them.

Beginning around 1600, literalist scholars again gained the upper hand and began reversing the progress of the past 200 years. They persuaded many of the masses, for instance, that Muslim scientists were trying to use science to explain away religion just as was occuring at the time in Christian Europe, and thus much scientific work in the Ottoman lands were destroyed by mobs, such as what was probably the finest telescope observatory in Europe.

Later on, literalist scholars successfully opposed and delayed efforts by the Khalifs to modernise the Empire. For example, all education was done in madrassahs, but the Khalifs wanted secular subjects such as science introduced to the syllabus to create the talent to industrialise the Ottomans. The scholars instead read this as an effort to introduce European innovations into religious education and thus change Islam. From the 1700s onwards, there were many, many example of the religious scholars who held more conservative views than the government foiling and delaying the governments efforts.

27

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT: *
....Islamic scholars were very influential under the midevil Muslim rulers, especially the Ottomans, in fact. The Ottomans were in fact more susceptible to influence by Islamic scholars due to the factthat the Ottoman Sultan claimed Khilafat, ....
[/QUOTE]

That's very right Bud! Precisely the reason why Mustafa Kamal kicked MAToos out of Turkey. He was correct in his analysis that MAToo Munkee business is bad for any country.

Look at Pakistan. MAToos have made this country a killing filed for Shias, Ahmadis, Christians and even Sunni Muslims.