Ottomans - research

[Yoda Power]

In early January I'm doing a very important report on the Ottomans. Did I say it was VERY important?

Anyway I can't just write about the Ottomans, I have to choose a much more specific subject. So far I'm thinking about Ottomans relationship/dealings with Europe, but this can, and probably will, change before January.

I wish to use this thread as a source of information, both now, and when I write the report. Maybe I can ask some questions. However the most important thing at this point is to get some sources. I need links, good links, and maybe book suggestions. I can't accepts any statements without some valid source to back it up. I doubt my history teacher will accepts this forum alone as a valid source.

So if you have any good links, or articles regarding the Ottomans, please post them. Don't just go out and rant whatever you know about the Ottomans, all the basic knowledge I already know, so that's usually useless to me.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Mirc]

I'm here just to give some advice, as I do not know many good sites about the Ottomans.

I'm really not ranting whatever I know about the Ottomans, please don't judge this post until you read it at least partially.




I'd recommend being extremely careful when searching for information about Ottoman Empire on the net. The Internet is full of wrong information about them. Really. Some sites even say that they conquered Ethiopia (!) or Moldavia, while both were never conquered. Some say that Constantinopole fell in 1339. :crazyeyes:

And some sites contradict themselves, saying that "Cyprus was not conquered until mid 1600's", then saying "Dates of Conquest: Cyprus - 1571. Be very careful, because a lot of the info out there is wrong!

And most important, never trust maps! Unless their source is known to be good and trustworthy. Maps are probably the easiest way to spread wrong information, and you will see that maps from different sites contradict each other. You'll see a lot of territory as "conquered territory", while the Ottomans "suffered an embarrassing defeat" there. For example, you'll see Vienna as a border city in some maps.

And some sites will say Bulgarians were glad to be part of the Ottoman Empire and didn't impose any resistance because of that.

I even found on a site info like: "The Ottoman Empire didn't conquer Austria because they realized they had no use for their lands and conquering them will only bring trouble". Or "For some short periods of time, various kings of Poland were vassals to the Ottoman sultan, which was almost as they were conquered". I especially love the "almost conquered" expression used.

Try to verify all information you get. And try to only take info from trustworthy, verifiable sources.

 

[Squonk]

I agree with previous post. To clear something up: Moldavia was never an integral part of Ottoman Empire, though it was fief of it for most of its history and its southern part (Budziak) was conquered by Turks and incorporated in 1484 or so.
Turks never conquered Ethiopia, but indeed they tried and conquered some coastal parts of it (Eritrea, that is), and named it "Ethiopia"
Poland was never conquered or vassalised.
However, during the first free election of king in 1573, there were two main factions: pro-austrian and pro-french ones. Taking into account that Austrians were the main enemy of Turkey, and French their silent ally against it, Turks declared support for french candidate. The French won, mostly due to extravagant promises of bishop of Valence, Monluc, and of himself, so Turks claim it shows their influence over Poland...
In 1672, Turkey attacked Poland, took Podolia province and part of Ukraine, and a treaty of Buczacz was signed, according to which Poland was supposed to pay tribute. It should have been ratified by the parliament, but the parliament instead of signing the treaty sent a new army that defeated the Turks and while it failed to recapture Podolia, a new treaty was signed.
I can say much about polish-turkish relations, it used to be part of my interest. If You need literature, however, I may ask profesor Kolodziejczyk at seminary, he's a specialist in turkish history.

 

[Tee Kay]

I'm a third of the way through Jason Goodwin's "Lords of the Horizon" and if you haven't read it yet I highly recommended that you do.

 

[Kyriakos]

Hm, does it have to be the ottomans or also the turkic tribes before them?

Afterall the ottomans were just one of the sultanates, which was created as a direct result of the relationship between the byzantine empire and the sultanate of Rum.
So if your paper can go before the creation of the ottoman sultanate a good topic might be one related to the sultanate of Iconion, and its creation; what purposes did it serve, and why was it helped by the byzantine empire. Generally the sultanate of Rum was seen by the byzantines as a block against the influx of more turkic tribes in the region. Before its creation the turks were semi-nomadic and not organised in states. They pillaged and ruled as petty- kings, overseing the societies which they had conquered. This caused an ever-existant demand for expansion as well, much like in the case of the mongol empire.
Another topic could be the reasons for a transformation of the ottoman empire, from an expansive one (up to the siege of Vienna) to a stabilised entity, with set borders, in the end of the austro-ottoman wars.
The topic can reach as far as the collapse of the empire, in the first world war, and as back as the creation of the sultanate of Iconion, with byzantine assistance

 

[Yoda Power]

I'm here just to give some advice, as I do not know many good sites about the Ottomans.

I'm really not ranting whatever I know about the Ottomans, please don't judge this post until you read it at least partially.




I'd recommend being extremely careful when searching for information about Ottoman Empire on the net. The Internet is full of wrong information about them. Really. Some sites even say that they conquered Ethiopia (!) or Moldavia, while both were never conquered. Some say that Constantinopole fell in 1339. :crazyeyes:

And some sites contradict themselves, saying that "Cyprus was not conquered until mid 1600's", then saying "Dates of Conquest: Cyprus - 1571. Be very careful, because a lot of the info out there is wrong!

And most important, never trust maps! Unless their source is known to be good and trustworthy. Maps are probably the easiest way to spread wrong information, and you will see that maps from different sites contradict each other. You'll see a lot of territory as "conquered territory", while the Ottomans "suffered an embarrassing defeat" there. For example, you'll see Vienna as a border city in some maps.

And some sites will say Bulgarians were glad to be part of the Ottoman Empire and didn't impose any resistance because of that.

I even found on a site info like: "The Ottoman Empire didn't conquer Austria because they realized they had no use for their lands and conquering them will only bring trouble". Or "For some short periods of time, various kings of Poland were vassals to the Ottoman sultan, which was almost as they were conquered". I especially love the "almost conquered" expression used.

Try to verify all information you get. And try to only take info from trustworthy, verifiable sources.

Well ofcause I have to be very carefull, but stupid mistakes like those, seem pretty easy to recognize as mistakes. Afterall it's not like I don't know anything about the Ottomans, I just need to know more. But thanks for the advice anyway .

I agree with previous post. To clear something up: Moldavia was never an integral part of Ottoman Empire, though it was fief of it for most of its history and its southern part (Budziak) was conquered by Turks and incorporated in 1484 or so.
Turks never conquered Ethiopia, but indeed they tried and conquered some coastal parts of it (Eritrea, that is), and named it "Ethiopia"
Poland was never conquered or vassalised.
However, during the first free election of king in 1573, there were two main factions: pro-austrian and pro-french ones. Taking into account that Austrians were the main enemy of Turkey, and French their silent ally against it, Turks declared support for french candidate. The French won, mostly due to extravagant promises of bishop of Valence, Monluc, and of himself, so Turks claim it shows their influence over Poland...
In 1672, Turkey attacked Poland, took Podolia province and part of Ukraine, and a treaty of Buczacz was signed, according to which Poland was supposed to pay tribute. It should have been ratified by the parliament, but the parliament instead of signing the treaty sent a new army that defeated the Turks and while it failed to recapture Podolia, a new treaty was signed.
I can say much about polish-turkish relations, it used to be part of my interest. If You need literature, however, I may ask profesor Kolodziejczyk at seminary, he's a specialist in turkish history.

Well Polish-Turkish relations could be included somehow, atleast if I choose to write about their dealings with Europe. I'm very interested in litterature.

I'm a third of the way through Jason Goodwin's "Lords of the Horizon" and if you haven't read it yet I highly recommended that you do.

I'll look into that, thanks.

Hm, does it have to be the ottomans or also the turkic tribes before them?

Afterall the ottomans were just one of the sultanates, which was created as a direct result of the relationship between the byzantine empire and the sultanate of Rum.
So if your paper can go before the creation of the ottoman sultanate a good topic might be one related to the sultanate of Iconion, and its creation; what purposes did it serve, and why was it helped by the byzantine empire. Generally the sultanate of Rum was seen by the byzantines as a block against the influx of more turkic tribes in the region. Before its creation the turks were semi-nomadic and not organised in states. They pillaged and ruled as petty- kings, overseing the societies which they had conquered. This caused an ever-existant demand for expansion as well, much like in the case of the mongol empire.
Another topic could be the reasons for a transformation of the ottoman empire, from an expansive one (up to the siege of Vienna) to a stabilised entity, with set borders, in the end of the austro-ottoman wars.
The topic can reach as far as the collapse of the empire, in the first world war, and as back as the creation of the sultanate of Iconion, with byzantine assistance

Well the Ottomans only, it's too late to expand the subject now. That means in round number that my period of interest is 1300-1920. I'm probably going to focuse on the first years though, up to ~1550.

 

[Verbose]

Ottoman-European relationships looks interesting, if a tad BIG as a subject.

What you get will vary with perspective as well. In the Balkans and central Europe the Ottomans were a reality to be reckoned with even before the fall of Constantinopolis in 1453, but the fall of that city brought home their rise to power for western Europe as well.

This led the Ottomans into contact and conflict with the Hapsburg Empire in SE Europe. It also brought them into conflict with the Italian trading republis in the Med, the Venetian empire in particular, but also the Genuese and the Spanish inheriting the maritime empire in the western Med of Aragon.

But getting in conflict with one set of European states also means picking up a bunch of friends, as in the enemy of my enemy.

Consequently His Most Catholic Majesty the King of France, François I, in the 1540's made the unheard move of allying himself with the Sultan. And since the French problem of being hemmed in by Imperial lands (Spain to the south, Austria to the east) didn't go away, France and the Ottomans spent the following centuries on more or less friendly terms.

Come the 17th c. the Swedish sudden bid for Prostestant great power status led it into conflict with the Habsburgs alongside the French and the Ottomans, so suddenly there was this triangulation of powers all trying to have a go at the Holy Roman Empire.
The Swedish-Ottoman alliance was then given a new lease of life with the rise of Russia as a common enemy in the 18th century, with France as a traditional ally and bankroller.

 

[Yoda Power]

So maybe French-Ottoman relations would be better? My teacher is french, so I would like to avoid teaching him French history, as he probably has a much better understanding than I have of it.

 

[mrtn]

Sounds interesting. You might want to look into the influence of the Sephardic Jews on the Ottoman Empire, after they got thrown out of Spain in 1492, a lot of them moved to Istanbul/Constantinople/Byzantion/Thatdamncity.

 

[Azkonus]

Sounds interesting. You might want to look into the influence of the Sephardic Jews on the Ottoman Empire, after they got thrown out of Spain in 1492, a lot of them moved to Istanbul/Constantinople/Byzantion/Thatdamncity.

That's right, but later Selanik/Salonica/Thessaloniki became main Ottoman Jewish city.

 

[Yoda Power]

Sounds interesting. You might want to look into the influence of the Sephardic Jews on the Ottoman Empire, after they got thrown out of Spain in 1492, a lot of them moved to Istanbul/Constantinople/Byzantion/Thatdamncity.

That was actually a pretty good suggestion too. I'm going to see about that

 

[BEHIND_THE_MASK]

If u write about ottoman relationsions then i suggest u write about German-Ottoman Relations.

They were rather close I believe... Good allies...

 

[Verbose]

If u write about ottoman relationsions then i suggest u write about German-Ottoman Relations.

They were rather close I believe... Good allies...

That would be later, the 19th c.

 

[Verbose]

So maybe French-Ottoman relations would be better? My teacher is french, so I would like to avoid teaching him French history, as he probably has a much better understanding than I have of it.

I'd think looking at a larger picture might be useful.

You can't look at Otto-French things without bringing in the Habsburgs anyway.

Personally what I find interesting is how integrated in general western European politics the Ottomans in fact were for a long time.

The interconnectedness was huge. The Spanish conquest of the New World bringing in huge amounts of precious metals didn't just cause rampant inflation in Spain (making Spain powerful but the king of Spain famously and incomprehensibly always broke), it practically killed the Ottomans as well. And at the time no one could figure out the mechanism why this was happening.

 

[jeriko one]

I must say beware Turkish sites. They are not historically correct and contains a lot of Jingo. However if you find anything byu Halil Inalcik, Ilber Ortayli, Murat Bardakci or Emre Kongar go for it. They are quite objective.

As a subject, I suggest you take a more specific subject. Something like "Vlad Dracul and the Ottoman Empire", " Malta Trials after WWI ", "Barbary Pirates and the Ottoman Empire" etc.

 

[knigh+]

Another interesting one might be the symbiotic relationship between early Ottomans and Byzantines. Ottomans often used help from some Byzantine castles/towns to fight other Byzantines or Turkish principalities. Osman's son got married to the daughter of the Byzantine governor of one of such ally towns. I think that governor was even given Gazi title, which is the Turkish equivalent of knighthood.

In the transition from nomadic life to settled civilization, they totally relied on Byzantine regulations, institutions, and clerks.

Later, the first lands and castles Ottomans gained in Europe were given as a gift from the Byzantines.

You can have a nice ending to the story with Mehmed's proclamation of himself being the new Ceasar (which was one of the titles of Byzantine Emperors as the head of Eastern Roman Empire) upon entering Constantinopolis.

 

[knigh+]

Other interesting but not well known events are the civil wars. These are interregnum (1402-1413) and conflict between Beyazid II and Cem (Jem,Djem) Sultan (1481+). The story of Cem Sultan has lots of European relations in it as well.

Also check this thread:

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=252131&page=1&pp=25

It is not in civfanatics, but it is in the forums of the game with most historical accuracy. It is a 20+ page thread with some dispute clutter, but if you quickly browse through it, you can easily see Tunch Khan's posts of encyclopedic size and format. He accumulated so much knowledge in that thread, that at some point the moderators posted thanks for his contribution to the next version of the game. He uses the same name in civfanatics, so I suppose you could find him here, send him a PM and ask his advice.

 

[Yoda Power]

I talked with my teacher today. He said I should find a period to focus on. He also thought that a subject concerning diplomatic relations was interesting, but he said I probably need more sources.

 

[#1 Person]

For this sort of research it is REALLY important and good to use text sources, as there are lots of books about it in any sort of reasonably sized library or online university site.

 

[useless]

if i was you id start around 1299–1683 since thats when the ottoman empire REALLY expanded
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/OttomanEmpireIn1683.png as this map shows ( they mainly took over former byzantine land (i.e constantinople and anatolia) i hope this helps.