Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How did the ottoman empire impact the early modern europe
Influence of ottoman empire power
European influence in Ottoman politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
From the 18th century through the beginning of the 19th century, European influence was a significant force in various aspects of the Ottoman Empire, Egypt, and Iran. Although the reforms, coined primarily by Gelvin as “defensive developmentalism,” were initially intended to centralize governmental control and strengthen the military, the actual effects were much broader. Based on varying pre-existing conditions and unique approaches to governorship, this process of modernization affected each region differently. This essay will explore the manners in which European influence shaped each territory, the primary areas of civilization, politics and culture that experienced reform, and the degree to which that influence was significant, or in the case of Iran, insignificant. European influence was most prominent in Egypt, beginning with the dynasty of Muhammad Ali who initiated the reforms that would lay the groundwork for future rulers. Ali sought to achieve a degree of autonomy from the Ottoman Empire and expand the rule of Egypt, both of which required military reform. In order to finance his efforts, he had to expand the Egyptian economy. Egyptian exports thrived on the back of cotton, which Ali attempted to consolidate into a government monopoly. Egypt’s focus on cotton production made it an export-heavy territory that was dependent upon European manufacturing imports from the West. In order to facilitate its exports, a robust transportation system was necessary. Egypt developed a railway from Cairo to Alexandria as well as ports along the Mediterranean coast because of its dependence upon the European market. The structure of Egyptian politics and state administration was also redefined during Ali’s rule. As the go... ... middle of paper ... ...r the region; however, they were also reluctant to let it simply slip into the others hands. The effect was a further weakening of central government in the region, which, as previously noted, increased the power and influence of the regional ulama powers. The control of the ulama was at its height during the Tobacco Protest of 1891 when the religious leaders were able to successfully organize popular dissatisfaction and demonstration against the rulers in Tehran. Ultimately, European influence played a fundamental role in the shaping of the Ottoman Empire and Egypt during the 18th and early 19th century. It’s influence was most significant through government, economic, and military influence but its effects reverberated throughout society. Western influence was much less significant in Iran, primarily due to the fragmented nature of governorship in the region.
Not only did the religious history play a large role in Iran’s beliefs but also foreign invaders have been imposing their power on the Iranian region for thousands of years. Iran...
European colonialism laid the groundwork for the emergence of the Modern Middle East by influencing almost every Middle Eastern country through mandates and protectorates. The French and British greatly influenced the Middle East by using their power to help set the borders and create the Middle East we know today. Saudi Arabia was one of the only countries that was barely influenced by European colonialism. The Middle East was a crucial place throughout ancient history and continued to be important in modern times. Many great civilizations existed in the Middle East. The most prominent was the Ottoman Empire.
First of all, imperialism was not something the Egyptians wanted. They witnessed the decline of the Ottoman Empire, and that acted as a wakeup call. They can either keep up with the modernization of the world around them, or be overwhelmed and lost among it (Modern World History, 354). They decided to make new reforms as an attempt towards modernization. One of these attempts was the Suez Canal. It was a waterway that connected the Nile River, Mediterranean Sea, and the Red Sea. The labor costed over 100 million dollars, and it opened in 1869 (Rosenberg). The Suez Canal, along with other reforms, put Egypt in a rough economic state. The British wanted control over the canal because it was the main route to India and its other colonies. Because of the huge debt, Egypt was forced to hand the canal over to Britain. Later, in 1882, Britain gained control to Egypt itself (Modern World History, 355). Thus, Egypt was under new rule and became one of Britain’s many colonies. To sum up, Egypt created many reforms ...
While taking the class of Early Modern European History there was two states that really stuck out and peaked my interest the most. They were the Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe. If you compare and contrast both the Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe during the 16th Century through the 18th Century, you will see that there are a number of similarities as well as differences when you look at the expansion of the states. You will also see many of these contrasts as well when you look in terms of each states military and commerce. Although the Ottoman Empire existed before the 16th century and continued to exist past the 18th century and in great decline until the early 20th century, when looking at the state as a whole the time period of 1500’s through the 1700’s is a period of growth and strength. It is perhaps even known as a golden era for the state, when taking in to comparison the Early Modern Europeans where the same time period marks a change in how society thought and how people were treated.
Egypt has one of the longest histories of any nation in the world. Written history of Egypt dates back to about 5,000 years, the commencement of civilization. While there is divergence in relation to Early Egyptian times, it is said that Egypt came to be around 3200 B.C., during the reign of a king by the name of Menes and unified the northern and southern cities of Egypt into one government. In 1675 B.C., Egypt was invaded by the Hyksos, people from the east, bringing along the very first of chariots and horses ever to come across Egyptian soil. Approximately 175 years later in 1500 B.C., the Egyptians had gotten rid of the Hyksos and driven them out. In 1375 B.C., Amenhotep IV had become the king of Egypt. During his reign he eliminated the worship of Egyptian gods and initiated the idea of only worshipping one god. But after his death, his ideas were retired and old ways were reestablished. Egyptian supremacy then started to decline around 1000 B.C. Between 1000 B.C. and 332 B.C., Egypt was ruled by many such as the Libyans, Assyrians, Ethiopians, and Persians. In 640, Muslims conquered Egypt and founded the city of Cairo in 969 and deemed it as the capital of Egypt. For many centuries Egypt was ruled by Muslim caliphs. A prominent ruler of this period was Saladin, who battled the Christian Crusaders at the conclusion of the twelfth century. In 1798 Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Egypt but was then forced to withdraw in 1801 Turkish and British armed forces. In 1805 Mohamed Ali began ruling Egypt till 1848 and great changed the country in terms of modernization and its military. During Mohamed’s conquest, he borrowed a lot of money from the French and British, which later resulted in Egypt’s coloniza...
Contemporary studies of the Timurid dynasty in Iran and Central Asia have long been dominated by nationalist, sectarian and ideological agendas which typically present the empire of the Timurid as an exclusively Iranian phenomenon. This paper re-evaluates the political and religious interpretation through the authoritative and administrative methods in the midst of Timur and Shuh Rukh reign, how did they keep up their empire through the political results in Central Asia and Western Persia. This paper display’s Timur and Shuh Rukh as an independent model, in like manner with the capital cities and territories; my proposal for that is to illustrate an analysis of the circumstances that appear at the particular time. My investigation will merge
1. The three main factors that resulted in the Ottoman expansion of the 14th century were rooted in geopolitics, military technology a nd strategy, and political strategy. The Ottoman capital and center of economics (post-1453) was located at Istanbul, which was not only the geographical “gateway” to Europe, but also connected Asia and Europe, which made Istanbul an extremely important area for commerce and merchants travelling from one continent to the other. Even after the Ottoman takeover of the Byzantines, they were able to expand even more partly due to the capitol and funds gained through commerce in Istanbul. The Ottomans also created an army that was aided by new technologies such as firearms as well as horses, which helped them expand exponentially through the Middle East. The balance within their military, with the Calvary coupled with armed Janissaries, furthered their military might. Lastly, the political strategy of Osman and his heirs helped to further Ottoman goals including expansion.
Spielvogel, Jackson J. "The Muslim Empires: The Ottoman Empire.” Glencoe World History. New York, NY: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, 2005. p.484-489. Print.
During the Tanzimat, two royal decrees were issued that displayed exactly what the reform movement was all about. It promised certain administrative reforms, the abolition of tax farming, the standardization of military conscription, and the elimination of corruption. 2 These decrees created equality among all religions, decentralized the government, and helped to make the millets more a...
Over the course of the last century, the Islamic Republic of Iran (formerly known as Persia) has seen colonialism, the end of a dynasty, the installation of a government by a foreign power, and just over three decades ago, the popular uprising and a cleric-led revolution. These events preceded what could be considered the world’s first Islamic state, as politics and fundamentalist religion are inextricably linked in contemporary Iran. Looking at Iran from the mid 1940’s until the present day, one can trace the path that led to the rise of fundamental Islam in Iran in three distinct periods. The first is that which began with the rise of secular nationalism and the decline of Islam. In the second, the secular, western-friendly government eventually gave way to the Islamic revival in the form of a government takeover by hard-line clerics and disillusioned, fundamentalist youth; both motivated and led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Rule of Iran by these fundamentalist clerics then led to the formation of the fundamentalist Islamic theocracy that governs present-day Iran. The current government has some democratic appearances, but all real power is in the hands of the supreme leader, an Ayatollah who is chosen by the Assembly of Experts, a group of clerics chosen by the Guardian Council. With the Iranian Revolution, political Islam was born, with the fundamentalists holding the reins of power in Iran to the present day.
Due to the large amounts of wealth flowing through Egypt it enabled Hatshepsut to begin restoring Egypt to its original state, this raised the calibre of Egypt’s architecture to a standard.
In the 1970’s Iran, under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was a very centralized military state that maintained a close relationship with the USA. The Shah was notoriously out of touch with working class Iranians as he implemented many controversial economic policies against small business owners that he suspected involved profiteering. Also unrestricted economic expansions in Iran lead to huge government expenditure that became a serious problem when oil prices dropped in the mid 1970’s. This caused many huge government construction projects to halt and the economy to stall after many years of massive profit. Following this was high rates of inflation that affected Iranians buying power and living standards. (Afary, 2012) Under the Shah, political participation was not widely available for all Iranians and it was common for political opposition to be met with harassment, illegal detention, and even torture. These measures were implemented by the Iranian secret police knows as ‘SAVAK’. This totalitarian regime combined with the increasing modernisation of the country paved the way for revolution.
Although the Iranian Revolution was caused by combination of political and religious motivations and ideas, the desires of the people supporting the movement were more dominantly religious ideas that were wished to be imposed in society and in a new government. The Shah, or king, of Iran at the time was Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, who had developed relations with nations in “western” world, specifically with the United States. The United States supported the White Revolution, which was a series of social reformations the Shah made to remove Islamic v...
As Muhammad got more involved in his leadership, he began creating a series of reforms in the military and in the economy. Without any help, he directed a change in Egyptian agriculture. He changed to a new plantation cash crop, called cotton. Because of this agricultural
Many of the reforms put in place by the White Revolution had a direct impact on the ulama and went against the ideology of the Islam. One of the “major grievance” the ulama had against Pahlavi’s regime was the continuous attempts to mitigate the “power and influence” of the ulama, as well as the “growing power of Western Infidels and their ways”. One policy that the ulama felt was an attempt to mitigate their influence was the land reform policy. The land reform policy allowed landowners to have “one village, or a total of six dongs (each dong is one sixth of a property)”. The government purchased the excess land, and then would redistribute the land to peasant farms. However, this policy directly affected the ulama economically. The ulama relied heavily on waqf lands, and used the revenues in order to maintain mosques and seminaries. Another policy that affected the ulama financial and contributed to their discontent with the Shah was in 1977, when Iran was in the middle of an economic crisis. The Shah appointed a new Prime minister, Jamshid Amuzegar, who imposed the austerity program. In the austerity program, Amuzegar decided to “substantially lower the allocation of a secret fund from which the ulama received lucrative stipends”. This act shut off an important source of capital that the ulama used to carry out their day-to-day operation. Further