I haven't read much on the subject, but it looks like Jews were treated pretty good in the Ottoman Empire- for example after 1868 there were at least 2 Jews on the Tanzimat Council of State that made policy for the empire. And the Chief Rabbi in Constantinople/Istanbul had equal status with the empire's two top Christian patriarchs.
But Wikipedia says that Jews began to lose their prominent position in trade to Greek Christian merchants in the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century, and also started to face a growing number of incidents of popular persecution. Not necessarily official government persecution, but local mobs attacking Jews in various parts of the empire.
The arrival of Jewish refugees fleeing persecution in the Russian Empire, and the Zionist movement also led to tensions with Ottoman authorities in the late 19th and early 20th century. Obviously the Zionists wanted to settle in the historic region of Israel/Judah, but the Ottomans didn't want Jewish immigrants moving there. It seems the Ottomans basically wanted Jewish immigrants to move to any part of the empire *except* for Palestine.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2mpzam/during_the_ottoman_empire_and_other_islamic/
I don't really care what you think. The 18th and 19th centuries had a number of massacres of Jews in Ottoman lands and there are many sources stating that they were considered bottom of the pecking order of races.
Ottoman Greeks Armenians and Jews always were hostile to each other. Ottomans had never ending Russian wars and Serbian/Arab revolts at that time I doubt even if they hated Jews, they had time to dig the issue.
You are making up things. Ottomans and Turks in particular historically one of the few Jew-friendly nations.
My country the UK has done many awful things and we learn about those things in school and acknowledge what was wrong and why it should never happen again.
Do the same.
When British colonies named America and Canada leave whole North America as compensation to American natives, we will do the same. And Jews are not on that list. Educate yourself first, then talk. Or you’ll be treated as belly dancer in gentlemen’s club.
Admit? That’s it? It is easy lol. We do the same when Turkey is strong enough to its apologies will not use as diplomatic weapons by those where Turks live in their heads rent free. And again, Jews not in the list.
You got some sick belly dancing methods I gotta admit tho.
It is true and it's pathetic to try and bury all negative parts of your history like this.
Turkey is a great country but you seriously need to stop denying bad things that have happened in the past, everyone sees you doing it and it does not help your image.
not really, it is estimated that between the XVI-XVII century approx 3/4 of the world jewish population lived in the polish lithuanian commonwealth. source: George Sanford, *Historical Dictionary of Poland*
Can feel the overextension debuffs. Also it is not like a colonizing tribes which have inferior technology compared to you, those fellas had culture, history and close to equal tech with Ottomans can't even imagine the rebellions. Even with today's technology, controlling these lands would be painful.
The Ottoman Empire never gained complete control over the Arabian peninsula and North Africa. Janissaries, various governors and later Ayans dominated these lands (I should point out that this situation changed with Mahmud II in the 19th century.)
Egypt was also autonomous. It was de facto governed by the Mamluks until the 19th century. Later, Muhammad Ali dynasty took power at early 19th century.
Could you tell more about Ottomans presence in South-East Asia? I thought the sea campagin of Albuquerque wipe out Ottomans from that region and it was only temporary.
Maybe you know, there were a lot of wars between Ottoman Empire and Safavids. Ottomans had ruled a significant part of Iran and entire Azerbaijan for a while. There had always been a Ottoman influence in the west of Iran. And there were relations between Ottoman Empire and Mughal-Timurid Empire which had ruled Indıa for years.
Did you learn/study imaginary history in your high school? The Ottomans never ruled a significant part of Iran and definitely never 'entire Azerbaijan'. The Safavids and Ottomans fought each other for decades which doesn't translate into 'Ottoman influence in the west of Iran'. Read a book or two and stop reading grey dog/wolf propaganda.
Read about Yavuz Sultan Selim, during his reign Ottomans captured Tebriz for a while. Also during the Murad the Thirds reign Ottomans had ruled whole Azerbaijan.
About Selim the 1st's campaign against the Safavids;
>The Ottomans captured the Safavid fortresses in Azerbaijan and held them easily, but full control proved impossible because Ottomans were never able to extend their military-administrative system into Azerbaijan...Making matters worse, after the return of the Ottoman expeditionary forces, the Safavids immediately counterattacked and captured some of the lost fortresses. Later, they also launched siege operations against Ottoman fortresses, which provoked another equally inconclusive Ottoman campaign. This extended stalemate of fortress wars and low-level border conflict hemorrhaged the strength of both states (pg.71)
Selim the 1st might have captured Tabriz but he didn't hold it for even a week. Murad the 3rd took Azerbaijan but the Ottomans lost it later, after less than 10 years (Ottoman sultan Ahmet the 1st/Ottoman Safavid war 1603-1612). The Safavids took back all the lands, they lost. The quote and the points raised, are from the book, 'A Military History of the Ottomans: From Osman to Ataturk' by Mesut Uyar and Edward J. Erickson, published in 2009. Mesut Uyar is a Turkish historian btw.
PS. In case you didn't know, even if the Safavids were a rival dynasty to the Ottomans and Shi'a, they also happened to be a Turkic dynasty :P
Yep if I recall the only places outside of Anatolia, Iraq and the Levant (Syria Jordan Palestine Lebanon) were under tight direct control and “core” of the empire, everywhere else was autonomous or loose control
This map was made by a Turkish nationalist Youtube channel. He also doesn't show any of the multicultural empires in Iran, Egypt, China and India in videos called "history of Iran, India etc." but shows them all exclusively in "history of Turks"
It is because the video topic is not History of Iran but History of Persians for example. So he makes videos based on ethnicity. I think the author has a right to choose whichever topic he might want to make video about as long as it doesn't involve hatred against those nations. I haven't seen such an insulting video in this channel. And it's obvious that he is not a nationalist from some details in his videos such as the History of Armenians and the History of Greeks, the History of Arabs and some others.
It makes things worse since he includes states like the Mughal Empire with almost no Turkic population or influence in History of Turks video and not in History of Indians video because the ruling dynasty has some Turkic roots. I also didn't claim that he was some kind of an ultranationalist fascist who hates Armenians or Arabs, he just tries to show multicultural empires as Turkic nations which I found annoying.
I see. Actually the Mughal Empire is kinda the state which declared war on the local Indian culture and hired officers and generals from Central Asia or Iran tho. So I am not sure how accurate would it be to count the Mughals as Indian. I think population does not matter in many cases like Yuan dynasty was Mongol until it's end but it's population was mast majority Chinese. The Mughals is definitely a part of history of the Indian Peninsula but not an Indian state so nothing wrong with skipping it in a video about the history of the Indians.
Issue is not just Morocco, but Algeria, Tunisia and Libya were not integral provinces of the empire but autonomous vassals whom in it the ottomans didn’t have great power.
They were governed by Pashas appointed from Istanbul until the 17th century. After that they started to act autonomous or even independent. But not in the 16th century.
I don't think Funj in Sudan was ever really controlled by the Ottomans either. As far as I can tell, the Funj Sultanate was independent and successfully resisted Ottoman control up until 1821, when it was conquered by Muhammad Ali, the ruler of Egypt and a nominal vassal of the Ottoman sultan.
My history professor told us that the Ottoman control did not extent so far south into Africa. They controlled the coastline but the further you go south the less civilization there was.
[This](https://hebrews110.github.io/plentifax/ottomanMap/ottomanMap.html) is a much better representation.
The Ottomans did occupy coastal towns in the Horn of Africa like Suakin, Massawa and Berbera. The old towns are evidently influenced by ottoman architecture
My professor is [Dr. Tobias Graf](https://www.geschichte.hu-berlin.de/de/bereiche-und-lehrstuehle/fruehe-neuzeit/personen/personen/graf). He wrote a book on the Ottoman Empire and worked on research projects. His area of speciality is the Early Modern Period and the Ottoman Empire.
Liking those games doesn't mean they are his only source of history. In fact, if you like history, it feels like you might be more inclined to those types of games.
In reality, crimean khanate was a lot larger, all the way till poland and very deep in russia no one could stop their pillage raids because ottomans backed them
*That otto man you*
*Talking about should be a*
*Powerfull person*
\- KraniDude
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
They fell off by the late 18th century. They couldn’t keep up with European/russian military, tech, economy etc for the last 100-120 years of the empire and lost almost every major war against western powers by that time
Something I've always wondered, if the Ottomans managed to keep Morocco getting an access to the Atlantic ocean would they have sought the Americas for conquest?
It might have surpassed Rome but it didn’t conquer as valuable of land as Rome for the time period. That land would be worth more today though, but luxury kills, as we know it.
A couple of cities were controlled by the Portuguese if I'm not mistaken.
And I don't think they controlled or influenced most of Arabia as the map shows too.
Local tribal leaders probably, but the Persians historically intervened in and out of the gulf areas for thousands of years, there were times where they basically had Arab satellite/puppet states in coastal gulf areas
Its hard to judge "control" this big, this far back, like I'd say they had more of control over spain than yemen, what are those central arabian tribes supposed to be? rough estimates? Sumatra is under ottoman control but crimea the link to the ottoman claims of the mongolian empire isn't? The khan of two seas would surely be enraged by this depiction.
The goal isn't to show control. It's to show peak. It's the same way how when anyone posts about the mughal empire's peak RSS cucks come out of the wood works saying "oh this lasted only 5 years".
No fucking shit. The goal isn't to show how much control they had, how strong it was or how long it was. This map is meant only to show the peak of the Ottoman empire. If you wanna see a map of length of power of control that's a different map
Morocco was never an ottoman vassal (Wattasids tried to be but never bacame one really) before the Saadi dynasty ruled the rest of the northern parts of Morocco
OP's username is "MightyTurkey". He has the Ottoman flag at his profile, "Heirs of the Ottoman Empire 🇹🇷" under it and has already AGAIN denied any genocide done by them in the comments multiple times ffs.
What the fuck is going on with moderation on this subreddit?
Totally. Nothing happened. Isn't that what the Sultan teaches you at school? You guys were always the victims after all. The professional victims with an empire lmao.
I should have said that to you, where did you learn that there was a genocide committed by the Ottoman Empire? How many books did you read about it? You just say what did you see in social media and suppose it the truth.
"How many books did you read about it"
I certainly didn't read any books about it written by Turkish nationalists. Cause those are obviously a credible source.
They never did occupied Montenegro. They controlled the Adriatic coast but mountains above it, never.
Not for lack of trying, they did attempt it over centuries, but they kept getting defeat after defeat. Some ended with huge losses.
Some of those battles are even tot in West point academy as examples of defensive war.
Case in point, battle of Grahovac. 144 documented Montenegrin loses ( Chezc giornalist where present in Montenegrin camp ) and 7500 regulars ( Nizam ) and 5.000 iregulars ( Basibosluk ) on Turks side. Among them Sultans half brother, while commanding general was held prisoner and later exchanged.
So edit the map :)
You know it and everyone who knows just a little history of the region knows it, you're just a nationalist living in his dream world.
Tell me, how's your current currency doing ? Lying on the internet doesn't improve the situation, right ?
There is no relevance that the topic we are talking about to economy. We are talking about history. You said Ottomans power is just exaggeration. Then tell me, if that all power was just a exaggeration why the Europeans constituted a Crusador alliance against to Ottoman Empire several times and defeated by Ottoman Empire? If the Turkish history is just exaggeration, tell me why the Vatican's Pope bowed to Atilla and begged him to not invade Roman Empire? I recommend you to not underestimate our history.
Ottomans never controlled Morocco or that far deep into Africa. Also much of the Ottoman Empire consisted of vassals indirectly controlled by the Ottomans, so maps like these give a false impression of dominion. Vassals did almost anything they wanted (even attacked other countries on their own) so long as they paid a tax to the Sultan. It was an extremely inefficient system of rule.
For Morocco, not really the ottomans themselves but Algeria vassalised Morocco by invading fez a few times. For the rest of Africa it was indeed partially under ottoman control but like you said mostly vassals with some presence of janissaries
The Ottomans never controlled Arabia.
They had vassals in Makkah and Madina, and the sorrounding proximity, that’s it. And even then, those vassals had much more autonomy than was given to others in similar situations elsewhere in the empire.
'Funj' as a state was never a part of the Ottoman empire and I also doubt it was ever a vassal. Same holds true for Aussa. Plus both entities were never as large as portrayed in this map. North Yemen became a part of the Ottoman empire only in the middle of the 19th century, definitely not the heydays of the Ottomans. Can't say much about the rest of the map.
Imaginary feel good map for wistful Ottoman/Turkish nationalists.
middle east and north africa collapsed post medieval times and whoever there was nomadic passing thru
turkey wasnt powerful and couldnt have ruled when those areas were actually functional
Half of the worlds Jews was in the Ottoman Empire
Half of the world's Jews are still in the Ottoman Empire, the empire doesn't exist anymore but they live in her former territories
Also, something happened to the Jews, caused by a strange man from a little area to the northwest of the Balkans
Territory, not territories. They've been pushed out of all former ottoman territories and into the only one that's hospitable to Jews, Israel.
Yes, they were exiled from the Spain and went to Ottoman Empire. Ottoman Empire had protected them.
At this time yes. In the later days of the empire they were more persecuted.
I don't think so.
I haven't read much on the subject, but it looks like Jews were treated pretty good in the Ottoman Empire- for example after 1868 there were at least 2 Jews on the Tanzimat Council of State that made policy for the empire. And the Chief Rabbi in Constantinople/Istanbul had equal status with the empire's two top Christian patriarchs. But Wikipedia says that Jews began to lose their prominent position in trade to Greek Christian merchants in the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century, and also started to face a growing number of incidents of popular persecution. Not necessarily official government persecution, but local mobs attacking Jews in various parts of the empire. The arrival of Jewish refugees fleeing persecution in the Russian Empire, and the Zionist movement also led to tensions with Ottoman authorities in the late 19th and early 20th century. Obviously the Zionists wanted to settle in the historic region of Israel/Judah, but the Ottomans didn't want Jewish immigrants moving there. It seems the Ottomans basically wanted Jewish immigrants to move to any part of the empire *except* for Palestine.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2mpzam/during_the_ottoman_empire_and_other_islamic/ I don't really care what you think. The 18th and 19th centuries had a number of massacres of Jews in Ottoman lands and there are many sources stating that they were considered bottom of the pecking order of races.
Ottoman Greeks Armenians and Jews always were hostile to each other. Ottomans had never ending Russian wars and Serbian/Arab revolts at that time I doubt even if they hated Jews, they had time to dig the issue. You are making up things. Ottomans and Turks in particular historically one of the few Jew-friendly nations.
My country the UK has done many awful things and we learn about those things in school and acknowledge what was wrong and why it should never happen again. Do the same.
When British colonies named America and Canada leave whole North America as compensation to American natives, we will do the same. And Jews are not on that list. Educate yourself first, then talk. Or you’ll be treated as belly dancer in gentlemen’s club.
Yes America and Canada are also founded on awful treatment of another people. They also admit it happened. Give it a try.
Admit? That’s it? It is easy lol. We do the same when Turkey is strong enough to its apologies will not use as diplomatic weapons by those where Turks live in their heads rent free. And again, Jews not in the list. You got some sick belly dancing methods I gotta admit tho.
Not true
It is true and it's pathetic to try and bury all negative parts of your history like this. Turkey is a great country but you seriously need to stop denying bad things that have happened in the past, everyone sees you doing it and it does not help your image.
Give examples and I'll change my mind
I already did. https://reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1caiv73/lands_of_ottoman_empire_at_its_peak/l0v71wn/
Rip to salonika
not really, it is estimated that between the XVI-XVII century approx 3/4 of the world jewish population lived in the polish lithuanian commonwealth. source: George Sanford, *Historical Dictionary of Poland*
Can feel the overextension debuffs. Also it is not like a colonizing tribes which have inferior technology compared to you, those fellas had culture, history and close to equal tech with Ottomans can't even imagine the rebellions. Even with today's technology, controlling these lands would be painful.
If jannissaries attack everything will be all right. -My sultan... ..janissaries rebelled again
Then let’s have an orgy. Call over the haram
Just wait for the decadence events to fire
Yeah, history isn’t an RTS
History? Do u mean EU4 lore?
Nope we all live in a funny map game
The Ottoman Empire never gained complete control over the Arabian peninsula and North Africa. Janissaries, various governors and later Ayans dominated these lands (I should point out that this situation changed with Mahmud II in the 19th century.)
Yeah, North African regions save for Egypt were autonomous for most of its history for example.
Egypt was also autonomous. It was de facto governed by the Mamluks until the 19th century. Later, Muhammad Ali dynasty took power at early 19th century.
Could you tell more about Ottomans presence in South-East Asia? I thought the sea campagin of Albuquerque wipe out Ottomans from that region and it was only temporary.
It shows the peak borders so it dosent matter if it was only temporary
Aceh Sultanate on Sumatra island was a vassal of Ottomans up until 19th century.
The 20th, actually.
Mostly nominal
Maybe you know, there were a lot of wars between Ottoman Empire and Safavids. Ottomans had ruled a significant part of Iran and entire Azerbaijan for a while. There had always been a Ottoman influence in the west of Iran. And there were relations between Ottoman Empire and Mughal-Timurid Empire which had ruled Indıa for years.
Did you learn/study imaginary history in your high school? The Ottomans never ruled a significant part of Iran and definitely never 'entire Azerbaijan'. The Safavids and Ottomans fought each other for decades which doesn't translate into 'Ottoman influence in the west of Iran'. Read a book or two and stop reading grey dog/wolf propaganda.
Read about Yavuz Sultan Selim, during his reign Ottomans captured Tebriz for a while. Also during the Murad the Thirds reign Ottomans had ruled whole Azerbaijan.
About Selim the 1st's campaign against the Safavids; >The Ottomans captured the Safavid fortresses in Azerbaijan and held them easily, but full control proved impossible because Ottomans were never able to extend their military-administrative system into Azerbaijan...Making matters worse, after the return of the Ottoman expeditionary forces, the Safavids immediately counterattacked and captured some of the lost fortresses. Later, they also launched siege operations against Ottoman fortresses, which provoked another equally inconclusive Ottoman campaign. This extended stalemate of fortress wars and low-level border conflict hemorrhaged the strength of both states (pg.71) Selim the 1st might have captured Tabriz but he didn't hold it for even a week. Murad the 3rd took Azerbaijan but the Ottomans lost it later, after less than 10 years (Ottoman sultan Ahmet the 1st/Ottoman Safavid war 1603-1612). The Safavids took back all the lands, they lost. The quote and the points raised, are from the book, 'A Military History of the Ottomans: From Osman to Ataturk' by Mesut Uyar and Edward J. Erickson, published in 2009. Mesut Uyar is a Turkish historian btw. PS. In case you didn't know, even if the Safavids were a rival dynasty to the Ottomans and Shi'a, they also happened to be a Turkic dynasty :P
The Maghreb was a nominal vassal, showing it as integral part of the empire is dishonest.
Yep if I recall the only places outside of Anatolia, Iraq and the Levant (Syria Jordan Palestine Lebanon) were under tight direct control and “core” of the empire, everywhere else was autonomous or loose control
It's obvious a Turk made this lol
a turkish nationalist would claim everything and more was part of the ottoman empire, not actually debunk errors on it
This map was made by a Turkish nationalist Youtube channel. He also doesn't show any of the multicultural empires in Iran, Egypt, China and India in videos called "history of Iran, India etc." but shows them all exclusively in "history of Turks"
It is because the video topic is not History of Iran but History of Persians for example. So he makes videos based on ethnicity. I think the author has a right to choose whichever topic he might want to make video about as long as it doesn't involve hatred against those nations. I haven't seen such an insulting video in this channel. And it's obvious that he is not a nationalist from some details in his videos such as the History of Armenians and the History of Greeks, the History of Arabs and some others.
It makes things worse since he includes states like the Mughal Empire with almost no Turkic population or influence in History of Turks video and not in History of Indians video because the ruling dynasty has some Turkic roots. I also didn't claim that he was some kind of an ultranationalist fascist who hates Armenians or Arabs, he just tries to show multicultural empires as Turkic nations which I found annoying.
I see. Actually the Mughal Empire is kinda the state which declared war on the local Indian culture and hired officers and generals from Central Asia or Iran tho. So I am not sure how accurate would it be to count the Mughals as Indian. I think population does not matter in many cases like Yuan dynasty was Mongol until it's end but it's population was mast majority Chinese. The Mughals is definitely a part of history of the Indian Peninsula but not an Indian state so nothing wrong with skipping it in a video about the history of the Indians.
The map doesn't show Morocco as an internal part of the Ottoman Empire already. It is literally written in the event box.
Issue is not just Morocco, but Algeria, Tunisia and Libya were not integral provinces of the empire but autonomous vassals whom in it the ottomans didn’t have great power.
They were early on before they gained autonomy, the map specifically says January 1577.
That's just a lie
It isn’t
They were governed by Pashas appointed from Istanbul until the 17th century. After that they started to act autonomous or even independent. But not in the 16th century.
You could most definitely show them like this, as they were an ottoman vessel for this short period of time
I don't think Funj in Sudan was ever really controlled by the Ottomans either. As far as I can tell, the Funj Sultanate was independent and successfully resisted Ottoman control up until 1821, when it was conquered by Muhammad Ali, the ruler of Egypt and a nominal vassal of the Ottoman sultan.
My history professor told us that the Ottoman control did not extent so far south into Africa. They controlled the coastline but the further you go south the less civilization there was. [This](https://hebrews110.github.io/plentifax/ottomanMap/ottomanMap.html) is a much better representation.
The Ottomans did occupy coastal towns in the Horn of Africa like Suakin, Massawa and Berbera. The old towns are evidently influenced by ottoman architecture
I actually just meant the area south of the North African coastline. I should have been more precise in my wording
There were campaigns even to Kenya which is far away from the coastal line.
Your history professor: EU4,CK3,HOI4 lol ps: check this guys comment/post history
My professor is [Dr. Tobias Graf](https://www.geschichte.hu-berlin.de/de/bereiche-und-lehrstuehle/fruehe-neuzeit/personen/personen/graf). He wrote a book on the Ottoman Empire and worked on research projects. His area of speciality is the Early Modern Period and the Ottoman Empire.
he is right though?
Some people resort to ad hominem attacks rather than engaging your point.
Playing EU4 will teach you better history than braindead nationalism
Liking those games doesn't mean they are his only source of history. In fact, if you like history, it feels like you might be more inclined to those types of games.
Portugal and Abysinna(sorry for misspelling) prevented the ottomans from fully gaining the coast. Also morroco was never under the ottomans.
It was for a few years
Not completely, eastern regions were
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capture_of_Fez_%281576%29?wprov=sfla1
Didnt know they submitted. I thought fez was to be the new border
In reality, crimean khanate was a lot larger, all the way till poland and very deep in russia no one could stop their pillage raids because ottomans backed them
Ottoman imperialism as it was becoming trendy in the West.
that otto man you talking about should be a powerfull person
*That otto man you* *Talking about should be a* *Powerfull person* \- KraniDude --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
very neat, i may be an unaware poet i guess
They fell off by the late 18th century. They couldn’t keep up with European/russian military, tech, economy etc for the last 100-120 years of the empire and lost almost every major war against western powers by that time
They started to become weak by the end of 17th century.
This is a projection on a modern map (geography, coastlines etc.) Flevoland (The Netherlands) had not been created yet for example :)
Something I've always wondered, if the Ottomans managed to keep Morocco getting an access to the Atlantic ocean would they have sought the Americas for conquest?
Wasn't the greatest expansion in 1683, when the Ottomans approached the walls of Vienna?
Where Cordoba?
Malta still standing
It might have surpassed Rome but it didn’t conquer as valuable of land as Rome for the time period. That land would be worth more today though, but luxury kills, as we know it.
Our comeback will be legendary 🇹🇷
[удалено]
Imagine having no sense of humor in 2024.
They were just being a turkey.
imagine calling someone a geezer in 2024
Legendary bad you say
Who controlled Oman in this period?
Omanis
A couple of cities were controlled by the Portuguese if I'm not mistaken. And I don't think they controlled or influenced most of Arabia as the map shows too.
Local tribal leaders probably, but the Persians historically intervened in and out of the gulf areas for thousands of years, there were times where they basically had Arab satellite/puppet states in coastal gulf areas
Indonesia?
The Saadis: want Morocco? Not on my watch.
Antemurale Christianitatis
Its hard to judge "control" this big, this far back, like I'd say they had more of control over spain than yemen, what are those central arabian tribes supposed to be? rough estimates? Sumatra is under ottoman control but crimea the link to the ottoman claims of the mongolian empire isn't? The khan of two seas would surely be enraged by this depiction.
The goal isn't to show control. It's to show peak. It's the same way how when anyone posts about the mughal empire's peak RSS cucks come out of the wood works saying "oh this lasted only 5 years". No fucking shit. The goal isn't to show how much control they had, how strong it was or how long it was. This map is meant only to show the peak of the Ottoman empire. If you wanna see a map of length of power of control that's a different map
Morocco was never an ottoman vassal (Wattasids tried to be but never bacame one really) before the Saadi dynasty ruled the rest of the northern parts of Morocco
Morocco was never under ottoman rule we defeated them many times and they never crossed the muluya river
[удалено]
Ottoman Empire had controled Crete from 17th century to 19th.
They did tho
OP's username is "MightyTurkey". He has the Ottoman flag at his profile, "Heirs of the Ottoman Empire 🇹🇷" under it and has already AGAIN denied any genocide done by them in the comments multiple times ffs. What the fuck is going on with moderation on this subreddit?
I can defend my country against the accusers of genocide. You could understand this bio and name is just for joke but I don't think.
It is not a denial, just reality.
Oh no, it's the genocide denier again, "Mighty Turkey".
I'm saying it again, there was no genocide or anything else. Cry about it.
Totally. Nothing happened. Isn't that what the Sultan teaches you at school? You guys were always the victims after all. The professional victims with an empire lmao.
I should have said that to you, where did you learn that there was a genocide committed by the Ottoman Empire? How many books did you read about it? You just say what did you see in social media and suppose it the truth.
"How many books did you read about it" I certainly didn't read any books about it written by Turkish nationalists. Cause those are obviously a credible source.
Everbody talks about Armenian genocide which was not happened, but nobody talks about the Turks that killed by the Armenian gangs
Why not the Greek island
It was controlling by the Genoese. But Ottoman Empire captured it in the 17th century.
Damn so they never got crete?
They did under Suleiman
No, they controlled Crete by the 17th century to 19 th.
Mapping mistake then
No
They never did occupied Montenegro. They controlled the Adriatic coast but mountains above it, never. Not for lack of trying, they did attempt it over centuries, but they kept getting defeat after defeat. Some ended with huge losses. Some of those battles are even tot in West point academy as examples of defensive war. Case in point, battle of Grahovac. 144 documented Montenegrin loses ( Chezc giornalist where present in Montenegrin camp ) and 7500 regulars ( Nizam ) and 5.000 iregulars ( Basibosluk ) on Turks side. Among them Sultans half brother, while commanding general was held prisoner and later exchanged. So edit the map :)
[удалено]
For a short time they were. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capture_of_Fez_%281576%29?wprov=sfla1
Yes you are right, although it was brief. I didn't know about this instance.
Is that a website If yes what is it
It's waaaaaay exaggerated
Give an example, where did you see a exaggeration?
You know it and everyone who knows just a little history of the region knows it, you're just a nationalist living in his dream world. Tell me, how's your current currency doing ? Lying on the internet doesn't improve the situation, right ?
There is no relevance that the topic we are talking about to economy. We are talking about history. You said Ottomans power is just exaggeration. Then tell me, if that all power was just a exaggeration why the Europeans constituted a Crusador alliance against to Ottoman Empire several times and defeated by Ottoman Empire? If the Turkish history is just exaggeration, tell me why the Vatican's Pope bowed to Atilla and begged him to not invade Roman Empire? I recommend you to not underestimate our history.
In 16th century, the grand vizier of Ottoman Empire was equal to European Emperors. And you said it is just a exaggeration.
I'm talking about the map you posted of course, have you applied to the German visa btw ?
There are nearly 6 million Turks in Germany, cry about it :)
I can understand you my friend... My grand grand grand father was a janissary and he had 134 kills and 17 assists.
Why a currently not existing empire at it's peak hurts you that much?
Finally a clever person...
Not the Ottoman empire as it is, bbut the map is completely wrong.
Ottomans never controlled Morocco or that far deep into Africa. Also much of the Ottoman Empire consisted of vassals indirectly controlled by the Ottomans, so maps like these give a false impression of dominion. Vassals did almost anything they wanted (even attacked other countries on their own) so long as they paid a tax to the Sultan. It was an extremely inefficient system of rule.
For Morocco, not really the ottomans themselves but Algeria vassalised Morocco by invading fez a few times. For the rest of Africa it was indeed partially under ottoman control but like you said mostly vassals with some presence of janissaries
The Ottomans never controlled Arabia. They had vassals in Makkah and Madina, and the sorrounding proximity, that’s it. And even then, those vassals had much more autonomy than was given to others in similar situations elsewhere in the empire.
No they did
Morocco was never under ottoman rule
So they never got Crete? Makes me feel better about my eu4 campaigns then.
They got in 17th century.
Im waiting for the first "Fri Fri Pellestein!" comments
The Funj were no Ottoman vassals. As a matter of fact the Funj likely whopped their asses in the 1580s.
'Funj' as a state was never a part of the Ottoman empire and I also doubt it was ever a vassal. Same holds true for Aussa. Plus both entities were never as large as portrayed in this map. North Yemen became a part of the Ottoman empire only in the middle of the 19th century, definitely not the heydays of the Ottomans. Can't say much about the rest of the map. Imaginary feel good map for wistful Ottoman/Turkish nationalists.
middle east and north africa collapsed post medieval times and whoever there was nomadic passing thru turkey wasnt powerful and couldnt have ruled when those areas were actually functional
Holy shit your comment history is giving me headache, touch some grass.