DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 14 Interactions in the Early Ottoman Period (1299-1518)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 14 Interactions in the Early Ottoman Period (1299-1518) Chapter 14 Interactions in the early Ottoman period (1299-1518) Tom Papademetriou Introduction To understand the nature of Christian-Muslim interactions in the early Ottoman era, it is important first to understand the background and his- torical development of the Ottomans in Asia Minor and, more impor- tantly, their advancement into the Balkans. The Ottomans were not only shaped by their Turkmen cultural milieu, which dominated Asia Minor in the 13th century, but also by their rapid expansion in the Balkans. These experiences determined the way in which the Ottomans interacted with Christians they encountered. The ultimate success of the Ottomans was not based upon sheer military force, or the singular religious ideology of holy war, but rather upon a practical approach to conquest and gov- ernance that integrated the local populations into their emerging state. As a result, local populations were both victims and agents of the great transformation that took place. In this chapter, we explore the interaction of Muslims and Christians in the early Ottoman period, that is, the two centuries or so from 1299 to 1518. We begin with brief contextualising discussions of Asia Minor in the 13th century and the origins of the Ottomans in Anatolia. We turn then to the role of Christian Timariots, the competing motifs of gaza (holy war) and istimalet (accommodation through dhimmī regulations), the phenomenon of Christians boys taken into Ottoman service through the Devshirme, cultural transformations, and the ‘holy man’ motif. The case of Gregory Palamas, the topics of bishops and the emirs, Byzantine observers of Ottoman conquest and the 1453 conquest of Constantinople are also discussed, leading into a concluding section on the new empha- sis on Islamic principles. 332 interactions in the early ottoman period Asia Minor in the 13th century Interactions between Byzantines and Ottomans were shaped by a series of events that weakened the Byzantine Empire and Seljuk Sultanate of Rum, the two significant 13th-century states in Asia Minor. The result- ing power vacuum allowed for the Osman tribal group to emerge with dynamism and tremendous force. In 1204, the European crusader forces sacked the city of Constantinople in what is known as the Fourth Cru- sade. Byzantine imperial families fled to Nicaea, where they established an exiled government of the Empire of Nicaea. For the period between 1204 and 1261, Nicaea and the surrounding region in north-west Asia Minor remained in Byzantine control. In 1261, Michael VIII Palaeologus (r. 1261-82) retook Constantinople and established himself as the emperor in the historic capital. But the devastating sack of Constantinople in 1204 was so serious that the Byzantines never recovered. Realising their great weakness, the Palaeologan dynasty renewed its focus on the imperial capital, along with calls for rapprochement with the West, and appeals for assistance from that quarter. This Western focus arguably led to the Byzantines losing sight of the importance of their holdings in Asia Minor and the region of Nicaea. It was at the end of the 13th century, in the region of Bithynia in the Sakarya River valley, that Ertoghrul, a Turkmen tribesman and father of the founder of the Ottoman dynasty, served as a border-lord. The Turkmen had entered Asia Minor as early as 1071, when the Seljuk leader Alp Arslen (r. 1063-72) defeated the Byzantine Emperor Romanus IV Diogenes (r. 1068- 71) in the battle of Manzikert. The Seljuk Sultanate of Rum then set up its capital in Konya (Iconium) and remained in control of the greater part of Asia Minor until the late 13th century. Around the same time, nomadic Turkmen tribes migrated into Asia Minor from Central Asia and Khorasan as a result of pressure from Mongol invasions led by Jengiz Khan. It is likely that Ertoghrul first served the Seljuks and later became a vassal to the Ilkhanid Mongols when the Mongols defeated the Seljuks in 1255. By the end of the 13th century, Seljuk power had been destroyed and Byzantine imperial power was all but erased from the landscape. What remained was a series of small but significant Turkmen tribes or emir- ates led by tribal leaders, emirs, and some Byzantine cities and fortresses still maintained by Byzantine military commanders who functioned as semi-independent warlords. It is out of these historical circumstances that the tribe of Osman originated. Certainly, there were other Turkmen nomadic groups that formed independent emirates throughout Anatolia, .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Christian Allies of the Ottoman Empire by Emrah Safa Gürkan
    Christian Allies of the Ottoman Empire by Emrah Safa Gürkan The relationship between the Ottomans and the Christians did not evolve around continuous hostility and conflict, as is generally assumed. The Ottomans employed Christians extensively, used Western know-how and technology, and en- couraged European merchants to trade in the Levant. On the state level, too, what dictated international diplomacy was not the religious factors, but rather rational strategies that were the results of carefully calculated priorities, for in- stance, several alliances between the Ottomans and the Christian states. All this cooperation blurred the cultural bound- aries and facilitated the flow of people, ideas, technologies and goods from one civilization to another. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Christians in the Service of the Ottomans 3. Ottoman Alliances with the Christian States 4. Conclusion 5. Appendix 1. Sources 2. Bibliography 3. Notes Citation Introduction Cooperation between the Ottomans and various Christian groups and individuals started as early as the beginning of the 14th century, when the Ottoman state itself emerged. The Ottomans, although a Muslim polity, did not hesitate to cooperate with Christians for practical reasons. Nevertheless, the misreading of the Ghaza (Holy War) literature1 and the consequent romanticization of the Ottomans' struggle in carrying the banner of Islam conceal the true nature of rela- tions between Muslims and Christians. Rather than an inevitable conflict, what prevailed was cooperation in which cul- tural, ethnic, and religious boundaries seemed to disappear. Ÿ1 The Ottomans came into contact and allied themselves with Christians on two levels. Firstly, Christian allies of the Ot- tomans were individuals; the Ottomans employed a number of Christians in their service, mostly, but not always, after they had converted.
    [Show full text]
  • Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: the Abridged Edition
    EXCERPTED FROM Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Abridged Edition edited by Benjamin Braude Copyright © 2014 ISBNs: 978-1-58826-889-1 hc 978-1-58826-865-5 pb 1800 30th Street, Suite 314 Boulder, CO 80301 USA telephone 303.444.6684 fax 303.444.0824 This excerpt was downloaded from the Lynne Rienner Publishers website www.rienner.com Contents Preface vii List of Abbreviations ix Note on Transliteration x 1 Introduction 1 Benjamin Braude 2 Transformation of Zimmi into Askerî 51 İ. Metin Kunt 3 Foundation Myths of the Millet System 65 Benjamin Braude 4 The Rise of the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople 87 Kevork B. Bardakjian 5 Ottoman Policy Toward the Jews and Jewish Attitudes Toward the Ottomans During the Fifteenth Century 99 Joseph R. Hacker 6 The Greek Millet in the Ottoman Empire 109 Richard Clogg 7 The Dual Role of the Armenian Amira Class Within the Ottoman Government and the Armenian Millet 133 Hagop Barsoumian 8 Foreign Merchants and the Minorities in Istanbul During the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries 147 Robert Mantran 9 The Transformation of the Economic Position of the Millets in the Nineteenth Century 159 Charles Issawi v vi Contents 10 The Millets as Agents of Change in the Nineteenth-Century Ottoman Empire 187 Roderic H. Davison 11 The Acid Test of Ottomanism: The Acceptance of Non-Muslims in the Late Ottoman Bureaucracy 209 Carter V. Findley 12 Communal Conflict in Ottoman Syria During the Reform Era: The Role of Political and Economic Factors 241 Moshe Ma‘oz 13 Communal Conflict in Nineteenth-Century Lebanon 257 Samir Khalaf 14 Unionist Relations with the Greek, Armenian, and Jewish Communities of the Ottoman Empire, 1908 –1914 287 Feroz Ahmad 15 The Political Situation of the Copts, 1798 –1923 325 Doris Behrens-Abouseif Selected Bibliography 347 About the Contributors 355 Index 357 About the Book 374 1 Introduction Benjamin Braude Thirty years ago the first edition of this book appeared.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ottoman Empire (1299-1922)
    The Ottoman Empire (1299-1922) After Muhammad’s death in 632 AD, Islam spread throughout the Arabian Peninsula and beyond. One of the largest and longest lasting dynasties to rule the Islamic world started in the 13th century (1200s AD) with Osman, a leader of a Muslim tribe in Turkey. A dynasty is a family or group that maintains power for generations. Osman started the Ottoman dynasty by defeating other Turkish tribes to become ruler of a small kingdom. Osman then rose to conquer what was left of the old Roman Empire (A.K.A the Byzantine Empire). The Turkish Ottoman Empire, whose name comes from Osman, eventually conquered most of the Middle East, North Africa, and southeast Europe. In 1453 the Ottomans captured the city of Constantinople, the capital of the eastern Roman Empire. The Ottomans renamed the city Istanbul and made it their capital. During the 15th and 16th centuries it was one of the most powerful states in the world. The Ottoman Empire lasted until the early 20th century (1900s), a span of almost 600 years. The “Sick Man” of Europe The Ottomans were fine soldiers, but had difficulty ruling. As Muslims, they were tolerant (accepting) of religious differences and generally treated Jews and Christians fairly. This tolerance strengthened the empire. On the other hand, unlike the Muslim rulers of the past, the Ottoman sultans (rulers) tended to fear and distrust new ideas. This proved fatal (deadly) to the empire. The Ottomans were largely passed over by several major advancements in history. The European Renaissance in the 15th and 16th centuries, the Enlightenment of the 18th century, and the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century had all brought new knowledge and technologies to Europe, making its countries more resourceful and powerful.
    [Show full text]
  • Legitimizing the Ottoman Sultanate: a Framework for Historical Analysis
    LEGITIMIZING THE OTTOMAN SULTANATE: A FRAMEWORK FOR HISTORICAL ANALYSIS Hakan T. K Harvard University Why Ruled by Them? “Why and how,” asks Norbert Elias, introducing his study on the 18th-century French court, “does the right to exercise broad powers, to make decisions about the lives of millions of people, come to reside for years in the hands of one person, and why do those same people persist in their willingness to abide by the decisions made on their behalf?” Given that it is possible to get rid of monarchs by assassination and, in extreme cases, by a change of dynasty, he goes on to wonder why it never occurred to anyone that it might be possible to abandon the existing form of government, namely the monarchy, entirely.1 The answers to Elias’s questions, which pertain to an era when the state’s absolutism was at its peak, can only be found by exposing the relationship between the ruling authority and its subjects. How the subjects came to accept this situation, and why they continued to accede to its existence, are, in essence, the basic questions to be addressed here with respect to the Ottoman state. One could argue that until the 19th century political consciousness had not yet gone through the necessary secularization process in many parts of the world. This is certainly true, but regarding the Ottoman population there is something else to ponder. The Ottoman state was ruled for Most of the ideas I express here are to be found in the introduction to my doc- toral dissertation (Bamberg, 1997) in considering Ottoman state ceremonies in the 19th century.
    [Show full text]
  • Heirs of Chinghis Khan in the Age of Revolutions: an Unruly Crimean Prince in the Ottoman Empire and Beyond
    Der Islam 2017; 94 (2): 496–526 Hakan Kırımlı and Ali Yaycıoğlu* Heirs of Chinghis Khan in the Age of Revolutions: An Unruly Crimean Prince in the Ottoman Empire and Beyond https://doi.org/10.1515/islam-2017-0029 Abstract: Focusing on Cengiz Mehmed Geray, an idiosyncratic member of the ruling house of the Crimean Khanate, this article examines how a Crimean Prince became an active participant in the stormy politics of the Ottoman Empire and later of Europe, as a result of his distinguished Chinghisid pedigree, in the age of revolutions. The first section of this article discusses the place of the Geray and Chinghisid lineage within Ottoman imperial politics. The second section focuses on the period following the Gerays’ departure from Crimea. It illustrates how members of the family, although scattered throughout the Balkans, oper- ated in the provincial and imperial politics of the Ottoman Empire in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. The following section introduces Cengiz Geray and his turbulent life between the Ottoman and Russian Empires, and discusses how he became an actor in a revolutionary age. The last section is a short discussion on Chinghisid charisma in the early modern Europe, Russia and the Ottoman Empire. Keywords: Ottoman Empire, Crimean Khanate, Russia, France, Balkans, Gerays, Chingis Khan, Napoleon, French Revolution, Cengiz Mehmed Geray, Osman Paz- vantoğlu Introduction We do not know whether Napoleon considered Cengiz Mehmed Geray Sultan (hereafter Cengiz Geray) a viable candidate to the Ottoman throne in 1801, when he received a letter implying that Cengiz Geray could play a major role after a pos- sible removal of the Ottoman dynasty.
    [Show full text]
  • FROM BYZANTINE CONSTANTINOPLE to OTTOMAN KOSTANTINIYYE GOLRU Neclpoglu
    FROM BYZANTINE THE conquest of Constantinople engendered Mehmed II's lifelong CONSTANTINOPLE ambition to revive the ruinous city's ancient status as the prosperous to OTTOMAN capital of a world empire. This essay interprets the sultan's negotiation of the western and eastern cultural horizons of his rapidly expanding KOSTANTINIYYE: domains through visual cosmopolitanism, a process of "creative CREATION ofa translation" and fusion that contributed to the construction of a COSMOPOLITAN multifaceted imperial identity. Mehmed II engaged with diverse artistic CAPITAL and VISUAL traditions in refashioning his public persona and self-image upon the CULTURE UNDER reconstructed stage of his new capital, which continued to be called Kostantiniyye (Costantinopolis), alongside its popular name, Istanbul SULTAN MEHMED II (from the Greek eis tin polin, meaning "to the city,,).l Strategically Gulru Necipoglu situated at the juncture of two continents (Asia, Europe) and two seas (Black Sea, Mediterranean), this was the ide~l center for an emerging empire that combined Perso-Islamic, Turco-Mongol, and Roman­ Byzantine traditions of universal sovereignty. The artistic patronage of Mehmed II (r. 1444-46, 1451-81) was shaped not only by his personal tastes but also by the Rum? (Eastern Roman) geopolitical and cultural identity he was forging for his empire, a polity mediating between multiple worlds at the crossroads of Europe and Asia.,,2 By systematically promoting kuls (converted Christian-born slave serv~nts) to the highest posts of his increasingly
    [Show full text]
  • The Ottoman Empire, 1700–1922, Second Edition
    This page intentionally left blank The Ottoman Empire, 1700–1922 The Ottoman Empire was one of the most important non-Western states to survive from medieval to modern times, and played a vital role in European and global history. It continues to affect the peoples of the Middle East, the Balkans, and Central and Western Europe to the present day. This new survey examines the major trends during the latter years of the empire; it pays attention to gender issues and to hotly de- bated topics such as the treatment of minorities. In this second edition, Donald Quataert has updated his lively and authoritative text, revised the bibliographies, and included brief bibliographies of major works on the Byzantine Empire and the post–Ottoman Middle East. This ac- cessible narrative is supported by maps, illustrations, and genealogical and chronological tables, which will be of help to students and non- specialists alike. It will appeal to anyone interested in the history of the Middle East. DONALD QUATAERT is Professor of History at Binghamton University, State University of New York. He has published many books on Middle East and Ottoman history, including An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, 1300–1914 (1994). NEW APPROACHES TO EUROPEAN HISTORY Series editors WILLIAM BEIK Emory University T . C . W . BLANNING Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge New Approaches to European History is an important textbook series, which provides concise but authoritative surveys of major themes and problems in European history since the Renaissance. Written at a level and length accessible to advanced school students and undergraduates, each book in the series addresses topics or themes that students of Eu- ropean history encounter daily: the series will embrace both some of the more “traditional” subjects of study, and those cultural and social issues to which increasing numbers of school and college courses are devoted.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Thirty the Ottoman Empire, Judaism, and Eastern Europe to 1648
    Chapter Thirty The Ottoman Empire, Judaism, and Eastern Europe to 1648 In the late fifteenth and the sixteenth centuries, while the Portuguese and Spanish explored the oceans and exploited faraway lands, the eastern Mediterranean was dominated by the Ottomans. Mehmed II had in 1453 taken Constantinople and made it his capital, putting an end to the Byzantine empire. The subsequent Islamizing of Constantinople was abrupt and forceful. Immediately upon taking the city, Mehmed set about to refurbish and enlarge it. The population had evidently declined to fewer than two hundred thousand by the time of the conquest but a century later was approximately half a million, with Muslims constituting a slight majority. Mehmed and his successors offered tax immunity to Muslims, as an incentive for them to resettle in the city. Perhaps two fifths of the population was still Christian in the sixteenth century, and a tenth Jewish (thousands of Jewish families resettled in Constantinople after their expulsion from Spain in 1492). The large and impressive churches of Constantinople were taken over and made into mosques. Most dramatically, Mehmed laid claim to Haghia Sophia, the enormous cathedral that for nine hundred years had been the seat of the patriarch of Constantinople, and ordered its conversion into a mosque. It was reconfigured and rebuilt (it had been in a state of disrepair since an earthquake in 1344), and minarets were erected alongside it. The Orthodox patriarch was eventually placed in the far humbler Church of St. George, in the Phanari or “lighthouse” district of Constantinople. Elsewhere in the city Orthodox Christians were left with relatively small and shabby buildings.1 Expansion of the Ottoman empire: Selim I and Suleiman the Magnificent We have followed - in Chapter 26 - Ottoman military fortunes through the reigns of Mehmed II (1451-81) and Bayezid II (1481-1512).
    [Show full text]
  • The Girays' Displacement Into
    THE SULTANS OF THE COUNTRYSIDE: THE GIRAYS’ DISPLACEMENT INTO OTTOMAN RUMELI AND THEIR WIDESPREAD ROLES IN NETWORKS OF VIOLENCE (1792-1807) By Muhammet Mazı Submitted to Central European University Department of History In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Supervisor: Tolga U. Esmer Second Reader: Jan Hennings CEU eTD Collection Budapest, Hungary June 2020 THE SULTANS OF THE COUNTRYSIDE: THE GIRAYS’ DISPLACEMENT INTO OTTOMAN RUMELI AND THEIR WIDESPREAD ROLES IN NETWORKS OF VIOLENCE (1792-1807) By Muhammet Mazı Turkey Thesis submitted to the Department of History, Central European University, Budapest, with a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. Accepted in conformance with the standards of the CEU. ____________________________________________ Chair, Examination Committee ____________________________________________ Thesis Supervisor ____________________________________________ Examiner ____________________________________________ CEU eTD Collection Examiner Budapest June 2020 ii Statement of Copyright Copyright in the text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies by any process, either in full or part, may be made only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author and lodged in the Central European Library. Details may be obtained from the librarian. This page must form a part of any such copies made. Further copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the written permission of the Author. CEU eTD Collection iii Abstract After the fall of the Crimean Khanate in 1783, the majority of the Giray dynasty was forced to settle in the Ottoman Balkans. Their immigration to Rumeli impacted the region in profound ways, and its repercussions reverberated beyond that province throughout the Selimian era (1789-1807).
    [Show full text]
  • Changing Identities at the Fringes of the Late Ottoman Empire: the Muslims of Dobruca, 1839-1914
    Changing Identities at the Fringes of the Late Ottoman Empire: The Muslims of Dobruca, 1839-1914 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Catalina Hunt, Ph.D. Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2015 Dissertation Committee: Carter V. Findley, Advisor Jane Hathaway Theodora Dragostinova Scott Levi Copyright by Catalina Hunt 2015 Abstract This dissertation examines the Muslim community of Dobruca, an Ottoman territory granted to Romania in 1878, and its transformation from a majority under Ottoman rule into a minority under Romanian administration. It focuses in particular on the collective identity of this community and how it changed from the start of the Ottoman reform era (Tanzimat) in 1839 to the outbreak of World War I in 1914. This dissertation constitutes, in fact, the study of the transition from Ottoman subjecthood to Romanian citizenship as experienced by the Muslim community of Dobruca. It constitutes an assessment of long-term patterns of collective identity formation and development in both imperial and post-imperial settings. The main argument of the dissertation is that during this period three crucial factors altered the sense of collective belonging of Dobrucan Muslims: a) state policies; b) the reaction of the Muslims to these policies; and c) the influence of transnational networks from the wider Turkic world on the Muslim community as a whole. Taken together, all these factors contributed fully to the community’s intellectual development and overall modernization, especially since they brought about new patterns of identification and belonging among Muslims.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ottoman Empire
    TEACHING MODERN SOUTHEAST EUROPEAN HISTORY Alternative Educational Materials The Ottoman Empire THE PUBLICATIONS AND TEACHER TRAINING ACTIVITIES OF THE JOINT HISTORY PROJECT HAVE BEEN MADE POSSIBLE THROUGH THE KIND FINANCIAL BACKING OF THE FOLLOWING: UK FOREIGN & COMMONWEALTH OFFICE Norwegian People’s Aid United States Institute of Peace Swiss Development Agency DR. PETER MAHRINGER FONDS TWO ANONYMOUS DONORS THE CYPRUS FEDERATION OF AMERICA Royal Dutch Embassy in Athens WINSTON FOUNDATION FOR WORLD PEACE And with particular thanks for the continued support of: 2nd Edition in the English Language CDRSEE Rapporteur to the Board for the Joint History Project: Costa Carras Executive Director: Nenad Sebek Director of Programmes: Corinna Noack-Aetopulos CDRSEE Project Team: George Georgoudis, Biljana Meshkovska, Antonis Hadjiyannakis, Jennifer Antoniadis and Louise Kallora-Stimpson English Language Proofreader: Jenny Demetriou Graphic Designer: Anagramma Graphic Designs, Kallidromiou str., 10683, Athens, Greece Printing House: Petros Ballidis and Co., Ermou 4, Metamorfosi 14452, Athens, Greece Disclaimer: The designations employed and presentation of the material in the book do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the publisher (CDRSEE) nor on the sponsors. This book contains the views expressed by the authors in their individual capacity and may not necessarily reflect the views of the CDRSEE and the sponsoring agencies. Print run: 1000 Copyright: Center for Democracy and Reconciliation in Southeast Europe (CDRSEE)
    [Show full text]
  • THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE: Its Rise, Decline and Collapse
    The Ottoman Empire THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE: Its Rise, Decline and Collapse Ahmad Fuad Fanani Mahasiswa Pascasarjana Flinders University, Adelaide-Australia; Dosen Universitas Muhammadiyah Prof. Dr. HAMKA, Jakarta Abstrak Turki Ustmani (the Ottoman Empire) menduduki posisi yang sangat istimewa dalam peta sejarah dan politik Islam karena ia diakui banyak ilmuwan dan peneliti sebagai kekhalifahan paling besar yang banyak mempengaruhi berbagai negara dan telah membentuk peradaban agung. Selain terkenal dengan kekuatan militernya, Kekhalifahan Turki Ustmani juga sebuah imperium yang dibangun berdasarkan multi etnis dan multi agama. Dengan konsep millet (komunitas keagamaan), masing-masing pemeluk agama dapat hidup berdampingan dengan damai dan penuh persaudaraan. Sayangnya, Kekhalifahan Turki Ustmani yang berdiri sejak tahun 1453 itu mulai mengalami kemunduran semenjak abad ke 18 M. Kekalahan pasukan Turki Utsmani di berbagai peperangan, intervensi Eropa, serta keterpurukan ekonomi menjadi salah satu penyebabnya. Kondisi ini diperparah oleh faktor internal yang menunjang kemundurannya. Tidak heran, jika pada akhir abad ke 19 M, the Ottoman Empire dijuluki banyak pengamat sebagai the ‘Sick Man of Europe’. Pada awal abad ke 20 M, kekhalifahan Turki Utsmani semakin terpuruk dan mengalami puncak kejatuhannya seiring dengan lahirnya konsep negara bangsa (nation state) dan pengaruh modernisasi. Artikel ini akan menganalisis dinamika dan faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi perkembangan dan kemunduran Kekhalifahan Turki Ustmani semenjak era kelahiran, kemunduran, serta kejatuhannya. INTRODUCTION Although the central Islamic lands had been devastated by the Mongol invasions in 1258, the presence of Islamic empires after the event showed that the Islamic people could make a new imperial in the world. The new imperial synthesis which was represented by the Mughal Empire of Delhi in the east, the Safavid Empire in Iran in the middle, and the Ottoman Empire in the West was an expansive Islamic state and gave cultural, political, and social contributions to the region.
    [Show full text]