How the Ottoman Empire Rose to Power (feat. Hikma History) 

great video @khAnubis

Khanoubi:As whit a lot persian baisd empires it did not last that long *sas iranian noises

@@tylersmooth6638 Who the hell is Kraut?

@@ximrade4287 a youtuber mostly on geopolitics and such

Yeah Subscribe to him, by the I am the same hanu chopra from those comments you liked my comment

Most of these are arabic and common in many muslim countries across asia and even africa

These are arabic loanwords though..... we have them even in Bangladesh

Yeah it's possible that the Turks could adopt these words from Arabs themselves. But the "Askar" part is clearly from the Turks.

Kadi means judge in arabic

@@zurielschubert9410 askar also means soldier in arabic. Not sure which it came from though

Lol

@Mr Seboss Mamluks had a chechen origin so not turkish. also there was the timurids which had origins as mongols that assimilated into turkish.

@Mr Seboss also the original bulgars didnt accept a slavic idenity the majority of the population was slavic even with the bulgars rulling them just the turkic rulling class lost power and the slavic majority population just accepted the "bulgar name". Think of it more so as the mongols in china rather than the anglos in americs.

@Mr Seboss I though chechens were just the what the russians called the the circassians after the circassian genocide as a way to deny it happened. Also I really like how your overlooking what they did to cities like Jaffa.

It’s a bird. It’s a plane. It’s the Seljuk Turks!

When they conquered the Mamluks, they were holding Mecca and Medina. Plus they were the protectors of the Abbasid caliph. When the Ottomans conquered the whole area, 1.Selim got the title of 'Servant of Mecca and Medina' by the Abbasid Caliph. It is unclear how the caliphate was transferred to the Ottoman Sultans, there is no written text about it. But at some time after the incident, even prior to it, the Ottoman Sultans used the title 'caliph'.

It is about power and will on it to undertake and fullfill the actions of being the caliph of Islam. Ottoman Turks had the principle called ''Ilâyi Kelimetullah'' meaning spreading the word (the faith) of Allah to the world as farther as they could inherited from Seljuk Turks.

Nice I get it

Φ

Φ

Φ

Ф

Damn they predicted the future

i didn't even realize i was subscribed to you for like 6 months until now lol.the notifications didn't come up.

Yeah what they gonna do sail around Africa or something? lol

"What that's bullshit!" said Portugal (spiceless)

@@johnvonshepard9373 lmao that's impossible or is it?

And you still didn’t get your heart

Not prevented the rise, more like lower their legitimacy

@G L.C Because officially, Turkey would still have to support counter terrorism, being a part of NATO and UN..... The Caliphs would still have to condemn terrorism and that would pretty much delegitimize such organizations....... look at how the ottomans helped legitimize British rule in India or put down rebellion against America in the Philippines for reference. Obviously they did both to appease stronger nations and they would likely do so to if they had existed in the modern world

@G L.C because the leader of Turkey is a populist, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but his base is the poor, uneducated and religiously extreme (also his party buys their votes off too) who support these extremist excursions which are exactly what would happen less often under a neutered monarchy as the caliph was like any other monarchy (not like the Saudi monarchy which is in turn based on the extremist Islamic interpretation known as Wahhabism), consisting of pragmatic elites and not impulsive populists like Erdogan. There’s a reason Istanbul was always so cosmopolitan, why the sultan would drink alcohol and involve himself with western affairs so much, they really didn’t follow islam the same way

@G L.C huh thinking about it, you're not entirely wrong about the Ottoman's bending to the will of the western powers causing their influence and legitimacy to decline. However I'm positive that had the Ottomans existed today, they would be no more than figurehead monarchs like those of Japan or UK, with no real authority. As such important stuff would be really decided in this hypothetical government by the Prime Minister or something. Besides ,its highly inaccurate to compare the House of Osman (who were relatively generous and liberal towards non-muslims in their empire, compared to say, the Germans to the Jews, or the Spanish to the muslims and jews) to the House of Saud, the latter being of the more stringent and extreme Wahabi doctrine. So I highly doubt this hypothetical Modern day Turk Sultanate would allow terror groups to rise (given that they never fanned the flames of rebellion in the British Empire, when they had the perfect chance to do so) Also, I disagree with the year you put for the reformation of the Ottoman Empire..... It should have happened by the 1800s, during the Napoleonic Era, while most of Europe was seeing revolutions, but they should've kept the Sultan as the head of state, given that the Ottoman Dynasty is probably one of the most influential dynasties in human history and was the embodiment of Turko-Islamic Civilization, in the same way the Yamato Dynasty is the literal embodiment of Japanese History and culture. As a muslim and history nerd, it frustrates me to know end that one of the greatest bloodlines in the world is just wasting away in some corner of Turkey

@@PresidentFlip Actually no I disagree with the sultans being more interested in european affairs The only reason why ottoman sultans were interested in europe was conquest They barely even saw the hungarians and Austrian monarchs as legitimate leaders At one point suleiman forced them to only use the term emperor when referring to ottomans through a treaty Honestly have you seen how aggressive kemalists were prior to the rise of erdogan? They pulled a coupe everytime they felt their powers being threatened They westernized so hard that most turks felt that their leaders were spineless and lived to appease foreigners Kemalist literally created Erdogan and his new movements filled with conservative muslims and neo-ottomans You need to understand something You cant shove things down peoples throats and force them to except it simply because europeans think it's a good idea That's how you end up like Iran's pahlavi dynasty

Cause rivers

It's geography not geology

@@AudieHolland oops... thanks. ^^

Hang on, you missed a spot

@@KhAnubis Don't forget to ban Europe from Indian spice trade!

@@erenm.5592 "What!? That's bullsh"t!" Said Portugal, Spiceless.

@@erenm.5592 Europe is like fine, we'll go the long way around then

@Вхламинго You ruined it

No, it's an Arabic word. That's the origin.

Nope, different person

actually it is Arabic and it literally means "city". Also, "Elviye" means "cities". The term "Eyalet" derived from cities by Ottomans and it was the largest administrative division (analogue to a Roman Province)

Britain/England is called anglestan in persian.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0vxSLxeYrr4.html is tje documentry

@Вхламинго a slight error - The Roman Empire at its peak was 5 million sq kms while the ottomans were slightly larger at 5.2 sq kms and the Brits had 1/4th of the world not 50 percent (that would crazy and amazing)

Muslim Turks particularly Ottomans had/have a principle called ''İlâ-i Kelimetullah'' meaning transmitting the word (the faith) of Allah to those not familiar with. In Islam, there is no force conversion of people. There was a Turkish poet dervish Yunus Emre stated ''Love the created one due to the Creator.'' The Ottomans perceive that norm their pillar guide and took control of those lands but not prohibit locals' own religions or from doing their bussinesses and they maintained locals well-being unless the locals don't cause trouble for public security. They encouraged locals to wam and embrace Islam and tried to treat justly all their subjects for muslims and non-muslims. But its economy was war-based after all and things went well untill it reached land that its max controlable extent. After that grumbles rose conveniently.

@Вхламинго Why is your name Flamingo

No

I think Turkic was the before the Turkish language like Latin vs Italianian. But that’s just from my very little study of languages

Take this with a grain of salt but I think the difference is that Turkish refers to stuff from Anatolian Turkey so modern day Turkey whilst Turkic means stuff and people from a larger expanse of land which is very wide from the Mongolian steppe to Anatolia from what I remeber. Hope I could help!

Turkish people are a Turkic ethnic group and nation living mainly in Turkey and speaking Turkish, Turkic is a collection of ethnic groups of Central, East, North and West Asia as well as parts of Europe and North Africa, who speak Turkic languages

Basically Turkish is a Turkic group, with other Turkic groups including Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Turkmen, Azeris, etc.

Turkish = Citizen of the Republic of Turkey Turkic = Meaning all of the Turkic countries, not just Turkey but Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan etc. too

Just you

@@dr.mmaudi8194 no I heard it and was like what im not subbed

@@robloxcraziness515 really?

7:02 is Mostar also in Bosnia, love the bosnian love!

@@kayrannkanal2026 That's not the point. Every ancient civilization has had colonies and violent wars. However, Europeans do recognise that and even pay billions of euros every year to help with the development of their old colonies. Turks, on the other hand, don't even acknowledge it happened, and if they do, they take pride in it.

@@kayrannkanal2026 Although it is compelling, comparing yourself to others doesn't make your case any better. The Ottomans have committed genocide and bloody rule, many times. So if you believe that the Europeans are bad because they haven't paid their debts, maybe you should set the example and do that yourself instead of sitting here and complaining.

@@yyacea03 There are types of colonization. 1) They aim for their colony to be civilized. 2) Settlement Ottomans mostly used settlement till 1800s and middle east having constant civil wars isn't the reason of Ottoman Empire but Arab Spring and Middle eastern cold war. Ottoman Empire actually did develop their all provinces otherwise all of lands would be stay same for many centuries.

@@yyacea03 Also it's not europeans but only British. I have never seen Germany, Belgium and France helping locals. Even Italians damaged their own colony.

_Shocking_

I thought it was by bakesales

Me an ultra intellectual: ت

Man

Empire

No it wasn't there's no proof for that

@@maikeliphillips850 sorry friend i researched and i really can't find any proof to this claim . So yeah I was wrong. Although i do still believe that places of worship shouldn't be forcefully changed . The same fate suffered by places like the mosque of cordobra. It is really not right.

@@maikeliphillips850 i will delete the comment if you want after sometime.

Hail the turtle empire

Justin Y. 2 electric boogaloo

@@aviz8590 soooo another spammer begging for likes?

this guy is simply a neckbeard impersonating a turtle. He is no Justin Y, who is at least respected throughout the community

@@wdwfanatic1394 A Turtle doesn't approve humans like you.

Your name and profile picture explains a lot

NoU