Tags: Custom AssignmentsSteps To Solve Math Word ProblemsPsychosynthesis Training New YorkDiscipline Essay PromptsMethods Of Critical Thinking In The Accounting ProfessionStrategic Account Business PlanBehave Classroom EssayAp Us History Dbq Essay 2005
This article was written to reflect the secondary sources.It's imperfect, of course, there are plenty of ways in which the article could be improved, but you can't contest the existence of an "Ottoman decline thesis" or claim that Ottoman decline "is a fact of history" without ignoring actual historical scholarship.Without claiming to have an extensive knowledge of the question, I think you are using a lot of argumentative strategies that are reminiscent of other elaborate contre-argumentative/apologetics strategies (such as conveying a false feeling of unity from a dissassembled set of thinkers i.e.
), although you could of course discuss its causes, and I am pretty confident most specialists of International Relations would feel the same....
Quotes such as these are not hard to find in works on Ottoman history.
The empire conquered Muslim countries which previously were at the forefront of science and technology, but stopped inventing new science and technology and was late to adopt ideas coming from the west (even such monumental ideas as the printing press and clock technology).
Also, the empire, by giving the Sultan absolute power to seize anyone's property or life (a power that did not exist in Europe at the time), made Capitalism impossible and hurt the economy and the military of the empire.
Chamboz (talk) , 18 June 2018 (UTC) Chamboz, I side with Nozulani and Nyh's comments: this article seems quite one-sided.
Or, rather, it makes an elaborate argumentation in orderto disprove a theory, called the "Ottoman decline thesis", that it hereby labels as such (I don't think Bernard Lewis or any of the so-called "20th century scholars" you mentioned ever called it a thesis).
Very one-sided and subjective, sounds more like an opinion piece than an encyclopedia article.
Is the situation similar in other articles in Wiki Project Ottoman Empire? Nozulani (talk) , 26 December 2016 (UTC) I don't see how it's one-sided and subjective when it's based very thoroughly in the academic literature. Chamboz (talk) , 26 December 2016 (UTC) It's one-sided because it gives impression that the decline has been rejected by virtually all mainstream scholars, when in fact several eminent scholars have supported it at least in part, the late Halil İnalcık and Donald Quataert to name two. Donald Quataert, "Ottoman History Writing and Changing Attitudes towards the Notion of 'Decline,'" History Compass 1 (2003), 1.
Chamboz (talk) , 3 September 2018 (UTC) An editor has recently dropped a huge amount of text into this article from a different page (increasing its size by almost 30%), apparently in an attempt to merge the two articles.
Merging some sections of the articles may be a good idea, but I think the way this was done was problematic: the new text isn't integrated into the article at all and most of it doesn't even address the actual topic (the decline thesis as a historiographical concept within Ottoman history).