Comments by "Mint" (@mint8648) on "Jabzy" channel.

  1. In the core terrritories of Antolia and Rumelia, they were far more centralized and bureaucratic than feudal Europeans
    92
  2. The Muslim world was likely more literate during the Abbasids
    43
  3.  @miles7314 It kinda was. They were far more centralized and bureaucratic, for instance
    33
  4.  @claudeyaz  The Ottomans were far more centralized than feudal Europeans. The core provinces were governed by bureaucratically appointed officials. This put loyalty to the state above familial ties. If the Ottomans did not practice fratricide, they would be like the Byzantine Empire, experiencing a civil war every other decade
    21
  5.  @leaveme3559  Only clerics were literate in europe. Many nobles and kings couldn’t even read
    20
  6.  @JabzyJoe  Middle Eastern Wars in 18th century: -Ottoman-Persian War (1722-1723) -Ottoman-Persian War (1730-1736) -Ottoman-Persian War (1743-1746) -Collapse of Afsharid Empire (1750s) -Rebellion in Ottoman Egypt (1770s) -Ottoman-Persian War (1775-1776) -Ottoman campaign in Palestine (1780s) -Wahhabi raids in Iraq and Hejaz (1790s) Middle Eastern Wars in 19th century: -Wahhabi sack of Karbala (1802) -Wahhabi conquest of Mecca (1805) -Wahhabi War (1811-1818_ -Ottoman-Persian War (1821-1823) -Ottoman campaign in Iraq (1831) -Ottoman-Egyptian War (1831-1833) -Ottoman-Egyptian War (1839-1841) -Ottoman campaign in Kurdistan (1850s) -Fall of Second Saudi State (1891) Middle Eastern Wars in 20th century: -Unification of Saudi Arabia (1902-1932) -World War 1 and Arab revolt (1914-1918) -Turkish War of Independence (1919-1923) -French invasion of Syria and Great Syrian Revolt (1920s) -Saudi-Yemeni War (1934) -Middle Eastern theater of WW2 (1939-1945) -Arab-Israeli War (1948) -Yemeni Civil War (1962-1970) -Six-day War (1967) -Yom Kippur War (1973) -Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990) -Iranian Revolution and Consolidation(1979) -Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) -First Gulf War (1991) This is ignoring several coups and minor rebellions. The Middle East is definitely more violent in modern times
    19
  7. Chinese and Indian GDP PPP per capita did decline by 20% during the 19th century. Free trade also contributed to Ottoman deindustrialization around the same time period
    17
  8.  @miles7314  I doubt the majority of academia would disagree with me that the Ottomans were more centralized and bureaucratic in Rumelia and Anatolia than feudal Europe.
    17
  9.  @jessiehuynh7495  it was the second most powerful in the world
    15
  10.  @akramkarim3780  Yes, though the Ottoman Empire themselves were not a hydraulic empire, they inherited the Persian style of bureaucracy, itself modelled on the bureacracies of ancient Babylon, Assyria, and Akkad. These bureaucracies emerged to coordinate irrigation systems and for flood control
    15
  11. taiwan stands with japan and turkey 🇹🇼🇯🇵🇹🇷
    14
  12.  @daltonsherrod1573  Right… calling it a colonial empire would be like calling every other empire in history a colonial empire, and the term simply becomes meaningless
    13
  13. The Ottomans were not a colonial empire because there was no distinction between mother country and “colony”
    10
  14.  @Yazdegerdiranyar Turk was a derogatory term until the late 17th century. Afterwards it was a common denonym for any Turkish-speaking subject
    10
  15.  @randomturd1415  There is no scholarly consensus that colonialism is a term applicable to medieval polities, whether Islamic or not. Though you are right that such debate would make no difference to indigenous populations of any given region, they would very much notice the absence of autonomy OR equal political representation. Because a colony is neither a client state nor a first-level administrative division. Take for instance, the Sepoy rebellion, when Hindus and Muslims alike rallied around the Mughal emperor against the British. The Mughals governed each Indian region as an integral part of their empire, while the British did not. Both empires were exploitative, but it was the British who viewed India as nothing more than a cash cow. The difference was very much clear to the Indians.
    9
  16. The Ottomans broke the Portuguese Indian Ocean monopoly by the 1550s. Around that same time, Venice regained its economic strength. During the 17th century, European trade with the Levant rose to levels not seen since the Crusades
    8
  17. They didn’t rely on agricultural slavery as much as household slavery, unlike european colonies
    8
  18.  @jorge6207  originally the portuguese blocked arab and turkish traders from india and the far east after the 1490s. this was no longer the case by 1550, as the ottomans expanded and sent expeditions all the way to southeast asia
    6
  19. Russia had the finest artillery during the late 18th century
    6
  20.  @Mrdestiny17  actually they didn't bother to learn english because england wasn't important at the time. but they did learn russian because russia was a better trading partner
    6
  21.  @SCA440 Europe went through several conflicts that killed from the hundreds of thousands to the millions. They simply don’t compare to those in the Middle East around the same time period -Thirty Years’ War -Swedish Deluge -Nine Years’ War -War of Spanish Succession -War of Austrian Succession -War of Polish Succession -Second Northern War -Great Northern War -Seven Years’ War -French Revolutionary Wars
    6
  22. ⁠ @puraLusa the ottoman system was far more stable and centralized than european empires though
    5
  23. Source?
    5
  24.  @jorge6207  The Ottomans never controlled the Indian Ocean in the first place. That’s why them being able to operate in these remote theaters was seen as a victory for the Muslim world
    5
  25.  @randomturd1415  Colonialism is not measured by atrocity olympics. Imperialism =/= colonialism. If you want to talk about imperialism, that’s fine. Non-colonial empires have been just as oppressive as colonial empires throughout history. But the distinction is very much sociopolitical, and based on how the ruler views the ruled. Again, it is dictated by the core-periphery relationship, if we define colonialism as the establishment of colonies. It would be nonsensical to call India a colony of the later Mughals, when they had already assimilated for generations and considered the country their homeland. Hindus were second-class citizens, but they could enter the state bureaucracy in Delhi. Less so the bureaucracy in faraway London.
    5
  26.  @rayzas4885  Feudalism as an economic system ended after the black death, but feudalism as a political system didn’t. That was only until the French revolution and the Revolutions of 1848
    5
  27.  @miles7314  I also replied to that comment, saying that it was the case in the core territories of Rumelia and Anatolia
    5
  28.  @ThePanEthiopian  For centuries Azerbaijan (Shirvan) was considered part of Iran. Southern Azerbaijan still is
    5
  29. Also Oman was an elective monarchy, fwiw
    4
  30.  @Aristocles22  The parlements of Paris survived until the French revolution. The reason why Louis XVI called the Estates-General was because the parlements blocked his taxation reforms
    4
  31.  @lukaswilhelm9290  through the capitulations they eventually got flooded with european manufactures and couldn’t develop their own manufacturing industries
    4
  32.  @cenktuneygok8986 The 19th century was when the Ottomans started centralizing control over Kurdistan, Iraq, and Hejaz.
    4
  33.  @kaanalpkaratas6091  but it could have been an province, according to lufti’s letter to vizier sokollu mehmed pasha, the aceh sultan wanted to be considered an ottoman slave and turn his country into an eyalet no different than yemen or egypt or algeria
    4
  34. Yet it took until the late middle ages for the Levant and Egypt to become majority Muslim
    4
  35. France?
    3
  36.  @jorge6207  Ottoman Age of Exploration by Giancarlo Casale. The point is, the Portuguese presence in the Indian Ocean did not stifle Muslim trade very much
    3
  37.  @christophernakhoul3998  Np
    3
  38. 9/11, 1683
    3
  39. They rose because of Islam
    3
  40. Yeah China was so peaceful that it became isolationist
    3
  41. Look up the CFA franc zone
    3
  42. Medieval Christendom violently expanded into eastern Germany, Baltics, and Slavic regions, and were even more intolerant than Medieval Muslims
    3
  43.  @socii1x0231h  Good point
    2
  44.  @JabzyJoe  To be fair I did list "Ali Beys independence war" under "Rebellion in Ottoman Egypt," and the wars of Zahir al-Umar under "Ottoman campaign in Palestine." And if you want to include the rest we should also count: -Zaraniq rebellion (1909-1910) -Egyptian revolution (1919) -Iraqi-Kurdish conflict (1919-2023) -Sheikh Said rebellion (1925) -Ararat rebellion (1930) -Dersim rebellion (1937) -Alwaziri coup (1948) -Egyptian revolution (1952) -Lebanon crisis (1958) -Mosul uprising (1959) -Dhofar rebellion (1962-1975) -Black September (1971) -Kurdish-Turkish conflict (1978-present) -Islamist uprising in Syria (1979-1982) -Sadr uprising (1980)
    2
  45. Who do you think you are
    2
  46.  @GlizzyGoblin757  Nah just look at the Thirty Years’ War
    2
  47. Not what colonization is but ok
    2
  48.  @denisdooley1540  Only in certain regions like Algeria. Not their other African and Asian territories.
    2
  49. The Manchus weren’t nomadic
    2
  50. The Manchus weren’t nomadic
    2