Week: 15

Outline for the Article/Chapter

Title of Article/Chapter: Chapter15- Institutional Change and the Longevity of the Ottoman Empire,
1500–1800
I. Introduction
A. Brief overview: The change of the Ottoman Empire in the fields of military technology and
organization and public and private financing between 1500 and 1800.
B. Importance of understanding the subject matter: Analyzing and studying the institutional
changes of a state that has ruled for a long time, such as the Ottoman Empire, is a guide for
economic and public policies.
C. Purpose of the article/chapter: To examine the role of institutional changes in the longevity of
the Ottoman Empire.
II. Background Information
A. Contextual information: Thanks to the pragmatic and flexible perspective of the Ottoman
Empire, it was able to bring together people belonging to various races or religions in its society.
B. Key terms or concepts: Institutional change, longevity, financial institutions, tax farm, islamic
finance, cash vakifs.
C. Historical framework: The institutional changes of the Ottoman Empire followed a different
path from the institutional changes of Western Europe that supported economic growth of the
period.
III. Main Points or Arguments
A. Point 1:
i. The Ottoman Empire did not implement institutional changes that strengthened capitalism as
in Western Europe.
ii. The Ottoman Empire has undergone changes in selective areas such as military technology
and organization, public and private financing. This situation ensured the long life of the
Ottoman Empire.
B. Point 2:
i. The Ottoman Empire faced the same difficulties compared to the Mughals and the Sephavids.
The structural decisions taken by the Ottoman State kept the Ottoman State afloat, unlike the
Mughals and the Sefevis.
ii. One of the most important reasons for this situation is that the Ottoman State pursues a
pragmatic and flexible policy. For example, he evaluated the tax collection conditions
separately by region.

C. Point 3:
i. Economic historians have mostly focused on the institutional change of Western Europe and
have not taken into account the institutional change of other states.
ii. According to these economic historians, the Ottoman Empire was depicted as a centralized
structure and they argued that its longevity was a complete mystery. This opinion is opposed in
the article.
IV. Case Studies or Examples
A. Case Study 1: In the sixteenth century, the Ottoman Empire allowed the use of existing monetary
systems in the newly conquered regions.
i. This flexible approach has prevented public dissatisfaction.
ii. The sultani was designated as the only gold coin of the empire and economic stability was
ensured.

B. Case Study 2: In the Ottoman Empire, cash vakifs were an important source of loans that
donated to charitable institutions using interest income.
i. Economic activities and investments have increased.
 Week: 15

ii. The production capacity of manufacturers has increased.

V. Counterarguments or Alternative Perspectives (optional)
A. Counterargument 1: Economic history researchers have studied only the institutional change of
Western Europe. They assumed that the Ottoman Empire had been standing for a long time as a
complete mystery.
i. However, compared to the Mughals and the Sephavids, it can be clearly seen that this situation
is not just a mystery.
ii. The Ottoman State did not follow the West in terms of the policies and institutional changes it
followed, and as a result, it survived for a long time.

VI. Conclusion
A. Summary of main points: Unlike Western Europe, the Ottoman Empire made changes in
selective institutions and preserved its tradition without going through capitalist transformation.
This situation has allowed him to hold the management for a long time.
B. Final thoughts: The longevity of the Ottoman Empire is not a mystery or a coincidence, but a
result of selective institutional changes and strong central government.
C. Suggestions for further research: Further studies may investigate how the institutional changes
made in the Ottoman Empire can be adapted to today's Turkiye.

VII. Reflection Questions

1. What kind of advantages did the flexible and pragmatist perspective followed in the Ottoman
Empire provide in state administration?
2. What are the selective institutional changes that ensure the longevity of the Ottoman State?
3. How do comparisons with the Safavids and the Mughals contribute to our understanding of the
political and economic evolution of the Ottoman Empire?