Grade by Grade
B. The World, 1450–1650 · The World, 1450–1650

The Ottoman Empire: From Constantinople to Vienna

B1 B2 B3 A1.4 A1.7About 75 minutes
Learning goals
  • I can explain how the Ottoman Empire expanded between 1453 and 1566.
  • I can describe how the empire was governed, including the devshirme, Janissaries and timar system.
  • I can explain how the Ottomans governed a multi-religious society.
  • I can compare the "decline" and "transformation" interpretations of the 1600s.

Words to know

sultan
The ruler of the Ottoman Empire.
grand vizier
The sultan's chief minister, who led the government.
devshirme
The Ottoman collection of Christian boys who were converted and trained as soldiers or officials.
Janissaries
The sultan's elite infantry, recruited through the devshirme.
timar
A grant of tax revenue from land given to a cavalryman in return for military service.
dhimmi
Under Islamic law, protected non-Muslim subjects (Christians, Jews) who paid the jizya.
jizya
A tax paid by non-Muslim subjects in many Islamic states.
historiography
The study of how historians' interpretations of the past have changed.

29 May 1453

For more than a thousand years, the walls of Constantinople had protected the capital of the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire. In the spring of 1453 the 21-year-old Ottoman sultan Mehmed II surrounded the city by land and sea. His army used huge cannons to batter the walls, and his engineers moved ships overland on greased rollers into the city's harbour. On 29 May 1453 the city fell. Mehmed made it his capital, and the great church of Hagia Sophia became a mosque.

For Christians in Europe, the fall was a shock. For the Ottomans, it confirmed their place as heirs to Rome and leaders of the Islamic world. Same event, two perspectives.

From frontier state to world empire

The Ottoman state began around 1300 as a small principality in northwest Anatolia, named after its founder Osman. By 1650 it ruled southeastern Europe, Anatolia, much of the Arab world and North Africa.

  • Mehmed II ("the Conqueror") took Constantinople (1453) and expanded in the Balkans.
  • Selim I defeated the Safavids at Chaldiran (1514) and conquered the Mamluk Sultanate (1516 to 1517), adding Syria, Egypt and the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Ottoman sultans increasingly presented themselves as caliphs, leaders of Sunni Muslims (the story that the title was formally handed over to Selim in 1517 is a later invention).
  • Suleiman I (ruled 1520 to 1566), called "the Magnificent" in Europe and Kanuni ("the Lawgiver") by Ottomans, took Belgrade (1521) and Rhodes (1522), won at Mohács in Hungary (1526), and besieged Vienna (1529) without taking it.
The Ottoman Empire, 1450 to 1650 (evenly spaced, not to scale)1453Constantinople1514Chaldiran1516-17Mamluks1520Suleiman1526Mohács1529Vienna siege1566Suleiman dies1571Lepanto; Cyprus
Key Ottoman events, evenly spaced so the labels fit (not to scale). Notice how many happened between 1514 and 1529, the peak of expansion.

How the empire was run

  • The sultan held supreme power. Below him the grand vizier led the government and the imperial council (divan).
  • The devshirme ("collection"): every few years, officials took boys from Christian families, mostly in the Balkans, converted them to Islam and trained them. The most able became palace officials and even grand viziers; others joined the Janissaries, the sultan's elite infantry, early users of firearms. These men were legally the sultan's slaves (kul), yet they could hold enormous power. For the families, losing a son was often a painful loss, although some families saw a path to advancement.
  • The timar system: cavalrymen (sipahis) received the right to collect taxes from farmland in return for military service. This paid for the army without a cash salary.
  • Law: the sultan's laws (kanun) worked alongside Islamic law (sharia). Suleiman's reputation as "Lawgiver" came from organizing these laws.
Ottoman government (simplified)Sultansupreme ruler, later caliphGrand vizier and divanran governmentAskeri: army, officials, ulemadid not pay most taxesReaya: taxpaying subjectsfarmers, merchants, artisans
A simplified picture of Ottoman rule. The big divide was between the tax-exempt askeri and the taxpaying reaya.

The two broad groups were the askeri ("military" class: soldiers, officials and religious scholars, the ulema, who were exempt from most taxes) and the reaya ("flock": the taxpaying majority of every religion). Unlike Europe's hereditary nobility, many top Ottoman positions were held by men recruited through the devshirme, who could not pass their offices to their sons.

A multi-religious empire

The empire included Muslims, Orthodox Christians, Armenian Christians, Jews and others. Following Islamic law, Christians and Jews were protected peoples (dhimmi): they paid a special tax (jizya) and accepted limits (for example, on building new places of worship), but they could practise their religion and their communities ran many of their own affairs, such as marriage and religious law, through their own leaders. Historians later called this arrangement the millet system, though it became formal mostly in the 1800s.

When Spain expelled its Jews in 1492, Sultan Bayezid II allowed many of them to settle in Ottoman cities such as Istanbul and Salonica (Thessaloniki), where Sephardic Jewish communities flourished.

Perspective check: this was not equality in the modern sense. Non-Muslims were second-class subjects. But compared with much of Europe at the time, where religious minorities were often expelled or forced to convert, the Ottoman system allowed considerable religious coexistence.

Trade, wealth and culture

Istanbul grew into one of the largest cities in Europe or Asia. The empire controlled key trade routes between the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, and taxed goods passing through. The chief architect Mimar Sinan (died 1588) designed hundreds of buildings, including the Süleymaniye Mosque in Istanbul, completed in 1557. Women of the imperial family could hold real power: Suleiman's wife Hürrem Sultan advised him and paid for mosques, schools and soup kitchens; in the 1600s, queen mothers (valide sultan) such as Kösem Sultan ruled on behalf of young sultans.

Rivals: Habsburgs, Venice and the Safavids

The Ottomans fought the Habsburgs (rulers of Spain and Austria) on land and at sea, and sometimes cooperated with France against them: a reminder that religion did not decide every alliance. In 1571 a Christian alliance, the Holy League, destroyed most of the Ottoman fleet at Lepanto. Europeans celebrated it as a turning point. Yet the Ottomans rebuilt their fleet within about a year and kept Cyprus, which they had just taken from Venice. A grand vizier reportedly told a Venetian envoy that taking Cyprus had cut off an arm, while Lepanto had only shaved the Ottomans' beard; the story may be embellished, but it captures the Ottoman view.

In the east, the Ottomans fought long wars with the Shi'a Safavid empire of Iran (next lesson).

"Decline" or transformation?

Older histories said the Ottoman Empire began to decline after Suleiman died in 1566. Many historians now reject this. They point out that the empire kept growing in places (Cyprus, 1571; Crete, conquered by 1669) and survived until 1922. They describe the 1600s as a transformation: power shifted from the sultan to the grand viziers, the palace and the Janissaries; tax-farming replaced the timar system; and the army adapted. This is a good example of historiography: historians' interpretations change as they ask new questions and use new sources, such as Ottoman tax and court records instead of European diplomats' reports.

Worked example

Modelled example: Comparing two interpretations

Interpretation 1: "After Suleiman, the Ottoman Empire entered a long decline." Interpretation 2: "In the 1600s the Ottoman Empire transformed itself to meet new challenges." Which is better supported?

  1. Identify what each claims. Interpretation 1 sees the period after 1566 as weakness. Interpretation 2 sees adaptation.
  2. Look at the sources each relies on. "Decline" accounts often relied on European observers and on Ottoman writers who wanted reform and so exaggerated problems.
  3. Test with evidence. The empire conquered Crete (1669), kept its core lands for centuries and adapted its army and taxes. But it did face rebellions, inflation (partly caused by American silver) and military defeats.
  4. Weigh it. The evidence shows real problems and resilience. A word like "decline" over 350 years hides too much.
  5. Conclude with nuance.

Sample conclusion: "Interpretation 2 is better supported. The empire faced serious crises after 1566, but its survival and continued expansion show adaptation rather than steady decline; the decline story relied too heavily on European and reform-minded sources."

Just for fun

Coffee spread through the Ottoman world in the 1500s, and Istanbul's coffee houses became places to talk, play games and hear storytellers. Some officials worried they encouraged gossip about the government. Some things never change: people still argue about politics over coffee.

Hands-on activity

Two headlines, one event

You need: paper, pencils and about 20 minutes.

  1. Write two newspaper headlines for 29 May 1453: one for a paper in Venice and one for a paper in Edirne (the Ottoman capital before 1453). (There were no newspapers then; this is a perspective exercise.)
  2. Under each, write two sentences explaining the event the way that audience would see it.
  3. Show your grown-up and ask them to guess which city each headline came from.
  4. Then write one neutral sentence a historian might use.

Look for: different word choices (fall, conquest, victory, opening), and a neutral sentence that describes without taking sides.

Your turn

1

Who took Constantinople, and when?

2

What did Selim I add to the empire in 1516 to 1517?

3

Why was Suleiman I called "Kanuni"?

4

What was the devshirme?

5

What was a timar?

6

What was the status of Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire?

7

What happened at Lepanto in 1571?

More practice: warm-up

1

What were the Janissaries?

2

Who was the chief Ottoman official under the sultan?

3

Which architect designed the Süleymaniye Mosque?

4

Which city did the Ottomans besiege in 1529?

5

Which group of Jews settled in Ottoman cities after 1492?

More practice: on your own

1

Explain two reasons the Ottomans succeeded in expanding.

2

How did the devshirme differ from European nobility as a way to choose leaders?

3

Why is "religious tolerance" a misleading description of the Ottoman system?

4

Why did Europeans see Lepanto as more significant than the Ottomans did?

5

What is historiography? Use the Ottoman "decline" debate as an example.

Challenge

1

Assess the significance of the fall of Constantinople (1453) for different groups.

2

"The Ottoman Empire was a European power as much as an Asian one." Evaluate.

3

Use cause and consequence to link American silver to problems in the Ottoman Empire around 1600.

Check your understanding

Quiz

1.

Why did Mehmed II's capture of Constantinople succeed after earlier attacks had failed?

2.

Which sultan ruled from 1520 to 1566 and was called "the Lawgiver"?

3.

What were the Janissaries?

4.

How did the Ottoman state generally treat Christian and Jewish subjects?

5.

What did many historians replace the "Ottoman decline" thesis with?

6.

Which conquest in 1516 to 1517 gave Ottoman sultans a claim to lead Sunni Muslims?

For parents and teachers

Big idea: This lesson covers the Ottoman Empire for B1 (political, social and economic structures), B2 (relations with Christian states, the Safavids and minorities) and B3 (law, architecture, identity). It practises comparing historians' interpretations (A1.4, A1.7).

How to help: Ask your teen to tell the story of 1453 from two perspectives. Ask why historians stopped talking about "decline".

Sensitivity: the devshirme took children from their families; treat it as a real loss for those families even though some recruits rose to great power.

Common difficulties: assuming Christian Europe was always united against the Ottomans (France cooperated with them); calling the empire simply "tolerant" or simply "oppressive".