Lasted from 1299 to 1923

Meme thread but
>forcibly convert part of populace, rape and enslave the rest
>Ottoman territories never went through Renaissance, Baroque, Enlightenment, etc.
>Technology and progress stagnated to an insane degree, ERE area went from being a wealthy and advanced region of Europe to perpetual shithole
>Roman Empire collapses, its successor nations now at peace and have good relations
>Ottoman Empire collapses, everything turns to shit, all the countries hate each other and go to war over religion and muh clay

Turks were good at conquering and nothing else.

>hi, I think long seiges are genocide

The ottomans didn't forcibly convert the population though also jannisaries were a tiny part of the population so thats insignificant.
Also the byzantine empire was already shit if anything the ottomans revitalized the whole area.
Besides all the post roman dominions kept killing eachother till 70 years ago.

>Ottomans
>preserving anything

Hagia Sofia says hello

All the murals about jesus etc are still there.

due to delusional turks and butthurt balkans no one can discuss ottoman empire without delving into politics and memes

similar to andalus and crusades

What would make you think that?

Everything islam related becomes shitposting general on this website.

>implying the West didn't do the same with the Roman pantheon and shit

if anything it looked better

>t. mehmet
Yes, that's why huge chunks of the Balkans are muslim today, because Turks didn't convert anything.

You know an Empire that actually didn't bother converting? The British Raj. Look at India today, virtually no Christians despite centuries of British rule. The Ottomans did allow some religious toleration but the Balkan Christians definitely DID NOT prosper under Turkish rule - actual prosperous kingdoms and regions, like Croatia, Serbia, Hungary were just set back by the eastern invasion and the Turkish rule.

I said forcibly if they did the balkans could already been muslim also it definitely did benefit the balkans because the ottomans pacified the region instead of leaving it as a couple feuding kingdoms.

This revisionism is laughable.

>preserved and improved the cultural heritage of the Byzantine Empire
>not christian

pick one

>its successor nations now at peace and have good relations
>after 1500+ years and the most bloody wars in history

well at least arabs were better when it comes to being sandniggers

>the British Raj
>1858-1947
>the Ottoman Empire
>1299-1923

>Look at India today, virtually no Christians despite centuries of British rule
Not even one century, and they focused their "civilizing" efforts on a few literate cities (Kerala is 18% Christian, Calcutta.) Some states in India are >80% Christian, although it was due to earlier or later missionary efforts rather than the Raj's.
There are over 20 million Christians in India either way.

Meanwhile, there are about 5 million Muslims in the Balkans after centuries of Muslim rule, and most of them originally converted for status and networking.

Also someone will inevitably mention that 20 millions isn't a lot in the whole of India, but converting 20 millions in a few decades in a subcontinent bigger than your home islands is harder than converting 5 millions over the centuries in a tiny region you rule over.

Any maps?

British were kicking around India way before 1858

If you count Company rule, that just adds one century. But the East India Company wasn't too concerned with civilizing India until the 19th century. Also, he said the Raj, no the Company.

We all know what he meant tho bruh.

>All the murals about jesus etc are still there.
After they removed the plaster.

Yeah which preserved it withoutbthat plaster those murals would have been fucked up in those centuries.

desu that's not a very good argument. Western Europe in 5th c. and the Balkans in the early 20th are not the same thing. Civilization advanced in the meantime, that's the whole point. The Ottomans, after dissolving, would have left a power vacuum, yes, but had they been halfway competent rulers their territories wouldn't be embroiled in perpetual ethnic and religious hatred that often escalates into open war.

Austria-Hungary collapsed at the same time, and you don't see Croatia waging war against Hungary or the Czechs against Slovenia or whatever. Modern era multinational empires are supposed to dissolve into a more or less peaceful mess. Look at the fucking Soviet Union, even there you don't see the republics fighting each other (aside from the Russian separatists in Ukraine, but that's a marginal case in one of the nearly 20 states).

The point is, the Ottomans left the place in a bad state, far worse than pretty much any comparable empire, and it's ludicrous to argue it's even remotely good, let alone the greatest or whatnot.

What the fuck is 1922 then?

Except when the frenchies uncovered it for renovations the retarded islamist workers started destroying them

They just stole the culture and didn't apply it for normal peasants, only for nobles

t. steppe turkroach

>definitely benefit balkan
That's hypocrisy. Balkan is litteraly the most unstable region in the whole Europe because of ottoman rule. Why do you think ISIS is making recruitment bases in Bosnia?

You guys are trying to make me mad

>jizya
>not a method of forceful conversion

>preserved and improved the cultural heritage of the Byzantine Empire

What makes you think that? Ottoman Empire never developed technologically or even in the fields such as art or literature. Their peak was the 16th century and only because the Americas had just barely been discovered. By the next century, they were already declining fast, and after their failed siege of Vienna, were never to be taken seriously again.

Not even close to being a successor of the Eastern Roman Empire.

>Hungary used to try to take back tarritorries from succesor states after WW1, Hungarian minorities in neighbouring states still causing feaud between Hungary and its neighbours
>Armenia and Azerbaijan waging war against each other over Karabah
>Chechnya
>Russian minority causing problems in the Baltics
>conflict over Fergana valley among Central-Asian republics

>have mad revenue stream
>wanting people to convert

This is also why the 'spread by the sword' bullshit falls apart under close scrutiny. Not to mention the Arab elitism.

Thats some super damage mode revisionism.

Ottoman conquest of Balkans halted social and cultural development of the region, disallowing those peopels the chance to go through the same stages as rest of Europe did.

Its exactly the Ottoman conquest why the Balkans is a feuding shithole to date.

> Look at the fucking Soviet Union, even there you don't see the republics fighting each other

That's because they're too busy infighting within their own new nations. Most all of them have had on and off again civil wars. Kazakhstan had huge riots and shit just a few weeks ago. Only thing keeping them together are dictatorships that solidify their power, trampling on minorities as they go.

That being said, Chechnya has declared war twice. South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh and so on.

You can say the exact same thing about Africa and Europeans. It's the inhabitants' fault.

turks saw the future and tried to save europe from denbts

You mean ruined the richest and most advanced part of the world forever. While the rest of the civilized world was developing technology and culture during the renaissance the former center of the world was a backward islamic shithole, decaying and rotting in islamic darkness.

...

But balkans were not behind rest of europe during that time.
Best example of how shit was ottoman empire would be comparison of bordering former AH countries with former Ottoman countries

looks quite cosy, shame they were all genocided