Nyh (talk) , 18 June 2018 (UTC) The purpose of this article is to reflect the significant historiographical shift in the field of Ottoman history which has taken place since the 1970s.The vision of Ottoman history which it critiques (in line with mainstream scholarship of modern times) is therefore that of the mid-twentieth century, so you're right when you say that nobody is still talking about the decline of the Ottoman Empire on its own - that's the whole point of the article, to note that fact and explain why.
Nyh (talk) , 18 June 2018 (UTC) The purpose of this article is to reflect the significant historiographical shift in the field of Ottoman history which has taken place since the 1970s.
Critiques of the article should be situated in the modern academic literature on Ottoman history.
Your comment does make me think that the history of the concept of decline and its application to the history of Islamic/Ottoman civilization is not being explained well enough in the article, that's one area that needs improvement.
Yet it was the British who came to dominate the Atlantic slave system.
British Empire ships carried more African captives than any nation (an estimated three million); Britain's colonies in the Caribbean and mainland North America produced vast quantities of tropical goods (sugar, tobacco, rice, indigo) for the home market; and the country as a whole grew rich on the profits of enslaved African labor.
Chamboz (talk) , 24 June 2019 (UTC) I have to agree with the critics above, it's absolutely one sided, the article clearly supports the "non decline" theory, and is trying to disqualify the decline thesis, this is not exact science, a lot of scholars agree with the decline thesis, the time in which one argument was presented is not a serious factor, so if in XIX century the decline thesis was more accepted, and nowadays this is supposedely not the case, this not show that the thesis is "wrong".
Sorry for the possible mistakes in my english spelling.
), 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.
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.