“Twins in Spite of Themselves”: Spanish and Ottoman Empires’ “Issues of Decline” in XVIIIth Century

A. Chalyi
{"title":"“Twins in Spite of Themselves”: Spanish and Ottoman Empires’ “Issues of Decline” in XVIIIth Century","authors":"A. Chalyi","doi":"10.46869/10.46869/2707-6776-2022-19-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Spanish and Ottoman empires had more similarities that could be found at first glance. Both experienced the take-off as leading force in Europe and Asia respectively, being for a while the most fearful and powerful states during XVI, faced economic and political blunders in XVII century and slightly ended with stagnation in XVIII century (as conventional wisdom says). Using comparative method and cultural analysis, article tries to answer a question – how unique or regular was that issues which stroke Spain and Ottoman Empires, how deeply they were engaged in so called decline narrative, created in XIX century European historiography and is it possible to create common trend for empire`s stagnation using not only historical sociology method (sociology of revolution used by Jack Goldstone and Teda Skocpole) and world-system analysis provided by Immanuel Wallerstein, with emphasis on history of ideas or begriffsgeschichte by Reinhardt Kosseleck. Main results are going to provide a more correct view on the status of Spanish and Turkish Empires during the XVIII century. Despite that Ottomans and Spaniards had obvious differences in political distribution, economic capabilities, warfare tactics and external actions, almost simultaneous decline was based on clear and exact reasons: lack of industrialization (production with high surplus value), hush incorporation of Ottoman and Spanish Empires into World-Economy, lack of defending tariffs, ineffective fiscal system and policy, devastating and lasting wars, decreasing price for agricultural products, down warding Kondratieff cycle, rigid political and social units, which constrain strict political actions. These gaps made the Empire’s decline possible notwithstanding those problems which they had previously. Oppositely, major European states (England, France, Prussia) had made reversed actions, which took a long time, but made European “take-off” inevitable, assured their economical breakaway to further domination over the Ottomans and Spaniards as well.","PeriodicalId":211354,"journal":{"name":"Problems of World History","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Problems of World History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46869/10.46869/2707-6776-2022-19-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Spanish and Ottoman empires had more similarities that could be found at first glance. Both experienced the take-off as leading force in Europe and Asia respectively, being for a while the most fearful and powerful states during XVI, faced economic and political blunders in XVII century and slightly ended with stagnation in XVIII century (as conventional wisdom says). Using comparative method and cultural analysis, article tries to answer a question – how unique or regular was that issues which stroke Spain and Ottoman Empires, how deeply they were engaged in so called decline narrative, created in XIX century European historiography and is it possible to create common trend for empire`s stagnation using not only historical sociology method (sociology of revolution used by Jack Goldstone and Teda Skocpole) and world-system analysis provided by Immanuel Wallerstein, with emphasis on history of ideas or begriffsgeschichte by Reinhardt Kosseleck. Main results are going to provide a more correct view on the status of Spanish and Turkish Empires during the XVIII century. Despite that Ottomans and Spaniards had obvious differences in political distribution, economic capabilities, warfare tactics and external actions, almost simultaneous decline was based on clear and exact reasons: lack of industrialization (production with high surplus value), hush incorporation of Ottoman and Spanish Empires into World-Economy, lack of defending tariffs, ineffective fiscal system and policy, devastating and lasting wars, decreasing price for agricultural products, down warding Kondratieff cycle, rigid political and social units, which constrain strict political actions. These gaps made the Empire’s decline possible notwithstanding those problems which they had previously. Oppositely, major European states (England, France, Prussia) had made reversed actions, which took a long time, but made European “take-off” inevitable, assured their economical breakaway to further domination over the Ottomans and Spaniards as well.
“不顾自己的双胞胎”:18世纪西班牙和奥斯曼帝国的“衰落问题”
西班牙和奥斯曼帝国有更多的相似之处,乍一看就能发现。两国都分别经历了作为欧洲和亚洲的主导力量的腾飞,在16世纪一度是最可怕和最强大的国家,在17世纪面临经济和政治上的失误,并在18世纪略微以停滞告终(正如传统智慧所说)。通过比较方法和文化分析,本文试图回答一个问题,即影响西班牙和奥斯曼帝国的问题有多独特或有多普遍,他们在多大程度上卷入了所谓的衰落叙事,在19世纪的欧洲史学中,是否有可能使用历史社会学方法(杰克·戈德斯通和泰达·斯科波尔使用的革命社会学)和伊曼纽尔·沃勒斯坦提供的世界体系分析,并强调莱因哈特·科塞莱克的思想史或begriffsgeschichte)来创造帝国停滞的共同趋势。主要的结果将提供一个更正确的观点,西班牙和土耳其帝国在十八世纪的地位。尽管奥斯曼人和西班牙人在政治分布、经济能力、战争战术和对外行动方面存在明显差异,但几乎同时衰落的原因是明确而准确的:缺乏工业化(高剩余价值的生产),奥斯曼帝国和西班牙帝国融入世界经济,缺乏防御性关税,无效的财政制度和政策,毁灭性和持久的战争,农产品价格下降,康德拉季耶夫周期下降,僵化的政治和社会单位,这些都限制了严格的政治行动。这些缺口使帝国的衰落成为可能,尽管他们之前有这些问题。相反,欧洲主要国家(英国、法国、普鲁士)采取了相反的行动,这花了很长时间,但使欧洲的“起飞”不可避免,确保了它们在经济上的分离,从而进一步控制奥斯曼人和西班牙人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书