The Ottomans: A Cultural Legacy

It's more than a scholarly work. It traces Ottoman Empire contributions to world culture in an engaging conversational style

Ms. Darke basic premise is that the Ottomans were as advanced, or even more advanced, than their European counterparts, a fact that is overlooked today, because of the decadent state of the Empire during its last century or so, and the current Christian-Muslim tension of our current times and recent past, which make objective views more difficult to maintain. She makes a strong case for the Ottoman Empire, despite its Turkomen and Anatolian origins, being a European entity -- it was certainly multi-ethnic, and for most of its existence the majority of its population were Christian; in addition, the wealthiest provinces were those based in the Balkans. She points out that the Ottomans wars with the Habsburg Empire in the west (and the Safavid Empire to its east) were wars of territorial conquest, and not wars centered around religion.My primary objection to the book is her constant refrain, and attempt, to suggest that the Ottomans were more advanced in virtually every field than the western countries and cultural institutions. She does this to the point of stretching the truth. Just one example: in the very interesting chapter on medicine she says "Sabuncuoglu (1385-1468) described the dangers of bacteria, pathogens..." And a page or so later quotes Aksemseddin (b. 1389) "Disease infects by spreading from one person to another. This infection occurs through seed that are so small they cannot be seen but are alive." While based on epidemiological considerations, these doctors may have correctly concluded that diseases are spread by close contact, they really could not know the bacterial (and viral) nature of infection as the microscope, which first revealed bacteria visibly, was not invented until hundreds of years later. Aksemseddin's observation may have been correct, but it was pure speculation.The potential reader should also be aware that this book is not a history of the Ottoman Empire -- it doesn't claim to be... its subtitle is "A Cultural Legacy." If the reader is looking for a history of the Ottoman Empire he/she should look elsewhere.Still, once you get over the authors constant "the Ottomans were better" drumbeat, the book is a very interesting read.

I found this an odd book. I'd give the illustrations a 5 -- it fulfilled my desire for a book that captured the architecture, art, aesthetic sensibilities, and personal comportment of the Ottoman Empire. A 3 or 4 for content; it's a nice 30,000-foot level summary of key themes rather than a turgid tome, although I can't say that it's that well written. I'd give it a 2 for tone -- the writing style is very immature. The author doesn't merely have a strong slant, she writes in a way I found snarky and oftentimes even childish. In fact, halfway through the book I started referring to my Darke book as my Snarke book.The tone resembles that of an adolescent who has decided everything about his or her own western culture is hypocritical and awful, and who then idealizes a foreign culture to contrast with it, to the point of overlooking any shortcomings of that culture, and exaggerating any supposed faults of the west. The book does this to the point of injecting this brand of whataboutism in places where it doesn't even mesh with what is being talked about. At one point Darke refers to the listing of the Roma as a half-nationality in the Ottoman Empire, and practically snorts a comment to the effect of, "this half-recognition is more than those nasty Europeans ever gave them." The text also rather unconvincingly tries to persuade the reader that women enjoyed much greater rights in the Ottoman Empire than they did in Europe, largely on the basis of the fact that they wore a sort of pantaloon, rode on horseback, and fought in battle. It's a terribly superficial way of reaching sweeping conclusions. At one point a narrative on another subject entirely is interrupted to reference the horrific slaughter of Bosnian Muslims in the 1990s, for no apparent purpose other than to cast an unfavorable light on Christian European nations relative to Ottoman societies at every turn.In some parts of this book, this slant becomes truly ridiculous. There is an admiring section on the amazing machinery of the "Ottoman Turk" chess-playing automaton, but this was not an Ottoman creation at all; it was a robot created in Europe, dressed to resemble a Turk. The book flatly asserts that British miners (who were free to leave their jobs) were exploited by capitalism, but the forced conscription of Anatolian villagers (who were not so free) by the Ottomans to perform mining operations is portrayed as enlightened. The book even credulously treats the fable of Ahmed Celebi flying across the Bosporous with wings strapped to his arms, even though it's been pretty well established that humans can't do that.It's not as though this book lacks value. I found many sections quite interesting. I learned how the Ottomans were pioneers of vaccination, and I appreciated Darke's insightful descriptions of the ornamentation employed on buildings and in carpets, as well as the Ottomans' pioneering advances in public waterworks.But I wish the text would exhibit a little more faith in its readers. Presumably, those of us who bought this book did so because we were interested in the achievements of the Ottomans, we're attracted to at least a certain extent by their history, their culture, their architecture, their music, their statecraft, their science, craftsmanship, and so much else. Where the book delivers that, it's quite enjoyable. We don't really need to constantly be told, "And oh, yeah, those Europeans stink, and everything Ottoman is GREAT!" every few pages. I would have far preferred a book with an adult, objective tone. Just tell me about the subject matter, don't flaunt your personal baggage.