Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Ottoman territories in Africa

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Aeoli View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 13-Feb-2015
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 243
  Quote Aeoli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Ottoman territories in Africa
    Posted: 08-Oct-2016 at 14:02
Originally posted by HomoFlores

I have newly found in my research, that the Ottoman occupation of Sudan occurred sometimes in the mid of the 16th century and is consisted of much atrocities, which no one rememorises. 

After controling Egypt and Hejaz (West Arabia including Holy Islamic Cities), not having a relation with Sudan & Horn of Africa would be odd. 

You are completly right, in most of time Sudan is forgetten

However I guess most effective contact was in Muhammed Ali Pasha Period in 19th century, not in 16th century. 

That period is also known as Al-Turkiyah.   




Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Oct-2016 at 11:33
Without sources, and details all you get is so what?



"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
HomoFlores View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 08-Oct-2016
Location: Frankfurt
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
  Quote HomoFlores Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Oct-2016 at 11:07
I have newly found in my research, that the Ottoman occupation of Sudan occurred sometimes in the mid of the 16th century and is consisted of much atrocities, which no one rememorises. 
Back to Top
kafkas View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 117
  Quote kafkas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 06:48
Originally posted by HEROI

Originally posted by kafkas



A lot of Turks have those features, including most people in my family. If you visit Turkey you'll see that they're not uncommon whatsoever.
I would belive they are mostly situated in places were there have been a majority of other Balkan people,such as the Albanians,or places were people have come from the Population exchanges with Greece,many non-Turks were shiped to Turkey based only on their religion,many of them Albanians,(Chams) who constitute the Albanian Region with the most Blonde people.In Vlora (city in Albania were i come from) i would say that the Cham population is 60% to 70% in favour of blondes.Some historians estimate that milions of people in Western Turky,specially in cities like Istambul and Izmir have Albanian origines.


I'm sorry but this is simply not true. A lot of Turkophobes will tell you that light featured Turks must be mixed with "Indo-Europeans" or something. It's all racist nonsense.

My family is very very old and there's no non-Turkic influence in us that we know of. Most of my family has light features, some have very dark features, some are redheads, and regardless we're all 100% Turk. The most ancient accounts of Turks by the Chinese also mentioned their variances in physical features, some having light hair and eyes while others having darker features.

This idea of people being mixed with foreigners if they look different from others is a eurocentric attitude that wouldn't make much sense if applied in Anatolia or the Caucasus.

Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Mar-2008 at 13:07
Infact mostly situated place is coast of blacksea and no they are not immigrants.
Back to Top
HEROI View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 06-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 468
  Quote HEROI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Mar-2008 at 12:24
Originally posted by kafkas



A lot of Turks have those features, including most people in my family. If you visit Turkey you'll see that they're not uncommon whatsoever.
I would belive they are mostly situated in places were there have been a majority of other Balkan people,such as the Albanians,or places were people have come from the Population exchanges with Greece,many non-Turks were shiped to Turkey based only on their religion,many of them Albanians,(Chams) who constitute the Albanian Region with the most Blonde people.In Vlora (city in Albania were i come from) i would say that the Cham population is 60% to 70% in favour of blondes.Some historians estimate that milions of people in Western Turky,specially in cities like Istambul and Izmir have Albanian origines.
Me pune,me perpjekje.
Back to Top
HEROI View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 06-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 468
  Quote HEROI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Mar-2008 at 12:18
Not maybe.
For sure.
It is well known that Muhamed Ali Pasha and Ibrahim pasha ,since they themselves were Albanians,they had in their army their Albanian regiments,(also Greeks) and the people closest to them were of course Albanians.
 
 
Me pune,me perpjekje.
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Mar-2008 at 19:18
These are the descendents of Turkish soldiers who invaded that country with Ibrahim and since they are not Arab, they were forbidden to marry into other tribes or to marry their daughters to other tribes which made them inbreed and keep their distinct features until today, Blue eyes, a minority green, and Blond hair. These people take pride for being "Turks" but their features are more in line with Germanic types than Slavic.
 
They were maybe albanian..
Back to Top
Tore The Dog View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 08-Feb-2008
Location: Sweden
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 74
  Quote Tore The Dog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Mar-2008 at 14:45
One vital Turkish possesion was Perim or Barim island , Portugese was there 1513 but did not occuped this strategic isle , so Ottoman empire had this isle for centuries.
 
 
Back to Top
kafkas View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 117
  Quote kafkas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Mar-2008 at 21:17
Originally posted by andrew

Originally posted by Al Jassas

Hello Andrew
 
Sorry but the historical accounts by historians who witnessed the invasion say otherwise and the people who were left also indicate otherwise. In the south of the Country in Asir region in the beautiful city of Al-Namas there is a large tribe called Bani Shahr. one of their biggest clans are knows as "Al-Asasblah" "العسابلة". These are the descendents of Turkish soldiers who invaded that country with Ibrahim and since they are not Arab, they were forbidden to marry into other tribes or to marry their daughters to other tribes which made them inbreed and keep their distinct features until today, Blue eyes, a minority green, and Blond hair. These people take pride for being "Turks" but their features are more in line with Germanic types than Slavic. Descendents of raped women in other places still possess distinct feautures only found in Europe.
 
Al-Jassas
 
Ineteresting. Still however, Turks don't possess those traits you mentioned. They had fairly dark hair and most have brown eyes like my mom's dad did. I'm sure Egypt was mixed also and became generally lighter then the average Arab but you obviously know more then I do and the evidence of the tribes obviously can't lie. Cirsassian, Turks, and Egyptians all fought in Ibrahim's army I think.


A lot of Turks have those features, including most people in my family. If you visit Turkey you'll see that they're not uncommon whatsoever.
Back to Top
Sikander View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 12-Aug-2004
Location: Portugal
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 198
  Quote Sikander Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Oct-2007 at 22:10
Nope, you missunderstood me! Smile
 
You refered Portuguese expansion in East Africa and Arabia; and I said that the Portuguese never had territorial expansion projects in those parts for they were too few and their enemies too many.
 
So, the only possible expansion was in Brasil and, into a certain extent, in Morocco (though it was a short-lived project).
 
As for West Africa, territorial expansion was nimble despite some battles in the Angolan mainland. Expansion would have to wait until the late XIX /early XX century.
 
Cheers
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Oct-2007 at 21:21
Hello Sikander
 
Soryy butit was you who misubderstood me, I meant in my earlier post the Portuguese holdings in east africa and Arabia not west africa and Brazil, the rest I agree with you on it.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Sikander View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 12-Aug-2004
Location: Portugal
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 198
  Quote Sikander Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Oct-2007 at 12:37
Al-Jassas wrote:

"Unlike what Sikander is proposing, the Portuguese's power never was extended beyond the sea cost, any attempt to occupy the interior they were defeated. "

- Huuummm, it's interesting as I have never proposed that... got to read it better, old chap!
Land dominance was contested in Morocco and into a certain extent in Angola, and clearly achieved in Brasil only.
As for the Indian Ocean, the Portuguese were to few even to dream about creating a continental power. The Portuguese project consisted in keeping coastal fortresses in order to choke competitor's commercial routes and liberate, or rather, secure, the Portuguese routes through East Africa (therefore the importance of Mombaa and the importance of Aden, which the Portuguese failed to take). Therefore, such small battles with the Arabs would serve only to secure a streach of land around the fortresses.
The land intervention in the Red Sea was to help a Christian ally, not to dominate the land.
 
As for the Omani surge in the XVII/XVIII cent., this was largely due to three main factors:
1 - An improvement in naval construction techniques by the Arabs (perhaps with European - English - help);
2- The empoverishment of the Eastern Portuguese Empire which by then consisted only in Goa, Macau and Timor/Flores. Therefore, at a time when the Portuguese in the Indian Ocean was nothing but a shadow of its former glory, it was easy to wage war against them;
3 - The global shift in the Portuguese Empire towards Brasil which then became the main area of concern in terms of economy, policies and investments.
Back to Top
andrew View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 31-May-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 253
  Quote andrew Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Oct-2007 at 02:28
Originally posted by Al Jassas

Hello Andrew
 
Sorry but the historical accounts by historians who witnessed the invasion say otherwise and the people who were left also indicate otherwise. In the south of the Country in Asir region in the beautiful city of Al-Namas there is a large tribe called Bani Shahr. one of their biggest clans are knows as "Al-Asasblah" "العسابلة". These are the descendents of Turkish soldiers who invaded that country with Ibrahim and since they are not Arab, they were forbidden to marry into other tribes or to marry their daughters to other tribes which made them inbreed and keep their distinct features until today, Blue eyes, a minority green, and Blond hair. These people take pride for being "Turks" but their features are more in line with Germanic types than Slavic. Descendents of raped women in other places still possess distinct feautures only found in Europe.
 
Al-Jassas
 
Ineteresting. Still however, Turks don't possess those traits you mentioned. They had fairly dark hair and most have brown eyes like my mom's dad did. I'm sure Egypt was mixed also and became generally lighter then the average Arab but you obviously know more then I do and the evidence of the tribes obviously can't lie. Cirsassian, Turks, and Egyptians all fought in Ibrahim's army I think.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Oct-2007 at 00:35
Hello Andrew
 
Sorry but the historical accounts by historians who witnessed the invasion say otherwise and the people who were left also indicate otherwise. In the south of the Country in Asir region in the beautiful city of Al-Namas there is a large tribe called Bani Shahr. one of their biggest clans are knows as "Al-Asasblah" "العسابلة". These are the descendents of Turkish soldiers who invaded that country with Ibrahim and since they are not Arab, they were forbidden to marry into other tribes or to marry their daughters to other tribes which made them inbreed and keep their distinct features until today, Blue eyes, a minority green, and Blond hair. These people take pride for being "Turks" but their features are more in line with Germanic types than Slavic. Descendents of raped women in other places still possess distinct feautures only found in Europe.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Byzantine Emperor View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Kastrophylax kai Tzaousios

Joined: 24-May-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1800
  Quote Byzantine Emperor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Oct-2007 at 21:29
This topic has been re-opened.  I have cleaned up the offensive material from the incident that occurred the other day.  At the same time, however, I have tried to preserve the integrity of the discussion that preceeded the incident by leaving the original posts.  I would ask that everyone be respectful of each other and each other's level of understanding of the topic at hand.  If we do this, I believe that we can all learn something and ultimately have a more fruitful discussion.  Thanks! Smile
Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2007 at 20:01
Back to the subject, the book I am reading now details the economic reasons behind the Ottoman expansion to the south and the east.

The main resource of Stefanos Yerasimos is Fernand Braudel, the famous 'longue duree' analyst. Braudel writes that for ages, the main source of gold fuelling the Mediterranean trade came from Africa through the Sahara desert. It arrived in Northern African states and entered the trade from there.

By the time Ottomans first came around, the Italian city states dominated the Med trade. However, the Portuguese (who don't have a coast on the Med) reached Western Africa and soon the gold started to flow to the Portuguese ports in W. Africa, rather than through the Sahara to the Med. This caused a major poblem for Med trade.

Only place which still had some gold income was Egypt, due to the gold coming from Sudan. And Ottomans knew that. That's the main reason why they turned south after consolidating the Black Sea trade in the 15th century.

However, after the Ottoman's expansion into Egypt (by 1520), the Portuguese troublemakers took Hormuz this time, and closed the straits. This action disrupted the Med trade to no end. So the Ottomans expanded to Basra and the Red Sea, and challenged the Portuguese in the Indian Ocean. Ottomans were not very successful in sending the Portuguese packing for good, but the campaign managed to break their hold on the Eastern trade through Basra and the Red Sea.

Soon afterwards, the long suffering trade in the Med flourished and reached record levels. Suddenly domination of Med became very important, and the rival powers led by Spain joined their forces against the dominant power in the med, the Ottoman Empire.

To sum it up, Ottoman expansion to the south and east was driven by the desire for gold and to keep the trade routes open. It is a huge lie that the Ottomans were blocking the Med trade so that the Europeans had to find new trade routes. In reality, Ottomans were trying to vitalise the Med trade, while non-Med countries such as Portugal, England and Netherlands were trying to undermine it.

Also, Ottoman campaigns in the Indian ocean were not total failures. In fact they achieved their objective of breaking the Portuguese block and resuming the eastern trade. However, this success costed them their dominance in the Med, as it caused Spain to turn its attention to the Med to create a huge anti-Ottoman alliance.
Back to Top
andrew View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 31-May-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 253
  Quote andrew Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2007 at 19:43
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

When we realized that they were weak after we had to do all the winning in the Greek War of Independence we nearly took Istanbul and if it had not been for the miraculous help of the Russian courts to save the Ottomans Egypt would've been the dominant power in the Middle East.


Real dominant power in the Middle East was the Great Powers. They would never allow Egypt to become powerful. And they did not.

As to Istanbul, it was impossible to take for Egypt. Russian intervention was not miraculous, Istanbul is an important place, and Great Powers intervened whenever it was threatened. Not even a Great Power could have taken Istanbul, because the others would prevent it.

Also, Egyptian military was not powerful enough to take Istanbul, even without Great Power intervention. Taking Istanbul is easier said than done. In history whenever someone defeats the Ottomans, they start dreaming about marching to Istanbul. This has happened after Lepanto, Vienna, 1770s war with Russia. But it never happened.

Istanbul is very very easy to defend, and that is not a coincidence. That's one reason why it was chosen as the new capital of the Roman Empire by Constantine. Even the allies failed to take it in World War I, let alone Egypt. Only Russia in 19th century was capable of doing that.
 
After the Battle of Ridaneyah the Ottoman capital was left undefended. All Egypt had to do was walk into Istanbul and take it. The Imperialist powers realized Egypt's growing power and the Ottomans had to give up Syria in order for Egypt not to take Istanbul, it was more then a possibiltiy. The Ottomans looked to diplomacy for a reason, had they been able to defend Istanbul they would've but they needed help and strangely enought their traditional enemy, the Russians, did help them. After the British defeat in the first Anglo-Egyptian war in 1806 they realized Egypt really was no cupcake.WinkSmile
Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355
  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2007 at 19:30
When we realized that they were weak after we had to do all the winning in the Greek War of Independence we nearly took Istanbul and if it had not been for the miraculous help of the Russian courts to save the Ottomans Egypt would've been the dominant power in the Middle East.


Real dominant power in the Middle East was the Great Powers. They would never allow Egypt to become powerful. And they did not.

As to Istanbul, it was impossible to take for Egypt. Russian intervention was not miraculous, Istanbul is an important place, and Great Powers intervened whenever it was threatened. Not even a Great Power could have taken Istanbul, because the others would prevent it.

Also, Egyptian military was not powerful enough to take Istanbul, even without Great Power intervention. Taking Istanbul is easier said than done. In history whenever someone defeats the Ottomans, they start dreaming about marching to Istanbul. This has happened after Lepanto, Vienna, 1770s war with Russia. But it never happened.

Istanbul is very very easy to defend, and that is not a coincidence. That's one reason why it was chosen as the new capital of the Roman Empire by Constantine. Even the allies failed to take it in World War I, let alone Egypt. Only Russia in 19th century was capable of doing that.
Back to Top
andrew View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 31-May-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 253
  Quote andrew Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2007 at 18:46
Originally posted by Al Jassas

Hello to you all

Actually the Saudi egyptian wars were fairly brutal and lots of bloodshed occured but in general the Saudis did use primative cannons and muskets but they preferred to use swords especially during engagements with the enemy. Early in the first campaign Tusun was defeated several times in Hejaz and Qassim (my tribe massacred the poor devils after luring them to well which they already poisned) and most famously by the tribe of Buqum who were lead by a woman. The last incident was the last straw and Ibrahim was put into command. Saudi's were very innovative in these wars but unfortunately their innovation only increased the reprisals after defeat. In the Siege of Unaizah, a tunnel was dug directly beneath the camp of the egyptians and it was filled with gunpowder (they ran out of cannon balls and the devil stopped shelling so that they can not use the balls falling on them against his). The explosion took over 1000 men dead immediatly and when the city fell Ibrahim Pasha allowed his men to rape women and children and to this day you can see people from Qassim with blue and green eyes and brown hair.
I have pictures of old arsenals that belong to several tribal leaders and ordinary men but I do not have a scanner to upload them.
 
AL-Jassas
 
Al Jassas, Ibrahim Pasha used Egyptians and Black Africans instead of Turks in the army. Egypt, at that time brought about the modernization by Muhammad Ali Pasha, made Egypt a world power and a big contestant to the Ottoman Empire at that time. We used advanced French military and engineering techniques which gave us a decisive advantage against the Middle East, even under the Ottomans who modernized along German lines.
 
Also, the Ottomans used the Egyptian empire as puppeteer to fulfill their demands. They knew a war against the Arabs would lead to bloodshed into what was already a backwards empire so they used used us to do their dirty work. When we realized that they were weak after we had to do all the winning in the Greek War of Independence we nearly took Istanbul and if it had not been for the miraculous help of the Russian courts to save the Ottomans Egypt would've been the dominant power in the Middle East.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.