TheTanzimat[a] (Ottoman Turkish: تنظيمات,Turkish:Tanzimât, lit. 'Reorganization') was a period of liberalreforms in theOttoman Empire that began with theGülhane Edict of 1839 and ended with theFirst Constitutional Era in 1876. Driven by reformist statesmen such asMustafa Reşid Pasha,Mehmed Emin Âlî Pasha, andFuad Pasha, under SultansAbdülmecid I andAbdülaziz, the Tanzimat sought to reversethe empire's decline by modernizing legal, military, and administrative systems while promotingOttomanism (equality for all subjects). Though it introduced secular courts, modern education, and infrastructure like railways,[2] the reforms faced resistance from conservative clerics, exacerbated ethnic tensions in the Balkans, and saddled the empire with crippling foreign debt. The Tanzimat’s legacy remains contested: some historians credit it with establishing a powerful national government, while others argue it acceleratedimperial fragmentation.[3][4]
Different functions of government received reform, were completely reorganized, or started from scratch. Among institutions that received significant attention throughout this period included legislative functions, secularization and codification of the legal system, crackdowns on the slave trade, education, property law, law enforcement, and the military. Ottoman statesmen also worked with reformers of the many confessional communities of the empire,millets, to codify — and in some cases democratize — their confessional governments.
The Tanzimat built on previous reform efforts of SultanMahmud II. During its height, thePorte's bureaucracy overshadowed the sultans. After a period of chaos following Âlî Pasha's death in 1871, the spirit of reorganization turned towards the imperialsocial contract, in the form of the1876 Ottoman Constitution, written byMidhat Pasha. The Tanzimat Period is considered to have ended with the accession ofAbdul Hamid II during theGreat Eastern Crisis (1875–1878).[5] However, reform efforts continued into theHamidian,Young Turk, andOne-Party period.
Reformists likeMustafa Reşid Pasha, who served as ambassador to London and Paris, argued that adopting European-style institutions could restore imperial power. Their ideas crystallized in theGülhane Edict (1839), which promised: Security of life, property, and honor for all subjects, Fair taxation and conscription, - Public trials and abolition oftax farming.
The ambitious project was launched to combat the slow decline of the empire that had seen its borders shrink and its strength wane in comparison to the European powers. There were both internal and external reasons for the reforms.
The Edict of Gülhane was based on the principles of traditional court philosophy, with Butrus Abu-Manneh arguing that there was no Western influence in the edict;[7] however, historianStanford Jay Shaw suggests that the Gulhane Edict was directly influenced by the ideals codified by the 1789 FrenchDeclaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen.[8]
The primary purpose of the Tanzimat was to reform the military by modernizing and taking inspiration from European armies. The traditional Ottoman army, theJanissaries, had fallen from grace in terms of military prestige and a European-inspired reconstruction was a necessary change to be made.[9] The Ottoman Empire consisted of a multitude of different cultures and the secondary priorities of the Tanzimat reforms were aimed at balancing the social structure that had previously favoured Muslim subjects. Another vital section of these reforms was the abolition ofİltizam, or land-tenure agreements.[10]
Internally, the Ottoman Empire hoped that abolishing themillet system would create a more centralized government, as well as increased legitimacy of the Ottoman rule, thus gaining direct control of its citizens. Non-muslims were partially governed by their ethnarchs or receivedberats of protection from foreign countries. Another major hope was that being more open to various demographics would attract more people into the empire. There was fear of internal strife between Muslims andnon-Muslims, and allowing more religious freedom to all was supposed to diminish this threat. Giving more rights to the Christians within the empire was considered likely to reduce the danger of outside intervention on their behalf.[citation needed]
On November 3, 1839, SultanAbdulmejid I issued ahatt-i sharif, or imperial edict, called theEdict of Gülhane. The edict gave guarantees to ensure the Ottoman subjects perfect security for their lives, honour, and property. This was followed by several statutes enacting its policies. In the edict the Sultan stated that he wished "to bring the benefits of a good administration to the provinces of the Ottoman Empire through new institutions". The following reforms came about during the Tanzimat period:[18][19]
The Council of Public Education (Meclis-i Maarif-i Umumiye) was established in (1841) as part of the Tanzimat reforms to regulate and modernize the Ottoman educational system. The council played a crucial role in overseeing primary schools and initiating the foundation of higher education institutions likeDarülfünun (House of Sciences).[22]
Reorganization of the army and a regular method of recruiting, levying the army, and fixing the duration of military service (1843–44)
First national identity cards (officially named theMecidiye identity papers, or informallykafa kağıdı (head paper) documents, 1844)[citation needed]
Establishment of a few provincial councils (meclis) attached to governors, a system which soon spread to the rest of the empire (1845)
Institution of a Council of Public Instruction (1845) and the Ministry of Education (Mekatib-i Umumiye Nezareti, 1847, which later became theMaarif Nezareti, 1857)
Coinciding with the Commerce Code, the establishment of commercial courts composed of mixed Turkish and European members, the first secular legal system in the Ottoman Empire (1850)
Establishment of the Academy of Sciences (Encümen-i Daniş) (1851)
Establishment of theŞirket-i Hayriye [tr] which operated the first steam-powered commuter ferries (1851)
Legislative functions of theSupreme Council of Judicial Ordinances (Meclis-i Vâlâ-yı Ahkâm-ı Adliye) passed to the Council of Reorganization (Meclis-i Âli-i Tanzimat) (1854)
First foreign loan borrowed from Britain to finance theCrimean War (1858)
Establishment of the modernMunicipality of Constantinople (Şehremaneti, 1854) and the City Planning Council (İntizam-ı Şehir Komisyonu, 1855)
Establishment of theOttoman Bank (originally established as theBank-ı Osmanî in 1856, and later reorganized as theBank-ı Osmanî-i Şahane in 1863)[27] and theOttoman Stock Exchange (Dersaadet Tahvilat Borsası, established in 1866)[28]
Permission for private sector publishers and printing firms with theSerbesti-i Kürşad Nizamnamesi (1857)
Establishment of the Refugee Commission (Mihacirin Komisyonu) to resettle refugees from the Caucasus, which built on the Immigration Law of 1857 (1860)
Promulgation of a French inspired Mixed Commercial Code (1861)[31]
Due toMahmud Nedim Pasha's absolutist agenda, the power of the Council of State reduced at the expense of the Judicial Council and a new Reform Commission (Islahat Komisyonu) and a Reduction and Economy Commission to streamline the bureaucracy (Tensikat ve Tasarrufat Komisyonu).Midhat Pasha's entry to the Grand Vizier's office sees these commissions quickly repealed, and the Council of State restored to its powers, and then some. (1872)
TheHatt-ı Şerif of Gülhane, was the first major reform in the Tanzimat reforms under the government of sultan Abdulmejid and a crucial event in the movement towards secularization. The decree, named after the rosehouse (gülhane) on the grounds of theTopkapi Palace, abolishedtax farming. It also created a bureaucratic system of taxation with salaried tax collectors. This reflects the centralizing effects of the Tanzimat reforms. Additionally, the Edict ofGülhane imposed forced military conscription within the administrative districts based on their population size.
However, the most significant clause of theGülhane decree was the one enforcing the rule of law for all subjects, including non-Muslims, by guaranteeing the right to life and property for all. This put an end to thekul system, which allowed the ruler's servants to be executed or have their property confiscated at his desire. These reforms sought to establish legal and social equality for all Ottoman citizens. The reformset spiritus eliminated themillet system in the Ottoman Empire. The millet system created religiously based communities that operated autonomously, so people were organized into societies, some of them often receiving privileges. This clause terminated the privileges of these communities and constructed a society where all followed the same law.
The new reforms called for an almost complete reconstruction of public life in the Ottoman Empire. Under the reconstruction, a system of state schools was established to produce government clerics. Ottomans were encouraged to enroll. Each province was organized so that each governor would have an advisory council and specified duties in order to better serve the territory. The new reforms also called for a modern financial system with acentral bank,treasury bonds and adecimal currency. Finally, the reforms implemented the expansion of roads, canals and rail lines for better communication and transportation.
The reaction to the edict was not entirely positive. Christians in the Balkans refused to support the reforms because they wanted an autonomy that became more difficult to achieve under centralized power. In fact, its adoption spurred some provinces to seek independence by rebelling. It took strong British backing in maintaining Ottoman territory to ensure that the reforms were instated.
TheReform Edict of 1856 was intended to carry out the promises of the Tanzimat. The Edict is very specific about the status of non-Muslims, making it possible "to see it as the outcome of a period of religious restlessness that followed the Edict of 1839". Officially, part of the Tanzimat's goal was to make the state intolerant to forced conversion to Islam, also making the execution ofapostates from Islam illegal. Despite the official position of the state in the midst of the Tanzimat reforms, this tolerance of non-Muslims seems to have been seriously curtailed, at least until the Reform Edict of 1856. The Ottoman Empire had tried many different ways to reach out to non-Muslims. First it tried to reach out to them by giving all non-Muslims an option to apply forDhimmi status. Having Dhimmi status gave non-Muslims the ability to live in the Ottoman Empire and own property, but this ability was not without special taxes (jizya).
For the "Ottoman ruling elite, 'freedom of religion' meant 'freedom to defend their religion'".[32]
The Tanzimat introduced secular law codes to replace traditionalsharia-based jurisprudence: -1858 Ottoman Penal Code: Modeled on France’sNapoleonic Code, it abolished punishments like limb amputation for theft, replacing them with fines and prison terms. Religious courts retained control over family law.[33] -Commercial Code (1850): Standardized trade laws to attract European investors but weakened Ottoman guilds, leading to artisanal protests in cities likeBursa.[34]
Foreign loans for infrastructure (e.g., £200 million borrowed from British and French banks by 1875) led to bankruptcy in 1875. In 1881, European powers established theOttoman Public Debt Administration to control revenue streams like tobacco taxes.[35]
Reforms failed to curb separatist movements especially in the Balkans. The 1875Herzegovina Uprising was partly fueled by tax grievances among Christian peasants.[36] The 1856 Imperial Reform Edict mandated military service for non-Muslims, but exemptions could be purchased withbedl-i askeri, leading to resentment among poorer Christians.[37] In practice however Christians were not expected to serve in the Ottoman army, with the door only opening for their service in 1909.
Conservative clerics opposed secular courts and schools, fearing the erosion of Islamic authority.[38] Muslim peasants and artisans resented losing tax exemptions and competing with European goods.[39] While a theme of Tanzimat reform was introducing secular law to aspects of life, Muslim conservatives won a victory through civil law codification through the introduction of theMecelle, aHanefi-Sharia code adapted for a modern bureaucracy.
Although the Edict of Gülhane and the Tanzimat provided strong guidelines for society, they were not a constitution and did not replace the authority of the sultan.
Still, the Tanzimat reforms had far-reaching effects overall. Those educated in the schools established during the Tanzimat period included major personalities of thenation states that would develop from the Ottoman Empire. The system was ultimately undone by negotiations with the Great Powers following theCrimean War. As part of the Charter of 1856, European powers demanded a much stronger sovereignty for ethnic communities within the empire, differing from the Ottomans, who envisioned equality meaning identical treatment under the law for all citizens. That served to strengthen the Christian middle class, increasing their economic and political power.[citation needed]
The reforms peaked in 1876 with the implementation of an Ottoman constitution checking the autocratic powers of the Sultan. The details of this period are covered under theFirst Constitutional Era. Although the new SultanAbdul Hamid II signed the first constitution, he quickly turned against it.
HistorianHans-Lukas Kieser has argued that the reforms led to "the rhetorical promotion of equality of non-Muslims with Muslims on paper vs. the primacy of Muslims in practice" (see TanzimatDualism); other historians have argued that the decreased ability of non-Muslims to assert their legal rights during this period led to the land seizure and emigration.[41] Part of the reform policy was an economic policy based on theTreaty of Balta Liman of 1838. Many changes were made to improve civil liberties, but many Muslims saw them as a foreign influence on the world of Islam. That perception complicated reformist efforts made by the state.[42] During the Tanzimat period, the government's series of constitutional reforms led to a fairly modernconscripted army, banking system reforms, the replacement of religious law with secular law[43] andguilds with modern factories.
Some scholars argue that from the Muslim population's traditional Islamic view, the Tanzimat's fundamental change regarding non-Muslims, from a status of a subjugated population (dhimmi) to that of equal subjects, was in part responsible for theHamidian massacres and subsequentArmenian genocide. According to this view, the government's allocation of more equality to non-Muslims conflicted with the Muslim's population's traditional values, thereby spurring violent reactions.[44]By the mid-19th century, approximately 35% of the Ottoman Empire’s population was non-Muslim.[45]
InLebanon, the Tanzimat reforms were intended to return to the tradition of equality for all subjects before the law. However, theSublime Porte assumed that the underlying hierarchical social order would remain unchanged. Instead, the upheavals of reform would allow for different understandings of the goals of the Tanzimat. The elites inMount Lebanon, in fact, interpreted the Tanzimat far differently from one another, leading toethno-religious uprisings among newly emancipated Maronites. As a result, "European and Ottoman officials engaged in a contest to win the loyalty of the local inhabitants — the French by claiming to protect theMaronites; the British, theDruze; and the Ottomans by proclaiming the sultan's benevolence toward all his religiously equal subjects."[46]
InPalestine, land reforms, especially the change in land ownership structure via theOttoman Land Law of 1858, allowedRussian andYemeni Jews to buy land, thus enabling them to immigrate there under thefirst Aliya. In order to boost its tax base, the Ottoman state required Arabs in Palestine, as elsewhere, to register their lands for the first time. As a rule thefellahin didn't trust the ailing regime, fearing that registration would only lead to higher taxation andconscription. Prevailing illiteracy among the fellahin meant in the end that many localmukhtars were able to collectively register village lands under their own name. Thus, they were able to later claim ownership and to sell the local peasants' lands out from under their feet to the new Jewish immigrants, as they themselves relocated permanently to Syria or Turkey.[47] Alternately, rich Christian or Muslim families, the class of the 'Effendis', were able to accumulate large amounts of land which they exploited by themselves or sold on.
The Tanzimat reforms, though designed to stabilize and modernize the Ottoman Empire, had profound and often destabilizing political consequences that reshaped the empire’s trajectory in the 19th century.
The reforms sought to centralize power in Istanbul, dismantling the autonomy of provincial elites (ayans) and religious leaders. This provoked rebellions in regions such as:
Bosnia Vilayet (1850–1851): Local leaders resisted Istanbul’s authority.
Mount Lebanon Mutasarrifate (1860 Druze–Maronite conflict): Religious and local factions rejected Ottoman rule.
Even efforts to modernize infrastructure, such as railways, were perceived as tools of imperial control, deepening distrust in the provinces.[49]
While the Tanzimat promotedOttomanism (equality for all subjects regardless of religion), it inadvertently accelerated ethnic and religious separatism. In theBalkans, Christian communities leveraged new legal rights to demand autonomy, culminating in:
European powers exploited the Tanzimat’s rhetoric of minority rights to justify intervention. TheTreaty of Berlin (1878), following the Ottoman defeat in the Russo-Turkish War, formalized the loss ofBulgaria,Bosnia, andCyprus. Additionally, France and Britain gained oversight over Ottoman reforms, further undermining imperial sovereignty.[51]
Reformist bureaucrats, such as theYoung Ottomans, clashed with conservative clerics and SultanAbdulaziz (r. 1861–1876), who suspended the1876 Constitution within two years. This cycle of reform and repression radicalized factions like theCommittee of Union and Progress (Young Turks), whose 1908 revolution ended Abdul Hamid II’s autocracy but failed to salvage the empire.[52]
From 1838 to 1908, the Ottoman Empire staged its final but doomed struggle for survival. The Tanzimat’s dual allegiance to Western progress and Islamic tradition left it alienating both reformers and traditionalists, accelerating its disintegration.Çelik, Zeynep.The Remaking of Istanbul: Portrait of an Ottoman City in the Nineteenth Century. University of California Press, 1986. ISBN 978-0520082397, p. 12.
^Currently, in French, the word "Tanzimat" is used as a plural, as in "Les Tanzimat". At the time, when French wasa common language for the educated in the empire, the word was often treated in the singular, as "Le Tanzimat".[1]
^Özyüksel, Murat (2014). "The Ottoman Railways: Networks and Discourse".Middle Eastern Studies.50 (6):906–927.doi:10.1080/00263206.2014.933422.
^Cleveland, William L. (2016).A History of the Modern Middle East. Routledge. pp. 71–83.ISBN978-0429495502.
^Faroqhi, Suraiya (1994).The Decline of the Ottoman Empire. Oxford University Press. pp. 110–115.ISBN978-0195091682.{{cite book}}:Check|isbn= value: checksum (help)
^Strohm, Frederic (2016).Istanbul im 19. Jahrhundert. Die Modernisierungsbestrebungen in der osmanischen Hauptstadt – lokale Faktoren und globale Einflüsse [Istanbul in the 19th century. Modernization efforts in the Ottoman capital: local factors and global influence] (in German). pp. 34–.
^"PTT Chronology" (in Turkish). PTT Genel Müdürlüğü. 13 September 2008. Archived fromthe original on 13 September 2008. Retrieved11 February 2013.
^Deringil, Selim (July 2003). "There Is No Compulsion in Religion': On Conversion and Apostasy in the Late Ottoman Empire: 1839–1856".Comparative Studies in Society and History.42 (3):547–575.doi:10.1017/S0010417500002930 (inactive 1 November 2024).S2CID146795365.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of November 2024 (link)
^Rubin, Avi (2011). "Modernity as a Code: The Ottoman Empire and the Global Movement of Codification".Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient.54 (5):844–851.doi:10.1163/156852011X614437 (inactive 2 March 2025).{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of March 2025 (link)
^Quataert, Donald (2002).Ottoman Manufacturing in the Age of the Industrial Revolution. Cambridge University Press. pp. 45–48.ISBN978-0521526074.
^Pamuk, Şevket (1987).The Ottoman Empire and European Capitalism, 1820–1913. Cambridge University Press. pp. 112–120.ISBN978-0521316003.{{cite book}}:Check|isbn= value: checksum (help)
^Jelavich, Barbara (1983).History of the Balkans. Cambridge University Press. pp. 72–75.ISBN978-0521274593.
^Masters, Bruce (2014).Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire. Lynne Rienner. pp. 134–137.ISBN978-1588268890.{{cite book}}:Check|isbn= value: checksum (help)
^Bein, Amit (2007). "The Ottoman Ulema and the Tanzimat Reforms".International Journal of Middle East Studies.39 (4):611–625.doi:10.1017/S002074380707110X (inactive 2 March 2025).{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of March 2025 (link)
^Quataert, Donald (2005).The Ottoman Empire, 1700–1922. Cambridge University Press. pp. 68–70.ISBN978-0521547826.
^Maksudyan, Nazan (2019). "review of This Is a Man's World?: On Fathers and Architects: Talaat Pasha father of modern Turkey, architect of genocide, by Hans-Lukas Kieser, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2018".Journal of Genocide Research.21 (4):540–544.doi:10.1080/14623528.2019.1613816.S2CID181910618.
^Roderic, H. Davison (1990).Essays in Ottoman and Turkish History, 1774–1923 – The Impact of the West.University of Texas Press. pp. 115–116.
^Movsesian, Mark (2010-05-05). "Elusive Equality: The Armenian Genocide and the Failure of Ottoman Legal Reform". Rochester, NY.SSRN1600745.{{cite journal}}:Cite journal requires|journal= (help)
^Karpat, Kemal (1985).Ottoman Population, 1830–1914. University of Wisconsin Press. p. 108.ISBN978-0299091606.
^Makdisi, Ussama (2000). "Corrupting the Sublime Sultanate: The Revolt of Tanyus Shahin in Nineteenth-Century Ottoman Lebanon".Comparative Studies in Society and History.42 (1):180–208.doi:10.1017/S0010417500002644 (inactive 1 November 2024).S2CID143901523.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of November 2024 (link)
^Shafir, Gershon.Land, Labor and the Origins of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 1882–1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
^Hovannisian, Richard G. (ed.).The Armenian People from Ancient to Modern Times. p. 198.
^Abu-Manneh, Butrus.Studies on Islam and the Ottoman Empire in the 19th Century. Isis Press, 2001. ISBN 978-9754281879, pp. 89–94.
^Jelavich, Barbara.History of the Balkans: Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Cambridge University Press, 1983. ISBN 978-0521274586, pp. 72–75.
^Anderson, Matthew S.The Eastern Question, 1774–1923. Macmillan, 1966. ISBN 978-0333026242, pp. 201–207.
^Findley, Carter V.Turkey, Islam, Nationalism, and Modernity. Yale University Press, 2010. ISBN 978-0300152609, pp. 102–115.
Cleveland, William L.; Bunton, Martin P. (4 December 2012).A history of the modern Middle East (Fifth ed.). Boulder, CO.ISBN978-0-8133-4833-9.OCLC813691473.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
Davison, Roderic (1963),Reform in the Ottoman Empire: 1856–1876, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press
Lafi, Nora.The Ottoman Municipal Reforms between Old Regime and Modernity: Towards a New Interpretative Paradigm.OCLC695237486.
Lafi, Nora (2002).Une ville du Maghreb entre ancien régime et réformes ottomanes : genèse des institutions municipales à Tripoli de Barbarie, 1795–1911. Paris: L'Harmattan.ISBN978-2-7475-2616-6.OCLC52813928.
Lafi, Nora.Municipalités méditerranéennes. Les réformes urbaines ottomanes au miroir d'une histoire comparée.OCLC695236822.
Indzhov, Emil (2017).The Bulgarians and the Administrative Reforms in the Ottoman Empire in 50-60 Years at the XIX Century (in Bulgarian). Vol. 56. Avalon.ISBN978-0-8133-4833-9.{{cite book}}:|work= ignored (help)
Creasy, Edward Shepherd (2011).History of the Ottoman Turks : from the beginning of their empire to the present time. British Library, Historic.ISBN978-1-241-43206-5.OCLC942693443.
Costanza, Maurizio (2010).Le mezzaluna sul filo : la riforma ottomana di Mahmûd II (1808–1839) : politica, società, arte e cultura di un grande impero euro-asiatico all'alba della modernità e del confronto con l'Occidente. Venezia: Marcianum Press.ISBN978-88-6512-032-3.OCLC722436035.
Karpat KH. The Transformation of the Ottoman State, 1789-1908. International Journal of Middle East Studies. 1972;3(3):243-281. doi:10.1017/S0020743800025010
.svg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_p733_-_THE_OTTOMAN_PARLIAMENT%2c_1877.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
