The Precarious Throne: Selim III’s Inheritance in 1789

When the young Selim III ascended to the Ottoman throne in 1789, he inherited an empire at a crossroads. The same year that witnessed the storming of the Bastille in Paris found the Ottomans emerging from the disastrous 1787-1792 war with Russia. Though still maintaining most of its territorial expanse – having lost only Hungary, Transylvania, Crimea, and Azov – the empire showed alarming signs of internal decay. Provincial governors (pashas) routinely flouted central authority, wielding unchecked power over life, death, and taxation. Rebellious movements simmered from the Wahhabi strongholds in the Arabian deserts to the Druze mountain communities of Syria and Palestine, while Egypt’s Mamluk beys openly defied Istanbul’s rule.

The empire’s structural weaknesses ran deep. A growing class of hereditary local lords called derebeys (“valley lords”) had emerged, creating a feudal system that would have been unrecognizable to Suleiman the Magnificent two centuries earlier. These provincial strongmen oppressed peasants while undermining the sultan’s authority. Meanwhile, the central government faced chronic financial crises, its tax base eroded by corruption and inefficiency. Against this backdrop, Selim III – educated, reform-minded, and deeply aware of European developments – resolved to implement comprehensive reforms that would go far beyond the cosmetic changes of the earlier “Tulip Period.”

The Nizam-i Jedid: Blueprint for a New Order

Selim’s reform program, collectively known as the “Nizam-i Jedid” (New Order), took inspiration from post-revolutionary France. The name itself came from a letter by Louis XVI that had intrigued the sultan. In a radical departure from Ottoman tradition, Selim adopted consultative methods, soliciting memoranda from 22 key officials (including two Christians) in 1791 and establishing committees to discuss reform proposals.

The Nizam-i Jedid represented the most ambitious reform attempt in Ottoman history, encompassing not just military reorganization but also administrative, economic, and educational reforms. Economic revival stood as a top priority, with plans to:
– Restore currency values after wartime inflation
– Establish government control over grain trade
– Create state-run industries like powder mills and paper factories
– Develop a Muslim merchant marine to break Christian dominance of trade

However, military modernization remained the most urgent concern. Selim, who had written a treatise on artillery before becoming sultan, dispatched envoys to study European armies, particularly Austria’s. French officers became key advisors, training personnel in new military schools that taught gunnery, fortification, and navigation. Remarkably, among early applicants from Paris was a young artillery officer named Napoleon Bonaparte.

Cultural Crosscurrents: The French Revolution’s Unexpected Impact

The French Revolution initially seemed a distant European affair, but its secular ideals gradually permeated Ottoman elite circles. French influence grew through:
– The restored French printing press in Istanbul (1795) producing Enlightenment works
– Military schools using Diderot’s Encyclopédie as textbooks
– French becoming compulsory for all students
– Growing social interaction between French and Turkish speakers

Revolutionary fervor occasionally spilled over dramatically. In 1793, French ships fired salutes near Sarayburnu celebrating the Republic, planting a “tree of liberty” on Ottoman soil while flying flags of nations not allied against France. The Austrian and Prussian ambassadors fumed as local French communities held revolutionary meetings wearing revolutionary symbols.

Yet reactions varied among Ottoman subjects. While some Turkish intellectuals embraced Enlightenment ideas, most conservatives viewed the Revolution as Christian Europe’s internal affair. As Selim’s private secretary Ahmed Efendi wrote in 1792: “May God cause the upheaval in France to spread like syphilis among the enemies of the Empire.” Christian minorities, particularly wealthy Greeks and Armenians, often opposed revolutionary ideas that threatened their economic privileges.

Military Modernization and Its Discontents

Selim’s military reforms proved most controversial. After witnessing European-style troops’ superior firepower, he created new units trained and equipped along French lines, funded by confiscated lands and new taxes on luxury goods. The “Topjis” artillery corps, initially formed from foreign converts and poor Muslims, performed well against rebels in Bulgaria and Rumelia.

By 1805, facing Russian threats, Selim took the radical step of conscripting Janissaries into these new units. This provoked violent resistance. In Edirne, officials attempting to enforce the decree were lynched. When a reformist governor brought new troops from Anatolia, Janissaries crushed them at the Danube front.

The crisis came to a head in 1807 when auxiliary troops (Yamaks) stationed at Bosphorus forts mutinied over new European-style uniforms. Joined by Janissaries, they overturned their campaign kettles (traditional symbol of rebellion) in the Hippodrome. With the reactionary clergy’s support, they:
– Established kangaroo courts that executed reformist officials
– Forced Selim to abolish the Nizam-i Jedid
– Obtained a fatwa deposing the sultan

Selim was imprisoned in the kafes (cage), where he attempted suicide before being murdered during a failed restoration attempt in 1808.

The Legacy of a Reformer Ahead of His Time

Selim III’s tragic end reflected fundamental tensions between reform and tradition. His failure stemmed from:
1. Attempting change within an inflexible system
2. Lacking sufficient popular or institutional support
3. Facing overwhelming conservative opposition from:
– The Janissary corps
– The religious establishment (ulema)
– The corrupt bureaucracy

Yet his reign planted seeds that would later grow. The Tanzimat reformers of the 1830s-1870s would revive many Nizam-i Jedid concepts. French revolutionary ideals – liberty, equality, fraternity – gradually took root in adapted forms within Islamic political thought.

As one Ottoman diplomat later quipped: “Our state is the most powerful. You try to destroy it from outside, we try to destroy it from inside – yet it still stands.” Selim’s story encapsulates this paradox – an empire too resilient to collapse yet too rigid to easily reform, caught between East and West at the dawn of the modern age. His vision of a reformed Ottoman state would only be partially realized by later generations, but his courage in attempting the impossible marks him as one of the empire’s most forward-looking rulers.