Parallel Paths in History: Tanzimat Restoration of Ottoman and Meiji Restoration of Japan
In this article series I will write on the similarities of both the Tanzimat Reforms starting in 1839 and the Meiji Restoration of 1868, is that both Empires opened to Westernization.
Introduction
The Tanzimat Restoration of the Ottoman Empire and the Meiji Restoration of Japan are two landmark periods in the history of their respective regions, characterized by sweeping reforms aimed at modernization and adaptation to global changes. Despite being geographically and culturally distinct, these two historical movements share striking similarities in their objectives, methods, and impacts. In this article I will delve into the parallels between the Tanzimat and Meiji Restorations, shedding light on their significance and exploring the academic discourse surrounding their comparative study.
Tanzimat Restoration
The Tanzimat was the defining course of Ottoman politics for at least 50 years; and it transformed a failed state torn by violence and wars into a resurgent, viable Power under the rule of the restored law. Its affect felt in every aspect of the daily life, from civillian right to government rule, from literature to art.
The impact of Tanzimat was felt across various domains, including transportation with the introduction of railways, improvements in postal and telegraph services, advancements in medicine, reforms in the legal system, modernization of education, and the promotion of civil rights.
In the Tanzimat period, literature produced was later referred to as Tanzimat Literature. Western-style literary genres such as story and novel emerged for the first time, also serving as tools for educating society. For instance, authors would sometimes digress from the main plot of a story to discuss table manners. Employing tutors to teach foreign languages within households became fashionable.
Pre-Tanzimat Era
In the early 1800s, preceding the Tanzimat era, the Ottoman Empire found itself in a state of disarray reminiscent of Europe’s Medieval Era. Its provinces had slipped from direct imperial control, falling under the dominion of local potentates known as “derebeys,” who wielded unchecked power over the populace, often defying orders from Istanbul. Under their rule, life and death hung at their whims, while the state struggled to collect taxes or enforce laws. The once-proud military had devolved into a feudal entity by the late 18th century, only to be reconstituted in 1826.
Entering the Tanzimat Era
This imperial decree reinstated the rule of law, stripped provincial authorities of their arbitrary power over life and death, and abolished tax farms that had paralyzed the state. It heralded a new era of governance, empowering local advisory councils and championing meritocracy over nepotism. Education became a cornerstone, with the establishment of state schools and a commitment to proper learning for all. Furthermore, the Fermanı declared equality before the law and safeguarded the property and livelihood of every subject.
Second Phase: The grand promise of the Gülhane Hatt-i Humayun
A second phase of the Tanzimat started in 1856, after the exit of Mustafa Reshid Pasha from office, when a second generation of more overtly liberal reformers, most prominently Emin Ali Pasha entered the government.
The grand promises of the Gülhane Hatt-i Humayun, or the Rose-bower Imperial Rescript, had to be wrested from the grasp of tyrannical provincial elites. From 1826 onwards, the Sultanate embarked on a campaign akin to reconquest, spanning from Bosnia to Greece, Egypt to Libya, Iraq to Syria. It aimed to depose feudal lords and usher in a nascent rule of law and administration directly from Constantinople, often reclaiming authority after a lapse of over a century.
The second phase of Tanzimat focused on consolidating and institutionalizing the reforms initiated in the initial phase. This period saw the establishment of key institutions, such as the Ottoman parliament (Meclis-i Mebusan) and the Council of State (Meclis-i Vâlâ), aimed at promoting constitutional governance and centralizing authority. Additionally, efforts were made to modernize the legal system, education, and military, further advancing the process of Westernization and modernization within the Ottoman Empire.
New Imperial Rescript (Islahat Fermanı)
The new Imperial rescript (Hatt-i Humayun), the Islahat Fermanı, pursued further policies of religious equality and attempted to integrate the religious institutions of the millets into the state service; it guaranteed non-discrimination in employment and the civil service, as well as explicity granting freedom of religion (the death penalty for apostasy had already been abolished in 1839). It also promised the mixed religious composition of all courts of justice dealing with intra-communal cases, as well as the introduction of further liberal reforms in the legal system.
Western Pressure
Western pressure played a significant role in driving the Tanzimat reforms. Encounters with Western powers highlighted the technological, economic, and administrative advancements of the West, prompting the Ottoman Empire to modernize in order to maintain its sovereignty and compete on a global scale. The pressure from Western nations, coupled with internal calls for reform, catalyzed the Tanzimat period, leading to extensive restructuring efforts across various aspects of Ottoman society and governance.
The abolition of the state monopolies in the name of free marketry eased the economic penetration of British interests. The edict also dictated the abolition of the ‘jizya and the institution of equal military service for Christians and Jews from which the ‘jizya had once exempted them: after massive popular discontent with this, the ‘jizya was brought back under an ostensibly different name, the haraç, a voluntary tax which in practice exempted minorities from military service.
Similarities
Main Similarities
- In both Restorations, an effort to unite the nation in response to the Western challenge, and the leaders of the restoration created a civic ideology centered around the emperor.
- In both Restorations, there exists an elite military class resistant to reform, whose removal marks the true beginning of significant change (Janissarie Class and Samurai Class)
- In both Restorations, by providing a new environment of political and financial security, the government made possible investment in new industries and technologies.
- In both Restorations, the governments also introduced a national educational system and a constitution, creating an elected parliament, called Meclis-i Mebusan in Ottoman and Diet in Japan.
Similarities in Objectives
Both the Tanzimat and Meiji Restorations were responses to external pressures and internal challenges, driven by the desire to strengthen their respective empires and ensure their survival in a rapidly changing world. The primary objective of both movements was modernization, with a focus on political, economic, social, and cultural reforms. In the Ottoman Empire, the Tanzimat aimed to centralize authority, codify laws, and promote equality among citizens regardless of religion or ethnicity. Similarly, the Meiji Restoration in Japan sought to abolish feudalism, centralize power under the emperor, and emulate Western models of governance, industry, and education.
Similarities in the Methods of Reform
Both the Tanzimat and Meiji Restorations employed a combination of top-down decrees and bottom-up initiatives to implement reforms effectively. In the Ottoman Empire, the edicts of the Tanzimat were promulgated by the central government but required the cooperation of provincial governors, religious leaders, and societal elites for successful implementation. Similarly, the Meiji government in Japan utilized a mix of imperial decrees, administrative reforms, and grassroots efforts to modernize the country’s infrastructure, economy, and education system. Both movements also emphasized the importance of learning from and adapting Western ideas and technologies while preserving essential aspects of their own cultural heritage.
Similarities of Impact and Legacy
The Tanzimat and Meiji Restorations had profound and lasting effects on the political, economic, and social landscapes of their respective regions. In the Ottoman Empire, the Tanzimat ushered in an era of unprecedented legal, administrative, and educational reforms, laying the groundwork for the eventual transition to a constitutional monarchy. Similarly, the Meiji Restoration transformed Japan from a feudal society into a modern industrialized nation, propelling it onto the world stage as a global economic and military power. The legacies of both movements continue to shape the identities and trajectories of modern-day Turkey and Japan, underscoring their enduring significance in world history.
Academic Discourse
The parallels between the Tanzimat and Meiji Restorations have been the subject of scholarly inquiry and comparative analysis by historians, political scientists, and sociologists. Numerous academic papers and research articles have explored various aspects of these two movements, examining their causes, dynamics, and consequences from multidisciplinary perspectives. Some scholars have highlighted the role of leadership, social mobilization, and external factors in driving reforms, while others have focused on the cultural, religious, and ideological dimensions of modernization efforts in the Ottoman Empire and Japan. Overall, the comparative study of the Tanzimat and Meiji Restorations offers valuable insights into the complexities of nation-building, state-society relations, and globalization processes in the 19th century and beyond.
A few examples of these studies;
A Study by The University of Wisconsin , 1986
Modernisation in the Tanzimat Period and the Ottoman Empire, International Journal of Social and Humanistic Sciences
Part II
In next Part, Rebirth of a Nation: The Meiji Restoration I will continue this articles serie with a closer look in Meiji Restoration of Japan and its similarities to Tanzimat Restoration.
