[christkv]

I’ve always wondered if the Ottoman Empire in many ways was the root of the problem as it traded stability of empire over anything else.

[keiferski]

Al-Jazari lived centuries before the Ottomans existed.

Otherwise, having studied the Ottomans extensively, I wouldn’t say they chose stability over anything else. Their slow downfall was due more to a gradual fossilization of their institutions. For example, the Janissaries went from a highly-trained elite force to essentially a social club that everyone wanted to join. The sultans themselves also gradually became less competent.

Also of note is that the Ottomans were initially on the cutting edge of military technology and even exported quite a lot of it to the Mughals, who then had an advantage over their opponents. So, they certainly weren’t “behind” technologically.

Pretty much the same pattern as any empire, really. Initial warrior class conquers land, their immediate descendants develop a refined culture, and it’s all downhill from there as following generations aim but fail to recapture the magic.

[Apocryphon]

> Their slow downfall was due more to a gradual fossilization of their institutions.

Sounds like an inevitable phase in the life cycle of empires.

[christkv]

Exactly the fossilization of the institutions more interested in maintaining the status quo. You saw the same in the Roman Empire which stagnated.

The chaos of the mess of Europe forced innovation and exploration of ideas at the cost of immense amounts of wars instability.

[selimthegrim]

Two black marks in my book

Selim I banning the printing press and and destruction of Taqiuddin’s observatory under Murad III

[Cyph0n]

The printing press ban probably had a huge impact. It was much easier to spread ideas if you didn’t have to transcribe them by hand.