Abstract:Spanish and Ottoman empires had more similarities that could be found at first glance. Both experienced the take-off as leading force in Europe and Asia respectively, being for a while the most fearful and powerful states during XVI, faced economic and political blunders in XVII century and slightly ended with stagnation in XVIII century (as conventional wisdom says). Using comparative method and cultural analysis, article tries to answer a question – how unique or regular was that issues which stroke Spain and Ottoman Empires, how deeply they were engaged in so called decline narrative, created in XIX century European historiography and is it possible to create common trend for empire`s stagnation using not only historical sociology method (sociology of revolution used by Jack Goldstone and Teda Skocpole) and world-system analysis provided by Immanuel Wallerstein, with emphasis on history of ideas or begriffsgeschichte by Reinhardt Kosseleck. Main results are going to provide a more correct view on the status of Spanish and Turkish Empires during the XVIII century. Despite that Ottomans and Spaniards had obvious differences in political distribution, economic capabilities, warfare tactics and external actions, almost simultaneous decline was based on clear and exact reasons: lack of industrialization (production with high surplus value), hush incorporation of Ottoman and Spanish Empires into World-Economy, lack of defending tariffs, ineffective fiscal system and policy, devastating and lasting wars, decreasing price for agricultural products, down warding Kondratieff cycle, rigid political and social units, which constrain strict political actions. These gaps made the Empire’s decline possible notwithstanding those problems which they had previously. Oppositely, major European states (England, France, Prussia) had made reversed actions, which took a long time, but made European “take-off” inevitable, assured their economical breakaway to further domination over the Ottomans and Spaniards as well.

Locating the Ottomans in Napoleon’s World

“With the Tatar Barbarism of Batu:” References to History in Russian Works Concerning Napoleon’s Campaign, 1812–1814

Egypt and Egyptology in the Course of Expansion and Competition of the European Powers

Bonaparte and the astronomers of Brera Observatory

The Ottoman Empire and International Law

[The three lives of the Count de Bonneval, alias Osman Pasha (1675-1747)]

War, Economy and Utopianism: Russia after the Napoleonic Era

Napoleon’s Discordant Historical Legacy: Republican Hero or Opportunistic Tyrant?

The Napoleon mystique and British poets

The Religious Element of the Myth of Napoleon in the Novel Crime and Punishment: The Image of “Napoleon-Prophet” and the Mystic Sects of Russian Schismatics, Worshippers of Napoleon

The Eastern Policy of France in the Second Half of the 17th — Second Half of the 18th Century

Why Did Napoleon Do It? Hubris, Security Dilemmas, Brinksmanship, and the 1812 Russian Campaign

The Mission of Johann Jakob Kurz von Senftenau to Constantinople (1623 – 1624) and the Challenges for the Habsburg Diplomats on the Bosphorus after the Long Turkish War

A Foreign Artist and a Russian War: Peter von Hess, a Case Study in Imperial Patronage and National Identity

Inevitable Choice for Survival: The Last Ottoman Grand Strategy

Surveilling the Revolutionaries: Armenian Revolutionaries, Spatial Politics, and Intelligence Activities in the Late Nineteenth-Century Ottoman Empire

The Ottoman International System: Power Projection, Interconnectedness, and the Autonomy of Frontier Polities

Cosmography, Local History, and National Sentiment: François de Belleforest and the History of Paris

‘What have the Ottomans ever done for us?’ Why history matters for politics in the Arab Middle East

“Twins in Spite of Themselves”: Spanish and Ottoman Empires’ “Issues of Decline” in XVIIIth Century

THE OTTOMAN POSITION ON THE RUSSO JAPANESE WAR IN THE FAR EAST 1896-1905