How did the reform movements of the 19th century redefine the relationship between states and society? Did reform look the same in the Ottoman Empire, Egypt, and Persia or was it different? Did people necessarily experience the reforms as the states themselves intended (in the Hatt-i Sharif, for example)?
1. Write an initial post (maximum 100 words) that makes a concise observation or point on the basis of one or more of the readings.
I need an answer to this question from these books specifically and only. you can choose one of them. just an answer to the question no more than 100 words.
Gelvin, The Modern Middle East, Ch. 5 (Hatt-i Sharif and Islahat Fermani)
Burke/Yaghoubian, Struggle and Survival, Chs. 2, 3, 4, and 5
also, a substantive reply to this no more than 75 words.
The reform movements of the nineteenth century redefined the relationship between the state and society in means of economics and religion. Along with that the reform movements in the Ottoman state itself was drastically different from those that occurred in Egypt and Persia. The people themselves did not experience the reforms as it was intended especially when the Ottomans targeted the Silk industry in Syria. The thing that took to my attention was the story of the weaver Ahmad in chapter 4 when he realized that the wages have been cut from 16 to 13 piasters. From this Ahmad felt that the reform robbed him from his right.