Best Podcasts on the Ottoman Empire and its Collapse
The Ottoman Empire’s final decades are among the most consequential in modern history. The collapse of a 600-year-old multiethnic empire — accelerated by military defeats, nationalist revolutions, and a disastrous entry into the First World War — created the modern Middle East. From the Sykes-Picot AgreementSykes-Picot Agreement
Full Description:The 1916 secret pact between Britain and France that partitioned the Ottoman Empire’s Arab provinces into colonial zones of influence. Exposed by the Bolsheviks in 1917, formalized by the San Remo Conference in 1920, and implemented through the League of Nations Mandate system, its borders—drawn without local knowledge or consent—became the boundaries of modern Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon. The agreement’s contradictory promises (McMahon-Hussein, Balfour Declaration) created overlapping claims that have fueled conflict for over a century.
Critical Perspective:Sykes-Picot is not the sole cause of every Middle Eastern conflict, but it is the original wound. Before 1916, the Arab world was an imperfect Ottoman space—multiethnic, religiously diverse, and pre-nationalist. After 1920, it became a collection of artificial states designed for imperial convenience: Sunni-led Iraq containing a Shia majority; Greater Syria chopped into competing sectarian fragments; Palestine turned into a demographic time bomb; and the Kurds erased entirely. The agreement’s defenders argue that post-colonial states could have reformed these borders; they did not. The Islamic State’s 2014 declaration that “Sykes-Picot is finished” was propaganda, but it resonated because millions feel those borders are prisons. A century later, the line drawn by two imperial bureaucrats continues to bleed. The Middle East will not be stable until it can either live with those borders—or transcend them—on its own terms. Neither process has begun.
Read more to the Palestinian Mandate, from the Armenian Genocide to the Turkish Republic, the reverberations are still being felt today. These fifteen episodes trace the full arc, from the crisis of the “Sick Man of Europe” through the Young Turk Revolution, the Great War, and the final partition of the empire’s Arab lands.
Section 1: The Sick Man of Europe — Decline, Revolution and the Young Turks (1876–1913)
By the late 19th century the Ottoman Empire had been losing territory for a century — to Russian expansion, European great-power rivalry, and a succession of nationalist uprisings in the Balkans. These six episodes trace the final crisis of the old order: the despotism of Abdul Hamid II, the Young Turk revolution that overthrew him, and the catastrophic Balkan Wars that stripped the empire of almost all its remaining European territory.
The Decline of the Ottoman Empire
Between 1876 and 1920 the Ottoman Empire experienced its final crises — delivering several shock defeats to allied powers in the First World War before being overcome in 1918 and subjected to humiliating terms in 1920, the consequences of which have reverberated across the 20th century.
The Young Turk Revolt 1908
After decades of decline and gradual European encroachment, disaffected army officers staged a revolt in 1908, forcing Sultan Abdul Hamid II to accept the reinstatement of a reformist constitution. The revolution promised a new era of modernisation — but its contradictions would prove fatal to the empire.
Sultan Abdulhamid’s Counter-Revolution — 1909
Within a year of the constitutional revolution, religious conservatives and mutinous soldiers attempted to roll back reform and restore the Sultan’s absolute power. The counter-revolution failed, leading to Abdul Hamid’s overthrow — but the struggle between secular modernisers and Islamic traditionalists was far from over.
The Scramble for Libya: Italy, the Ottomans, and the Prelude to the Balkan Wars
In 1911 Italy launched an opportunist war against the Ottoman Empire for control of Libya. Despite the unexpected guerrilla resistance and huge costs, Italy prevailed — and the empire’s humiliation emboldened the Balkan states to strike next.
The First Balkan War and the End of Ottoman Europe
In 1912, Serbia, Greece, Montenegro, and Bulgaria sensed the empire’s weakness and struck together, stripping away almost all its remaining European territory in a matter of weeks. The loss was catastrophic — and produced the refugee crisis and ethnic hatreds that would dominate Balkan politics for a generation.
Civil Crisis in the Ottoman Empire — 1913
Military defeat and political crisis in the Balkan Wars transformed the empire from within. The Committee of Union and Progress (the Young Turks) tightened their grip on power, set the empire on a path towards Turkish ethnic nationalism, and began laying the ideological groundwork for genocide.
Section 2: The Ottoman Empire Enters the War (1914–1915)
The decision to enter the First World War on Germany’s side was the empire’s fatal gamble. These four episodes trace the secret diplomacy that tied Constantinople to the Central Powers, the disastrous British attempt to knock Turkey out of the war at the Dardanelles, and the beginning of the systematic murder of the Armenian population.
The Ottoman Empire and Germany — 1914
In the summer of 1914 the Ottoman Empire attempted to play both the Entente and the Central Powers against each other, seeking the best terms for its survival. It was the arrival of a German dreadnought in Constantinople — and the ambitions of Enver Pasha — that finally tied Turkey to Germany’s cause.
The Ottoman Empire and the July Crisis
As the final desperate negotiations to prevent war failed in July 1914, the Ottoman government engaged in simultaneous secret diplomacy with Germany and Russia — each side offered different inducements, and neither fully understood what the Ottomans had promised the other.
The Ottoman Empire and the First World War — 1914
Between August and October 1914, Germany forced the Ottoman hand. When Ottoman ships bombarded Russian Black Sea ports in late October, Britain and France declared war. The empire was now fighting on multiple fronts — Gallipoli, the Caucasus, Mesopotamia, Palestine — with a military that was already critically weakened.
British Decision-Making and the Dardanelles Campaign — 1915
A complete absence of intelligence about new German guns along the Dardanelles led Britain into a disastrous campaign in 1915, built on the hope that naval power alone could force a passage to Constantinople and knock Turkey out of the war. The campaign failed at enormous cost, and Gallipoli became a symbol of imperial hubris.
Section 3: War, Collapse and the Arab Revolt (1915–1918)
As the war ground on, Britain began planning for the post-war division of Ottoman territories. These three episodes trace the secret diplomacy of Sykes-Picot, the romanticised Arab Revolt led by T.E. Lawrence, and the final British campaigns that destroyed Ottoman power in Mesopotamia and Syria.
Sir Mark SykesSir Mark Sykes
Full Description:A British aristocrat, adventurer, and Member of Parliament who co-negotiated the Sykes-Picot Agreement. Sykes had traveled extensively in the Ottoman Empire and cultivated a romanticized, paternalistic fascination with the Middle East. He was seen as a “expert” on the region, though his knowledge was superficial and his sympathies entirely imperial.
Critical Perspective:Sykes embodies the cheerful arrogance of British imperialism. He was personally charming, genuinely interested in Arab culture, and utterly convinced that he knew what was best for millions of people he had never governed. His legacy is a warning: well-intentioned ignorance, when backed by military power, can be as destructive as malice. He died of the Spanish flu in 1919, never witnessing the full catastrophe his line in the sand would unleash.
Read more and the Eastern QuestionEastern Question
Full Description:The 19th- and early 20th-century diplomatic problem posed by the decline of the Ottoman Empire. European powers (Britain, France, Russia, Austria-Hungary) each sought to maximize their influence over Ottoman territories without triggering a general European war. The Eastern Question drove the Crimean War (1853–56), the Balkan Wars (1912–13), and ultimately World War I.
Critical Perspective:The Eastern Question is the intellectual framework that made Sykes-Picot possible. For a century, European statesmen treated Ottoman lands as an inheritance to be divided among heirs, not as territories with living populations possessing rights. The “question” assumed that Ottomans were passive objects, not historical actors. This mindset—that Middle Eastern peoples existed to be managed, not consulted—did not end with the Mandates. It persists in every Western intervention from the Baghdad Pact to the Iraq War.
Read more — 1915
In 1915, as Ottoman forces proved more effective than expected, British planners began dividing up the Middle East in secret. The discovery of oil at Mosul transformed strategic calculations — and produced the Sykes-Picot Agreement, whose borders still shape the region today.
Lawrence of Arabia
In 1916, British officer T.E. Lawrence and the Arab prince Feisal of Mecca led a guerrilla army of Bedouin fighters against the Ottoman Empire across Arabia. Lawrence became an international celebrity, but his story also illuminates the broken promises Britain made to Arab leaders in exchange for their support.
The Fall of Damascus and Mesopotamia — 1918
By 1918 the Ottoman Empire was exhausted. General Edmund Allenby skilfully encircled Ottoman armies in Palestine and Syria, seizing Damascus and Beirut in a rapid advance. The collapse was swift and total — and Britain’s armies now occupied the territories it had already secretly divided with France.
Section 4: The Peace Settlement and the Mandate SystemMandate System
Full Description:A mechanism established by the League of Nations after World War I to administer former Ottoman and German territories. “Class A” Mandates—Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, and Transjordan—were considered nearly ready for independence but placed under temporary control of France or Britain until they could “stand alone.” In reality, Mandates were colonies by another name.
Critical Perspective:The Mandate System was hypocrisy institutionalized. The same powers that carved up the Middle East for their own advantage claimed they were acting as benevolent trustees. No timetable for independence was set; “readiness” was defined by the mandatory power. Iraq was granted nominal independence in 1932, but with a British client king and treaty that preserved British military bases and oil control. The Mandate was not the road to freedom but the road to neocolonialism.
Read more (1919–1920)
The Paris Peace Conference determined the fate of the Ottoman Empire’s former territories. These two episodes examine how Wilsonian idealism was compromised by British and French imperial interests, how the Mandate system created colonial states masquerading as trusteeship, and how the Greek occupation of Smyrna set off a new cycle of catastrophic violence.
World War One and the Creation of the Mandate System
During and immediately after the First World War, a range of plans were devised to distribute and manage former Ottoman territories. The process was shaped by Wilsonian idealism and British colonial assumptions about civilisation — and produced a system of mandates that was, in practice, colonialism by another name.
Venizelos, Lloyd George and the Greek Annexation of Smyrna — 1919
As allied leaders deliberated at Paris, David Lloyd George encouraged the Greek prime minister Venizelos to seize the former Ottoman city of Smyrna. The episode explores the catastrophic consequences for a city that had been a bastion of religious and cultural tolerance — and the Greek-Turkish war that followed.
Subscribe to Explaining History
Explaining History is a podcast and newsletter covering modern history from the First World War to the present. New episodes are released weekly. Subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts, or find us on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.
