At the same time, political reforms affected the life of ethnic-religious communities. The edict of the year 1839 affirmed the equality among all subjects of the Sultan, whatever their faiths were. For each community (millet), it was reaffirmed the liberty of faith, equality of rights and duties; privileges and immunities were acquired, whereas ecclesiastic properties were also reconfirmed (Scarcia Amoretti, 1998: 186). 

A second decree the Hatt-ı Hümayun, proclaimed in the year 1856, re-stated the equality among Muslim non-Muslim subjects. In order to transform them into ?citizens? of the Ottoman Empire, further measures were taken as the Nationality Law of the 1869 and the promulgation of the first Constitution of the Empire (1876), elaborated during the reign of the Sultan Abdülhamid II. Nevertheless, the Constitution signaled the limits of reforms: the Sultan was still the protector of Islam. Although a great number of subjects were non-Muslims, the Empire was a Muslim State and even the new law on the equality between Muslim and non-Muslims could not alter this fact. 

These measures, released for the pressure of European powers--which had political and commercial interest in the Empire[8]--were a double-edged sword, while it aimed at fostering among different groups a shared identity as citizens of the Empire; nevertheless, they signed the end of the millet system, since the word became synonimus of ?nationalities? and was used for territorial claims.[9] At the same time, the interference of foreign powers, which by the time had transformerd the Ottoman lands in a semi-colony, had induced the ruling elite of the Empire to rethink about their own identity and to clearly define themselves versus ?others?(Deringil, 1988: 217).

Initially, it was from exponents of the literary circles[10] and the ruling elite that the re-elaboration of an ?Ottoman? identity had origin.  Writers like Namık Kemal, focused mainly on two elements for defining the Ottoman identity: language (Turkish) and religion (Islam, purified by the rigidity imposed by Ulemas). The religious component of the Ottoman identity was exalted during the reign of the Sultan Abdülhamid II (Öztürkmen, 1992: 177). The Hamidian time was one of the most controversial periode of the Ottoman History. Although the Sultan continued to promote reforms, based on the European model, he also favored the diffusion of a Islamic identity.[11]  He used religion and faith as a tool for fostering the unity of Muslims people, living in different territories of the Empire.[12]

Nevertheless, it was only in the beginning of the 20^th century that the idea of a ?Turkish identity?, intended as ?Turkish ethnicity?, started to gain popularity; as Karpat remind us: ?It is around 1911 and 1912 that the idea of a nationality based mainly on ethnicity rooted in language began to appear among the Ottoman elite? (Karpat, 2002: 552). A great contribution to the spreading of Turkish identity?s theory, was given by the sociologist Ziya Gök Alp, who became the leading ideologues of the young Turkish republic, who rejected the idea of an Ottoman nation, and refused the concept of Islam linked to Perso-Arabic tradition (Deringil, 1988: 226).  His theories were lately adopted by the founding father of the Turkish Republic, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. 

[8]Christian foreigners resident in the Empire had the aman (mercy) safe-conduct under Islamic law. These grants gave rise to the regime of capitulations, originally voluntary concessions of the Sultan to foreign friendly States; nevertheless, since the eighteenth century they had acquired the status of treaties.

[9]Regarding the importance of Balkan wars (1860s -1870s), see Karpat (2002:546).

[10]Many of those writers were part of the movement called Young Ottomans.

[11]Regarding debates on ?Islamic?-?Pan.Islamic identity,? see Karpat, (2002:549).

[12]The Sultan claimed to be a universal Muslim caliph with a right to religious over lordship of the mosques everywhere.