Bu çalışmadaki temel amaç, Osmanlı Devleti’nde 18. yüzyılda başlayan ve özellikle hukuki alana hasredilen yenilik hareketlerinin neden başarıya ulaşamadığını tespit etmektir.Çalışma bu amaçla insanlık tarihinin seyrinde yaşanan ve dönüm noktası olarak kabul edilen önemli gelişmeleri, bu gelişmelerin yarattığı yeni iktisat zihniyetini ve bu iktisat zihniyetinin devlet birey ilişkisi ve hukuk devleti bağlamında belirlediği yeni toplumsal kurumların ortaya çıkışını ve bu durum ile Osmanlı ’daki anayasacılık hareketlerinin mukayeseli olarak incelenmesini kapsamaktadır.Çalışma ’da konu ile ilgili özellikle iktisat zihniyeti, iktisat ahlakı, modernizm, kapitalizm, burjuvazi ve anayasacılık hareketlerinin doğuşu ve gelişmesi konulu kitap, dergi ve makale gibi ikincil kaynaklar taranmış ve ulaşılan bilgiler yorumlanarak kullanılmıştır.Çalışmanın genelinde elde edilen bulgular, iktisadi alanda yaşanan gelişmelerin mevcut iktisat zihniyetlerini değiştirdiği, değişen iktisat zihniyetlerinin ise yeni ekonomik sistemler oluşturduğu ve bu ekonomik sistemlerin de başta hukuk alanında olmak üzere kendine has kurumlar oluşturduğudur. Çalışmanın özelinde elde edilen bulgular ise Osmanlı Devleti ’ndeki mevcut iktisat zihniyetinin, Batı ’dakine benzer şekilde değişip dönüşmediği ve bu sebeple Osmanlı ’da, Batı ’daki gibi bir kapitalist sistem ve burjuva sınıfının oluşmadığı, ekonomik anlamda bu dönüşüm yaşanmadan kapitalist sisteme has hukuki kurumların ithal edilmeye çalışılmasının bu hukuki kurumları icat eden ve koruyan sınıfın yokluğundan dolayı yerleşip olgunlaşamamasına sebep olduğudur.

The history of mankind has been shaped by transition from hunting and gathering to settled life(i.e. to simple agricultural production), industrial revolution, the change that the technology created by this revolution brought in terms of cultivating land(transition to modern agriculture) and finally the emergence of modern capitalist system. This historical process came together with the conception of plus-product,which first emerged following the transition to settled life and then got completely set along with industrial revolution, and the issue of sharing this plus-product. People used to earn their living by hunting and gathering in a process starting 2 million years ago(i.e. from Paleolithic Era) and continueing until 8000 AD(i.e. until Neolithic Era).This era came to an end with people’s starting to grow food in addition to hunting and gathering. Later, Medieval economic mentality which had had a stable,idle and unrationalized understanding of economy dominated the life of economy for a long while. In the West was a process of transition and transformation -which got started by geographical discoveries that the adventurers of 15th and 16th centuries had made in the hope of seeing new places and obtaining unexpected wealth there ,and accelarated in 17th century ,and eventually peaked thanks to industrial revolution in 18th century. In this proces, a new mentality began to develop in the West.The name of this new mentality was the mentality of ‘’profit’’ and ‘’enterprise’’. Putting an end to Medieval mentality and expressing rationally earning money by means of using reasonable methods of production and commerce, this new rationalized mentality caused many a change in the fields of economy, sociality and law in the West. Industrial revolution and capitalist system caused by a newly-shaped economic mentality in the West created a social class which was itself called ‘bourgeoisie’. Having emerged in Europe following industrial revolution and capturing an important portion of production means, this dynamic class of capitalist system always acted in the incentive of defending itself against governmental power. As a result of this incentive, in the West, limiting state’s power by individuals’ rights and liberties, establishing basic rights and liberties in accordance with natural law theory and puttin them under a legal guarantee, constitutional state and constitutionist movements –as a way to realize these all- came into being The Ottoman Empire, on the other hand, did not experience these transitions and transformations being seen in the West. The chief reason to this was Medieval economic mentality being dominant in the Empire. Large landownership and sort of sovereignty based on this land-ownership, spirit of landlordship and nobility steming from land-regime, economic system resulted from the fact that wealth was based upon land, dullness of commerce except for some certain districts, simple market guilds in towns, -different from active working mentality based upon conveyable wealth in modern times- inactive and slow understanding of wealth and value , and a mystical understanding of religion(Inwardness) which surrounded all these were of a classical economic mentality in Middle ages. The Otoman failed to transform this economic mentality into a Wester-like economic mentality. This condition has several various reasons such as phsical circumstances, ‘inwardness’ and political attitude of the state. Since the Ottoman Empire failed to transform into capitalism, it was also not possible to mention a class of bourgeoisie. As a result, reformation movements in many fields-especially in those of military, government, law and educationfailed owing to lacking of a social order(capitalist system) which would support. In the field of law , as in other fields, this condition hindered legal institutions peculiar to constitutional state to be established. The main aim of this study is to determine why reformation movements, particularly in the field of law, that started in 18th century in the Ottoman Empire could not be successful. Important developments regarded as turning points in the process of the history of mankind and new economic mentality which these developments yielded, and the emergence of new social institutions that this mentality determined in the context of state-individual relation and civil-state, and the comparison of the Ottoman’s constitutionist movements to this contidion are in the scope of this study. For the study, relevant books,magazines and articles on economic mentality, economic morality, modernism, bourgeoisie, capitalism, and emergence and development of constitutionist movements were scanned.And, obtained data was interpretively used. Generally speaking, what have been found are the facts that developments in the field of economy change economic mentalities, that changed mentalities constitute new economic systems, and that those economic systems form institutions-particularly in the field of law- peculiar to themselves. Specifically speaking, what have been found are the facts that the existing economic mentality in the Ottoman did not transform so did that in the West, and that consequently a capitalist system and a class of bourgeoisie as in the West did not come into being, and that attempts to import legal institutions peculiar to capitalist system without having economically experienced this transformation failed because of lacking of a class which would form and protect such legal institutions.