The two great institutions and the lesser parallel ones included practically all the government of the empire when regarded in its widest aspect. In the time of Suleiman the Ruling Institution was perhaps of greater power and influence than the Moslem Institution, but the tendency of the latter was to gain upon the former. Notable progress in that direction was made during his reign, and indeed through his personality. The policy of both toward the parallel lesser institutions was to prevent them from gaining in power, and, so far as possible, to weaken them. In the former aim this policy succeeded with all but two classes,—the governments of North Africa, which were separated by a sea under their own control, and the organizations of the foreign settlements, which were supported by active and increasing powers outside of the empire. But the two great institutions were restrained by circumstances and their own inherent structure from extirpating the parallel institutions, and in time they were to cease to weaken them. The greatest dangers to the whole Ottoman system lay, however, in the rivalry of the two great institutions and in a tendency of the Ruling Institution toward decentralization and division into its component parts. CONTEMPORARY DESCRIPTIONS OF THE TWO GREAT INSTITUTIONS Few writers on the history and government of the Ottoman Empire since the sixteenth century have grasped the individual unity, the parallelism, and the contrast of its two leading institutions. D’Ohsson and Von Hammer understood the Moslem Institution, but missed the conception of the Ruling Institution, the unity of which had disappeared long before their time. Ranke obtained from a few of the Italian writers a very vivid conception of the Ruling Institution, particularly as a slave-family and an army; but he did not see the Moslem Institution in its due proportion and importance. Zinkeisen, making wider use of the Italians, came nearer than any other to a clear understanding of the whole scheme; yet his exposition does not leave a distinct impression. Bury, in his lucid chapter in the _Cambridge Modern History_, describes well the _Spahis_ and the Janissaries, and notes that many tribute children rose to high positions; but he does not grasp the unity of the Ruling Institution, and he seems hardly at all to see the Moslem Institution. Jorga, the latest to write a general history of Turkey, makes it his avowed purpose to exhibit cultural and institutional growth; he comes near, but does not attain, a distinct conception of the Ruling Institution; while giving especial attention to the renegades who reached high position in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, he seems not to recognize how definite, and how intelligently constructed and directed, were the policy and organization which raised them to power.[69]