Starting with the mid-nineteenth century, a new generation of Ottoman historians began to discuss the Ottoman past with a modern historical-mindedness as they engaged with new concepts and methods. These historians aimed to incorporate comparative approaches and different periodization models, as well as new subjects of interest into the conventional history writing. By closely following the changes in European historiographical trends, they aimed to establish history as a scientific discipline in the Ottoman realm. These changing trends in history writing, however, did not mean a complete rupture from traditional practices. Instead, nineteenth-century historians also sought reconciliation with the historians of previous generation as well as the major texts that influenced Ottoman historical writing. Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddimah, a translation of which was completed in the nineteenth century, was one of the most influential texts that continued to shape Ottoman historical thought during this period. Abdurrahman ?eref Efendi (d. 1925) was among the most prominent members of the new generation of Ottoman historians who utilized Ibn Khaldun’s thought in his writings and in his pursuit of empirical evidence. This paper explores how Abdurrahman ?eref discussed Ibn Khaldun’s historical methodology and periodization model in his two-volume history of the Ottoman State, Tarih-i Devlet-i Osmaniyye, the first volume of which was published in 1891 and the second in 1895. In Tarih-i Devlet-i Osmaniyye, which was a textbook designed to be taught in professional schools, especially the School of Civil Administration, Abdurrahman ?eref claims that he follows Ibn Khaldun’s methodology, which requires not only narration of historical events but also establishing a causal relationship among them. At first glance, Abdurrahman ?eref seems to be an “Ibn Khaldunist” as he also adapts Ibn Khaldun’s model of dynastic cycles in his periodization of Ottoman history. Yet I explain how Abdurrahman ?eref modifies Ibn Khaldun’s historical concepts into his own progressivist way of historical thinking. Ultimately, I argue that Abdurrahman ?eref’s history presents an exception to “Ibn Khaldunism” as he transforms Ibn Khaldun’s cyclical view of history into his own vision of the Ottoman Empire, which he regarded as an eternal state (devlet-i ebed-müddet) that would last until the end of the world due to the series of reforms initiated in the nineteenth century.