This article examines the recent policy decision about the teaching of Ottoman Turkish at high schools in Turkey and unpacks its historical, political, and social undercurrents. It theoretically rests upon Spolsky's [2004. Language policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Language management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press] and Shohamy’s (2006. Language policy: Hidden agendas and new approaches. London: Routledge] work on language policy and management at the state level, and Liddicoat and Baldauf’s [2008. Language planning in local contexts: Agents, contexts and interactions. In A. J. Liddicoat & R. B. Baldauf (Eds.), Language planning and policy: Language planning in local contexts (pp. 3–17). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters] and Chua and Baldauf’s [2011. Micro language planning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 936–951). New York, NY: Routledge] explorations of micro language planning and agency. After providing background on the orthographic revolution in 1928 and the subsequent lexical purification in Turkey, this article explores the policy decision about the incorporation of Ottoman Turkish into the high school curriculum. The assay leads to three main observations. First, this policy decision appeared as part of the national identity reconstruction efforts stage-managed by the ruling political party aligned with neo-Ottomanist ideals. Second, the government has ideologically constructed the teaching of Ottoman Turkish at high school as essential to rebuild the connection with Ottoman-Islamic heritage lost purportedly after the Turkish Language Reform. Third, save for the attempts to address the issues about linguistic expertise and fairness in selecting teachers, this policy mostly neglected the micro-level agentive responses. This article closes with conclusions that connect the analysis of the Ottoman Turkish case in Turkey to broader language planning inquiry.