Succession and the Ottoman Sultanate
Patrick Kenny
The question of the decline of the Ottoman Empire has been a much debated issue: it spans several centuries and involves factors ranging from military technology and Balkan geography to the rise of nationalism, the challenge from an expanding Russian Empire and the diplomatic tensions of the Great Powers. It also shaped the history of peoples across Europe and the Middle East, as far as 20 th -century conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo. I hope in this essay to examine an event often stated as contributing to its decline and consider how far it actually was important. Broadly what happened is this: from the 15 th century it was customary for the Sultan’s adult sons to act as governors for areas of the empire. Then, on his death there would be a scramble between these sons for who could reach Istanbul first, secure the support of the army and the Porte 105 and declare himself Sultan. Usually this meant a civil war of varying scale, with the victor committing mass fratricide of all male rivals. However, in 1603 Mehmed III died leaving only young sons. The oldest, Ahmed aged 14, became Sultan but, since he was childless, the possibility that the line of Osman I (the dynasty’s founder in the 13 th century) would end if his brothers were killed and then he died, meant that one brother, Mustafa, was kept alive. From this point succession passed through each generation (brother to brother, then to the next generation) and the princes remained inside the palace in Istanbul, often in the ‘Kafes’ area in Topkapi, literally ‘the cage’. The clearest benefit here is that there were no longer civil wars at every succession. Previously, as a prince you would have known that failure to become Sultan meant being murdered by your brother or half-brother and this was strong motivation to fight ferociously for the throne after, or even before, the
current Sultan’s death. For example, in 1481 Mehmed II’s death saw war between his sons, Bayezid and Jem. Although Bayezid defeated Jem, this rival was able to flee and remain in Malta and Rome until he died in 1495, and for fear of his return and stirring up rebellion, Bayezid made no conquests till Jem died, half his total reign. Of course there were still internal conflicts after the change in succession, but not the invariable wars every generation as previously. Moreover, these familial struggles occurred even before the death of a Sultan in the old system. Intrigue was rife as the Sultan grew older and princes built up their support. In 1553 Suleiman the Magnificent executed his son Mustafa after the ‘Haseki’ (favourite concubine) Khurrem conspired against the prince, while succession to Bayezid II was also bloody: his youngest son, Selim, defied his father and left Trebizond to be closer to Constantinople. Although defeated in battle by his father in 1511, the Janissaries, 106 loyal to Selim, rose up against his brother Ahmed who also defied Bayezid, particularly in looking to the Safavid Shah of Iran for support. Thus Selim returned to become Selim I, killing Ahmed after defeating him in battle on 24 th April 1513, almost exactly a year after becoming Sultan. In both cases, conspiracy and betrayal along with actual violence distracted from the business of the empire, caused long-term resentment from defeated parties and saw destruction of the country caught in civil war. However, the new system’s main fault was that it allowed weak, unpopular and often young Sultans to emerge, which caused subsequent problems. Partly this was because princes no longer learned the arts of
106 The Janissaries were the infantry that formed the Sultan’s household guard and bodyguard but were the main fighting force in an empire since normal troops were raised only at times of war
105 ‘The Sublime Porte’: a metonym for the Ottoman government.
61
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker