DOCSLIB.ORG

Ottoman Holy War to the North of the Danube Full Article Language: En Indien Anders: Engelse Articletitle: 0

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ottoman Holy War to the North of the Danube Full Article Language: En Indien Anders: Engelse Articletitle: 0 _full_alt_author_running_head (neem stramien B2 voor dit chapter en nul 0 in hierna): 0 _full_articletitle_deel (kopregel rechts, vul hierna in): Ottoman Holy War to the North of the Danube _full_article_language: en indien anders: engelse articletitle: 0 54 Chapter 3 Chapter 3 Ottoman Holy War to the North of the Danube 1 Efforts to the Way of Allah Initially, as vassals of the Seljukid sultans, the Anatolian beys, including the fledging Ottoman dynasty, accompanied their suzerains in holy campaigns (gaza) against Byzantine territories.1 Adopting the ideology of cihad, the Ot­ toman sultans assumed for themselves the task of leaders of the holy war against infidels of Southeastern Europe. This idea was directly and most cate­ gorically declared in “letters of conquest” (fetihnames), accounts of victorious campaigns against unbelievers, distributed both domestically and abroad by the sultans. The most relevant examples of this genre are to be found in Meh­ med II’s statements in letters sent to Muslim rulers.2 Furthermore, both Byzan­ tine and Ottoman sources indicate that sultans were conscious of their obligation to conduct cihad. For instance, in 1421, after Mehmed I’s death, as Nişancı Mehmed paşa informs us, his son, Gazi Sultan Murad Han, came to the imperial throne. Murad Han did not abandon but rather followed the right way, hoisted the banners of the holy campaign and the holy war (gaza ü-cihad bayraklarını yücelten) and confided in the glorious Allah.3 Step by step, but especially after the conquest of Arab territories, the image of sultans as leaders of holy wars was recognized across the Muslim world.4 In the sixteenth century, stereotypes dominated the image of the sultan as a holy warrior. As Christine Woodhead pointed out in her analysis of campaign 1 According to the chronicler Nișanci Mehmed pașa, Ertoǧrul had accompanied his suzerain Alaaddin Kay­Kubad iii in sacred campaigns (gaza ü cihadda sultanla birlikte bulunmak istedi) (Mehmed pașa, Tarih, in Osmanlı Tarihleri, I, 344). 2 To the Mamluk sultan after the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 (Critobul, Mehmed II, 56–74; Inalcık, Ottoman Empire, 56). To Uzun Hasan, in 1476, after the campaign against the Moldavian prince (Guboglu, “Izvoare turco­persane,” 139). 3 Mehmed pașa, Tarih, in Osmanlı Tarihleri, I, 348. On Bayezid i (Ducas, Istoria, III/4; Chalcocondil, Expuneri, 77). On Mehmed i, Mustafa Çelebi and Güneyt (Ducas, Istoria, XXIV/5, XXIV/12, XXI/10). 4 Inalcık, Ottoman Empire, 57; Carl Max Kortepeter, “How the Ottomans governed the Arabs: The Observations recorded by Evliya Çelebi in 1672.” In Studia Turcologica Memoriae Alexii Bombaci Dicta, Naples: Istituto universitario orientale, 1982, 318–333. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/9789004411104_004 _full_alt_author_running_head (neem stramien B2 voor dit chapter en nul 0 in hierna): 0 _full_articletitle_deel (kopregel rechts, vul hierna in): Ottoman Holy War to the North of the Danube _full_article_language: en indien anders: engelse articletitle: 0 Ottoman Holy War to the North of the Danube 55 accounts (gazavatnames) produced during the reign of Süleyman Kanunî (1520–1566): Here Süleyman’s role as warrior king, the sultan of the gazis, dominates: he surpasses the achievements of his predecessors in extending the ter­ ritorial bounds of empire and of Islam; he marches with a magnificently arrayed, invincible force, reduces the strongest fortresses, slays the irre­ deemable infidel, and puts rebels to flight.5 According to Ottoman juridical theory, there was a permanent state of war between the Abode of Islam (dar al-Islam) and the Abode of War (dar al-harb) that would last until infidels’ territories were brought under the sultan’s au­ thority. To accomplish this goal, the ideology of offensive cihad was built and promoted as the main element of fifteenth­ and sixteenth­century Ottoman political thought. This meant the only just war was cihad, i.e. that war which had as final aim the achievement of a pax ottomanica or imperium mundi for the Ottoman Empire.6 From this perspective, the Moldavian scholar Dimitrie Cantemir insisted that the rationales for war were purely theological: they [the Ottomans] call those Wars just, (and only those) which are un­ dertaken for the Propagation of the Mahometan Religion: On the con­ trary, unjust Wars with them are such as are entered into for the enlarging the Bounds of their Empire, or the Royal Revenue…7 Contemporary analysts also attempted to prove that Ottoman wars were waged for just causes by insisting that all victories and defeats were ultimately decid­ ed by “divine Providence.”8 Actually, this mentality originated in the standard reaction of the Ottoman dignitaries: “it was so the Allah’s will,” chroniclers 5 She quoted especially Tabakat ül-memalik of Mustafa Celalzade (Christine Woodhead, “Perspectives on Süleyman,” in Süleyman the Magnificent and His Age. The Ottoman Empire in the Early Modern World, Edited by Metin Kunt and Christine Woodhead, London and New York: Longman Publishing, 1995, 172–173). 6 E. Tyan, “Djihad,” EI-2, II, 1991, 538–540; Morabia, Ǧihad, 416; Cl. Cahen, “Harb. II. Sous le cali­ fat,” EI-2, III, 185. On the just war in Western Europe, see R. Regnant, La doctrine de la guerre juste de s. Augustin à nos jours, d’après les théologiens et canonistes catholiques, Paris, 1934; F. M. Russel, The Just War in the Middle Ages, 2nd ed., Cambridge, 1977. 7 Cantemir, Othman History, 79, n. 4. 8 Chalcocondil, Expuneri, 279; Kara­Çelebi­Zade, Ravdat ül-Ebrar, in Cronici turcești I, 544; Cantemir, Othman History, 79, n. 4. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mongol Aristocrats and Beyliks in Anatolia
    MONGOL ARISTOCRATS AND BEYLIKS IN ANATOLIA. A STUDY OF ASTARĀBĀDĪ’S BAZM VA RAZM* Jürgen Paul Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg Abstract This paper is about beyliks – political entities that include at least one town (or a major fortress or both), its agricultural hinterland and a (large) amounts of pasture. It is also about Mongols in Anatolia in the beylik period (in particular the second half of the 14th century) and their leading families some of whom are presented in detail. The paper argues that the Eretna sultanate, the Mongol successor state in Anatolia, underwent a drawn-out fission process which resulted in a number of beyliks. Out of this number, at least one beylik had Mongol leaders. Besides, the paper argues that Mongols and their leading families were much more important in this period than had earlier been assumed. arge parts of Anatolia came under Mongol rule earlier than western Iran. The Mongols had won a resounding victory over the Rum L Seljuqs at Köse Dağ in 1243, and Mongols then started occupying winter and summer pastures in Central and Eastern Anatolia, pushing the Turks and Türkmens to the West and towards the coastal mountain ranges. Later, Mongol Anatolia became part of the Ilkhanate, and this province was one of the focal points of Ilkhanid politics and intrigues.1 The first troops, allegedly three tümens, had already been dispatched to Anatolia by ———— * Research for this paper was conducted in the framework of Sonderforschungsbereich 586 (“Differenz und Integration”, see www.nomadsed.de), hosted by the universities at Halle-Wittenberg and Leipzig and funded by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.
    [Show full text]
  • Phd 15.04.27 Versie 3
    Promotor Prof. dr. Jan Dumolyn Vakgroep Geschiedenis Decaan Prof. dr. Marc Boone Rector Prof. dr. Anne De Paepe Nederlandse vertaling: Een Spiegel voor de Sultan. Staatsideologie in de Vroeg Osmaanse Kronieken, 1300-1453 Kaftinformatie: Miniature of Sultan Orhan Gazi in conversation with the scholar Molla Alâeddin. In: the Şakayıku’n-Nu’mâniyye, by Taşköprülüzâde. Source: Topkapı Palace Museum, H1263, folio 12b. Faculteit Letteren & Wijsbegeerte Hilmi Kaçar A Mirror for the Sultan State Ideology in the Early Ottoman Chronicles, 1300- 1453 Proefschrift voorgelegd tot het behalen van de graad van Doctor in de Geschiedenis 2015 Acknowledgements This PhD thesis is a dream come true for me. Ottoman history is not only the field of my research. It became a passion. I am indebted to Prof. Dr. Jan Dumolyn, my supervisor, who has given me the opportunity to take on this extremely interesting journey. And not only that. He has also given me moral support and methodological guidance throughout the whole process. The frequent meetings to discuss the thesis were at times somewhat like a wrestling match, but they have always been inspiring and stimulating. I also want to thank Prof. Dr. Suraiya Faroqhi and Prof. Dr. Jo Vansteenbergen, for their expert suggestions. My colleagues of the History Department have also been supportive by letting me share my ideas in development during research meetings at the department, lunches and visits to the pub. I would also like to sincerely thank the scholars who shared their ideas and expertise with me: Dimitris Kastritsis, Feridun Emecen, David Wrisley, Güneş Işıksel, Deborah Boucayannis, Kadir Dede, Kristof d’Hulster, Xavier Baecke and many others.
    [Show full text]
  • Mighty Guests of the Throne Note on Transliteration
    Sultan Ahmed III’s calligraphy of the Basmala: “In the Name of God, the All-Merciful, the All-Compassionate” The Ottoman Sultans Mighty Guests of the Throne Note on Transliteration In this work, words in Ottoman Turkish, including the Turkish names of people and their written works, as well as place-names within the boundaries of present-day Turkey, have been transcribed according to official Turkish orthography. Accordingly, c is read as j, ç is ch, and ş is sh. The ğ is silent, but it lengthens the preceding vowel. I is pronounced like the “o” in “atom,” and ö is the same as the German letter in Köln or the French “eu” as in “peu.” Finally, ü is the same as the German letter in Düsseldorf or the French “u” in “lune.” The anglicized forms, however, are used for some well-known Turkish words, such as Turcoman, Seljuk, vizier, sheikh, and pasha as well as place-names, such as Anatolia, Gallipoli, and Rumelia. The Ottoman Sultans Mighty Guests of the Throne SALİH GÜLEN Translated by EMRAH ŞAHİN Copyright © 2010 by Blue Dome Press Originally published in Turkish as Tahtın Kudretli Misafirleri: Osmanlı Padişahları 13 12 11 10 1 2 3 4 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without permission in writing from the Publisher. Published by Blue Dome Press 535 Fifth Avenue, 6th Fl New York, NY, 10017 www.bluedomepress.com Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Available ISBN 978-1-935295-04-4 Front cover: An 1867 painting of the Ottoman sultans from Osman Gazi to Sultan Abdülaziz by Stanislaw Chlebowski Front flap: Rosewater flask, encrusted with precious stones Title page: Ottoman Coat of Arms Back flap: Sultan Mehmed IV’s edict on the land grants that were deeded to the mosque erected by the Mother Sultan in Bahçekapı, Istanbul (Bottom: 16th century Ottoman parade helmet, encrusted with gems).
    [Show full text]
  • The Making of Sultan Süleyman: a Study of Process/Es of Image-Making and Reputation Management
    THE MAKING OF SULTAN SÜLEYMAN: A STUDY OF PROCESS/ES OF IMAGE-MAKING AND REPUTATION MANAGEMENT by NEV ĐN ZEYNEP YELÇE Submitted to the Institute of Social Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History Sabancı University June, 2009 © Nevin Zeynep Yelçe 2009 All Rights Reserved To My Dear Parents Ay şegül and Özer Yelçe ABSTRACT THE MAKING OF SULTAN SÜLEYMAN: A STUDY OF PROCESS/ES OF IMAGE-MAKING AND REPUTATION MANAGEMENT Yelçe, Nevin Zeynep Ph.D., History Supervisor: Metin Kunt June 2009, xv+558 pages This dissertation is a study of the processes involved in the making of Sultan Süleyman’s image and reputation within the two decades preceding and following his accession, delineating the various phases and aspects involved in the making of the multi-layered image of the Sultan. Handling these processes within the framework of Sultan Süleyman’s deeds and choices, the main argument of this study is that the reputation of Sultan Süleyman in the 1520s was the result of the convergence of his actions and his projected image. In the course of this study, main events of the first ten years of Sultan Süleyman’s reign are conceptualized in order to understand the elements employed first in making a Sultan out of a Prince, then in maintaining and enhancing the sultanic image and authority. As such, this dissertation examines the rhetorical, ceremonial, and symbolic devices which came together to build up a public image for the Sultan. Contextualized within a larger framework in terms of both time and space, not only the meaning and role of each device but the way they are combined to create an image becomes clearer.
    [Show full text]
  • Yavuz Sultan Selim'in Taht Mücadelesi
    YAVUZ SULTAN SELİM’İN TAHT MÜCADELESİ Doç. Dr. Faruk SÖYLEMEZ∗ Öz II. Bayezid’in saltanatının sonlarına doğru hastalığı ve yaşlılığından dolayı devlet işleriyle ilgilenememesi sonucunda Osmanlı devlet yönetiminde meydana gelen zafiyet, birtakım olayların meydana gelmesine sebep olmuştur. Osmanlı tahtında meydana gelebilecek boşluğu doldurmak için şehzadelerin her biri İstanbul’a doğru harekete geçti. Böylece Şehzade Ahmed ile Şehzade Selim arasında taht mücadelesi başlamış oldu. Veziriazam Ali Paşa ve Şehzade Şehinşah’ın ölümü II. Bayezid’i son derece üzmüş ve hastalığının artmasına neden olmuştur. Bunun üzerine Sultan Bayezid devlet yönetiminin daha da kötüye gitmemesi için saltanattan çekilme kararı aldı. II. Bayezid şehzadeler arasındaki bu çekişme sürecinde Şehzade Selim’in Osmanlı sultanı olacak kabiliyette olduğunu müşahede etmiş ve ülkeyi içinde bulunduğu bunalımdan ancak onun kurtaracağına kanaat getirdikten sonra onu İstanbul’a davet ederek tahtı kendisine bırakmıştır. Anahtar Kelimeler: II. Bayezid, Şehzade Selim, Şehzade Ahmed, Taht, İstanbul. Yavuz Sultan Selim’s Struggle For The Throne Abstract Aged Bayezid II who suffered with some diseases, became an incapable sultan in recent years of his reign to rule the country. Sultan’s absence of power weakened his rule and created serious problems in the Ottoman Empire. Bayezid’s situation triggered competition between his sons for the throne. Princes left their sanjacks for İstanbul to grab the imperial power which could possibly fade at any time with sultan’s death. Princes Ahmed and Selim involved into a bitter fight. Death of Grand vizier Ali Pasha and Prince Şehinşah pushed the sultan into a grim sorrow and this aggravated his illness. Eventually, Sultan decided for self-abdication not to cause further problems.
    [Show full text]
  • The Urbanization and Ottomanization of the Halvetiye Sufi Order by the City of Amasya in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries
    The City as a Historical Actor: The Urbanization and Ottomanization of the Halvetiye Sufi Order by the City of Amasya in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries By Hasan Karatas A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Near Eastern Studies in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Hamid Algar, Chair Professor Leslie Peirce Professor Beshara Doumani Professor Wali Ahmadi Spring 2011 The City as a Historical Actor: The Urbanization and Ottomanization of the Halvetiye Sufi Order by the City of Amasya in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries ©2011 by Hasan Karatas Abstract The City as a Historical Actor: The Urbanization and Ottomanization of the Halvetiye Sufi Order by the City of Amasya in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries by Hasan Karatas Doctor of Philosophy in Near Eastern Studies University of California, Berkeley Professor Hamid Algar, Chair This dissertation argues for the historical agency of the North Anatolian city of Amasya through an analysis of the social and political history of Islamic mysticism in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries Ottoman Empire. The story of the transmission of the Halvetiye Sufi order from geographical and political margins to the imperial center in both ideological and physical sense underlines Amasya’s contribution to the making of the socio-religious scene of the Ottoman capital at its formative stages. The city exerted its agency as it urbanized, “Ottomanized” and catapulted marginalized Halvetiye Sufi order to Istanbul where the Ottoman socio-religious fabric was in the making. This study constitutes one of the first broad-ranging histories of an Ottoman Sufi order, as a social group shaped by regional networks of politics and patronage in the formative fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sons of Bayezid the Ottoman Empire and Its Heritage
    The Sons of Bayezid The Ottoman Empire and its Heritage Politics, Society and Economy Edited by Suraiya Faroqhi and Halil Inalcik Associate Board Firket Adanir · Idris Bostan · Amnon Cohen · Cornell Fleischer Barbara Flemming · Alexander de Groot · Klaus Kreiser Hans Georg Majer · Irène Mélikoff · Ahmet Ya¸sarOcak Abdeljelil Temimi · Gilles Veinstein · Elizabeth Zachariadou VOLUME 38 The Sons of Bayezid Empire Building and Representation in the Ottoman Civil War of 1402–1413 By Dimitris J. Kastritsis LEIDEN • BOSTON 2007 On the cover: Lokman, Hünername (1584–1588), detail of miniature showing Mehmed Çelebi’s 1403 enthronement in Bursa. Topkapı Palace Library, MS. Hazine 1523, folio 112b. Reprinted by permission. This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress ISSN 1380-6076 ISBN 978 90 04 15836 8 Copyright 2007 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in aretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands To the memory of my parents By force of armes stout Mahomet his father’s kingdome gaines, And doth the broken state thereof repaire with restlesse paines.
    [Show full text]
  • Leer Artículo Completo
    REAL ACADEMIA MATRITENSE DE HERÁLDICA Y GENEALOGÍA La Casa de Osmán. La sucesión de los Sultanes Otomanos tras la caída del Imperio. Por José María de Francisco Olmos Académico de Número MADRID MMIX José María de Francisco Olmos A raíz de la reciente muerte en Estambul el 23 de septiembre pasado (2009) de Ertugrul Osman V, jefe de la Casa de Osmán o de la Casa Imperial de los Otomanos, parece apropiado hacer unos comentarios sobre esta dinastía turca y musulmana que fue sin duda una de las grandes potencias del mundo moderno. Sus orígenes son medievales y se encuentran en una tribu turca (los ughuz de Kayi) que emigró desde las tierras del Turquestán hacia occidente durante el siglo XII. Su líder, Suleyman, los llevó hasta Anatolia hacia 1225, y su hijo Ertugrul (m.1288) pasó a servir a los gobernantes seljúcidas de la zona, recibiendo a cambio las tierras de Senyud (en Frigia), entrando así en contacto directo con los bizantinos. Osmán, hijo de Ertugrul, fue nombrado Emir por Alaeddin III, sultán seljúcida de Icconium (Konya) y cuando el poder de los seljúcidas de Rum desapareció (1299), Osmán se convirtió en soberano independiente iniciando así la dinastía otomana, o de los turcos osmanlíes. Osmán (m. 1326) y sus descendientes no hicieron sino aumentar su territorio y consolidar su poder en Anatolia. Su hijo Orján (m.1359) conquistó Brussa, a la que convirtió en su capital, organizó la administración, creó moneda propia y reorganizó al ejército (creó el famoso cuerpo de jenízaros), en Brussa construyó un palacio cuya puerta principal se denominaba la Sublime Puerta, nombre que luego se dio al poder imperial otomano hasta su desaparición.
    [Show full text]
  • SÜLEYMAN ÇELEBÎ. Veya EMÎR SÜLEYMAN ÇELEBÎ ( 1377?—1410), Bayezid I
    SÜLEYMAN ÇELEBÎ. Veya EMÎR SÜLEYMAN ÇELEBÎ ( 1377?—1410), Bayezid I. ( Yıldırım )'in en büyük oğlu ölüp, babasının Timur 'a esir düşmesi ve vefatını müteakip bir müddet Edirne 'de saltanat sürdüğü cihetle garplı tarihçiler tarafından Osmanlı hanedanı içinde Süleyman I. olarak pâdişâh itibar olunmuş, fakat Osmanlı tarihçileri tarafından sâdece fetret devrinin bir şehzâde-emîri sayılarak pâdişâhlar silsilesine alınmamıştır. Bununla beraber, tarihçi Mustafa Âlî senelerce onun nâmına hutbe okunduğunu ve eski devirlerde de kırk-elli gün içinde iki-üç hükümdarın bile hüküm sürdüğünü kabul eden müverrihlerin mevcudiyetini belirterek, onu da bir pâdişâh olarak kabul etmiştir (Kunh al-ahbâr, matbu kısım, V, 117). Bayezid'in cülusundan sonra imparatorluğun kurulmasında tütûhat hareketlerinde ve ıdâre hayatında genç bir şehzade sıfatıyle vazifeler alan Süleyman Çelebi, önce, Aydın ve Saruhan beyliklerinin ortadan kalkmasiyle yeni fethedilmiş olan Karası ve Saruhan sancak beyliğine tâyin edilmiş ( 1390 ), sonra Rumeli fütuhatında da kendisine vazife verilmiştir. Ezcümle 1393 'te Macar kiralının Tuna kenarına gelmiş olması ve Bulgarların onlarla birleşmesi ihtimâli, Bayezid 'i harekete getirdiğinden, Bulgar kır allığını tamamen ortadan kaldırmaya karar veren pâdişâh, Emir Süleyman Çelebi kumandasında bir ordu sevketmişti. Bu ordu, Bulgarların payitahtı olan Tırnova 'yi şiddetli bir muhasaradan sonra almış ve müteakiben de müstahkem birer kale olan Silistre, Niğbolu ve Vidin zaptolunmuştu. Daha sonra Kastamonu valiliğine tâyin edilen Süleyman Çelebi, J398 'de, Kâzi Burhan al-Din 'in Akkoyunlu-lar ile mücâdelesinde öldürülmesi ve Sivas ümerâsı tarafından Bayezid I. 'in davet edilmesi üzerine, mühimce bir kuvvetle o tarafa gönderildi. Şehzade bu esnada Akkoyunlu beyini mağlûp ve Erzincan 'a doğru çekilmeğe mecbur etmişti. Kâzi Burhan al-Din 'in memleketi Osmanlı devletine ilhak edilince Sivas valiliğine şehzade Süleyman Çelebi tâyin edildi (Taki al-Din İbn Şuhba'nin, all'lâm bi-târih ahi al-islâm 'ından naklen İ.
    [Show full text]
  • Human and Physical Geography
    Human and Physical Geography Anatolia (AN-uh-TOH-lee-uh), also called Asia Minor, is a huge peninsula in modern-day Turkey that juts out into the Black and Mediterranean seas. Anatolia is a high, rocky plateau, rich in timber arid agriculture. Nearby mountains hold important mineral deposits. By the 1300s, Anatolia was inhabited mostly by the descendents of nomadic Turks. Many Anatolian Turks saw themselves as ghazis (GAH-zees), or warriors for Islam. They formed military societies under the leadership of an emir, a chief commander, and followed a strict Islamic code of conduct. They raided the territories of the "infidels," or people who didn't believe in Islam. These infidels lived on the frontiers of the Byzantine Empire. Rise of the Ottomans The most successful ghazi was Osman. People in the West called him Othman and named his followers Ottomans. Osman built a small Muslim state in Anatolia between 1300 and 1326. His successors expanded it through land purchases, alliances, and conquest. The Ottomans' military success was largely based on the use of gunpowder. They replaced their archers on horseback with musket-carrying foot soldiers. They also were among the first people to use cannons as offensive weapons. Even heavily walled cities fell to an all-out attack by the Turks. The second Ottoman leader, Orkhan I, was Osman's son. He felt strong enough to declare himself the sultan, meaning "overlord" or "one with power." In 1361, the Ottomans captured Adrianople (ay-dree-uh-NOH-puhl), the second most important Byzantine city. A new Turkish empire was on the rise.
    [Show full text]
  • Byzantine Eye-Witnesses of Anatolian Power- Breakers During the Years of 1421-1423*
    International Journal of Arts and Commerce ISSN 1929-7106 www.ijac.org.uk BYZANTINE EYE-WITNESSES OF ANATOLIAN POWER- BREAKERS DURING THE YEARS OF 1421-1423* Nilgün ELAM** Assistant Prof. Dr., Anadolu University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of History, 26470 Eskişehir E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Ducas and Chalcocondyles' chronicles reveal more detailed information than the Ottoman chronicles about the roles of Byzantine Empire and Anatolian emirates during the Ottoman Interregnum (1402-1423). Also a Burgundian diplomat Ghillebert de Lannoy who was present at Byzantine capital-city in 1423 forms a very informative source about the Murad II’s problematic enthronement on which the Ottoman chronicles seem to be extremely laconic. Another group of sources shedding light on this period of Ottoman history is the Anonymous Greek Short Chronicles. These two Byzantine historians of 15th century, Lannoy’s work and short chronicles complete the gaps of Venetian-Genoese official records which give remarkably rich information for the Near-Eastern history. In this paper, we will re-consider the roles of Turkish emirates of Anatolia in Pseudo-Mustapha’s and Mustapha the Younger’s struggles for power (1415-1423) under the light of Byzantine, Ottoman, Italian historical sources. Keywords: Byzantine History, Ottoman History, Ottoman Civil War, Interregnum, Anonymous Short Chronicles, Pseudo-Mustafa, Mustafa the Younger ÖZET Dukas’ın ile Halkokondyles’in kroniği Bizans Devleti ile Anadolu beyliklerinin Osmanlı tarihinin Fetret dönemi (1402-1423)’ndeki rolleri hakkında Osmanlı kroniklerine nispetle daha ayrıntılı bilgiler verirler. Ayrıca 1423 yılında Bizans başkentine bulunan Burgundiyalı diplomat Ghillebert de Lannoy da Osmanlı kroniklerinin fazlasıyla sessiz kaldığı II.
    [Show full text]
  • To the Ottoman Turks
    DECLINE AND FALL OF BYZANTIUM TO THE OTTOMAN TURKS BY DOUKAS An Annotated Translation of "Historia Turco-Byzantine" by Harry I Magoulias, Wayne State University Wayne State University Press Detroit 1975 C y 2Wa.yAn iuersit ess, Detroit,, Micchigan5482 rightsarereserved No part of this book naybe reproduced without formal permission. Library of Congress Catalogingin Publication Data Ducas, fl. 1455. Decline and fall of Byzantium tothe Ottoman Turks. First ed. published under title:Historia Byzantina. Bibliography: P. Includes index. 1. Byzantine Empire History.2. TurkeyHistory-1288-1453 A2D813Magot949.5 Harry 75 9949 itle. DF631 ISBN 0-8143-1540-2 To Ariadne vuvevvoc KaX4 re Kl 7aO7 CONTENTS Chronology 9 Introduction 23 Decline and Fall of Byzantium to the Ottoman Turks 55 Notes 263 Bibliography 325 Index 331 7 ILLUSTRATIONS Old City of Rhodes 42 John VI Kantakouzenos 43 Manuel II Palaiologos 44 Emperor John VIII Palaiologos 45 Monastery of Brontocheion, Mistra 46 Palace of Despots, Mistra 47 Walls of Constantinople 48 Walls of Constantinople with Moat 49 Mehmed H the Conqueror 50 Emperor Constantine XI 51 MAPS The Byzantine World Before the Fall 1453 52 Greece and Western Anatolia Before the Fall 1453 53 Constantinople 54 8 CHRONOLOGY CHAPTER I page 57 Listing of the years and generations from Adam to the Fourth Crusade, 12 April 1204. CHAPTER II page 59 Reigns of the emperors of Nicaea to the recapture of Constantinople in 1261. Conquests of the Seljuk Turks and appearance of the Ottomans. Reigns of Andronikos II and Michael IX, Andronikos III, John V and John VI Kantakouze- nos. Turks occupy Gallipoli (1354).
    [Show full text]