#fatma should have been executed | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

rhaenahanzades · 3 months ago

Note

Thanks for the answer! I hope you don’t mind if I reblog instead of sending a new ask entirely.

It’s interesting you pointed out about the report of 1627 from Giorgio Giustiniani that he claimed both Hasan and Mustafa were Murad IV’s brothers-in-law. When I first read it, I focused a lot on the story told by Giustiniani that Hasan had been "chiecaià" of the Old Kizlar Aga (Haci Mustafa?) and who told Kosem about Osman trying to kill Mehmed and Kosem being able to stop it thanks to him... Which would mean Osman tried to kill Mehmed before January 1621, but was unsuccessful in it due to Kosem (did Baki Tezcan never noticed this? I think it would`ve been a nice addition to his article of Kosem being Mehmed's mother)...

But since I was too focused on that part, I let it slip by that Hasan was called a brother-in-law already, and when I read about Mustafa, I simply connected him to Kara Mustafa Pasha, who is ascribed as Fatma Sultan's husband. Anyway, what bugs me here is what should be Kara Mustafa Pasha's real death date if he's the Mustafa who had been executed for keeping corrupt money mentioned by Giustiniani, in around July 1627. Oztuna and Sakaoglu both claim Kara Mustafa was executed in 1628, and Joseph von Hammer mentions a report that claims the King's brother-in-law Mustafa was executed dated December 1627... Anyway, I believe the Mustafa is Kara Mustafa Pasha, but then why did Giustiniani not mention that Hasan had been given Mustafa's widow, assuming his death had been recent to the point it was even mentioned in the report? And if it's him, then Peirce is completely wrong by saying Fatma was married to Kara Mustafa after divorcing Hasan in 1628.

And I don't think Giustiniani was talking about a third Kenan Pasha, it's Koca Sofu Kenan Pasha, but this confirms he received Burnaz Atike in marriage in 1627 or before. Or maybe it was still a betrothal?

Indeed my question had been about the names and whether Ibrahim's Atike existed separately from Gevherhan, who appears with her own name as the wife of Sari Kenan and Ismail by Ragusans and Rycaut, marriages that are ascribed to Atike.

As for Sakaoglu, I do not understand why he corrected Gurcu Mehmed to the other Mehmed. As you say, the other Mehmed was indeed never governor of Buda, while Gurcu Mehmed was and his age fits the description more because he had surely been a very old man in 1660s, as some say he was the slave of Grand Vizier Koca Sinan Pasha who died in 1596, so he couldn't have been younger than what, 75 at his death in 1665 (and maybe he just aged very badly that people thought he really was 90)? I suppose it might be because two sisters getting married to two Mehmeds in one single decade could be hard to believe, especially if the historian could not find an Ottoman chronicler that talked about the damadhood of Gurcu Mehmed. And then there’s the fact that besides Haseki Mehmed (d. 1661), they also believe it could've been Çavuşzade Mehmed (d. 1681) instead, which makes everything even more complicated and impossible to solve without more sources on the matter.

I do wonder if there's a big possibility only Beyhan and Gevherhan were alive in 1672, as by that date Mehmed is recorded to have only brought these sisters to Babadag. What would be the reason to exclude other sisters if there were any others? So many questions...

Again, thank you so much for the answer!

Hi! Previously in Ottomanladies you answered an ask about marriages of Burnaz Atike, Gevherhan and little Atike. So, some historians confused Burnaz Atike with one of Ibrahim's daughters when they claim she married Musahib Cafer Pasha (d.1647) in 1630, as according to Giorgio Giustinian in 1627, Koca Kenan (d. 1652) was already married to Murad IV's sister (Pedani, p.596). And some historians say Gevherhan was the one who married Cafer in November 1646, like Sakaoglu.

And according to Joseph von Hammer, the youngest daughter of Ibrahim betrothed to Cafer was married to the other Kenan, Sari Kenan (d. 1659). But some historians separate the wives of these pashas as Gevherhan marrying Cafer and her sister Atike marrying Sari Kenan, with Atike going on to marry Ismail Pasha.

However, in "Dubrovacka akta i povelje", a report of 1650s refers to "Ghiusciahato sultana moglie di Chieman passa", so it seems to me she married Sari Kenan after Cafer died. And the "Mémoires du Sieur de la Croix" in 1670s, pages 368, 369, 370 and 371 says: "Les soeurs du Grand Seigneur (...) la premiere fut mariée à trois ans, & eftoit à dix avec fon second mary Affaki Mehemet Pasha, Gouverneur dAlep, il fuit étranglé fous pretexte de fauffe monnoye, & elle fe maria pour la troisiéme fois avec Ibrahim Pacha Tefterdar, du depuis Pacha du Kaire, dAlep, & enfin Capitan Pacha, aprés la mort duquel Jemblat Oglou Gouverneur du Kaire la épousée en quatriéme nopces. La seconde mariée auffi jeune que sa soeur, a eu cinq maris, dont le dernier la prit vierge, à cause dun défaut de nature (...) Je ne fcay pas le nom des deux premiers, le troisiéme fut Sinan Pacha, lequel estant Capitan Pacha, perdit la Bataille des Dardanelles (...) Le quetriéme eftoit Ismael Pacha, ce grand Seigneur l ayant choifi pour und es Lieutenans generaux de l armée dHongrie (...) Le cinquiéme sappelle Kassum Pacha, il est Chirurgien de profession"

The quote says Mehmed IV had 2 sisters in 1670s. The 1st married Haseki Cavuszade Mehmed Pasha, then Defterdar Ibrahim Pasha and then a Canpulatoglu (son of Kosems Fatma?). The other, younger than the first, was married to "Sinan" who was Kaptaniderya, so it should be Sari Kenan. After him she married Ismail Pasha and then Cerrah Kasim Pasha, and also had 2 husbands before the first.

(All in all, I believe the first sister who married Haseki Cavuszade could be Beyhan instead, as in 1653, according to "Dubrovacka akta i povelje" she is called "Behar sultana, moglie di passa di Cairo", and in 1563 this was Haseki Cavuszade Mehmed; but interestingly historians believe he was Gevherhans second husband instead...)

In "Per favore della Soltana", several lists give us marriages of Gevherhan. In 1648, she is called widow of Cafer, in 1662 she is wife of Ismail Pasha, and in 1670 she is called wife of Casciu Pascia who is probably Cerrah Kasim Pasha. And in 1676 and 1680, she is called wife of a Canpolatoglu and not another Sultana as Croix claimed.

Paul Rycaut in "The Present State of the Ottoman Empire" also says Gevherhan married Ismail Pasha (and then remarried to Gurcu Mehmed Pasha): "At this tenderness of age, Sultan Ibrahim, father of the present Grand Signior, married three of his daughters, one of which was called Gheaher Han Sultan, hath had already five husbands, and yet as is reported by the world, remains a virgin; the last husband deceased was Ishmael Pasha, who was slain in the passage of the River Raab; and is now again married to Guirgi Mehemet Pasha of Buda".

So it seems to me that Gevherhan married the following: Musahib Cafer in 1646, Sari Kenan in 1647, Ismail Pasha after him, then Gurcu Mehmed, then Cerrah Kasim Pasha, and then maybe a Canpulatoglu (unless that was the other sister like Croix claimed, maybe Beyhan?), before finally marrying Palabiyik Yusuf later in life.

But after all this, I want to ask whether its possible that this sister of Mehmed IV called Atike existed at all? Because it seems quite certain that Gevherhan married Kenan Pasha and Ismail Pasha, not one named Atike, and historians did make a confusion with Burnaz Atikes marriages. And if little Atike didnt exist, was Gevherhan the full-sister of Mehmed IV instead? I know Gevherhan is believed to be born in 1642, and with Mehmed and Fatma it gets too much for Turhan, but Hammer describes her as the youngest daughter in 1647, and if the sister who married Haseki Mehmed was Beyhan, and she was reportedly married for the first time to another at the age of 3 as Croix claims, and the sister who married Sari Kenan and the others was younger than her, then Beyhan could still be born in 1645 as she married Hezarpare in 1648, and Gevherhan was born after her...

Hi! Please be patient with me because these asks take time to unwrap and I’m only doing this in my free time.

I think you’re talking about this ask. About the confusion, it’s something that Uluçay too believes:

Alderson confused the daughters of Ahmed I, Murad IV and Sultan Ibrahim, so he made mistakes.

Alderson confused the daughters of Ibrahim with the daughters of Ahmed I and Mehmed IV, and therefore made some mistakes.

and he’s right because the rapid successions plus the practice of marrying princesses as children created so much confusion.

(it’s so funny that he says that twice lmao)

Okay, so your theory is that Atike Sultan binti Ibrahim doesn’t exist and that some historians seem to have mistaken Burnaz Atike with a daughter of Ibrahim? I hope I understood well.

Everything under the read more (it's very... heavy, sorry lol)

I read Giustiniani’s relazione and the math is not really mathing because he says Murad IV put his four brothers-in-law at the highest posts of government but then mentions five brothers-in-law:

Çatalcalı Haşan Pasha: he’s Fatma’s husband

Hafiz Ahmed Pasha: he’s Ayşe’s husband

Bayram Pasha: he’s Hanzade’s husband

(Recep Pasha: he’s Gevherhan’s husband) > Giustiniani only mentions her as Osman II's elder sister

“Chinan” who, you believe, was Koca Sofu Kenan Pasha

“Mustaffà” ?? who is he??

Sicill-i Osmani says that Kenan Pasha married Burnaz Atike in 1633-34, but Giustinian’s last dispatch from Istanbul was dated 4 July 1627 so… did he foresee the future? Were there more Kenan Pashas?

(Also, who is that Mustafa??)

Now, onto Ibrahim's daughters.

So, I made this table to semplify things because I was going insane with all the information.

I think there is some confusion between Haseki Mehmed Pasha, who was strangled in Aleppo in June 1661 (like de la Croix says), and Çavuşzade/Çavuşoğlu Mehmed Paşa, who lived until 1681. Sicill-i Osmani doesn’t call the latter “Haseki” but he’s identified as Gevherhan Sultan’s husband. Now, the princess who married Haseki Mehmed Pasha could have remarried after 1661, but the one who married Çavuşzade/Çavuşoğlu Mehmed had to wait until 1681.

Beyhan is admittedly a mistery because she was married for less then a year to Hezâr-pâre Ahmed Pasha when she was little but afterwards didn’t have a husband for 11 years? It seems strange. If the Ragusian diplomats called her “wife of the pasha of Cairo” and if Haseki Mehmed Pasha was beylerbey of Egypt in 1653 (as Oztuna confirms in Devletler ve Hanedanlar), then Haseki Mehmed Pasha was married to Beyhan binti Ibrahim. Unfortunately my only Ragusian sources come from the essay Per Favore Della Soltana, and in it there’s a gap between a letter dated 1648 and one dated 1662.

About the Canpulatoğlu Pasha, I would like to add that Canbulad-zâde Mustafa Paşa had two sons with Fatma: Sultânzâde Hüseyn Paşa, who was governor of Budin and of Egypt, and Sultânzâde Süleymân Bey. Both lived to adulthood. Moreover, he had a daughter from his previous marriage: Ayşe Hâtûn. Maybe he had other sons too. It is interesting, though, that de la Croix says Canpulatoğlu is Governor of Egypt, because Sultânzâde Hüseyn Paşa was indeed governor of Egypt at some point.

About Atike binti Ibrahim:

(Uluçay doesn't believe she existed)

As we can see, Oztuna and Sakaoğlu use the same source. Oztuna, though, says that Atike binti Ibrahim was buried in Ibrahim’s mausoleum, while Sakaoğlu says that her burial place is unknown. Curiously, Atike binti Ahmed I is buried in Ibrahim’s mausoleum too.

Since Alderson gave his sources, I went to check. This is a passage from Histoire de l’Empire Ottoman, volume 12, pp. 49-50:

L'ainée, Aïsché, fiancée dès l'age de trois ans à Ipschir-Pascha, épousa à dix Mohammed-Pascha, gouverneur de Haleb; ce dernier ayant été décapité comme faux monnoyeur, elle devint la femme du defterdar Ibrahim, gouverneur du Kaire, puis de Haleb, et alors kapitan-pascha; à sa mort, elle fut mariée à Djanbouladzadé, ancien gouverneur d’Ofen, qui depuis remplit les mêmes fonctions au Kaire. La seconde, nommée Aatika, épousa d'abord le vizir Kenaan-Pascha, puis le vizir Yousouf-Pascha, et en troisième lieu le kapitan Sinan-Pascha, qui avait perdu la bataille des Dardanelles contre les Vénitiens; elle eut pour quatrième époux Ismail-Pascha, grand-inquisiteur en Asie, qui fut tué à la bataille de Saint-Gotthardt; enfin elle contracta une cinquième union avec KasimPascha, l'un des pages de la chambre intérieure, et chirurgien de profession, qui, lors de la circoncision du sultan Mohammed , sut arrêter, au moyen d'une poudre astringente, une hémorrhagie qui avait fait tomber le prince-en défaillance, service que ce dernier récompensa plus tard en donnant à Kasim le gouvernement de Temeswar. […] le Sultan, en reconnaissance du sang qu'il lui avait conservé, refusa de répandre le sien, et, pour le sauver, lui donna la main de sa sœur, qu’un vice de conformation avait empêchée d'appartenir à ses premiers maris, et qui, après dix-neuf ans de mariage, entra vierge dans le harem de Kasim. Celui-ci la délivra de son infirmité au moyen d'ine opération qu’il pratiqua pendant le sommeil d'Aatika, assoupie par un narcotique. Ce fut ainsi qu'il acquit des titres puissans aux bonnes grâces de la princesse, comme précédemment il avait mérité la faveur particulière de Mohammed IV.

Doesn’t it kind of sound like de la Croix (below)? I think Hammer’s source is him.

"La premiere fut mariée à trois ans, & estoit à dix avec son second mary Assaki Mehemet Pasha, Gouverneur d’Alep, il fut étranglé sous pretexte de fausse monnoye, & elle se maria pour la troisiéme fois avec Ibrahim Pacha Tefterdar, du depuis Pacha du Kaire, d’Alep, & enfin Capitan Pacha, aprés la mort duquel Jemblat Oglou Gouverneur du Kaire l’a épousée en quatriéme nopces. La seconde mariée aussi jeune que sa soeur, a eu cinq maris, dont le dernier la prit vierge, à cause d’un défaut de nature (...) Je ne sçay pas le nom des deux premiers, le troisiéme fut Sinan Pacha, lequel estant Capitan Pacha, perdit la Bataille des Dardanelles (...) Le quetriéme estoit Ismael Pacha, ce grand Seigneur l’ayant choisi pour un des Lieutenans generaux de l’armée d’Hongrie (...) Le cinquiéme s’appelle Kassum Pacha, il est Chirurgien de profession”

Now, I think Hammer starts with a mistake because Ibsir Mustafa Pasha was one of Ayşe binti Ahmed I’s husbands. Also, it’s impossible to say where he found that Mehmed IV’s eldest sister was named Ayşe. After these mistakes, though, he repeats what de la Croix said: Haseki Mehmed Pasha, Defterdar Ibrahim Pasha, Canbuladzâde Pasha. The second sister is named Atike (so he says) and stayed a virgin until her last husband, Cerrah Kasim Pasha, operated on her to solve some kind of physical problem she had. This story is similar to the one reported by Rycaut, but he named her Gevherhan instead:

At this tenderness of Age, Sultan Ibrahim, Father of the present Grand Signior, married three of his Daughters; one of which called Gheaher Han Sultan, hath had already five Husbands, and yet, as is reported by the World, remains a Virgin; the last Husband deceased was Ishmael Pasha, who was slain in the passage of the River Raab; and is now again married to Gurgi Mahomet Pasha of Buda, a Man of 90 Years of Age, but rich and able to maintain the greatness of her Court, though not to comply with the youthfulness of her Bed, to which he is a stranger like the rest of her preceding Husbands. — p. 40.

It’s possible that Rycaut had already left the Ottoman Empire when this princess married Cerrah Kasim Pasha. He’s the only one talking about Gurci Mehmed Pasha, though… Interestingly, Sakaoğlu corrects Rycaut’s Gürcü into “(Çavuşzade, Haseki)” but, admittedly, his quote is quite different from Rycaut’s original. In Sakaoğlu’s it is said that the pasha is 30, while Rycaut says he’s 90. Moreover, as far as I know, Çavuşzade Mehmed Pasha was never governor of Buda.

In conclusion, I’m more confused than before lol

As for Mehmed IV’s full sister, I really have no opinion on this. Usually, it’s Beyhan who is given as Turhan Hatice’s daughter but with no hard evidence.

You (and other people) can send me asks on ottomanladies now, I have re-opened my ask box. As I have already said, please be patient with me because I don't have much free time and these things need to be analyzed properly :D

20 notes · View notes

reallifesultanas · 4 years ago

Text

Portrait of Murad IV / IV. Murad portréja

Birth and childhood

Murad was born in July 1612 as the second son and fifth child of Ahmed I and his favorite concubine, Mahpeyker Kösem. In addition to Ahmed's two sons from Kösem, Ahmed had another son, Prince Osman, the eldest child. Murad belonged to a generation of princes who, for the first time in history, did not have to fear the law of fratricide. According to a tradition enshrined in law by Mehmed II, sultans had to execute all of their brothers in order to maintain order. However, Sultan Ahmed did not do this when he left his brother, Mustafa, alive after his accession to the throne in 1603. Thus the sons of Ahmed were already born into a new world. It is a fact, however, that Ahmed was not sure of his decision for a long time, so he repeatedly attempted to execute Mustafa, but in the end, his conscience and Kösem Sultan convinced him, so Mustafa was saved.

Murad lived his early childhood in relative calmness, as his father was a popular sultan, his mother held the rank of Haseki Sultan, and she was a very influential and popular woman. However, all this changed in 1617. Sultan Ahmed died and a kind of inheritance chaos broke out in the empire. The people had enough of the fratricide but Ahmed had not left a legal decree about who should follow him on the throne: his younger brother, Mustafa, or his eldest son, Osman. Eventually, with the accession of Mustafa to the throne, the inheritance officially changed, the throne no longer passed from father to son but was taken over by the oldest male of the dynasty. So Murad and his siblings could survive, but they lived in solitary confinement in Topkapi Palace, while their mother Kösem Sultan along with her daughters moved to the Old Palace.

The following years were quite chaotic, Mustafa was soon dethroned because of his mental illness, and Murad’s half-brother, Osman, ascended the throne. Osman was a very unpopular, bad ruler who, although tried to maintain a fair relationship with Kösem Sultan in his early reign, he later in January 1621 executed Kösem's son so Murad's brother, Prince Mehmed. Murad and his younger brothers certainly lived in awe away from their mothers, their sisters, locked up, exposed to a tyrant ruler, and it cannot be ruled out that they witnessed the execution. Eventually, Osman's brutal murder brought relief to them. But it also gave Murad a lifelong lesson that not even a sultan can be safe.

Accession to the throne

The brutal execution of Osman was attributed to Halime Sultan and her son, Mustafa I, so that Sultan Mustafa was eventually dethroned again and his mother exiled to the Old Palace. Murad, just 11 years old, was the next in the line of inheritance. Given his age, the divan and ulema appointed his mother Kösem Sultan as a regent, until Murad himself became mature enough to rule. Although Murad could relief as he became the sultan, it was certainly not easy for him to start a new life after such a difficult childhood. It is also important to note that Murad was able to spend some time with his mother last time in 1617 at the age of five. He lived separated from his mother for six years between 1617 and 1623, this presumably caused serious difficulty for the two of them to re-establish a mother-son relationship.

Murad was a difficult child to handle. Several letters of Kösem Sultan have survived in which she complains to the Grand Vizier about how much Murad does not listen to her, and sometimes he even refuses to meet her for days. In addition to the long isolation, their similar personalities did not help to form a nice relationship much either. They were both leading individuals, with a very strong will, so they had a hard time getting along with each other. They argued many times, after which Kösem Sultan was the one who wanted to reconcile with Murad. After one of their big quarrels, for example, she gifted a horse to Murad, and at other times she organized a huge ceremony for him. In addition, Kösem has regularly expressed concern about Murad’s health, suggesting that perhaps Murad was already struggling with health problems at the time.

From the time of Ahmed's death, the empire gradually fell into anarchy. They lost several important areas and tried in vain to recapture them. Furthermore, Abaza Mehmed Pasha, who revolted after the execution of Osman II, refused to recognize Murad as his ruler and continued his rebellion. Nor did this rebellion was suppressed by the pashas sent against him. To exacerbate the situation, in 1625 a plague broke out in the capital, killing thousands of people. For the first time in the same year, Murad rebelled against his mother’s will. Kösem made a treaty with the Spaniards at the time, but Murad did not like that, so in the end, Kösem gave up.

Then in 1628, Murad became seriously ill, lying in bed for weeks. His exact illness was not revealed, some said his epilepsy started at this time, others said he had digestive problems. But good things also happened that year, Abaza Mehmed Pasha’s rebellion finished and they captured him. In the same year, Murad gave another signal that he soon wanted to take over the reign and openly confronted his mother when he dissolved his sister Fatma’s marriage to Admiral Çatalcalı Haşan Pasha, whom his mother had given special attention to. In addition, Murad was increasingly disturbed by the fact that his mother let corruption go on. Kösem Sultan herself also gave special attention to pashas she liked and this provoked resentment from many, especially her son, Murad. For example, Kösem gave a very important Janissary position to Hafiz Ahmed Pasha, the new husband of Murad's sister, Fatma. However, this was too much for the Sipahis and the Janissaries. In the end, it was the event that marked the beginning of Murad’s absolute monarchy.

The absolute monarch

In 1632, after the appointment of Hafiz Ahmed Pasha, a Sipahis and Janissary rebellion broke out, during which the rebels executed several loyal men of Sultan Murad, including his close friend Musa Çelebi. To make matters worse, the soldiers publicly demanded that Murad show them his younger brothers. By doing so, they wanted to signal to him that if they wanted to, they could replace him with one of his brothers; on the other hand, such unfounded rumors circulated that Murad and Kösem got rid of the princes. Murad was forced to show his younger brothers. Murad never forgot this and never forgave either the rebels or his brothers. In fact, Murad was immeasurably humiliated at that time, he lost his allies and close friends. No ruler could leave that unrevenged. However, Murad was thoughtful and intelligent enough not to take revenge immediately but only execute the chief rebels when his power was consolidated a few months later.

Either way, after the rebellion in May 1632, Murad took control and resigned his mother from the regent position. Kösem Sultan did not object, she stood aside, but she would have tried to help her son, show him the way. Murad did not appreciate this and did not listen to his mother's advice. Murad was compulsively trying to keep his mother away from politics, and it is clear from his actions that he was disturbed by his mother’s great influence. That is why, as soon as he took power under his own control, Murad sought to replace his mother's men, such as his own brother-in-law, Hafiz Ahmed Pasha, who had already been mentioned, so that he could begin his monopoly by withdrawing himself from his mother's influence.

Although Kösem and Murad's relationship was undoubtedly stigmatized by the 1632 uprising, it would be a mistake to think that Murad completely excluded his mother from his life. He always respected her as the leader of the harem and as his mother, and according to a report from 1632, he even asked for his mother's opinion on his private life. Namely, Knolles reported at this time that after the birth of Murad's seventh daughter, he wanted to marry (or rather gave the Haseki rank) to the child's mother to express his love for the woman, but before he did so, he asked for Kösem's opinion. It is an interesting question of who this woman was, for we know of the only privileged consort of Murad’s early reign was Haseki Ayşe Sultan, but we do not know exactly who her children were and when they were born.

Also, when Murad left the capital for a shorter period, he always left his mother as a supervisor, and Kösem Sultan always reported everything accurately to her son. When Kösem noticed a problem, she immediately signaled it to Murad with the most detailed description. A concrete example of the former occurred in 1634, when, in Murad's absence, Kösem learnt that a mufti had not accepted one of Murad's decisions and wanted to review it. She immediately sent a message to her son, “My heroic lion, come immediately. There are rumours of intentions towards the throne and people are starting to gather”. Murad didn't need anything more, he returned immediately and executed the muft without any investigation. It was the first such event in the history of the empire, they had never executed a mufti before. On another occasion, Murad asked Kösem Sultan to do a diplomatic talk with the Crimean Khan.

The tyrant

Murad's personality is very divisive. Many consider him simply a tyrant, but he is more than that. Many times his cruel acts certainly stem from his difficult childhood and his fear of dethronement. Plenty of legends are known about his cruelty, like that he killed people for pleasure and often tortured them innocently, but also we can hear such things that the Sultan ran through the streets at night with a sword and killed anyone who came face to face with him. In this form, these are, of course, just lies and very strong exaggerations. But it is a fact true that he had many acts that did not make him particularly popular. Kösem Sultan tried to influence her son in every possible way and tried to cushion her son’s aggressive actions with her own charities.

Murad banned alcohol and tobacco and even closed all cafes because he thought the Janissaries and Sipahis gathered and allied against him there. And whoever broke the rules could face severe punishment, even the death penalty. To keep his orders, he often go to the streets in disguise and acted in person against those who violated the ordinance. But it is also a fact that if he experienced an injustice or a frustrating thing at these times, he also tried to do against it. He also changed a lot of basic laws, tightened penalties, and made the death penalty more common for even minor offenses. Legends commemorate a case in which he executed a vizier for beating his mother-in-law. At other times, an ambassador, Alvise Contarini, was imprisoned for a minor crime. Contarini's accounts became unreliable after this incident, as he often wrote lies and exaggerations about Murad because of his personal resentments. This was the case, for example, when Contarini reported that Murad was systematically threatening his mother, siblings, and concubines with a beating. However, all the other evidence reports statethe opposite, claiming he was very nice to his family, so behind that account, perhaps Contarini’s dislike have been the only reason.

While there was no doubt that Murad’s austerity was excessive, he managed to put the empire in order, chaos and anarchy seemed to actually be resolved. Murad sat on the throne after chaotic times when the sultans were less respected by the people than any time before. In the time of Suleiman I, the sultan was almost a deity, an inaccessible, superior creature. And a sultan had to maintain this appearance in order to rule an empire of this size. In the chaos that followed the death of Ahmed I, the people saw, on the example of Osman, that the Sultan was indeed a mortal, simple man, the divine image built over the centuries was destroyed. Murad tried to rebuild this. When this did not go in an easy way, he did so in the way of violence and rigor, but anyway he established order in his country.

Not surprising, that Murad considered Yavuz Selim I as his role model, who controlled with strictness, and who did not tolerate contradiction. Murad, following the theory of his teacher, believed that the decline of the empire began during Suleiman's reign, so it was clear that a former successful sultan had to be imitated by him. In addition, Murad had an undisguised goal of restoring the old succession-system. Although he owed his own life to the change of the succession-system, he still believed it posed too many dangers if a Sultan had rivals roughly the same age and same education as him. While many people clearly condemn this, we have to admit, there was truth in this. The brutal execution of Osman and the way as they used Mustafa as a puppet, are all good examples of how dangerous was the existence of brothers. Murad wanted his own son as his heir, which is why he executed his younger brothers over time, except for the mentally unstable Ibrahim. This, by the way, raises several questions, especially about the sons of Murad.

There are quite a lot of question-marks about Murad’s children. We know from Evliya Çelebi's accounts that Murad had many sons, but almost without exception they all died in infancy, for they were born in rather poor health. Unfortunately, for most of his children, we don’t know when they died. What is certain is that in 1634, according to an ambassadorial report, he had two infant sons in poor health. However, despite these, we must assume that when Murad executed his brothers (1635, 1638) there must have been at least one living son of his who was no longer an infant. His eldest son, Ahmed, was born in 1627 and many say he lived the longest, though no exact date is available for his death. There are also those who say that Murad did not have an older living son at these times, he simply wanted the end the dynasty, so he killed his brothers. The latter is supported by the fact that at the time of Ibrahim I's accession (1640) there was not a single son of Murad alive, so perhaps none of them were alive in Murad's last years. However, this does not mean that in 1635 and 1638 he did not have a son who was still alive. All we know from an ambassadorial account from 1637 is that at least 6 sons of Murad died before the age of one, and the health of the others was very fragile. But we don’t know what and how many children the author meant by the others.

Murad, the individual

We are forced to consider Murad as a tyrant in some ways, even with the utmost benevolence, as his decrees and his punishments, often unbalanced with the degree of sin, suggest so. At the same time, Evliya Çelebi's descriptions reveal much more about Murad's personality. Based on these, it seems that the cruel Murad was just a mask behind which the sultan hid his true nature. Murad believed that people and his soldiers will respect him only if they were afraid of him. We must understand that in such era it was logical. All his actions suggest that also, so maybe that’s why he played the cruel Murad role. Of course, this could not have been very far from his true personality, since otherwise, he would not have been able to carry out his cruelty that much.

But what do we know about Murad, the individual? According to others, he was an extremely intelligent, educated man with a very good sense of humor and was a talented poet. According to Evliya, "He was an emperor with a dervish’s nature, kind-hearted and devil-may-care." The latter analogy may have been particularly fitting to Murad because he had great respect and appreciation for the whirling dervishes. So much that he honored a dervish named Ömer with the address "my father." By the way, they often made music together with Ömer. Murad wrote the lyrics and the dervish added the melody. And we know for sure that, contrary to rumors, Murad was not crazy. He was characterized by a certain level of paranoia, but given what had happened to him in the past - he first-hand experienced his brother's death and then his half-brother's brutal murder - was not particularly surprising. However, among the people he loved and trusted, Murad blossomed and showed his true face. The real Murad was a young man in full force, with whom they could humorize even about the most personal things, with whom they could have fun and converse about serious things at the same time. However, Evliya did not doubt that Murad was a very stubborn and strong-minded man, especially towards his mother.

Evliya is also associated with a famous (or infamous) story that many consider the Sultan to be homosexual. The point of Evliya’s story is that they talked to the sultan about a beautiful person, Handan, who the sultan loves and who Evliya says is really charming also. According to the story, the sultan asked Handan to take a rose from his/her hair and give it to Evliya to cheer up the grumpy Evliya. There would be basically nothing special about the story if it all happened in a Western empire. However, knowing the customs of the Ottoman Empire, it becomes clear to us that Handan could not have been a woman, since a harem concubine could not be in the company of foreign men, especially not with uncovered hair. It also makes it difficult to accurately recognize Handan that the name 'Handan' is a unisex name and that there is no male or female gender in the Ottoman language so we cannot know if Evliya talks about a he or a she. Because of this, many people think that Handan was a eunuch or a young man. It is important to know that in the Ottoman Empire until the mid-1800s, homosexuality was accepted, not punishable. In most brothels (because they were also present in the empire) not only women but also men were available. In addition, since Sultan Mehmed II, pederasty has been accepted among sultans and pashas. Mehmed II (who was probably really gay or bisexual) inherited this ancient Greek tradition, which refers to the homosexual relationship between an adult man and a man much younger than him, after the conquare of Constantinople. Later, there were sultans who took advantage of this opportunity and there were those who did not. However, pederasty was primarily a status symbol rather than a relationship driven by sexual desire.

Many have also rumored that Kösem Sultan has sent men to Murad’s bed when he was young, but there is no indication that this is true. Either way, Murad’s sexual orientation will probably never be revealed and maybe it doesn’t even matter. There were two significant concubines in his life, Haseki Ayşe Sultan, who dominated his reign almost throughout, and who, in addition to Esmehan Kaya, must have been the mother of several other children; and there was another woman whose name could not be reconstructed and who came to Murad's life in the last years of his reign and who became a Haseki also. Ayşe, however, was certainly Murad's favorite throughout his reign, as he even took her with him to his Revan campaign. This thing occurred in the case of the early sultans quite often, but from the early modern period of the Empire, sultans did not let their wives and consorts accompany them to war as it was quite risky.

From the tyrant to the adored sultan

Like Murad’s predecessors, he was aware that the fastest way to gain popularity was a successful campaign. Murad was under particular pressure, for at the beginning of his reign they lost particularly important territories, so he had to somehow rectify this. Murad was truly a man of a warrior nature, and there are also legends about his physical performances. It is true that his health was not very good, but he had a very strong physique. He was a tall, robust man with black hair and eyes and pale skin. So Murad, in addition to being handsome with his physical strength, was also able to impress his subjects on a regular basis. Legends revolve about bows that no one but him could stretch or maces that no one could swing but him. According to Evliya, the sultan often dropped his clothes from one minute to the next and began wrestling with a guard just nearby. On other occasions, the sultan simply lifted Evliya over his head without any particular effort. Such a fit, and quite an agile sultan in relation to his stature, was well suited to warfare. And such a sultan was finally able to convince his subjects and soldiers that they could win the war with him!

After several unsuccessful attempts by his pashas in the first half of his reign to reclaim the lost territories, Murad decided to embark on a campaign in person. His first campaign took place in 1635, and the goal was to recapture Yerevan (Revan). They left Üsküdar in the spring and although they often stopped on the way to execute some bandits in Anatolia or to execute those against whom there were many complaints, they even reached Yerevan by July. Roughly a week after the siege, on August 8, Mirgune Tahmasp Quli Khan, the governor who ruled the castle, gave up the castle and surrendered. Murad appreciated that Mirgune Tahmasp Quli Khan accepted him as his new ruler and a deep friendship developed between them. The man's new name became Emirgün and he was with Murad until his death. According to some, it was Emirgün who pushed Murad to start drinking alcohol more and more often.

After the victory, Murad went to Tabriz with his troops, but they could not keep the city, and Murad also got sick, so they traveled to Van in the winter. And by the end of the year, they had returned to Istanbul, where Kösem Sultan was waiting for her son with a huge ceremony. The whole city celebrated Murad’s victory. Murad immediately ordered the construction of a pavilion inside Topkapi Palace in honor of the victory. It later became the Revan Pavilion. Murad planned every step wisely and always acted when the conditions were right. He did so when he dealt with the chief rebels of the 1632 uprising, and he did so when he wanted to get rid of his half-brothers, Bayezid and Suleiman, who posed a great threat to him. Murad knew that fratricide was not to the liking of the people, he knew that a sultan could easily be dethroned for this, but he definitely wanted to carry out his plans and bring back the inheritance from father to son. He, therefore, ordered the execution of the two princes at the moment when his popularity was at its highest and when the whole empire celebrated the victory of his. Although the execution of the two princes naturally shocked the people, everyone was preoccupied with the victory, the booming economy, so they did not turn against Murad.

Murad's popularity was not really diminished by the fact that the Safavids recaptured Yerevan in the spring of the following year. Of course, he had no idea to accept this either, but he waited again for the most opportune moment. It finally came in the spring of 1638. This time, he did not satisfied with Yerevan, he set a goal for Baghdad. By the end of October, he had already reached Baghdad and encamped around the city, and began the siege. On December 24, Bektash Khan, the governor of Baghdad, surrendered, so in January Murad was finally able to enter the coveted city, as did his great predecessor, Suleiman I, 100 years ago (in 1534). In Baghdad, Murad ordered that the mausoleum, previously built by Suleiman, be repaired and renovated.

Although Murad had a strong physique, his health was never good, and the horrific camp conditions worsened it. Especially since he mostly trained with his soldiers, he spent a lot of time with them to gain their support. His worsening alcoholism also did not help the situation. In Diyarbekir, the sultan eventually became so ill that they had to station there for months before they could reach Istanbul. While Murad was lying in bed, his Grand Vezir Tayyar Mehmed Pasha made an agreement with the Persian Shah to finally end the war that had lasted since 1603 and restored the Amasia Treaty of 1555, restoring peace between the two countries and allowing the Ottoman Empire to keep Baghdad.

Returning to Istanbul in June, the Sultan was greeted again with a huge celebration, glorified by all. True to his custom, he crowned this victory by building a new pavilion the Baghdad Pavilion. Unfortunately, he also tried to keep his other custom, so he ordered his brother, Prince Kasim (and perhaps Prince Ibrahim along with him) to the Revan Pavilion, where Prince Kasim was executed, and some said Ibrahim's life was saved only by the prayer and threat of their mother, Kösem Sultan. Others say Murad didn't want to execute Ibrahim just Kasim. Kasim's execution was particularly significant because, unlike the two princes who had been executed earlier, Kasim was a full-brother to Murad, and, according to contemporary accounts, they were even close to each other. By this time Murad was beginning to be overwhelmed by his illness, alcoholism, and paranoia.

His death and legacy

After Murad returned to Istanbul, he was in very poor health for months. He had several chronic diseases, but we don’t know much about them. Some said he may have had epilepsy, others said he may have had similar digestive problems as his father (Ahmed I) and grandmother (Handan Sultan). These were further aggravated by combat injuries, as Murad himself fought in his campaigns; and cirrhosis due to alcoholism.

Murad was able to recover from his fighting injuries, as in the early 1640s he celebrated Ramadan without any problems, met his vezirs, and took part in events. In fact, to further tire his already sick body, he regularly horse-rided to places, went hunting, and alcoholized with his friends. On one such occasion, Murad lost consciousness and was taken back to Topkapi Palace by his guards. The sultan sometimes regained consciousness, it seems that by this time he already knew he was dying. At his special request, he was transferred to the Revan Pavilion, where he had executed his younger brother a few months earlier. Maybe that's why he wanted to die there too. Not knowing who had been by his side in his last hours, but they probably couldn't have kept his mother away even if they had wanted to as they both were in the palace. According to some, on his deathbed, Murad also ordered the execution of Ibrahim, but there is no evidence of this.

A huge crowd gathered for Murad's funeral, his black horse was walking adorned in front of his coffin, and several of those present sobbed loudly. Thus, it is not true that the people rejoiced at the death of the Sultan. Although Murad was not perfect, he performed many cruel deeds, yet after decades he was the first sultan to conquer and he was the one who successfully restored the peace of the empire for which the people loved him. Murad IV was the last sultan to conquer in the true classical sense since no more sultans led a campaign in person. Murad resembled Yavuz Selim I or Suleiman I, who ruled in the early 1500s, rather than his immediate predecessors. Thus his person gave a strong end to the age of conquests and the heyday of the Ottoman Empire. He was buried in the mausoleum of his father, Ahmed I, because during his short life he did not have the opportunity to build his own mausoleum, and, according to many, he was not even preoccupied with architecture.

Used sources: C. Finkel - Osman's Dream: The Story of the Ottoman Empire; L. Peirce - The imperial harem; G. Börekçi - Factions and favourites at the courts of Sultan Ahmed I (r. 1603-17) and his immediate predecessors; S. Faroqhi - The Ottoman Empire and the World; C. Imber - The Ottoman Empire 1300-1650; F. Suraiya, K. Fleet - The Cambridge History of Turkey 1453-1603; G. Piterberg - An Ottoman Tragedy, History and Historiography at Play; F. Suraiya - The Cambridge History of Turkey, The Later Ottoman Empire, 1603–1839; Howard - A History of the Ottoman Empire; Öztuna - Devletler ve Hanedanlar; Uluçay - Padişahların Kadınları ve Kızları; : F. Davis - The Palace of Topkapi in Istanbul; Y. Öztuna - Genç Osman ve IV. Murad; G. Junne - The black eunuchs of the Ottoman Empire; R. Dankoff - An Ottoman Mentality: The World of Evliya Çelebi; R. Murphey - ‘The Functioning of the Ottoman Army under Murad IV (1623–1639/1032–1049):Key to Understanding of the Relationship Between Center and Periphery; S. Faroqhi - Another Mirror for Princes, The Public Image of the Ottoman Sultans and Its Reception

* * *

Születése és gyermekkora

Murad 1612 júliusában született I. Ahmed és kedvenc ágyasa, Mahpeyker Köszem második fia és ötödik gyermekeként. Ahmednek Köszem két fia mellett volt még egy fia, Oszmán herceg, a legidősebb gyermek. Murad ahhoz a herceggenerációhoz tartozott, akiknek először a történelemben nem kellett a testvérgyilkosság törvényétől tartaniuk. A II. Mehmed által törvénybe foglalt, de nála sokkal idősebb hagyomány szerint a trónralépő szultánnak minden testvérét ki kell végeztetni, a rend fenntartásának érdekében. Ahmed szultán azonban ennek nem tett eleget, mikor 1603-as trónralépése után életben hagyta öccsét, Musztafát. Így Ahmed fiai már egy új világba születtek. Tény azonban, hogy Ahmed sokáig nem volt biztos döntésében, így többször is megkísérelte Musztafa kivégzését, de végül a lelkiismerete és Köszem győzködése használt, így Musztafa megmenekült.

Murad koragyermekkorát relatív nyugalomban élhette, hiszen apja népszerű szultán volt, édesanyja a Haszeki szultána rangot viselte, igen befolyásos és népszerű asszony volt. Mindez azonban 1617-ben megváltozott. Ahmed szultán meghalt és egyfajta örökösödési káosz sújtotta a birodalmat. Az embereknek elege volt a testvérgyilkosságból, azonban Ahmed nem rendelekzett arról, hogy ki kövesse a trónon: öccse, Musztafa vagy legidősebb fia, Oszmán. Végül Musztafa trónralépésével hivatalosan is megváltozott az örökösödés, többé nem apáról fiúra szállt a trón, hanem a legidősebb férfi foglalta el azt. Murad és testvérei így életben maradhattak, azonban elzárva éltek a Topkapi Palotában, míg édesanyjuk Köszem a Régi Palotába költözött lányaival.

A következő évek meglehetősen zavarosak voltak, Musztafát mentális betegsége miatt hamarosan trónfosztották és Murad féltestvére, Oszmán került a trónra. Oszmán nagyon népszerűtlen, rossz uralkodó volt, aki bár uralkodásának korai szakaszában igyekezett korrekt viszonyt ápolni Köszem szultánával, később 1621 januárjában kivégeztette Murad édesbátyját, Mehmed herceget. Murad és öccsei minden bizonnyal rettegésben éltek innentől, anyjuktól, nővéreiktől távol, elzárva, kiszolgáltatva egy zsarnok uralkodónak, és az sem kizárt, hogy tanúi voltak a kivégzésnek. Végül Oszmán brutális meggyilkolása hozott enyhülést számukra. Ám ugyanakkor életreszóló leckét is adott Muradnak arról, hogy még egy szultán sem lehet biztonságban.

Trónralépés

Oszmán brutális kivégzése Halime szultánához és fiához, I. Musztafához volt köthető, így végül újra trónfosztották Musztafa szultánt, anyját pedig száműzték a Régi Palotába. Az öröklési sorban a mindössze 11 éves Murad következett. Korára való tekintettel a divan és ulema édesanyját, Köszem szultánát nevezte ki régensnek, míg Murad maga elég éretté nem válik az uralkodáshoz. Murad bár fellélegezhetett, hiszen ő lett a szultán, ilyen nehéz gyermekkorral bizonyára nem volt könnyű új életet kezdeni. Emellett fontos leszögezni, hogy Murad utoljára öt évesen 1617-ben tölthetett hosszabb időt édesanyjával, az 1617 és 1623 közötti hat évet anyjától elszakítva, bezárva élte, így feltehetőleg az is komoly nehézséget okozott kettejüknek, hogy újra kialakítsanak egy anya-fia kapcsolatot.

Murad nehezen kezelhető gyermek volt, Köszem több levele is fennmaradt, melyekben a nagyvezírnek panaszkodik arról, mennyire nem bír Muraddal és, hogy az mennyire nem hallgat rá, sőt olykor napokig találkozni sem hajlandó vele. Amellett, hogy az elszigeteltség éket vert közéjük, hasonló személyiségük sem segített sokat. Mind a ketten vezéregyéniségek voltak, igen erős akarattal, így nehezen jöttek ki egymással. Sokszor vitatkoztak egymással, mely viták után Köszem volt az, aki békülni szeretett volna Muraddal. Egyik nagy veszekedésük után például egy lovat ajándékozott fiának, máskor hatalmas ünnepséget rendezett neki. Emellett Köszem rendszeresen fejezte ki aggodalmát Murad egészségével kapcsolatban, ami arra enged következtetni, hogy talán Murad már ekkor egészségügyi problémákkal küzdött.

A birodalom Ahmed halálától kezdve fokozatosan süllyedt anarchiába. Több fontos területet is elveszítettek és hiába próbálták visszahódítani ezeket, nem jártak sikerrel. Továbbá a II. Oszmán kivégzése után fellázadó Abaza Mehmed Pasa dacára annak, hogy mindenkit felelősségre vontak a gyilkosságért, nem volt hajlandó elismerni Muradot új uralkodójaként és folytatta a lázadást. Ezt a lázadást sem sikerült leverni az ellene kiküldött pasáknak. A helyzetet fokozandó, 1625-ben pestis tört ki a fővárosban és több, mint százezer áldozattal járt. Murad először szintén ebben az évben lázadt anyja szava ellen. Köszem ekkor kötött egy megállapodást a spanyolokkal, Muradnak azonban nem tetszett az egyezség, ezért azonnal visszahívatta azt.

1628-ban aztán Murad is súlyos beteg lett, hetekig feküdt ágyban. Pontos betegsége nem derült ki, egyesek szerint ekkor kezdődött epilepsziája, mások szerint emésztőrendszeri problémái voltak. Öröm volt az ürömben, hogy legalább ebben az évben sikerült leverni Abaza Mehmed Pasa lázadását és elfogni a férfit. Ugyanebben az évben Murad újabb jelét adta annak, hogy hamarosan át kívánja venni az uralkodást és nyíltan szembe ment anyjával, amikor felbontotta nővére Fatma házasságát az admirális Çatalcalı Haşan Pasával, akit anyja kiemelt figyelemben részesített. Emellett Muradot egyre jobbn zavarta, hogy anyja szemethuny a korrupció felett. Köszem maga is nagy előnyökhöz juttatta az általa favorizált pasákat, ami sokakból váltott ki ellenérzéseket, különösen fiából, Muradból. Így került például fontos janicsár pozícióba Murad nővérének, Fatma szultánának az új férje, Hafiz Ahmed Pasa. Ez azonban a szpáhiknak és a Köszemet szerető janicsároknak is sok volt. Végül ez volt az az esemény, mely kijelölte Murad egyeduralmának kezdetét.

Az egyeduralkodó

1632-ben, Hafiz Ahmed Pasa kinevezése után szpáhi és janicsár lázadás tört ki, melynek során a lázadók kivégezték a nagyvezírt és Murad szultán több hűséges emberét, többet között közeli barátját, Musa Çelebit. Hogy a helyzet tovább bonyolódjon a katonák nyilvánosan követelték, hogy Murad mutassa meg nekik öccseit. Ezzel jelezni akarták neki, hogy ha akarnák le tudnák cserélni valamelyik öccsére; másrészt pedig keringtek olyan alaptalan pletykák, hogy Murad és Köszem megszabadultak a hercegektől. Murad kénytelen volt engedni a követeléseknek és bemutatta öccseit, akiket a katonák ekkor éltetni kezdtek. Murad ezt sosem felejtette el és sosem bocsátotta meg sem a lázadóknak, sem testvéreinek. Muradot tulajdonképpen ekkor mérhetetlenül megalázták, szövetségeseit, közeli barátját meggyilkolták. Ezt egy uralkodó sem hagyhatta. Murad azonban volt annyira megfontolt és intelligens, hogy nem azonnal kezdett bosszúhadjáratba, hanem csak akkor végeztette ki a hangadókat, mikor néhány hónap múlva hatalmát sikerült megszilárdítani.

Akárhogyan is, a lázadás után 1632 májusában Murad saját kezébe vette az irányítást és lemondatta édesanyját a régensi pozícióból. Köszem nem ellenkezett, félreállt, azonban igyekezett volna segíteni fiát, utat mutatni neki. Murad ezt nem értékelte és nem hallgatott édesanyja tanácsaira. Murad kényszeresen igyekezett anyját távol tartani a politikától és cselekedeteiből egyértelműen kiolvasható, hogy zavarta őt anyja nagy befolyása, az, hogy az elmúlt években sokkal nagyobb hatalma volt anyjának, mint neki. Épp ezért, amint a hatalmat saját irányítása alá vonta, Murad igyekezett anyja embereit - így például saját sógorát, a már említett Hafiz Ahmed Pasát - sorra leváltani, hogy édesanyja befolyása alól kivonva magát, elkezdhesse egyeduralmát.

Bár Köszem és Murad viszonyát kétségkívül megbélyegezte az 1632-es lázadás, hiba lenne azt gondolni, hogy Murad teljesen kizárta életéből édesanyját. Annak hárem vezetői tisztségét és édesanya mivoltát mindig tiszteletben tartotta, sőt egy 1632-ből származó beszámoló szerint kifejezetten fontos volt neki anyja véleménye a magánéletét illetően. Knolles ugyanis arról számolt ekkor be, hogy Murad hetekik lányának születése után feleségül akarta venni (vagy inkább Haszeki rangra emelni) a gyermek anyját, hogy kifejezze szeretetét a nő irányába, de mielőtt ezt megtette volna, kikérte Köszem véleményét. Érdekes kérdés, hogy ki volt ez a nő, ugyanis Murad korai uralkodásából egyetlen kiemelt státuszú ágyast ismerünk, Haszeki Ayşe szultánát, azonban nem tudjuk pontosan, kik voltak a gyermekei és mikor születtek.

Emellett mikor Murad hosszabb rövidebb időre elhagyta a fővárost, mindig anyját hagyta meg felügyelőnek, Köszem pedig mindig mindenről pontosan beszámolt fiának. Amikor Köszem problémát észlelt, azonnal jelezte azt a legrészletesebb leírással Murad számára. Előbbire egy konkrét példa történt 1634-ben, amikor Murad távollétében Köszem arról értesült, hogy egy müfti nem fogadta el Murad egyik döntését és felül akarta azt bírálni. Azonnal üzenetet küldött fiának "Én harcos oroszlán fiam, gyere azonnal! Pletykák terjednek a trónoddal kapcsolatban, az emberek pedig mozgolódnak." Muradnak nem kellett több, azonnal visszatért és minden vizsgálat nélkül kivégezte a müftit. Ez volt az első ilyen esemény a birodalom történetében, korábban sosem végeztek ki müftit. Egy másik alkalommal Murad Köszemet bízta meg, hogy diplomáciai megbeszéléseket folytasson a Krími Kánsággal.

A zsarnok

Murad személyisége nagyon megosztó. Sokan egyszerűen zsarnoknak tartják, azonban több volt ennél. Sokszor kegyetlen cselekedetei minden bizonnyal nehéz gyermekkorából származnak és a trónfosztástól való rettegéséből. Rengeteg legenda ismert, miszerint élvezettel gyilkolt embereket és sokszor ártatlanul kínozta őket, de olyanokat is hallani, hogy a szultán éjszaka kivont karddal rohangált az utcákon és megölt bárkit aki szembe jött vele. Ilyen formában ezek természetesen nagyon erős túlzások, ám tény, hogy sok olyan cselekedete volt, melyek nem tették különösebben népszerűvé. Köszem szultána igyekezett minden létező módon hatni fiára és saját jótékonykodásaival próbálta tompítani fia agresszív cselekedeteit.

Murad megtiltotta az alkohol és dohány fogyasztását, sőt minden kávézót bezáratott, mert szerinte a janicsárok és szpáhik itt gyülekeztek és szövetkeztek ellene. Aki pedig megszegte a szabályokat, súlyos büntetésre számíthatott, akár halálbüntetésre is. Hogy parancsait betartassa gyakran ment utcára álruhában és lépett fel a rendeletet megszegőkkel szemben személyesen. Ám az is tény, hogy ha ekkor igazságtalanságot vagy elkeserítő dolgot tapasztalt, az ellen is igyekezett tenni. Emellett sokat változtatott az alapvető törvényeken is, a büntetéseket megszigorította, gyakoribbá vált a halálbüntetés kisebb vétségek esetében is. A legendák megemlékeznek egy esetről, amikor egy vezírt végeztetett ki, amiért az megverte saját anyósát. Máskor pedig egy követet, Alvise Contarinit záratta börtönbe egy jelentéktelen bűnért. Contarini beszámolói ezen eset után megbízhatatlanná váltak, ugyanis gyakran írt hazugságokat, túlzásokat Muradról, személyes ellenérzései miatt. Ilyen volt például, mikor Contarini arról számolt be, hogy Murad ütlegeléssel fenyegeti rendszersen anyját, testvéreit és ágyasait. Azonban minden más bizonyíték épp az ellenkezőjéről számol be, így emögött a beszámoló mögött valószínűleg Contarini ellenszenve lehetett az egyetlen ok.

Bár kétségtelen, hogy Murad szigora túlzó volt, ennek köszönhetően sikerült rendbe szednie a birodalmat, a káosz és anarchia ténylegesen megoldódni látszott. Murad olyan kaotikus idők után ült a trónon, mikor a szultánokat kevésbé tisztelte a nép, mint régen. I. Szulejmán idejében a szultán szinte istenség volt, egy elérhetetlen, felsőbbrendű teremtmény. Egy szultánnak pedig, hogy uralhasson egy ekkora birodalmat fenn is kellett tartani ezt a látszatot. Az I. Ahmed halála után bekövetkező káoszban, mikor a nép Oszmán példáján meglátta, hogy a szultán igenis halandó, egyszerű ember, lerombolódott az évszázadok alatt felépített isteni kép. Murad ezt igyekezett újjáépíteni. Amikor ez szép szóval nem ment, akkor erőszakkal és szigorral tette, de rendet teremtett az országába.

Nem is meglepő ez tudva, hogy Murad példaképének I. Yavuz Szelimet tartotta, aki vasszigorral irányított, nem tűrte az ellentmondást. Murad - tanítója elméletét követve - úgy vélte, hogy a birodalom hanyatlása Szulejmán uralkodása alatt kezdődött, emiatt egyértelműen egy korábbi sikeres szultánt kellett imitálni. Emellett Muradnak nem titkolt célja volt a régi öröklési rend visszahozása is. Bár saját életét a törvény változásának köszönehtte, ő mégis úgy vélte, túl sok veszélyt tartogat magában, ha a szultánnak vele nagyjából egy idős vetélytársai vannak. Bár sokan egyértelműen elítélik ezért, be kell lássuk, volt igazság ebben. Oszmán brutális kivégzése, Musztafa bábként rángatása mind jól példázza, hogy a szultánok egyeduralma és kiemelt státusza megszűnt azzal, hogy hozzájuk hasonló vetélytársaik voltak és azzal, hogy elkezdtek érző lényeknek tűnni. Murad saját fiát akarta maga után a trónon látni, emiatt végeztette ki idővel öccseit, kivéve a mentálisan sérült Ibrahimot. Ez egyébként felvet több kérdést is, különös tekintettel Murad fiaira.

Murad gyermekeivel kapcsolatban elég sok a kérdőjel. Evliya Çelebi beszámolóiból tudjuk, hogy Muradnak rengeteg fia született, ám szinte kivétel nélkül mind elhunyt csecsemő korában, ugyanis meglehetősen rossz egészséggel jöttek világra. Sajnos legtöbb gyermeke esetében nem tudjuk, hogy mikor hunytak el. Annyi bizonyos, hogy 1634-ben egy követi beszámoló szerint két gyenge egészségű csecsemő fia volt. Azonban ezek ellenére is azt kell feltételezzük, hogy mikor Murad kivégeztette testvéreit (1635, 1638) legalább egy élő fia kellett, hogy legyen, aki nem csecsemő volt már. Legidősebb fia, Ahmed 1627-ben született és sokak szerint ő élt legtovább, igaz pontos dátum nem áll rendelekzésre halálát illetően. Vannak olyanok is, akik szerint Muradnak nem volt idősebb élő fia ekkoriban, egyszerűen csak a dinasztia végét akarta, ezért ölette meg testvéreit. Ezutóbbit alátámasztja a tény, hogy I. Ibrahim trónralépésekor Muradnak nem volt már élő fia, így talán Murad utolsó éveiben sem élt már egyikük sem. Azonban ez nem jelenti azt, hogy 1635-ben és 1638-ban sem volt már élő fia. Annyit tudunk 1637-ből egy követi beszámoló alapján, hogy Murad legalább 6 fia még egy éves kora előtt meghalt, a többiek egészsége pedig nagyon törékeny. Ám nem tudjuk, hogy a szerző mit és hány gyermeket értett a többiek alatt.

A magánember

Szultánként Muradot a legnagyobb jóindulattal is kénytelenek vagyunk valamilyen módon zsarnoknak tartani, hiszen rendeletei és sokszor a bűn mértékével nem egyensúlyban lévő büntetései erre utalnak. Ugyanakkor Evliya Çelebi leírásaiból igen sok minden tárul fel Muradról az emberről. Ezek alapján olyabá tűnik, hogy a kegyetlen Murad csupán egy álarc volt, ami mögé valódi természetét rejtette a szultán. Murad úgy vélte, hogy csak akkor tiszteli népe és katonái, ha félnek tőle. Minden cselekedete erre utal, így talán emiatt játszotta ezt a szerepet. Természetesen valódi személyiségétől sem állhatott nagyon távol ez, hiszen máskülönben nem tudta volna végrehajtani kegyetlenségeit.

Mit tudunk azonban mégis Muradról az emberről? Többek szerint rendkívül intelligens, művelt férfi volt, akinek igen jó volt a humora és tehetséges költő is volt. Evliya szerint "egy császár ő, lelkében egy dervis természetével." Utóbbi hasonlat különösen illő lehetett Muradhoz, mert nagyon tisztelte és elismerte a kerengő derviseket. Olyannyira, hogy egy Ömer nevű dervist az "apám" megszólítással tisztelt meg. Ömerrel egyébként gyakran szereztek zenét együtt. Murad a szöveget írta meg, a dervis pedig a dallamot adta hozzá. Azt pedig biztosan tudjuk, hogy a pletykákkal ellentétben, Murad nem volt őrült. Bizonyos szintű paranoia jellemezte ugyan, de ez figyelmebe véve a korábban vele történteket, azt, hogy első kézből tapasztalta bátyja halálát, majd féltestvére brutális meggyilkolását, nem különösebben meglepő. Azonban azon emberek között, akiket szeretett és akikben bízott Murad kivirágzott és megmutatta valódi arcát. Az igazi Murad egy ereje teljében lévő fiatal férfi volt, akivel a legszemélyesebb dolgokkal is lehetett humorizálni, akivel egyszerre lehetett mulatni és komoly dolgokról társalogni. Azt azonban Evliya sem vonta kétségbe, hogy Murad igen önfejű és hirtelen haragú ember volt, különösen anyjával szemben.

Szintén Evliyához köthető egy híres (vagy hírhedt) történet is, mely alapján sokan tartják napjainkban homoszexuálisnak a szultánt. Evliya történetének lényege, hogy egy gyönyörű személyről, Handanról beszélgettek a szultánnal, akit a szultán szeret és aki Evliya szerint is igazán elragadó. A történet szerint a szultán megkérte Handant, hogy a hajából vegyen ki egy rózsát és adja Evliyának, hogy ezzel felvidítsa a rosszkedvű Evliyát. A történetben alapvetően nem lenne semmi különös, ha mindez egy nyugati birodalomban történik. Ismerve a birodalom szokásait azonban egyértelművé válik számunkra, hogy Handan nem lehetett egy nő, hiszen egy háremhölgy nem tartózkodhatott idegen férfiak társaságában, különösen nem fedetlen hajjal. Emellett nehezíti Handan pontos felismerését, hogy a Handan egy uniszex név és hogy az oszmán nyelvben nincs férfi és női nem. Emiatt sokan gondolják, hogy Handan egy eunuch vagy egy fiatal férfi volt.Fontos tudnunk, hogy az Oszmán Birodalomban az 1800-as évek közepéig a homoszexualitás elfogadott volt, nem volt büntetendő. A legtöbb bordélyban (mert ezek is voltak a birodalomban) nem csak nők, de férfiak is elérhetőek voltak. Emellett II. Mehmed szultán óta a pederasztia elfogadott volt a szultánok és pasák között. Ezt az ókori görög hagyományt, mely egy felnőtt férfi és egy nála jóval fiatalabb férfi közti homoszexuális kapcsolatot jelenti, II. Mehmed (aki valósznűleg tényleg meleg vagy biszexuális volt) vette át, Konstantinápoly elfoglalása után. Később volt olyan szultán, mely élt ezzel a lehetőséggel és voltak akik nem. Azonban a pederasztia elsődlegesen inkább státuszszimbólum volt, mint szexuális vágy által hajtott kapcsolat.

Sokan pletykálták azt is, hogy Köszem szultána gyermekkora óta férfiakat küldött Murad ágyába, azonban semmi nem utal arra, hogy ez igaz lenne. Akárhogy is, Murad szexuális orientációja valószínűleg sosem fog kiderül és talán nem is számít. Életében két jelentős ágyas volt, Ayşe Haszeki, aki uralkodását szinte végig dominálta és aki Esmehan Kaya mellett bizonyára több gyermek édesanyja is volt; és egy másik nő, akinek nevét nem sikerült rekonstruálni és aki Murad utolsó éveiben került mellé és lett Haszeki. Ayşe volt azonban Murad kedvence minden bizonnyal uralma alatt végig, hiszen a nőt még revani hadjáratára is magával vitte. Ez a korai szultánok esetében előfordult, ám évszázadok óta nem éltek a hagyománnyal, hiszen megleehtősen kockázatos volt.

Zsarnokból az imádott szultán

Murad elődeihez hasonlóan tisztában volt azzal, hogy a leggyorsabb út a népszerűséghez egy sikeres hadjárat. Muradon különösen nagy volt a nyomás, ugyanis az ő uralkodása elején veszítettek el kifejezetten fontos területeket, így valahogy helyre kellett hoznia ezt. Murad igazán harcos természetű férfi volt, emellett fizikai teljesítményeiről is legendák szólnak. Igaz, hogy egészsége nem volt túl jó, de nagyon erős fizikummal bírt. Magas volt, robosztus alkatú, fekete hajú és szemű férfi, halvány bőrrel. Murad amellett tehát, hogy jóképű volt fizikai erejével is rendszeresen tudta lenyűgözni alattvalóit. Legendák keringenek íjakról, melyet rajta kívül senki sem tudott kifeszíteni vagy buzogányokról, melyeket senki nem tudott meglendíteni, csak ő. Evliya szerint a szultán gyakran egyik percről a másikra ledobta ruháit és birkózni kezdett egy éppen a közelben lévő őrrel. Más alkalmakkal a szultán egyszerűen felemelte Evliyát minden különösebb erőfeszítés nélkül a feje fölé. Egy ilyen fitt, és termetéhez képest meglehetősen mozgékony szultánhoz remekül illett a háborúskodás. És egy ilyen szultán végre el tudta hitetni alattvalóival és katonáival, hogy vele megnyerhetik a háborút!

Miután uralkodásának első felében több pasát is küldtek, hogy visszaszerezze az elvesztett területeket, ám minden kísérlet kudarccal végződött, Murad úgy döntött személyesen indul hadjáratra. Első hadjáratára 1635-ben került sor, a cél pedig Yerevan (Revan) visszahódítása volt. Tavasszal indultak Üsküdarból és bár útközben gyakran megálltak, hogy Anatoliában leszámoljanak kisebb bandákkal vagy kivégezzék azokat, akik ellen sok panasz volt, júliusra el is érték Yerevant. Nagyjából egy hét ostrom után, augusztus 8-án a kastélyt uraló helytartó, Mirgune Tahmasp Quli Khan feladta a várat és megadta magát. Murad értékelte, hogy Mirgune Tahmasp Quli Khan elfogadta őt új uralkodójának és mély barátság alakult ki köztük. A férfi új neve, Emirgün lett és a szultán kegyeltjeként haláláig mellette volt. Egyesek szerint Emirgün volt az, akinek hatására Murad egyre gyakrabban kezdett alkoholt fogyasztani.

A győzelem után Murad Tabrizbe ment a csapataival, azonban a várost nem tudták megtartani, ráadásul Murad is beteg lett, így telelni Van-ba utaztak. Év végére pedig visszaérkeztek Isztambulba, ahol Köszem szultána hatalmas ünnepséggel várta fiát. Az egész város Murad győzelmét ünnepelte és éltette a szultánt. Murad azonnal elrendelte egy pavilon építését a Topkapi Palotán belül a győzelem tiszteletére. Ez lett később a Revan Pavilon. Murad minden lépését okosan megtervezte és mindig akkor cselekedett, amikor a körülmények megfelelőek voltak. Így tett akkor is, mikor leszámolt az 1632-es lázadás hangadóival és így tett akkor is, amikor féltestvéreitől, a rá hatalmas veszélyt jelentő Bayezidtől és Szulejmántól kívánt megszabadulni. Murad tudta, hogy a testvérgyilkosság nincs a nép kedvére, tudta, hogy egy szultán könnyen belebukhat ebbe, azonban mindenképpen véghez akarta vinni terveit és vissza akarta hozni az apáról fiúra szálló trónöröklést. Ezért abban a pillanatban adta parancsba a két herceg kivégzését, amikor népszerűsége a legmagasabb volt és az egész birodalom győzelmét ünnepelte. Bár a két herceg kivégzése természetesen megdöbbentette az embereket, mindenki el volt foglalva a győzelemmel, a fellendült gazdasággal, így nem fordultak Murad ellen.

Murad népszerűségét az sem igazán csökkentette, hogy következő év tavaszán a szafavidák visszafoglalták Yerevánt. Természetesen esze ágában sem volt elfogadni ezt, de ismét kivárta a legalkalmasabb pillanatot. Ez végül 1638 tavaszán jött el. Ezúttal nem elégedett meg Yerevannal, Bagdadot tűzte ki céljául. Október végére el is érte Bagdadot és letáborozott a város köré és megkezdte az ostromot. December 24-én Bektash Khan, Bagdad kormányzója megadta magát, így januárban Murad beléphetett végre a hőn áhított városba, úgy mint nagynevű elődje, I. Szulejmán is tette 100 évvel ezelőtt (1534-ben). Bagdadban Murad elrendelte, hogy javíttassák meg és újítsák fel a korábban Szulejmán által építtetett mauzóleumot.

Murad bár erős fizikummal bírt, egészsége sosem volt jó, a rémes tábori körülmények pedig tovább rontottak állapotán. Különös tekintettel arra, hogy legtöbbször katonáival együtt edzett, sok időt töltött velük, hogy ezzel nyerje meg támogatásukat. Súlyosbodó alkoholizmusa szintén nem segítette a helyzetet. Diyarbekirben végül olyan rosszul lett a szultán, hogy hónapokig kellett ott állomásozniuk mielőtt Isztambulba érhettek volna. Amíg Murad a betegágyat nyomta, nagyvezíre Tayyar Mehmed Pasa egyezséget kötött a perzsa sahhal, hogy lezárják végre az 1603 óta tartó háborút, és visszaállították az 1555-ben kötött Amaszia egyezményt, így a két ország között helyreállt a béke, Bagdadot pedig az Oszmán Birodalom megtarthatta.

Júniusban, Isztambulba visszatérve újra hatalmas ünneplés fogadta a szultánt, mindenki dicsőítette. Szokásához híven ezen győzelmét is pavilon építéssel igyekezett megkoronázni, így megépíttette a Bagdad Pavilont. Sajnos más szokását is igyekezett megtartani, így édesöccsét, Kasim herceget (és talán vele együtt Ibrahim herceget is) a Revan Pavilonba kérette, ahol Kasim herceget kivégeztette, Ibrahim életét pedig egyesek szerint csak Köszem szultána könyörgése és fenyegetőzése mentette meg. Mások szerint Ibrahimot nem is akarta kivégeztetni Murad. Kasim kivégzése különösen jelentős volt, ugyanis a két korábban kivégzett herceggel ellentétben Kasim édestestvére volt Muradnak és korabeli beszámolók alapján még közel is álltak egymáshoz. Muradon ekkorra kezdett elhatalmasodni betegsége, alkoholizmusa és paranoiája.

Halála és hagyatéka

Murad Isztambulba való visszatérése után nagyon rossz egészségi állapotban volt, hónapokon keresztül nyomta az ágyat. Több alapbetegsége is volt, azonban ezekről nem tudunk sokat. Egyesek szerint epilepsziás lehetett, mások szerint neki is hasonló emésztőrendszeri problémái lehettek, mint apjának (I. Ahmed) és nagyanyjának (Handan szultána). Ezeket tovább súlyosbították a harci sérülések, hiszen Murad maga is harcolt a hadjáratain; valamint az alkoholizmusa miatt kialakuló májzsugor.

Murad harci sérüléseiből képes volt felépülni, ugyanis 1640 elején a Ramadánt minden gond nélkül ünnepelte, találkozott a vezíreivel, rendezvényeken vett részt. Sőt, hogy tovább fárassza beteg testét rendszeresen járt lovagolni és alkoholizálni barátaihoz. Egyik ilyen alkalommal Murad elvesztette az eszméletét és testőrei vitték vissza a Topkapi Palotába. A szultán néha magához tért, úgy tűnik ekkor már tudta, hogy haldoklik. Külön kérésére vitték át a Revan Pavilonba, ahol néhány hónappal korábban öccsét végeztette ki. Talán épp emiatt akart ő is ott meghalni. Nem tudni, hogy kik voltak mellette utolsó perceiben, de valószínűleg édesanyját ha akarták volna sem tudták volna távol tartani. Egyesek szerint halálos ágyán Murad kiadta a parancsot Ibrahim kivégzésére is, ám erre nincs bizonyíték.

Murad temetésére hatalmas tömeg gyűlt össze, koporsója előtt fekete lova sétált feldíszítve, a jelenlévők közül pedig többen hangosan zokogtak. Így tehát nem igaz, hogy a nép örült volna a szultán halálának. Bár Murad nem volt tökéletes, sok kegyetlen tettet vitt véghez, mégis évtizedek után ő volt az első hódító szultán és ő volt az, aki sikerrel állította vissza a birodalom békéjét, amiért a nép szerette őt. IV. Murad volt az utolsó igazi klasszikus értelemben vett hódító szultán, hiszen többé egyik szultán sem vezetett személyesen hadjáratot. Murad inkább hasonlított az 1500-as évek elején uralkodó I. Yavuz Szelimre vagy I. Szulejmánra, mint közvetlen elődeire. Így személye erős lezárást adott a hódítások korának és az Oszmán Birodalom fénykorának. Édesapja, I. Ahmed mauzóleumában helyezték örök nyugalomra, mivel rövid élete során nem volt alkalma saját mauzóleumot építtetni és sokak szerint nem is foglalkoztatta az építészet.

Felhasznált források: C. Finkel - Osman's Dream: The Story of the Ottoman Empire; L. Peirce - The imperial harem; G. Börekçi - Factions and favourites at the courts of Sultan Ahmed I (r. 1603-17) and his immediate predecessors; S. Faroqhi - The Ottoman Empire and the World; C. Imber - The Ottoman Empire 1300-1650; F. Suraiya, K. Fleet - The Cambridge History of Turkey 1453-1603; G. Piterberg - An Ottoman Tragedy, History and Historiography at Play; F. Suraiya - The Cambridge History of Turkey, The Later Ottoman Empire, 1603–1839; Howard - A History of the Ottoman Empire; Öztuna - Devletler ve Hanedanlar; Uluçay - Padişahların Kadınları ve Kızları; : F. Davis - The Palace of Topkapi in Istanbul; Y. Öztuna - Genç Osman ve IV. Murad; G. Junne - The black eunuchs of the Ottoman Empire; R. Dankoff - An Ottoman Mentality: The World of Evliya Çelebi; R. Murphey - ‘The Functioning of the Ottoman Army under Murad IV (1623–1639/1032–1049):Key to Understanding of the Relationship Between Center and Periphery; S. Faroqhi - Another Mirror for Princes, The Public Image of the Ottoman Sultans and Its Reception

#Murad IV #Kösem sultan #kösem #mahpeyker kösem #Ahmed I #ibrahim I #Osman II #Mustafa I #Ayse #haseki ayşe #sanavber #emirgün #fratricide #sehzade bayezid #sehzade kasim

49 notes · View notes

mc-critical · 3 years ago

Note

Glad to see you’re back to taking asks!❤️ I hope all is well for you!

A bit of a simpler one this time around, I felt like Gülfem closer to the end of season 4 started to come off a bit..ingenuine to me? If that’s the right word? I mean she spent previous seasons partaking in plots against Hürrem and what seemed like hating her or at the very least expressing open disapproval of her actions and what she stood for to..consoling Hürrem’s restless conscience after Hürrem was diagnosed with a terminal illness? I just remember her saying things like she should be proud of the life she lived, that she wasn’t a bad person, that she shouldn’t think of her illness as a punishment etc etc. I suppose we could give Gülfem the benefit of the doubt and say that she saw no point in openly opposing Hürrem anymore (like Fatma or Mahidevran felt towards the end) but why not just leave the palace as they did? Perhaps they kept her around for the sake of the story but I feel like they didn’t do much with her arc past that point, they just did a time jump then revealed to us in a flashback she died? I think I’m just more confused than anything. Why not keep Gülfem’s feelings towards Hürrem at least somewhat consistent like Mahi/Fatma?

I'm fine, thank you! ❤❤ I closed my ask box mostly due to school work, the end of the year exams can be intense heh

I definetly get your sentiments since that sure seems to be an inconsistency to Gülfem's character at first glance. It may indeed turn out as a contrast to the remainder of what we have seen.

It isn't such a big problem for me, however, because we have to take two things into consideration:

Gülfem's stance of Hürrem plays a part in reflecting the tone of the final episodes of S04. The whole last chunk of the show before Hürrem's death did its best in recognizing her alleged legacy in ways it hadn't before. It suddenly began acknowledging her power, showing SS prove considerably more affection than ever before (that makes the most narrative sense out of everything, but still), folk praising her for the first time ever and most notably, various characters in the show, with positive, ambiguous and negative relationship with her alike, either praising her or consoling her. Gülfem is one of the more neutral characters in the castle and the most nurturing one, the one most able to empathize and console. It is only fitting to give her such a role to fit the message the writers want to deliver. Acknowledging Hürrem's legacy just now and like this is truly as much of a copout as it is fanservice, but at least it's not completely out of nowhere (especially the acknowledgment of her fondations) and they do give us some consistency with what Gülfem does along with everyone else in this whole ordeal.

S04 extends on Gülfem's role as a conscience character-wise, besides utilizing it in favor of the narrative voice. In these last episodes in particular, she seems to be the conscience of everyone in the castle, given her nature and that she's the last person left there who could do that. That includes Süleiman, as well as it includes Hürrem.

These things aren't presented in the best way, writing-wise, and could be sometimes more subtle than necessary. Gülfem herself could be a little underdeveloped as a character and has comparatively lesser screentime than the rest of the main and secondary cast. Her conscience is her clear role in the narrative, but her relationships, with the exception of Hatice (and the other sisters of SS to an extent), aren't as well defined. Look at her relationship with Mahidevran, for example: we got hints of their supposed past rivalry, we got hints of resentment, but these hints only turned into an inconsistent mess. There were much more scenes where they were in good terms with each other and anything else was so few and far in between, it only appeared to be a contrast. We got no true perspective of their past in Manisa and Gülfem's more personal opinion on Mahidevran, leaving it only as a static, but pretty good relationship. (which is why I'm grateful that S03 removed this set-up of their relationship, rendering it still not that well fleshed out, but more consistent.)

In a similar fashion, we never got a proper exploration of how exactly she felt about Hürrem, too. What I think I can say with confidence though is that certainly didn't hate her - Gülfem is a very patient and just woman, which I can only admire her for. She is a voice of reason, trying her best to be unbiased in her outlooks and stand for what is right. She has happened to knock Hürrem down a peg, but not because she disliked her, but because she thought she was crossing the line or offending the people she cares about. The closest we got to a look into a tiny resentment of Gülfem's of Hürrem was when Hürrem used her to make Mahidevran lose her rulership of the harem. It's normal that Gülfem would harbor such feelings, knowing that she didn't do anything to Hürrem before that and only supported her about Mahidevran wanting Valide's chambers. Being used in an intrigue like that clearly hurt her and her willing to stand even more against Hürrem was hinted at a little, but once again, that was a very short conflict. It would be a decent transition if the writers wanted that for Gülfem, but they didn't. It would run against Gülfem's forgiving nature at this point to hate Hürrem. Gülfem just is notorious in putting the past behind her. {hence on a thematic note, her backstory and origins not only didn't get revealed to us except for a few scenes, similarly to Mahidevran (Mahidevran got flashbacks, at least), but she, in contrast to both Mahidevran and Hürrem, has already adapted to her present, knowing that she cannot bring back what she has lost. And her adaption has already happened, it's not made out to be a character arc within the series.} Her feelings for Hürrem aren't kept consistent, because there isn't much to be kept consistent. Mahidevran and Fatma both have pivotal dynamics with Hürrem that play a major role in the narrative as they both play a more major part of the story. Gülfem and Hürrem's relationship as a whole seemed to have both its good and bad moments (as Hürrem herself recalled in E133) and the good moments were usually when both consoled someone and Gülfem consoling Hürrem now doesn't seem this strange anymore.

Gülfem also seems to put her own feelings behind her in favor of those of the others, probably in result of her huge loss. She always comforts the others, is there for them and shows her moral support. She seems to identify herself in their own struggles. That, I feel, gives her the ability to sympathize even with those she presumably doesn't like, because she's very open and honest overall. I don't think it's ingenuine, because Gülfem never showed signs of hypocrisy. Not to mention that every hypocrisy there is in the franchise, we know of: either through previously fully established dynamics, direction or character motive. (or at least that's a pattern I have noticed) I don't think they would put Gülfem, out of everyone, in such position. This consolation of Hürrem may have been moulded a bit, but it's certainly not ingenuine and runs in line with who she is. Besides, she did say she forgives Hürrem for every possible offense in E133. I think that clears the whole thing up.

I wouldn't say that Gülfem had no arc at all in S04, as well. [I wouldn't see them leaving her just for the story, either, because aside from E59-63, Gülfem usually didn't move the story in any significant way. They probably left her because she was the moral compass of the palace and she was one of the first characters after all, for her to stay as much as she can.] She doesn't have too much in the way of development or arc in the rest of the show, probably because she didn't have much to develop on her own and the writers didn't want to really flesh her out. The only thing she could develop is her relationships and most of them also didn't leave room for development (not even Hürrem, because she didn't do that much against her, except for the S02 finale, correct me if I'm wrong?), except for one: her relationship with Süleiman. Gülfem wants to preserve justice and Süleiman began to act completely counter of that. It's not a built-up arc, but it's only by S04 where SS's shadiest actions began to reach their peak, so only then would it begin to happen. Because she valued Süleiman before then.

She valued him to the point she dismissed his faults in the strife between his women and asked him the comfort question of whether he is happy with them when he called her to talk in E15. Their joint scenes had their continuation only by S04 where she similarly acted as his conscience after Hürrem's death. For she was the one close enough to him for him to confide in. Many people confided in Gülfem through the series, but Süleiman is one of the people that did it the most and it was as if this consoling went beyond the sheer usual support for her.

And what happens afterwards? The table begins to turn after Bayezid's execution. That angle is looked upon only after the time skip and during the flashback in E139, but it shows by its own merit alone a change, an evolution of Gülfem's opinion of SS and a reverse approach of her role as a conscience: Gülfem is so patient and understanding, but she has finally snapped. She has finally met her limit. In her words to SS in the scene we see how his actions have put themselves in a conflict far beyond what she can bear. She can no longer excuse him, she can no longer justify him.

That scene showed us her realization that he has the biggest part of the blame in the misfortunes in the palace. ("Even leaf cannot fall without your approval!") And she wanted to end him for that. I know it looks like this happened almost overnight, maybe looked a little too edgy and may feel like a contrived attempt to make an exit for her character, but it works well enough with me. Because after all, she has truly went through a lot and that suffering didn't even begin from Topkapı. It's only natural she would try to kill the root of the suffering for good. And here, for once, she stands up for herself, too, along with calling out all the unfortunate and devastating events.

#magnificent century #muhteşem yüzyıl #muhtesem yuzyil #gulfem hatun #hurrem sultan #sultan suleiman #ask #stuffandthangs

7 notes · View notes

ottomanladies · 4 years ago

Note

MC was so inconsistent with its punishments. Hurrem was banished for allegedly killing a concubine but Mahidevran dead ass sent poison to the Sultans dinner table and nearly beat Hurrem to death but she just got a talking to. Fatma attacked and burned the Sultans legal wife but literally nothing happened? She got promoted to Mustafas head concubine. Literally all of Hurrems concubines were murdered under the orders of Ibrahim or one of Suleimans sisters but they never receive any punishment

bad storytelling? Sometimes they would push themselves so far with the drama that they would have to rein in it in some way. Hürrem too did a lot of awful stuff but got away with it, though most of the time she acted way smarter than those who had preceded her.

Fatma wasn't punished because Hafsa kind of agreed with what she had done LOL. It was her who sent the concubines against Hürrem, after all. If I remember correctly, she then told Süleyman that Hürrem sort of had it coming... therefore legitimising actions that could have never been taken against the sultan's wife—but MC dug its own grave when they had Hürrem and Süleyman get married while Hafsa was still alive. Hafsa never recognised her change of status (also because it could have been higher than hers in theory) and since she didn't, nobody else did: Ibrahim kept calling Hürrem Hatun for a long time (to the point that it's now a meme) even though he very well knew that she wasn't one anymore. I mean if the one at the top of the hierarchy doesn't respect someone, why should all the others do? Fatma knew she would be protected by Hafsa when she burned Hürrem because after all the valide sultan had shown so many times how much she disliked her son's top consort (and she also spread rumours on purpose among the concubines—iirc)

About Hürrem's ladies: the thing is Ibrahim, as Grand Vizier, and Süleyman's sisters had the power to have simple slaves killed. Is it awful? Yep, but I don't think Süleyman would have done anything to them had he known. In their mentality, a slave is expendable. Even if Süleyman had asked questions, they could have provided proof that the concubine deserved to be punished.

Your example, Hürrem being banished in S1 (I think), is different because at that time she didn't have much social standing in the show. Even if it didn't actually happen, it was imperative to keep order in the harem or it would have literally become hell on earth. She is just banished because she had children; hadn't she been a mother, she would have been executed.

Yeah, Mahidevran almost poisoning the sultan was out of the world. She could have been banished for a while, at least, idk.

#anon #ask post #ask: magnificent century #Anonymous

18 notes · View notes

starbabe569 · 1 year ago

Text

This is why Fatma should have been executed when Mahidevran brought her back after Suleiman's return.

Fatma literally knew what was going to happen to Lalezar. She was absolutely involved. And yet here she is pretending to be protective of the concubine she is sacrificing for her own irrational hatred of Hürrem.

5 notes · View notes

peter69a · 2 years ago

Text

Gay rights in Zanzibar (Tanzania)

LGBT rights in the

United Republic of Tanzania

Location Tanzania AU Africa.svg

Tanzania

Status

Illegal since 1864 in Zanzibar.

Illegal since 1899 as German East Africa and then as mainland Tanzania.[1]

Penalty

Male: 14 years imprisonment

.In Zanzibar, 25 years imprisonment for males, and for females, 5 years imprisonment or a 500,000 shilling fine. Vigilante executions, beatings and torture[2][3] are also tolerated.

Gender identity

Military

Discrimination protections

Family rights

Recognition of relationships

No recognition of same-sex unions

Adoption

According to the 2007 Pew Global Attitudes Project, 95 percent[a] of Tanzanian residents believed that homosexuality is a way of life that society should not accept, which was the seventh-highest rate of non-acceptance in the 45 countries surveyed.[4]

According to Afrobarometer 2020 poll only 10% of Tanzanians would be tolerant of someone with a different sexual orientation which is among the lowest in Africa but higher than a 2007 poll.[5]

In recent years, Tanzania has become particularly hostile to LGBT people. In October 2017, it deported several HIV/AIDS groups on the basis of "promoting homosexuality" (Tanzania has a high HIV/AIDS rate and reportedly one million people are infected).[6] The Government has also increasingly resorted to homophobic rhetoric, believing that homosexuality is "un-African". In 2018, a so-called "witch hunt" was declared against gay people in Dar es Salaam, where gay people were forced to endure anal examinations and torture.[6] Tanzania has a bad human rights record. Government respect for freedom of speech and freedom of assembly is declining.

Despite this there have been several Tanzanian human rights campaigners, activists, lawyers and Feminists like Maria Sarungi, Fatma Karume, Mwanahamisi Singano Tundu Lissu, Zara Kay, Khalifa Said, Goodluck Haule and many others who have openly supported LGBT rights whilst openly opposing state sanctioned homophobia and dangerous rhetoric from government officials who have called for further persecution of this marginalized groups from people like the former president Magufuli himself, Paul Makonda, Ally Hapi, Hamisi Kigwangalla.

#gay rights #zanzibar #tanzania

0 notes

fatihdaily · 7 years ago

Note

Did Mehmed have sisters ? Or brothers ?

Yes, he had.

Firstly, Alderson lists 5 (+ one uncertain) brothers and 6 sisters.

He provides only one name for the eldest sister on his list, Fatma, but lists the names of almost all brothers: Ahmed (Elder), Alaeddin Ali, Hasan, Orhan, Ahmed (Younger) and only one unnamed.

Uluçay lists 4 daughters of Murad II and provides the following names: Erhondu, Fatma, Hatice and Şehzade. I will now try to provide some information on the siblings.

Note 1: Even after carrying out extensive research, it is hard to provide a lot of information in cases of women and children who die young in that era. Daughters were often not even recorded and if they were most common information was birth and death dates and marriages. Often even names are lost.

Note 2: Sources are behind the cut

Brothers

Ahmed (Elder) [Büyük Ahmed] - He was born in 1420. He was appointed governor of Amasya, where he died unexpectedly in 1437. Mehmed succeeded him as Amasya’s governor.

Alaeddin Ali - born in 1430. John Freely in his biography of Mehmed II mentions that Ali’s mother was Murad II’s favourite wife, Hatice Halime Hatun. Ali first served as governor of Manisa, then in 1439 Murad II decided to switch Mehmed and Alaeddin, so that Alaeddin got sent to Amasya, and Mehmed to Manisa. Ali was said to be Murad II’s favourite son and was described as “distinguished by courage and astuteness” and “powerful physique that (…) called for admiration” (Babinger). In 1443, Ali was summoned by his father to join him on a campaign. After the campaign ended, he parted with Murad in Bursa, after which a mysterious tragedy took place. Kara Hizir Pasha was sent to Amasya after the prince and strangled Ali in his own bed, together with his two young sons, aged six and eighteen months. Babinger notes that Western and Ottoman sources stress that Murad was in great pain after the loss of Ali. He also requested to be buried next to his favourite son after his death. Alderson lists the deaths of Ali and his sons as possible executions and suggests Murad II might have ordered the death of his son and grandsons. On the other hand, Freely makes a suggestion that Ali’s murder might have been ordered by someone wanting to clear the way to the throne for Mehmed. Nothing is however proven, the only certain thing is that s a result of this mysterious and unresolved tragedy Mehmed became the heir to the throne.

Hasan - we only know that he was born in 1444.

Orhan - we only know that he died in 1451, the year Mehmed II ascended the throne. However, Alderson lists him as possible execution, not a certain one as in case of Ahmed (the Younger). Alderson makes a note that he should not be confused with Şehzade Orhan, who was a son of Bayezid I and was held as a hostage in Byzantium.

Ahmed (the Younger) [Küçük Ahmed] - he was born in 1450 and was executed upon the order of his brother when Mehmed ascended the throne. Hiis mother was Hatice Halime Hatun. When Mehmed was talking with Hatice Halime Hatun, one of his men was strangling his half-brother in the bath. Mehmed then married Hatice Halime to Ishak Bey, beylerbey of Anatolia. Freely comments that Küçük Ahmed was the last of Mehmed’s brothers, so it can be deduced that Hasan and Orhan had died by the time of Ahmed’s execution. Alderson mentions that the Court was so shocked by what happened to the fifteen-month-old child that Mehmed put the blame on the person who had executed his order and sentenced him to death.

Unnamed - Alderson provides only death date in 1496, but states the existence of this brother is very unlikely, and the person mentioned in documents is likely a son of another member of the dynasty than Murad II.

Sisters

Erhondu - she was married to Yakup Bey. We do not know her date of birth, marriage, death or whether she had children, only that she died before her husband.

Fatma - again, no death or birth dates provided. Babinger and Alderson state that her husband was Zaganos Mehmed Pasha, but Uluçay states it is wrong and based on archives from Bursa documenting people living there provides that her husband was in fact Çandarlı Ibrahim Pasha and they had a son called Mehmed Celebi.

Hatice - we know nothing about her except name and that she is buried in Bursa next to her father. Possibly one of unnamed sisters listed below.

Şehzade - wife of Sinan Bey. She founded a village in Yenişehir in her husband’s name and a soup kitchen in Edirne in her name. Şehzade also founded a vakf in her village that offered help to people in Holy Cities. Uluçay states she died in 1480 and was buried in Sultan Alâeddin’s tomb. It is possible that she was one of the unnamed daughters of Murad II listed by Alderson, since Alderson has one unnamed daughter married to Koca Sinan Pasha, and Babinger once mentions that a reference to certain Sinan Bey could mean Koca Sinan Pasha, a husband to one of Mehmed’s sisters and the Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire for two years. Alderson provides the date of death for this sister as 1486.

Unnamed sister - married in 1440 Emir Kemaleddin Ismail, son of Ibrahim II of Karaman and Selçuk Hatun, daughter of Mehmed I (grandfather of Mehmed II) with whom she had two sons: Hasan and Yahya.

Unnamed sister - married to Kasim Kavameddin, uncle to Emir Kemaleddin Ismail.

Unnamed sister - married to a certain Mehmed, son of Haran.

Unnamed sister - married Isa Bey in 1470. Angiolello calls her a “mad sadist”. Babinger speculates she could be a full sister of Mehmed, thus Hüma Hatun’s daughter.

- Joanna

Sources:

- Alderson, Anthony Dolphin. The Structure of the Ottoman Dynasty. Greenwood Press, 1982.

- Babinger, Franz. Mehmed the Conqueror and his time. Princeton Univ. Press, 1992.

- Freely, John. Grand Turk: Sultan Mehmet II–Conqueror Of Constantinople And Master Of An Empire. Overlook, 2009.

- Uluçay, Mustafa Çağatay. Padişahların kadınları ve kızları. Ankara, Ötüken. 2011.

#answered #mehmed ii #ottoman history #history #Anonymous

13 notes · View notes

impressivepress · 4 years ago

Text

How the Spirit Of Morocco Seized Matisse

The rain began to fall just a few hours after Henri Matisse installed himself in the Hotel Villa de France in Tangier at the end of January, 1912. For days it poured. ''Shall we ever see the sun in Morocco?'' the artist complained in a letter to Gertrude Stein after his first week.

Matisse kept himself busy by painting a vase of irises in his room, a dark image that makes much of the irregular pattern created by flowers against an ornate dressing table. Only the pale yellow and green stripes reflected in the dressing table's mirror hint at the extraordinary colors that Matisse was to discover in Tangier when the clouds finally lifted.

''Matisse in Morocco,'' which opens today at the National Gallery of Art, has only 23 paintings and about 47 drawings, most of them casual sketches that the artist did while wandering the streets and staring out the window of his hotel during his two trips to North Africa, in 1912 and 1913.

But if the exhibition is small in number of works, it greatly illuminates this key figure in the history of 20th-century art. Matisse's Moroccan paintings are for the most part bathed in a dusty, hazy light, a light composed of pinks and yellows and soft blues and greens. If the somber, sharper tones of his still life with irises were the result of cloudy skies, the view of Tangier from the open window of his hotel room that he painted on his second trip to Morocco reflected an entirely different experience.

This is a scene parched by the sun. Like so many of Matisse's Moroccan paintings, it is covered only in the thinnest washes of pigment, as if Matisse wanted the texture of the unpainted canvas to show through so that it would add rawness to the browns and grays.

Although Matisse spent only a few months in Morocco, his experiences apparently remained vividly with him for the rest of his long life. To see, for example, the paintings he completed in Nice during the 20's, with their odalisques and their dizzying arrangements of carpets and wallpaper is to see Morocco transplanted to the Riviera. And to see the cutouts of Matisse's last years, with their brilliant floral concoctions, is to see the spirit of Morocco still alive in the artist's imagination.

Even the evolution from Matisse's depiction of a female nude in ''Back I'' of 1909 to his abstracted, treelike ''Back IV'' of 1930 can be understood more clearly after seeing the paintings from Tangier. As Pierre Schneider points out in his essay for the exhibition's catalogue, Morocco quickened in Matisse the ''process of botanization'' by which human forms and vegetal forms coalesced in the artist's imagination.

The synthesis emerges in the paintings of Moroccans by Matisse, which are rarely portraits in any traditional sense of the term, so skimpy are they on facial details. Their emphasis is on costume and color, as if the subjects were fantastical flowers, not specific people (like many Europeans, Matisse seemed to view North Africans as exotica). ''Look at a tree,'' Matisse said. ''It is like a human being.''

Once the rain cleared, Matisse saw for the first time the Moroccan landscapes, far more lush than any he had known. He went almost immediately into the gardens of the Villa Brooks, a private estate not far from the hotel, and spent weeks painting the acanthuses, palms and periwinkles that covered the grounds. The landscapes he produced describe a kind of earthly paradise, a place where Matisse's Fauvist heritage, with its palette of unnaturally shocking colors, gave way to something subtler and more seductive.

Matisse obviously did not want to paint Morocco as he had seen it in the works of the French orientalist artists who had made pilgrimages to North Africa since the early 19th century. He strove for neither the picturesque nor the pornographic. Nude women bathing or revealing themselves for the delectation of Arab men - familiar themes in the works of such artists as Jean Leon Gerome - was far from Matisse's mind.

As it did for Delacroix, North Africa liberated his imagination. Matisse looked instead at the foliage, at the designs of the buildings and the textiles, and most of all at the quality of light, and he found a repertory of forms and colors that matched his decorative impulse. Decoration in Morocco was not like decoration in France. It was not secondary to an image; it was the principal subject. By painting the patterns and flowers and costumes he saw around him, Matisse realized that he could elevate decoration to something weightier and more evocative than it had been in certain of his earlier works.

In his sketchbooks, he recorded the way buildings tumbled down to the sea in Tangier, the way minarets went cheek by jowl with boxy stucco cottages, the way city squares looked in the afternoon, when the sun drove everyone indoors. He did not pretend to be anything more than an observer of this territory, an outsider on tour, as he presents himself in a witty pen-and-ink drawing, sketching a mosque in his topcoat under the gaze of a woman in chador.

His drawings were mental notes, quick reminders of what he had observed. Yet if they are slight, they do not lack insight or consideration. It is surely no mistake that in Matisse's sketch of the English Church in Tangier he emphasized the precision of a row of cypress trees, while elsewhere he depicted the marabout dome of the Casbah overrun by foliage. Europe was orderly and predictable. Morocco meant extravagance.

The drawings have been compiled and published for the first time by Jack Cowart, curator of 20th-century art at the National Gallery, who organized the exhibition with Mr. Schneider. ''Matisse in Morocco'' brings together almost all the paintings from the artist's two trips, as well as ''The Moroccans,'' which Matisse completed in 1915-16 at his home near Paris.

This curatorial feat could not have been accomplished just a few years ago. It has required the extensive cooperation of the State Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts in Moscow and the Hermitage in Leningrad, which own most of the Moroccan canvases. After closing here on June 3, the show travels to the Museum of Modern Art in New York from June 20 to Sept. 4, before going to the Pushkin in later September and the Hermitage in mid-December.

The paintings ended up in Soviet museums because Matisse worked mostly for two enlightened Russian patrons during his trips to Tangier, Sergei Ivanovich Shchukin and Ivan Abramovich Morosov. Shchukin, an importer of textiles and a lover of orientalism, was collecting Matisses before anyone else in Russia - and before most people in Paris - and it was he who bought not only ''The Vase of Irises'' but also several figure studies and other Moroccan works. Morosov commissioned the landscapes that Matisse painted in the gardens of the Villa Brooks.

The artist's relationship with his Russian patrons was more than a matter of money. Matisse visited Shchukin in Saint Petersburg and Moscow in 1911, shortly before his trip to Morocco, and to judge by the works he painted in Tangier, he was deeply affected by what he saw in the Russian churches.

The figure studies that Matisse sold to Shchukin - ''Amido,'' ''Fatma, the Mulatto Woman'' and ''Zorah Standing'' - are tall, narrow images resembling Byzantine paintings of saints. Zorah in particular, who squarely confronts the viewer in a costume as brilliant as almost anything in Byzantine art, brings to mind an icon.

But there is even something religious about the extreme quietude and heavenly plenitude of Matisse's Moroccan landscapes. And the seated pose of Zorah in ''On the Terrace'' suggests a woman praying.

''On the Terrace,'' it should be added, is part of a trio of works that the artist painted for Morosov. It was intended to be the centerpiece between ''Landscape Viewed From a Window'' and ''The Casbah Gate,'' although as with so many of Matisse's Moroccan paintings, the meaning of this grouping is not made clear. But it is interesting that many of Matisse's Moroccan paintings were executed in threes. Mr. Schneider may not be far off when he states, ''Where there are triptychs there is a preoccupation, be it subconscious, with the sacred.''

''The Moroccans,'' which he painted after his return to France, is a triptych, too, in that it combines three distinct memories of Tangier - a memory of the architecture, a memory of the people and a memory of nature. In the upper-left corner of this wide painting Matisse has presented a marabout dome; below is an abstracted scene of what looks like melons but can also be figures bowed in prayer. To the right is an even more ambiguous passage, which resembles an Arab in a burnoose.

The whole is bathed not in the dusky light of his earlier Moroccan canvases but in black. Matisse wrote at the time that he began to ''use pure black as a color of light and not as a color of darkness,'' and perhaps this was his way of reconfiguring the Moroccan sun. But also, by using so much black, he eulogized his experiences in Tangier. Clearly, Morocco remained for Matisse not simply a country of colorful characters and stirring landscapes but also a place of spirituality and mystery.

---

A version of this article appears in print on March 18, 1990, Section 2, Page 37 of the National edition with the headline: ART VIEW; How the Spirit Of Morocco Seized Matisse.

~ Michael Kimmelman · Mar 18, 1990.

#matisse #art article #exibition review #review #morocco #painting #The New York Times

1 note · View note

ericfruits · 4 years ago

Text

Some Tanzanian judges are bravely ruling against the government

Courting the big man Some Tanzanian judges are bravely ruling against the government

Others seem happy to protect executive power

FROM THE parade of politicians and journalists passing through, one might think that the Kisutu Resident Magistrate Court is a high-society haunt. But instead of being offered cocktails and gossip, they are here to be tried (or, at least, denied bail) by a judiciary that looks increasingly like the strong arm of Tanzania’s government.

John Magufuli, Tanzania’s president (pictured), has never been one for democratic niceties such as the separation of powers between the executive, parliament and courts. Since taking office in 2015 he has made it clear that all three should bend to his will. In particular he has attacked the judiciary’s independence, threatening to “take action” against judges who acquitted those accused of crimes (when, at least in his mind, there is clear evidence of guilt).

Parliament, controlled by Mr Magufuli’s CCM party, has limited citizens’ ability to sue over allegedly unconstitutional laws or policies. And last year Tanzania in effect withdrew from the African Court on Human and People’s Rights—an important guardian, with more cases on its docket against Tanzania than any other country.

Given how hard he has tried to control the judiciary, Mr Magufuli must have been gratified when, on August 5th, Tanzania’s highest court gave the constitutional stamp of approval to one of his favourite tactics: charging opponents with offences for which they cannot post bail. Once arrested, defendants pinball endlessly between prison and court, being told at each court appearance that the case against them is not quite ready. Many eventually plead guilty to end the torment. The tactic is used not only against political rivals or critical journalists, but also against executives of companies accused of tax evasion who are ordered to pay arbitrary sums. Fatma Karume, a former head of the Tanganyika Law Society who was suspended from practising law after acting as counsel in a suit against Mr Magufuli, argues that this is legalised extortion. “These people are acting like Henry VII,” she says, referring to a notoriously grabby English king.

Some judges have taken a stand against this repressive tactic. In May the High Court declared that it was unconstitutional to deny people bail automatically, simply because they had been charged with, for instance, money-laundering. The judges said this law impinged on judicial discretion and denied people freedom. But on August 5th the government found a more sympathetic ear at the Court of Appeal, which overturned the ruling.

Demagogues the world over try to control judges. This is made easier in countries such as Tanzania, where the president chooses who sits on the bench. But it is not just the power to appoint judges that matters to Mr Magufuli; he also wants to control the officials who oversee elections.

With Tanzania going to the polls in October, the impartiality of those who will count the votes is particularly important if the result is to be seen as credible. Tanzania’s High Court thought so too last year, when it struck down a law that allowed Mr Magufuli to appoint party hacks as election officials, arguing that it compromised the independence of the electoral commission. Once again Mr Magufuli’s government turned to the Court of Appeal, whose learned judges overturned the ruling, saying that it was “speculative and based on apprehension” to suppose that officers picked by the president might be partisan. Perish the thought. ■

This article appeared in the Middle East & Africa section of the print edition under the headline "Courting the big man"

https://ift.tt/2FmRQAb

#IFTTT #Feedly

0 notes

reallifesultanas · 4 years ago

Text

Portrait of Ibrahim I / I. Ibrahim portréja

Birth and childhood

Ibrahim was born in October or November 1615 as the fourth son of Sultan Ahmed I and his favorite concubine, Mahpeyker Kösem Sultan. At his birth a total of seven (or eight) princes were before him in the line of succession to the throne: Ahmed I's younger brother, Prince Mustafa; Ibrahim's brothers: Osman, Mehmed, Murad, Bayezid, Hüseyin, Kasim, and there was a prince named Suleiman who was born about the same time. With such a background, it seemed almost impossible that Ibrahim could ever ascend the throne.

Ibrahim’s childhood was very difficult, as his father Ahmed I died in 1617 and for many years there were fights over the throne and a kind of hereditary chaos plagued the empire. The people were fed up with the fratricide, but Ahmed did not write a legal decree about who would follow him on the throne, his brother, Mustafa, or his eldest son, Osman. Eventually, with the accession of Mustafa, the inheritance officially changed, the throne no longer passed from father to son but was taken over by the oldest male. The following years were quite confusing, Mustafa was soon dethroned because of his mental illness, and Ibrahim's half-brother, Osman, ascended the throne. Osman was a very unpopular, bad ruler.

During the chaotic years, the child Ibrahim was torn from his mother, his sisters, and kept locked up with his brothers. Then, in 1621, his brother, Prince Mehmed, was executed by the then reigning sultan, Osman II. The death of his brother must have filled little Ibrahim and his brothers with terror. Not surprisingly, soon it became visible that Ibrahim was not completely mentally stable. The traumatic years made the young prince paranoid and unstable.

The reign of his full-brother, Murad IV, may have brought him some peace from 1623, as for about ten years their mother, Kösem Sultan, ruled the empire as regent and protected her sons with all her strength. It is important to mention, however, that Ibrahim practically had barely met his mother for six years from the age of two, so the reunion was less satisfying for him than to his older brothers, who could at least remember their mother.

The dread

We don’t know much about the daily life of Ibrahim and his brothers. Based on the surviving information, it is probable that while Kösem ruled as regent, although the princes lived locked up, they were not in complete isolation and could receive an education. However, the relative calm period ended soon, along with the regency of Kösem Sultan. In 1632, a Sipahi rebellion broke out, during which the rebels executed several loyal men of Sultan Murad. To make matters worse, the soldiers publicly demanded that Murad should show them his younger brothers. Murad was forced to give in to the demands and introduced his younger brothers. Ibrahim and his brothers could then face up that as long as they exist, they would always be dangerous to Murad, and this threatened their own lives.

Murad was also traumatized by their difficult childhood, which made him a tough and tyrant ruler. Unsurprisingly, he considered Selim I as his role model and tried to follow him in everything. This is why he wanted to bring back the old order of succession so that after his death his son would follow him on the throne, and not one of his younger brothers. In addition, Murad was deteriorating mentally and physically, so he began to become paranoid and saw conspiracy against him in everything. After the victory of Revan in 1635, while the people celebrated he ordered the execution of his two half-brothers, Prince Bayezid and Suleiman. The already unstable Ibrahim was certainly pushed further down the slope by this tragedy.

One of the last things that ruined Ibrahim’s common sense came in 1638, when after the victorious campaign in Baghdad, Murad executed his full-brother, Kasim, who was said to be the closest to him among his brothers. According to some sources, Ibrahim was also present in the Revan Pavilion, where the execution took place and his life was saved only by the supplication of Kösem Sultan due to his mental illness. Others said Murad did not even try to execute Ibrahim at that time. Either way, it must have been hard for Ibrahim that his brothers died next to him in a row, and his only brother, Murad, was more unpredictable.

His accession to the throne

After the execution of Kasim, Murad's health deteriorated for months. He had a chronic illness, but we don’t know much about it. Some said he may have had epilepsy, others said he may have had similar digestive problems as his father (Ahmed I) and grandmother (Handan Sultan). These were further aggravated by combat injuries, as Murad himself fought in his campaigns; and cirrhosis due to alcoholism. Murad was able to recover from his combat injuries, as in early 1640 he celebrated Ramadan without any problems, met his vezirs, and took part in events. In fact, to further tire his sick body, he regularly rode and alcoholized with his friends. On one such occasion, Murad lost consciousness and was taken back to Topkapi Palace by his bodyguards. According to some, on his deathbed, Murad ordered the execution of Ibrahim, but there is no evidence of this.

As Murad passed away, the throne passed to the oldest (and in this case the only) heir, Ibrahim. Grand Vizier Kemankeş Kara Mustafa Pasha went to Ibrahim's apartment, telling him that Murad was dead, so he had the throne. However, Ibrahim did not believe him. The mourning Kösem Sultan then tried to talk to her son, but Ibrahim did not trust anyone after the tragedies of recent years, so he refused to leave his apartment and ascend the throne. He thought the whole thing was just Murad’s intrigue, and if he left his apartment he would be executed immediately. Ibrahim wanted to present himself as a faithful and humble brother, so he refused to come out on any request or order. Finally, Kösem Sultan ordered that the dead body of Murad should be taken to Ibrahim. Even then, Ibrahim did not believe, he examined the body thoroughly to make sure Murad was dead. Eventually, Ibrahim realized that he was the new ruler and ascended the throne.

The accession of Ibrahim to the throne in 1640 did not solve the greatest problem of the dynasty, the question of the heir. After Murad systematically murdered his brothers and his sons died of natural causes, Ibrahim was the only heir. New princes were needed as soon as possible, but Ibrahim showed no interest in women and sexuality. Some said he was afraid of having a child because he was afraid Murad would execute him then, others said he simply didn’t care. They tried in every way possible to arouse the sultan's sexual desire, made pornographic depictions for him, and offered him aphrodisiacs. The persistent endeavor eventually became successful, with his first son (and presumably his first or second child), Mehmed, born in January 1642. Legend has it that the aphrodisiacs had such a strong effect on the Sultan that he organized arranged orgies for himself, and there were several reports of various perversions.

The birth of Prince Mehmed was followed in turn by the other children, Gevherhan (1642?), Suleiman (1642), Fatma (1642?), Ahmed (1643), Murad (1643), Atike (?), Selim (1644), Osman (1644) , Beyhan (1645?), Ayşe (1646?), Kaya (?), Ümmügülsüm (?) and at least two anonymous sultanas. It can be seen, that Ibrahim’s initial dread of women soon dissipated as in a short time he produced an extremely large number of children. Ibrahim was not a very good father to his children. He was often unpredictable due to his unstable mental state. This is well exemplified by an event around 1645 when he quarreled with Prince Mehmed's mother, Turhan Hatice. Turhan Hatice complained that the sultan did not care for Mehmed, but instead played a lot with the son of the wet-nurse, whom he raised and cherished as his own. The couple's quarrel escalated to the point where Ibrahim, in his rage, threw away Prince Mehmed, who had suffered a serious head injury in the cistern and wore its mark on his forehead for the rest of his life.

Ibrahim and women

The foregoing events already suggest that Ibrahim did not have a nice relationship with his firstborn son's mother. According to some, after the abuse of Mehmed, the relationship between Turhan and Ibrahim was completely severed. It nuances the picture somewhat that it seems that in addition to Mehmed, Turhan gave birth to at least one other child to Ibrahim, Atike Sultan. The date of birth for Atike is unknown, so it is difficult to determine whether she was born before or after the incident.

In addition to Turhan, Ibrahim had seven other Hasekis, with which he practically destroyed the power of Haseki title, since the mother of all his children had this title. Two of the Hasekis stand out, Şivekar was an Armenian concubine who was able to gain serious political influence by being able to influence Ibrahim anytime, anywhere. Şivekar is also an interesting concubine because her existence proves one of Ibrahim's perversions. For the sultan, having once seen a cow from behind he decided that he wanted to acquire the fattest woman in the empire, as it might best resemble a cow. In the end, it was Şivekar who met the parameters, so she got into the sultan's harem. The other special Haseki was Telli Hümaşah, who twisted Ibrahim around her finger so much that the sultan married her. Hümaşah’s prominent position is well illustrated by the fact that Ibrahim assigned his own full-sisters and niece to serve Hümaşah.

It is a well-known legend that Ibrahim took away one of his deceased brothers, Murad IV's concubine. There is no clear evidence to support or refute this. Some say this concubine was none other than Ayşe Haseki, Murad’s favorite, who asked for the sultan’s favor in the matter of marrying off her daughter and then the sultan tried to rape her in exchange for the favor. Others say it happened to an insignificant concubine, but there are also those who say the rape case did not happen because when Ibrahim asked Sultan Murad's former concubine the woman refused the order and turned to the harem leader who, along with Kösem Sultan, forbade the sultan to touch the concubine of his deceased brother.

In addition to the former story, however, it is certain that Ibrahim kidnapped or forced Hazerpare Ahmed Pasha’s wife to be his favorite. Some say the woman received the orphaned Beyhan Sultan to raise her. Another time, Ibrahim wanted to take the daughter of Seyhülislam Muid Ahmed Efendi to his harem. When Seyhülislam did not allow this, Ibrahim abducted the girl from a public bath. Some said he raped her, others said the sultan was stopped just in time. In any case in the end Ibrahim sent the girl back to his father soon after.

In addition to his concubines, harem servants also successfully influenced the sultan, such as Şekerpare, who, with his sweet manner, was able to persuade the sultan to do anything and who gained immense wealth and influence. Not surprisingly, Ibrahim’s tragic end was ultimately caused by his influenceability. His concubines only influenced the Sultan in relatively harmless things, but soon he came under the influence of a much more dangerous person.

The ruler

We cannot really talk about Ibrahim as a ruler. Because of his mental condition, his mother, Kösem Sultan, and Murad IV's last Grand Vezier, Kemankeş Kara Mustafa Pasha, ruled in his place. Although Kösem Sultan and Kemankeş Kara Mustafa Pasha were not in a good relationship and even constantly rivaled each other, they still worked excellently together for the sake of the empire. Ibrahim, although was not capable to rule alone, tried to live up to expectations in the first few years of his reign. He constantly followed the events, regularly negotiating with the Grand Vizier, for which his handwritten letters also serve as a good example. These letters from Ibrahim are significant because it shows that Ibrahim was properly educated, was not weak-minded, so he was actually only struggling with mental illnesses caused by trauma.

Ibrahim's early reign was therefore hopeful in relation to his condition. He did not replace his brother's former leaders, his pashas, so in fact, the change of sultan took place very simply and everything could go as before, which was very positive for the empire. Over time, however, he came under the influence of a certain Cinci Hoca and rebelled against his mother. Cinci Hoca was an occult science charlatan who considered himself a religious leader. Cinci Hoca convinced the sultan in various ways that he could cure his headaches and mental problems. Instead, he took advantage of Ibrahim’s credulity and amassed a huge fortune for himself and his supporters. Events eventually deteriorated to the point where, without any experience or aptitude, Cinci Hoca was appointed by the Sultan as Chief Kadi; Cinci Hoca's faithful companion, Silahdar Yusuf Aga, became the Grand Admiral. Cinci Hoca's greatest opponent was Kemankeş Kara Mustafa Pasha, the Grand Vizier, so he constantly spoke against him, as a result of which the Sultan executed Kemankeş Pasha in 1644. Kemankeş Pasha was replaced by another supporter of Cinci Hoca, Sultanzade Mehmed Pasha. Sultanzade Mehmed Pasha was, by the way, the son of Ayşe Hanimsultnasa, thus the grandson of Ayşe Hümaşah Sultan and the great-grandson of the Mihrimah Sultan and Rüstem Pasha.

By getting under the spell of unfit persons, Ibrahim started to destroy the state, which formerly was great, led by Murad’s pashas. Over time, Ibrahim replaced all of Murad’s previous pashas and replaced them with his own confidants who were unable to manage properly. Similarly, people’s displeasure was triggered by the launch of another costly campaign. In 1644, Maltese pirates attacked an Ottoman ship on which, in addition to the chief black eunuch, the son of Prince Mehmed's wet-nurse, whom Ibrahim loved and cherished more than his own son, was present. Under the pretext of attack, the Fifth Venetian-Ottoman War broke out in 1645 and lasted for 24 years.

Shortly after Kemankeş was executed, Ibrahim also exiled his mother, Kösem Sultan. He originally intended to send his mother to the island of Rhodes, but eventually, his concubines persuaded him to send her only to another palace. Over time, dissatisfaction grew, and more and more people turned to Kösem Sultan in exile for help. Kösem Sultan's well-known letter to Hezarpare Ahmed Pasha - whose wife had previously been abducted by the Sultan - was written this period. The letter says "In the end he will leave neither you nor me alive. We will lose control of the government. The whole society is in ruins. Have him removed from the throne immediately." The letter is a good indication that Ibrahim’s insane rule threatened more and more people. The sultan executed people for almost no reason and gave high positions to those who were completely unfit. More and more people turned against Ibrahim and it was increasingly likely that he would not be able to stay on the throne for long.

The end

The situation deteriorated to the point that in 1647 Kösem Sultan and the new Grand Vizier, Salih Pasha and Seyhülislam Abdürrahim Efendi, tried to dethrone Ibrahim but failed. Salih Pasha was executed and Kösem Sultan remained in exile. The following year, both the Janissaries and the Ulema joined the rebellion, and on August 8, 1648, the mad sultan was easily dethroned and imprisoned. Then due to the evidence, Kösem Sultan returned to the palace. She there received a letter from the leading statesmen, asking her to give them Prince Mehmed so they can make him sultan in the Janissary Mosque. Kösem Sultan rejected the request and asking the leaders to go to the palace and let's discuss the situation. Kösem Sultan personally welcomed them at the second gate - without any kind of paravane, just veiled - and argued at length for them why they should leave Ibrahim in his position. She told them that the sultan had only followed the advice of bad people, so it was enough to get rid of these advisors. It is doubtful that Kösem Sultan really thought so or simply felt that this was expected of her as Ibrahim’s mother. The latter can be inferred from her earlier letter in which she clearly stated that Ibrahim should be dethroned; and that, after two hours of discourse, Kösem Sultan agreed to the ascension of Mehmedm, barely six and a half years old. It is important to note, however, that based on the recorded speech of Kösem Sultan, she only agreed to Ibrahim’s dethronement due to compulsion. Kösem Sultan for concluding the discourse with the following sentence: "All are united in the opinion that the Sultan must be deposed; it is impossible to do otherwise. You tell me that if I don't hand over the Prince, they will enter the palace and take him by force." So whatever she felt or thought, Kösem showed outwardly that she was trying to protect her son as a mother.

Ibrahim's followers were removed from their positions at the same time as the sultan's dethronement happened, and most of them were executed. Then they had to decide the fate of Sultan Ibrahim soon, but it was not easy. There used to be a mad sultan who was simply closed up after his dethronement, so this could have been possible in the case of Ibrahim. However, Ibrahim caused too much pain to the people, executed too many, and simply had too many supporters to keep him alive. Eventually, the new Grand Vizier, Sofu Mehmed Pasha, asked the Seyhülislam Efendi to allow the execution of Ibrahim. Seyhülislam allowed it. Some say Kösem Sultan also agreed to the execution, others said was not notified until the last minute so she could not prevent it. Finally, Ibrahim was strangled on August 18, 1648. According to the descriptions, when the execution squad entered the sultan's room, he, clutching the Qur’an, asked to be shown which line of the Qur’an suggests his execution. He said that if they show it to him, he would surrender. Of course, this was not possible, one of the executioners threw the noose around the neck of the sultan from behind. Like his dethroned mad predecessor, Mustafa I, he was also buried in Aya Sofya.

Used sources: A. D. Alderson - The Structure of the Ottoman Dynasty; L. Peirce - The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire; N. Sakaoğlu - Bu Mülkün Kadın Sultanları; M. Ç. Uluçay - Padişahların Kadınları ve Kızları; C. Finkel - Osman's Dream: The Story of the Ottoman Empire; G. Börekçi - Factions and favourites at the courts of Sultan Ahmed I (r. 1603-17) and his immediate predecessors; S. Faroqhi - The Ottoman Empire and the World; C. Imber - The Ottoman Empire 1300-1650; G. Piterberg - An Ottoman Tragedy, History and Historiography at Play; F. Suraiya - The Cambridge History of Turkey, The Later Ottoman Empire, 1603–1839; Howard - A History of the Ottoman Empire; Öztuna - Devletler ve Hanedanlar; F. Davis - The Palace of Topkapi in Istanbul; Y. Öztuna - Genç Osman ve IV. Murad; G. Junne - The black eunuchs of the Ottoman Empire; R. Dankoff - An Ottoman Mentality: The World of Evliya Çelebi; R. Murphey - ‘The Functioning of the Ottoman Army under Murad IV (1623–1639/1032–1049):Key to Understanding of the Relationship Between Center and Periphery

* * *

Születése és gyermekkora

Ibrahim 1615 októberében vagy novemberében született I. Ahmed szultán és kedvenc ágyasa, Mahpeyker Köszem szultána negyedik közös fiaként. Születésekor összesen hét (vagy nyolc) herceg állt előtte a trónöröklési sorban: I. Ahmed öccse, Musztafa herceg; Ibrahim bátyjai: Oszmán, Mehmed, Murad, Bayezid, Hüseyin, Kasim és Ibrahimmal nagyjából egyszerre született egy Szulejmán nevű herceg is. Ilyen háttérrel szinte kizártnak tűnt, hogy Ibrahim valaha is trónra kerülhet.

Ibrahim gyermekkora igen hányatott volt, hiszen 1617-ben édesapja I. Ahmed elhunyt és hosszú éveken át trónviszályok dúltak és egyfajta örökösödési káosz sújtotta a birodalmat. Az embereknek elege volt a testvérgyilkosságból, azonban Ahmed nem rendelkezett arról, hogy ki kövesse őt a trónon, öccse, Musztafa vagy legidősebb fia, Oszmán. Végül Musztafa trónralépésével hivatalosan is megváltozott az örökösödés, többé nem apáról fiúra szállt a trón, hanem a legidősebb férfi foglalta el azt. A következő évek meglehetősen zavarosak voltak, Musztafát mentális betegsége miatt hamarosan trónfosztották és Ibrahim féltestvére, Oszmán került a trónra. Oszmán nagyon népszerűtlen, rossz uralkodó volt.

A kaotikus évekből a gyermek Ibrahim minden bizonnyal annyit érzékelt, hogy elszakították édesanyjától, lánytestvéreitől és elzárva tartották fiú testvéreivel együtt. 1621-ben aztán édesbátyját, Mehmed herceget kivégeztette az akkor regnáló II. Oszmán. Bátyja halála bizonyára rettegéssel töltötte el a kis Ibrahimot és testvéreit. Nem meglepő hát, hogy Ibrahimról hamarosan kiderült, mentálisan nem teljesen ép. A traumatikus évek paranioássá és instabillá tették a fiatal herceget.

Némi nyugalmat hozhatott neki bátyja, IV. Murad 1623-as trónralépése, hiszen innentől nagyjából tíz évig édesanyjuk, Köszem szultána uralta a birodalmat régensként és minden erejével fiait védelmezte. Fontos azonban megemlíteni, hogy Ibrahim gyakorlatilag két éves korától kezdve hat éven át szinte alig találkozott édesanyjával, így bizonyára nem töltötte el akkora nyugalommal és megkönnyebbüléssel az újraegyesülés, mint idősebb testvéreit, akik legalább emlékezhettek anyjukra.

A rettegés

Nem sokat tudunk Ibrahim és testvérei mindennapjairól. A fennmaradt információk alapján valószínűsíthető, hogy míg Köszem régensként uralkodott a hercegek bár elzárva éltek, nem teljes izolációban voltak és oktatásban is részesülhettek. A relatív nyugalom azonban hamarosan, Köszem régensségével együtt végleg a múlté lett. 1632-ben szpáhi lázadás tört ki, melynek során a lázadók kivégezték a nagyvezírt és Murad szultán több hűséges emberét. Hogy a helyzet tovább bonyolódjon a katonák nyilvánosan követelték, hogy Murad mutassa meg nekik öccseit. Ezzel jelezni akarták neki, hogy ha akarnák le tudnák cserélni valamelyik öccsére; másrészt pedig keringtek olyan alaptalan pletykák, hogy Murad és Köszem megszabadultak a hercegektől. Murad kénytelen volt engedni a követeléseknek és bemutatta öccseit, akiket a katonák ekkor éltetni kezdtek. Ibrahim és testvérei ekkor szembesülhettek azzal testközelből, hogy amíg csak léteznek, mindig veszélyesek lesznek Muradra, ez pedig saját testiépségüketis fenyegette.

Muradot szintén megviselte nehéz gyermekkoruk, ami miatt kemény kézzel uralkodott. Nem meglepő, ha példaképének I. Szelimet tartotta és őt próbálta követni mindenben, így a régi öröklési rendet is vissza akarta hozni, hogy halála után fia kövesse a trónon, ne pedig öccsei közül valaki. Emellett Murad mentálisan és fizikailag is egyre rosszabb állapotban volt, így kezdett paranoiddá válni és mindenben konspirációt látott személye ellen. Ezek együttesen okozták azt, hogy 1635-ben a győztes revani hadjárata után, míg az emberek ünnepeltek ő elrendelte két féltestvére, Bayezid és Szulejmán hercegek kivégzését. Az egyébként is labilis Ibrahimot minden bizonnyal továb taszította ez a tragédia a lejtőn.

Az Ibrahim józaneszét tönkretévő egyik utolsó dolog 1638-ban következett be, mikor a győztes bagdadi hadjárata után Murad kivégeztette édestestvérét, Kasimot is, aki állítólag testvérei közül legközelebb állt hozzá. Egyes források szerint Ibrahim is jelen volt a Revan Pavilonban, ahol a kivégzés történt és az ő életét csak Köszem szultána könyörgése és elborult mentális állapota mentette meg. Mások szerint Murad meg sem próbálta kivégeztetni Ibrahimot ekkor. Akárhogyan is, minden bizonnyal megviselte Ibrahimot, hogy testvérei sorra fogytak el mellőle, egyetlen bátyja, Murad pedig egyre rosszabb állapotba került és egyre kiszámíthatatlanabb lett.

Trónralépése

IV. Murad Kasim halálát követően egyre rosszabb egészségi állapotban volt, hónapokon keresztül nyomta az ágyat. Több alapbetegsége is volt, azonban ezekről nem tudunk sokat. Egyesek szerint epilepsziás lehetett, mások szerint neki is hasonló emésztőrendszeri problémái lehettek, mint apjának (I. Ahmed) és nagyanyjának (Handan szultána). Ezeket tovább súlyosbították a harci sérülések, hiszen Murad maga is harcolt a hadjáratain; valamint az alkoholizmusa miatt kialakuló májzsugor. Murad harci sérüléseiből képes volt felépülni, ugyanis 1640 elején a Ramadánt minden gond nélkül ünnepelte, találkozott a vezíreivel, rendezvényeken vett részt. Sőt, hogy tovább fárassza beteg testét rendszeresen járt lovagolni és alkoholizálni barátaihoz. Egyik ilyen alkalommal Murad elvesztette az eszméletét és testőrei vitték vissza a Topkapi Palotába. Egyesek szerint halálos ágyán Murad kiadta a parancsot Ibrahim kivégzésére is, ám erre nincs bizonyíték.

Ahogy Murad elhunyt, a trón a legidősebb (és jelen esetben egyetlen) örökösre szállt, Ibrahimra. A nagyvezír Kemankeş Kara Mustafa Pasa ment Ibrahim lezárt lakrészébe, elmondta neki, hogy Murad meghalt, így övé a trón. Ibrahim azonban nem hitt neki. Ezekután a gyászoló Köszem szultána próbált meg beszélni fiával, de Ibrahim az elmúlt évek tragédiái után senkiben sem bízott, így megtagadta, hogy elhagyja lakrészét és elfoglalja a trónt. Úgy vélte az egész csak Murad cselszövése, és ha elhagyja lakrészét azonnal kivégzik. Ibrahim hűséges és alázatos testvérnek akarta mutatni magát, így semmilyen kérlelésre és parancsra nem volt hajlandó kijönni lakrészéből. Végül Köszem szultána úgy rendelkezett, hogy Murad holttestét vigyék be Ibrahimhoz. Ibrahim még ekkor sem nyugodott meg, alaposan megvizsgálta a testet, hogy biztos legyen benne, Murad elhunyt. Végül Ibrahim felfogta, hogy ő az új uralkodó és elfoglalta a trónt.

Ibrahim 1640-es trónralépésével nem oldódott meg a dinasztia legnagyobb problémája, az örökös kérdése. Miután Murad szisztematikusan kiírtotta testvéreit, fiai pedig természetes okból hunytak el, Ibrahim volt az egyetlen örökös. Mielőbb szükség volt új hercegekre, Ibrahim azonban semmilyen érdeklődést nem mutatott a nők és a szexualitás iránt. Egyesek szerint rettegett attól, hogy gyermeket nemzzen, mert félt, hogy akkor Murad kivégezteti őt, mások szerint egyszerűen nem érdekelte a dolog. Minden létező módon igyekeztek felkelteni a szultán szexuális vágyát, pornográf ábrázolásokat készítettek számára, afrodiziákumokat szolgáltak fel neki. A kitartó próbálkozás végül eredményes lett, 1642 januárjában megszületett első fia (és feltehetőleg első vagy második gyermeke), Mehmed. A legendák úgy vélik, hogy a vágyserkentők olyan erősen hatottak a szultánra, hogy előfordult, orgiákat rendezett magának és több beszámoló szerint is különböző perverzió voltak.

Mehmed herceg születését sorra követte a többi gyermek, Gevherhan (1642?), Szulejmán (1642), Fatma (1642?), Ahmed (1643), Murad (1643), Atike (?), Selim (1644), Osman (1644), Beyhan(1645?), Ayşe (1646?), Kaya (?), Ümmügülsüm (?) és legalább két névtelen szultána. Látható tehát, hogy Ibrahim kezdeti rettegése a nőktől hamarosan feloldódott és rövid időn belül extrém sok gyermeket nemzett. A gyerekekkel szemben Ibrahim nem volt túl jó apa. Instabil mentális állapota miatt gyakran volt kiszámíthatatlan. Ezt jól példázza egy 1645 körüli esemény is, mikor összevitatkozott Mehmed herceg édesanyjával Turhan Haticével. Turhan Hatice nehezményezte, hogy a szultán nem törődik Mehmeddel, ellenben sokat játszik a szoptatósdajka fiával, akit sajátjaként nevel és dédelget. A pár veszekedése odáig fajult, hogy Ibrahim dühében elhajította Mehmed herceget, aki a ciszternába esve komoly fejsérülést szenvedett és élete végéig viselte nyomát a homlokán.

Ibrahim és a nők

Arra már az előbbi események is utalnak, hogy Ibrahimnak nem volt felhőtlen a viszonya elsőszülött fia anyjával. Egyesek szerint a Mehmedet ért bántalmazás után Turhan és Ibrahim kapcsolata teljesen megszakadt. Némileg árnyalja a képet, hogy olybá tűnik Turhan Mehmed mellett még legalább egy gyermeket szült Ibrahimnak, Atike szultánát. Atike szultána születési ideje nem ismert, így nehéz megállapítani, hogy még az incidens előtt vagy már az után született.

Ibrahimnak Turhan mellett hét másik Haszekije is volt, mellyel gyakorlatilag elvette a Haszeki rang súlyát, hiszen minden gyermekének anyja megkapta ezt a titulust. A Haszekik közül ketten emelkednek ki, Şivekar egy örmény ágyas, aki komoly politikai befolyást tudott magának szerezni azzal, hogy bármikor, bármiben képes volt befolyásolni Ibrahimot. Şivekar azért is érdekes ágyas, mert létezése bizonyítja Ibrahim egyik perverzióját. A szultán ugyanis miután egyszer látott egy tehenet hátulról úgy döntött, hogy a birodalom legkövérebb nőjét akarja megszerezni magának, hiszen az hasonlíthat legjobban a tehénhez. Végül Şivekar volt az, aki megfelelt a paramétereknek, így került a szultán háremébe. A másik különleges Haszeki Telli Hümaşah volt, aki olyannyira az ujjaköré csavarta Ibrahimot, hogy a szultán feleségül is vette. Telli Hümaşah kiemelt pozícióját jól mutatja, hogy Ibrahim saját édestestvéreit és unokahúgát osztotta be Telli Hümaşah mellé szolgálónak.

Jól ismert legenda, miszerint Ibrahim megerőszakolta elhunyt bátyja, IV. Murad egyik ágyasát. Nincsenek egyértelmű bizonyítékok, amik alátámasztanák vagy cáfolnák ezt. Egyesek szerint ez az ágyas nem volt más, mint Ayşe Haszeki, Murad kedvence, aki a szultán szívességét kérte lánya kiházasításának ügyében, majd a szultán megpróbálta őt megerőszakolni a szívességért cserébe. Mások szerint egy jelentéktelen ágyassal történt mindez, de olyanok is vannak, akik szerint az erőszakra nem került sor, mert mikor Ibrahim kérette Murad szultán egykori ágyasát a nő megtagadta a parancsot és a hárem vezetőhöz fordult segítségül, aki Köszem szultánával együtt megtiltotta a szultánnak, hogy elhunyt tesvtére ágyasához érjen.

Előbbi történet mellett azonban az bizonyos, hogy Ibrahim elrabolta vagy kényszerítette Hazerpare Ahmed Pasa feleségét, hogy legyen a kegyeltje. Egyesek szerint az asszony megkapta az elárvult Beyhan szultánát, hogy nevelje. Máskor pedig Ibrahim, a Seyhülislam Muid Ahmed Efendi lányát akarta háremébe vitetni. Mikor a Seyhülislam ezt nem engedte, Ibrahim egy fürdőből elraboltatta a lányt. Egyesek szerint megbecstelenítette, mások szerint még időben jobb belátásra bírták a szultánt, aki kétségkívül visszaküldte a lányt apjához nemsokkal később.

Ágyasai mellett hárem szolgálók is sikerrel befolyásolták a szultánt, így Şekerpare, aki negédes modorával bármire rá tudta venni a szultánt és aki hatalmas vagyonra és befolyásra tett szert. Nem meglepő, hogy Ibrahim vesztét is végül befolyásolhatósága okozta. Ágyasai viszonylag ártalmatlan dolgokban befolyásolták csak a szultánt, amit a legtöbben még elnéztek neki. Hamarosan azonban egy sokkal veszedelmesebb ember befolyása alá került.

Az uralkodó

Ibrahimról, mint uralkodóról nem igazán beszélhetünk. Mentális állapota miatt édesanyja, Köszem szultána és IV. Murad utolsó nagyvezíre, Kemankeş Kara Mustafa Pasa uralkodott helyette. Bár Köszem és Kemankeş Kara Mustafa Pasa nem voltak jóban, sőt állandóan rivalizáltak egymással, a birodalom érdekében mégis kiválóan dolgoztak együtt. Ibrahim, bár maga nem volt alkalmas az uralkodásra, trónralépése utáni pár évben igyekezett megfelelni az elvárásoknak. Állandóan követte az eseményeket, rendszeresen tárgyalt a nagyvezírrel, melyre kézzel írt levelei is jó példaként szolgálnak. Ibrahim ezen levelei azért jelentősek, mert kitűnik belőle, hogy Ibrahim megfelelő oktatásban részesült, nem volt gyengeelméjű, tehát ténylegesen csak a traumák okozta mentális betegségekkel küzdött.

Ibrahim korai uralma tehát állapotához képest reménykeltő volt. Nem cserélte le bátyja korábbi vezíreit, pasáit, így tulajdonképpen nagyon egyszerűen zajlott le a szultánváltás és minden mehetett a korábbiak szerint, ami a birodalom szempontjából igen pozitív volt. Idővel azonban egy bizonyos Cinci Hoca befolyása alá került és fellázadt anyja uralma ellen. Cinci Hoca okkult tudományokkal foglalkozó sarlatán volt, aki magát vallási vezetőnek tekintette. Cinci Hoca különböző módszerekkel meggyőzte a szultánt arról, hogy képes gyógyítani fejfájását és mentális problémáit. Helyette kihasználta Ibrahim hiszékenységét és hatalmas vagyont halmozott fel magának és támogatóinak. Az események végül odáig fajultak, hogy minden tapasztalat és alkalmasság nélkül Cinci Hocát nevezte ki a szultán a főkádinak; Cinci Hoca hű társát, Silahdar Yusuf Agát pedig a főtengernaggyá tette meg. Cinci Hoca legnagyobb ellenfelének Kemankeş Kara Mustafa Pasát, a nagyvezírt tekintette és állandóan ellene beszélt, minek eredményeképpen a szultán 1644-ben a kivégeztette Kemankeş Pasát. Kemankeş Pasa helyére Cinci Hoca egy másik támogatóját Sultanzade Mehmed Pasát nevezte ki Ibrahim. Sultanzade Mehmed Pasa egyébként Ayşe Hanimszultána fia volt, tehát Ayşe Hümaşah szultána unokája és Mihrimah szultána dédunokája.

Azzal, hogy Ibrahim alkalmatlan személyek bűvkörébe került azt történt, hogy a korábban Murad pasái által nagyszerűen vezetett állam az összeomláshoz közeledett. Ibrahim idővel leváltotta Murad összes korábbi pasáját és saját bizalmasaival helyettesítette őket, akik nem voltak képesek megfelelően irányítani. Hasonlóan az emberek nemtetszését váltotta ki egy újabb költséges hadjárat indítása. 1644-ben máltai kalózok támadtak egy oszmán hajóra, melyen a fő fekete eunuch mellett jelen volt Mehmed herceg szoptatósdajkájának fia is, akit Ibrahim a saját fiánál, Mehmednél jobban szeretett és dédelgetett. A támadás ürügyén 1645-ben kirobbant az ötödik velencei-oszmán háború, mely 24 évig tartott.

Ibrahim nemsokkal Kemankeş kivégzése után édesanyját is száműzte. Eredetileg Rodosz szigetére szándékozta küldeni anyját, de végül ágyasai meggyőzték, hogy csak egy másik palotába küldje. Idővel egyre nőtt az elégedetlenség, egyre többen fordultak a száműzetésben lévő Köszem szultánához, hogy segítségét kérjék. Köszem valószínűleg széműzetésében írta meg jól ismert levelét is Hezarpare Ahmed Pasának - akinek feleségét a szultán korábban elrabolta -, mely így szólt: "Végül sem titeket, sem engem nem hagyna életben és újra elveszítenénk az uralmat az állam felett, ezzel pedig lerombolnánk társadalmunkat." A levél jól jelzi, hogy Ibrahim őrült uralma egyre többeket veszélyeztett. A szultán szinte minden ok nélkül végeztetett ki embereket, és teljesen alkalmatlanoknak adott magas beosztást. Egyre többen fordultak Ibrahim ellen és egyre valószínűbb volt, hogy nem maradhat sokáig a trónon.

A vég

Odáig fajult a helyzet, hogy 1647-ben Köszem szultána és az új nagyvezír, Salih Pasa és a Seyhülislam Abdürrahim Efendi megpróbálták trónfosztani Ibrahimot, azonban lebuktak. Salih Pasát kivégeztették, Köszem pedig száműzetésben maradt. A következő évben aztán a janicsárok és az ulema is csatlakozott a lázadáshoz és 1648. augusztus 8-án könnyűszerrel trónfosztották és bebörtönözték az őrült szultánt. Ekkor Köszem a bizonyítékok alapján visszatért a palotába, hiszen ott kapta meg a vezető államférfiak levelét, miszerint adja ki nekik Mehmed herceget, hogy a janicsár mecsetben szultánukká tegyék őt. Köszem elutasította a kérést és arra kérte a vezetőket, hogy menjenek a palotába, hogy megvitassák a helyzetet. Köszem személyesen fogadta a második kapunál az odasereglőket - minden fajta paraván nélkül, csupán elfátyolozva - és hosszasan érvelt nekik arról, hogy miért kellene meghagyniuk Ibrahimot a pozíciójában. Elmondta nekik, hogy a szultán csak rossz emberek tanácsát követte, így elég azoktól megszabadulni. Kétséges, hogy Köszem valóban így gondolta vagy egyszerűen úgy érezte, hogy Ibrahim anyjaként ezt várják tőle. Utóbbira enged következtetni korábbi levele és hogy két órányi diskurzus után Köszem beleegyezett az alig hat és fél éves Mehmed trónra ületetésébe. Fontos azonban megjegyezni, hogy Köszem rögzített beszéde alapján Köszem csak kényszer miatt ment bele Ibrahim trónfosztásába. Köszem a következő mondattal zárta le a diskurzust: "Mind egyetértetek tehát, hogy a szultánt trónfosztani kell, lehetetlen bármi más megoldás. Azt kéritek tőle, adjam át nektek Mehmed herceget és ha nem teszem erőszakkal viszitek ki a palotából." Így bármit érzett is vagy gondolt is Köszem, kifelé azt mutatta, hogy édesanyaként próbálja védeni fiát.

Ibrahim követőit a szultán trónfosztásával egy időben eltávoltották a pozícióikból, majd legtöbbüket ki is végezték. Ibrahim szultán sorsáról is hamarosan dönteniük kellett, azonban ez nem volt egyszerű. Korábban már volt egy őrült szultán, akit trónfosztása után egyszerűen csak elzártak, erre Ibrahim esetében is lehetett volna tehát lehetőség. Ibrahim azonban túl sokaknak okozott fájdalmat, túl sokakat végeztetett ki és egyszerűen túl sok támogatója volt ahhoz, hogy életben hagyják. Végül az új nagyvezír, Sofu Mehmed Pasa kérvényezte a Seyhülislam Efenditől, hogy engedélyezze Ibrahim kivégzését. A Seyhülislam engedélyezte. Egyesek szerint Köszem szultána is beleegyezett a kivégzésbe, mások szerint az utolsó pillanatig nem értesítették, nehogy megakadályozhassa azt. Végül Ibrahimot 1648. augusztus 18-án megfojtották. A leírások szerint amikor a kivégzőosztag belépett a szultánhoz, az a Koránt szorongatva azt kérte, mutassák meg neki, hogy a Korán mely sorára hivatkozva akarják kivégezni és ha megteszik megadja magát. Erre természetesen nem volt mód, az egyik kivégző hátulról rádobta a hurkot a szultán nyakára. Hasonlóan trónfosztott őrült elődjéhez, őt is az Aya Sofyában temették el, mint I. Musztafát.

Felhasznált források: A. D. Alderson - The Structure of the Ottoman Dynasty; L. Peirce - The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire; N. Sakaoğlu - Bu Mülkün Kadın Sultanları; M. Ç. Uluçay - Padişahların Kadınları ve Kızları; C. Finkel - Osman's Dream: The Story of the Ottoman Empire; G. Börekçi - Factions and favourites at the courts of Sultan Ahmed I (r. 1603-17) and his immediate predecessors; S. Faroqhi - The Ottoman Empire and the World; C. Imber - The Ottoman Empire 1300-1650; G. Piterberg - An Ottoman Tragedy, History and Historiography at Play; F. Suraiya - The Cambridge History of Turkey, The Later Ottoman Empire, 1603–1839; Howard - A History of the Ottoman Empire; Öztuna - Devletler ve Hanedanlar; F. Davis - The Palace of Topkapi in Istanbul; Y. Öztuna - Genç Osman ve IV. Murad; G. Junne - The black eunuchs of the Ottoman Empire; R. Dankoff - An Ottoman Mentality: The World of Evliya Çelebi; R. Murphey - ‘The Functioning of the Ottoman Army under Murad IV (1623–1639/1032–1049):Key to Understanding of the Relationship Between Center and Periphery

#ibrahim I #deli ibrahim #ibrahim the mad #mahpeyker kösem #Kösem sultan #Turhan Hatice Sultan #turhan hatice #Murad IV #Osman II #sehzade bayezid #Sehzade mehmed #sehzade kasim #Mustafa I #Ahmed I

47 notes · View notes

toldnews-blog · 6 years ago

Photo

New Post has been published on https://toldnews.com/sports/please-fight-for-me-bahrain-soccer-player-detained-in-thailand-pleads-for-help/

'Please fight for me.' Bahrain soccer player detained in Thailand pleads for help

The professional soccer player is unable to hold the precious message, instead he must read it from behind a glass pane as a friend holds it up from the visitors room of Bangkok Remand Prison prison in the Thai capital.

“I am crying inside, I miss her so much, we were together every day,” he tells CNN from the prison on Friday. The only way to communicate with him is through a telephone set that’s wired to the other side of the window pane separating inmates from their visitors.

Al-Araibi says he and his wife have been together for seven years and were planning on having a baby. “There is not a single day I would not miss her. I love her very much, and I worry about her very much.”

Those happy family plans were forcibly put on hold when Al-Araibi, a refugee and former member of the Bahraini national soccer team, was arrested at Bangkok’s Suvarnabhumi Airport while on his honeymoon on November 27. Interpol had issued a “red notice” — an international arrest warrant — which is not supposed to be given to refugees.

Al-Araibi, who fled Bahrain in 2014, was detained and held in Thailand at the request of the Bahrain government. He holds refugee status in Australia where he plays for Melbourne soccer club Pascoe Vale, but has been locked in an overcrowded Thai prison cell since his arrest while officials await extradition proceedings.

On Friday, Al-Araibi’s lawyer said that is due to appear in court on Monday morning local time and will be asked whether he will comply with the extradition request or challenge it.

Activists campaigning for his release have launched a global campaign of support and warn that his case has become an “absolute emergency” now that an extradition request has been filed.

Speaking to CNN’s News Stream on Thursday, former Australia soccer captain Craig Foster, who is spearheading the campaign, said Al-Araibi is “nothing more than a political prisoner.”

“This is about retribution from the government and royal family in Bahrain, and all Australians are saying we will not stand for it,” he said.

Fleeing torture in Bahrain

On Monday, Bahrain’s Minister of Interior, Lieutenant General Rashid bin Abdullah al-Khalifa, said that extradition proceedings were “in process” and a Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman confirmed to CNN that Thailand had transmitted the documents to the Office of the Attorney-General.

Rights groups say if Al-Araibi is extradited to Bahrain, he could face unfair trial, imprisonment and torture. Al-Araibi has publicly said that he was tortured in Bahrain and that his life would be in danger if he returns.

“I think it is imperative to know that Hakeem is a torture survivor,” Evan Jones, program coordinator for Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network (APRRN) told CNN.

“It is almost certain that he’d suffer the same fate again if returned to Bahrain. The Thai government should outright reject the extradition request from Bahrain and allow Hakeem to return home (to Australia),” said Jones.

The 25-year-old said he is afraid that he will be sent back to Bahrain.

“I couldn’t sleep much during the night, I have been thinking a lot until my head aches. I am afraid to go back,” he said.

Inside the prison, Al-Araibi said he initially had to share a cell with 60 other people but has now been moved into a “better room.”

He fills his days by running in the prison yard and trying to keep fit, “I run every day. But the place is too small,” he said.

Al-Araibi has been openly critical of the Bahraini government and its record on human rights. In 2012 he was arrested and detained for three months accused of vandalizing a police station during a protest. He told CNN that he was released because he presented evidence that he was playing soccer live on TV when the protest happened.

Al-Araibi was playing soccer in Qatar when he was sentenced to ten years in absentia in 2014 for the vandalism charge — a verdict that came as a surprise to him, Al-Araibi said. He fled to Australia where he was granted refugee status in 2017.

He told CNN that he believes Bahrain has targeted him now because of a 2016 interview he gave to German channel, ARDTV, saying that Asian Football Confederation (AFC) President, Salman Bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa, was not fit for the presidency of FIFA.

According to a report by Human Rights Watch, Al-Araibi accused Salman of failing to stop a crack down on Bahraini athletes during the 2011 Arab Spring protests.

Bahrain’s Interior Minister on Monday defended the extradition request and said that claims Al-Araibi would not receive a fair trial, or would face torture “false reports.”

“External interference in the internal affairs of Bahrain is unacceptable,” he said. “Those raising unfounded doubts about the integrity and independence of the Kingdom’s judicial system are not only interfering, but also attempting to influence the course of justice.”

Al-Araibi said he has done nothing wrong. He said his mother and sister are in Bahrain and are afraid to speak out for him.

Campaign to release Al-Araibi intensifies

As Al-Araibi’s fate becomes increasingly uncertain, a global campaign for his release is gathering steam.

Australia soccer captain Foster, who along with Brendan Schwab, Executive Director of the World Players Association, met with FIFA officials in Zurich on Monday to urge the world soccer governing body to do more to ensure his release.

Foster said that from his meeting with FIFA general-secretary Fatma Samoura, Al-Araibi’s case has been “escalated to immediate high level meetings with both countries.”

“This is the litmus test,” Foster told CNN. “The case that is going to prove whether sport and human rights is substantive, and that the political and huge economic implications coming out of the Middle East region can not play any role in what is a very basic case of a refugee law.”

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has written to Thai Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, telling reporters this week that Australia is “pushing on every door” to ensure Thailand releases him, according to SBS news.

Other sporting and human rights organizations, including the International Olympic Committee, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are also putting pressure on Thailand to free Al-Araibi.

Al-Araibi’s wife, who has asked not to be named, penned a letter to the Thai prime minister urging for her husbands release. She has also appealed to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Adern for help, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

“I can’t sleep, can’t breathe, knowing what awaits him,” she wrote in an op-ed with the Guardian last week.

Speaking to CNN, Al-Araibi implored FIFA, sporting organizations and those working on human rights to help him fight his case.

“It is 2019 now, there should be human rights. In Bahrain there is none,” he said.

“Please fight for me.”

#Football #Hakeem Al-Araibi urges international cimmunity to &039;please fight for me&039; - CNN #latest sports news #news sport #Sport #sportnews #sports articles #sports breaking news #sports latest news #sports news headlines #sports news in english #sports scores #today's sports news #today's sports news headlines

0 notes

ottomanladies · 4 years ago

Note

What was the life of the daughters of Şehzade Mustafa and Şehzade Bayazid? Did Suleiman pay special attention to them? Wikipedia mentions the names of Prince Mustafa's daughters Raziye and Fatma. The source of these names is the book of the history of Amasya by Hesamuddin Hussein. This book is a historical source. Is it more authentic than Oztana? Could Raziye actually be the daughter of Şehzade Mustafa?

Amasya Tarihi is not a contemporary source. I assume you mean that by "historical source" because well, anything can be a historical source, even a post-it. Anyways, Amasya Tarihi is a 12-book project by Hüseyin Hüsâmeddin (1869-1939), who in the end wrote only the first five volumes before dying. Volume 3, which is the one cited by the Wikipedia article, was published in 1927.

Now, I am not saying that it should be thrown away but Ottoman history has progressed a lot from 1927, and information found in that book could be dated and/or incorrect.

For example, Halûk Şehsuvaroğlu in 1953 found a plaque in the Yahya Efendi mausoleum that said "Kanunî Sultan Süleyman's daughter, Yahya Efendi's spiritual daughter, the carefree Raziye Sultan".

Now, maybe there were two Raziyes? Maybe Mustafa called one of his daughters Raziye in honour of the sister that had died in childhood? The thing is, no one mentions a Raziye among Mustafa's children. Öztuna says that he had two daughters, one called Şah and the other Nergis-Şah. Alderson confirms that one was called Şah but doesn't provide a name for the other, only that she married one Mahmud; I assume his source is von Hammer because he said that "the daughter of Prince Mustafa" married "the fourth vizier Mahmud" (Histoire de l’Empire ottoman - tome 7). While Öztuna claims that Şah's wedding was in 1562 with Selim II's daughters, I think it is more probable that her wedding was in 1566/67, when “... Ferhad Pasha, the fourth vizier Mahmoud, and the third vizier Ahmed, had married, the first the daughter of Prince Mohammed, the second the daughter of Prince Mustafa, and the third a princess of the blood, all three granddaughters of Süleyman I." It is quite known that Süleyman organised Selim II's daughters' weddings right after the execution of Bayezid, possibly to strengthen Selim's position as the indisputable heir. So, I think that Ismihan, Gevherhan and Şah (Selim II's daughter) all got married in 1562 when Mihrimah famously refused to celebrate because Bayezid had just been executed. The daughters of the "lesser" princes were instead married off in 1566/67, even though Hümâ-Şâh (Mehmed's daughter) was older than Selim II's three daughters. This is because there was a rigid hierarchy; Selim's daughters now came before all the other granddaughters because they would soon become the sultan's daughters. Indeed if Öztuna is right, Nergis-Şah was quite old at her wedding because she was born in 1536. Indeed [2], if the weddings were instead celebrated in 1567 then it was Selim II who found husbands for them and not their grandfather. That Süleyman waited for so long to marry them off may seem like a continuation of his treatment of Mahidevran after Mustafa's execution (his refusal to give her funds to pay her servants etc)... it doesn't explain, though, why Hümâ-Şâh was grouped with the daughters of executed princes. Ayşe Hümâ-Şâh got married in 1557 (possibly), way earlier than the other granddaughters. While it explains why Selim's, Mustafa's and Bayezid's daughter were unmarried (there wasn't a designated heir at the moment), I don't understand why Mehmed's daughter Hümâ-Şâh couldn't have got married in 1557 with her cousin.

Whatever, this is not what you asked.

I don't think that Süleyman paid special attention to the daughters of the princes that he had executed. Their inferior rank could also be seen in harem registers and in the stipend they received but unfortunately, I can't prove this theory.

#anon #ask post #ask: ottoman history #sehzade mustafa son of suleyman i #osmanlihanedan14

12 notes · View notes

graduationpaula · 5 years ago

Text

Marketing

The following is a summary of notes I took when researching the topic of marketing. It helped me to further structure my thoughts in order to start writing the research report:

Determining effective sustainable fashion communication strategies

· Available as google book

· Eco rpoducts only become successful only if customers perceive the regular product attributes as superior to competitor’s conventional offering

· Values action gapà consumers say they want sustainable products but don’t act upon it

o Information needs to be provided in a clear and coherent manner

· Results: most people said that ethics are not important and only seen as a secondary benefit.

o To make sustainable fashion desirableà right designs at a competitive price

o Unique designs and limited edition supply created by upcycling can also create an appealing exclusivity

· Circular economy fashion communicationà nurture relationships between consumer and producer, encourage responsible consumptionà long-lasting value and enduring style

· Personal creativity is emphasized à non-purchase related lifestyle choices, mending etc

The sustainability claims' impact on the consumer's green perception and behavioral intention: A case study of H&M

· The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether various kinds of sustainability claims based on the supply chain drive different extents of green psychological variables and behavioral intention.

· Fast-fashion retailers are facing sustainability challenges, as their global supply chain is responsible for pollution, chemical wastes, ecological hazards, the upswing in consumption, and environmental catastrophes in developing countries (Gilal et al., 2014; 2019a; Yang, Song, & Tong, 2017). Similarly, the apparel industry outsources the workforce from developing countries to exploit the cheap labor opportunity (Dabija, Pop, & Postelnicu, 2016). Media reports claim that the clothing and textile industry is involved in the human rights violation, discrimination between gender, and animal testing. For instance, a recent deadly tragedy in the global supply of the apparel industry killed thousands of people in Bangladesh. Which is changing customer perception and attitude towards the fashion industry.

· In this internet era, while consumers have easy access to business operations (Gilal et al., 2016; 2017; Iglesias, Ind, & Alfaro, 2017), green customers are keeping an eye to the clothing and textile industry sustainable practices in emerging countries (Kauppi & Hannibal, 2017). Consumers highly demand their favorite brands to behave ethically (Shaw & Shiu, 2002) and prefer products that generally perceived environmental friendly (Laroche, Bergeron, & Barbaro-Forleo, 2001).

· More precisely, sustainable communication emphasis the organization's social commitment to induce positive perception among consumers (Bae, 2016; Jeong, Paek, & Lee, 2013). Green advertisement and marketing have been diversifying and emerging significantly for many years, including a sustainable supply chain, green advertising, sustainable marketing (Leonidou, Leonidou, Palihawadana, & Hultman, 2011).

o Streetman and Banerjee (1995) defined green advertisement as (1) any product or services which implicitly or explicitly show a relationship with the biophysical environment, (2) its emphasis on adoption of green lifestyle without stressing on product or services, (3) project a corporate green responsible image. Promotional activities are used to inform current and potential customers about the firm green innovation process (R. Y. K. Chan, Leung, & Wong, 2006), which in turn help to gain the desired brand image, favorable attitude (Dach & Allmendinger, 2014), customer's loyalty (Fatma, Khan, & Rahman, 2018), and customer satisfaction (Han, Lee, & Kim, 2018). The whole endeavor systematically adds on into the corporation's long-cherished reputation.

· Literature findings suggest that all sustainability messages are not equal, and consumers react differently to subtle distinctions in the communication of the company's sustainability messages (Line et al., 2016). To this end, our research intends to examine whether or not various types of sustainability claims based on the global supply chain can lead to various green psychological variables such as purchase intention.

· Mean-end theory extensively used in the area of marketing and consumer behaviors for positioning decisions. It provides the methodology which is also known as a laddering. Laddering methodology is helpful to understand the consumer's preferences and decision-making process. The theory is based on the concept that products and its attributes are the mean which aids people to reinforce their personal value and obtain benefits, and further gain crucial consequences. Brands that positioned on the bases of benefits and values gain a competitive advantage because that is difficult to imitate (Vriens & Hofstede, 2000; Gilal et al., 2016). P. C. Stern and Dietz (1994) argue that attitudes of concern about environmental issues are based on a person's more general set of values. These personal value orientations have an effect on the person's attitude and this attitude leads towards the behavior. Consumer concern and attitude toward environmental issues are based on the persona's own general set of values (P. C. Stern & Dietz, 1994; Gilal et al., 2019a; 2019b). This value will affect their belief which in turn influences personal norms that drive their pro-environmental behaviors. Thus, an individual's own value orientation towards the environment has a major effect on his/her proenvironmental behavior (Moser, 2015). Further, the consumer's personal obligation and norms are considered as a basis of environmental behavioral disposition (Stern, 2000).

· On the other side, a distinctive brand image can be used to promote the competitiveness and differentiation in the competitive market (T. J. Reynolds & J. J. J. o. a. r. Gutman, 1984). Thus, brand management is considered an important aspect of the marketing strategy. "Green brand image" is defined as "a set of perceptions of a brand in a consumer's mind that is linked to environmental commitments and environmental concerns" (Y.-S. J. J. o. B. e. Chen, 2010).

· In prior research, the concept of satisfaction with the environmental aspect has been associated (M.-F. Chen & Lee, 2015; Y.-S. Chen, 2008). Green satisfaction construct can be explained as "a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfillment to satisfy a customer's environmental desires, sustainable expectations, and green needs." The customer expects the products to be environmental friendly in a combination of excellent quality and low price while making the purchase decision. Similarly, Hoyer & MacInnis (2004) argue that consumer considers the environmentally friendly product as a higher quality product. Consequently, marketing strategy mainly focuses on satisficing the consumers' need for environmentally friendly products and services (Ottman, Stafford, Hartman, & Development, 2006).

· Consumers know that s/he is contributing to the environmental cause. Hwang, Lee, Diddi, Karpova, and Journal (2016) and Croteau, Yan, and Hyllegard (2016) found that ecologically concerned consumers' response was more favorable towards green products which highlight the green aspects in advertisement compare to advertisements without green elements. In that respect, consumer behavior research has a critical position when it comes to communicating sustainable efforts because consumers ultimately make the perception regarding sustainable advertisement and make purchasing decisions. Consumers are more inclined towards green products and feel no hesitation to pay more for the less environmentally harmful products (Ayadi & Lapeyre, 2016; Kumar, Ghodeswar, & Planning, 2015).

· Corporations are using green advertisement to communicate their green efforts in order to exploit the business opportunities (Nyilasy, Gangadharbatla, & Paladino, 2014). Various green communication strategies such as green labeling (Maniatis, 2016), sustainability reporting (Ioannou & Serafeim, 2017), ethical labeling (Hashmi, Abdullah, & Anees, 2016), and CSR web pages (Capriotti, 2017) are used to inform customers about sustainability efforts.

o Wagner and Hansen (2002) elaborates that an advertisement should have five characteristics "driving force," "leverage point," "executional framework," "consumer benefits," and "message elements." If marketers want advertisement to be influential then each element in the MECCAS model should be communicated to the target audience.

· Supply chain based information can be sourced from credible message enhancement, as well as can bring a positive attitude towards the brand. S. A. Molina-Murillo and T. M. Smith (2009) used LCA-based information in corporate communications. The results suggest that LCA- Based information not only enhances the message's credibility but also positively affects the brand attitude. As a result, have a positive effect on purchase intention.

Greenwashing?

· More and more companies take an interest in communicating their environmental and ethical conduct in their marketing, especially companies utilising many resources on keeping themselves as environmentally responsible as possible. The Danish Consumer Ombudsman has recently issued Guidelines containing a detailed and very strict framework for when and how environmental and ethical claims can be used in marketing. This is bound to limit the ways in which "storytelling" can be used as a means of marketing. Therefore, the Guidelines will be of great importance. Since the Danish Consumer Ombudsman uses a very wide definition of environmental and ethical claims, the Guidelines cover all information which is likely to give consumers the impression that a given product or activity is a better choice from an environmental or ethical point-of-view, such as "green", "blue", "gentle", "sustainable", "environmentally friendly" or "fair". At the same time, the Guidelines are very ambitious in their requirement for environmental and ethical claims to be adequately documented. This raises a very important question for many operators in the market: When does the company hold sufficient documentation to highlight itself?

Fashionably Sustainable or Sustainably Fashionable?

· Many companies participate in CSR programs in order to reduce the negative impact they have on the environment and society and thus be positive actors for social change, but they are also motivated to engage in CSR in order to boost their own business returns through better reputation, higher levels of sales and investment, customer loyalty, employment interest, a strengthened corporate image and better overall stakeholder relationships (Du, Bhattacharya & Sen 2010).

· The term greenwashing is often used to describe the inconsistency between “talk” and “walk” of CSR initiatives (Walker & Wan 2012) and has in general been considered to be bad for the reputation of a firm

· Since it is very important for managers to understand why, what, how, when and where to communicate responsible actions in an efficient way in order to benefit from CSR strategically, this paper also offers an important managerial implication. The implications of untruthful CSR communication are widespread because consumers are sceptical about which products actually are good for the environment. Due to higher rates of consumer scepticism, legitimate attempts by companies to be more environmentally friendly might lose competitive advantage because consumers see environmental claims as simple marketing tricks without any real positive impact. Untruthful environmental marketing and communication does thus not only hurt the consumers and firms, but also the environment in the end. When a consumer is sceptical about a product and what it claims, she is more likely to ignore all environmental claims, also claims about products that actually are better for the environment. (Polonsky et al 1998) This managerial implication is not only helpful for managers in the apparel industry but can be applied in the CSR communication of any company.

0 notes