r/ottomans

İpşirli Argıt, Rabia Gülnuş Emetullah Sultan, “A Queen-mother and the Ottoman Imperial Harem”.

Betül İpşirli Argıt has demonstrated that Gülnuş Sultan, the mother of Mustafa II and Ahmed III was in fact another Valide Sultan of great importance in the late 17th and 18th centuries.

According to Betül İpşirli Argıt, upon Turhan Sultan’s death in 1683, Gülnuş became the sole authority in the Imperial Harem, and her political power and influence only grew bolder under the sultanates of her two sons, despite the political instability and depositions of both of her sons. (She would pass away before her second son Ahmed III was deposed)

Indeed, from 1695 until her death in 1715, Gülnuş Sultan acted as one of the chief royal advisors, a power-broker in contemporary court politics as well as a key intermediary agent of diplomacy, as exemplified by her personal involvement and correspondence in the traffic of the diplomatic relations and negotiations during the so-called Great Northern War between Russia and Sweden (King Charles XII of Sweden fled to the Ottoman Empire in 1709 and he worked aggressively to persuade Sultan Ahmed III to attack Tsar Peter the Great) —a conflict to which the Ottoman Empire was drawn as an ally of Swedish. (Explained in great detail in Dilek Seniha Cenez’s work: 18. Yüzyılda bir devlet adamı: Çorlulu Ali Paşa)

She authored the definitive study "A Queen Mother and the Ottoman Imperial Harem: Rabia Gülnuş Emetullah Valide Sultan (1640–1715)", published in the Oxford University Press volume Concubines and Courtesans: Women and Slavery in Islamic History.

Her research challenges the narrative that female political power in the Ottoman Empire sharply declined after the mid 17th century after Turhan Sultan, and Gülnus was another key figure of the "Sultanate of Women". By analyzing the life of Rabia Gülnuş Emetullah, she demonstrates that late 17th and early 18th century Ottoman Valide Sultans continued to possess extraordinary social, architectural, and political authority.

According to Ispirli Argit, Gülnus was deeply involved in state affairs, acting as a critical bridge between her sons and the imperial court. She used her alliances to influence the appointments and dismissals of Grand Viziers and other high-ranking officials. Gülnus did not shy away from international relations, going as far as corresponding directly with foreign statesmen and rulers during major conflicts like the Great Northern War.

She channeled vast amounts of personal wealth into large-scale charitable endowments (waqfs). This included funding hospitals, mosques, and soup kitchens not just in Istanbul, but also along the pilgrimage route to Mecca and Medina.

Muzaffer Özgüleş has accordingly dubbed her “one of the most influential of Ottoman royal women”, due to her prolonged prestige and standing as Haseki and Valide Sultan.

Gülnüş Sultan was not the first Ottoman imperial woman to build a hospital in Makkah, following in the footsteps of another haseki, Hürrem Sultan. However, unlike Hurrem Sultan, Gülnüş Sultan’s dar al-shifa (hospital) in 1679 is less popular.

Historian Muzaffer Özgüleş dedicated his 2017 book “Female Patronage and the Architectural Legacy of Gülnuş Sultan” to Gülnuş Sultan.

Baltacı Mehmed Pasha: Gülnus was a key supporter of his. During his tenure, she directly received and reviewed letters regarding his military campaigns and political standing. Baltaci Mehmed Pasha (1704–1706, 1710–1711) famously led the Ottoman forces to a major victory over Peter the Great during the Prut River Campaign in 1711. He successfully encircled the Russian army, forcing Russia to return the fortress of Azov.

Merve Karacay Turkal, The Dismissal process of Baltaci Mehmed Pasha and the Letter sent to Valide Gülnus Sultan

Çorlulu Ali Pasha: Supported by the Valide Gülnus Sultan until his downfall, he was Ahmed III's chosen Grand Vizier early in the reign, managing the treasury and stabilizing the government. Appointed early in Ahmed's reign, he was instrumental in reorganizing the treasury, stabilizing the government against rival factions, and managing early diplomatic relations with Sweden and Europe.

Dilek Seniha Cenez, 18. Yüzyılda bir devlet adamı: Çorlulu Ali Paşa (1706-1710)

janissaries where badass, I like turkish muskets too.

🦋In the second half of the 16th century, the institutional structure of the Ottoman Empire began to deteriorate, the madrasas were also affected by this decline. Madrasas (educational institutions) admitted more students than they could accommodate, and students graduated without the necessary qualifications. The graduates turned into rebels/bandits after not being able find employment. Over time, these “suhte” bandit groups evolved into units of hundreds or even thousands, and turned the lives of innocent Anatolian villagers into living hell by forming illegal forces. There were cases of SA’s against women and children :( it’s also interesting how these men were educated in Islamic arts in the Madrasa, but ended up looting and SA’ing people, which is strictly against Islamic values.

🦋The population growth experienced in the 16th-century Ottoman Empire was also one of the major causes of the social and financial crisis. In particular, the increase in the population in Anatolia led to a rise in the number of people without shelter, land, or work, which in turn caused the formation of gangs, an increase in banditry and looting, and major hardships for farmers. So, this crisis had strictly economic reasons.

🦋The state was aware of the consequences: Ottoman Empire’s economy was mostly based on animal husbandry and agriculture, and if the production in the villages were affected by these bandits, it would affect the whole empire. Military precautions were taken in Suleyman’s and Selim II’s period.

🦋The WORST wave of Celali rebellions happened during Murad III’s period, but these rebellions rooted back to Suleyman’s reign:

⭐️⭐️The constant campaigns against Safavid Empire and Austria, and problems with sipahi forces

⭐️⭐️Düzmece Mustafa incident—a false Prince Mustafa appeared after Prince Mustafa’s execution

⭐️⭐️Prince Bayezid’s rebellion and his escape to Safavid Empire, 30,000 soldiers joined him. A large, armed mass in Anatolia posed a threat in the second half of 16th century. (Honestly, Beyazid caused so much harm to the empire by his rebellious behavior, and the ramifications of his rebellion continued through decades)

⭐️⭐️Groups of bandits of “Sipahi” (Turkish men of Anatolian origin, as opposed to Devşirme class from the Balkans that didn’t have Anatolian roots) and “Sekban” origin joined those rebels, along with medrese students known as “suhte”. They were bandits spread across all the provinces of Anatolia, raided villages and towns, forcibly collecting food and money, and killing residents who resisted them.
(When these sipahis and sekbans are turned into bandits who loot and attack villages they’re now called “Celali” rebels if this is confusing)

🦋Unlike his father Selim II and his grandfather Sultan Suleyman, Murad III tried to have a more peaceful approach to those bandits: He attempted to negotiate with these rebels. He pardoned them at some point, but realized that the bandits continued to pillage the villages.

Murad III might have believed that he could solve the issue through a more diplomatic approach, and with military force if necessary but he didn’t take the necessary measures to address the root cause of the issue: He failed to implement reforms regarding those Madrasas (educational institutions) where those bandits and rebels were once educated in. Some corrupt local statesmen would turn a blind eye to those rebels. Things got so bad, there was no safety of life or property for those living in rural areas.

🦋The third and ABSOLUTELY WORST wave of the Celali Rebellions began in the late 16th century during Murad III’s reign. The prolonged wars placed a heavy burden on the treasury, in 1586, the devaluation of money happened, and the silver content of the akçe was reduced by 44 percent. (The silver that European merchants had begun bringing into the Ottoman Empire in 16th century had created a surplus of silver and began to disrupt the Ottoman domestic market.)

The resulting inflation cut the people’s purchasing power nearly in half. These rebellions continued into his son Mehmed III’s reign.

The long Ottoman-Iranian War (1578–1590) and the Ottoman-Austrian War (1593–1606) certainly didn’t help. During Haçova battle (1596) against the Austrians, a large number of “tımarlı sipahis” who had lost their estates crossed over to Anatolia and joined the Celalis. Some of the population had taken refuge in nearby safe cities and towns to escape the Celali raids. Anatolia was brought into further chaos.

🦋The “Sekban” unit had replaced the Sipahis, but they also joined the bandits when they found themselves unemployed during peacetime. Their numbers had reached 25,000 to 30,000. The Great Celali Rebellions began after the Battle of Haçova in 1596 as I explained above, the battle was personally commanded by Sultan Mehmed III.—a stark difference to his father Murad III who rarely left his residence.

Under the leadership of Karayazıcı Abdülhalim, the Celalis became quite dangerous. Karayazıcı gathered groups of deserters who did not want to go to war. Starting in 1598, they began attacking towns and cities. They established control over Central Anatolia and the Maraş region. After Karayazıcı’s death in 1602, they spread throughout
all of Anatolia.

In the summer of 1608, the Ottoman Army, led by Kuyucu Murat Pasha, put an end to the Celali uprisings. Kuyucu Murat Pasha’s campaign against the bandits eliminated the remaining Celali rebels.

Source:
Mustafa Akdağ
Selaniki

I came across these comments in another Reddit thread and wanted to hear the opinion of people who are more familiar with Ottoman history.

Some of the claims include:

Arabic and Persian were valued more than Turkish.

The middle and upper classes were mostly non-Turks and non-Muslims.

Almost all government officials were Greeks or Armenians.

Turks mostly lived in poor villages.

Almost everyone across the empire spoke Turkish.

From what I have read, some of these statements seem to contain partial truths, while others appear to be broad generalizations or historically inaccurate.

I would appreciate answers based on academic research or reliable historical sources rather than nationalism or politics.

Which of these claims are accurate, which are misleading, and what important historical context is missing?

Translation:
The Fury of My Ghazi Soldiers
One day, the Ghazi soldiers learned of the letters Kadıoğlu had sent to the populace. They immediately armed themselves and gathered in force before the palace gates. Upon hearing the news, I went out to meet them.
"What is it, my sons? Welcome; I trust all is well?"
"Listen, Father Pasha. Kadıoğlu has sent missives to the people, saying: 'Come and submit to me. Once I capture Algiers and become its Sultan, I shall settle the score with you; we shall leave no trace of the Turkish people in Algiers—we shall put them all to the sword.'
"They have resolved to slaughter us. Grant us leave, then, to slaughter them in return—sparing no one, from seven-year-olds down to the very infants in their cradles."
I saw that they were burning with rage.
"My sons, may the Almighty grant you honor in this world and the next. You have pleased me today. For when the soldiers of Islam are roused to wrath, they do not often pause to ask for permission—yet that is precisely how true soldiers ought to be. Bless you.
"But, my sons and bretherns—since you have sought permission from this beadsman of yours and shown me such regard, I, too, have a request of you. Let us be patient for a while. For there is great virtue in patience; haste comes from the Devil. Let the insolence remain with them. The Almighty created us for this very purpose. We did not come to this province to engage in trade. Leaving our own lands and homes behind, we came for the sake of Allah to protect these people from the enemy. While they were paying *jizya* to the infidel, we—with Allah’s aid—wrested these provinces from infidel hands and illuminated them with the light of Islam.
"If they repay our deeds with treachery, the Almighty—He who is Mighty—will deal with them. There will be no need for us to slaughter them ourselves."
"Everyone will come to regret their actions. Just be patient and see what God reveals," I said, calming them down. I broke into a cold sweat trying to quell this discord. Eventually, they all dispersed and returned to their homes. I told them, "May God be pleased with you, my sons. You did not let me down before the town. Nevertheless, let us remain vigilant and keep our eyes open" and sent them all on their way on good terms.

Source: Kaptan-ı Derya Barbaros Hayrettin Paşa’nın Hatıraları(Gazavat-ı Hayreddin Paşa), Kaynak Yayınları 2004, p. 206-207

Summary: it sounds a bit unrealistic to me that Selim tried to poison his sole heir Suleyman with a poisonous kaftan. Selim I worked to improve the territories and treasury of Ottoman Empire and it would be a fatal mistake to execute his sole adult heir and put the dynastic continuation at risk. These rumors were likely based on Selim I’s own personal experience with his father Beyazid and his competition with his brother Ahmed, giving him the reputation of a bloodthirsty man because he got the throne despite not being the eldest prince.

Let’s look at Suleyman’s princely years to analyze his relationship with his father:

🩵Selim I is declared padişah semi officially on April 24th 1512 (7 Safar 918 Friday)

🩵Selim I’s first job was to pursue his brother Ahmed and his sons who had a power base in Anatolia

🩵Selim I immediately sent a letter to Caffa and invited his son Suleyman to the capital. Selim I informed the Crimean Khan that he was now the Sultan of Ottoman Empire and requested his son Süleyman be sent to Istanbul to guard the city.
A Venetian letter dated June 18th 1512 from Ragusa, reported the departure of the armada kept at Caffa to Istanbul.

🩵Suleyman is greeted on the shores of Üsküdar with canon fires. The city was in a festive mood spreading beautiful textiles under the feet of his horse. For the first time, Suleyman’s future looked bright, and Selim I put up a show of his dynastic continuity. At this point in 1512, Suleyman and Selim were working together for their joint future and part of the same faction: If his father succeeded at getting rid of Ahmed and his son Suleyman would be the sole heir of the Ottoman throne.

🩵Year of 1513 marks a turning point in Suleyman’s claims to the throne. In late March 1513 Selim I wrote a letter to Süleyman who was guarding Istanbul at the time and asked his son to go to a location on the outskirts of Istanbul.

“… as soon as my imperial decree reaches you,
without delaying even for a moment or an hour, find a safe place near Istanbul so that you may come near Istanbul, for an important matter has arisen. Upon my command, once you have arrived near Istanbul, write and inform my royal court. Then, whatever form my exalted command
may take, you shall act in accordance with it. On this twenty-seventh day of the sacred month of Muharram, which is the appointed day, I too departed from the blessed city of Bursa with blessings and good fortune and, by the grace of Allah, set out toward Sultan Ahmed. Know this well: Place your trust in the sacred emblem. Written toward the end of Muharram al-Haram 919” Sultan Selim I to his son Suleyman

🩵11 days later, Selim and his brother Ahmed met in Yenişehir —not for a catch up but for a fight that would solidify Suleyman’s status as the heir to Ottoman throne. Ahmed was caught while attempting to flee to İzmit. Ahmed was executed and buried in Bursa, while his son Osman (Suleyman’s cousin) who was in Amasya at the time was captured by Selim’s forces. Both Ahmed’s son Osman and Murad’s son Mustafa (Ahmed’s grandson) were strangulated on May 14th, 1513.

🩵Nicolo Giustiniani, the Venetian bailo in Istanbul, reported that Selim would soon grant Suleyman a “Sanjak” — a province.

Manisa Sanjakbey in 1513:

Suleyman moved to his Manisa governorship as the only heir of the throne. Francesco Arimondo, the commander of Napoli di Romania, wrote on July 24th 1513: “the son of the Signor has gone to Manisa, where his father gave him the governorship”.

In 1514 and 1516, Suleyman was ordered to go to Edirne while his father Selim was leading a campaign. Selim sent at least two announcements of victory to Süleyman during the first Eastern campaign; one following the battle of Çaldıran and the other one following Kemah. They both ordered the prince to make celebrations for the victory.

Süleyman came to Istanbul and spent time with his father following Selim I’s return from the campaign in 1515. Suleyman arrived on July 26th, 1515 and was taken to İskender Pasha’s residence. Süleyman came over to present his gifts and kiss the Sultan’s hand. “… On the ninth day, a court session was held. The young, fortunate prince came to receive his (Selim’s) authorization and also to kiss the hand.” There are no contemporary records of whether Suleyman spent one on one “dad and son” time with Selim, but he performed his duty in these ceremonies displayed his loyalty to his father.

The met again near Kırklareli in 1518, and again Suleyman kissed his father’s hand and presented his loyalty. Lutfi Pasha observed that Sultan Selim I had appreciated his son and decided that his son was fit to rule after him.

Up until this point, it seems that while we are not sure if there was a deep father and son bond between Selim and Suleyman, it’s evident from the events took place during Suleyman’s princehood that Selim was confident that Suleyman would be a fit ruler after him and Suleyman meticulously followed his father’s orders. It’s very unlikely that Selim I who worked tooth and nail to expand the empire’s territories and who only had one legitimate heir at the time would make such an abrupt decision like killing his son and risk the continuation of Ottoman dynasty. It’s also important to note that Selim I seems to have stopped having relationships with women, which means he was content with his son Suleyman. On February 7th 1514, Antonio Giustiniani, reported that Sultan Selim did not wish to have any more children so he did not engage with women anymore. Alvise Mocenigo repeated the same information on June 4th 1518 and emphasized that Selim did not want any more children. (By this point Suleyman already had male kids of his own)

🩵

However, Giovio would tell the story of “Hafsa Hatun saving Süleyman’s life upon discovering the poisoned kaftan gifted to him by his father”:

“For it is said that he once wanted to kill his son with a garment laced with a most cruel poison, to avenge certain words of the boy’s that were too sharp; but that the mother, with shrewd mercy, refused the gift of that dangerous garment and, in Suleiman’s stead, gave it to one of her servants, thereby swiftly saving her son’s life.”

“Sultan Selim arrived in Constantinople, where
he had left Suleiman, his only son, under the guardianship of Piri Pasha, a man of great loyalty and singular prudence; and there were many who said that Suleiman had been in great danger of being poisoned by a robe dipped in poison, which his father had sent him, fearing that his son might do to him what he had done to Sultan Bayezid.”

Nicolo Giustiniani, the Venetian bailo in Istanbul also mentions the “poisoned gown” in his letters from April 1515.

I believe these reports are based on hearsay and are not indeed based on actual events. Had Selim thought Suleyman was truly a traitor, he would probably execute him with more traditional means and wouldn’t bother with a poisoned kaftan.

Source: Zeynep Yelce