Fratricide, few concepts
could be more repugnant to Westerners than the idea of killing your brother
or brothers. However, in the Ottoman Empire, fratricide was the modus
operandi of dynastic succession, from the beginning of the empire in the
late thirteenth century, until 1603 when Ahmed I became sultan. It
was also around this time that the Ottoman Empire entered its long period
of decline. (The empire reached its territorial height in 1570 and
their last territorial gain, Crete, was made in 1669). Was it a coincidence
the decline of the empire occurred simultaneously with the dynasty's abandonment
of fratricidal practices? It does not seem likely. In fact,
the Ottomans' use of fratricide gave them a unique advantage over their
European opponents.
From its very conception,
the Ottoman dynasty made use of fratricide in the broadest sense of the
word (i.e. the killing of one's close relatives). In his rise to
power as Emir of Sogut, Osman killed his uncle Dundar to secure his succession.
This began the Ottomans' pattern of primogenitive succession. Succession
based on primogeniture was unusual for Islamic dynasties, which tended
to base succession on tribal leadership role; i.e. power passed from the
oldest member of the family to its next oldest member. (Primogeniture dominated
Ottoman succession for the next three hundred years). Previous Islamic
dynasties made use of fratricide as well. In fact, one might say
it was necessary for Islamic dynasties since the practice of polygamy produced
a dangerously high number of male heirs.1
Realizing this to be the
case, the ulema (religious intellectual community) condoned the practice
of fratricide as a way to prevent civil strife.2
The idea of fratricide, providing stability, was reinforced by secular
authors of the time as well. In the early 1600's, Mar'I al-Karmi
wrote in his panegyric of the Ottoman dynasty, Qala'id al'iqyan fi fada'il
al Uthman, "One of their virtues is that they kill their children
to prevent civil strife and possible dangers to the state." Here,
al-Karmi called fratricide a virtue, not just a mere necessity. In
a later part of his treatise, he questions the morality of such an act,
but notes that the ulema permits it and that sometimes "it is necessary
to kill one third in order to improve the other two thirds."3
In fact, it appears that al-Karmi was correct; the killing of some of the
members of the dynasty did in fact improve the dynasty overall.
As mentioned above, Osman
I began the tradition of committing fratricide. Sometimes, as was
the case with Mehmed I and Murad II, the act of fratricide took the form
of a dynastic civil war between brothers, where only one was left alive
at its conclusion. Mehmed II, like his predecessors, practiced fratricide;
he even went a step further, he codified the practice as a law. Mehmed's
legal code, Kanunname, contained a clause that stated, "For welfare of
the state, the one of my sons to whom God grants the sultanate may lawfully
put his brothers to death. A majority of the ulema considers this
permissible."4
In the late sixteenth century,
the first moves were made away from the practice of fratricide. Sultan
Murad III sent only his eldest son, Mehmed III, to the provinces to serve
as a governor; he had all of his other sons confined at court. In
the past, the practice had been to send several of one's sons to the provinces
so they could learn the art of governing by serving as governors.
Then, those sons would be able to compete for the throne. By confining
all of his sons, with the exception of his predetermined heir, Murad III
allowed Mehmed III to come to power without proving himself. When
Mehmed III did so, he committed the greatest act of fratricide ever recorded
in the Ottoman Empire: he ordered the strangulation of all of his nineteen
brothers. Mehmed also decided to keep all of his sons at court, in
an effort to prevent any possibility of his sons leading a rebellion against
him. Mehmed II even constructed a special compound for his sons to
be held in; this isolated structure, which was contained within the walls
of Topkapi Palace, would later be called the "Cage."5
With the advent of the "Cage,"
the practice of fratricide was no longer necessary. Mehmed III's
son and successor, Ahmed I, chose to simply keep his mentally ill brother
Mustafa imprisoned during his reign, instead of killing him. He also
had all of his sons imprisoned in the "Cage." This practice became
known as the Kafes system. Following Ahmed I's death, one of his
chief concubines, Turhan, maneuvered to have Mustafa made sultan because
she feared that Ahmed's oldest son, Osman, would become sultan. Osman
was the son of Ahmed I and his other chief concubine, Hadice. Turhan
worried that if Osman became sultan, he would call for the execution of
her sons. Turhan's meddling resulted in a shift away from primogeniture
towards the traditional Islamic pattern of succession, from the dynasty's
oldest member to its next oldest member. (Ironically, Turhan's intrigue
was pointless. Mustafa was deposed after a very short time on the
throne because of his mental condition. He was replaced by Osman,
and despite Turhan's fears, Osman did not execute her sons).6
Life within the "Cage" was
difficult. Social interaction between the different prisoners was
limited. For that matter, freedom of movement, in general, was highly
limited. Prisoners were sometimes allowed personal attendants and
female companions, but no prisoner was allowed to father children.
The social isolation of the "Cage" failed to provide its residents with
the opportunity to develop their leadership skills. Considering that
some of them went on to become sultans, their lack of appropriate skills
was highly unfortunate. In more severe cases, the "Cage" experience
resulted in outright insanity. A good example of this was Sultan
Ibrahim I. His apparent mental problems were either caused completely
or at least exacerbated by the twenty-three years of his life he spent
isolated in the "Cage."7
Fratricide, while cruel,
allowed only the most capable of the sultan's sons to become the heir apparent.
A sultan's struggle against his brothers provided him with the ability
to plot effectively against his enemies later. Furthermore, for those
sultans who met their brothers on the battlefield to secure their ascension,
the practice of fratricide could provide valuable military experience.
As fratricide was phased out and the Kafes system was implemented, sultans
also lost the experience gained from time spent as provincial governors.
Thus the Kafes system not only denied heirs important experiences that
fratricide provided them with, but it also hindered their ability to develop
important skills at all. The "Cage" environment was not conducive
to an education in statesmanship or military skill, both of which were
essential characteristics of a successful ruler.
Fratricide provided the
Ottomans with a distinct advantage over other neighboring powers that chose
their leaders on birthright alone. Early Ottoman sultans had been
made to prove themselves and defend themselves from external threats before
they were even crowned. When fratricide was phased out, the Ottomans
lost this advantage. The Kafes system, which was then put in place,
actually led to the Ottomans being at a disadvantage with their enemies.
Sultans without any of the proper training, which they were isolated from
receiving, were allowed to rule. The inept rulers the Kafes system
produced were nothing like the hardened and skilled Sultans that fratricide
resulted in. These unskilled and unprepared rulers failed to stand
up to their European counterparts, and their ineptitude was one of the
major reasons for the Ottoman decline.
_________________________
1 Alderson, Anthony Dolphin,
The
Structure of the Ottoman Dynasty (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956), 4-5.
2 Ibid., 27.
3 Winter, Michael, "A
Seventeenth-Century Arabic Panegyric of the Ottoman Dynasty," Asian
and African
Studies
13:2 (July 1979) 144-145.
4 Inalcik, Halil, The
Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age, 1300-1600, (New York: Praeger Publisher,
1973),
59.
5 Ibid., 60-61.
6 Alderson, 10-12.
7 Ibid., 32-35.