even now, when we all talk of the turkish empire as moribund, it is doubtful if it will perish under any decay from within. the subject races do not grow stronger, as witness recent scenes in armenia, where a single tribe, with only tolerance from the sultan, keeps a whole people in agonies of fear. the arabs, full-blooded and half-caste, who might succeed in insurrection, find the strength of civilized europe right across their path, and are precipitating themselves, in a fury of fanaticism and greed, upon the powerless states of the interior of africa. the european subjects of the sultan are cowed, and without foreign assistance will not risk a repetition of batouk. the army for internal purposes is far stronger than ever, the men being the old ottoman soldiers, brave as englishmen, abstemious as spaniards, to whom the germans have lent their discipline and their drill. no force within the empire outside arabia could resist the reorganized troops or hope to reach, as no doubt the first mahdi if left alone might have reached, constantinople itself. the financial difficulties of the treasury are great, but the sultans have recently risked and have survived complete repudiation, and the revenue is enough, and will remain enough, to keep the army together and supply the luxury of the palace.
—meredith townsend in “asia and europe.”
[pg 31]
we cannot trace here the story of the rise and spread of islam from its cradle in arabia to the period of its greatest virility in 1529, when all europe trembled at its onward sweep and conquest. we can speak only of the rise of the ottoman empire that has been perpetuated in unbroken succession to the present time.
near the middle of the thirteenth century a tribe of turks, not suljuks, left their camping-grounds in khorassan, urged on by the mongol invaders, and wandered into armenia. this tribe was divided into four sections; one of these, led by ertogrul, went into asia minor, and there became allied with aladdin the suljukian, sultan of iconium. he settled upon the borders of phrygia and bithynia and there his son othman, or osman, who became the founder of a dynasty and an empire, was born and nurtured. the name “ottoman empire” or “osmanli turks” came from him. the name “othman” signifies “bone-breaker.”
the young man succeeded his father as the head of the tribe. he united in his character the traits of shepherd, freebooter, and warrior. osman’s ambition was fired by a dream of conquest that seated him upon the byzantine throne. he was upon the border of the decaying greek empire to the west, and back of him were the vast, restless populations ready to enlist under any leader of strength and action. he invaded nicomedia july 27, 1299, from which time his reign is usually dated. this was parallel with edward i of england, philip the fair of france, [pg 32] and andronicus palæologus the elder of constantinople. slow encroachment was made upon the imperial domains of the greek empire, while at the same time his authority was extended over considerable districts in the north and west of asia minor, including large parts of phrygia, galatia, and bithynia. prusa (brusa) was captured and became the residence of othman, and was the seat of his government when he died in 1326.
othman was succeeded by orchan, his son, who extended the boundaries of the infant state with marked rapidity. he took nicæa, the rest of bithynia, the greater part of mysia, and was the first turkish ruler to pass over into europe. he coined money in his own name, and assumed the prerogatives of royalty, and began the systematic organization of his government. a permanent military force was established. one of his strongest military organizations was composed of the children of conquered christians who were reared in islam, inured from their youth to the profession of arms. these became the famous janissaries perpetuated in the conquests of the turkish government until the middle of the nineteenth century. they were distinguished for their valor and fanaticism. through more than three centuries, marked by a long series of great battles, they experienced only four signal reverses. one of these was by tamerlane, in 1402, and another by the hungarian general, john huniades, in 1442. the present methods of administration of the ottoman empire are due in no small measure to the despotic nature and fanatical character of the janissaries. their assumption finally reached such a state that it became necessary to extirpate them by the sword to prevent their exercise of authority over the sultans themselves. this was accomplished by mohammed ii in 1826. [pg 33]
amurath i succeeded orchan in 1359. he began at once to make advance against the greek throne, which was much weakened by its schismatic separation from the roman church. in 1361 he took adrianople in europe and made it his official residence, and the first european capital of the ottoman power. his successor, bajazet i, changed the title of “emir” for that of “sultan,” which name has been perpetuated. he set the example, followed so repeatedly since, of putting his only brother to death in order that he might not aspire to the throne. he extended his domains east to the euphrates and north to the danube. he boasted that he would yet feed his horses on the altar of st. peter’s in rome. he was captured by tamerlane in 1402, dying the following year in captivity. tamerlane held undisputed sway over asia for a few years. a son of bajazet, mahomet i, restored the empire of his fathers in its integrity. it was during his reign, 1413-21, that the first turkish ambassador appeared abroad. he was sent to venice. the sultan himself paid a visit to the emperor manuel at constantinople.
without dwelling upon the successive sultans and the advances made by each, it is sufficient to record that most important of all the victories, the capture of constantinople, the capital of the greek empire, by mohammed ii, the seventh in succession from othman, on may 29, 1453, in the second year of his reign. this terminated the greek empire, 1123 years after constantine the great had removed his imperial throne to byzantium, changing its name to constantinople. consternation prevailed among the european nations, especially in those immediately contiguous to the mohammedan empire.
from that time to the present day, constantinople has been the [pg 34] residence of the sultans ruling over the ottoman empire, and the seat of the turkish power. much of the machinery of government now in use was organized and put into operation by mohammed ii. the administrative departments were constituted in what was then called “the porte,” while the head of the department was given the well-known name of “sublime porte.” this name came from the metaphorical resemblance between a state and a house or tent. the most important part of the tent was the entrance in which the chiefs sat for the administration of justice, as well as for the performance of other duties.
mohammed died in 1481. succeeding sultans for a century seriously threatened the institutions of western nations. in the religious conflicts of the sixteenth century the pope of rome was undecided which to fear the more, the protestants or the turks.
the ottoman empire reached the zenith of its power under suliman, the tenth sultan, whose reign was the longest in the annals of the empire, from 1520-1566. he is often known in europe as suliman “the great” or “the magnificent,” but moslem writers name him “the lawgiver.” in 1525 the french ambassador appeared at the ottoman court. the first european states to stipulate regular capitulations with the porte were genoa and venice, which accomplished this in 1453 and 1454 respectively. these were confirmed and enlarged by succeeding sovereigns to 1733. france next secured capitulations in 1528, which were afterwards amplified, renewed, and confirmed down to 1861. the first treaty relations of england with turkey were in 1579. other european nations followed in orderly succession, until the united states concluded its first treaty at constantinople, may 7, 1830, which was ratified at washington, feb. 4, 1832. [pg 35]
at the beginning of the seventeenth century the ottoman empire covered europe, macedonia, adrianople, greece, and the greater part of hungary, while in asia it held all of asia minor, armenia, georgia, daghestan, the western part of koordistan, mesopotamia, syria, cyprus, and the chief part of arabia. in africa, egypt, tripoli, tunis, and algiers acknowledged allegiance to the sultan at constantinople; and the khanate of crimea, the principalities of wallachia, moldavia, and transylvania with the republic of ragusa were vassal states. diplomatic and commercial relations had been established between the porte and the leading european nations. from that time the great power then possessed began to wane.
fundamentally the laws of turkey are based upon the teachings of the koran. the only restraint upon the acts of the sultan are the accepted truths of islam as laid down in the sacred book of the prophet mohammed. next to the koran the authority is a code of laws formed of the supposed sayings and opinions of mohammed, and of sentences and decisions of his immediate successors. these are called the “multeka,” and are binding upon both the sovereign and his subjects. beyond these the will of the man who occupies the throne of the ottoman empire is absolute and must be unquestioned by every subject.
the sultan, therefore, is at the head of every department of government, amenable to no laws except the law of the koran. he appoints two high dignitaries,—the grand vizier, to be the nominal head of the temporal government, and the sheik-ul-islam, to be the head of the spiritual government. the sheik-ul-islam presides over the “ulema,” a body made up of the mohammedan clergy, the great judges, theologians, and jurists, as well as the noted teachers of mohammedan literature and science. [pg 36]
there is no constitution to exercise directing influence over either the sultan or his subordinates. the grand vizier is nominally at the head of the government and represents the sultan. at the present time he has come to be only the agent of the sultan in carrying out his wishes, having little authority to act independently. the privy council, over which the grand vizier presides, is composed of the following officials or cabinet officers:
sheik-ul-islam
minister of justice
“ “ war
“ “ marines
president of the council of state
minister of foreign affairs
“ “ the interior
“ “ finance
“ “ pious foundations
“ “ public instruction
“ “ commerce and public works
the whole of the country is divided into vilayets or states, and these are subdivided into sanjaks or provinces, which, in turn, are also divided and subdivided. the ruler in a vilayet is a vali or governor-general, who receives his appointment directly from the sultan, and who, with the assistance of a provincial council, is master of the vilayet. he has power over the inferior officers of his district, whom, theoretically at least, he appoints and removes at will. there are eight of these vilayets in europe, eleven in asia, five in armenia, three in mesopotamia, six in syria, two in arabia, and two in africa, making thirty-seven in all. the man at the head of each one of these states, averaging a population of about 700,000 souls each, is accountable to the sultan alone for his position and to him he makes constant secret reports. these valis are frequently recalled and more [pg 37] frequently changed from place to place by orders issued directly from the throne. in this way the sultan controls all parts of his dominions and personally determines the character of the administration. all policies carried out in any part of the empire are his own and cannot be otherwise under present conditions. [pg 38]
