Ottoman Line Goes Extinct

My favorite general narrative on the Ottoman Empire is Caroline Finkel's Osman's Dream. In it she talks about when Ibrahim the Crazy was dethroned in favor of Mehmed IV his son. She says at the time that despite Mehmed being a child he had to take the throne because there were no other male members of the Ottoman line. Now Ibrahim went on to have more sons after he was dethroned and Mehmed did too so the line was strengthened, but what if in that critical moment in time they both die and there are no more male Ottomans?

Do they invite the Crimean Girays to rule? Do parts of the empire (like say Egypt) break away? What if the Ottoman line ends in late 1648 or early 1649?
 
I always assumed the Girays take charge or are invited in. Maybe they marry one of the Girays to one of the female Ottomans?
 
Well, the Girays would have the best "dynastic" claim (not because of any relationship with the House of Osman, but because they were Genghisids-direct descendents of Genghis Khan). But the thing is, the Muslim world never quite took the concept of "dynastic legitimacy" to the levels that Europe did. Things like personal unions or inheretance of one kingdom by another were extremely rare, and most of the Islamic world was just fine with the throne being siezed by military strongmen with no royal blood. So, if the Ottoman line dies out, the result is going to be a giant, chaotic free-for-all, with everyone who has, or can raise, a substantial private army making a grab for the throne, and probably some parts of the empire (as MNP mentioned, Egypt in particular comes to mind) trying to break off. The Girays will probably be very well positioned to come out on top-their status as Khans of the Crimea means they already have a substantial army, and the fact that they're Ghengisids will give them some legitimacy-which might help in getting the Ottoman bureaucracy and the Jannissaries* to support them. But they're certainly going to have to fight for it, and there's no guarantee of the empire surviving intact through the whole thing, especially since some of the European countries will try to milk the situation for as much advantage as possible.

*Though I can also see the Jannissaries in particular trying to crown their own candidate sultan, which may or may not work, and probably won't be good for the empire in any case.
 

Thande

Donor
I believe the Girays would have been called in not because of any automatic succession, but because the Ottomans (as in the dynasty) specifically said that they should be.
 
The thing is though, the Girays are a lot less sophisticated than the Ottomans. I think there would be a significant culture shock and from the time Mehmed IV, the Grand Vizier became more powerful (culminating in the Koprulus of course). I would think the Girays are more in the mode of warrior kings so perhaps that would please the military but it might anger the bureaucracy and it cost a lot to have the Sultan go on campaign.

For reasons mentioned earlier I think it would be difficult for the Girays to hold on to the whole empire. I think the best parts at this time are the Balkans and Egypt. Anatolia has been in slow-motion chaos for about 40 years but they'd probably still have that. Probably not Egypt though. They'd have to try and reconquer parts--but could they do it? It seems like everyone was exhausted from 1640-1660, the Hapsburgs, Ottomans, Safavids alike.
 
The thing is though, the Girays are a lot less sophisticated than the Ottomans. I think there would be a significant culture shock and from the time Mehmed IV, the Grand Vizier became more powerful (culminating in the Koprulus of course). I would think the Girays are more in the mode of warrior kings so perhaps that would please the military but it might anger the bureaucracy and it cost a lot to have the Sultan go on campaign.

For reasons mentioned earlier I think it would be difficult for the Girays to hold on to the whole empire. I think the best parts at this time are the Balkans and Egypt. Anatolia has been in slow-motion chaos for about 40 years but they'd probably still have that. Probably not Egypt though. They'd have to try and reconquer parts--but could they do it? It seems like everyone was exhausted from 1640-1660, the Hapsburgs, Ottomans, Safavids alike.

Well, the thing is, the Ottoman Interregnum, though very damaging in the short run, was probably helpful overall. It tore up a lot of the old bureacracy and military, and allowed Mehmed I and his successors to work out some of the empire's systematic issues and turn it into the sort of state that could take its troops to the walls of Vienna.

And while this situation certainly has the potential to be as chaotic as the Interregnum was, the fact is that the Ottoman Empire was beginning to have some serious problems at this point. The Sultan's role in government had diminished so that the harem and the bureacracy and the Janissaries could get outsized roles. The Janissaries themselves had begun to morph from an elite fighting force into a political extortion mafia. An Interregnum-like civil war might well destroy large parts of the bureacracy and break the Janissary corps (if it ends in a Giray victory, I think both are likely). But one can argue that this is what the empire needs right now. The Girays will need the old bureaucratic elite, but they can assert their dominance over it, and and end to the Janissaries* would allow the Girays to reconstruct the military, possibly along more sustainable lines.

I do hope someone gets to writing this TL, as it would be rather interesting.

*Since I've mentioned this a couple times, I really do think the Janissaries would try to crown one of their own as sultan, and any other potential claimants would have to defeat them.,
 
Well, the thing is, the Ottoman Interregnum, though very damaging in the short run, was probably helpful overall. It tore up a lot of the old bureacracy and military, and allowed Mehmed I and his successors to work out some of the empire's systematic issues and turn it into the sort of state that could take its troops to the walls of Vienna.

And while this situation certainly has the potential to be as chaotic as the Interregnum was, the fact is that the Ottoman Empire was beginning to have some serious problems at this point. The Sultan's role in government had diminished so that the harem and the bureacracy and the Janissaries could get outsized roles. The Janissaries themselves had begun to morph from an elite fighting force into a political extortion mafia. An Interregnum-like civil war might well destroy large parts of the bureacracy and break the Janissary corps (if it ends in a Giray victory, I think both are likely). But one can argue that this is what the empire needs right now. The Girays will need the old bureaucratic elite, but they can assert their dominance over it, and and end to the Janissaries* would allow the Girays to reconstruct the military, possibly along more sustainable lines.

I do hope someone gets to writing this TL, as it would be rather interesting.

*Since I've mentioned this a couple times, I really do think the Janissaries would try to crown one of their own as sultan, and any other potential claimants would have to defeat them.
It probably will come down to a fight between the Janissaries and the Criman Tatars at some point. But I'm not sure the Girays really have new ideas and even the Koprulus seemed to function by making the the existing system work rather than changing things. Where are the new ideas going to come from? What ARE the new ideas?

Also the Ottomans got away with it after Anakara because the neighboring states were very weak and disorganized themselves and by the time they got heir act together Murad had things in hand. Never the less he had to fight a LOT. How are the neighboring states in the 1650 period?
 
Top