Sehzade Mahmud (Son of Mehmed III) Becomes Sultan

Kellan Sullivan

Sehzade Mahmud was the eldest surviving son of Sultan Mehmed III, who was executed on his father's orders. Within the year, Mehmed himself was dead and Sultan Ahmed I became sultan.

What if Mahmud (or rather his mother, since it was her consultation of a seer which caused Mehmed's patience to finally snap) were more circumspect? Better yet, either didn't consult the seer or Mahmud led a successful coup of the janissaries against his father?

@Osman Aga @anyone else familiar with this period
 
Osman Aga

Osman Aga

Banned
Kellan Sullivan said:
Sehzade Mahmud was the eldest surviving son of Sultan Mehmed III, who was executed on his father's orders. Within the year, Mehmed himself was dead and Sultan Ahmed I became sultan.

What if Mahmud (or rather his mother, since it was her consultation of a seer which caused Mehmed's patience to finally snap) were more circumspect? Better yet, either didn't consult the seer or Mahmud led a successful coup of the janissaries against his father?

@Osman Aga @anyone else familiar with this period
Click to expand...

A successful janissary coup in this period will have bigger negative effects than the periods of Bayezid II and Selim I. But sure, let's continue...

Mahmud was very much loved by the military. This popularity was used by his Grandmother Safiye to use against his Father. In result Mahmud died... But if he were to become Sultan (he was around 18 when died), he would still lead the armies and probably send Ahmed to a Sancak (Mahmud has no son so he is pretty much reliant on his brothers if he were to die). The Safavid-Ottoman Wars started out in the period when Ahmed I was 14, hardly controlled the Court let alone the Middle Eastern Frontiers. Mahmud I, in this case, wouldn't have the same problems although he would be very much confronted by his Grandmother that will back one of his brothers (Ahmed, Mustafa). But overall, if he doesn't die early as his brother Ahmed, his rule would be remembered something like Suleiman's rule: long, militaristic and order
 

Kellan Sullivan

Osman Aga said:
Mahmud was very much loved by the military. This popularity was used by his Grandmother Safiye to use against his Father
Click to expand...
So sort of like how Roxelana turned Suleiman the Magnificent against his eldest son?

Osman Aga said:
Mahmud I, in this case, wouldn't have the same problems although he would be very much confronted by his Grandmother
Click to expand...
According to wiki, Ahmed exiled Safiye to the Old Palace. Can Mahmoud do the same? Or is she still dangerous in her exile?

Osman Aga said:
his rule would be remembered something like Suleiman's rule: long, militaristic and order
Click to expand...

Will Mahmud do something about the royal fratricide? Like Ahmed did OTL? I know you mentioned he's "dependent" on his brothers since he has no children of his own, but it's surely not the first time that a sultan has ascended with no kids?

Osman Aga said:
A successful janissary coup in this period will have bigger negative effects than the periods of Bayezid II and Selim I. But sure, let's continue...
Click to expand...

My bad. I'll admit that my knowledge of Ottoman history is spotty. Essentially, Suleiman the Magnificent is the only sultan I really know anything "about". The rest my familiarity comes from when they're mentioned in biographies of other historical figures.
 
Hawabin

Hawabin

Kellan Sullivan said:
was it possible that had Achmed - or Mahmud - lived longer, i.e. long enough for his son to become an adult, that the Ottomans might've brought in primogeniture instead of the sort of "tanistry" that they seemed to have going on? Or is that unlikely.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately that's where my knowledge end, so you will just have to wait till @Osman Aga finishes his exam!
 
Venetian Doge

Venetian Doge

Not an expert on this period (you may want to ask other members previously referenced) but I would think that this represents an important step, similar to the succession of Ahmed I to Mustafa I OTL (referenced in this thread already). Also, a "primogeniture" Ottoman dynasty with only occasional detours out of necessity (i.e. Murad IV -> Ibrahim I) might have a more full "crown prince" role for the Sehzade. (As opposed to the "tanistry" period, where potential heirs were shunted off to a governorship).
 

Kellan Sullivan

A slight tangent to this question, but I've often seen it referenced that in the eventuality of the Osmani dynasty self-exterminating, the Girays were to take the throne. But would this have been allowed? And was there any actual documentation of this agreement or was it simply a sort of "mutual understanding"?
 
Hawabin

Hawabin

Kellan Sullivan said:
A slight tangent to this question, but I've often seen it referenced that in the eventuality of the Osmani dynasty self-exterminating, the Girays were to take the throne. But would this have been allowed? And was there any actual documentation of this agreement or was it simply a sort of "mutual understanding"?
Click to expand...
I found this https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/the-house-of-giray-the-ottoman-empire.154807/

and according to this, it was an unspoken agreement or something!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top