A book review of Colin Imber’s third edition of The Ottoman Empire (Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk, Amazon.de, Amazon.fr) has first to note that this book was first published in 2002 and then again in 2009. In 2019, the former Reader in Turkish at the University of Manchester (UK) has mainly enlarged the section on the Ottoman provinces and, in particular, added a chapter on the Arab provinces. Furthermore, he has added material on Islamic Law.
In 1650, the Ottoman Empire encompassed most of the Balkan peninsula south of the rivers Danube and Save, and the lands of central Hungary to the north. The principalities of Transylvania, Wallachia, Moldavia and the Crimea were tributaries to the Ottoman sultan. In Asia, the Empire extended eastwards from the Bosphorus to the border with Iran, southwards to the headwaters of the gulf. In Africa, the Empire comprised part of the western littoral of the Red Sea, Egypt, Tripli, Tunis and Algiers. In the Mediterranean, Cyprus and most of the islands in the Aegean were Ottoman possessions. By 1669, so too was Crete. Plenty of reasons to have a closer look at the history of the Ottoman Empire.
Colin Imber presents a detailed chronology of the years from 1300 until 1650, information about the dynasty, the palace, the provinces, the law, taxation, the army, the Janissary recruitment, the fleet, a glossary as well as a detailed, topical bibliography at the end, which helps students and interested readers to learn even more.
The Ottoman Empire was a dynastic state. The sultan was both political leader and military commander. However, this traditional picture is an oversimplification. The sultan was not all powerful. His powers evolved during the years and centuries. Especially for the first sultans, the absence of a nobility in the European sense did not mean an absence of territorial magnates. As examples, Colin Imber cites the Evrenos dynasty of Macedonia, the vizierial family of Chandarli and the Shadgeldi family of Amasya.
The sultan co-opted members of local dynasties to serve rather than to oppose his interests. It was, however, not a method that worked throughout the Empire. In some cases, the sultan tried to gain loyalty through negotiation and the bestowal of Ottoman titles. The sultan probably enjoyed the greatest power during the 16th century, precisely the period when the image of the Ottoman sultan as absolute ruler became fixed. The graduates of the palace schools came to monopolise most of the governorhips in the Empire, whether as viziers in the capital or as governors in the provinces. They were men with no power base outside the palace. Their careers depended entirely on royal patronage. Powerful viziers got married to Ottoman princesses, ensuring their loyalty.
According to Colin Imber, between the 14th and 16 centuries, the fundamental nature of the Empire had not changed. However, in the 16th century, membership of the ruling class was no longer by virtue of blood relationship to a powerful family, but by virtue of an education received as a member of the sultan’s household.
The power of the Ottoman sultan’s was never absolute, since there were checks, formal and informal, which limited their freedom of action. The adoption of Islam imposed the formal limit. Before the 20th century, Islam expressed itself, above all, through the law, although very flexible in practice, was in its essence immuable.
The sultan appointed men to legal positions. But during the 16th century, the senior posts in the legal establishment became the monopoly of a few families, which narrowed the sultan’s choice. In practice, those senior legal figures appointed judges and other legal officers.
From the early 17th century, as a response in particular to the ‘heresy’ of the Safavids, the Ottoman sultans began began to portray themselves as the sole legitimate defenders of the Holy Law. However, the law could also justify their removal. The senior legal figures played a major part in the deposition of both Mustafa I and Ibrahim, in both cases citing the Holy Law in justification for the act.
From the late 16th century on, with a few exceptions, the sultan no longer went to war. Therefore, many of his powers passed in practice to the commander in the field. In non-military affairs, too, there were limits to the sultan’s area of control. The Empire was held together not by the sultan, but governors, viziers, army commanders and other authorities as his clients. The sultan retained control over the governing class rather than over individual acts of government. The frequent executions, which remained a feature of Ottoman politics, served as a constant reminder of this fact.
Courtiers possessed no formal political authority, but were nonetheless in a position to influence the sultan. The same was true of the women of the imperial harem. Colin Imber cites the influence of Mehmed II’s stepmother Mara. He adds that, in the 16th century, the influence of the harem became quasi-institutional, with favorite concubines and, later, queen mothers exercising an influence in dynastic and imperial policies.
The degree to which a sultan allowed these constraints to limit his exercise of power depended to a large degree on his personality. The politcal system required a strong sultan or a commanding figure like Sokollu or the Köprülü vizers to remain stable. Nonetheless, the Ottoman Empire had a remarkable resilience. Colin Imber cites the case of the defeat at the battle of Ankara in 1402 which did not lead to its dissolution. In addition, at the beginning of the 17th century, the Ottoman Empire faced unsuccessful wars on two fronts, rebellion in Anatolia, weak sultans and unstable politics. It still survived.
The reason for this capacity to whether crises probably lies in thee institutions: the scribal service, ensuring daily functions of government, the treasury, which continued to raise taxes, as well as the courts and the legal system, which continued to function and to keep the confidence of the sultan’s subjects in regulating their affairs.
For Colin Imber, the Ottoman Empire was, above all, a military organisation. There was no clear distinction between civil government and military command. The political structure of the Empire reflected the structure of the army, with viziers and provincial governors acting also as commanders in war. The expansion of the Ottoman Empire between 1300 and 1590 is a testimony to the effectiveness of its military system.
Colin Imber stresses three reasons for this success. The abundant supply of men and war materials, which few of their rivals could match. From the late 14th century, the practive of registering the incomes and obligations of all timar-holding cavalrymen which offered the government a permanent record of the troops at its disposal. At the same time, the establishment of the Janissaries and the Six Divisions created a standing army, whose skills and esprit de corps provided a stable centre to Ottoman armies. Desertion or failure to appear on compaign would result in the loss of livelihood. The treasury’s ability to finance campaigns was remarkable. The author mentions that the spectacle of footloose and unpaid soldiers plundering the countryside in Hungary was a Habsburg, rather than an Ottoman phenomenon. Last, but not least, until the end of the 16th century, the Ottomans had been proficient in developing weapons and tactics, and very quick to learn from their ennemies.
However, during the Austrian war of 1593-1606, it became clear that the Ottoman army had lost its superiority both in weapons and tactics, and that it had difficulty in adapting to new methods. In the 17th and 18th centuries, the loss of supremacy became even more evident. Nonetheless, even during those troubled times, the Ottoman Empire resisted, a testimony to the resources and administrative system as much as to its military prowess.
Colin Imber’s book is an excellent source for understanding the Ottoman Empire. These are just a few takeaways from the author’s conclusion.
Colin Imber: The Ottoman Empire, 1300-1650: the stucture of power. Red Globe Press (Macmillan International), third edition, 2019, 399 pages. Order the book from Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk, Amazon.de, Amazon.fr.
Book review added on August 30, 2019 at 17:08 Polish time. For a better reading, quotations and partial quotations are not put between quotation marks. Beauty items at Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk.
