The Turkish Empire, Its Growth and DecayEversley, G. Shaw-Lefevre (George Shaw-Lefevre), Baron
History
The Turkish Empire, Its Growth and Decay
Eversley, G. Shaw-Lefevre (George Shaw-Lefevre), Baron
Turkey -- History
It is not perhaps fair to judge of Mahomet as regards his cruelties
and perfidies by a high standard. His opponents, the chiefs of the
countries he invaded and conquered, were, in many cases, not inferior
to him in these respects. Scanderbeg, whose patriotic defence of
Albania won for him the reputation of a saint in his own country, and
a high place in history, was most cruel and vindictive whenever he
had the opportunity. He habitually massacred the prisoners taken in
his battles. The two despots of the Morea were not behindhand in this
respect. The Prince, or Voivode as he was called, of Wallachia, Wlad by
name, was one of the most cruel and bloodthirsty ruffians recorded in
history. He was known by the name of “the Impaler.” He revelled in the
dying agonies of the prisoners and other victims whom he subjected to
this cruel death. They were reserved for this purpose to enliven his
banquets. When some guest expressed surprise that he could bear the
odour emanating from the victims of this death, the prince directed the
immediate execution of his guest, on a higher pale than the others, so
that he might not be incommoded by the odour he complained of.
Mahomet invaded Wallachia, in 1462, with an army of two hundred
thousand. In his pursuit of Wlad he came across a field where twenty
thousand Turks and Bulgarians had been put to death, one-half of them
by impalement and the other half by crucifixion. Mahomet defeated and
drove into exile this ruffian, and installed in his place a favourite
named Radul, who had been brought up at his Court as a page. On the
death of this man Wlad turned up again, but was killed by a slave.
Wallachia, which previously had been compelled to pay tribute by
Mahomet, was now made a vassal State. The Sultan appointed its prince.
It was not otherwise treated as a Turkish province.
The failure of the Turkish general to capture the island of Rhodes
was said to be due to the fact that, just before the final assault,
after long resistance by the Knights who held this island, the Turkish
general issued an order to the army that there was to be no pillage
of the city, wishing to reserve for the Sultan and himself the wealth
which might be captured. This dispirited the Turkish soldiers, and they
made no effort for success in the assault. The Knights again repulsed
the attack and the siege was raised. It was not till 1520 that Rhodes
was finally captured.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account