The Turkish Empire, Its Growth and Decay — John Shaqi
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 notable that Othman, from the outset of his career, devoted his
efforts, not against the Turkish Moslem States lying to the south and
west of him, but against the territory to the north in possession
of the Byzantine Empire, or which had recently been more or less
emancipated from it, and inhabited chiefly by Christians. It is to be
inferred from this that the motive of Othman was partly a religious
one, to extend Islam. This was not effected by any signal victories
over the armies of the Greek Empire. There was only one recorded battle
against any army of the Emperor, that at Baphœon, near Nicomedia, where
Othman, who by this time reckoned four thousand horsemen among his
followers, defeated the inconsiderable body of two thousand Byzantine
troops. In the following year, 1302, the Greek Emperor, Michael
Palæologus, alarmed at the progress of Othman, crossed in person into
Asia Minor at the head of a small army of mercenary Slavs. But he
brought no money with him to pay his soldiers. They would not fight
without pay. They dispersed, and Michael was obliged to return to his
capital. This was his last attempt to defend his remaining territory in
that district. He was hard pressed in other directions by other Turkish
Emirs in Asia Minor, and in the first decade of the fourteenth century
the Greek Empire lost all its possessions in the islands of the Ægean
Sea.
The extensions of territory by Othman, during his long reign of
thirty-eight years, were effected by a slow process of attrition, by
capturing from time to time petty fortresses and castles and annexing
the districts round them. He acted in this respect, in the earlier
stages, as fief of the Seljuk State; but later, when that Empire came
to an end, Othman declared his independence, and thenceforth his
accretions of territory were on his own behalf. It would seem that, as
these additions were made, their populations, or the greater part of
them who were Christians, adopted Islam, not under compulsion—for there
is no record of the massacre of captives or of the sale of them as
slaves—but because they were abandoned by their natural protectors,
the Greeks of Constantinople. The important fact, clearly shown by
Mr. Gibbons in his recent work, is that the new State thus created by
Othman did not consist purely of Turks. It had a very large mixture of
Greeks and Slavs, who were welded with Turks by the religion of Islam.
They were, from an early period, very distinct from the people of other
Turkish States. They called themselves Osmanlis. The term ‘Turk’ was
used by them rather as a term of contempt for an inferior people, as
compared with themselves. It was only in later years, when the other
Turkish States of Asia Minor were incorporated in the Empire, that
the term ‘Turk’ was applied to its people, in the first instance by
outsiders, and eventually by themselves.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account