Köprülü era

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The Ottoman Empire reached its greatest territorial extent in Europe under the Köprülü grand viziers.

The Köprülü era (Turkish: Köprülüler Devri) (c. 1656–1703) was a period in which the Ottoman Empire's politics were frequently dominated by a series of grand viziers from the Köprülü family. The Köprülü era is sometimes more narrowly defined as the period from 1656 to 1683, as it was during those years that members of the family held the office of grand vizier uninterruptedly, while for the remainder of the period they occupied it only sporadically.[1]

The Köprülüs were generally skilled administrators and are credited with reviving the empire's fortunes after a period of military defeat and economic instability. Numerous reforms were instituted under their rule, which enabled the empire to resolve its budget crisis and stamp out factional conflict in the empire.[2]

Köprülü Mehmed Pasha

The Köprülü rise to power was precipitated by a political crisis resulting from the government's financial struggles combined with a pressing need to break the

Turhan Hatice selected Köprülü Mehmed Pasha as grand vizier, as well as guaranteeing him absolute security of office. She hoped that a political alliance between the two of them could restore the fortunes of the Ottoman state.[5] Köprülü was ultimately successful; his reforms enabled the empire to break the Venetian blockade and to restore authority to the rebellious Transylvania. However, these gains came at a heavy cost in life, as the grand vizier carried out multiple massacres of soldiers and officers he perceived to be disloyal. Regarded as unjust by many, these purges triggered a major revolt in 1658, led by Abaza Hasan Pasha. Following the suppression of this rebellion, the Köprülü family remained unchallenged politically until their failure to conquer Vienna in 1683. Köprülü Mehmed himself died in 1661, when he was succeeded in office by his son Fazıl Ahmed Pasha.[6]

Fazıl Ahmed Pasha and Merzifonlu Kara Mustafa Pasha

The Battle of Vienna, 12 September 1683, painting by Frans Geffels.

Fazıl Ahmed Pasha (1661–1676) continued the reforming tradition of his father, and also engaged in numerous military campaigns against the empire's European neighbors. He conquered

Amcazade Hüseyin Pasha
(1697–1702), yet they never again achieved as firm a grip on power as they had enjoyed before 1683.

The War of the Holy League

In the subsequent conflict, the Ottomans struggled under the strain of multi-front warfare with the

Habsburgs, the princes of the Holy Roman Empire, Venice, Poland–Lithuania, and Russia. After a series of defeats culminating in the loss of Hungary, the Ottomans managed to stabilize their position, reconquering Belgrade in 1690. However, attempts to regain further territory were unsuccessful, and following defeat in the Battle of Zenta in 1697 they were forced to recognize their inability to reconquer the lost Hungarian lands.[9]

In 1699, under the terms of the resulting

Economic and social developments

The Köprülü era is also noteworthy for several other developments in the Ottoman Empire. Fazıl Ahmed Pasha's tenure in office coincided with the height of the

Muslim intellectuals, such as Kâtib Çelebi and Mustafa Naima, who viewed them as backwards-thinking and overly reactionary.[12] Following the Siege of Vienna, Vani Mehmed Efendi fell out of favor and was exiled from court, his movement no longer receiving imperial support.[13]

The Ottoman Empire was profoundly affected by reforms carried out during the 1683-99 War of the Holy League. After the initial shock of the loss of

tax farms known as malikâne. These measures enabled the Ottoman Empire to resolve its budget deficits and enter the eighteenth century with a considerable surplus.[14]

See also

References

  1. ^ Caroline Finkel, Osman's Dream, 253.
  2. ^ Finkel, Osman's Dream, 281.
  3. ^ Finkel, Osman's Dream, 252.
  4. ^ Halil İnalcık. Devlet-i 'Aliyye: Osmanlı İmparatorluğu Üzerine Araştırmalar - III, Köprülüler Devri, [Devlet-i 'Aliyye: Studies on the Ottoman Empire - III, Köprülü Era] (in Turkish) (Istanbul: Türkiye Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2015), pp. 17-28.
  5. ^ Leslie Peirce, The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire, (Oxford University Press: 1993), pp. 256-7.
  6. ^ İnalcık, Devlet-i 'Aliyye, pp. 27-39.
  7. ^ İnalcık, Devlet-i 'Aliyye, pp. 83-111.
  8. ^ Rhoads Murphey, Ottoman Warfare, 1500-1700, (Rutgers University Press, 1999) pp. 9-10.
  9. ^ Gábor Ágoston, Guns for the Sultan: Military Power and the Weapons Industry in the Ottoman Empire, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 202.
  10. ^ Virginia Aksan, Ottoman Wars, 1700-1860: An Empire Besieged, (Pearson Education Limited, 2007) 28.
  11. . historians of the Ottoman Empire have rejected the narrative of decline in favor of one of crisis and adaptation
  12. ^ Lewis V. Thomas, A Study of Naima, Edited by Norman Itzkowitz. (New York: New York University Press, 1972), pp. 106-110.
  13. ^ Marc David Baer, Honored by the Glory of Islam: Conversion and Conquest in Ottoman Europe, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 105, 221-227.
  14. ^ Rhoads Murphey, "Continuity and Discontinuity in Ottoman Administrative Theory and Practice during the Late Seventeenth Century," Poetics Today 14 (1993): 419-443.
    • Linda Darling, Revenue-Raising and Legitimacy, Tax Collection and Finance Administration in the Ottoman Empire, 1560-1660, (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996) 239.
    • Finkel, Osman's Dream, p. 325-6.

Bibliography

Further reading

General histories

Monographs