Ekrem Buğra Ekinci, 1987’de Ankara Hukuk Fakültesi’ni bitirdi. Avukatlık stajı yaptı.

Ankara’da başladığı kariyerini İstanbul’da sürdürdü.
Doktorasını 1996’da İstanbul Hukuk Fakültesi’nde tamamladı.

Türkiye ve Daily Sabah gazetelerinde yazmaktadır.
Devam
 
THE HISTORY of FRATRICIDE in the OTTOMAN EMPIRE

06 Ağustos 2015 Perşembe

Undoubtedly, fratricide is one of the most controversial topics in Ottoman history. Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror's Law of Governance imparted the right of executing the male members of the dynasty to his son in order to prevent an interregnum. There were different practices regarding fratricide throughout the empire's history, with most of them seen as legitimate, but some executions, done to prevent a possible revolt, were criticized as illegitimate.

While the law introduced by Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror sanctioned the practice of fratricide, Sultan Ahmed I ended it by not killing his brothers and introducing seniority succession to the Ottoman dynasty. Even though it seems rationally and conscientiously convenient, it created handicaps and become one of the reasons the empire entered its period of stagnation.

The tradition of the "kingdom being the common property of the dynasty," which was a feature of old Turkish politics, continued after the convertion to Islam. Some Turkish rulers chose to divide their country into regions and gave them over to the administration of princes in order to prevent civil war. However, this practice weakened the state and paved the way for its downfall. Thankfully, the Ottomans learned from these experiences. They sacrificed themselves for the state and their people and drank the bitter poison themselves. This bitter poison was the execution of the members of the dynasty for the good of the people, which is also known as fratricide.

In his letter to the son of Timur, Mehmed I Chelebi, the fourth sultan of the Ottomans, said: "My ancestors handled some inconveniences with their experience. Two sultans cannot live in the same country." The execution of members of the dynasty for political reasons does not pertain only to the Ottomans. It was also practiced by the Sasanians, Romans, Byzantines and even the Muslim Andalusian states. However, the main reason for this practice in these kingdoms was to take over the throne instead of preserving the unity of the state and the livelihood of the people. On the other hand, thousands of people who died during the long-lasting wars for the right of succession in Europe should be remembered.

It is narrated that the first capital punishment ordered within the dynasty was enforced by Osman Gazi, the founder of the Ottoman state, in 1298, for his uncle, Dündar Bey, as he was working on his own behalf and collaborated with the Byzantine feudal lords. During the first few centuries, members of the dynasty became a problem for the state under the rule of almost all sultans. The shahzades (Sultan's sons, princes), who laid claim to the throne, rebelled by being backed up by other Anatolian states or even the Byzantines. Following the Battle of Ankara (1402), in which the Ottomans were defeated, the state fell into an authority gap and the four shahzades of Bayezid I, that each had thousands of supporters, fought for the throne for years . At the end of this civil war, Mehmed I Chelebi, the youngest son of the sultan, defeated his brothers and became the sole holder of the Ottoman throne in 1413.

There was no set rule of succession for the Ottomans within the frame of the old Turkish political tradition. Each shahzade was sent to a "sanjak" (administrative divisions of the Ottoman Empire) an equal distance from the capital after the age of 12. They underwent a period of training in a way, and the shahzade who came to the capital first following the death of his father became sultan. However, the famous article from Sultan Mehmed II the Conqueror's Law of Governance states that "Any of my sons  ascend the throne, it  acceptable for him to kill his brothers for the common benefit of the people (nizam-i alem). The majority of the ulama (muslim scholars) have approved this; let action be taken accordingly." The law did not present a new rule of succession, but formulated that the shahzade who was the luckiest and the most powerful could succeed to the throne and wipe out his other brother who might claim the throne. Thus, the principle of the indivisibility of sovereignty in Islamic law was adopted by Ottoman politics, even if it cost the lives of the members of the dynasty. The executions of shahzades were performed according to the positive law, in other words, according to the Code of Sultan Mehmed II. As in all other monarchies, the ruler holds the judicial power in his hands under Islamic law.

There are three different reasons for the execution of shahzades in the Ottoman dynasty. First, shahzades were executed in the case they revolt to capture the throne. A coup attempt is seen as a crime all over the world. Upon the death of Ottoman Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror in 1481, his younger son, Cem Sultan, sent his older brother Bayezid, the next Ottoman Sultan, a message suggesting that they share the country between them. Sultan Bayezid II rejected the offer. He defeated his brother, and Cem Sultan escaped to Europe and lived there for the rest of his life under sorrowful captivity. Some legal experts say execution can be ordered to punish a shahzade if he completes preparations for a revolt against the sultan.

Second, there might be no clear revolt attempt but certain signs of an uprising. Disobedience to the emperor through words or action or encouraging the public to rise up in revolt was a crime. When the eighth Ottoman sultan, Selim I, succeeded to the throne, he did not kill his brother Shahzade Korkut, but offered him a governorship position. Some viziers and soldiers from the former sultan's administration sent him a letter saying that they would like to see him as emperor and all conditions were convenient to his succession. Shahzade Korkut unluckily gave a positive response; the sultan saw the letter and ended his brother's life in 1513. Shahzade Mustafa, the son of Sultan Suleiman I 'the Magnificent', was executed for the same reason. Modern law does not specify punishment for criminal plots as long as any preparation is not carried out. However, it is up to the interpretation of theorists and practitioners to decide whether a plot can be considered preparation or action. To illustrate, if three people gather to kill someone, it is not seen as a criminal attempt; however, meeting to stage a coup is a criminal attempt.

Shahzade Mustafa and Shahzade Mahmud, the son of Ottoman Sultan Mehmed III, were not personally involved in any uprising, but were unwary. Such reckless behaviors were seen as a threat to the monarchies at that time and led to their executions to avoid possible disorder in the future. Shahzade Selim, another son of Sultan Suleiman I, and Shahzade İbrahim, the son of Sultan Ahmed I , found themselves on the throne with their patience and cautious attitudes even their successions were not presumed due to the existence of their elder brothers.

Third, in this example, there is neither a revolt nor preparation. Here there is a legitimacy problem. For many legal experts in the Ottoman Empire, the execution of shahzades was seen as legitimate, as they might rise up in the future. The public always saw the Ottoman dynasty as the eligible holder of the throne. Succession of another person or family outside the dynasty was never conceived. In military revolts, the emperor was threatened by enthroning a shahzade to the throne. Poor shahzades became a potential danger threatening the state and the nation's safety. Ottoman Sultan Murad IV sacrificed his innocent brother to suppress a riot as the army wanted to enthrone his brother. Austria's Ambassador Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq, who stayed in the Ottoman Empire during the rule of Suleiman I, said: "It is an unfortunate thing to be a son of [Ottoman] emperors. It is because when one of them succeeds to the throne, the others then wait for their death. If the emperor's brother is alive, the army's requests never end. When the emperor does not accept their demand, then they cry 'God save your brother,' which shows their will to enthrone him."

Some  modern scholars consider that the execution of shahzades who did not attempt to incite any riots was legal abuse and against the Sharia law system. The punishment of an innocent person with the worry of a possible crime in the future is against the law in accordance with the princible of "a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty according to the law." Those who see the execution of shahzades justifiable bases their approach on the "maslaha" (the interests of the public) principle in Islamic law. "Maslaha" means placing the public's interest before personal interest in regards to deciding an issue. The Quran specifies that fitna  (rebellion, social disturbance) is worse than killing a person. For instance, Ottoman Sultan Osman II wanted to execute his brother when he was going to the Battle of Khotyn to avoid possible disobedience behind. However, Ottoman Shaikh al-Islam (Grand Mufti) Es'ad Efendi did not issue a fatwa, and the sultan took it from Qadi'asker Tashkopruzade. It was very common to see different fatwa interpretations in a case that is not clearly defined in legal references

Ottoman ulema explain clearly that fratricide was applied in accordance with verses of the Holy Qur'an. It is narrated in Qur'an (18:80-81) that the friend of Prophet Moses killed an innocent child. Moses had asked him: "Have you killed an innocent person who had killed none?" When Moses criticized him for killing an innocent child, he said: "And as for the lad, his parents were believers and we feared lest he should oppress them by rebellion and disbelief. It was our wish that our God should grant them another in his place, a son more righteous and better in affection." The Gospel of John (18:14) also says: "… it is better for you that one man dies for the people than that the whole nation perish." An example in fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) books related to this subject is also worth mentioning: "The enemy attacks Muslims and some Muslim prisoners are used as a shield. Unless Muslims do not shoot, they would be defeated. They are allowed to shoot these innocent prisoners as if they were the enemy. This situation here refers to "maslaha," that is, common benefit . Otherwise, an execution of an innocent Muslim is forbidden. The Muslim army then can target its enemy. If the army does not take any action to save Muslim prisoners, the enemy invades the country and everyone including the prisoners would be killed.

There are concrete examples proving that precautions are not against Islamic law as they avoid possible harm. At the time of the Prophet Muhammad, a person who was imprisoned for theft was released when he was exonerated. Caliphs Umar bin al-Khattab and Ali judged that craftsmen such as tailors and launderers would have to repay the damage due to the common benefit.

Modern law specifies that civil rights and liberties can be suspended by political, legal and administrative bodies in case of a criminal suspicion. Although they do not have criminal responsibility, people with severe mental problems can be isolated from the public in order to avoid them harming society. Other examples include the detention of a suspect, body search, phone tapping, , cordoning off roads, keeping out football fans that might kick up a fuss in matches and, even further, the detention of hooligans during matches and taking certain metal items away from those entering secure areas. These measures are of course not as severe as fratricide. From a legal perspective, however, they are all similar actions. Therefore, the execution of a "shahzade" (prince) who does not attempt an uprising against the sultan is a precaution rather than a punishment. It is true that the sultans thought that their execution decision had a legal base even at the cost of pushing the limits of political freedom of the sharia system in use.

Syrian Hanbali scholar Karmi (d. 1624), said that the execution of princes was a virtue of the Ottoman dynasty. Karmi approved of the killing of sons to avoid revolt among Muslims and placing the country in difficulties. He said that although a person with good sense does not recognize this decision, he found great benefit in it and believed that he preferred to give the fatwa of the execution of three people in order to protect another 30. Karmi's words illustrate the principle of choosing the more moderate path between two harmful ones. He narrates the collapse of the Moroccan sultanate due to the lack of fratricide in the sultanate.

Throughout the history of the Ottoman Empire, 60 princes were executed. Sixteen of them were executed due to their revolt against the sultan while seven were killed for their revolt attempts and others for reasons of common benefit . Ottoman princes were executed by strangulation, as Turkic-Mongolian traditions prohibited shedding the blood of dynastic members. Compared to European dynasties, executing princes prevented the formation of an aristocracy that developed in parallel with the dynasty.

Ascending to the throne in 1603, Sultan Ahmed I did not kill his brothers, including Shahzade Mustafa – an indication of his tolerant character. Ahmed I was also a dervish and did not have a child when he became sultan. His behaviour might be related to the public indignation that emerged after his father, Sultan Mehmed III, executed his 19 brothers following his accession to the throne. When Ahmed I died in 1617, his brother ascended the throne even though he had sons. It was the first time that a sultan's brother became emperor after the sultan's death. Until that time, the sultan was invariably followed by his son. After this, princes were not sent to sanjaks as governors, but rather waited their turn to become sultan at the palace. The execution of princes was also abolished. French writer Alphonse de Lamartine once said: "After Sultan Ahmed I, a brother's succession to the throne showed that the Genghis Khan laws, which say political sovereignty jointly belongs to the dynasty, were still alive in the Ottoman Empire." This practice increased the credit of Sultan Ahmed I and successive sultans yet brought the empire to grief. Although seniority succession to the throne avoided fratricide to a certain extent, it had different handicaps:

1. As the throne was handed down from father to son in the first stage, the average duration of a sultan's rule was longer and political sustainability was much stronger. Because the oldest dynasty members ascended the throne in later periods, reigns were shorter and the sultans were unable to show the required dynamism as emperor.
2. Previously, princes were assigned as sanjak governors to better train for political and administrative skills. When this practice was discontinued they had less chance to gain experience at the imperial palace.
3. At first, sanjak governor princes were the only alternative authority after the imperial palace. When they began to stay in the palace, other authorities outside the dynasty, including viziers, the ulema, soldiers and even public figures, gained more power. Having lived in the Ottoman Empire from 1634 to 1636, English lawyer and traveler Sir Henry Blount said the following after janissaries created trouble for the sultan: "The reason for this is Sultan Ahmed I, who spared the life of his brother after his enthronement and allowed him to claim a right to the throne. This practice gave impertinent soldiers the chance to taste the Bloud Royall that can never regain its lost dignity.

The Ottoman constitution of 1876 recognized the succession of the oldest dynasty member to the throne. Although Ottoman sultans in the last century of the empire attempted to institute the old inheritance system to enthrone young and dynamic princes as seen in European dynasties, they failed. It is wrong to evaluate incidents without considering their place and actors without the specific conditions of the period. Therefore, it is a simple issue to describe fratricide in Ottoman ideology as an atrocity, or brutality or egoism at the least. Fratricide is incomprehensible both emotionally and conscientiously, but was one of the elements that kept the Ottoman Empire alive for centuries.


 Önceki Yazılar
19.05.2017 - MAY 19: START OF THE ANKARA MOVEMENT

12.05.2017 - BEING A TRADESMAN NOT AN EASY JOB IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

05.05.2017 - SPRING IS FINALLY HERE: HIDIRELLEZ

28.04.2017 - SABBATAISM AND DOENMEHS IN OTTOMAN SOCIETY

21.04.2017 - OTTOMAN HUMANITARIAN AID TO THE IRISH GRIPPED BY FAMINE

14.04.2017 - GREAT COLONIAL EMPIRE ESTABLISHED BY A SMALL COUNTRY

07.04.2017 - CALLIGRAPHY AS INCORPOREAL PROTECTOR OF OTTOMAN HOUSES

24.03.2017 - MODERN INSURANCE SYSTEM HAS ITS ROOTS IN MEDIEVAL ANATOLIA

17.03.2017 - PRINTING PRESS AS A TURKISH INVENTION

10.03.2017 - THE PALESTINE ISSUE THAT COST SULTAN ABDULHAMID II THE OTTOMAN THRONE

03.03.2017 - THE RISE AND FALL OF THE ISLAMIC CALIPHATE IN HISTORY

24.02.2017 - THE MEMORIES OF ARMENIAN OLYMPIANS IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

17.02.2017 - RUMELIAN TURKS: OTTOMAN MIGRANTS FROM BALKANS TO ANATOLIA

10.02.2017 - IN THE PURSUIT OF ROYAL OTTOMAN FAMILY'S TANGLED INHERITANCE

03.02.2017 - MUHAMMED ALI PASHA'S CAIRO AND EGYPT UNDER OTTOMAN RULE

27.01.2017 - JOURNEY OF TOBACCO FROM THE CARIBBEAN TO OTTOMAN EMPIRE

20.01.2017 - CYPRUS DISPUTE: AN ISLAND AT A CROSSROADS

18.01.2017 - Graves of Ottoman princes, sons of Sultan Abdulhamid II in ruins in France’s Bobigny cemetery

13.01.2017 - A FAREWELL TO LAST HEIR OF OTTOMAN EMPIRE PRINCE OSMAN BAYEZID

10.01.2017 - New heir to the former Ottoman throne witnesses horrors of Syrian civil war in Damascus

06.01.2017 - OTTOMAN-ERA CLOCK TOWERS TELLING TIME FROM BALKANS TO MIDDLE EAST

23.12.2016 - ALEPPO: AN ANCIENT CITY RUINED IN MODERN-ERA DESTRUCTION

16.12.2016 - THE HISTORY OF ROWING ALONG THE BOSPORUS IN OTTOMAN ISTANBUL

10.12.2016 - TEA: EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT A TURKISH OBSESSION

02.12.2016 - THE EVOLUTION OF OTTOMAN-ERA SECRET SERVICES

25.11.2016 - HISTORIC FOUNTAINS AND WATER CULTURE IN OTTOMAN ISTANBUL

11.11.2016 - MUMMIES OF ANATOLIA STILL A MATTER OF INTEREST

04.11.2016 - AGE OF FIRE: THE DISASTER THAT MENACE OTTOMAN CITIES

28.10.2016 - HEJAZ RAILWAY: A HISTORIC LINE TO ISLAM'S HOLIEST CITIES

21.10.2016 - BIRDHOUSES: MINIATURE MANSIONS OF ISTANBUL

14.10.2016 - SPORTS CULTURE IN OTTOMAN SOCIETY

07.10.2016 - TURQUERIE: EVOLUTION OF TURKISH THEME IN EUROPEAN ART, STYLE

30.09.2016 - THE BALYAN FAMILY: ARMENIAN MASTERS BEHIND OTTOMAN ARCHITECTURE

23.09.2016 - WORLD'S FIRST HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS

16.09.2016 - THE KULELI INCIDENT: AN OTTOMAN COUP ATTEMPT

09.09.2016 - THE SOCIAL DIVIDE BEHIND THE SYRIAN WAR

02.09.2016 - SYRİA: FROM THE DAWN OF CİVİLİZATİON TO CHAOS OF WAR

26.08.2016 - FEB 28: A 'POST-MODERN' COUP OF RELIGIOUS, POLITICAL OPRESSION

19.08.2016 - 1971 MILITARY MEMORANDUM: A POLITICAL DOWNTURN

12.08.2016 - THE 1980 COUP: FEARFUL PERIOD AMID POLITICAL CRACKDOWN

08.08.2016 - THE 1960 COUP: FIRST ATTACK ON TURKISH DEMOCRACY

29.07.2016 - TREATY OF LAUSANNE: TRIUMPH OR LOSS?

22.07.2016 - A BRIEF HISTORY OF COUPS IN TURKEYTORY OF COUPS IN TURKEY

15.07.2016 - UNWRAPPING THE HISTORY OF PAPER AND ITS INFLUENCE IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD

08.07.2016 - A TRAVEL DIARY FROM MAGHRIB TO THE ATLAS MOUNTAINS

04.07.2016 - RAMADAN BAYRAM: SHARE, REJOICE, WORSHIP

24.06.2016 - PRINCESS EMINE NECIBE: A LOST TALE FROM CAIRO TO ISTANBUL

17.06.2016 - THE KARAMANLIDES: A TURKISH-SPEAKING GREEK ORTHODOX COMMUNITY IN ANATOLIA

10.06.2016 - DATES: THE SACRED FRUIT DURING RAMADAN

03.06.2016 - THE SOCIAL ROLE OF WAQFS DURING THE OTTOMAN ERA

27.05.2016 - SHAMANISM: A PRACTICE OF EARLY TURKIC BELIEFS

20.05.2016 - A MONETARY HISTORY OF ISLAMIC SOCIETIES

16.05.2016 - FEZ: A TIME-HONORED OTTOMAN HAT FROM THE MEDITERRANEAN

06.05.2016 - THE ABDULLAH BROTHERS: PIONEERS OF PHOTOGRAPHY IN THE LATE OTTOMAN PERIOD

29.04.2016 - THE SIEGE OF KUT: AN UNFORGOTTEN OTTOMAN VICTORY

23.04.2016 - HEALING IN ISLAMIC SCIENCE AND MEDICINE

18.04.2016 - BEDESTEN: THE OTTOMAN PRECURSOR TO THE SAFETY DEPOSIT BOX

08.04.2016 - THE ART of THE MEDDAH: TRADITIONAL TURKISH STORYTELLING

01.04.2016 - RETHINKING THE IMPERIAL HAREM: WHAT DID LIFE LOOK LIKE FOR OTTOMAN PALACE WOMEN?

25.03.2016 - THE ROMA: A LIFE OF CONSTANT TRAVEL

18.03.2016 - TWO SIDES OF THE GALLIPOLI WAR

11.03.2016 - EUROPE MUST KEEP THE TRADITION OF LIVING TOGETHER

04.03.2016 - THE HOLODOMOR: A MANUFACTURED HUMAN TRAGEDY

26.02.2016 - JAMRAH: THE HERALD of SPRİNG

19.02.2016 - HANDKERCHIEFS: THE SECRET LANGUAGE OF LOVE

12.02.2016 - KARAITE JEWS: THE READERS of HEBREW SCRIPTURES

05.02.2016 - 150 PERSONAE NON GRATAE: THE BLACK LIST OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED REPUBLIC

29.01.2016 - WHY THE ISLAMIC WORLD FELL BEHIND IN SCIENCE

22.01.2016 - ADA KALEH: A TURKISH ISLAND IN THE DANUBE RIVER

15.01.2016 - THE MOSUL QUESTION: A CLASH FOR OIL

09.01.2016 - THE GOOD OLD DAYS, WHEN DUMPING SNOW IN THE BOSPORUS WAS AMUSEMENT

01.01.2016 - NEWSPAPERS: AN INTELLECTUAL LEGACY of the OTTOMAN EMPIRE

18.12.2015 - THE GALATA BANKERS: FINANCING OTTOMAN STATE

11.12.2015 - A BRIEF HISTORY OF TURKISH-RUSSIAN RELATIONS

04.12.2015 - FRAMING WOMEN'S STATUS THROUGH THE AGES

27.11.2015 - SICILY: AN ETERNAL MEETING POINT BETWEEN AFRICA AND EUROPE

20.11.2015 - TURKISH-ARAB RELATIONS FROM PAST TO TODAY

13.11.2015 - SLAVERY AND ISLAM: A TRANSFORMATIVE MEETING

30.10.2015 - THE BRIEF HISTORY of ELECTIONS in TURKEY

23.10.2015 - ASHURA: THE TRADITIONAL DESSERT EMBRACING PEOPLE FROM EVERY RELIGION

16.10.2015 - TURKISH CHEESES OFFER A VARIETY OF TASTES

09.10.2015 - TRANSFORMATION OF OTTOMAN COFFEEHOUSES TO THE PRESENT

02.10.2015 - THE STORY OF THE STAR AND CRESCENT ON THE ARMS OF TWO EUROPEAN CITIES

25.09.2015 - QURBAN BAYRAM: HOW DO MUSLIMS CELEBRATE A HOLY FEAST?

18.09.2015 - MAHPEYKER KOSEM SULTAN: THE WOMAN WHO OVERSAW 3 GENERATIONS of the OTTOMAN EMPIRE

11.09.2015 - LITERACY IN OTTOMAN SOCIETY WAS HIGHER THAN BELIEVED

04.09.2015 - HOSTILITY BETWEEN SELIM I AND ISMAIL I UNDERLIES SECTARIAN DIFFERENCES

28.08.2015 - IMAM SHAMIL: A PIONEER OF THE CAUCUSES'S STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM

22.08.2015 - THE DEVŞIRME SYSTEM: A LADDER TO THE TOP OF THE STATE FOR NON-MUSLIMS

14.08.2015 - THE SPANISH TREASURE LYING AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ATLANTIC

31.07.2015 - THE HISTORICAL CITY GATES OF ISTANBUL

24.07.2015 - THE STORY OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE'S CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY

17.07.2015 - CELEBRATING THE JOYOUS HOLIDAY OF EID AL-FITR

10.07.2015 - SYKES-PICOT: THE WESTERN AGREEMENT THAT SEALED THE MIDDLE EAST'S DOOM

04.07.2015 - A TRAITOR OR A HERO? THE EXECUTION OF SHEIKH SAID

26.06.2015 - HATS: A POLITICAL SYMBOL OF TURKISH HISTORY

19.06.2015 - RAMADAN FESTIVITIES BRING LIVELY ATMOSPHERE

12.06.2015 - LEGENDS ABOUT TAQI AL-DIN AND THE DEMOLISHED OTTOMAN OBSERVATORY

08.06.2015 - MYTHS AND REALITY ABOUT THE PRINTING PRESS IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

29.05.2015 - THE CONQUEST OF CONSTANTINOPLE: THE HERALDING IN A NEW ERA

23.05.2015 - A CHURCH, A MOSQUE AND FINALLY A MUSEUM: THE NEARLY 1,500-YEAR-OLD STORY OF THE HAGIA SOPHIA

16.05.2015 - THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE: A SHELTER FOR ALL KINDS OF REFUGEES

09.05.2015 - THE MOSQUE THAT STANDS ON THE SEA: KILIÇ ALI PASHA MOSQUE

02.05.2015 - THE ROLES OF MAJOR POWERS DURING THE 1915 ARMENIAN INCIDENTS

24.04.2015 - HOW WERE THE 1915 INCIDENTS CONFRONTED BY THE OTTOMANS?

17.04.2015 - MYSTERIOUS SCHOLAR BETWEEN EAST AND WEST: LEGEND OF JAMAL AL-DIN AL-AFGHANI

10.04.2015 - A UNIQUE PERIOD IN TURKISH HISTORY: THE TULIP ERA

03.04.2015 - YEMEN: SEARCHING FOR A SIGN OF PEACE

27.03.2015 - FROM KAFFA TO ISTANBUL: COFFEE'S JOURNEY TO TURKEY

20.03.2015 - JIHAD: A MISUNDERSTOOD ISLAMIC TERM

13.03.2015 - THE BITTER STORY OF THE OTTOMAN DYNASTY’S EXILE

06.03.2015 - THE HISTORIC JOURNEY OF YOGURT: FROM TURKIC PEOPLES TO THE WORLD

27.02.2015 - THE HISTORICAL ADVENTURE OF THE TOMB OF SULEYMAN SHAH

20.02.2015 - SHOULD TURKEY SWITCH TO A PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM?

13.02.2015 - WAHHABISM: PURE ISLAM OR EXTREMISM?

06.02.2015 - WORLD WAR I: THE HEAVY TOLL OF A DEADLY CONFLİCT

27.01.2015 - LOOKING BACK ON THE LIFE OF A KING

19.01.2015 - THE OTTOMANS’ EXEMPLARY TREATMENT OF STREET ANİMALS

09.01.2015 - HURREM SULTAN: A BELOVED WIFE OR MASTER MANIPULATOR?

03.01.2015 - AN ANCESTRAL LANGUAGE WITH A DIFFERENT ALPHABET

26.12.2014 - DISCOVER THE SEALS OF OTTOMAN SULTANS

02.12.2014 - MEMORIES OF ISTANBUL SHELTERED IN FIREPROOF LIBRARIES

10.09.2014 - SEA BATHING, THE GOOD OLD FASHION WAY

07.06.2014 - SMILE AND SAY 'CHEESE'

13.05.2014 - THE OTTOMAN AQUADUCT LEGACY

25.04.2014 - WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ARMENIANS (MILLET-I SADIKA)?

20.04.2014 - OTTOMAN MILITARY MARCHING BAND

12.04.2014 - MUSLIMS COME FIRST IN THE HISTORY OF CONSTITUTIONS

05.04.2014 - ISTANBUL COMES TO BLOOM WITH TULIPS

28.03.2014 - AN EXOTIC COMMUNITY IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE: THE LEVANTINES

21.03.2014 - CELEBRATE WITH SWEETS ALL YEAR ROUND

21.03.2014 - MURDERS FOR A FALSE PARADISE: THE HASHSHASHINS

10.03.2014 - NOTABLE LIFE OF MIHRIMAH SULTAN

10.03.2014 - SULTAN SULEIMAN'S INACCURATE PORTRAYAL ON TV SHOW

07.03.2014 - CRIMEA BETWEEN TWO FIRES