Ottomans, there still remained the Empire of Trebizond, governed by
a Greek prince, David Comnenus. Part of his dominions, Sinope and
Paphlagonia, were conquered in 1461, and then the last Emperor of
Trebizond turned for help to his Turkoman ally, Hassan, ruler of
Armenia and part of Persia. Mohammed struck at his foes rapidly.
Marching on Erzeroum, he forced Hassan to sue for peace, and so the
Greek Emperor was left to meet the Turks unaided. The city of Trebizond
was effectively encircled by land and sea, and David was soon brought
to surrender, and afterwards, with many members of his household,
was put to death. Equally implacable was Mohammed to the Seldjoukian
emirates. At the death of Ibrahim, the Prince of Karamania, the Sultan
intervened, while seven claimants were disputing over the succession,
and after several campaigns annexed the emirate. Hassan’s time soon
came. Feeling the insecurity of his rule, he asked help of Rhodes and
Venice, especially requesting to be furnished with artillery, by the
aid of which so many of the Ottoman victories were won. Two hundred
Italian gunners were sent in answer to his call. In 1472 he took the
Ottoman town of Tokat, and sacked it. This act caused Mohammed to take
up the war against him in person. The two armies met on July 26, 1473,
at Outlouk-Bali, near Terdjan, where a decisive victory was won by the
Sultan. All the prisoners taken were massacred. The Turkomans had no
desire to contest further the predominance of Ottoman rule, which was
now extended without question over both Karamania and Anatolia.
It must not be supposed, however, that Mohammed was always successful.
Albania held out against him under the heroic leader Scanderbeg, whose
earlier exploits have been already chronicled. His success against
the Ottomans continued without a break. Even when a nephew proved
disloyal and brought an army of 40,000 Turks into the land, he rose up
and smote the invaders after the manner of his earlier years (1461).
For a time afterward peace prevailed; then, during the Venetian war,
he stood as an ally of the republic. His old antagonist Mohammed had
another opportunity of testing the valor of the Albanian chieftain at a
decisive defeat of the Turkish army under the walls of Croia in 1465.
Two years later Scanderbeg died at the age of sixty-seven, and his
death was followed by civil strife.
The rounding off of the Ottoman Empire, a process by which the vassal
states were absorbed, put an end to the internal movements against
centralized rule, and enabled the Sultan to work out his policy of
systematic aggression in the regions to the north. After the year 1470
Turkish armies ravaged Southern Hungary, Croatia, Carinthia, Styria,
and Carniola; Belgrade, on account of its strong defensive position,
was respected. In 1479 the Turks made an expedition in force into
Transylvania, where, in the neighborhood of Hermannstadt, they burnt
200 villages. When they were on the point of withdrawing with their
booty they were attacked on the Cornfields (Kenyermezo, October
13), and suffered severe losses. Not more successful were the acts
of aggression on Hungarian territory in the following year; but the
Hungarian King, Matthias, was satisfied with repulsing his enemies; he
had no desire to prosecute the war against the Turks on a large scale,
for he had none of the ambition or enthusiasm of his famous father,
Hunyadi.
In the Greek islands the activity of the Turkish fleet produced
positive and permanent results; Lesbos was taken in 1462, and to the
list of Turkish successes in these years were soon added Lemnos,
Imbros, Samothrace. Much more valiant defenders of their island were
the Knights of Rhodes, whom the Sultan was especially desirous of
punishing for the part they had taken in the already mentioned Venetian
expedition against Asia Minor. In 1480 a large Ottoman fleet of about
one hundred ships appeared in sight of the island, and a bombardment
was begun, but the fortifications proved too strong for the Turkish
guns to make any impression, though the siege lasted from early in May
till the end of August, in which time, despite the assaults made on the
citadel, only one tower was taken. The Grand Master, Pierre d’Aubusson,
and his brother, had prepared most intelligently for the crisis by
collecting from all provinces of the Order money, which they used in
providing weapons, especially cannon. They had been furnished also by
the Pope, just before the siege began, with a large store of food and
provisions. Finally, after a heroic defense of eighty-nine days, two
Neapolitan ships forced their way into the harbor and broke up the
blockade.
In the Wallachian lands the Ottomans met a redoubtable warrior, who,
in the annals of the Roumanian people, takes such a high place as a
champion against the Turks that the record of his deeds gives him a
rank alongside Hunyadi and Scanderbeg. Vlad, the Prince of Wallachia,
1456-1462, called by the Hungarians the Devil, and with equal
significance spoken of by the Turks as the Impaler, had a reputation
for violence even among his own people. He repressed the internal
troubles of his vassals with an iron hand; for after Mircea’s death
the country had gone through the same period of divisions and intrigues
that is found with such frequency in all the Balkan lands, making them,
as we have seen, an easy prey for the Ottoman.
It is told how Vlad brought Wallachia to a peaceful state by the
execution of 20,000 men, and how, afterwards, in the same drastic
style, he resolved to put an end to the annual tribute of 500 children
demanded by his overlord the Sultan. Looking for allies in carrying on
the resistance to Mohammed, he helped Stephen IV to secure the throne
of Moldavia, and married a relative of Matthias, King of Hungary.
Mohammed resolved to nip in the bud the independent movements of his
dangerous vassal, and sent a renegade Greek official, Catabolinus,
with a corps of 2000 Turks to depose Vlad and to replace him by his
brother, Radu. Vlad, having surprised this small force, impaled all the
prisoners he took; to the pasha who led them was accorded the honor
of being impaled on the longest stake. After this outrage the Sultan
sent three ambassadors to reinforce his demands; but, when the Moslem
delegates refused to remove their turbans in his presence, Vlad ordered
their headgear to be nailed to their heads.
This picturesque barbarity appealed to the imagination of the Turkish
ruler, who, as an artist in cruelty, conceded that Vlad belonged to a
class above him. When the Turkish sovereign made a punitive expedition
to Bucharest, he found the approach to the town, half a mile long,
lined with stakes, on which were rotting the bodies of 2000 dead Turks.
“How,” Mohammed said, “can we despoil of his estates a man who is not
afraid to defend it by such means as these?” Vlad hung on the invading
army, always inflicting losses, without showing himself long enough
to be attacked in a formal battle. Using his familiarity with the
Turkish language, he penetrated with some companions into the midst
of the Turkish camp, and would have succeeded in murdering Mohammed
himself, had not a mistake been made in selecting the tent. Instead of
the Sultan one of the pashas was killed. Though there are conflicting
accounts as to the details of Vlad’s versatility in defense, we know
that Mohammed gave up his plan of aggression against Wallachia and
returned to his capital, Adrianople.
Vlad’s career was cut short by the enmity of his neighbor the Moldavian
King, Stephen, who, afraid of his influence, drove him from his throne,
although he had relied on Vlad to promote his own interests when the
Moldavian succession was in dispute. This was, of course, a gross
error in statesmanship, for the only possibility of resisting Turkish
aggression in these extreme Eastern lands of Europe depended on the
close coöperation of Moldavia and Wallachia. If Wallachia were once
occupied by the Turks, Moldavia’s invasion was certain to be the next
step. After Vlad’s expulsion, he took refuge at the court of Matthias
of Hungary.
His successor, Radu, was entirely devoted to Turkish interests; and
soon after this change of rule in Wallachia, Stephen of Moldavia
was able to seize the seaport town of Kilia, whose inhabitants were
not unwilling to accept an overlord of better reputation than Radu,
whose close relations with the Sultan had made him an object of
contempt (1465). In the hostilities that followed between Matthias of
Hungary and Stephen of Moldavia, the Hungarian King, who had taken up
Vlad’s cause, was beaten at the battle of Baia. Stephen then invaded
Transylvania, captured Peter Aron, the pretender to the throne of
Moldavia, and put him to death. Peace was restored with the Hungarians
on terms that were advantageous to Stephen, who received two fortresses.
Not long after this Hungarian incident, which, like so many others,
weakened the power of resistance to Turkish arms, Stephen invaded
Wallachia with the intention of dethroning the Sultan’s favorite, Radu.
The Moldavian prince prepared for war against the Turks by entering
into negotiations with the Venetians, who, as we have seen, were
indefatigable in organizing a general league against Mohammed. An
ambassador, who had been sent by the republic to secure the coöperation
of the Persian King, Louzoun Hassan, visited Stephen, and proposed him
as leader in organizing a holy league against the Ottomans, “in order,”
as he said, “that we may not be left alone to keep up the struggle
against them.” But before the Venetian envoy had passed beyond the
Balkan lands, Mohammed’s army, in great force, was already swarming
over Moldavia. To meet them Stephen had only some 50,000 men, mostly
of his own nation. With these and a few Hungarians he won a brilliant
victory over 120,000 Turks at Rakova in 1475, where he killed 20,000
men, took 100 standards, and many prisoners, including four pashas.
Pursuing the defeated army, he massacred a large part of them. A church
was built to celebrate the battle, and a solemn fast was initiated,
followed by the impaling of many Turkish prisoners. This success of
Stephen was celebrated as a unique feat of arms in Western Europe, and
deservedly so, for the trained troops of Mohammed had been hewn down by
a peasantry armed only with pikes, scythes, and axes.
Stephen asked help from the Pope and from Venice to carry on the
struggle; but he got no aid, for the Venetians were worn out with the
long war against their Eastern foes, and the Pope explained that all
money for defense had been turned over to Matthias of Hungary, the
overlord of the Moldavian King. Matthias, however, proposed to spend
the money at home, as he dreaded the inevitable increase of Stephen’s
power if he were to inflict another decisive defeat on a Turkish army.
When the Turks appeared again, the help of the peasant population could
not be secured because they were simultaneously alarmed at the news of
a Tartar invasion, said to have been timed to coincide with the passage
of the Danube by the Turks.
The Moldavian nobles, however, and their men-at-arms, made an heroic
stand against Mohammed’s army; their cannon did such execution that
the Janitschars threw themselves on the ground to escape the rain of
projectiles. The Sultan was forced to lead his men in person to save
the day. So stout was the stand the Christians made that the combat
lasted far into the night. When most of his nobles had been slaughtered
Stephen withdrew from this battle, which was fought at Razboieni, July
24, 1476. After he had been pursued to the forest country in the north
of Moldavia, he was finally forced to withdraw to the inaccessible
mountain regions. Here, with characteristic enterprise, he gathered
together a second army, and the Turks, who already were exhausted by
the strenuous campaign in a country ill provided with food, and ravaged
as they were by disease, were easily driven back across the Danube.
After this success Wallachia was invaded the same year by the Moldavian
Boyars, who were joined by the Transylvanians under their new leader,
Bathory. The pro-Turkish prince of the country was dethroned, and
Vlad, the mighty hammerer of the Turks, now again an ally of Stephen,
was replaced by the latter on the throne; but the veteran leader did
not long survive his restoration. He died in December, 1477, near
Bucharest, in a fight with the Turks, who attacked him as soon as
Stephen had withdrawn to Moldavia. He was buried in a monastery founded
by him at Snagov, but no inscription marked the resting place of the
Christian champion.
Mohammed’s own reign was closed on the 3d of May, 1481, in Anatolia.
For some time, owing to his excessive weight, campaigning had been
difficult and painful for him. In the latter years of his life he was
often so incapacitated by gout that he was compelled to give up more
than one important warlike expedition, and it was to this disease that
his death was due. During his reign the Turkish Empire acquired much
new territory; Anatolia was occupied as far as the northern reaches of
the Euphrates, and in Europe the Balkan peninsula was made subject to
his arms as far as the Danube. Many successful expeditions were also
made far beyond these limits, both on the east and on the west. But
two great obstacles to Turkish advance he failed to overcome: Rhodes
and Belgrade, the latter stronghold commanding the Danube, while the
former was the key to the Ægean.
VI SELIM AND SOULIMAN
In the line of succession were two sons, Bajesid and Djem. Bajesid
managed, by rapid marching, to reach Scutari before his brother, and
was proclaimed Sultan. Djem, who had occupied Broussa, proposed a
division of the empire, but Bajesid refused, and defeated Djem in a
decisive battle, fought at Yeni-Chchir (1481). The defeated brother
took refuge first in Egypt, with the Sultan of the Mamelouks, and
afterwards appeared as a suppliant at Rhodes, where the Grand Master,
fearing to keep so valuable a hostage, sent him to France, where he
remained for several years in captivity. Djem finally ended his life as
a victim of the Borgia Pope, Alexander VI, who is charged with having
murdered him to secure the favor of Bajesid. So long as Djem lived,
Bajesid was wary of stirring up the enmity of Occidental Christendom;
he feared the effect on the stability of his throne by the return of a
pretender, backed up by Christian armies. He even refused to answer the
appeal for aid sent him by the last King of Granada, only venturing to
show ineffective sympathy by sending a fleet to cruise off the Spanish
coast.
Charles VIII of France, encouraged by his successful expedition into
Italy, planned a new general crusade against the Turk, and secured
promises of coöperation from various Western powers. He kept in touch
with the Christian population of the Ottoman Empire, and even looked
forward to taking the imperial throne of Constantinople by purchasing
title deeds to it from the Paleologi family.
After Djem’s death, which was soon followed by that of Charles, the
Sultan had a free hand. From 1492 to 1495 he warred with partial
success against the Hungarians; then came the turn of Venice, whose
Italian dominions again saw a Turkish army. In the Morea, also, the
republic lost some of the few cities it still possessed. There Nauplia
held out, but Modon, Navarino, and Coron passed into the possession of
the Turks. Under Papal leadership, an anti-Ottoman league was formed,
and the Christian fleet proved its prowess by destroying two Turkish
flotillas and by ravaging the shores of Asia Minor.
Internal troubles in Asia Minor, defeats in Hungary, and a long,
troublesome war with the Sultan of Egypt brought the warlike
enterprises of Bajesid to an end. The Sultan’s sons through their
dissensions darkened the close of his reign; all three rebelled. Of
the three, the most successful in opposing his father’s power was
Selim, who won the Janitschars over to his side, and through their
interference was able to enter Constantinople in triumph, and there
enforce his own conditions. Bajesid first offered large sums if Selim
would withdraw to the Asiatic province, of which he was governor;
finally he consented to accept him as heir and co-regent on the throne;
but Selim had secured the influence of the troops, and they demanded
the Sultan’s immediate abdication. Bajesid was obliged to accede to
their request, and only asked that he might be allowed to withdraw to
die at Demotica, the place where he was born. The third day after his
abdication he died. Because of its suddenness, his death, as was so
often the case in those days, was said to be due to poison.
Selim’s path after his accession was anything but smooth; the troops
were not amenable to discipline, and there were a host of brothers and
nephews, who were in no mood to accept him as their lord. Besides his
own son, Souliman, there were ten princes who stood near the throne.
All were taken and murdered. Though Selim affected to explain their
executions as due to reasons of state, his acts were severely judged
by his contemporaries. The Turks called him “The Inflexible,” while
in the West he was entitled “The Savage.” Foscolo, the Venetian,
described him as the cruelest of men, “a man who dreams only of
conquests and wars.” He was a well-educated man who favored the pursuit
of literature, and it was said that the only individual who was ever
able to induce him to revoke a death sentence was the grand mufti,
Ali Djemali. His viziers felt the implacable nature of their master;
seven of them were executed, for whenever the soldiers were restless
the vizier was made a victim of the Sultan’s discontent. According to
an old report one of them only agreed to accept the dangerous office
after Selim had beaten him with his own hands. Intractable at home,
Selim, so far as Europe was concerned, proved a pacific prince, his
name being recorded only in connection with one expedition against the
Christians. His Christian vassals, too, were left undisturbed; all
that he exacted from them was the payment of a regular tribute. To the
Moslem dissenters in Persia of the Shiite sect, he showed himself an
implacable persecutor, all the more because his animosity was excited
by the encouragement given to his rebellious brother Ahmed and his
three sons by Ismail, the master of Persia. Ismail also negotiated
an alliance with the Sultan of Egypt against the Osmanlis. Selim
began in his own provinces by organizing a systematic massacre of the
schismatics. Then followed a holy war against the Shah, in 1513, in
which Selim led an army of 140,000 warriors; and after three campaigns,
in one of which a great pitched battle was fought at Tchaldiran
(August 24, 1514), he extended the domains of the Ottoman far to the
east, bringing to submission Georgia and Kurdistan, and overrunning
Mesopotamia and the parts of Syria that were controlled by the Moslem
lord of Egypt.
By the expansion of his empire in this direction he soon came into
conflict with the Sultan of the Mamelouks. Aleppo was taken, and,
when Selim entered the city, he was hailed in the great mosque as the
guardian of the two holy cities of Mecca and Medina, a title which
gave the Ottoman Sultan almost the rank of the Khalif of the faithful.
Damascus also fell into his hands, and so rapid were the successes of
the Ottomans, that early in the year 1517 Selim found himself within
sight of Cairo. The Mamelouks made an heroic resistance; protected
by their coats of mail they charged into the center of the Turkish
position, killing the vizier and ten generals. But here, as so often,
the superiority of the Turks in artillery decided the day, and Cairo
was taken after a prolonged and desperate struggle. Selim proclaimed
an amnesty in favor of the Mamelouks; 500 of them, trusting in the
conqueror’s promises, surrendered and were decapitated, and 50,000 of
the citizens of Cairo were massacred. Touman, who led the Egyptian
forces, was finally taken and hanged.
Egypt was allowed to retain its ancient organization, with its
irregular force, the Mamelouks, and its twenty-four Begs as military
commanderies; but the direction of the government was placed in the
hands of the Ottoman Pasha. With the possession of Egypt Selim became
lord of Yemen, its dependency, and so exercised actual control over
the holy places of the Moslem faith. At Cairo he had found a sheik,
an obscure and neglected personage, called Elmo-stansir-bi-illah, who
was reputed to be in the direct line of descent from the second branch
of the Abbasides Khalifs. Selim kept him in confinement until, on the
promise of securing his liberty, and for a small money payment and a
pension, he agreed to transfer to the Turkish ruler all his claims to
the Khalifate.
Selim’s victories made a great impression. Venice, whose commercial
interests were affected, sent ambassadors to Cairo to arrange for
paying the tribute that was due to the Sultan of Egypt for the island
of Cyprus. Hungary asked to have the truce prolonged between the two
powers, and the Shah of Persia sent gifts and congratulations. Selim
died on September 22, 1520, while he was preparing for an expedition
against the island of Rhodes. He was succeeded by his only son,
Souliman, a ruler whose long reign, from 1520 to 1566, makes him a
contemporary of the great European leaders of the sixteenth century,
a fact which Paul Veronese recognized when he placed him in his
celebrated painting, “The Marriage at Cana,” along with the chief
sovereigns of the day.
As the lines of expansion in the East and in Africa had been closed by
the remarkable achievements of Selim, Souliman’s hands were free to
take up the traditional line of aggressive progress of Turkish power.
Hungary was attacked on the ground that the payment of tribute was
refused. In 1521, after two important battles, Belgrade was besieged
by the Sultan; the fate of the city was decided by the defection of
its Servian and Bulgarian allies. Twenty assaults were made, and there
were only 400 able-bodied men in the garrison, when a mutiny among the
inhabitants forced the town to capitulate on August 29, 1521.
The conquest of Rhodes, the center of Christian resistance in the East,
was now not long delayed. A large navy of 200 vessels appeared off the
island with a summons to the grand master, Villiers de l’lsle Adam, to
surrender. Souliman had collected an army of 100,000 men to undertake
the siege, but the defenders were not terrified. Every assault made
on the great bastions of the citadel caused enormous losses among the
Turks; but their prolonged artillery fire and the new supplies of
men, drawn constantly from Asia, showed the mere handful of defenders
that their struggle could have only one outcome. In December, 1522,
the island capitulated on terms that were favorable to the heroic
defenders; even the Sultan appreciated the tragedy, for he is recorded
to have said to his favorite Ibrahim, that he was loath to force this
Christian commander, in his old age, to leave his house and his goods.
[Illustration: SULEYMAN THE MAGNIFICENT
(In Youth.)]