the black death in early ottoman territories - Bilkent University

Ottoman ruler and his conquests, but not on society as a whole. Large-scale death
of their subjects did not fit into a narrative describing the deeds of the Ottoman
ruling class. Death was ubiquitous through war, famine, and other diseases - an
indescernible background noice.The only way for an outbreak to gain narrative
importance was through its link with other events: the departure of the ruler for the
yayla or the death of prominent members of society. As for the last, it is
noteworthy that for the two outbreaks wich registered individual deaths, the
victims were persons who were in fact prisoners 99 , namely Karasıoğlu and
Murad`s brothers Yusuf and Mahmud. The mentioning of their death seems done
apogetically: it was neither by order of the Ottoman ruler, nor for want of care that
they died. Thus, the fact that one outbreak is recorded and another goes unnoticed
is more related to its narrative value, than to its severity. This also explains why
famine never is mentioned in the chronicles: it basically kills the poor, never the
rich and causes no material damage. Great fires and earthquakes, on the other
hand, are mentioned, for they always cause destruction of walls, palaces,
hammams, even whole cities. The narrative value also explains why no death of
members of the Ottoman dynasty would ever be registered as plague. A death
caused by plague was no heroic death in the eyes of the Ottomans. 100 Finally,
although plague in the ranks of the enemy might have given the Ottomans military
advantage during siege or battle, there would be no reason to emphasize this fact in
an epic chronology.
99 Of course, there were also the other notables that died in the 1429 outbreak.
100 See also the discussion of Selim's death on pages 54-57 .
28