03.07.2013 Views

TURKOMANS BETWEEN TWO EMPIRES: THE ... - Bilkent University

TURKOMANS BETWEEN TWO EMPIRES: THE ... - Bilkent University

TURKOMANS BETWEEN TWO EMPIRES: THE ... - Bilkent University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

that there were a great number of Safavid disciples, who liked to amuse their nefs (or to<br />

fulfill even the immoral desires of their soul) and were inclined to attack defenseless<br />

(miskin) people in several regions of Anatolia. Idrīs indicates a very interesting point<br />

here that because of the qizilbash groups in Anatolia, serious discords (fitne) appeared<br />

within the imperial army. 1702 Unfortunately he gives no further detail about this discord.<br />

However, his account makes the point clear that there were certain qizilbash<br />

sympathizers in the Ottoman army, most probably among the sipāhis. 1703<br />

Furthermore, the plunder and banditry of the qizilbashes also created a serious<br />

discontent especially among the Sunni subjects of the empire. Thus, the Sunni<br />

population in Anatolia was in great expectation from Sultan Selim when he returned to<br />

Istanbul as the ninth Ottoman sultan. I have already discussed how he won the public<br />

opinion of the Sunni population by his successfully applied policy since his movement<br />

from Trabzon. When he returned to Topkapı Palace, there was a public expectation from<br />

him to resolve two principal problems: the corruption within the askerī classes, which<br />

increased the burden on the shoulders of re’āya, and the qizilbash trouble. Indeed, the<br />

second problem was not easy to settle in a short time if one would desire a permanent<br />

solution. However, Sultan Selim believed in a short-cut ‘solution’, which was indeed by<br />

no means a solution for the benefit of the society but would leave an inheritance of<br />

irreversible socio-religious cleavage within Anatolian population. He preferred to use<br />

the sword to deal with this complicated knot instead of untying it; namely he attempted<br />

to extirpate the society who caused ‘problem’ with cruel and harsh methods. Indeed,<br />

what he did to his Muslim subjects was questionable for a Muslim ruler. It must be the<br />

1702 IDRS, p. 122.<br />

1703 The leading role of the provincial timar-holding sipāhis in Şahkulu Revolt is already delineated.<br />

503

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!