Ottoman DHEs

[Chamboozer]

A lot of Ottoman Dynamic Historical Events don't align very well with actual history, or seem to reflect some sort of Wikipediaization of it. Here I'll look at a few of them in turn. I'll also write up some alternatives and suggest them later, but for now this post is going to be big enough as it is. All pokes at Paradox are in jest, I know they're all not historians and can't be expected to keep everything factually correct and unbiased.

Enderun Academy

Enderun Academy was established by Mehmed II in Constantinople. Promising devsirmes (often kidnapped Christian children from the Balkans) and sons of prominent Ottoman officials were trained in literature, theology, engineering, mathematics etc. at Enderun, preparing them for government service as civil servants and janissaries. The janissaries became rivals to the landed Timariot sipahi soldiers that made up the bulk of the Ottoman army, and tensions were inevitable between the two classes."

• "Found the Enderun"
• "Expand the Timariot system instead"

A few things here - "devşirme" should be spelled "devshirme" in English if the "ş" letter can't be used. Sons of prominent Ottoman officials weren't trained in the palace school. They could enter palace service through the Muteferrika corps but that's not the same as it didn't entail being trained in the Enderun school. It should say "The Enderun" in all instances, "Enderun" meant "interior", i.e. the Palace interior, thus it wasn't a proper name on its own and needs to be preceded by the definite article. Also the "Janissary-Sipahi rivalry" was a major feature of Ottoman history, but it wasn't between the former and the landed cavalry, but with the imperial household "Kapıkulu" cavalry, who were not timariots. The event is, in any case, presenting the player with strange dichotomy, after all Mehmed II in reality both established the Palace system and expanded the timariot system during his reign.

Persians take advantage of Ottoman instability

The Spahi revolts in Eastern Anatolia encouraged the Persian Shah to seek revenge for the humiliating losses incurred by Murad III. War broke out yet again in 1603.

There were no sipahi* revolts in Eastern Anatolia in 1603, however there was a revolt of the kapıkulu sipahis in Istanbul, and there were rebellions in Anatolia by the Celalis - armed bands of footsoldiers with firearms, usually former mercenaries or any common person who felt like his life was going nowhere. The text of this event would be fine if "Sipahi revolts" were changed to "instability" or "Celali Rebellions".

Cem Sultan's Rebellion

Cem Sultan, the governor of Karaman and Konya rebelled against his older brother Sultan Bayezid II upon the death of their father. However, Bayezid had broader support in court and Cem was ultimately defeated. He fled to Rhodes, where he remained a captive of the Knights of St. John until his death in 1494.

Can't really say he "rebelled", more like both brothers were forced into fighting one another due to the circumstances. Cem also did not remain a captive on Rhodes until his death, he was taken to France and later became a captive of the Pope in Rome. Lastly, he actually died in 1495 while in the custody of Charles VIII of France.

Mamluk Uprising

The treacherous governor of the newly conquered Mamluk Egypt, Canbirdi Ghazeli, rose up in rebellion against the Ottomans hoping to re-establish the Mamluk state under his own leadership.

Janbirdi al-Ghazali was the governor of Damascus, not Egypt. There was a revolt in Egypt, but that was under Haın Ahmed Paşa who was not a former Mamluk.

The Great Legal Reform

Sultan Süleyman I became known as Kanuni - Lawgiver - to his own people thanks to his huge legal reforms and just rule. By codifying the secular laws, 'kanun', he lessened the importance of the rigid Muslim Shari'ah laws.

This is by far the worst of the lot. The entire idea behind Süleyman and Ebussuud Efendi's law reforms was bringing Ottoman Kanun in line with Sharia and harmonizing the former with the latter. In other words, dramatically increasing the importance of Sharia law.

Celali Uprising

In 1598 a sekban leader, Karayazici Abdülhalim, united the dissatisfied groups in Anatolia, forcing the towns to pay tribute and dominating the Sivas and Dulkadir provinces in central Anatolia. When Ottoman forces were sent against them the Celalis withdrew to Urfa in southeastern Anatolia, making it the center of resistance. Karayazici rejected offers of governorships in Anatolia and died in 1602. His brother Deli Hasan then seized Kutahya, in western Anatolia, but later he and his followers were won over by grants of governorships. The unrest, however, continued under the leadership of Janbuladoglu in Aleppo and Yusuf Pasa and Kalenderoglu in western Anatolia. They were finally suppressed by the grand vizier Kuyucu Murad Pasha, who by 1610 had eliminated a large number of Celalis.

Karayazıcı didn't reject governorships in Anatolia, he accepted the offer of the Sancakbeyilik of Amasya in 1600 and then used his newfound position to continue his attacks. This is actually the most interesting aspect of the Celali Rebellions - nearly all of them simply desired to be entered into the Ottoman military system.

Kösem Sultana

Ahmed I married a beautiful Greek slave girl who would prove a very mixed blessing to the people of the Ottoman Empire. Kösem Sultana ruled her husband as she would rule no less than four of his successors - with an iron grip. Kösem was the real power behind the throne, and although she was a very able ruler, she was not a very popular one.

The phrasing of this event seems to hint at the awkward orientalism and sexism of the "Sultanate of Women" concept. Kösem Sultan was a source of stability in an era of factionalism. I don't think it's quite fair to say "mixed blessing" and "iron grip" as though that's not been true for every other ruler. Makes it sound like Paradox is trying to discredit her - but I know that this is probably just taken from the old histories. Also, who are these four successors that she supposedly ruled with an iron grip? She was regent for Murad IV and Ibrahim I, but the other sultans who ruled before and after them were not dominated by her by any means, although she still maintained degrees of influence. Lastly, it's just "Sultan", not "Sultana", Ottomans didn't utilize this feminine form for the females in their dynasty.

Celali Uprising

In 1658 Central Anatolia once again rose up in revolt under a new breed of Jelalis. Local concessions in power and taxes were again at stake.

The revolts of 1658 were not related to the Celalis and weren't referred to as such, nor were they about mere "local" concessions in power and taxes. It was a revolt by numerous Pashas and cavalrymen against the authoritarian and centralizing tendencies of Köprülü Mehmed Pasha's grand vezirate. They were demanding his removal from power, and thus a dramatic change in central government, not local issues.

The Murder of Kösem

Old Kösem Sultana, still meddling in high politics, probably attempted to have her grandson Mehmed IV killed, but was herself strangled by men in the entourage of her daughter-in-law, Turhan Sultan. Although the old conniving witch was hardly missed by most, she still had loyal supporters among the Janissaries, who were outraged by her murder.

Here's more of the inappropriate language, "meddling in high politics". I guess Paradox doesn't think that this is the proper place for women. The reality is that Kösem Sultan was very deeply entrenched in Ottoman politics as the matriarch of the dynasty and she was an integral part of the factional balance in the central government. She wasn't meddling, she could have said "I am the State" just as much as Louis XIV could have, hence the very real outrage at her murder. It's not as though the Valide Sultan's role in politics ended with her death, it just meant that the young Mehmed IV's mother Turhan Hatice Sultan took over her role at the head of the regency. I have to assume Paradox is just joking or emulating the opposition with the "conniving witch" part, though.

The Treaty of Kasr-i Sirin

The Treaty of Kasr-i Sirin, signed between the Ottoman Empire and Persia in 1635, established borders that have changed little to this day. Hostilities between the two great empires decreased remarkably following the treaty as their relations steadily improved until 1722 when war broke out again. However, the treaty was dusted off and renewed in 1747.

Just a minor note, it should be "Shirin" and it was in 1639, not 1635.

Fate of the Patriarchate

Your Excellency, with Constantinople in our hands, we must decide the fate of the Christian Patricarch. There are many Christians still in the city, it might be prudent to show some leniency. This time...

• "Allow the Patriarchate to exist and keep the current Patriarch", -50 piety
• "Close down the Patriarchate and confiscate its properties", +50 piety

Here's an example of another odd and unfortunate trend in the events all Muslim countries get - the notion that persecuting Christians is a good thing in Islam and should give "piety". The issue of the Patriarch is an important one historically, but I think it should instead be changed to choosing between leaving it autonomous (+0.5 to heathen tolerance) or collecting taxes from it (+5% national tax modifier).

The Decentralizing Effect of the Provincial System

The provincial governors, or 'Beys', were powerful men, usually ambitious, and not always loyal. Although the Ottoman Empire did not have a noble class or a feudal system like most European nations, the Beys were a close equivalent with many of the same intrinsic problems. The Beys were reluctant to give up their powers and usually demanded even more concessions... even to the point of outright independence.\n\nThe Bey of [Root.GetName] is now demanding more power."

The beys weren't really a close equivalent to the European feudal system, nor did they have many of the same problems, as Machiavelli recognized - along with historians of today. The Ottomans rotated their governors constantly and they almost never refused to give up their powers because they believed that they had more to gain by working within the Ottoman system than by fighting against it. It was only in the late 18th Century when local notables (sing. ayan) had collected enough power in a region to be able to challenge the central government that provincialism became a problem. But these were not the same as the "Beys" of the 15th, 16th, and 17th Centuries.

The Devsirme System

Up until 1648, the Janissaries were recruited through the devsirme system. Non-Turkish children, especially Christians from the Balkans, were sent to live with Turkish families to learn Turkish and the rules of Islam before being enrolled in military schools. The Janissaries were neither free men nor slaves, they were expected to convert to Islam and to live in celibate, and were trained under strict discipline.

What happened in the year 1648 specifically that was so significant to change all of this? Janissaries had been coming from non-Devshirme backgrounds for a long time by that point (as another DHE even recognizes), and the devshirme was hardly in use that late in the 17th Century, although it did continue periodically all the way until the first decade of the 18th.

Increased Recruiting

At the end of the 16th century, Sultan Murad III started to allow enrollment with the Janissaries outside of the devsirme system, mostly of Muslim origin. The lowered standard of recruits led to a decline in quality.

Muslims are inherently worse soldiers than Christians, apparently. People of different origin entering the corps led to a change in its ethos, but not really a distinguishable decline in quality, at least not in a way that can be declared in such matter-of-fact terms.

Janissary Decadence

In the early 17th century the Janissaries had become so prestigious and influential that they dominated the government. Aware of their own importance they also began to desire a better life. The long slide into decadence had started...

In the early 21st Century, Paradox Interactive had become so prestigious and influential that they dominated the historical education of computer gamers. Aware of their own importance they also began to write events about Ottoman history. The long slide into orientalist tropes and cliches had started...

The Threat of the Janissaries

By 1622, the Janissaries had become a serious threat to the stability of the Ottoman Empire. Through greed and indiscipline they had lost much of their former fighting power and were now losing against modern European armies.

You're about 150 years too early with this one, Paradox.

Anyone notice weird DHE's from other countries?

 

[wingzero890]

In the early 21st Century, Paradox Interactive had become so prestigious and influential that they dominated the historical education of computer gamers. Aware of their own importance they also began to write events about Ottoman history. The long slide into orientalist tropes and cliches had started...

made me lol

 

[Bloodyfield]

Thanks for the interesting read. The only point I really knew about was the one with the piety versus tolerance of heathens. It was never considered as a lack of piety to accept christians or jews in Islamic empires. In fact, even the first empire under Muhammad and the khalifs that followed him set the path of acceptance of christians and jews to some extend. I feel like the common picture of the mindset of a violent, militant islamist is being understood as the general view of islamic rulers in the past. Although I am not a specialist and therefore quite careful when talking about these things.

 

[FrosT37]

I hope Paradox reads this thread.

 

[DevastatingTech]

Magnificient thread, brother; but; how do you expect historical reality from EU4, LoL. History is ruined in that game already.

 

[Aquilah]

While Paradox may have a case about decadence events concerning the Janissaries, there are even more mistakes than what were mentioned in the thread.

For a while, I actually thought they had done some serious research to make me go skeptical about what I know. Eventually, I realized they just didn't put in the effort.

 

[Legend92]

also adding hungary hasburg event missions will be good too

 

[User29]

The one about the lawgiver made me laugh and facepalm xD

 

[Dorevai]

The 150 years too early thing is what always gets me. Anytime you load up the game prior to 1670 or so, the turks are kicking butt in tech, but if you actually play the game, the AI turks fall behind in tech at or before the protestant reformation, virtually the beginning of the game. In my custom personal mod of the game I changed the ottoman group to be the same tech as western speed and some tolerance heathen bonuses so they can push and hold western land with greater ease.

 

[Legend92]

The 150 years too early thing is what always gets me. Anytime you load up the game prior to 1670 or so, the turks are kicking butt in tech, but if you actually play the game, the AI turks fall behind in tech at or before the protestant reformation, virtually the beginning of the game. In my custom personal mod of the game I changed the ottoman group to be the same tech as western speed and some tolerance heathen bonuses so they can push and hold western land with greater ease.

agree with you, before 1700 ottomans should have no tech penalty, after 1700 some event add to ottomans tech penalty better

 

[unmerged(332172)]

agree with you, before 1700 ottomans should have no tech penalty, after 1700 some event add to ottomans tech penalty better

I agree, the Ottomans should start with Western tech but in the mid 17th century an event should fire that would penalize the Ottomans to "Ottoman tech". This would be an interesting test, and could perhaps be even used for the Mughals, and Safavid Empires.

 

[Straigthtsilver]

You made a lot of good points Chamboozer, bravo. Hopefully Paradox sees this and decides to implement some changes.

 

[Insentient]

Ottomans really need some kind of faction system. That system if played well, should make Ottomans really strong but events and other mechanics should drag them down, weaken them and even be a great threat to them at times as well. Concepts like "Ottoman Tech" or poorly written DHE's are half measures at best. If overhauled, Ottomans would not only become the threat they were and add to the atmosphere of the single player campaign, but would be a very interesting and exciting country to play as, as well.

 

[grisamentum]

Thank you, OP.

I think posts like yours are extremely valuable because they show how shallow the "historical" aspect of EU4 is.

 

[yerm]

I agree, the Ottomans should start with Western tech but in the mid 17th century an event should fire that would penalize the Ottomans to "Ottoman tech". This would be an interesting test, and could perhaps be even used for the Mughals, and Safavid Empires.

It's true Ottomans should not be penalized earlier but should have it hard later, but the problem is honestly far worse in so many other places, that it would probably be better to overhaul tech penalties rather than just changing this one nation.

Many tech groups would be better with a scaling tech penalty where it starts off perhaps at 100%, but goes up by a percent or more each tech - for example, a 1.5% penalty would mean they're paying 115% for tech 10, and 130% for tech 20, rather than a flat 125% always. It's also a bit strange that every tech group pays an identical price for ideas, despite the tech malus largely being based on more of what ideas represented - failures to innovative, modernize, specialize and what have you -and not an actual lack of technological achievement. China is an example of a tech group that I think would benefit from having a significantly lower tech malus (arguably none) at the start, but a significant penalty to ideas and end-game tech costs.

The one glaring problem with starting in one tech group and being switched later (good candidates being Ottomans and Poland being penalized late-game) is that tech groups also relate to unit choice.

 

[birincikalite]

Thanks, brilliant. It's been at least 3 Ottoman threads like this I guess, hope Paradox will soon realize too though your thread is a lot more helpful than "Buff Ottomans" threads.


/// Also that tech scaling idea seems pretty cool. Historically I'd doubt Western tech countries were researching faster than most Muslim nations by 1444 ... Instead they should start weaker but after reformation, they should quickly get the lead and after 1699 the Ottomans getting penalty on tech etc.