Suleiman the magnificent’s dad had a LOT of problems, but he set his country up for success by killing all of suleiman’s brothers and leaving his most capable heir to take the throne. This obviously paid great dividends. Suleiman on the other hand killed his most capable son and left the country to his drunk failure of a son because he was paranoid
The ottoman succession scheme could be very beneficial to the country when it was run “right”, picking the best heir that didn’t always have to be the oldest, but would lead to civil war or a breakdown of power if not administered correctly
npaakp34 on
That’s in my opinion a major reason why Europe was able to get ahead of the rest of the world, the emerging practice of giving everything to the firtborn son, which was also something put on paper and not just a spoken rule, significantly lessened infighting for the various realms of Europe.
That’s not to say there was no infighting or succession crisis, there definitely were, but it was to a lesser extent and the would-be usurpers had a massively smaller support base.
Circles-of-the-World on
Byzantines: “Alright, who’s ready for a free for all?!”
Thuyue on
So the Ottomans did it another way? OP care to elaborate?
VenitianBastard on
No wonder half of Europe fucking hated them
TerminalJammer on
Fun fact: this is exactly how European monarchs did it for a very long time.
LordKristof on
Like european monarchs did not went full on bloodbath whenever the prize was good enough.
Maiming, sending people into monasteries, bribing and the occasional fratricide all happened.
The idea that Primogeniture was an ultimate solution without flaws is completly false. Many times the ruling monarch needed to basically bribe their other kids to at least chill out until he dies then they can tear things into pieces.
belabacsijolvan on
monarchy:
giving serious incentive to kill children since 1.5M BCE
DespondentEyes on
This practice did help to keep the empire together. Divisions between sons upon a ruler’s death, like was customary in the early dark ages in Europe, only served to divide the country and weaken authorative power.
11 Comments
The Mughals, too, post Akbar.
Suleiman the magnificent’s dad had a LOT of problems, but he set his country up for success by killing all of suleiman’s brothers and leaving his most capable heir to take the throne. This obviously paid great dividends. Suleiman on the other hand killed his most capable son and left the country to his drunk failure of a son because he was paranoid
The ottoman succession scheme could be very beneficial to the country when it was run “right”, picking the best heir that didn’t always have to be the oldest, but would lead to civil war or a breakdown of power if not administered correctly
That’s in my opinion a major reason why Europe was able to get ahead of the rest of the world, the emerging practice of giving everything to the firtborn son, which was also something put on paper and not just a spoken rule, significantly lessened infighting for the various realms of Europe.
That’s not to say there was no infighting or succession crisis, there definitely were, but it was to a lesser extent and the would-be usurpers had a massively smaller support base.
Byzantines: “Alright, who’s ready for a free for all?!”
So the Ottomans did it another way? OP care to elaborate?
No wonder half of Europe fucking hated them
Fun fact: this is exactly how European monarchs did it for a very long time.
Like european monarchs did not went full on bloodbath whenever the prize was good enough.
Maiming, sending people into monasteries, bribing and the occasional fratricide all happened.
The idea that Primogeniture was an ultimate solution without flaws is completly false. Many times the ruling monarch needed to basically bribe their other kids to at least chill out until he dies then they can tear things into pieces.
monarchy:
giving serious incentive to kill children since 1.5M BCE
This practice did help to keep the empire together. Divisions between sons upon a ruler’s death, like was customary in the early dark ages in Europe, only served to divide the country and weaken authorative power.
Mehmed the Conqueror, truly the Slimmest.