Chapter II: Front Matter (2)

It is one of the marvels of history that the Ottoman empire,
broken and dismembered by Timour, recovered its vigor and
re-entered upon a long career. After the fall of Bajazet,
three fragments of his dominions were held by three of his
surviving sons, while other portions were transferred by
Timour to princes of the old Seljuk house. Civil war broke out
between the brothers of the Ottoman race; it resulted in the
triumph of Mahomet, the youngest (A. D. 1413), who reunited a
large part of the dominions of his father. He reigned but
eight years, which were years of peace for the Greeks, with
whom Mahomet maintained a friendly intercourse. His son,
Amurath II., was provoked to renew the state of war, and a
formidable attack upon Constantinople was made in August,
1422. The first assault failed, and disturbances at home
recalled Amurath before he could repeat it. The Roman capital
was reprieved for thirty years; but its trembling emperor paid
tribute to the sultan and yielded most of the few cities that
remained to him outside of his capital. The Ottoman power had
become threatening again in Europe, and Servians, Bosnians,
Albanians, Wallachians, Hungarians, and Poles now struck hands
together in a combination, once more, to oppose it. "A severe
struggle followed, which, after threatening the utter
expulsion of the house of Othman from Europe, confirmed for
centuries its dominion in that continent, and wrought the
heavier subjugation of those who were then seeking to release
themselves from its superiority. In 1442 Amurath was repulsed
from Belgrade; and his generals, who were besieging
Hermanstadt, in Transylvania, met with a still more disastrous
reverse. It was at Hermanstadt that the renowned Hunyades
first appeared in the wars between the Hungarians and the
Turks. He was the illegitimate son of Sigismond, King of
Hungary, and the fair Elizabeth Morsiney. In his early youth
he gained distinction in the wars of Italy; and Comines, in
his memoirs, celebrates him under the name of the White Knight
of Wallachia. After some campaigns in Western Christendom,
Hunyades returned to protect his native country against the
Ottomans." At Hermanstadt, and again at Vasag, Hunyades
defeated the Turks with great slaughter and rivalled them in
the ferocity with which his prisoners were treated. His fame
now gave a great impulse to the Crusade against the Turks
which Pope Eugenius had preached, and drew volunteers to his
standard from all the nations of the West. In 1443, Hunyades
led a splendid and powerful army across the Danube near
Semendra, drove the Turks beyond the Balkans, forced the
passage of the mountains with a boldness and a skill that is
compared with the exploits of Hannibal and Napoleon, and
extorted from the Sultan a treaty (of Szegeddin, July 12,
1444) which rescued a large Christian territory from the
Moslem yoke. "The Sultan resigned all claims upon Servia and
recognised George Brankovich as its independent sovereign.
Wallachia was given up to Hungary." But the peace which this
treaty secured was brief; Christian perfidy destroyed it, and
the penalty was paid by whole centuries of suffering and shame
for the Christians of the Danubian states. "Within a month
from the signature of the treaty of Szegeddin the Pope and the
Greek Emperor had persuaded the King of Hungary and his
councillors to take an oath to break the oath which had been
pledged to the Sultan. They represented that the confessed
weakness of the Ottomans, and the retirement of Amurath [who
had placed his son Mahomet on the throne and withdrawn from
the cares of sovereignty] to Asia, gave an opportunity for
eradicating the Turks from Europe which ought to be fully
employed. The Cardinal Julian [legate of the Pope] pacified
the conscientious misgivings which young King Ladislaus
expressed, by his spiritual authority in giving dispensation
and absolution in the Pope's name. … On the 1st of September,
the King, the legate, and Hunyades, marched against the
surprised and unprepared Turks with an army of 10,000 Poles
and Hungarians. The temerity which made them expect to destroy
the Turkish power in Europe with so slight a force was equal
to the dishonesty of their enterprise." They advanced through
Bulgaria to the Black Sea, and southward along its coast as
far as Varna, which they took. There they were called to
account. Amurath had resumed the sceptre, put himself at the
head of 40,000 of the best warriors of Islam and on the 10th
November he dashed them upon the Christian forces at Varna,
with the broken treaty borne like a banner at their head. His
victory was overwhelming. Cardinal Julian and the King of
Hungary were both among the slain. Hunyades fled with a little
remnant of followers and escaped to try fortune in other
fields. "This overthrow did not bring immediate ruin upon
Hungary, but it was fatal to the Sclavonic neighbours of the
Ottomans, who had joined the Hungarian King against them.
Servia and Bosnia were thoroughly reconquered by the
Mahometans; and the ruin of these Christian nations, which
adhered to the Greek Church, was accelerated by the religious
intolerance with which they were treated by their fellow
Christians of Hungary and Poland, who obeyed the Pope and
hated the Greek Church as heretical. … The bigotry of the
Church of Rome in preaching up a crusade against the sect of
the Patarenes, which was extensively spread in that country
[Bosnia], caused the speedy and complete annexation of an
important frontier province to the Ottoman Empire. Seventy
Bosnian fortresses are said to have opened their gates to the
Turks within eight days. The royal house of Bosnia was
annihilated, and many of her chief nobles embraced
Mahometanism to avoid a similar doom." After once more
attempting to escape from the throne, and being recalled by
domestic disturbances, Amurath reigned yet six years,
extending his dominions in the Peloponnesus, defeating once
more his old antagonist, Hunyades, who invaded Servia (1448),
but being successfully defied in Albania by the heroic
Scanderbeg. He died in 1451.

{3137}

_Sir E. S. Creasy,
History of the Ottoman Turks,
chapter 4._

ALSO IN:
_L. Ranke,
History of Servia,
chapter 2._

_E. Szabad,
Hungary,
part 1, chapters 3-4._

_A. Lamartine,
History of Turkey,
books 10-11._

TURKS: A. D. 1451-1481.
Conquest of Constantinople.
The Empire organized and perfected by Mahomet II.

Mahomet II., son of Amurath II., "finished the work of his
predecessors; he made the Ottoman power in Europe what it has
been ever since. He gave a systematic form to the customs of
his house and to the dominion which he had won. His first act
was the murder of his infant brother, and he made the murder
of brothers a standing law of his Empire. He overthrew the
last remnants of independent Roman rule, of independent Greek
nationality, and he fixed the relations which the Greek part
of his subjects were to bear both towards their Turkish
masters and towards their Christian fellow-subjects. He made
the northern and western frontiers of his Empire nearly what
they still remain. The Ottoman Empire, in short, as our age
has to deal with it, is, before all things, the work of
Mahomet the Conqueror. The prince whose throne was fixed in
the New Rome held altogether another place from even the
mightiest of his predecessors. Mahomet had reigned two years,
he had lived twenty-three, on the memorable day, May 29th
1453, when the Turks entered the city of the Cæsars and when
the last Emperor, Constantine, died in the breach. …

See CONSTANTINOPLE: A. D. 1453.

And now that the Imperial city was at last taken, Mahomet
seemed to make it his policy both to gather in whatever
remained unconquered, and to bring most of the states which
had hitherto been tributary under his direct rule. Greece
itself, though it had been often ravaged by the Turks, had not
been added to their dominions. The Emperors had, in the very
last days of the Empire before the fall of Constantinople,
recovered all Peloponnesos, except some points which were held
by Venice. Frank Dukes also reigned at Athens, and another
small duchy lingered on in the islands of Leukas and
Kephallenia and on the coasts of Akarnania. The Turkish
conquest of the mainland, again saving the Venetian points,
was completed by the year 1460, but the two western islands
were not taken until 1479. Euboia was conquered in 1471. … The
Empire of Trebizond was conquered in 1461, and the island of
Lesbos or Mitylene in 1462. There was now no independent Greek
state left. Crete, Corfu, and some smaller islands and points
of coast, were held by Venice, and some of the islands of the
Ægean were still ruled by Frank princes and by the Knights of
Saint John. But, after the fall of Trebizond, there was no
longer any independent Greek state anywhere, and the part of
the Greek nation which was under Christian rulers of any kind
was now far smaller than the part which was under the Turk.
While the Greeks were thus wholly subdued, the Slaves fared no
better. In 1459 Servia was reduced from a tributary
principality to an Ottoman province, and six years later
Bosnia was annexed also. … One little fragment of the great
Slavonic power in those lands alone remained. The little
district of Zeta, a part of the Servian kingdom, was never
fully conquered by the Turks. One part of it, the mountain
district called Tsernagora or Montenegro, has kept its
independence to our times. Standing as an outpost of freedom
and Christendom amid surrounding bondage, the Black Mountain
has been often attacked, it has been several times overrun,
but it has never been conquered. … To the south of them, the
Christian Albanians held out for a long time under their
famous chief George Castriot or Scanderbeg. After his death in
1459, they also came under the yoke. These conquests of
Mahomet gave the Ottoman dominion in Europe nearly the same
extent which it has now. His victories had been great, but
they were balanced by some defeats. The conquest of Servia and
Bosnia opened the way to endless inroads into Hungary,
South-eastern Germany and North-eastern Italy. But as yet
these lands were merely ravaged, and the Turkish power met
with some reverses. In 1456 Belgrade was saved by the last
victory of Huniades [see HUNGARY: A. D. 1442-1458], and this
time Mahomet the Conqueror had to flee. In another part of
Europe, if in those days it is to be counted for Europe,
Mahomet won the Genoese possessions in the peninsula of Crimea
[A. D. 1475], and the Tartar Khans who ruled in that peninsula
and the neighbouring lands became vassals of the Sultan. … The
last years of Mahomet's reign were marked by a great failure
and a great success. He failed to take Rhodes [A. D. 1480],
which belonged to the Knights of Saint John; but his troops
suddenly seized on Otranto in Southern Italy. Had this post
been kept, Italy might have fallen as well as Greece; but the
Conqueror died the next year, and Otranto was won back."

_E. A. Freeman,
The Ottoman Power in Europe,
chapter 4._

ALSO IN:
_A. Lamartine,
History of Turkey,
books 12-13._

_Sir E. S. Creasy,
History of the Ottoman Turks,
chapters 5-6._

_E. Gibbon,
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 68._

See, also, ITALY: A. D. 1447-1480.

TURKS: A. D. 1454-1479.
Treaty with Venice, followed by war.

See GREECE: A. D. 1454-1479.

TURKS: A. D. 1479.
Defeat at Kenyer-Mesö by the Hungarians and Wallachians.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1471-1487.

TURKS: A. D. 1481-1520.
The sad story of Prince Jem and the Christians.
Massacre of the Shiites.
Selim's conquests in Persia, Syria and Egypt.
The Sultan becomes the successor of the Khalifs,
the chief of Islam.

"The long reign of Bayezid [or Bajazet] II. (1481-1512) which
surpassed that of his father and grandfather, so that the
three together nearly completed a century, was marked by a
general lethargy and incapacity on the part of the Turkish
Government. … Family dissensions were indeed the leading
incidents of Bayezid's reign, and for many years he was kept
in a state of anxious uncertainty by the ingenious intrigues
of the Christian Powers concerning the custody of his brother,
the unfortunate Prince Jem. The adventures of Prince Jem (the
name is short for Jemshid, but in Europe it has been written
Zizim) cast a very unpleasant light upon the honour of the
Christians of his time, and especially upon the Knights of
Rhodes. Of the two sons of Mohammed II. Jem was undoubtedly
the one who was by nature fitted to be his successor. … Jem
however, was not the first to hear of his father's death, and
a year's warfare against his brother ended in his own defeat.
{3138}
The younger prince then sought refuge with the Knights of
Rhodes, who promised to receive him hospitably, and to find
him a way to Europe, where he intended to renew his opposition
to his brother's authority. D'Aubusson, the Grand Master of
Rhodes, was too astute a diplomatist to sacrifice the solid
gains that he perceived would accrue to his Order for the sake
of a few paltry twinges of conscience; and he had no sooner
made sure of Prince Jem's person, and induced him to sign a
treaty, by which, in the event of his coming to the throne,
the Order was to reap many sterling advantages, than he
ingeniously opened negotiations with Sultan Bayezid, with a
view to ascertain how much gold that sovereign was willing to
pay for the safe custody of his refractory brother. It is only
fair to say that Bayezid, who had no particle of cruelty in
his nature, did all he could to come to terms with Jem. … All
negotiation and compromise having proved ineffectual, he
listened to the proposals of the crafty Grand Master, and
finally agreed to pay him 45,000 ducats a year, so long as he
kept Jem under his surveillance. The Knights of St. John
possessed many commanderies, and the one they now selected for
Jem's entertainment was at Nice, in the south of France. In
1482 he arrived there, wholly unconscious of the plots that
were being woven about him. … On one pretext or another the
knights contrived to keep their prisoner at Nice for several
months, and then transferred him to Rousillon, thence to Puy,
and next to Sassenage, where the monotonies of captivity were
relieved by the delights of love, which he shared with the
daughter of the commandant, the beautiful Philipine Hélène,
his lawful spouse being fortunately away in Egypt. Meanwhile
Grand Master D'Aubusson was driving a handsome trade in his
capacity of jailor. All the potentates of Europe were anxious
to obtain possession of the claimant to the Ottoman throne,
and were ready to pay large sums in hard cash to enjoy the
privilege of using this specially dangerous instrument against
the Sultan's peace. D'Aubusson was not averse to taking the
money, but he did not wish to give up his captive; and his
knightly honour felt no smirch in taking 20,000 ducats from
Jem's desolate wife (who probably had not heard of the fair
Hélène) as the price of her husband's release, while he held
him all the tighter. Of such chivalrous stuff were made the
famous knights of Rhodes; and of such men as D'Aubusson the
Church made cardinals! A new influence now appeared upon the
scene of Jem's captivity. Charles VIII. of France considered
that the Grand Master had made enough profit out of the
unlucky prince, and the king resolved to work the oracle
himself. His plan was to restore Jem to a nominal sultanate by
the aid of Matthias Corvinus, Ferdinand of Naples, and the
Pope. He took Jem out of the hands of the knights, and
transferred him to the custody of Innocent VIII., who kindly
consented to take care of the prince for the sum of 40,000
ducats a year, to be paid by his grateful brother at
Constantinople." Innocent's successor, the terrible Borgia,
Alexander VI., unsatisfied with this liberal allowance, opened
negotiations with Constantinople looking to the payment of
some heavy lump sum for summary riddance of poor Jem. But the
sinister bargain was interrupted by Charles VIII. of France,
who invaded Italy at this juncture, passed through Rome, and
took the captive prince in his train when he went on to
Naples. Jem died on the way, and few have doubted that Pope
Alexander poisoned him, as he had poisoned many before. "The
curious conclusion one draws from the whole melancholy tale
is, that there was not apparently a single honest prince in
Christendom to take compassion upon the captive." In 1512
Bayezid was deposed by his son Selim, and did not long survive
the humiliation. To avoid troubles of the Prince Jem
character, Selim slew all his brothers and nephews, eleven in
number, making a family solitude around the throne. Then he
prepared himself for foreign conquest by exterminating the
sometimes troublesome sect of the Shias, or Shiites, in his
dominions. "A carefully organized system of detectives, whom
Selim distributed throughout his Asiatic provinces, revealed
the fact that the number of the heretical sect reached the
alarming total of 70,000. Selim … secretly massed his troops
at spots where the heretics chiefly congregated, and at a
given signal 40,000 of them were massacred or imprisoned. …
Having got rid of the enemy within his gates, Selim now
proceeded to attack the head of the Shias, the great Shah
Ismail himself [the founder of the Sufi line of Persian
sovereigns, who had lately established his authority over the
provinces of Persia]. … Selim set forth with an army estimated
at over 140,000 men, 80,000 of which were cavalry. … After
weary and painful marching, the Ottomans forced Ismail to give
battle at Chaldiran [or Tabreez—see PERSIA: A. D. 1499-1887],"
and defeated him. "The victory of Chaldiran (1514) might have
been followed by the conquest of Persia, but the privations
which the soldiery had undergone had rendered them
unmanageable, and Selim was forced to content himself with the
annexation of the important provinces of Kurdistan and
Dyarbekr, which are still part of the Turkish Empire; and then
turned homewards, to prosecute other schemes of conquest. No
peace, however, was concluded between him and the Shah, and a
frontier war continued to be waged for many years. During the
campaign against Persia, the Turks had been kept in anxiety by
the presence on their flanks of the forces of the Mamluk
Sultans of Egypt and Syria, whose frontiers now marched with
the territory of the Ottomans." Turning his arms against the
Mamluks, "Selim set out in 1516 for Syria, and meeting the
Mamluk army on the field of Marj Dabik near Aleppo,
administered a terrible defeat, in which the aged Sultan
El-Ghuri was trampled to death. He found a brave successor in
Tuman Bey, but in the interval the Turks had mastered Syria
and were advancing to Gaza. Here the Mamluks made another
stand, but the generalship of Sinan Pasha was not to be
resisted any more than the preponderance of his forces. The
final battle was fought at Reydaniya in the neighbourhood of
Cairo, in January, 1517. … Twenty-five thousand Mamluks lay
stark upon the field, and the enemy occupied Cairo. There a
succession of street-fights took place." The perfidious
Turkish Sultan finally cheated the Mamluks into submission by
offering amnesty, and then put them to the sword, giving the
city up to massacre. "Tuman Bey, after some further
resistance, was captured and executed, and Egypt became a
Turkish province. … Sultan Selim returned to Constantinople in
1518, a much more dignified personage than he had set out.
{3139}
By the conquest of the Mamluk kingdom he had also succeeded to
their authority over the sacred cities of Arabia, Mekka and
Medina, and in recognition of this position, as well as of his
undoubted supremacy among Mohammedan monarchs, he received
from the last Abbaside Khalif, who kept a shadowy court at
Cairo, the inheritance of the great pontiffs of Baghdad. The
'fainéant' Khalif was induced to make over to the real
sovereign the spiritual authority which he still affected to
exercise, and with it the symbols of his office, the standard
and cloak of the Prophet Mohammed. Selim now became not only
the visible chief of the Mohammedan State throughout the wide
dominions subdued to his sway, but also the revered head of
the religion of Islam, wheresoever it was practised in its
orthodox form. The heretical Shias of Persia might reject his
claim, but in India, in all parts of Asia and Africa, where
the traditional Khalifate was recognized, the Ottoman Sultan
henceforth was the supreme head of the church, the successor
to the spiritual prestige of the long line of the Khalifs. How
far this new title commands the homage of the orthodox Moslem
world is a matter of dispute; but there can be no doubt that
it has always added, and still adds, a real and important
authority to the acts and proclamations of the Ottoman
Sultan." Selim died in 1520, and was succeeded by his son
Suleyman, or Solyman, who acquired the name of "the
Magnificent."

_S. Lane-Poole,
Story of Turkey,
chapters 8-9._

ALSO IN:
_A. de Lamartine,
History of Turkey,
books 15-18 (volume 2)._

_A. A. Paton,
History of the Egyptian Revolution,
chapter 5._

TURKS: A. D. 1498-1502.
War with the Venetians.

"During the first 17 years of Bajazet's reign, the peace
between the Venetians and the Porte, though occasionally
menaced, remained on the whole undisturbed. The Venetians
complained of the Turkish incursions; and the definitive
occupation of Montenegro, while the Porte, on its side, was
jealous because the Republic had reduced the Duke of Naxos to
dependence, and obtained possession of Cyprus (1489). At last,
in 1498, the Turks, after making great naval preparations,
suddenly arrested all the Venetian residents at
Constantinople, and in the following year seized Lepanto,
which surrendered without striking a blow (August 1499). Soon
after, a body of 10,000 Turks crossed the Isonzo, carrying
fire and desolation almost to the lagoons of Venice. In August
1500, Modon was taken by assault. … Navarino and Koron
surrendered soon after, but towards the close of the year the
Venetians were more successful. They captured Ægina,
devastated and partly occupied Mytilene, Tenedos, and
Samothrace, and with the help of a Spanish squadron, and 7,000
troops, under Gonsalvo de Cordova, reduced the island of
Cephalonia. For this service the grateful Venetians rewarded
Gonsalvo with a present of 500 tuns of Cretan wine, 60,000
pounds of cheese, 266 pounds of wrought silver, and the
honorary freedom of their Republic. In 1501 the Venetian fleet
was joined by a French, a Papal, and a Spanish squadron, but,
through a want of cordiality among the commanders, little was
effected. The Turks, however; had not made a better figure;
and the Porte, whose attention was at that time distracted by
the affairs of Persia, was evidently inclined for peace. The
disordered state of the Venetian finances, and the decay of
their commerce through the maritime discoveries of the
Portuguese, also disposed them to negociation; although the
sale of indulgences, granted to them by the Pope for this war,
is said to have brought more than 700 pounds of gold into
their exchequer. The war nevertheless continued through 1502,
and the Venetians were tolerably successful, having captured
many Turkish ships, and, with the assistance of the French,
taken the island of Sta. Maura. But at length a treaty was
signed, December 14th, by which Venice was allowed to hold
Cephalonia, but restored Sta. Maura, and permitted the Porte
to retain its conquests, including the three important
fortresses of Modon, Koron, and Navarino."

_T. H. Dyer,
History of Modern Europe,
book 1, chapter 6 (volume 1)._

TURKS: A. D. 1519.
The Sultan acquires sovereignty of Algiers and Tunis.

See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1516-1535.

TURKS: A. D. 1520.
Accession of Solyman I.

TURKS: A. D. 1521-1526.
Capture of Belgrade.
Great invasion of Hungary.
Overwhelming victory of Mohacs.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1487-1526.

TURKS: A. D. 1522.
Conquest of the isle of Rhodes.
Expulsion of the Knights of St. John.

See HOSPITALLERS OF ST. JOHN: A. D. 1522.

TURKS: A. D. 1526-1567.
The Sultan suzerain of Transylvania and master of Hungary.
Invasion of Austria and siege of Vienna.
Death of Solyman the Magnificent.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1526-1567.

TURKS: A. D. 1527.
Final subjugation of the Bosnians.

See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: 9-16TH CENTURIES.

TURKS: A. D. 1532-1553.
Frightful depredations along the coast of Southern Italy.

See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 1528-1570.

TURKS: A. D. 1542.
Alliance with France.
Siege of Nice.
Ravages on the Italian coast.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1532-1547.

TURKS: A. D. 1551-1560.
Unsuccessful attack on Malta.
Capture of Tripoli.
Disastrous attempt of the Christians to recover that city.

See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1543-1560.

TURKS: A. D. 1565.
Unsuccessful attack on the Knights of St. John in Malta.

See HOSPITALLERS OF ST. JOHN: A. D. 1530-1565.

TURKS: A. D. 1566-1571.
Reign of Selim II.
War with the Holy League of Spain, Venice and the Pope.
Conquest of Cyprus.
Great defeat at Lepanto.

"In 1566, Solyman the Magnificent closed his long and
prosperous reign. His son and successor, Selim II., possessed
few of the qualities of his great father. Bred in the
Seraglio, he showed the fruits of his education in his
indolent way of life, and in the free indulgence of the most
licentious appetites. With these effeminate tastes, he
inherited the passion for conquest which belonged, not only to
his father, but to the whole of his warlike dynasty. … The
scheme which most occupied the thoughts of Selim was the
conquest of Cyprus. … Selim, resolved on the acquisition of
Cyprus, was not slow in devising a pretext for claiming it
from Venice as a part of the Ottoman empire. The republic,
though willing to make almost any concession rather than come
to a rupture with the colossal power under whose shadow she
lay, was not prepared to surrender without a struggle the
richest gem in her colonial diadem. War was accordingly
declared against her by the Porte, and vast preparations were
made for fitting out an armament against Cyprus.
{3140}
Venice, in her turn, showed her usual alacrity in providing
for the encounter. She strained her resources to the utmost.
In a very short time she equipped a powerful fleet, and took
measures to place the fortifications of Cyprus in a proper
state of defence. But Venice no longer boasted a navy such as
in earlier days had enabled her to humble the pride of Genoa,
and to ride the unquestioned mistress of the Mediterranean.
The defences of her colonies, moreover, during her long repose
had gradually fallen into decay. In her extremity, she turned
to the Christian powers of Europe, and besought them to make
common cause with her against the enemy of Christendom." The
only responses to her appeal came, first, from Pope Pius V.,
and finally, through his urgency, from Philip II. of Spain.
After much deliberation, Philip agreed, in the spring of 1570,
to enter into an alliance with Venice and the Pope against the
Ottoman Porte. "The ensuing summer, the royal admiral, the
famous John Andrew Doria, who was lying with a strong squadron
off Sicily, put to sea, by the king's orders. He was soon
after reinforced by a few galleys which were furnished by his
holiness, and placed under the command of Mark Antonio
Colonna. … On the last of August, 1570, the combined fleet
effected its junction with the Venetians at Candia, and a plan
of operations was immediately arranged. It was not long before
the startling intelligence arrived that Nicosia, the capital
of Cyprus, had been taken and sacked by the Turks, with all
the circumstances of cruelty which distinguish wars in which
the feeling of national hostility is embittered by religious
hatred. The plan was now to be changed. A dispute arose among
the commanders as to the course to be pursued. No one had
authority enough to enforce compliance with his own opinion.
The dispute ended in a rupture. The expedition was abandoned.
… Still the stout-hearted pontiff was not discouraged;" nor
did the king of Spain draw back. "Venice, on the other hand,
soon showed that the Catholic king had good reason for
distrusting her fidelity. Appalled by the loss of Nicosia,
with her usual inconstancy, she despatched a secret agent to
Constantinople, to see if some terms might not yet be made
with the sultan." Her overtures, however, were coldly received
by the sultan, and she was won back to the alliance. "Towards
the close of 1570, the deputies from the three powers met in
Rome to arrange the terms of the league." With much
difficulty, a treaty was concluded, and ratified in May, 1571,
to the effect that the operations of the league "should be
directed against the Moors of Tunis, Tripoli, and Algiers, as
well as against the Turks; that the contracting parties should
furnish 200 galleys, 100 transports and smaller vessels,
50,000 foot and 4,500 horse, with the requisite artillery and
munitions; that by April, at farthest, of every succeeding
year, a similar force should be held in readiness by the
allies for expeditions to the Levant; and that any year in
which there was no expedition in common, and either Spain or
the republic should desire to engage in one on her own account
against the infidel, the other confederates should furnish 50
galleys towards it; that if the enemy should invade the
dominions of any of the three powers, the others should be
bound to come to the aid of their ally; that three-sixths of
the expenses of the war should be borne by the Catholic king,
two-sixths by the republic, the remaining sixth by the Holy
See; … that each power should appoint a captain-general; that
the united voices of the three commanders should regulate the
plan of operations; that the execution of this plan should be
intrusted to the captain-general of the league, and that this
high office should be given to Don John of Austria [natural
son of Charles V. and half-brother of Philip II.]. … Such were
the principal provisions of the famous treaty of the Holy
League." The sultan was not dismayed. "He soon got together a
powerful fleet, partly drawn from his own dominions, and in
part from those of the Moslem powers on the Mediterranean, who
acknowledged allegiance to the Porte. The armada was placed
under the command of Selim's brother-in-law, the Pacha Piali.
… Early in the season [of 1571] the combined fleets sailed for
the Adriatic, and Piali, after landing and laying waste the
territory belonging to the republic, detached Uluch [dey of
Algiers] with his squadron to penetrate higher up the gulf.
The Algerine, in executing these orders, advanced so near to
Venice as to throw the inhabitants of that capital into …
consternation. … Meanwhile the Venetians were pushing forward
their own preparations with their wonted alacrity,—indeed with
more alacrity than thoroughness. … The fleet was placed under
the command of Sebastian Veniero," and sailed before
midsummer, "or as much of it as was then ready, for the port
of Messina, appointed as the place of rendezvous for the
allies. Here he was soon joined by Colonna, the papal
commander, with the little squadron furnished by his holiness;
and the two fleets lay at anchor … waiting the arrival of the
rest of the confederates and of Don John of Austria." The
latter reached Messina on the 25th of August. "The whole
number of vessels in the armada, great and small, amounted to
something more than 300. Of these full two thirds were 'royal
galleys.' Venice alone contributed 106, besides six
'galeazzas.' These were ships of enormous bulk. … The number
of persons on board of the fleet, soldiers and seamen, was
estimated at 80,000. … The soldiers did not exceed 29,000. …
On the 16th of September the magnificent armament … stood out
to sea." Before encountering the Turkish fleet, the allies
received tidings "that Famagosta, the second city of Cyprus,
had fallen into the hands of the enemy, and this under
circumstances of unparalleled perfidy and cruelty. … The fall
of Famagosta secured the fall of Cyprus, which thus became
permanently incorporated in the Ottoman empire." On Sunday,
October 7th, the armada of the Turks was found and attacked in
the gulf of Lepanto. The terrific fight which ensued lasted
only four hours, but those were hours of indescribable
destruction and carnage. "It was indeed a sanguinary battle,
surpassing in this particular any sea-fight of modern times.
The loss fell much the most heavily on the Turks. There is the
usual discrepancy about numbers; but it may be safe to estimate
their loss at nearly 25,000 slain and 5,000 prisoners. What
brought most pleasure to the hearts of the conquerors was the
liberation of 12,000 Christian captives, who had been chained
to the oar on board the Moslem galleys, and who now came
forth, with tears of joy streaming down their haggard cheeks,
to bless their deliverers.
{3141}
The loss of the allies was comparatively small,—less than
8,000." As to the armada of the Turks, "it may almost be said
to have been annihilated. Not more than 40 galleys escaped out
of near 250 which entered into the action. … The news of the
victory of Lepanto caused a profound sensation throughout
Christendom. … In Venice, which might be said to have gained a
new lease of existence from the result of the battle, … the
7th of October was set apart to be observed for ever as a
national anniversary. … It is a great error to speak of the
victory of Lepanto as a barren victory, which yielded no
fruits to those who gained it. True, it did not strip the
Turks of an inch of territory. … But the loss of
reputation—that tower of strength to the conqueror—was not to
be estimated."

_W. H. Prescott,
History of Philip II.,
book 5, chapters 9-11._

ALSO IN:
_Sir W. Stirling-Maxwell,
Don John of Austria,
volume 1, chapters 13-15._

TURKS: A. D. 1569-1570.
First collision with the Russians.
Vizir Sokolli's canal project and its frustration.
Peace with the Czar.

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1569-1571.

TURKS: A. D. 1572-1573.
Withdrawal of Venice from the Holy League.
Conquest of Tunis by Don John of Austria
and its recovery, with Goletta.

"Ulucciali, whom Selim … made commander-in-chief of all his
naval forces, exerted himself with extraordinary vigour and
activity in fitting out a new fleet, to supply the place of
that which had been ruined in the battle of Lepanto; and such
at this time were the resources of the Turkish empire, that he
was ready by the month of April [1572] to leave
Constantinople, with more than 200 galleys, besides a great
number of other ships. With this fleet he coasted along
Negropont, the Morea, and Epirus; put the maritime towns into
a posture of defence; chastised with great severity many of
those Christians who had been concerned in the invitation
given to Don John [who had just been offered the sovereignty
of Albania and Macedonia by the Christians of those
countries]; and afterwards took his station at Modon in the
Morea, with an intention to watch there the motions of the
enemy. He had full leisure to finish all the preparations
which he judged to be necessary. The allies disputed long with
one another concerning the plan of their future operations."
and were also held inactive by the Spanish king's fear of an
attack from France. "It was the last day of August before the
allies could effectuate a junction of their forces; and it was
the middle of September before they came in sight of the
enemy. … Ulucciali drew out his fleet, as if he intended to
offer battle; but no sooner had he made a single discharge of
his artillery … than he retired under the fortifications of
Modon." The allies thought first of besieging Modon, but gave
up the project. They then sent Alexander Farnese, prince of
Parma—afterwards so famous in the Netherlands—to reduce
Navarino; but he had no success and abandoned the siege. The
expedition then returned to Messina. The Venetians,
dissatisfied with the conduct of the war, now faithlessly
negotiated a separate peace with the Turks; but Philip II. of
Spain maintained his alliance with the Pope (now Gregory
XIII.), and ordered his brother, Don John, to proceed the next
spring to Africa and undertake the reduction of Tunis. Don
John obeyed the order, "carrying with him for this purpose a
fleet of 2,000 sail, having 20,000 foot on board, besides 400
light horse, 700 pioneers, and a numerous train of heavy
artillery. Tunis was at this time in the hands of the Turks,
commanded by Heder Basha, whom Selim had lately sent to govern
the town and kingdom. Heder, seized with consternation at the
approach of the Spanish fleet, left Tunis with his troops and
a great number of the inhabitants, and Don John took
possession of the place without meeting with the smallest
opposition. Philip had instructed his brother, when he sent
him on this expedition, to destroy Tunis, and to strengthen
the fortifications of the isle and fortress of Goletta. But
instead of complying with these instructions, Don John
resolved to fortify the town more strongly than ever; and
having laid the foundations of a new fort, or citadel, he
treated all the inhabitants who remained with lenity and
indulgence; and engaged many of those who had fled to return
and submit to the Spanish government; after which he carried
back his fleet to Sicily." It is believed that Don John had
conceived ambitious hopes of a kingdom on the African border
of the Mediterranean. "In the summer following [1573], Selim
sent Ulucciali against Tunis, with a fleet consisting of 300
ships, having about 40,000 troops on board, under the command
of his son-in-law, Sinan Basha. The new fort which Don John
had begun to build was not yet complete. Nor was the garrison
which he had left strong enough to hold out long against so
great a force." Before Don John could reassemble a fleet with
which to make his way to the protection of his African
conquest, both Tunis and Goletta were carried by assault, and
passed again into the possession of the Turks and their
Moorish vassals.

_R. Watson,
History of Philip II.,
book 9._

ALSO IN:
_Sir W. Stirling-Maxwell,
Don John of Austria,
volume 2, chapters 1-3._

TURKS: A. D. 1572-1623.
Beginning of the decline of the Ottoman power.

"The conquest of Cyprus was the last great exploit which ever
added materially to the dominions of the Porte; the battle of
Lepanto was the final blow which destroyed its naval
superiority. The days of greatness had gone by. The kingdoms
of the West were developing their strength, and had learnt the
policy of union and of peace among themselves. Their armies
had acquired the discipline and had learnt the lessons in
which the Ottomans had shown so formidable an example; and
their navy rode triumphant on the seas. The Empire, no longer
in the hands of Charles V., with foreign interests to absorb
its power, could bestow an undivided strength upon its own
affairs; and the Emperor Ferdinand was looking forward with
some hope to an incorporation of Hungary, which should end the
weakness, and ensure the safety, of his eastern frontier. As
the pre-eminence of the Porte, however, and the dread of it
declined, a wider intercourse for her with Europe began. …
Slowly the Sultans were beginning to take part in the schemes
and combinations of the Christian Powers, from which they had
hitherto so contemptuously stood aloof. Five reigns succeeded
to that of Selim [the Sot, son of Solyman the Magnificent].
during which the progress of decline continued marked.
{3142}
The indolence of Amurath III. [1574-1595], the incapacity of
Mahomet III. [1595-1603], the inexperience of Achmet I.
[1603-1617], the imprudence of Othman II. [1618-1622], and the
imbecility of Mustapha [1617-1618, and 1622-1623], contributed
to bring the Ottoman Empire into a condition of anarchy and
weakness. During the reign of Amurath hostilities with Austria
were renewed, and successive losses testified to the enfeebled
state of the Ottoman arms."

_C. F. Johnstone,
Historical Abstracts,
chapter 3._

TURKS: A. D. 1591-1606.
Wars in Hungary and Croatia.
Great victory at Cerestes.
Peace of Sitvatorok.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1567-1604; and 1595-1606.

TURKS: A. D. 1621-1622.
War with Poland.
Victory at Cecora and defeat at Choczim.

See POLAND: A. D. 1590-1648.

TURKS: A. D. 1623-1640.
War with Persia.
Siege and capture of Bagdad.
Horrible massacre of the inhabitants.

"During the first twelve years of the reign of Amurath IV.
[1623-1635], the Ottoman Empire had been occupied with active
hostilities in different parts of Europe, and especially with
Poland, Germany, and the maritime powers of the Mediterranean.
… In the east, however, great losses had been sustained. Shah
Abbas, a sovereign well entitled to the epithet 'Great,' had
repossessed himself of Diarbekr, Baghdad [1623], the district
of the Euphrates, with Kourdistan; and, on the north, he had
regained Armenia, and a considerable part of Anatolia. The
Sultan therefore resolved to undertake an expedition to
recover the territories thus taken from him, and to this he
was encouraged by the death of his formidable foe the Persian
monarch. Amurath marched from his capital early in 1635, to
superintend the operations of the campaign. … In passing
through Asia, he took care personally to examine into the
conduct of his various Pashas, and wherever it was requisite
he subjected them to a severe punishment. One of them, the
Pasha of Erzeroum, was put to death. Having at that city
reviewed his army, he found them to amount to 200,000 men, and
as his first object was the seizure of Armenia, the key of the
Persian provinces, he besieged Erivan, and notwithstanding a
vigorous defence, the fortress in a few days surrendered.
Tauris and the surrounding provinces speedily fell into his
hands, and Amurath returned in the winter to Constantinople,
entering the city in great triumph. The affairs of Europe were
in such a state of confusion, that it was several years ere he
again appeared in the east, the scene of so many of his
victories. The Khan of Tartary threw off his allegiance, the
Polish serfs appeared suddenly on the Caspian shores, and,
joining a body of Russians, attacked and carried the fortress
of Azof. … The European war, which at this time occurred,
rendered it unnecessary for the Sultan to entertain any
serious apprehension from his enemies in the west, who were
sufficiently occupied with their own affairs. He therefore
directed his attention to Persia, resolved to subjugate that
country, and to seize upon Baghdad. To this end his
preparations were proportionally great. An immense army was
collected on the Asiatic side of the Bosphorus. This mighty
host numbered more than 300,000 armed men, and was accompanied
by a numerous array of miners, as well as artillery. And after
having consulted an astrologer, Amurath embarked amid all the
display which Asiatic pomp could furnish, and directed his
progress toward Persia. After a successful march, this immense
army arrived at Baghdad. The city was strongly fortified, and
defended by a resolute army of 80,000 men. The Shah, however,
was absent in the northern part of his dominions, which had
been threatened by an invasion from India, under Shah Jehan,
father of the celebrated Aurungzebe. Baghdad, therefore, was
left to its own resources. The operations of the siege began
in October 1638. … The besieged made repeated sallies, with a
force of five or six thousand men at a time, who, on retiring,
were succeeded by a similar number, and thus the losses of the
Ottoman army were sometimes very great. The 200 great guns,
however, which played upon the ramparts, at length made a wide
opening in the walls, and after five days' fighting in the
breach thus made, where 'the slain lay in immense multitudes,
and the blood was stagnated like a pool to wade through,' the
city was taken. Quarter was given to 24,000 of the defenders,
who remained alive, on condition that they would lay down
their arms. But as soon as they had done so, the Sultan
perfidiously issued orders to the Janizaries, and the work of
butchery commenced, and was carried on by torch-light during
the night on which the city was taken, and an indiscriminate
slaughter took place, neither youth, nor age, nor sex being
spared by the ruthless conqueror and his merciless soldiers. …
In the morning of the 23d of December the Sultan marched into
the city, passing with his army over the innumerable bodies of
the unfortunate Persians, whose gallant defence merited a
better fate. Some 15,000 women, children and old men were all
that remained of the inhabitants, who, but a day or two
before, filled every part of the magnificent capital. … The
capture of Baghdad closed the military career of the Sultan."

_R. W. Fraser,
Turkey, Ancient and Modern,
chapter 17._

"A peace with Persia, on the basis of that which Solyman the
Great had granted in 1555, was the speedy result of Amurath's
victories (15th September, 1639). Eriwan was restored by the
Porte; but the possession of Bagdad and the adjacent territory
by the Ottomans was solemnly sanctioned and confirmed. Eighty
years passed away before Turkey was again obliged to struggle
against her old and obstinate enemy on the line of the
Euphrates. … Amurath died at the age of 28, on the 9th of
February, 1640."

_Sir E. S. Creasy,
History of the Ottoman Turks,
chapter 13._

TURKS: A. D. 1625-1626.
War in Hungary.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1606-1660.

TURKS: A. D. 1640.
Accession of Ibrahim.

TURKS: A. D. 1645-1669.
The war of Candia.
Conquest of Crete.

"The Turks attacked the island [of Crete] in 1645, and the war
went on till 1669, when Crete was lost. This is called the war
of Candia, from the long siege of the town of Candia, which
was most gallantly defended by the Venetians, with the help of
many volunteers from Western Europe. It must be remembered
that, though the island has sometimes got to be called Candia,
from the town of Candia and its memorable siege, yet the
island itself has never changed its name, but has always been
called Crete both by Greeks and Turks."

_E. A. Freeman,
The Ottoman Power in Europe,
page 145._

{3143}

"The war which cost the republic of Venice the island of Crete
owed its origin to the incessant irritation caused by the
Western corsairs in the Archipelago. Some strong measures
adopted by the Venetians to suppress the piracies committed by
Turkish and Barbary corsairs in the Adriatic, created much
dissatisfaction on the part of the Othoman government, which
looked chiefly to the Mohammedan corsairs as a protection
against the Christian corsairs in the Levant, and considered
it the duty of the Venetians to suppress the piracies of these
Christians. The Porte at last resolved to seek a profitable
revenge, and a pretext soon presented itself. In 1644 some
Maltese galleys made a prize which offended the personal
feelings of the reigning sultan, Ibrahim. … As he feared to
attack Malta, he resolved to make the Venetians responsible
for the shelter which Crete had afforded to the corsairs. The
Porte affected to consider Venice as a tributary State, which
was bound to keep the Archipelago free from Christian
corsairs, in return for the great commercial privileges it
enjoyed in the Othoman empire. Immediate preparations were
made for attacking Crete, but the project was concealed from
the Venetian senate, under the pretence of directing the
expedition against Malta. … In the month of June 1645, the
Othoman army landed before Canea, which capitulated on the
17th of August. This treacherous commencement of the war
authorised the Christian powers to dispense with all the
formalities of international law in lending assistance to the
Venetians during the celebrated War of Candia, which lasted
nearly 25 years. During this long struggle the Venetians
generally maintained the superiority at sea, but they were
unable to prevent the Othoman navy, whenever it exerted its
full force, from throwing in supplies of fresh troops and
ample stores, by which the Othoman army was enabled to command
the whole island, and kept Candia, and the other fortresses in
the hands of the republic, either blockaded or besieged. The
Greeks generally favoured the Turks, who encouraged them to
cultivate their lands by purchasing the produce at a liberal
price, for the use of the army. … The squadrons of the
republic often ravaged the coasts of the Othoman empire, and
on one occasion they carried off about 5,000 slaves from the
coast of the Morea, between Patras and Coron. In the year
1656, after Mocenigo's great victory at the Dardanelles, they
took possession of the islands of Tenedos and Lemnos, but they
were driven from these conquests by the Othoman fleet in the
following year. At the end of the year 1666, the grand vizier,
Achmet Kueprily, one of the greatest ministers of the Othoman
empire, took the command of the siege of Candia. The whole
naval force of Venice, and numerous bands of French and
Italian volunteers, attempted to force the grand vizier to
raise the siege; but the skill of the Italian engineers, the
valour of the French nobles, and the determined perseverance
of Morosini, were vain against the strict discipline and
steady valour of the Othoman troops. The works of the
besiegers were pushed forward by the labours of a numerous
body of Greek pioneers, and the fire of the powerful batteries
at last rendered the place untenable. At this crisis Morosini
proved himself a daring statesman and a sincere patriot. When
he found that he must surrender the city, he resolved to make
his capitulation the means of purchasing peace for the
republic. … On the 27th September 1669, Achmet Kueprily
received the keys of Candia, and the republic of Venice
resigned all right to the island of Crete, but retained
possession of the three insular fortresses of Karabusa, Suda,
and Spinalonga, with their valuable ports. No fortress is said
to have cost so much blood and treasure, both to the besiegers
and the defenders, as Candia; yet the Greeks, in whose
territory it was situated, and who could have furnished an
army from the inhabitants of Crete sufficiently numerous to
have decided the issue of the contest, were the people on the
shores of the Mediterranean who took least part in this
memorable war. So utterly destitute of all national feeling
was the Hellenic race at this period."

_G. Finlay,
History of Greece under Othoman and Venetian Domination,
chapter 2._

TURKS: A. D. 1649.
Accession of Mohammed IV.

TURKS: A. D. 1660-1664.
Renewed war with Austria.
Defeat at St. Gothard.
A twenty years truce.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1660-1664.

TURKS: A. D. 1664-1665.
Alliance with France broken.
War of the French with Tunis and Algiers.
See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1664-1684.

TURKS: A. D. 1670-1676.
Wars with the Poles.

See POLAND: A. D. 1668-1606.

TURKS: A. D. 1681-1684.
Rupture with France.
French attack on Scio and war with the Barbary States.

See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1664-1684.

TURKS: A. D. 1683.
Great invasion of Austria.
Siege of Vienna.
Overwhelming defeat by Sobieski and the Imperialists.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1668-1683.

TURKS: A. D. 1683-1699.
Expulsion from Hungary.
The Peace of Carlowitz.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1683-1699.

TURKS: A. D. 1684-1696.
War with the Holy League.
Expulsion from Hungary.
Venetian conquests in Greece.
Revolution at Constantinople.
Accession of Solyman II.
Czar Peter's capture of Azov.
The first Russian acquisition on the Black Sea.