Written by Max De Loach
When discussing political leaders, historically or contemporarily, it is important to contextualize, in order to understand what makes a leader “good” during a particular time. While our definition of “good” leaders has morphed in recent years, especially in the United States, this was not always the case. Before the advent of European thought throughout the world, a leader was good if he could affirm his legitimacy to the world, provide for his people and dominate militarily. (Of course, I do not intend to stand before you and tell you that this was in any way a desirable system.) All and all, I intend to give you a very brief, not necessarily formal, understanding of the political history of the Ottoman Empire and its best sultan, Mehmed II.
The House of Osman ruled the Ottoman Empire for the whole of its existence, dating from its foundation in 1299 to its disintegration in 1922. Throughout its history, and much like European history, the Ottoman Empire had both good — with an Islamicate Period understanding of the word “good” — and bad leaders. Despite its many contenders, I will still submit that Mehmed II is the greatest Ottoman Sultan, not only for his numerous military achievements but also for his cultural significance throughout both his time and the modern world.
Starting first with his cultural achievements, Mehmed II was uniquely interested in development of the arts and sciences in the Ottoman Empire, especially when considering the broader state of the world in this time period. At the same time that Europe was still clawing its way out of the Middle Ages, Mehmed II was erecting massive monuments, a university, mosques, the Topkapı Palace and the Tiled Kiosk. Mehmed II was also a patron of Renaissance art, commissioning both Ottoman and Mediterranean artists, and further contributing to the spread of cultures between Europe and the Middle East. Furthermore, Mehmed II even assisted the Christian mission by ordering Gennadius, a Byzantine patriarch, to translate many Christian texts to Turkish. Through all of these examples, it is clear that Mehmed II considered cultural significance, promotion of education and enrichment through education as a worthy pursuit of a sultan.
Militarily speaking, Mehmed II had a unique mind for the battlefield and as a result has quite an extensive and remarkable war resume. Most important to Ottoman history was the siege of Constantinople in 1453, two years after Mehmed II’s second ascension to the throne in 1451. Constantinople is arguably the most well-defended city, conventionally speaking by Middle Ages standards, in human history. Despite that, through his ingenuity, Mehmed developed a plan to lift Ottoman boats over land to bypass Byzantine defenses and siege the city through the full force of Ottoman naval capabilities. Yet it was what followed this siege — Mehmed II’s claim of the title of Caesar — that shows his cultural and historical understanding of how to gain the approval of one’s citizens, which is of course to claim legitimacy through accessing the past, particularly an idealized past. This is not the first, nor the last time, that someone will claim the title of Caesar, yet despite that, a certain amount of credit must be given to him, as this claim followed the siege of Constantinople.
Mehmed II appealed to the people in a way that no other sultan was capable of doing: through genuine belief in the power of his citizens, and through the understanding of his citizens enough to know that they’d need more than just simple divinity to gain their acceptance. Mehmed II built the foundation on which his nation could thrive and did everything in his power to be perceived as a “good” leader for his people.
