Whosoever comes to you while your affairs has been united under one man, intending to break your strength or dissolve your unity, kill him. – Sahih Muslim

A carpet is large enough to accommodate two sufis, but the world is not large enough for two Kings. – Yavuz Selim (Selim I)

Sultan Saladin was a famous Muslim Sultan. Countless versions of his life story have been told in historical texts, novels, cartoons and even on the big screen. He was known for his justice and sincerity.

Yet, it was only 60 years after his death that civil war entered creating a split empire, various brothers and relatives maintaining power over individual states. This eventually allowed the non-Muslim Mongols to tear through and assassinate the Sultans and Caliphs, end the dynasty and ransack Muslim land and libraries.

In Andalus (Moorish Spain), after the overthrow of Hisham III, the land holdings devolved into weak city states ruled by various Emirs which eventually led to the inability to respond to Ferdinand and Isabella’s Inquisition and subsequent usurpation of Granada.

Is participating in a power struggle enough to consider a person an immoral ruler? Is relinquishing power the only moral option? The Islamic understanding of a great leader has been unique in that it is generally understood that the best leaders are those who have power thrust upon them, rather than demanded or taken by force (or won by seeking office). Most modern Muslims apply this principle to an extreme, and end up having a distaste for looking at the struggles between leaders of the past.

However, when examining upright rulers within Islamic history it becomes clear that the motivations of consolidation of power seemed to be completely separate from the desire of power itself. Sultan Saladin, widely considered a Wali (Friend of Allah) by Sunni tradition and defender of the Holy Cities from Crusaders, fought numerous Muslim leaders of sub-states in the process of consolidation. Yet somehow, the deaths of Muslims in the struggles that occurred in the process of securing power are not considered to be a black mark on his reputation.

The truth of the matter is that it has always been understood that successorship and power was in the hands of those whom Allah has given power and success to. If leaders were moved by spiritual wisdom and political forces to gather power to ensure better protection of their Muslim territories, or if there indeed were rebellious factions to the obvious leader of the people, then the unfortunate reality is that battles were necessary.

Examples of the conflicts which resulted from the consolidation of power that arose between Muslims are numerous within Islamic history.

Sultan Nur ad-Din desired to consolidate Muslim power and unify the Muslim states. By the fortune of the recent deaths of various Sultans, he was able to gain control over a large territory between the Euphrates and the Nile. Only Damascus remained, where Sultan Mujir ad-Din had agreed to pay tribute to the Crusaders for their protection. Sultan Nur ad-Din was eventually able to overthrow Sultan Mujir ad-Din and establish a solid front against the Crusaders. Sultan Nur ad-Din also brought Egypt under his control as well, taking it from the Shia Fatimid dynasty.

However, it wasn’t until Sunni Muslims began facing external forces that the critical nature of minimizing such instability and disturbances became apparant. It was the forces of the Crusaders, the Mongols and Persians that made clear the need for a strong unified leadership.

When Raynald of Chatillon directly threatened to attack Makkah during the course of the Crusades, Sultan Saladin ended up using the combined forces of the Muslims to secure and recapture Jeruselem. In the course of these battles he ended up using Egyptian land as a safehaven and used Syria to wait and consolidate his power. All of this would not have been possible with separate sovereign empires, independently bargaining for their safety, determining their own strategies, and certainly would have left Muslims at the mercy of petty squabbles.

It is clear that such consolidation of power was a necessary evil in order to unify Muslims under the strongest leadership possible. Certainly it is only with this system in place that made it possible for Muslims (with the Ottomans) to hold the longest-reigning dynasty in world history.

Yet, this dynasty is questioned quite often on the moral compass of its leadership, especially by Muslims. Muslims who, by mere fortune of having eaten the fruits of the sacrifices of these people, find it quite easy to turn back and complain about this or that from the hundreds of years they relied on the Ottomans to protect them. One example, beyond the necessity to battle Muslim states, was the practice of ‘fratricide’ supposedly put in place by the Ottomans.

Modern day Muslims tend to view the Caliphs and Sultans as invincible tyrants, free to have their whim obeyed at each turn. The reality was the Sultans lived in complex political times, their relatives were representing other powerful political groups with their own interests, Viziers from previous administrations and commanders and statesmen representing noble families wielded great influence. The motivations for power were not simply personal ambition but a representation of a vast families, political parties, provinces.

In Ottoman times, the simple presence of a lateral royal personality caused great havoc. Such individuals would constantly be approached to rally some area under their banner and seek to gain greater control or become puppets of another.

Upon the succession of Sultan Murad II, the Byzantine Empire released Mustafa Celebi and declared him the rightful heir to the Ottoman Sultanate. Of course, this was with prior agreement that a number of provinces would be turned over to the Byzantines should he succeed in claiming the throne. Sultan Murad II was able to properly defeat this rebellion and in Gallipoli executed Mustafa Celebi. This same situation occurred again in Sultan Murad’s reign when the Byzantines used his younger brother Mustafa to distract Sultan Murad from his siege on Constantinople by supporting an uprising in Anatolia.

With Sultan Beyazid, his brother Cem gave Pope Innocent VIII a figurehead and puppet Muslim king with which to seek resources to launch another crusade. Fortunately for Muslims, the European monarchies rejected the proposal from the Pope at the time. Cem was a powerful figure, capable of rallying people and creating disunity in the Empire. Prior to his capture and use by the Pope, he was able to rally an army of over four thousand and win Anatolia from his brother, until Sultan Bayezid was forced to act against him. Once captured, the European powers and the Pope used Cem often to halt Ottoman advances at the Balkans, threatening his mistreatment or even release.

The overarching threat of enemy use of powerful individuals with the ability to draw large armies did not end there. When the succession was still in play Korkud attempted to buy the jannisaries support by distributing gold which they accepted. However when Selim I arrived in Istanbul in April 1512, they backed his succession and deposition of his father (ref: Uluchay, ‘Yavuz Sultan Selim’ VII 10.125-6, VIII/ 11-12.185-6). Upon succession, Sultan Selim I found the European powers eyeing his brother Korkud to be used in a similar manner to Cem and the Safavid Persians were providing heavy support to his brother Ahmed.

Due to these and numerous other events, Sultan Selim I was forceful in his elimination of lateral competition to the throne, in the interest of unity against enemies of the orthodox Sunni Ottomans. Actual execution became a practice for a period of less than 100 years leading to utter confinement. Either of these approaches were not something taken lightly by the Sultans nor their family. This sacrifice was a very real necessity that became something demanded of the Sultans by the statesmen of the Ottoman Empire, and the Muslim people, in the interest of presenting a unified front and eliminating needless bloodshed.

When imagining the power struggles and hearing of the supposed penultimate power of the Caliphate, one would think: who would be so eager to kill their brother except a power hungry facist? But it turns out this was not the case at all.

Proof that these executions were not the deepest wish of the Sultan is found clearly within the Ottoman archives. Sultan Murat’s Jewish physician, Domenico Hierosolimitano, describes the sacrifice made for stability in describing the ascension of Sultan Murat to the throne (and its consequences for his family):

But Sultan Murat, who was so compassionate as to be unable to see blood shed, waited eighteen hours, in which he refused to sit on the Imperial throne or to make public his arrival in the City [arrival in Istanbul was trigger for the process of ascension], seeking and discussing a way to free his nine brothers of blood who were in the Seraglio… In order that he should not break the law of the Ottoman state … weeping, he sent the mutes to strangle them, giving nine handkerchiefs with his own hands to the chief of the mutes. – ref: Austin, Domenico’s Istanbul

Each of the Sultans lateral competitors to the throne were carrying influences from their families and political allies. Each of the members of the House of Osman had their political fate tied to them at birth. At a certain point, it was commonly known to all involved what would occur when a Sultan succeeded to the throne. Every individuals fate, political allies, and enemies in the family being known to them years in advance. When the men of this family weren’t facing execution, they were facing long-term confinement in the Palace (so as not to rally any potential factions under their flag).

When the assembly of statesmen, legal authorities and commandors assembled to discuss who should ascend the throne after Sultan Mehmed IV (who had accepted abdicating the throne), they decided in favour of his brother Suleyman. This case, like others, indicates the Sultanship was (unlike European kingdoms) transferred through the process of consultation and deliberation of those in authority. Quite similar to what occurred in the time of the Sahabi and the Khulafa Rashidun, not simple ‘nepotism’.

Further, the entire process of the ascension was related by Silahdar Findiklili Mehmed Agha, who was serving as a page in the privy chamber, he (as he notes) ‘witnessed the truth of it all’. This narration demonstrates the manner in which the family of Osman was raised, what they were asked to sacrifice, the manner in which they were ready to die, and the manner in which they accepted Sultanship. The myth of plump princes handed free reign over the world through nepotistic practices disappears quickly. The lessons in here are innumerable, so I will end on this narration of the successorship of Sultan Suleyman Khan (Suleiman II).

The Chief Black Eunuch went to that part of the Palace known as the Boxwood apartment, where Prince Suleyman Khan was confined, and invited him to leave his quarters whereupon, supposed he was to be done away with, the Prince refused to come out. ‘Your majesty, my Sultan, fear not! By God, I swear I intend you no harm. All the imperial ministers and doctors of theology and your military servants have chosen you as the next sultan and are awaiting the honour of your presence. We are at your command.’

His heart still in a state of unease, the Prince replied, weeping, ‘If my removal [i.e. execution] has been ordered , tell me, so that I may perform my prayers in the prescribed form prior to the order being carried out. I have been confined for forty years – ever since I was a child. Rather than dying [a thousand deaths] each [and every] day, it is preferable to die [once] at the earliest instant….’
Again placing a kiss on the Prince’s foot, the imperial officer responded, ‘God forbid, do not say such things, I beg you! It is not a death but rather a throne which has been set up for you’.

[When the Chief Black Eunuch stated that all the Prince's servants would attend him] the Prince’s companion by his side, his younger brother Ahmed, offered reassurance, saying, ‘By your leave, do not be afraid, the Agha always tells the truth’ Upon this, the Prince emerged from the apartment Since he was dressed in a robe of red satin and his feet encased in a pair of short, heavy, riding boots- having had nothing to wear for years except clothes of the very meanest and poorest sort – the Agha had one of his own robes brought, a dark bluish-brown broadcloth lined with sable, which he draped over Prince Suleyman’s satin robe, and then, giving his arm to the Prince, conducted him with reverance and deference to the Pavilion of Felicity of the Privy Chamber and seated him on a throne by the pool. The Swordbearer and the pages of the Privy Chamber came forward and, as he advanced in their company toward the imperial Audience Hall, the Prince inquired, ‘Are you going to stop by the Lion House (a former church where animals were kept), all enveloped in darkness, and execute me there?’

‘Oh my Lord’, the Swordbearer answered, ‘how can you suggest such a thing? God forbid, may it be known that your removal from the Boxwood Apartment was in order that you should ascend the throne. See your servant, the Chief White Eunich, along with the imperial messenger, is coming from the Privy Apartments to meet you’ The Chief White Eunuch extended his salutations to the Prince and putting his arm through the Prince’s left arm escorted him to the imperial audience hall and seated him on the throne. In accordance with ancient custom, the sacred turban of the Prophet Joseph, [kept safe] in the Imperial Treasury, was brought forth and placed on the exalted head of the Prince and adorned with three bejewelled plumes, trailing downwards. The point to which the sun ahd risen was but one-and-a-half spears-length high: it was three o’clock.

Prince Suleyman ascended the imperial throne … and the first in line to swear allegiance was the Registrar of the Descendants of the Prophet Muhummad (S), followed by the Grand Vizir’s Proxy and the Chancellor and the chief justices of the provinces of Rumeli and Anadolu and subsequently, the SheykhulIslam with various doctors of theology, and the senior officers of the militia and the sultan’s regiments and the rebels, as well as the head of the Palace Doorkeepers and the chief officer of the Bearers of the Imperial Flask – all swore their allegiance to the Sultan. In turn, the Sultan extended his salutations to the assembled body in the imperial Audience Hall and then honoured the Pavilion of the Privy Chamber by his presence, where he was seated on a throne at the pool. Now, the servants of the treasury and the commissariat and the campaign also came to swear their allegiance.

The Chief Black Eunuch, Ali Agha, came bearing an imperial rescript ordering the confinement of the new Sultan’s brother Ahmed Khan, the deposed Sultan [Mehmed IV], and the two princes … Mustafa Khan and Ahmed Khan; the three were raised up and detained in the Boxwood Apartment. A secret concealed from the inmates in the court and residents of the city, the imperial writ was presented to Sultan Mehmed Khan, who said, ‘ I bow my head to God’s wish. Once imprisoned are we then to be executed? ‘ The Agha replied, ‘ God forbid, your Majesty ! May that day never come. The order only refers only to your being confined.’ That same say, the palace heralds delivered the propitious news to the Queen-mother and were granted an untold number of gifts, and the public crier proclaimed to the city the glad tidings of the imperial accession; and the Firday sermon was orated in the name of the newly enthroned sultan and the coinage now bore his name.

ref [Silahdar Findiklili Mehmed Aga, Silhadar Ta rihi 2.296-8]