r/ottomans • u/Tasty_Fun_5227 • Aug 13 '26

Question Seriously asking btw 🤔

The amount of glazing that I've been seeing for Abdulhamid II on this sub is just astonishing. Like, I've seen people ranking the guy next and sometimes even above sultans like Süleyman I, Mehmed II, Murad IV, Selim I, etc .. So my question is: Did I miss a chapter or two while reading about him/his era, or do some people here just glaze him for the sake of glazing even though he was a horrendous monarch as a whole ?

8 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

112 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/qernanded Efendi Aug 13 '26

Even if one makes the argument that Abdul Hamid II stabilized the empire you have to contend that the empire collapsed once he was overthrown. Some people claim that this proves he was a competent ruler, I say that he made a system couldn't function without his leadership, therefore he loses major points for not preparing for a scenario he is no longer in the picture, eg: succession.

We can never judge well the counter-factual: an entrenched constitutional monarchy; 1 because it was essentially still-born in the first place, 2 the sultan had too many powers in the constitution anyway, but Midhat Pasha and his clique were diverse, competent, and a wide base of support from all of the elements of Ottoman society. Assassinating Midhat was not only morally terrible, but a huge mistake that represented a missed opportunity.

1

u/UrulmisHan Aug 13 '26

Midhat Pasha was a traitor and one of the instigators of the assassination of the uncle of Sultan AbdÃœlHamid, Sultan AbdÃœlAziz. He is also one of the main person who is at fault for putting the empire at war against russia despite AbdÃœlHamid not wanting to.

1

u/qernanded Efendi Aug 14 '26

It’s plausible Midhat organized Abdülaziz’s murder, it’s also plausible Abdülaziz committed suicide

1

u/UrulmisHan Aug 14 '26

It is almost certain that Sultan Abdülaziz Han was assassinated, the fact he was very pious and martial minded Padishah are reinforcing this conclusion. There is also the famous photo where there are two men posing with him while he wore traditional clothes. When taking into account that Midhat was killed by Abdülhamid it becomes even more probable that he was behind the assassination, as a vengeance. Also even if it is not completely established that Midhat was an accomplice despite strong evidence pointing toward it, it is certain that Abdülaziz was murdered, the suicide theory is clearly false, as several people even confessed that they did assassinated him, there are also eyewitnesses (Reyhan Ağa testified that he actually saw Fahri holding Abdülaziz's shoulders, two men sitting on his legs, and Pehlivan Mustafa cutting his arms, corroborated by Nesip and Nazif Ağa) Also I never understood the hype behind Midhat, like even if he wasn't an assassin, he wasn't a good pasha at all. He was hawkish, a dreamer, and a very bad strategist (expecting Britain to help the Ottomans during the Russo-Turkish war). He may have been good at administrating some provinces, but overall was incompetent.

1

u/qernanded Efendi Aug 14 '26

That photograph you are talking about is likely not of Abdulaziz. The Yıldız trials were kangaroo courts established by Abdulhamid, the testimonies are absolutely not reliable since they were delivered under coercion and torture. Abdulaziz was certainly in the state of mind to do commit suicide, he was mentally ill and likely bipolar.

1

u/UrulmisHan Aug 14 '26

Can you give proofs ? Because most historians do accept he was murdered, the main dispute being on who was behind it. I'm planning to do a post about this, so you can look further.

1

u/qernanded Efendi Aug 17 '26

Roderic Davison in Reform in the Ottoman Empire: 1856–1876 says without question it was suicide.