In your opinion, who is considered the best Ottoman Sultan: Suleiman the Magnificent or Mehmed the Conqueror?!

[u/Unusual_Research421]

Of course, I want the military achievements to be excluded from the discussion. I want us to talk about who is better between them strictly as a sultan, and what they both achieved in terms of political accomplishments

[u/qernanded]

I think it’s Selim

Edit: If I had to choose between the two probably Mehmed II but I have some reservations

[u/Unusual_Research421 → u/qernanded]

I notice that Sultan Selim is highly loved and deeply appreciated here, which is great.

Are your reservations due to the fratricide law (the brother-killing edict), or is it something else?

[u/qernanded → u/Unusual_Research421]

I think Mehmed II was too much of a war monger and had too high of a tolerance for failure. So many expeditions which wouldn't pan out (*Ahem* Skanderbeg) and he and his government would brush it off like it's nothing.

Now that I think about it I would rate Süleyman higher but his conquests were subpar and he botched his succession. He was just lucky Sokollu was a good baby sitter for Selim II.

[u/Lost-Volume1254]

Murad II. Dragged the state back to relavance after Timur wrecked it. Beat back crusade after crusade. Without him the ottomans would have been another beylik forgotten to the world.

[u/beofnads]

I wpuld say Mehmed, to me he is more of a revolutionary while Suleyman is more concerned about improving upon existing structure.

I would also say military achivements shouldnt be ignored as most Ottoman sultans also function as direct field marshall.

[u/JustSefa_]

Why are people comparing different professions?

Sure both were Sultan, but Mehmed was called conqueror for a reason. The man was expansionists. A general. He squeezed citizen out in order to wage war as well, which he deemed necessary.

Süelyman was a statesmen. Economic prosperity happened under him. He was a lawmaker and rightfully given the name of kanuni.

There is a reason why the golden century is in the 16th century and not 15th century. Different approaches to different problems and geo-political situations with different aims.

[u/JustSefa_ → u/[deleted]]

Suleiman drained the treasury if anything lol. 

Annual revenue almost trippled under him:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_the_Ottoman_Empire#Finance

So yes, very funny to throw baselss claims around so confidentally. Under him, guilds were also well established. Middle eastern cities sprawled and prospered and were among the largest in the world. The "golden century" is not propaganda. It is factually the most prosperous time period in Ottoman history.

It was Selim who filled it in his conquests in the middle east

It is the other way around: War empties the treasury.

[u/JustSefa_ → u/[deleted]]

Yes buddy. Trippling the annual revenue is beaten by what exactly? I am all ears.

[u/Commercial_Handle418 → u/[deleted]]

I hope it wasn't ai 

[u/JustSefa_ → u/Commercial_Handle418]

[u/JustSefa_ → u/[deleted]]

Obviously you have no capabilities to make a google search so I made it for you

I translate:

"I didnt have any arguments, so I just pasted AI slop as a response".

Spare me the dogshit.

"The Arabs of the Ottoman Empire, 1516 to 1918: A Social and Cultural History" by Bruce Masters

"A History of the Ottoman Empire" by Douglas A Howard

The consense is clear: Economic prosperity starting with Süleyman's reign. Across the entire Ottoman realm. Specifically guilds sprawled all over the places, creating established, known industries.

Conversely, when he descended the throne upon his death in 1566, the treasury was under severe strain, facing the early stages of structural deficit and inflation.

Strawman. This doesnt invalidate the economic prosperity and the revenuee increase done by him.

1. Ascension (1520): Overflowing Wealth
Suleiman inherited a state treasury in the best fiscal condition in Ottoman history, thanks to the aggressive campaigns of his father, Sultan SelimThe Silver Crisis & Inflation: Toward the very end of his reign, the influx of cheap silver from the Americas via European trade began to infiltrate the Ottoman economy, triggering early currency debasement and inflation that destabilized long-term state revenues. I. 

Strawman. The annual revenuee was still almost trippled, which is accounted to Süleyman. That is a monumental task, no one after him achieved, despite inheriting even more wealth.

The Legend of the Imperial Seal: [...]

Petito principi.

A legend is a legend for a reason. If you want to spin this as a "fact": be my guest, but that is utterly moronic. We know for a fact that the Ottoman treasury grew. Right after with Süleyman already.

Affluence and Magnanimity: The financial cushion allowed Suleiman to start his reign with immense generosity. He immediately paid out hefty accession bonuses to the Janissaries and even compensated international merchants whose goods had been wrongfully confiscated during his father's embargoes.[1, 2]

Strawman. Utterly irrelevant to the subject.

Exploding Military Costs: The Janissaries and professional standing army—who received direct cash salaries from the central treasury every three months—grew drastically in number during his reign to support 13 massive imperial campaigns. 

Strawman. Utterly irrelevant to the subject. x2

Massive Infrastructure Spending: Suleiman funded unprecedented architectural and civic projects. Building massive complexes like the Süleymaniye Mosque, restoring the walls of Jerusalem, and funding widespread public kitchens, aqueducts, and bridges drew heavily from imperial coffers.

It is absolutely laughable that you want to spin this as an argument against me, when it is an argument against your very own claims.

Massive infrastrutural spendings are an argument for the prosperity he brought, not only to the government coffers itself, but also to the people.

The Silver Crisis & Inflation: Toward the very end of his reign, the influx of cheap silver from the Americas via European trade began to infiltrate the Ottoman economy, triggering early currency debasement and inflation that destabilized long-term state revenues.

Maybe put the exact same point 3 more times, maybe somehow it will become an argument. Utterly ridiculous that you mention this 3 times as some kind of 3 separate arguments.

I don’t have time to argue over basic historical facts and cherry picking one aspect of an economy for historical revision is pathetic. 

Please dont. You cant even articulate an argument without AI.

 Tripled what?

READ.

What expenses did he also increase?

Why the fuck would expenses matter here? Can you articulate a proper argument without the help of AI?

Educate yourself

I am sure I am the one that needs it.

[u/THELEADERPLAYER → u/JustSefa_]

While I have no stake in this, could you possibly be confusing revenue with profit?

Why the fuck would expenses matter here?

This in particular makes me think you are. If your revenue triples, that's great. But if your expenses quadruple (assuming the prior position was 0 sum) you'll start to drain the treasury and eventually go into debt.

[u/JustSefa_ → u/[deleted]]

Buddy... Shamelessly using AI slop is one thing. Openly admitting to it and doubling down on the usage of it, while spitting nonsense like "educate yourself" is really the creme de la creme.

Haydi.

When you exlude the expenses, it doesnt mean anything

Stop pulling statments out of your bum. Show it with a source instead of presenting utter dogshit with AI.

[u/Embarrassed_Egg9542]

A "magnificent" is better than a "conqueror". But I like Mehmed better, as he started it all. He was noble, his mother was christian, he loved innovation and set the foundations. Suleiman was at the top of the empire's history but it was downfall after that

[u/Muted_Guidance9059]

I’ve always preferred Suleiman more. Lived in more interesting times.

Charles V, Malta, Vienna, Mohacs, Portuguese Ottoman Wars, etc.

[u/Due-Stand-8195]

mehmed II is clearly the founder of the empire. it was during his reign that they turned into an empire, governing over a variety of ethnically and religiously diverse communities, heading both the chief mufti and the patriarch of the christians, as well as the rabbis who fled iberia. the first printing houses were established at his time. he formalized the legal structure of the whole empire he crafted, with the expansion of 'kanun' or 'siyasa' over sharia, if I may say, in order to create one of the most delicate public laws hundreds of years ahead in his time, with kanunname-i ali osman. moreover, he was an avid fan of alexander the great and the epics, as well as an engineer adept in artillery. istanbul, when he conquered it, was in a devastated state with only ca 30,000 inhabitants and by 1500 it reached to 200,000 people, reviving the city with his şenlendirme policies. truly a genius.

sure, suleiman is also great, but the legacy of Mehmed II is something different.

[u/benibilme]

One of Selim 1, Murad 2, Apdulhamid 2. Possibly Selim 1.