Blogs

  • News
  • |
  • Art
  • |
  • History
  • |
  • Food and Travel
  • |
  • Science
Paleofuture

A history of the future that never was

Past Imperfect

History with all the interesting bits left in


March 22, 2012

The Ottoman Empire’s Life-or-Death Race

The Topkapi Palace, Istanbul, site of the deadly race run between condemned grand viziers and their executioners.

The executioners of the Ottoman Empire were never noted for their mercy; just ask the teenage Sultan Osman II, who in May 1622 suffered an excruciating death by “compression of the testicles”–as contemporary chronicles put it–at the hands of an assassin known as Pehlivan the Oil Wrestler. There was reason for this ruthlessness, however; for much of its history (the most successful bit, in fact), the Ottoman dynasty flourished—ruling over modern Turkey, the Balkans and most of North Africa and the Middle East—thanks in part to the staggering violence it meted out to the highest and mightiest members of society.

Seen from this perspective, it might be argued that the Ottomans’ decline set in early in the 17th century, precisely at the point when they abandoned the policy of ritually murdering a significant proportion of the royal family whenever a sultan died, and substituted the Western notion of simply giving the job to the first-born son instead. Before then, Ottoman succession had been governed by the “law of fratricide” drawn up by Mehmed II in the middle of the 15th century. Under the terms of this remarkable piece of legislation, whichever member of the ruling dynasty succeeded in seizing the throne on the death of the old sultan was not merely permitted, but enjoined, to murder all his brothers (together with any inconvenient uncles and cousins) in order to reduce the risk of subsequent rebellion and civil war. Although it was not invariably applied, Mehmed’s law resulted in the deaths of at least 80 members of the House of Osman over a period of 150 years. These victims included all 19 siblings of Sultan Mehmed III—some of whom were still infants at the breast, but all of whom were strangled with silk handkerchiefs immediately after their brother’s accession in 1595.

Osman II: death by crushed testicles. Image: Wikicommons.

For all its deficiencies, the law of fratricide ensured that the most ruthless of the available princes generally ascended to the throne. That was more than could be said of its replacement, the policy of locking up unwanted siblings in the kafes (“cage”), a suite of rooms deep within the Topkapi palace in Istanbul. From around 1600, generations of Ottoman royals were kept imprisoned there until they were needed, sometimes several decades later, consoled in the meantime by barren concubines and permitted only a strictly limited range of recreations, the chief of which was macramé. This, the later history of the empire amply demonstrated, was not ideal preparation for the pressures of ruling one of the greatest states the world has ever known.

For many years, the Topkapi itself paid mute testimony to the grand extent of Ottoman ruthlessness. In order to enter the palace, visitors had first to pass through the Imperial Gate, on either side of which were two niches where the heads of recently executed criminals were always on display. Inside the gate stood the First Court, through which all visitors to the inner portions of the palace had to pass. This court was open to all the sultan’s subjects, and it seethed with an indescribable mass of humanity. Any Turk had the right to petition for redress of his grievances, and several hundred agitated citizens usually surrounded the kiosks at which harassed scribes took down their complaints. Elsewhere within the same court stood numerous armories and magazines, the buildings of the imperial mint and stables for 3,000 horses. The focal point, however, was a pair of “example stones” positioned directly outside the Central Gate, which led to the Second Court. These “stones” were actually marble pillars on which were placed the severed heads of notables who had somehow offended the sultan, stuffed with cotton if they had once been viziers or with straw if they had been lesser men. Reminders of the sporadic mass executions ordered by the sultan were occasionally piled up by the Central Gate as additional warnings: severed noses, ears and tongues.

Selim the Grim. Image: Wikicommons.

Capital punishment was so common in the Ottoman Empire that there was a Fountain of Execution in the First Court, where the chief executioner and his assistant went to wash their hands after decapitating their victims—ritual strangulation being reserved for members of the royal family and their most senior officials. This fountain “was the most feared symbol of the arbitrary power of life and death of the sultans over their subjects, and was hated and feared accordingly,” the historian Barnette Miller wrote. It was used with particular frequency during the reign of Sultan Selim I—Selim the Grim (1512-20)—who, in a reign of eight short years, went through seven grand viziers (the Ottoman title for a chief minister) and ordered 30,000 executions. So perilous was the position of vizier in those dark days that holders of the office were said not to leave their homes in the morning without tucking their wills inside their robes; for centuries afterward, Miller points out, one of the most common curses uttered in the Ottoman Empire was “Mays’t thou be vizier to Sultan Selim!”

Given the escalating demands of the executioner’s job, it seems remarkable that the Turks employed no specialist headsman to tackle the endless round of loppings, but they did not. The job of executioner was held instead by the Sultan’s bostancı basha, or head gardener—the Ottoman corps of gardeners being a sort of 5,000-strong bodyguard that, aside from cultivating the Sultan’s paradise gardens, doubled up as customs inspectors and police officers. It was the royal gardeners who sewed condemned women into weighted sacks and dropped them into the Bosphorus—it is said that another Sultan, Ibrahim the Mad (1640-48), once had all 280 of the women in his harem executed this way simply so he could have the pleasure of selecting their successors—and the tread of an approaching group of bostancıs, wearing their traditional uniform of red skull caps, muslin breeches and shirts cut low to expose muscular chests and arms, heralded death by strangulation or decapitation for many thousands of Ottoman subjects down the years.

A bostancı, or member of the Ottoman corps of gardener-executioners. The artist, a European who worked from travelers' accounts, has incorrectly shown him wearing a fez rather than the traditional skull cap.

When very senior officials were sentenced to death, they would be dealt with by the bostancı basha in person, but—at least toward the end of the sultans’ rule—execution was not the inevitable result of a death sentence. Instead, the condemned man and the bostancı basha took part in what was surely one of the most peculiar customs known to history: a race held between the head gardener and his anticipated victim, the result of which was, quite literally, a matter of life or death for the trembling grand vizier or chief eunuch required to undertake it.

How this custom came about remains unknown. From the end of the eighteenth century, however, accounts of the bizarre race began to emerge from the seraglio, and these seem reasonably consistent in their details. Death sentences passed within the walls of the Topkapi were generally delivered to the head gardener at the Central Gate; and Godfrey Goodwin describes the next part of the ritual thus:

It was the bostancibaşi‘s duty to summon any notable.… When the vezir or other unfortunate miscreant arrived, he well knew why he had been summoned, but he had to bite his lip through the courtesies of hospitality before, at long last, being handed a cup of sherbet. If it were white, he sighed with relief, but if it were red he was in despair, because red was the color of death.

For most of the bostancıs’ victims, the sentence was carried out immediately after the serving of the fatal sherbet by a group of five muscular young janissaries, members of the sultan’s elite infantry. For a grand vizier, however, there was still a chance: as soon as the death sentence was passed, the condemned man would be allowed to run as fast as he was able the 300 yards or so from the palace, through the gardens, and down to the Fish Market Gate on the southern side of the palace complex, overlooking the Bosphorus, which was the appointed place of execution. (On the map below, which you can view in higher resolution by double clicking on it, the Central Gate is number 109 and the Fish Market Gate number 115.)

A plan of the vast Topkapi Palace complex in Istanbul, from Miller's Beyond the Sublime Porte. Click to view in higher resolution.

If the deposed vizier reached the Fish Market Gate before the head gardener, his sentence was commuted to mere banishment. But if the condemned man found the bostanci basha waiting for him at the gate, he was summarily executed and his body hurled into the sea.

Ottoman records show that the strange custom of the fatal race lasted into the early years of the nineteenth century. The last man to save his neck by winning the life-or-death sprint was the Grand Vizier Hacı Salih Pasha, in November 1822. Hacı—whose predecessor had lasted a mere nine days in office before his own execution—not only survived his death sentence, but was so widely esteemed for winning his race that he went on to be appointed governor general of the province of Damascus.

After that, though, the custom languished, along with the empire itself. The Ottomans barely saw out the 19th century, and when the Turkish state revived, in the 1920s under Kemal Atatürk, it did so by turning its back on almost everything the old empire had stood for.

Sources

Anthony Alderson. The Structure of the Ottoman Dynasty. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956; Joseph, Freiherr von Hammer-Purgstall. Des Osmanischen Reichs: Staatsverfassung und Staatsverwaltung. Vienna, 2 vols.: Zwenter Theil, 1815; I. Gershoni et al, Histories of the Modern Middle East: New Directions. Boulder [CO]: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002; Geoffrey Goodwin. Topkapi Palace: an Illustrated Guide to its Life and Personalities. London: Saqi Books, 1999; Albert Lybyer. The Government of the Ottoman Empire in the Time of Suleiman the Magnificent. Cambridge [MA]: Harvard University Press, 1913; Barnette Miller. Beyond the Sublime Porte: the Grand Seraglio of Stambul. New Haven [CT]: Yale University Press, 1928; Ignatius Mouradgea D’Ohsson. Tableau Général de l’Empire Ottoman. Paris, 3 vols., 1787-1820; Baki Tezcan. The Second Ottoman Empire: Political and Social Transformation in the Early Modern World. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.



***

Sign up for our free email newsletter and receive the best stories from Smithsonian.com each week.

13 Comments »

  1. RayM says:

    Wonderful!

  2. Dr. Meow says:

    RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!

  3. Can Karadayi says:

    Great article, nothing like starting the day with breaking few eggs. In this case, Osman’s.

  4. zuberino says:

    Ouch, ouch, ouch… compression of the testicles? Agonising, yes. But is it really enough to kill someone?

    • Mike Dash says:

      There are in fact several Turkish sources giving slightly different versions of Osman’s death; some of the evidence is summarised by Miles, “Signing in the Seraglio: mutes, dwarfs and gestures at the Ottoman court,” in Disability & Society 15:1 (January 2000), who writes:

      “Most victims might have preferred the bowstring to another bloodless method, compression of the scrotum, ‘a mode of execution reserved by custom to the Ottoman emperors’. Evliya Chelebi reported that Osman II died thus [Evliya, 1834, pp. I (ii) 11 and II: 87]. In practice, the squeeze may have been largely diversionary, attracting the victim’s hands away from defending his neck. Thus, ‘It was not until [the Pasha] Davut took Osman’s testicles in his butcher’s grip that the cord could be tightened round his neck’ (Goodwin, 1994, p. 158). Another account has Osman ‘diverted’ by an axe blow on his head.’ Evliya, a Turkish writer of the seventeenth century, did not discuss the ethics of scrotum-squeezing.”

      All this does not help solve the mystery of who precisely killed the sultan, and the issue is exacerbated by the problem that “Pehlivan”, the name given in some sources, is a generic Turkish word for a champion wrestler. I have seen various elaborations, but nothing that is unequivocally a proper name.

      I believe compression of the testicles can itself result in death as result of neurogenic shock. You can find a listing of 10 cases in which testicle compression led to death here.

  5. John Geoghegan says:

    Red sherbet, anyone?

  6. Demetri says:

    Imposible to imagine that all these happened in a European city during renaissance and on.

  7. Elif says:

    Corporeal punishment was a part of all renaissance cities. Foucault explains in the Birth of Prison, modern ideas of punishment superseded marking crime on the body quite recently. So Constantinople was just one city where customary punishments were inflicted on ruling class members and the laity. even the corporeal punishments the church inflicted through the Inquisition were customary and gruesome. the Ottoman Empire became the haven of Jews who were expelled from the Iberian peninsula.

    As for the purely Ottoman side of things: Selim I ordered the execution of two grand viziers only, whereas I can think of three grand viziers Mehmed II had executed off the top of my head: Candarli Halil Pasha, Rumi Mehmed Pasa, Mahmud Pasa (popularly thought of as a saint!). Plus his chief architect Sinan-ı Atik! Selim I’s policy of execution in Çaldiran battle was and is a contentious issue but I’m not so certain that he ordered more ruling class member executions than his predecessors or successors!

    I don’t understand why a janissary would execute ‘Bostanci’s victims’?! Janissaries were indeed the elite corps, but they were not in charge of executions. The Bostancis were responsible for executions, not the janissaries. The Bostancibasi (not bostanci basha) was their chief. It would be too simplistic to think of bostancis as gardeners, they had always been more than that, if all states needs to monopolize legitimate violence, the bostancis were those who monopolized a very important and sensitive part of it.

    There’s no evidence that proves Ibrahim’s concubines numbered that high and that they were all thrown to the sea. Myth busters who specialize on the Ottoman Empire needed! (Leslie Peirce’s the Imperial Harem was a good scholarly start).

  8. A. S. says:

    Good narrative. One detail about Osman 2′s death; Evliya Celebi wrote all about it with incredible details, but two pages from the original manuscript were ripped off and burned by the head of a group of historians, compiling historical documents in 1896. The chief historian, Necip Asim Bey thought the story of Osman 2′s rape and torture would give wrong ideas to the future generations. However, the pages were already read and rest of the historians later told all about the censored pages. It has to be noted that the same trend continues today and as an example, the part of the harem where slave girls and eunuchs were executed is still not open to public.

    Details and other interesting info can be reached here:
    http://www.felsefe.net/tarih/3696-osmanlilarda-cinsellik-escinsellikoglancilik.html

  9. aydin says:

    Good job, yet, the so-called ‘Fatal Race’ is an urban legend.

    “Ottoman records show that the strange custom of the fatal race lasted into the early years of the nineteenth century.”

    What are those records? Where are they?

    • Mike Dash says:

      Our principal source is Barnette Miller, a Yale historian who spent many years chronicling the Topkapi. Her book gives details of the final reported “race” mentioned in the text. We’d be very open to hearing evidence to the contrary, though–can you cite anything that shows she’s wrong?

  10. Cynical Simon says:

    Just been to vist the Topkapi Palace … not one single word from the guides or the headset we rented of any of this rather murderous behaviour…their version of the Palace is one of peace and love and tranquility…..it is just so sanitised. Are they worried they will frighten the tourists or are they ashamed of their inglorious past. I would love to hear why they censor their own history in this way.

  11. aydin says:

    At last I got the chance to check Miller´s original Ottoman reference.There is absolutely nothing written about a Life-or-Death Race in the original Ottoman source.Miller obviously became victim of the translator.In the original text it is written that if the executioner had been sent to the Fish Market Gate before the deposed minister taken there , then his execution was inevitable.However, if there was no executioner waiting for him at the Fish Market Gate, then, there was a period of three days of silence during which the Sultan would make up his mind about the final decision, namely execution or exile. I also took a look at the life story of Grand Vizier Haci Salih Pasha.Nothing is told about him being the winner of a deadly race…To my knowledge there were no gyms or fitness centers in the Topkapi Place for the ministers and organizing a running race to decide the fate of a deposed prime minister was not part of the Ottoman royal entertainment…

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until Smithsonian.com has approved them. Smithsonian reserves the right not to post any comments that are unlawful, threatening, offensive, defamatory, invasive of a person's privacy, inappropriate, confidential or proprietary, political messages, product endorsements, or other content that might otherwise violate any laws or policies.

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free

Advertisement



Follow Us

Travel with Smithsonian






Advertisement