I'm going to attempt to keep this review short and sweet for now. Why? Because I read this back in January 2018 (it's December 4th 2018 right now) so I'm going to attempt to keep this review short and sweet for now. Why? Because I read this back in January 2018 (it's December 4th 2018 right now) so until I get a chance to find and review the notes I had made back then to give more in-depth reasons why I am giving this book the grade I'm giving it, this is the review.
B+ | Recommend only if you've read The Imperial Harem by Leslie Peirce AND Ottoman Women Builders: The Architectural Patronage of Hadice Turhan Sultan by Lucienne Thys-艦enocak. This book definitely not a book for someone who hasn't read either one of these books (especially the latter - which I previously reviewed).
脰zg眉le艧 attempts to argue that because of her patronage which showcased her 鈥渋mmense power鈥, Emetullah belongs in the 鈥淪ultanate of Women鈥 (which is a time period in Ottoman history when women of the imperial harem exerted political influence over their sons & state matters due to the fact that their sons were minors and/or mentally unstable when they rose to power). He did a fantastic job with the research and his dedication was clear from the first. The inclusion of his own photographs of the structures that are still standing (which - unfortunately - are limited to a few since many of Emetullah Sultan's buildings/structures that she endowed and/or bore her name have fallen into disrepair, disappeared, and are forgotten) showed to me how devoted he was to this topic.
His analysis was pretty sound especially when it came to analyzing her building activities and what they meant. I appreciated and rather liked the chapters about the conversion of churches into mosques in her name and the Galata New Mosque for the research and analysis that he did for them. He really took the time to do the research and get the evidence he needed to support his idea. However, there were times when I thought he sounded too desperate and was pulling at strings.
Unfortunately, I wasn't convinced of 脰zg眉le艧' argument that Emetullah belongs in the "Sultanate of Women". Sound as his analysis, there were obvious weaknesses in his arguments and the desperation was there all too often. Basically, he shined where he shined, but in the parts that were so-so, the writing and the argument were just that: so-so.
So basically? This book is a solid B+. Again, don't recommend it if you haven't read either of the books I mentioned above, especially 罢丑测蝉-舰别苍辞肠补办'蝉 Ottoman Women Builders. That book is essential to understanding this topic in my opinion. Yes, Peirce's book is important too, but I'm assuming that you've at least read that before thinking about jumping into this one. Because you need to know how the Ottoman harem operates to get a clue and a decent foundation to understand what's happening in this book. ...more
Captured in Russia at the age of twelve, Hadice (Hatice) Turhan Sultan (whom I shall be calling Turhan Sultan from now on) entered the Ottoman ImperiaCaptured in Russia at the age of twelve, Hadice (Hatice) Turhan Sultan (whom I shall be calling Turhan Sultan from now on) entered the Ottoman Imperial Harem as a slave. Eventually, she rose through the ranks to become one of Ibrahim I's Hasekis. She bore him a male child, Mehmed, who would become sultan after his father was deposed. When Mehmed I became sultan at the age of six, Turhan Sultan became Valide Sultan or "Queen Mother". However, it wasn't until her rival & Mehmed's grandmother, Valide K枚sem Sultan, was murdered after plotting to have Mehmed deposed & replaced with another grandson with another mother, that Turhan Sultan was able to become de facto ruler of the Ottoman Empire, a position she held for a little over three decades until her death on the 4th of August 1683. It is during her time as valide sultan that Turhan undertook her architectural patronage in which she oversaw numerous projects, including the construction of two fortresses (the Sedd眉 lbahir and Kumkale) & the completion of the Yeni Valide Mosque in Emino虉nu虉 in Istanbul.
Ottoman Women Builders was written for a general audience of early modern scholars & students. The prose is clear & straightforward. It's comprehensive. The evidence provided are numerous but presented in a manner that allows the reader to digest them, despite the fact that they are sourced from a variety of sources. The book is organized in a way that allows for paragraphs to flow into each other. Even those who are just lovers of history should have no problem reading through this book because Thys-Senocak does offer insights into the various topics to help the reader understand as she presents her evidence to support her argument that Turhan Sultan, despite being away from the public view, legitimized her political authority through patronage of bold architectural works & established her as protector of the empire when she commissioned the construction of the Sedd眉 lbahir and Kumkale fortresses.
Chapter 1 is the introduction. It gives readers an insight to what to expect & offers an introduction to the themes presented in the following chapters.
For those who are more interested in Turhan herself, Chapters 2 & 3 gives a thorough introduction & historical context into this amazing woman as well as draws on comparisons with her Ottoman & European counterparts like Nurbanu, K枚sem, Elizabeth I, & Catherine & Maria de'Medici.
Chapter 2 provides the reader with background information on Turhan herself as well as her rise from concubine to valide sultan. Even if you have not read The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire by Leslie P. Peirce, Thys-Senocak takes the possibility into account & gives a brief overview of how things operate within the harem. It is in this chapter that Thys-Senocak explains Turhan's relationship with Ibrahim as well as her relationship with K枚sem. Also, there is a section in the chapter called "Administrative Duties" which recounts Turhan's duties as valide sultan & gives readers an insight into Turhan herself. Thys-Senocak makes it a point to point out that Turhan has always been concerned with the empire's security as well as the fact that she had "cultivated a strong image of an imperial figure dedicated to justice".
Chapter 3 gives more context in terms of how Turhan compared to her European & Ottoman counterparts. It's here that once more, Thys-Senocak takes into account that you might not have read Peirce's book & explains, briefly, the limitations of Ottoman women vs their European counterparts, especially in terms of their architectural patronages. Here, she also points out the relationship between a woman's life stages & their power & agency. Again, there's a comparison between European & Ottoman women ; Thys-Senocak makes it a point to point out that the prestige & legitimacy that a valide sultan had was derived from her position as the mother of the reigning sultan, not as widow of the deceased sultan.
Thys-Senocak shifts in Chapters 4 & 5 from Turhan herself to her architectual endeavors where she brings the fire so to speak. It is here that she offers a beautiful & detailed account of Turhan鈥檚 major architectural projects : the Sedd眉 lbahir and Kumkale fortresses & the Yeni Valide Mosque in Emino虉nu虉.
In Chapter 4, goes in depth about the Sedd眉 lbahir and Kumkale fortresses. As Thys-Senocak pointed out in Chapter 2, Turhan has always been concerned with the empire's security. However, she goes on further & is able to successfully argue that Turhan had commissioned the two fortresses to legitimize herself & her power & authority. Thys-Senocak points out that traditionally, concern with the empire's safety is something the sultan would be focused on. Thys-Senocak successfully argues that by taking on the task & commissioning the fortresses, Turhan legitimized herself as protector of the empire. She also argues that Turhan did this in hopes of preparing her son, Mehmed, to become as famed of a sultan as his ancestors.
This brings us to Chapter 5, which talks about the Yeni Valide Mosque in Emino虉nu虉 in Istanbul which Thys-Senocak argues is what completely legitimized & fully established Turhan's power as well as advertised her piety. Thys-Senocak carefully explains the history behind the Yeni Valide Mosque, the architecture & planning of the mosque itself (which she argues was done on purpose to allow Turhan to view the complex), the politico-ideological messages, as well as pointing out the inscriptions on the walls which Thys-Senocak argues was meant for Mehmed in hopes of driving him to become a formidable sultan.
Chapter 6 is the conclusion which reiterates Turhan鈥檚 architectural patronage as deliberate & well calculated attempts to legitimizing her power & political authority, despite the fact that unlike her European counterparts, she was hidden from public view.
Ottoman Women Builders is a remarkable scholarly work. It represents a valuable contribution to Ottoman women鈥檚 history as well as architectural history & the study of imperial female patronage. Scholars, students, & enthusiasts alike will find this work to be worth taking the time to read & is a valuable text for those studying this field. It gets 5 stars....more
Haseki H眉rrem Sultan (or Roxelana) was catapulted into the history books after she became Sultan S眉leyman鈥檚 concubine & his favorite. She would eventuHaseki H眉rrem Sultan (or Roxelana) was catapulted into the history books after she became Sultan S眉leyman鈥檚 concubine & his favorite. She would eventually become his chief consort - his haseki, a title created for her position as chief consort, but unequal to that of the sultan. Her true name is lost to history; however, she was renamed H眉rrem - a name that she used to refer to herself for the rest of her life. Captured & enslaved as a young woman, H眉rrem was ultimately brought to the imperial harem, an institution Peirce thoroughly examined in The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire. Going against the tradition of one son per concubine, H眉rrem would remain in S眉leyman鈥檚 bed & would give birth to six children, five of them sons; her son Selim would become sultan after S眉leyman鈥檚 death.
Despite its interesting subject matter, Peirce鈥檚 Empress of the East: How a European Slave Girl Became Queen of the Ottoman Empire is a terribly written & biased piece that lacks structure, neglecting to include important information at logical junctures. More alarmingly, she distorts & exaggerates historical fact to embellish her subject鈥檚 power & influence, caters to fans of the ruthless second wave feminism trope, & ultimately tries to spin history into a fairytale rags-to-riches story. In the attempt to exonerate H眉rrem & frame her as a heroine worth rooting for, Peirce presents her as far too brilliant, far too powerful, & far too perfect. Peirce鈥檚 H眉rrem can do no wrong; she is intelligent, politically aware, & a keen manipulator of circumstance, but at the same time indisputably innocent of charges leveled against her - not even to ensure one of her sons would take the throne. Conversely, those who stood against H眉rrem鈥檚 success like Mahidevran, Ibrahim, & Mustafa are consistently painted in a far more negative light. Their importance is watered down, their merits are downplayed, & their figures presented dismissively order to serve the narrative & make H眉rrem look better.
When compared to her academic work, Empress falls flat on itself. While the prose is easy to read, Peirce鈥檚 writing falters as she attempts to write for a general audience. Rather than providing a scholarly analysis backed up by historical evidence, she favors a biased narrative that relies heavily on speculative 鈥渋magining鈥, value judgments, & tenuous yet sweeping claims. Her use of romantic & idyllic language drags down her writing rather than lift it up, & uncritically attempts to frame H眉rrem & S眉leyman鈥檚 relationship as a love story. The concluding statement of the introduction provides no better example of Peirce鈥檚 modus operandi, in which she asserts the Ottoman Sultanate鈥檚 survival was largely 鈥渂olstered by the reforms she introduced鈥, a process 鈥済enerated along with the Ottoman empire鈥檚 greatest love story.鈥
This language is typical in the book. Peirce forces the reader to see the Ottoman world through her lens & adopt her wishful imagings, instead of allowing them to form their own views & imagine independently. Her 鈥渟peculation鈥 includes comparisons that make little sense, all the while implying that H眉rrem 鈥渕ust have thought鈥 of such things herself! Peirce notes that women forced into sexual servitude may not have viewed their status positively, yet at one point abhorrently tries to justify it because of the 鈥渃ompensations鈥 - that these women 鈥渕ust鈥 have known they probably wouldn鈥檛 have had easy lives or happy marriages in their homelands, & would be comforted that, even as palace slaves, they could at least live in the lap of luxury: 鈥淎n emotionally & sexually fulfilling marriage had not necessarily been in store for them in their hometowns & villages. The common practice of arranged marriage could saddle them with husbands who were unattractive, considerably older, or even brutal. Mostly peasants, they were more likely than not destined for a life of daily toil - perhaps poverty - early death. The dynastic family to which they now belonged at least kept them in luxurious comfort - good health.鈥
Of course, no one knows what H眉rrem thought during certain events; suggestions that she would have connected herself to other women in history, or compare the converted Ayasofya to her own experience, do not belong in a biography. Peirce can speculate - draw conclusions based on the facts that she has. However, she can鈥檛 lead readers to imagine that H眉rrem ever thought of what architectural endeavors she might take on should she succeed with S眉leyman, sympathized with Anne Boleyn, or compared herself to G眉rc眉 Hatun (a Christian-born consort beloved by a Muslim ruler) - Byzantine royals like Eirene; that S眉leyman instructed her in the art of war, tutored her as a diplomat, or gave her a say in how the design of the new palace harem, especially whilst S眉leyman鈥檚 mother Hafsa was alive. There鈥檚 no evidence for any of these things. Such fanciful scenarios are better suited for a work of historical fiction - & considering how Peirce omits pertinent information she herself described in The Imperial Harem to suit the narrative, she might as well have written a novel!
Empress gives the impression that it was by marrying S眉leyman that H眉rrem became a 鈥渜ueen鈥 & obtained the stature that she had. However, this is not the case. Although Peirce mentions that noblewomen married Ottoman sultans in prior centuries, she neglects to inform the reader that because royal wives were barred from having children, they were not as powerful as their slave counterparts who did. 鈥淲omen without sons were women without households & therefore women of no status,鈥 she summarized in Harem. Because the Ottomans granted greater prestige to women who bore a son over a childless one, limiting reproduction limited access to political power: 鈥淩oyal wives were deprived of this most public mark of status [the patronage of public buildings], presumably because they lacked the qualification that appears to have entitled royal concubines to this privilege: motherhood. The suppression of the capacity of royal wives to bear children is an example of the Ottoman policy of manipulating sexuality & reproduction as a means of controlling power. To deny these women access to motherhood, the source of female power within the dynastic family, was to diminish the status of the royal houses from which they came.鈥
Peirce gives the example of Sitti艧ah (Sitti) Hatun, who married Mehmed the Conqueror. She describes Sitti鈥檚 wedding to Mehmed, an event surrounded by great pomp & circumstance. However, she neglects to inform the reader that Sitti鈥檚 marriage to Mehmed bore no children. Franz Babinger writes that although she had wed to the great conqueror himself, the childless Sitti was ultimately powerless & died lonely & forsaken. As Peirce explained in 1993, unions such as that of Sitti & Mehmed were largely symbolic & strictly political in nature: 鈥淎lthough their careers as consorts of the sultans often began with the ceremonial of elaborate weddings, royal brides were ciphers in these events. What counted was the ceremony itself & what it symbolized: less the union of male & female than a statement of the relationship between two states. The function of the bride, particularly in view of the non role that awaited her as the sultan鈥檚 wife, was to symbolize the subordinate status of the weaker state.鈥
There is no question that H眉rrem & S眉leyman鈥檚 marriage rattled Ottoman society. Nevertheless, it is alarming that Peirce, who once authored a seminal work on the structure & politics of the harem, omits the fact that it was motherhood & not marriage that empowered a woman in the dynastic family. Such gaps in knowledge might lead those previously unfamiliar with the Ottoman harem to believe that marriage made H眉rrem a 鈥渜ueen鈥 & gave her political power, going so far to describe her & S眉leyman as a 鈥渞eigning couple鈥 at one point. (Bizarrely, she does discuss abortion in Empress, yet avoids writing about dynastic family politics beyond mentioning 鈥減olitical planning鈥.)
Far more perturbing is Peirce鈥檚 insistence that H眉rrem did more than she actually did for the empire. She claims that it was H眉rrem who played a pivotal role in 鈥渕oving the Ottoman Empire into modern times鈥 & allowed the sultanate to survive through reforms she introduced. While she certainly paved the way in some regards for the women who followed her, Peirce overestimates H眉rrem鈥檚 impact on the history of the Ottoman empire. There are other influential figures who helped preserve the sultanate, other forces that allowed it to flourish. Furthermore, Peirce downplays external factors that allowed for H眉rrem鈥檚 ascent in the first place - namely the absence of a valide after 1534, not to mention S眉leyman鈥檚 lasting infatuation for her - in favor of emphasizing her purportedly 鈥渦nique鈥 qualities of endurance, intelligence, & being a survivor.
Peirce goes on to anachronistically frame H眉rrem as a feminist figure. In one passage, she describes her as a 鈥渇orward-thinking equal opportunity employer鈥 who 鈥渃hallenged women鈥檚 etiquette鈥 because she wanted a female scribe for her foundation. Peirce鈥檚 language suggests that it was H眉rrem alone who bolstered women鈥檚 opportunities, yet she does not present any evidence that H眉rrem introduced or influenced any social or political reforms for women of the time. Yet perhaps most erroneous is Peirce鈥檚 claim that credits H眉rrem with the start of 鈥渁 more peaceable system of identifying the next sultan鈥. This couldn鈥檛 be further from the truth. Following their H眉rrem鈥檚 death, her sons Selim & Bayezid became entangled in a civil war that ultimately ended with the deaths of Bayezid & his children. Even in the absence of prolonged violence, subsequent secession crises of the sixteenth century were resolved through the execution of the new sultan鈥檚 brothers, including infants. It was only with the ascent of thirteen-year-old Ahmed in 1603 that this tradition was set aside for dynastic concerns, although the practice of fratricide did not cease entirely.
When Peirce isn鈥檛 falling over to frame H眉rrem as a wonder woman, she dismisses those who stood in opposition to her ascent, such as Mahidevran, S眉leyman鈥檚 previous consort & mother of his firstborn son, Mustafa. Peirce takes a dim view of Mahidevran, presenting her as a jealous woman who needed to be reminded of her duties as mother of a prince. She is depicted a woman worried about losing a man鈥檚 favor, rather than a woman who, by all historical accounts, was deeply concerned for her son鈥檚 future. Early in S眉leyman鈥檚 reign, the ambassador Pietro Bragadin reported that Mustafa was his mother鈥檚 鈥渨hole joy鈥 at their residence in Istanbul. Later, the crucial role Mahidevran played in supporting her son at his provincial governorships was detailed by visiting diplomats. In 1540, Bassano noted her guidance in 鈥淸making] himself loved by the people鈥 at his court in Diyarbak谋r. Mahidevran鈥檚 efforts to protect Mustafa, as well as the bond between mother & son, were observed by Bernardo Navagero in 1553: 鈥淸Mustafa] has with him his mother, who exercises great diligence to guard him from poisoning & reminds him every day that he has nothing else but this to avoid, & it is said that he had boundless respect & reverence for her.鈥
Ibrahim Pasha is another figure disparaged by Peirce鈥檚 negative bias. A friend from S眉leyman鈥檚 youth who quickly ascended to the rank Grand Vizier, Ibrahim was not only a skilled & cultured diplomat admired by his counterparts in Europe, but a talented administrator & commander. Eric R. Dursteler writes, 鈥淒uring this time, by all accounts, Ibrahim ruled the day-to-day affairs of the empire effectively. S眉leyman seems to have been content to give Ibrahim nearly unlimited power & autonomy in running the Ottoman state, & all matters of any significance passed directly through his hands. [...] If Ibrahim's initial ascent was due to his personal ties to S眉leyman, in his years as grand vizier, he proved himself a capable diplomat & an effective political & military leader. In 1524, S眉leyman sent Ibrahim to Egypt to restore order following an uprising led by a rebellious Ottoman official sent to rule the earlier conquered province. Ibrahim reorganized legal & fiscal institutions, punished mutinous officials & subjects with severity, established schools, restored mosques, &, by all accounts, restored peace & order to the region.鈥
Conversely, Peirce describes Ibrahim as 鈥渄ispensable鈥, implies that he was holding S眉leyman back from achieving his greatest accomplishments, & states 鈥渙ther minds were better suited鈥 to administer the empire as Grand Vizier. When comparing her portrayal of Ibrahim to that of R眉stem Pasha, Mihrimah Sultan鈥檚 husband - & H眉rrem鈥檚 son-in-law - Peirce鈥檚 bias becomes clear. She fawns over R眉stem while being completely dismissive of Ibrahim.
Finally, there is Mustafa: the son of H眉rrem鈥檚 rival Mahidevran & S眉leyman鈥檚 oldest living son. Empress paints Mustafa as a brat, calling him 鈥渁 proud child whose sense of entitlement was apparently both acute & insecure." Peirce recounts an ambassadorial report describing the young prince鈥檚 jealousy over his father鈥檚 relationship with Ibrahim - a story she previously featured in Harem: 鈥楾he sultan sent I虈brahim the gift of a beautiful saddle for his horse with jewels & all; & Mustafa, aware of this, sent word to I虈brahim to have one like it made for him ; [I虈brahim] understood this & sent him the said saddle, & said to him, 鈥榥ow listen, if the sultan learns of this, he will make you send it back.鈥
Peirce鈥檚 two treatments of the same story is telling. In Harem, the account illustrates 鈥淚虈brahim鈥檚 kindly patience in soothing the child Mustafa鈥檚 jealousy of his father鈥檚 affection for his favorite鈥, with Peirce noting that the relationship 鈥渟eems to have consolidated鈥 over time - particularly with the emergence of his half-brothers as a greater threat. In Empress, on the other hand, Peirce only concludes that such incidents 鈥渕ay simply reflect a jealousy on Mustafa鈥檚 part of anyone close to his father鈥 without mention of the relationship improving, nor of Mustafa recognizing his true rivals to survival.
Whenever Peirce describes Mustafa鈥檚 intelligence & his worthiness, she emphasizes that these are the opinions of his contemporaries. It鈥檚 as though she wants to disagree, but can鈥檛 because historical evidence only points to Mustafa being how he is remembered to be: an intelligent & a worthy heir to the throne. Mustafa was the clear favorite among the people & the army. In Harem, Peirce notes that 鈥淢ustafa was universally desired to follow his father to the throne鈥 according to Venetian reports in 1550 & again in 1552. He was more popular than Selim or Bayezid, H眉rrem鈥檚 living sons who were contenders to the throne. Mehmed, H眉rrem鈥檚 firstborn, could have been a match for Mustafa had he lived longer, but in the absence of evidence this is mere speculation.
Mustafa鈥檚 execution did indeed stain H眉rrem鈥檚 name. She & R眉stem Pasha were blamed by contemporaries for orchestrating the downfall of the beloved heir apparent. Peirce predictably sets out to clear H眉rrem鈥檚 name & exonerate her of involvement in the tragedy, but instead of focusing on a lack of hard evidence, she illogically places blame on Mustafa for his own demise. Writing that previous historians studying the topic 鈥渓argely failed to consider Mustafa鈥檚 part in the affair鈥, Peirce points out the prince鈥檚 popularity & that people were already hailing him as 鈥渟ultan鈥 - something S眉leyman would undoubtedly find threatening. Perhaps Mustafa was the victim of his own success, but it would be deeply unfair to blame him for meriting praise & adoration from others, which could only be earned through excelling in his princely duties.
Had Mustafa won the throne after S眉leyman died, Ottoman tradition would dictate the deaths of H眉rrem鈥檚 sons - even Cihangir, said to be fond of his eldest half-brother. According to Navagero, S眉leyman reminded Cihangir of this reality, warning his son that 鈥淢ustafa will become the sultan & will deprive [you & your brothers] of your lives.鈥 Per the Ottoman practice of institutionalized fratricide, someone would have to die.
Beyond the fact that her sons would face near-certain death had he ascended the throne, a victory for Mustafa would deprive H眉rrem of power, leaving her to face the fate that had befallen Mahidevran after her son鈥檚 death: destitute & cast aside. As Thys-Senocak explained in Ottoman Women Builders: The Architectural Patronage of Hadice Turhan Sultan: 鈥淯nlike her European counterparts, the prestige & political legitimacy that an Ottoman valide possessed was derived from her position as the mother of the reigning sultan, rather than through her position as the widow of the deceased sultan [...] Once the father of her son was dead, the valide鈥檚 sole source of power & legitimation was through her son, the reigning sultan.鈥 If Mustafa took the throne after S眉leyman鈥檚 death, H眉rrem would have lost not only her sons, but also her status.
The fate of a mother was thus closely bound to the survival of her son. It was not only a mother鈥檚 duty to ensure that her son was a contender to the throne, but through his mother鈥檚 influence that he survived. A prince鈥檚 mother was his mediator, his guardian, his most steadfast ally; it was she who sought to safeguard him from potentially hostile forces, including his own father. While imperial lalas (tutors) ensured that a prince was prepared to take the throne, it was the mother who acted as 鈥渁n effective agent for her son through her connections with the imperial court, her wealth, & her status as a royal consort & as the most honored person at the provincial court after her son.鈥
H眉rrem, however, did not accompany her sons to their provincial governorships to fulfill the principal role of a prince鈥檚 mother. Once again bucking established practice, she remained in Istanbul with S眉leyman during this time save for the occasional visit.
Herein lies the irony of Peirce鈥檚 H眉rrem. Only remotely involved with her sons鈥 provincial careers, painting H眉rrem as an innocent flower who never intrigued at court would mean she did nothing to protect, promote, or prepare them at one of the most crucial points of their lives. If she did not have a hand in anything, whether at sanjak or in Istanbul -- not even to eliminate their biggest competition -- what did Peirce鈥檚 H眉rrem do to ensure her sons鈥 success and survival? It is only in the epilogue of Empress that she briefly notes H眉rrem鈥檚 involvement in ensuring one of her sons received aid he might need. Nevertheless, in the quest to exonerate her subject, Peirce inadvertently makes it seem H眉rrem neglected her chief responsibility as mother of the sultanate鈥檚 heirs. Even with multiple sons and no precedent to follow, one would think she would鈥檝e done anything to help or protect them -- and by extension, herself. Yet Peirce provides no evidence or examples of H眉rrem鈥檚 involvement in educating or preparing her sons for rulership.
Ultimately, Empress of the East only does H眉rrem a disservice by presenting her as a proto-feminist, empowered heroine rather than a complex, controversial historical figure. Peirce embellishes and exaggerates when it suits her narrative, just as she painstakingly aims to clear her subject of alleged wrongdoings. But this approach backfires when one considers the book as a whole: rather than a mother and a politician who understood the importance of protecting her sons and readied them for the throne, Peirce gives the impression H眉rrem did little to advance their interests -- despite the allegedly large clout she had as 鈥渜ueen鈥....more
Veronica 馃嚨馃嚟馃ゥ
>
Books:
ottoman-history
(21)
Loading...
