Back More
Salem Press

Great Lives from History: The Middle Ages

Mehmed II

by J. R. Broadus

Sultan of Ottoman Empire (r. 1451-1481)

As sultan of the Ottoman Empire, Mehmed II commanded armies that captured Constantinople, and under his rule control of the Balkans and Anatolia in substantial portions was extended as the Ottoman state became one of the most important powers of early modern times.

Areas of Achievement Government and politics, military, warfare and conquest

Early Life

Although it is known that, as a prince of the Ottoman Empire , Mehmed (meh-MEHT) was the son of Murad II , the sixth sultan, the identity of the boy’s mother has not been established with certainty. It would appear that she was one of the sultan’s slave girls, and she may have been from a non-Muslim family in the Balkans. Mehmed was born in Adrianople, the Ottoman capital of that time. At about the age of two, he was sent to a special court at Amasya, in north central Anatolia; later, he was taken to Manisa, near İzmir, where he was educated by tutors who subsequently gained distinction in the academic profession or as government ministers.

For reasons that still remain obscure, and notwithstanding Ottoman reverses of this period during fighting in Europe, in August, 1444, Murad abdicated in favor of Mehmed. A coalition of Christian powers had been formed, under the leadership of Hungary’s János Hunyadi, which was also promoted by the Byzantine Empire, the Papacy, and Venice, in an effort to present a common front against the Ottoman state. After attending to conflicts in Asia, and even with his son nominally ruler, Murad returned at the head of a large army, and a major defeat was inflicted on their opponents at Varna, in Bulgaria, on November 10, 1444. While this major battle served notice to European governments that the Ottomans could not easily be dislodged from the Balkans, other engagements followed; though the position of George Branković, the despot of Serbia, remained problematical, the renowned Skanderbeg (George Kastrioti) of Albania had commenced resistance to the Ottomans. In May, 1446, Murad returned to the throne in the wake of a janissary revolt. Another important battle was fought in October, 1448, at Kosovo in Serbia; while Murad commanded Ottoman troops, Mehmed also took part in actual fighting as Hungarian and other armies were put to flight.

For Mehmed, family concerns arose at a relatively early age. His first son, who later was to become his successor as Bayezid II , was born to him by Gülbahar, a slave girl, in December, 1447, or January, 1448. In 1450, Mehmed’s second and favorite son, Mustafa, was born, though the identity of Mustafa’s mother remains unclear. Subsequently a marriage with a woman from a suitable social station was arranged when Mehmed took Sitt Hatun, from a noted family of central Anatolia, as his wife. Mehmed also became the father of six other children, some of whom were born from liaisons or marriages that were concluded after he came to power. Although during Murad’s second reign Mehmed may have continued to regard himself as the rightful sultan, a reconciliation of sorts would appear to have taken place; yet Murad died of apoplexy rather unexpectedly. On February 18, 1451, Mehmed ascended to the throne in Adrianople. While in the past Ottoman rulers, including Murad, had eliminated family members for political reasons, Mehmed had two of his brothers executed and sanctioned the practice of fratricide by which, for nearly two centuries, sultans summarily were to remove potential rivals from any struggle for supreme power.

Mehmed II.

ph_0111204949-Mehmed2.jpg

Life’s Work

At the outset of his second reign, Mehmed II attended to a flurry of unrest in Anatolia and stirrings of discontent among the janissaries before turning to military planning, which was centered on a single consuming ambition. The Byzantine Empire had maintained a prolonged and precarious existence even though Constantinople was surrounded by territories under Ottoman control; by virtue of its double line of walled fortifications and its position at the edge of the Bosporus, the imperial city remained difficult of access to armies in the field. While the Byzantine emperor Constantine XI Palaeologus had threatened to support a different claimant to the Ottoman throne, a trade agreement with Venice had been renewed, at the request of Çandarli Halil, the grand vizier, and a treaty was negotiated with Hungary. Though Halil advised against precipitous action, it had become evident that the beleaguered city could expect little European assistance. Mehmed commenced preliminary operations with the construction of a major fortress north of Constantinople. A sympathetic Hungarian gunsmith known as Urban helped to cast cannon of a size larger than any that previously had been used. In the face of an Ottoman blockade, Byzantine forces received few reinforcements, apart from a Genoese contingent from Chios; some Venetian and Genoese fighting men already had been stationed nearby. The Ottomans possessed an immense numerical advantage, with possibly eighty thousand men under arms, as opposed to about nine thousand defenders.

The siege began on April 6, 1453, and, following repeated bombardments, Mehmed resolved finally to storm the city. On May 29, after some sharp fighting at many points, Ottoman troops entered Constantinople through a gate to the north and subdued their opponents in short order. Apparently Constantine died at this time. For his military prowess, Mehmed acquired the nickname Fatih, or the Conqueror. The city was pillaged briefly, and some prominent men, including Çandarli Halil, were executed. Afterward, to encourage the restoration and development of the new Ottoman capital, which became known as Istanbul, the sultan allowed many original inhabitants to return to their homes. Further settlers, both Muslims and Christians, were recruited from Asia and Europe. As a mark of his toleration for religious communities within the Ottoman Empire, Mehmed recognized Gennadius II Scholarios, a churchman who had opposed union with the Catholics, as the Greek Orthodox patriarch; a Jewish grand rabbi and an Armenian patriarch also were accepted as representatives of their faiths in Mehmed’s capital.

Subsequent military endeavors revealed the broad sweep of Mehmed’s ambitions and the extent of Ottoman power on two continents. Although in 1456 Ottoman forces failed to take Belgrade after a siege of six weeks when Hunyadi’s forces intervened successfully against them, the Hungarian commander died later that year, and shortly thereafter George Branković of Serbia also died. In 1459, the Ottomans annexed what remained of the southern Slavic area, while in 1463 most of Bosnia was occupied as well. During other expeditions, Ottoman forces captured Athens in 1456, and during the next four years much of the Morea (in Greece) was overrun. Some setbacks that were suffered by Mehmed’s armies did not have lasting effects. A campaign into Walachia to enforce a previous tributary relationship, against the infamous Vlad Ţepeş (the Impaler, who was also the historical prototype for the famous horror figure Dracula), resulted in a grisly massacre of Ottoman soldiers. Yet, under pressure from Mehmed, Vlad was deposed in 1462, and when he returned to power much later he met with death in battle.

In Asia Minor, Ottoman forces secured the submission of Trebizond, the last Greek kingdom of the Byzantine era, in 1461. Subsequently a particularly dangerous threat arose when Uzun Ḥasan , ruler of the Turkmen Ak Koyunlu Dynasty that had become established in western Iran, attempted to displace Mehmed’s authority in central Anatolia. An entire Ottoman army was mobilized, and, when Mehmed led his troops in person, a convincing victory was obtained at Bashkent near Erzincan, on August 11, 1473. Ottoman control of the area northwest of the Euphrates River thus was consolidated. An important success for Ottoman policy on the northern coast of the Black Sea came in 1475, when the Tatar khanate of the Crimea acknowledged Mehmed’s suzerainty. Political complications at several points in the Balkans had led to a prolonged war with Venice, between 1463 and 1479, and during much of his later reign Mehmed was also involved in undertakings of several sorts in Europe. Although the redoubtable Skanderbeg, who was allied with the Venetians, had resisted Ottoman incursions until shortly before his death in 1468, eventually the fortress of Krujë surrendered to Mehmed himself in 1478, and Ottoman forces held most of Albania. In the end, Venice was compelled to make peace on relatively harsh terms. Mehmed evidently was not entirely appeased, and in 1480 an Ottoman army obtained a foothold in Italy by capturing Otranto; a landing at Rhodes, in the eastern Mediterranean, was repelled, however, by the Knights of Saint John.

While Mehmed frequently accompanied his armies during their campaigns, his administrative work brought many reforms, some of which provoked an adverse reaction after his death. His conception of power was along strictly autocratic lines, and often he did not attend meetings of the Divan, or council of state. Where he did delegate authority, he exercised some care in maintaining distinctions among offices that were subordinate to his. Mehmed also directed the codification of laws , which were promulgated on his authority and were meant to serve regulatory purposes alongside Qur՚ānic law. Fiscal policies were far-reaching but high-handed. Mehmed instituted the sale of private monopolies in essential goods to augment government revenues; some private estates and religious foundations were confiscated as state lands. Commercial relations with other countries were promoted even as Mehmed had customs duties increased. One of the most widely resented of Mehmed’s measures, however, was the repeated reduction in the silver content of Ottoman coinage.

In other respects, Mehmed has been regarded as having had an urbane and cosmopolitan outlook. He was a patron of literary men, including Persian poets, and he composed a collection of verse in his own right. In addition to supervising the conversion of Byzantium’s most famous church into the Hagia Sophia mosque, he left further architectural monuments, of which the Faith mosque in Istanbul was perhaps the most notable. He had an interest in the visual arts that overcame any religious objections to such forms of representation, and he supported the production of medals and paintings by which his appearance has become known. The most famous portraits of Mehmed, by Sinan Bey, a Turkish artist, and by Gentile Bellini, a Venetian master whom Mehmed commissioned to paint his likeness, show broad, angular features with the eyes set in a stern fixed gaze; a large curved nose was set above thin, taut lips and a small, slightly receding chin. A brown or reddish mustache and full beard suggested somewhat more of an imperious bearing. Sinan’s work also depicts Mehmed as having some tendency toward corpulence, which reputedly affected the sultan during his later years. Indeed, when Mehmed died, on May 3, 1481, at a place about 15 miles (25 kilometers) east of Istanbul, the effects of gout were cited as a cause. Some suspicion has existed, however, that he was poisoned.

Significance

The interpretations that have generally been advanced of Mehmed II’s character and aims are of several sorts. While his importance in the expansion of Ottoman power has invariably been acknowledged, some have maintained that he intended essentially to extend his authority over an area roughly corresponding to that of the Byzantine Empire from a much earlier period. It has further been contended, though with some notable exaggerations, that older Byzantine practices served as the model for some of the measures that were implemented during his reign. Other views have emphasized the Turkic elements in his methods of rule and have noted that continuity among Ottoman rulers was stressed in the official court historiography of Mehmed’s period. It has been maintained as well that, because primacy with respect to other Islamic states was asserted in many of Mehmed’s pronouncements, he regarded his efforts as the fulfillment of aspirations that were at once both religious and political. The conception of Mehmed as a Renaissance ruler who was at home in several cultural milieus, while alluring to certain writers, has been sharply criticized as neglecting the priority he typically assigned to military matters. On the other hand, the notion that Mehmed was unusually cruel and vindictive, or inordinately devoted to conquest as an end in itself, has been challenged by those who would argue, with some justice, that the Ottoman ruler was probably no more severe than other commanders of his age. In all, it would appear that, very much in the way that Ottoman traditions combined political and cultural elements from several sources, the achievements of Mehmed may have arisen from aims and ideas that reflected his various purposes.

Further Reading

1 

Babinger, Franz Carl Heinrich. Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time. Edited by William C. Hickman. Translated by Ralph Manheim. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1978. This imposing work by an important modern scholar is by far the most significant Western study of Mehmed’s statecraft. Provides references that summarize scholarly views and research findings. Bibliography, index.

2 

Ducas. Decline and Fall of Byzantium to the Ottoman Turks. Translated by Harry J. Magoulias. Detroit, Mich.: Wayne State University Press, 1975. A well-informed Greek writer produced this chronicle of which the most useful and detailed portions deal with events from the time of Murad until 1462. In spite of a tendency to criticize Mehmed harshly, the author provides some shrewd insights about political developments of this period. Bibliography.

3 

Freely, John. Istanbul: The Imperial City. New York: Viking, 1996. Explores the history of the city now known as Istanbul, from the seventh century b.c.e. through the fall of the Ottoman Empire in the early twentieth century. Includes chapters on the city when it was known as Constantinople and its fall during Mehmed’s time. Illustrations, spelling and pronunciation guide, bibliography, index.

4 

Gueriguian, John L. “Amirdovlat, Mehmed II, and the Nascent Armenian Community of Constantinople.” Armenian Review 39, no. 2 (1986): 27-48. Some interesting and little-known facts about one of Mehmed’s personal physicians are presented here alongside speculation about Mehmed’s physical and psychological condition.

5 

Inalcik, Halil. “The Policy of Mehmed II Toward the Greek Population of Istanbul and the Byzantine Buildings of the City.” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 23/24 (1969/1970): 231-249. In a solid scholarly study, the author demonstrates the extent of Mehmed’s efforts to promote recovery and urban development after the siege of 1453.

6 

Kritovoulos. History of Mehmed the Conqueror. Translated by Charles T. Riggs. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1954. The divided sympathies of a Greek writer who became the governor of Imbros under Mehmed are expressed in this narration of events from 1451 until 1467. The work was dedicated to Mehmed and praises him highly in places, but delivers lamentations for the fate of peoples in formerly Byzantine lands. Illustrations.

7 

Michałowicz, Konstanty. Memoirs of a Janissary. Translated by Benjamin Stolz. Ann Arbor: Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures, University of Michigan, 1975. The experiences of a Southern Slav who was taken prisoner and accompanied Mehmed’s armies were set down in this account, which is of particular value for the period between the fall of Constantinople and the Bosnian campaign of 1463. Text transcribed from a Czech manuscript, with the translation on facing pages. Bibliography, index.

8 

Raby, Julian. “Pride and Prejudice: Mehmed the Conqueror and the Italian Portrait Medal.” Studies in the History of Art 21 (1987): 171-194. A noted art historian herein provides some interesting evidence, drawn partly from Venetian archives, about Mehmed’s interest in portraiture during various stages of his career.

9 

Runciman, Steven. The Fall of Constantinople, 1453. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990. This study by a distinguished Byzantinist, originally published in 1965, is probably the standard work in English on the famous siege. Attention to scholarly detail does not impede the retelling of enthralling and tragic episodes from the last days of the city’s resistance to the Ottomans. Illustrations, maps, bibliography, index.

10 

Sicker, Michael. The Islamic World in Ascendancy: From the Arab Conquests to the Siege of Vienna. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2000. Presents a history of the rise and expansion of the Islamic empire, including the conquests of Mehmed. Concludes with a chapter on the end of the ascendancy. Bibliography, index.

11 

Tursun Beg. The History of Mehmed the Conqueror. Edited and translated by Halil Inalcik and Rhoads Murphey. Chicago: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1978. The work of an important Ottoman writer is presented here in a summary translation followed by a facsimile of an original Turkish manuscript. The author, who participated in a number of Mehmed’s campaigns, comments in places on the harsher qualities of Mehmed’s character in an account meant partly as instruction for Mehmed’s successor. Bibliography, index.

Related articles in Great Events from History: The Middle Ages

532-537: Building of Hagia Sophia; 1040-1055: Expansion of the Seljuk Turks; 1077: Seljuk Dynasty Is Founded; 1273: Sufi Order of Mawlawīyah Is Established; 1442-1456: János Hunyadi Defends Hungary Against the Ottomans; May 29, 1453: Fall of Constantinople.

Citation Types

Type
Format
MLA 9th
Broadus, J. R. "Mehmed II." Great Lives from History: The Middle Ages, edited by Shelley Wolbrink, Salem Press, 2005. Salem Online, online.salempress.com/articleDetails.do?articleName=GLMA_3631013311.
APA 7th
Broadus, J. R. (2005). Mehmed II. In S. Wolbrink (Ed.), Great Lives from History: The Middle Ages. Salem Press. online.salempress.com.
CMOS 17th
Broadus, J. R. "Mehmed II." Edited by Shelley Wolbrink. Great Lives from History: The Middle Ages. Hackensack: Salem Press, 2005. Accessed October 22, 2025. online.salempress.com.