Talk:Ottoman dynasty

Ottoman Sultans as Roman Emperors

Can someone provide a citation for the claim that Mehmet Fatih was crowned Roman Emperor by the Orthodox Patriarch? If he was in fact crowned, did successive Ottoman sultans also officially take the title of Roman Emperor (cite)? Dec. 15 '05 20:36 EST 129.22.46.197

Fatih Sultan Mehmet became the Roman Ceasar but not officially. He invaded the last lands of Roman Dynasty and as we know, till the rise of the Holy Roman Empire, Ottoman Sultans didn't even have a rival in this position. Finally, we can consider that Mehmet II had all the power of a Ceasar but not officially became a Ceasar. (This answer is from Dusrun Onur Ilhan, from Turkey/Istanbul)

Mehmed II indeed claimed the title of Caesar of the Roman Empire when he conquered Constantinople in 1453, and his heirs held it till the abdication of the Mehmed VI in 1922. The title was reinforced around 1500 when Manuel Palaiologos, grandson or grandniece of Constantine XI and heir apparent of the throne, decided to sold his rights to the current sultan Bayezid II. Manuel became a Turkish nobleman and his sons made career in the Ottoman navy. The claim was contested by the Christian powers, however; not just because they didn't think that the Roman emperor could be a Muslim, but because when Manuel sold his rights he had actually an elder brother living in exile in Naples, Andreas, who claimed the Byzantine throne due to his primogeniture. Andreas died childless in 1503 and named Ferdinand II of Aragon as his heir, and through him the claim passed to the Kings of Spain. So, in essence, there are reasons to see the Ottoman sultans as Roman emperors, or not. They though they were and acted as such in any case.--Menah the Great 03:41, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Ottoman Sultans as Caliphs

Which one was the first one to be a Caliph?--iFaqeer 08:04, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

Selim I (Yavuz Sultan Selim) was the first Caliph. He gained the title after the conquest of Egypt where the Holy Treasures (Kutsal Hazineler) were kept. 212.98.201.1 09:01, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This is disputed: see http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/sangat/khilafat.htm

It may be disputed (but then so were the last two US Presidential elections!) but Selim was nevertheless the first Ottoman caliph, which is all that is relevant to this article. While the earlier sultans took the title for granted, it is not true that the claim was an 18th c fabrication. The legitimacy of the claim was thoroughly discussed and debated in the 16th c. Jpiccone 19:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Djem 1

How Come Djem was taken out as a Sultan for a brief period?? User:Tancarville

See Cem.—iFaqeer | Talk to me! 20:24, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

Other meanings of Osmanli

I know of another meaning of Osmanli: Ottoman language. I think there also is a people of the name Osmanli. Sarcelles 19:07, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Osmanlı" means "Ottoman." It's an adjective and can refer to just anything Ottoman (e.g. the language). Therefore, the title of the page should be changed to make clear WTF is meant by "Ottoman." In Turkish, the article is called (transl.) "the Ottoman Caliphs." (check [1], registration is needed but for free).

I googled "osmanli" in English and couldn't find serious articles, where it was used as a noun like here.

Another thing: It's not "Osmanli" but "Osmanlı." Not "i" but "ı", a Turkish character from the ASCII set. There was a big discussion in wikipedia some time ago about conventions for non-English names as titles for articles. It was decided that, if regional/local titles are the same as (or very similar to) the English titles only with e.g. German umlauts or French accents then the local variant should be used. So, if there was an English concept as "Osmanli" it should be "Osmanlı" for a title.

Summing up, "Osmanli" is a) incorrectly spelled and b) makes no sense in Turkish c) nor does it seem to be in use in English. Ben ^T/_{C 00:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC)}

Still no comments... Anyway, I propose moving the page to Ottoman dynasty. Please comment now. Ben ^T/_C 15:12, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree in full, Ottoman dynasty would be great, though I'm not certain whether the 'd' should be capitalized or not. This page should then be made a redirect to Ottoman (and so should Osmanlı); that disambig should in turn be expanded to include links to the Ottoman Turkish language, the Ottoman Dynasty and possibly more. /The Phoenix 15:38, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment and the suggestions. I'll do it now. Ben ^T/_C 13:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Done. This title makes much more sense.

I capitalized the d. Alternative titles could be Ottoman caliphs or The Ottomans. I made some redirects. Ben ^T/_C 14:04, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Great! /The Phoenix 13:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Osmanli Culture

The new section "Osmanli Culture" should probably be moved to Culture of the Ottoman Empire. /The Phoenix 18:19, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

page titles

Most monarchs on wikipedia follow the naming conventions for titles, but none of the Ottoman sultans do. I propose that the titles be changed to add "... of Turkey" or "..., Ottoman Sultan" or "..., Ottoman Emperor". Many of them need disambiguation and this is the format that the European monarchs follow. Any comments? Cuñado - Talk 05:55, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Timeline Clarification

the ottoman empire's main article says it was founded/begun in 1299. that's the date given in the article that osman declared the kayi's independence from the seljuks. but the ottoman dynasty's article says it ruled the empire started in 1281. how is that possible? are both dates correct? and does the answer lie in the dynasty's article that mention's osman's father isnt included in the dysnasty timeline? 4.230.174.139 00:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

You are right. 1299 is the correct date. I have changed the dates in the article accordingly. Yucina (talk) 17:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The beginning of the Ottomans' sovereign state is in dispute. It is definitely around 1299; however it is not certain. Most probably this day was accepted by the Ottomans -and many historians- later since it is -almost- the beginning of a new century -both in Hijret(Muslim) and Gregorian calendars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.149.185.13 (talk) 22:15, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Armenian wars

I have removed the paragraph relating to the Armenian rebellion/massacre (Headed "Just for clarification") from this article as it quite simply does not belong here. This article is about the House of Osman, not the alleged policies of the Ottoman government almost a century ago. The paragraph did not clarify anything already contained within the remainder of the article. Pavlvs-rex

Which mid-17th century Sultan was referred to as Mahomet Han? Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 01:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Interlanguage links

The interlanguage links were quite messy. Currently, three Wikipedias have separate articles for the Ottoman Dynasty and the List of Sultans of the Ottoman Empire: the Chinese, English and Turkish Wikipedias. These are two different topics, and I have thus organized the links as follows:

Ottoman Dynasty

• cs:Osmani
• el:Οθωμανική Δυναστεία
• en:Ottoman Dynasty
• es:Osmanlíes
• fr:Dynastie ottomane
• it:Dinastia ottomana
• ja:オスマン家
• la:Ottomannidae
• lv:Osmaņu dinastija
• nl:Ottomaanse dynastie
• nn:Det osmanske dynastiet
• no:Det osmanske dynastiet
• pt:Dinastia Otomana
• sv:Osmanska dynastin
• tr:Osmanlı Hanedanı
• uk:Османи
• zh:奧斯曼王朝

List of Sultans of the Ottoman Empire

• bs:Sultani Osmanlijskog carstva
• de:Liste der Sultane des Osmanischen Reichs
• en:List of Sultans of the Ottoman Empire
• eo:Listo de osmanidaj imperiestroj
• fi:Luettelo osmanien sulttaaneista
• he:סולטן עות'מאני
• hu:Oszmán szultánok listája
• hy:Օսմանյան սուլթանների ցանկ
• ka:ოსმალეთის სულთნების სია
• ko:오스만 제국의 군주
• ru:Османские султаны
• sr:Spisak sultana Osmanskog carstva
• tr:Osmanlı padişahları
• zh:奥斯曼帝国苏丹列表

I have also removed the link to the Polish Wikipedia (pl:Władcy Turcji) since it has a much broader scope than the articles in other projects: it covers all Turkish monarchs, not just the Ottomans. --BomBom (talk) 23:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Ethnicity

In the infobox the ethnicity of the dynasty is given as "Turkish". However, Valide Sultans (see the article "List of Valide Sultans") were always non-Turkish so the later Sultans would have hardly any trace of Turkish ancestry. Is there a way of clarifying or qualiflying this in the article?

Ethnicity is primarily a matter of culture, not genetics.Eregli bob (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Strange assertion

"Thus they still formally acknowledged the sovereignty of the contemporary Seljuk Sultanate of Rûm and its successor, the Ilkhanate."

This statement makes no sense. In what way is the "Ilkhanate" a successor to the Konya Rum Sultanate ?Eregli bob (talk) 15:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)