This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
I have added back the paragraph on Ahmed I's military exploits—which was moved by OttomanReference to another article—on the grounds that this article, Ahmed I, should not neglect information relevant to the subject/person covered. The article is (at least at the current time) short enough that it is not overwhelming the reader, which is the general reason to start shunting information off to other articles (v. Wikipedia:Long article layout), and any reader coming to this page and wishing to find here any information directly relevant to Ahmed I should—I believe—be able to find it here. —Saposcat 06:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
"He was of kindly and humane disposition"? I read a book called "the lost village" about the Sack of Baltimore in which 100 Irish people were enslaved and sold in N. Africa. It described Ahmed as completely bonkers, having citizens randomly executed for no reason. Soldiers went in front of him to scare people away, because he was liable to order anyone to be killed. Also the brother he so kindly locked up went insane. EamonnPKeane 18:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
He locked his brother to protect him. You must read Ottoman sources. Baburhan 1 (talk) 13:16, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Historians do not know for sure why Mustafa I wasn't killed. To quote from Leslie Peirce, one of the foremost authorities on the subject:
"When Mehmed III's son Ahmed ascended to the throne in 1603 at the age of thirteen, his nine-year-old brother Mustafa was not executed. The reason generally stated for the sparing of Mustafa is that he presented no threat to his elder brother's rule because of his mental infirmity. However, the fact that Mustafa was later considered sane enough to be enthroned raises the question of the degree to which his infirmity could have been obvious at this early stage. A more plausible explanation for Mustafa's survival is that his execution would have entailed a great risk, pinning the survival of the dynasty on a single male child whose ability to father children was untested."
From The Imperial Harem (1993), 99. Chamboz (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)