Part 1013

"Ulucciali, whom Selim … made commander-in-chief of all his naval forces, exerted himself with extraordinary vigour and activity in fitting out a new fleet, to supply the place of that which had been ruined in the battle of Lepanto; and such at this time were the resources of the Turkish empire, that he was ready by the month of April [1572] to leave Constantinople, with more than 200 galleys, besides a great number of other ships. With this fleet he coasted along Negropont, the Morea, and Epirus; put the maritime towns into a posture of defence; chastised with great severity many of those Christians who had been concerned in the invitation given to Don John [who had just been offered the sovereignty of Albania and Macedonia by the Christians of those countries]; and afterwards took his station at Modon in the Morea, with an intention to watch there the motions of the enemy. He had full leisure to finish all the preparations which he judged to be necessary. The allies disputed long with one another concerning the plan of their future operations." and were also held inactive by the Spanish king's fear of an attack from France. "It was the last day of August before the allies could effectuate a junction of their forces; and it was the middle of September before they came in sight of the enemy. … Ulucciali drew out his fleet, as if he intended to offer battle; but no sooner had he made a single discharge of his artillery … than he retired under the fortifications of Modon." The allies thought first of besieging Modon, but gave up the project. They then sent Alexander Farnese, prince of Parma—afterwards so famous in the Netherlands—to reduce Navarino; but he had no success and abandoned the siege. The expedition then returned to Messina. The Venetians, dissatisfied with the conduct of the war, now faithlessly negotiated a separate peace with the Turks; but Philip II. of Spain maintained his alliance with the Pope (now Gregory XIII.), and ordered his brother, Don John, to proceed the next spring to Africa and undertake the reduction of Tunis. Don John obeyed the order, "carrying with him for this purpose a fleet of 2,000 sail, having 20,000 foot on board, besides 400 light horse, 700 pioneers, and a numerous train of heavy artillery. Tunis was at this time in the hands of the Turks, commanded by Heder Basha, whom Selim had lately sent to govern the town and kingdom. Heder, seized with consternation at the approach of the Spanish fleet, left Tunis with his troops and a great number of the inhabitants, and Don John took possession of the place without meeting with the smallest opposition. Philip had instructed his brother, when he sent him on this expedition, to destroy Tunis, and to strengthen the fortifications of the isle and fortress of Goletta. But instead of complying with these instructions, Don John resolved to fortify the town more strongly than ever; and having laid the foundations of a new fort, or citadel, he treated all the inhabitants who remained with lenity and indulgence; and engaged many of those who had fled to return and submit to the Spanish government; after which he carried back his fleet to Sicily." It is believed that Don John had conceived ambitious hopes of a kingdom on the African border of the Mediterranean. "In the summer following [1573], Selim sent Ulucciali against Tunis, with a fleet consisting of 300 ships, having about 40,000 troops on board, under the command of his son-in-law, Sinan Basha. The new fort which Don John had begun to build was not yet complete. Nor was the garrison which he had left strong enough to hold out long against so great a force." Before Don John could reassemble a fleet with which to make his way to the protection of his African conquest, both Tunis and Goletta were carried by assault, and passed again into the possession of the Turks and their Moorish vassals.

_R. Watson, History of Philip II., book 9._

ALSO IN: _Sir W. Stirling-Maxwell, Don John of Austria, volume 2, chapters 1-3._

TURKS: A. D. 1572-1623. Beginning of the decline of the Ottoman power.

"The conquest of Cyprus was the last great exploit which ever added materially to the dominions of the Porte; the battle of Lepanto was the final blow which destroyed its naval superiority. The days of greatness had gone by. The kingdoms of the West were developing their strength, and had learnt the policy of union and of peace among themselves. Their armies had acquired the discipline and had learnt the lessons in which the Ottomans had shown so formidable an example; and their navy rode triumphant on the seas. The Empire, no longer in the hands of Charles V., with foreign interests to absorb its power, could bestow an undivided strength upon its own affairs; and the Emperor Ferdinand was looking forward with some hope to an incorporation of Hungary, which should end the weakness, and ensure the safety, of his eastern frontier. As the pre-eminence of the Porte, however, and the dread of it declined, a wider intercourse for her with Europe began. … Slowly the Sultans were beginning to take part in the schemes and combinations of the Christian Powers, from which they had hitherto so contemptuously stood aloof. Five reigns succeeded to that of Selim [the Sot, son of Solyman the Magnificent]. during which the progress of decline continued marked. {3142} The indolence of Amurath III. [1574-1595], the incapacity of Mahomet III. [1595-1603], the inexperience of Achmet I. [1603-1617], the imprudence of Othman II. [1618-1622], and the imbecility of Mustapha [1617-1618, and 1622-1623], contributed to bring the Ottoman Empire into a condition of anarchy and weakness. During the reign of Amurath hostilities with Austria were renewed, and successive losses testified to the enfeebled state of the Ottoman arms."

_C. F. Johnstone, Historical Abstracts, chapter 3._

TURKS: A. D. 1591-1606. Wars in Hungary and Croatia. Great victory at Cerestes. Peace of Sitvatorok.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1567-1604; and 1595-1606.

TURKS: A. D. 1621-1622. War with Poland. Victory at Cecora and defeat at Choczim.

See POLAND: A. D. 1590-1648.

TURKS: A. D. 1623-1640. War with Persia. Siege and capture of Bagdad. Horrible massacre of the inhabitants.

"During the first twelve years of the reign of Amurath IV. [1623-1635], the Ottoman Empire had been occupied with active hostilities in different parts of Europe, and especially with Poland, Germany, and the maritime powers of the Mediterranean. … In the east, however, great losses had been sustained. Shah Abbas, a sovereign well entitled to the epithet 'Great,' had repossessed himself of Diarbekr, Baghdad [1623], the district of the Euphrates, with Kourdistan; and, on the north, he had regained Armenia, and a considerable part of Anatolia. The Sultan therefore resolved to undertake an expedition to recover the territories thus taken from him, and to this he was encouraged by the death of his formidable foe the Persian monarch. Amurath marched from his capital early in 1635, to superintend the operations of the campaign. … In passing through Asia, he took care personally to examine into the conduct of his various Pashas, and wherever it was requisite he subjected them to a severe punishment. One of them, the Pasha of Erzeroum, was put to death. Having at that city reviewed his army, he found them to amount to 200,000 men, and as his first object was the seizure of Armenia, the key of the Persian provinces, he besieged Erivan, and notwithstanding a vigorous defence, the fortress in a few days surrendered. Tauris and the surrounding provinces speedily fell into his hands, and Amurath returned in the winter to Constantinople, entering the city in great triumph. The affairs of Europe were in such a state of confusion, that it was several years ere he again appeared in the east, the scene of so many of his victories. The Khan of Tartary threw off his allegiance, the Polish serfs appeared suddenly on the Caspian shores, and, joining a body of Russians, attacked and carried the fortress of Azof. … The European war, which at this time occurred, rendered it unnecessary for the Sultan to entertain any serious apprehension from his enemies in the west, who were sufficiently occupied with their own affairs. He therefore directed his attention to Persia, resolved to subjugate that country, and to seize upon Baghdad. To this end his preparations were proportionally great. An immense army was collected on the Asiatic side of the Bosphorus. This mighty host numbered more than 300,000 armed men, and was accompanied by a numerous array of miners, as well as artillery. And after having consulted an astrologer, Amurath embarked amid all the display which Asiatic pomp could furnish, and directed his progress toward Persia. After a successful march, this immense army arrived at Baghdad. The city was strongly fortified, and defended by a resolute army of 80,000 men. The Shah, however, was absent in the northern part of his dominions, which had been threatened by an invasion from India, under Shah Jehan, father of the celebrated Aurungzebe. Baghdad, therefore, was left to its own resources. The operations of the siege began in October 1638. … The besieged made repeated sallies, with a force of five or six thousand men at a time, who, on retiring, were succeeded by a similar number, and thus the losses of the Ottoman army were sometimes very great. The 200 great guns, however, which played upon the ramparts, at length made a wide opening in the walls, and after five days' fighting in the breach thus made, where 'the slain lay in immense multitudes, and the blood was stagnated like a pool to wade through,' the city was taken. Quarter was given to 24,000 of the defenders, who remained alive, on condition that they would lay down their arms. But as soon as they had done so, the Sultan perfidiously issued orders to the Janizaries, and the work of butchery commenced, and was carried on by torch-light during the night on which the city was taken, and an indiscriminate slaughter took place, neither youth, nor age, nor sex being spared by the ruthless conqueror and his merciless soldiers. … In the morning of the 23d of December the Sultan marched into the city, passing with his army over the innumerable bodies of the unfortunate Persians, whose gallant defence merited a better fate. Some 15,000 women, children and old men were all that remained of the inhabitants, who, but a day or two before, filled every part of the magnificent capital. … The capture of Baghdad closed the military career of the Sultan."

_R. W. Fraser, Turkey, Ancient and Modern, chapter 17._

"A peace with Persia, on the basis of that which Solyman the Great had granted in 1555, was the speedy result of Amurath's victories (15th September, 1639). Eriwan was restored by the Porte; but the possession of Bagdad and the adjacent territory by the Ottomans was solemnly sanctioned and confirmed. Eighty years passed away before Turkey was again obliged to struggle against her old and obstinate enemy on the line of the Euphrates. … Amurath died at the age of 28, on the 9th of February, 1640."

_Sir E. S. Creasy, History of the Ottoman Turks, chapter 13._

TURKS: A. D. 1625-1626. War in Hungary.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1606-1660.

TURKS: A. D. 1640. Accession of Ibrahim.

TURKS: A. D. 1645-1669. The war of Candia. Conquest of Crete.

"The Turks attacked the island [of Crete] in 1645, and the war went on till 1669, when Crete was lost. This is called the war of Candia, from the long siege of the town of Candia, which was most gallantly defended by the Venetians, with the help of many volunteers from Western Europe. It must be remembered that, though the island has sometimes got to be called Candia, from the town of Candia and its memorable siege, yet the island itself has never changed its name, but has always been called Crete both by Greeks and Turks."

_E. A. Freeman, The Ottoman Power in Europe, page 145._

{3143}

"The war which cost the republic of Venice the island of Crete owed its origin to the incessant irritation caused by the Western corsairs in the Archipelago. Some strong measures adopted by the Venetians to suppress the piracies committed by Turkish and Barbary corsairs in the Adriatic, created much dissatisfaction on the part of the Othoman government, which looked chiefly to the Mohammedan corsairs as a protection against the Christian corsairs in the Levant, and considered it the duty of the Venetians to suppress the piracies of these Christians. The Porte at last resolved to seek a profitable revenge, and a pretext soon presented itself. In 1644 some Maltese galleys made a prize which offended the personal feelings of the reigning sultan, Ibrahim. … As he feared to attack Malta, he resolved to make the Venetians responsible for the shelter which Crete had afforded to the corsairs. The Porte affected to consider Venice as a tributary State, which was bound to keep the Archipelago free from Christian corsairs, in return for the great commercial privileges it enjoyed in the Othoman empire. Immediate preparations were made for attacking Crete, but the project was concealed from the Venetian senate, under the pretence of directing the expedition against Malta. … In the month of June 1645, the Othoman army landed before Canea, which capitulated on the 17th of August. This treacherous commencement of the war authorised the Christian powers to dispense with all the formalities of international law in lending assistance to the Venetians during the celebrated War of Candia, which lasted nearly 25 years. During this long struggle the Venetians generally maintained the superiority at sea, but they were unable to prevent the Othoman navy, whenever it exerted its full force, from throwing in supplies of fresh troops and ample stores, by which the Othoman army was enabled to command the whole island, and kept Candia, and the other fortresses in the hands of the republic, either blockaded or besieged. The Greeks generally favoured the Turks, who encouraged them to cultivate their lands by purchasing the produce at a liberal price, for the use of the army. … The squadrons of the republic often ravaged the coasts of the Othoman empire, and on one occasion they carried off about 5,000 slaves from the coast of the Morea, between Patras and Coron. In the year 1656, after Mocenigo's great victory at the Dardanelles, they took possession of the islands of Tenedos and Lemnos, but they were driven from these conquests by the Othoman fleet in the following year. At the end of the year 1666, the grand vizier, Achmet Kueprily, one of the greatest ministers of the Othoman empire, took the command of the siege of Candia. The whole naval force of Venice, and numerous bands of French and Italian volunteers, attempted to force the grand vizier to raise the siege; but the skill of the Italian engineers, the valour of the French nobles, and the determined perseverance of Morosini, were vain against the strict discipline and steady valour of the Othoman troops. The works of the besiegers were pushed forward by the labours of a numerous body of Greek pioneers, and the fire of the powerful batteries at last rendered the place untenable. At this crisis Morosini proved himself a daring statesman and a sincere patriot. When he found that he must surrender the city, he resolved to make his capitulation the means of purchasing peace for the republic. … On the 27th September 1669, Achmet Kueprily received the keys of Candia, and the republic of Venice resigned all right to the island of Crete, but retained possession of the three insular fortresses of Karabusa, Suda, and Spinalonga, with their valuable ports. No fortress is said to have cost so much blood and treasure, both to the besiegers and the defenders, as Candia; yet the Greeks, in whose territory it was situated, and who could have furnished an army from the inhabitants of Crete sufficiently numerous to have decided the issue of the contest, were the people on the shores of the Mediterranean who took least part in this memorable war. So utterly destitute of all national feeling was the Hellenic race at this period."

_G. Finlay, History of Greece under Othoman and Venetian Domination, chapter 2._

TURKS: A. D. 1649. Accession of Mohammed IV.

TURKS: A. D. 1660-1664. Renewed war with Austria. Defeat at St. Gothard. A twenty years truce.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1660-1664.

TURKS: A. D. 1664-1665. Alliance with France broken. War of the French with Tunis and Algiers. See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1664-1684.

TURKS: A. D. 1670-1676. Wars with the Poles.

See POLAND: A. D. 1668-1606.

TURKS: A. D. 1681-1684. Rupture with France. French attack on Scio and war with the Barbary States.

See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1664-1684.

TURKS: A. D. 1683. Great invasion of Austria. Siege of Vienna. Overwhelming defeat by Sobieski and the Imperialists.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1668-1683.

TURKS: A. D. 1683-1699. Expulsion from Hungary. The Peace of Carlowitz.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1683-1699.

TURKS: A. D. 1684-1696. War with the Holy League. Expulsion from Hungary. Venetian conquests in Greece. Revolution at Constantinople. Accession of Solyman II. Czar Peter's capture of Azov. The first Russian acquisition on the Black Sea.

In 1684, "a league against the Turks, under the protection of the Pope, and thence called the Holy League, was formed by the Emperor, the King of Poland, and the Republic of Venice; and it was resolved to procure, if possible, the accession to it of the Czar of Muscovy. The Venetians were induced to join the league by the hope of recovering their former possessions, and declared war against the Sultan, Mahomet IV., July 15th. The war which ensued, now called the Holy War, lasted till the Peace of Carlowicz in 1609. Venice in this war put forth a strength that was little expected from that declining state. Many thousand Germans were enrolled in her army, commanded by Morosini, and by Count Königsmark, a Swede. The Austrians pursued the campaign in Hungary with success [steadily expelling the Turks—see HUNGARY: A. D. 1683-1609]. … While the war in Hungary had been conducted by the Emperor with such eminent success, the King of Poland had made only some fruitless attempts upon Moldavia. The Czar of Muscovy, Ivan Alexiowitsch, who, after settling some disputes about boundaries with the King of Poland, had joined the Holy League in 1686, did not fare much better. All the attempts of the Russians to penetrate into the Crimea were frustrated by the Tartars. {3144} The Venetians, on the other hand, had made some splendid conquests. St. Maura, Koron, the mountain tract of Maina, Navarino, Modon, Argos, Napoli di Romania, fell successively into their hands. The year 1687 especially was almost as fatal to the Turks in their war with Venice as in that with Hungary. In this year the Venetians took Patras, the castles at the entrance of the bay of Lepanto, Lepanto itself, all the northern coast of the Morea, Corinth, and Athens. Athens had been abandoned with the exception of the acropolis or citadel; and it was in this siege that one of the Venetian bombs fell into the Parthenon, which had been converted by the Turks into a powder magazine, and destroyed the greater part of those magnificent remains of classical antiquity. The acropolis surrendered September 29th. The fall of Athens, added to the disastrous news from Hungary, excited the greatest consternation and discontent at Constantinople," and brought about a revolution which deposed the sultan, raising his brother Solyman to the throne (1687) in his place. "By the capture of Malvasia in 1690, the Venetians completed the conquest of the Morea. The Isle of Chios, taken in 1694, was again lost the following year; but in Dalmatia and Albania the Venetian Republic made many permanent conquests, from the mountains of Montenegro to the borders of Croatia and the banks of the Unna. The operations of the Poles in the Turkish war were insignificant; but in July 1696, the Russians, under the Czar Peter, after many long and fruitless attempts, at length succeeded in taking Azov, at the mouth of the Don; a most important conquest as securing for them the entry into the Black Sea. It was the fall of this place, combined with the defeat at Zenta [in Hungary], that chiefly induced the Porte to enter into negociation for a peace."

_T. H. Dyer, History of Modern Europe, book 5, chapter 4 (volume 3)._

TURKS: A. D. 1691. Accession of Achmet II.

TURKS: A. D. 1695. Accession of Mustapha II.

TURKS: A. D. 1703. Accession of Achmet III.

TURKS: A. D. 1709-1714. Refuge given to Charles XII. of Sweden. His intrigues. Unlucky invasion of Moldavia by Peter the Great. The Treaty of the Pruth.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1707-1718.

TURKS: A. D. 1714-1718. War with Venice and Austria. Recovery of the Morea and disasters in Hungary. The Peace of Passarowitz.