Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Middle Eastern and African History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Middle Eastern and African History Middle Eastern and African History Forum - Egypt, Syria, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and all nations of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 24th, 2012, 06:35 AM   #11

Belisarius's Avatar
Dominus Historiae
 
Joined: Jun 2006
From: U.K.
Posts: 9,651

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazyman View Post
The above post makes absolutely no sense and it seems you wrote a wall that basically says "go search, search what? I don't know" .
English is not everyone's first or second language so it often pays to read the post carefully and ask questions about intended meanings; or as Americans might say, "Cut Anax some slack, dude."
Belisarius is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 26th, 2012, 04:43 PM   #12
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Constantinople
Posts: 2,248

Quote:
Originally Posted by sultantutan View Post
Guys, maybe some of you are experts here, I need some enlightenment regarding this, out of curiosity. What kind of Military Tactics did the Ottomans used during their golden age 15th - 16th Century that made them one of the best armies in the world. Thanks in advance!
Artillery was the key I think.
Farinal is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 12:35 AM   #13

Essa's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Bahrain
Posts: 1,758

Got 2 questions here:

- Were "Duals" important at Ottoman time ?.....and I mean the Duals that take place between individuals from opposing armies before the start of the battle....and were Ottomans famous for it ?

- I might be wrong on this point but I'll mention it....: When I go through the history of Ottoman military (in parallel to what I've known about Arab military) I get the impression that more 'Sultans' are glorified than 'Commanders'...or in other words: more Sultans are "in the picture" than Commanders.

In Arab history we may glorify rulers such as Al-Rashidun, and others from Umayyad or Abbassid time, but a host of commanders are also glorified, like Khalid/Amr Ibn Al-Aas/Qutaiba/Tariq/Musa Ibn Nusair/Maslama Ibn Abdul Malik...etc.....

Based on what I know from Ottoman history....I can recall Hassan Ulubatli, Khair Alddin Barbaross, Ebrahim Pasha, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk himself in Gallipoli......I'm interested to know more....
Essa is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 01:06 AM   #14
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Karachi
Posts: 1,015

1) Not really, from what I've gathered they were your basic steppe army during the initial expansion under Osman and Orhan , later becoming more of a Renaissance army , with emphasis on firearms and defensive tactics, alongside large numbers of cavalry, often outnumbering the infantry .

2) The trend does appear to be apparent, Sultans are very active militarily . One more general you can add may be Piri Reis .
Lazyman is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 01:40 AM   #15

KUZGUN's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 345

Quote:
Originally Posted by Essa View Post
Got 2 questions here:

- Were "Duals" important at Ottoman time ?.....and I mean the Duals that take place between individuals from opposing armies before the start of the battle....and were Ottomans famous for it ?
You mean duels before battles? I've never heard of such thing in Ottoman era. But i'm not a historian.

Quote:
- I might be wrong on this point but I'll mention it....: When I go through the history of Ottoman military (in parallel to what I've known about Arab military) I get the impression that more 'Sultans' are glorified than 'Commanders'...or in other words: more Sultans are "in the picture" than Commanders.

In Arab history we may glorify rulers such as Al-Rashidun, and others from Umayyad or Abbassid time, but a host of commanders are also glorified, like Khalid/Amr Ibn Al-Aas/Qutaiba/Tariq/Musa Ibn Nusair/Maslama Ibn Abdul Malik...etc.....

Based on what I know from Ottoman history....I can recall Hassan Ulubatli, Khair Alddin Barbaross, Ebrahim Pasha, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk himself in Gallipoli......I'm interested to know more....
Yes you are right, sultans are more glorified than commanders under them. Maybe it's because of the Ottoman tradition of sultans commanding their armies themselves. According to stories about sultans, their sarıks (turban) were actually kefens (burial shroud), and they joined battles with that sarık-kefen. It means they were ready to fight and die with their army. There was nothing more heroic than sultan joining the battle. So they got all the credit. (and beautiful women)

This tradition was valid for the first half of Ottoman era. Mighty sultans commanding their armies, joining battles ended later.

Last edited by KUZGUN; November 27th, 2012 at 01:59 AM.
KUZGUN is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 02:18 AM   #16

Essa's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Bahrain
Posts: 1,758

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazyman View Post
1) Not really, from what I've gathered they were your basic steppe army during the initial expansion under Osman and Orhan , later becoming more of a Renaissance army , with emphasis on firearms and defensive tactics, alongside large numbers of cavalry, often outnumbering the infantry .

2) The trend does appear to be apparent, Sultans are very active militarily . One more general you can add may be Piri Reis .
Mmmmm. another Naval hero....maybe Sultans didn't use to command naval battles...
Essa is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 02:24 AM   #17

Essa's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Bahrain
Posts: 1,758

It is remarkable and admirable that the Sultans commanded their own armies. But does that necessarily mean that they have the "battle expertise" compared to their commanders !

And yes, my note on "Duels" was referring to individual engagements between selected soldiers/champions before commencement of the battle.....Its a great tactic for boost morale especially if you formidable warriors.
Essa is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 02:35 AM   #18

KUZGUN's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 345

Quote:
Originally Posted by Essa View Post
It is remarkable and admirable that the Sultans commanded their own armies. But does that necessarily mean that they have the "battle expertise" compared to their commanders !
Of course they benefited from experienced commanders and advisers like every other sultan/khan/king. It's just that they commanded armies during battles and they got all the credit for the victories instead of commanders under them.
KUZGUN is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 02:40 AM   #19
Scholar
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 582

Quote:
Originally Posted by Essa View Post
It is remarkable and admirable that the Sultans commanded their own armies. But does that necessarily mean that they have the "battle expertise" compared to their commanders !
Pargalı Ibrahim Pasha http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pargalı_Ibrahim_Pasha

also known as Frenk Ibrahim Pasha, was born a Christian Greek, near Parga, Epirus, Greece.

He was skilled commander of Suleiman's
Suleiman_the_Magnificent Suleiman_the_Magnificent
army, and as also on the diplomatic front portraying himself as "the real power behind the Ottoman Empire", the Venetian diplomats even referred to him as "Ibrahim the Magnificent", a play on Suleiman's usual sobriquet.
He eventually fell from grace after an imprudence committed during a campaign against the Persian Safavid empire, when he awarded himself a title including the word Sultan (in particular, his adoption of the title Serasker Sultan was seen as a grave affront to Suleiman).

Although he had long since converted into Islam, he maintained some ties to his Christian roots, even bringing his parents to live with him in the Ottoman capital.

Click the image to open in full size.
=============

Last edited by ANAX; November 27th, 2012 at 03:18 AM.
ANAX is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 03:07 AM   #20
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Karachi
Posts: 1,015

Quote:
Originally Posted by Essa View Post
It is remarkable and admirable that the Sultans commanded their own armies. But does that necessarily mean that they have the "battle expertise" compared to their commanders !
In a sense it does, they essentially grew up with the Army .
Lazyman is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Middle Eastern and African History

Tags
military, ottoman, tactics


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which single person has contributed the most to military tactics and strategy? Cavanboy War and Military History 108 December 17th, 2012 06:18 AM
Norse military tactics Ri Fhionngaill European History 2 September 6th, 2011 10:57 AM
Ottoman Military haow85 Middle Eastern and African History 13 October 13th, 2010 09:32 AM
Bulgarian military tradition during the Ottoman rule czarnian Medieval and Byzantine History 2 January 30th, 2010 10:29 AM
Ottoman military from 1803-1908 Scipio240 War and Military History 1 July 12th, 2009 02:15 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.