Related News
Empires in collision
By Eric Ormsby |
June 21, 2009, Sunday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
BY 1683, Kara Mustafa, grand vizier of the Ottomans, was still a pasha with something to prove. He had been raised in the household of the illustrious Koprulu family, which would supply an unbroken succession of brilliant -- if often ill-fated -- grand viziers to the Ottoman court. Described by a contemporary as "corrupt, cruel and unjust," Kara Mustafa had risen to become admiral of the Aegean galley fleet but had also succeeded in navigating the treacherous cross-currents of palace intrigue; by 1675, the sultan had offered him his daughter's hand.
His steady rise did nothing to satisfy his fierce ambition. For Kara Mustafa, the ultimate prize lay to the West. More than a century before, in 1529, Suleiman the Magnificent had besieged Vienna, but the onset of winter forced him to abandon the assault. To succeed where Suleiman had failed represented the pinnacle of imperial glory.
As Andrew Wheatcroft brilliantly shows in "The Enemy at the Gate," the skirmishes and the pitched battles that raged for centuries between Habsburgs and Ottomans, and their numerous vassals on both sides, represented not so much a "clash of civilizations" as a collision of empires.
Territory was the aim, along with something less tangible but equally compelling: the right to claim the legacy of the Roman Empire. Leopold I, Holy Roman Emperor, took it as given that the legacy belonged rightfully to the Habsburgs, but the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed IV believed just as fervently that the title of Roman Caesar was his. Had not his ancestor, Mehmed the Conqueror, toppled the Byzantines and seized Constantinople two centuries before? Far from wishing to obliterate the Byzantine past, the Ottomans meant to assume it as their own, and Vienna, the seat of the Habsburg empire, was the final prize.
Kara Mustafa is only one of many bold and complex characters Wheatcroft brings swaggering to the stage in his scholarly but fast-paced narrative. He is especially attuned to the hidden contradictions of his personages. Leopold I is seen as simultaneously rigid and dithering, a disastrous combination, while Mehmed IV, though bookish and retiring, reveled in martial exploits; he would lead his vast army as far as Belgrade before transferring command to Kara Mustafa. Wheatcroft relies on such adroit contrasts to depict these distant figures.
Thus, Prince Eugene of Savoy, the "noble knight" of Habsburg legend, was not only the greatest general of the age but an impassioned bibliophile, a discerning connoisseur who managed his private life so discreetly that it remains a mystery to this day. Beside him, Charles V, Duke of Lorraine, another Habsburg hero, emerges as all raw courage and bristling audacity, alive in the saddle in the thick of battle.
Wheatcroft, the author of several earlier books on both Habsburgs and Ottomans, states that he set out here to portray the Ottoman "face of battle," borrowing a phrase from the classic work by John Keegan, and in this he succeeds; his narrative is thrilling as well as thoughtful, a rare combination. Even so, a subtle imbalance prevails.
The Ottomans inspired dread in their enemies; fear was part of their arsenal. But, as Wheatcroft repeatedly demonstrates, the Habsburgs were fearsome too, and perhaps even crueler than their opponents, engaging not only in full-scale massacres but in flayings, beheadings and impalements.
Perhaps because Wheatcroft hasn't drawn on Ottoman Turkish sources, his Ottomans, for all his skill at depicting them, appear oddly imperturbable.
His steady rise did nothing to satisfy his fierce ambition. For Kara Mustafa, the ultimate prize lay to the West. More than a century before, in 1529, Suleiman the Magnificent had besieged Vienna, but the onset of winter forced him to abandon the assault. To succeed where Suleiman had failed represented the pinnacle of imperial glory.
As Andrew Wheatcroft brilliantly shows in "The Enemy at the Gate," the skirmishes and the pitched battles that raged for centuries between Habsburgs and Ottomans, and their numerous vassals on both sides, represented not so much a "clash of civilizations" as a collision of empires.
Territory was the aim, along with something less tangible but equally compelling: the right to claim the legacy of the Roman Empire. Leopold I, Holy Roman Emperor, took it as given that the legacy belonged rightfully to the Habsburgs, but the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed IV believed just as fervently that the title of Roman Caesar was his. Had not his ancestor, Mehmed the Conqueror, toppled the Byzantines and seized Constantinople two centuries before? Far from wishing to obliterate the Byzantine past, the Ottomans meant to assume it as their own, and Vienna, the seat of the Habsburg empire, was the final prize.
Kara Mustafa is only one of many bold and complex characters Wheatcroft brings swaggering to the stage in his scholarly but fast-paced narrative. He is especially attuned to the hidden contradictions of his personages. Leopold I is seen as simultaneously rigid and dithering, a disastrous combination, while Mehmed IV, though bookish and retiring, reveled in martial exploits; he would lead his vast army as far as Belgrade before transferring command to Kara Mustafa. Wheatcroft relies on such adroit contrasts to depict these distant figures.
Thus, Prince Eugene of Savoy, the "noble knight" of Habsburg legend, was not only the greatest general of the age but an impassioned bibliophile, a discerning connoisseur who managed his private life so discreetly that it remains a mystery to this day. Beside him, Charles V, Duke of Lorraine, another Habsburg hero, emerges as all raw courage and bristling audacity, alive in the saddle in the thick of battle.
Wheatcroft, the author of several earlier books on both Habsburgs and Ottomans, states that he set out here to portray the Ottoman "face of battle," borrowing a phrase from the classic work by John Keegan, and in this he succeeds; his narrative is thrilling as well as thoughtful, a rare combination. Even so, a subtle imbalance prevails.
The Ottomans inspired dread in their enemies; fear was part of their arsenal. But, as Wheatcroft repeatedly demonstrates, the Habsburgs were fearsome too, and perhaps even crueler than their opponents, engaging not only in full-scale massacres but in flayings, beheadings and impalements.
Perhaps because Wheatcroft hasn't drawn on Ottoman Turkish sources, his Ottomans, for all his skill at depicting them, appear oddly imperturbable.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
