ghazimehmedivandcandia 143distinct yet connected, loyalty was owed to the dynasty and not individual sul-
tans, who became far less significant figures than in the past. The royal house-
hold was separated from the state, although the state still earned its legitimacy
from being affiliated with the dynasty. Sultans “were needed to reign: ruling
became the prerogative of others.”^17 Sultans were not needed as warriors.
For some sultans, the only sword they would ever unsheathe was the cer-
emonial one that accompanied their accession. And if they were mad or minors
they did not hold it long. Because they became dispensable, seventeenth-
century sultans were the first in Ottoman history to be executed. Some sultans
attempted to break this pathetic mold. Mehmed IV’s uncle Murad IV has a
more robust reputation, for he conquered Yerevan and Baghdad and built vic-
tory kiosks at Topkapı Palace in the fourth courtyard overlooking Istanbul to
commemorate the successes. He was broken down by these campaigns, which
caused him poor health and an early death at the age of twenty-nine. Murad IV
did not have the reputation of being a just ruler, for although Katip Çelebi
writes that he was the “greatest of sultans to have reigned since 1 000 [ 1 590],”
as a result of his “using the sword of execution to frighten and terrify the rebel-
lious, taking the reins of state in his able hands,” most of his commands went
against sultanic statute and “completely terrorized everyone with his oppres-
sion” and shedding of blood.^18 Moreover, he is not considered a pious sultan.
He never endowed any mosques of his own, instead installing open-air places
of prayer at archery grounds.^19 Osman II attempted to make himself into awarrior-sultan who engaged in battle with the Christian enemy and left the
palace in order to not appear “more a persona than a person” to his subjects.^20
His effort was resisted violently and he paid the ultimate price. Nevertheless,
sultans realized that “the original justification of a sultan’s right to rule was as
a leader in war.” Accordingly, to acquire political and religious legitimacy and
counter criticism, they had their chroniclers emphasize their martial exploits.^21
Changes in the royal household led to the passing of power from strong sul-
tans to royal women such as the valide sultan, who became the most powerful
and authoritative figures in the dynasty during the “age of the queen mother,”
along with the chief eunuch of the harem, who had access to both male and
female members of the dynasty, serving as liaison between the harem and the
sultan.^22 This figure rivaled the grand vizier for control of imperial policy in an
era when sultans were raised in the harem and the valide sultan was the most
influential figure of the dynasty. Prior to Mehmed IV’s reign, a frightening
number of sultans, including his father, were dethroned and executed. Sultans
seemed irrelevant and were treated as if disposable. The Ottoman court wit-
nessed an era dominated by women. With the decreasing importance of the
sultan and the increasing role of Ottoman royal women, it is not surprising that