Page 128 - sfogliabile 49

394 Evrim Türkçelik

Ottoman historiographers went on producing over the years were not
combined into a single, coherent interpretation. Thus, modern
historiography on the conquest of Tunis has been caught between two
extremes and has suffered from that uncertainty until today. This
article, while dwelling upon the historiographical quandary that
Barbarossa’s conquest of Tunis in 1534 represented, has revealed that
there was a real stalemate among the sources, which has turned the
issue of the authorization of the conquest of Tunis into a conundrum.
Until now, modern historians have found the most obvious statement
of sultan’s authorization only in the mid-seventeenth century. The
validity of this source has been challenged by the most recent literature
basing that challenge on the belief that no contemporary source existed
of an order by the sultan. This article has shown that an authorization
by the sultan was alleged already in the early sixteenth century. Thus,
immediately after the contest for Tunis, the main historiographical
tendency was to emphasize the existence of an order by the sultan. After
then, Ottoman historiographical practice experimented with silence,
denial, accusation and manipulation in its handling of this topic.
Especially, the emphasis of panegyric historiographical activity was
constrained for a considerable time by the exigencies of dynastic
concerns and dynastic propaganda. Their content was updated according
to political and dynastic interests so that the sultan was totally removed
from the decision and so entirely untouched by the humiliating defeat of
Barbarossa in 1535. In a period when the Ottomans perceived
themselves as exceptional in universal history and portrayed the sultan’s
struggle against Habsburgs and Safavids from imperial and messianic
perspectives, it would have been impossible to recognize the failure at
Tunis as a result of Süleyman’s own plans, given that the emperor
commemorated his victory for years to come as the greatest victory
against the Ottoman Empire.
Would or could Barbarossa have dared to conquer Tunis without
the consent of Sultan Süleyman? We cannot completely rule out an
opportunistic move by Barbarossa, which would be completely
compatible with his previous career particularly as the ruler of Algiers.
However, there is no convincing evidence of this. The existence of
different narratives, official interventions, deliberate manipulation and
what appears in retrospect as an attempt to relegate it to oblivion only
reinforces doubts over such an interpretation. Considering the period
in which these narratives were produced and the historical genres in
which they appeared, accepting that the conquest of Tunis in 1534
was the result of the sultan’s authorization would surely be a more
appropriate response and much closer to the historical reality.

Mediterranea - ricerche storiche - Anno XVII - Agosto 2020
ISSN 1824-3010 (stampa) ISSN 1828-230X (online)