Talk:Kösem Sultan

Origin

According to most Turkish sources she was of Bosnian (or Serbian) origin. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

she’s Greek 2A01:41E3:519F:500:5D2C:B213:6104:6D91 (talk) 21:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

I KNOW THAT HURREM (ROXALANE) WAS THE MOST POWERFUL SULTAN IN OTTOMAN EMPIRE

Wasn't she? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.236.129.137 (talk) 19:50, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Hürrem was an influential woman. But of course, the most powerful name was her husband, Suleyman I. Kösem on the other hand was a widow after 28 years of age. After 1617 she saw the reigns of two almost crazy sultans (Mustafa I and İbrahim) and two minors (Murat IV and Mehmet IV) She was unrivalled real ruler of the empire several times between 1617-1651. (except during the reigns of Osman II and grown up Murat IV ) Hürrem never had this opportunity. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Hurrem Was Never That Strong. Eventually In 1534s She Just Ruled Harem like Average Womans in The Sultanate (Mihrimah,Nurbanu And Handan) Until 1553 While Kosem Had Eventually The Best Reign Ever. Remember That Safiye Sultan Was also an Grandmother. But She Got Exiled. But Kosem Never did. 78.190.152.109 (talk) 08:42, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Stop Reverting and rewording citations

Anonymous user 78.179.176.237 (talk) is vandalizing the article and rewording existing sourced material to suit her own WP:POV , like it or not, the references you reworded respect WP:RS, and altering reliably sourced material is considered vandalism in Wikipedia. Please seek consensus for each of your removals first or they will be reverted and try to discuss changes rather than engaging in an edit war.- Best regards Prefamilile (talk) 22:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

RE : 78.179.176.237 is Zafer From istanbul is preparing thesis about Turkish History the most data written on the page was fictions rather than scientific data, obsessive and distorting on Official Ottoman History. The most powerful woman of Ottoman empire, KOSEM SULTAN WAS NOT, if emperiors considered it is Fatih Sultan Mehmet. This is not for the personel comments missionaries but history science.

I have discovered that two of the sources used have indeed been reworded (by replacing the word ‘Greek’ for ‘Bosnian’) in order to portray Kosem as a Bosnian instead of Greek, the real citations:

Source 1 - Amila Buturović, İrvin Cemil Schick (2007). ‘Women in the Ottoman Balkans: gender, culture and history.’ p. 23 explains that :

" Kosem, who was of Greek origin. Orphaned very young, she found herself at the age of fifteen in the harem of Sultan Ahmed."

Source 2 - Singh, Nagendra Kr (2000). International encyclopaedia of Islamic dynasties. Anmol Publications PVT. p. ‘423–424’, explains in more detail that:

" KOSEM WALIDE or KOSEM SULTAN, called Mahpaykar (ca. 1589-1651), wife of the Ottoman sultan Ahmad I and mother of the sultans Murad IV and Ibrahim I [q.vv.]. She was Greek by birth, and achieved power in the first place through the harem, exercising a decisive influence in the state during the reigns of her two sons and of her grandson Mehemmed IV"

These cites have been corrected. Zorlusert (talk) 14:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can see the major subject of dispute is her origin. ( I deduce this from the history of the page) She was either a Bosnian-Serbian or a Greek. The origins of the slave girls were never certain. Not only that, even the mothers of some sultans (e.g. Mustafa I and Mahmut II) are not known for sure. On the other hand the question who was the most influenced seems rather meaningless. Nobody can compare the influences in different circumstances and in different ages. If Kösem were the wife of say Selim I probably we wouldn’t even know her name. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:00, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

But we know name of Mustafa I and Mahmud II's mothers. They are Halime Sultan and Naksidil Sultan.There is reasonable certainty in this regard and widespread historical consensus.

(88.242.236.114 (talk) 07:56, Oliveoil. (UTC))Was'nt she sent by Bosnia Beylerbeyi from Bosnia ?

However there were many new claims reverted not only she was Greek (Not Rûm), even her father was a saint from Tinos... easy is Turks somehow was'nt cared their history.

Blows influence On Ottoman History etc. paid movies.

What makes you to consider she was the most powerful woman of the ottoman history, multicultural Eu?.(88.242.236.114 (talk) 07:27, 5 March 2011 (UTC)).

Picture.

Haseki Mahpeyker Kösem Valide Sultan was the most powerful woman in Ottoman history. She was the wife (most likely married) of Sultan Ahmed I. And she was mother of Sultan Murad IV and Sultan Ibrahim I. Also she was mother of Sultan Ahmed's 3 children another from Murad and Ibrahim. Kösem Mahpeyker was the manager of the Ottoman Empire from 1623 to 1633 but in other times, especially in Osman II's and Ibrahim I's reign, she was very influential too. She had such a big power that other sultans couldn't had. She was known as "Valide-i Muazzama" (which means Huge Mother), Sahibet-ül Makam (which means owner of chair) She was known as very charitable and helpful sultan by the community. The community was loving her so much. So, it must be a photograph of her. English Wikipedia is quite professional and it must be like that in its every title. Someone must upload her photograph urgently.

~~meltemtskn~~

Picture.

Haseki Mahpeyker Kösem Valide Sultan was the most powerful woman in Ottoman history. She was the wife (most likely married) of Sultan Ahmed I. And she was mother of Sultan Murad IV and Sultan Ibrahim I. Also she was mother of Sultan Ahmed's 3 children another from Murad and Ibrahim. Kösem Mahpeyker was the manager of the Ottoman Empire from 1623 to 1633 but in other times, especially in Osman II's and Ibrahim I's reign, she was very influential too. She had such a big power that other sultans couldn't had. She was known as "Valide-i Muazzama" (which means Huge Mother), Sahibet-ül Makam (which means owner of chair) She was known as very charitable and helpful sultan by the community. The community was loving her so much. So, it must be a photograph of her. English Wikipedia is quite professional and it must be like that in its every title. Someone must upload her photograph urgently.

~~meltemtskn~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meltemtskn (talk • contribs) 19:51, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

You use the name "Constantinople" but this name was until 1453. The official name was since 1453 Kostantiniyye or sometimes İstanbul. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_Istanbul — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.109.105.99 (talk) 12:04, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

The other female regent

The text states that two women in the history of the Ottoman Empire ruled officially as regents. One was Kösem Sultan, so who was the other one?

Likely Nurbanu Sultan, Selim II's wife. --Ukas (talk) 09:34, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

- Nope the other one was Turhan Hatice Sultan, wife of the Sultan Ibrahim I and mother of the Sultan Mehmed IV. She ordered Kösem's strangulation and took her place after her death Enginmoo (talk) 14:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Kösem behind the dethronement and execution of Ibrahim

Quite a few sources mention Kösem taking part of two attempts to depose her son sultan Ibrahim, of which the latter was successfull. Also several sources claim, that Kösem authorized or agreed on the execution of Ibrahim - even though he was pressured to do so by other parties in power. For example, in Honored by the Glory of Islam: Conversion and Conquest in Ottoman Europe by Marc David Baer (pp.36, citating 18th century text: "Karaçelebizade, Ravzatü’l-ebrâr zeyli, 12–13, 25.") "She articulated the fact that only she could make the final decision concerning who sat on the throne and whether the sultan lived or died: “They said my son Ibrahim was not suitable for the sultanate. I said ‘depose him.’ They said his presence is harmful, I said ‘let him be removed.’ I said ‘let him be executed.’ If anyone is under my protection, it is my son.”" Caroline Finkel, in Osman's Dream (pp. 189) writes: "All are united in the opinion that the Sultan must be deposed; it is impossible to do otherwise. You tell me that if I don’t hand over the Prince, they will enter the palace and take him by force." It was a measure of the authority which had accrued to the figure of the sultan’s mother, and to the present queen-mother in particular, that it was considered necessary to win her over before the Sheikhulislam could deliver his opinion. Although she could write to the Grand Vezir privately of her true feelings, in the company of the statesmen convention required that she appear to resist them. Fearing that attempts might be made to restore İbrahim, another juridical opinion was sought regarding his subsequent execution. " Also, Selcuk Aksin Somel in The A to Z of the Ottoman Empire suggest that she authorized his execution. --Ukas (talk) 13:04, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

There is a debate going on about this issue. There is no clear evidence about any possible intervention of Kösem on Ibrahim's death. But there is clear evidence showing that Kösem protected Ibrahim when Murat IV ordered his death. Enginmoo (talk) 14:27, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Ref-bombing

I would suggest that we strip some of the superfluous sources that refer to her Greek origin, as this is undisputed.--Zoupan 05:19, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Not one source on the page says she was of Bosnian origin

In my experience there were never any Bosnians in Tinos. The confusion seems to come from the fact she was bought as a slave in Bosnia after being captured in Tinos by Venetians. Easy to correct. 90.244.11.178 (talk) 10:12, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kösem Sultan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.4dw.net/royalark/Turkey/turkey5.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:46, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Rename to Mahpeyker Sultan

Kösem was just a nick name and not the personal name. So the page should be renamed to Mahpeyker Sultan. User:Retrieverlove (Talk) 06:05, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

That's a good point or it can be mahpeyker Kösem sultan Faris murad (talk) 21:19, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that name is in wide use, Leslie Peirce uses Kösem Seraphimsystem (talk) 21:47, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Nickname or not, it's her common name as sources use this name and Turkish people also refer to her as Kösem Sultan. Keivan.f^Talk 11:10, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Another version of Kosem's place of birth

TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi says that Kosem was probably from Bosnia. While Tinos remains the most accepted version, the Bosnia hypothesis should also be added as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.190.213.216 (talk) 07:03, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Kefalonia Island Syariff Hakim 90 (talk) 03:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

References

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Kösem portait.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:23, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Kösem contemporary.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:23, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Kosem's children

The entire section of the children should be rearranged, since, as for other Ottoman spouses, there is no consensus on the children, the number of which varies from 6 to 11 depending on the historian. Aise, Fatma, Handaze, Murad, Kasin and Ibrahim are universally considered sons of Kosem. Mehmed does not yet have universal consensus because Leslie Pierce excludes it, but modern research has shown him to be the son of Kosem and it is the most popular thesis. Gevherhan and Suleyman are very divisive, with some scholars arguing, with evidence worthy of reflection, that they were in fact the youngest daughter of Mahfiruz (the mother of Osman II) and the son of an unknown concubine or of Mahfiruz own. Finally, in a contemporary letter, a certain Selim and Orhan are mentioned as sons of Kosem. However, the lack of other sources and the failure to mention Kosem's other certain children already born cast doubt on their existence, with some historians believing these to be the middle names of Kasin and Ibrahim, but not all agree. I think the list needs to be rearranged to show these controversies. 31.156.255.6 (talk) 09:19, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Because both Selim and Orhan died in infancy, it's impossible to determine whether they were her children, but given the time gap between 1609 and 1612, it's possible. It is exceedingly perilous for Mehmed to rely on a single widely trusted source; the same can be said for Atike Sultan, who was born in 1614, the same year as Kasim. Kösem's biological daughter, Ayse Sultan, was born the same year as Mehmed, and both Ahmed and Kösem married in the same year. None of these four possible candidates could be considered because they are all controversial. Thank you. Jacob Historian (talk) 12:09, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Kösem Sultan hill.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Kösem and Mehmed

Why so much resistance to the inclusion of Mehmed among the sons of Kosem? I KNOW Pierce ruled it out, but history, especially Ottoman genealogy, is subject to change. The most modern and currently considered work in the field by exoerts is Baki Tezcan's "Debut of Kosem's Political Career" where he successfully demonstrates, using a new set of documents, sources and evidence, that Kosem was indeed Mehmed's mother. Tezcan is a respected university professor and expert in Ottoman history and his work, such as that on Mahfiruz, has convinced most of his colleagues. I believe that Wikipedia does not say fossilize due to the stubbornness of its editors and that it is therefore necessary to add, perhaps with notes, this new piece of the puzzle. If there is consent, I can provide the page note myself. Sira Aspera (talk) 10:26, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Marriage

Good evening,Kosem Sultan was never a legal wife,the letter that O. Kumrular found this means the letter was written 6 years after Sultan Ahmed’s death.Which means it was definitely not written by 12 year old Murad at the time.Kumrular does mention this document but she doesn’t say in orphan word she thinks its 100% convincing and authentic evidence,in fact she herself points out that apart from this one sentence nothing else in the world can justify their marriage.Kumrular HERSELF points out that it is possible that Kosem only wanted to increase her prestige,Historian Erhan Afyoncu also believes Kosem dictated the letter.Apart from the letter full of uncertainties nothing proves that marriage took place,its not mentioned anywhere. Cecac (talk) 09:04, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Kumrular does say it is convincing to her - in introduction and later when she comments matter. She says it would be great scandal if letter presented Kosem as wife when it was known she was not, and she thinks letter is enough to asses Kosem most likely was legal wife. I cannot brought exact quite because I have only Polish translation of her books, but read again book in your language and all what she wrote Sobek2000 (talk) 10:56, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

This is translation of exact fragment from my Polish edition, page 140: "If it was really the Sultana who ordered this letter to be written, I don't think she would dare to take such a risk and take responsibility for such a serious lie just to legitimize her rights. Venice knew every move of the Ottomans, watched their every breath, it wouldn't take them long to show that the content of this letter was a lie. Moreover, if the Venetians, who were everywhere, had made a fuss, a diplomatic scandal would undoubtedly have broken out. Therefore, we can believe that Kosem really was the legal wife of Sultan Ahmed". [Jeśli to naprawdę sułtanka zleciła napisanie tego listu, to nie sądzę, aby odważyła się aż tak ryzykować i brać na siebie odpowiedzialność za tak poważne kłamstwo tylko po to, aby usnakcjonować swoje prawa. Wenecja znała każdy ruch Osmanów, śledziła każdy ich oddech, nie zajęłoby więc im wiele czasu wykazanie, że treść  tego pisma jest kłamstwem. Co więcej, gdyby Wenecjanie, których było wszędzie pełno, narobili szumu, niewątpliwie wybuchłby skandal dyplomatyczny. Dlatego możemy uwierzyć, że Kosem naprawdę była ślubną żoną sułtana Ahmeda. ]

You said: "she doesn’t say in orphan word she thinks its 100% convincing ". Well, quotes from book clearly say it is convincing to her. She believes in this. Now, matter might be ambiguous, but you completely misquoted and misrepresented Kumrular in your post. She said that Kosem lying to increase her prestige would be unlikely (in Kumrular's view) and SHE thinks Kosem was indeed married to Ahmed. Now, she can be wrong in her beliefs, but book clearly supports idea that Kosem was wife of sultan. Sobek2000 (talk) 11:22, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Kosam’s first son is mehmet

Why this article is silent about mehmet who was the first son of kosam and ahmed 1. He was executed by his step brother osman the son of ahmed 1 and another concubine. 112.134.191.6 (talk) 11:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

It's not clear if Mehmet was Kosem's son. He is sometimes believed to be full brother of Osman. And if he was son of Kosem, then he would be his half-brother, not step-brother. Sobek2000 (talk) 12:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Missing Citation

Hello Anastasia magnificent! In edit , you added a footnote for "Sonyel 1993" and "Gibb 1954". But those citations don't exist in this article, and ever since then the material is unreferenced and causes an error in the page. Are you able to provide the missing citations so that the error can be fixed? Otherwise, I think the claims about her alternate name should be removed as they're not verifiable. -- mikeblas (talk) 16:13, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Rumi ≠ Greek

The sources that say Kösem was Greek (Turks called the citizens of the Roman Empire Rum) did not refer to her as Greek, but as Rum. Rum and Greek do not mean the same thing in Turkish. 60mergen (talk) 05:08, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Chief Consort

Here is the place to discuss whether or not to include the phrase "chief consort" in the article.
For my part, I was able to verify that Alex Croutier's Harem: The World Behind the Veil includes the phrases "he favored the Greek beauty Kösem" and "Kösem was fifteen years old when she became the favorite of fifteen-year-old Ahmed I". Is that enough? I'm not sure. "Chief" seems like some kind of title. Maybe "Favored consort" instead? Woodroar (talk) 16:24, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

So we do have the Pierce source used at Haseki Sultan that is used to assert the term means "chief consort". Peirce, Leslie P. (1993). The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. ISBN 0-19-507673-7.

I would be interested to see if other sources contradict this as, if the Pierce source is being misapplied it might have downstream impacts for several Ottoman empire articles. Simonm223 (talk) 16:29, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

In the cited page (107) Pierce writes about the meaning of "Haseki" shifting « from single "favorite" to something more general like "royal consort" » during Murad IV and Ibrahim I reigns.--Phso2 (talk) 23:55, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Simonm223 persists to add "chief consort" although it is unsourced, and pretends that there is a consensus when this is not the case since no source supports this.--77.130.249.165 (talk) 23:57, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

I would not say they are pretending there is a consensus in this discussion no one opposed it being added in this discussion until you now and two people seemed to agree to it with one person opposed. GothicGolem29 (talk) 00:11, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Two people "seemed"° to agree with no one producing a source backing the claim that it should be added is a consensus? Do you count the first participant who proposeed "favored consort" instead (because "chief consort is not in the sources") as "pro" or "contra" in the consensus?--86.71.230.140 (talk) 07:45, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

It is sourced from the Pierce ref mentioned above in the discussion. Simonm223 (talk) 10:48, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Woodroar said they weren't sure they offered that as an alternative but my read is that they didn't say they preferred it(happy to be corrected by them if they did mean that.) GothicGolem29 (talk) 11:54, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

But Pierce does not say anything about "chief consort" but translates "haseki" as "favorite", so how can you say that "it is sourced by Peirce" when it is not???--77.130.249.53 (talk) 21:41, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

State of the consensus : now we have woodroar who is not sure that "chief consort" is accurate and proposes another formulation, Simonnm223 who is "pro" but is wrong when he says it is sourced on Peirce, phso2 and gothicgolem29 who don't seem to take stance, me who is opposed because it is vague and unsourced, and Mariamaliaduchessadiparma who erased it but don't discussed here; so the new consensus is that the "chief consort" thing should not be re-added again, unless it is duly sourced, or at least discussed here beforehands.--77.130.249.77 (talk) 17:32, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I dispute that is the new consensus there is two who seem to be in favour of it one who isn't sure me then there is you who is opposed and possibly one more. That does not seem like the consensus you suggested. GothicGolem29 (talk) 17:39, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Who do you count as "in favour" except Simonnm223 (whose position is based on the wrong assertion that it is sourced, when it is not, and who could therefore change his mind when he realizes this)?--77.130.249.77 (talk) 18:02, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I counted User:Phso2 in favour as there comment seemed to suggest the term was used(if they say they didn't mean that I will happily stand corrected.) GothicGolem29 (talk) 18:06, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

If you look at the article history this user replaced "chief consort" by "haseki (favorite)" so you can't count them as favoriting "chief consort" (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=K%C3%B6sem_Sultan&diff=prev&oldid=1314109640).

So Simonnm223 is the one and only user that favors "chief consort" (whithout providing a source since Peirce does not use this formulation https://books.google.com/books/content?id=L6-VRgVzRcUC&hl=it&pg=PA107&img=1&zoom=3&sig=ACfU3U2V2m3Fripr3JlJ1k6wOFzpJmkWCg&w=1280), since the others are either against or unsure. How can he impose a so-called "consensus" based on his sole opinion? 77.131.3.105 (talk) 19:35, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Since the situation is now more clear and no contestation remains, I will now update the article accordingly. If someone feeled a necessity of adding again the vague and unsourced wording "chief consort", they will have to beforehands "discuss" here and provide sources, instead of edit-war.77.130.249.171 (talk) 19:48, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Wedding

Couldn’t we add date “1610” as their approximate wedding date? As according to George Sandys, who wrote presumably in 1610 reported the following;

• "this also hath married his concubine, the mother of his yonger sonne, (she being dead by whom he had the eldest) who with all the practices of a politicke stepdame endevours to settle the succession on her owne...”

Melty love (talk) 14:52, 28 September 2025 (UTC)