Ottoman Conquests in Europe

According to later Ottoman chronicles, Osman Gazi, the 13th-century founder of the dynasty, was said to have had a dream in which a tree grew from him and its shade covered vast lands. Muslim readers may appreciate this as part of Ottoman sacred memory, but historians treat it as a later dynastic legend rather than an independently verifiable report from Osman's own lifetime. The early Ottomans did use the language of ghaza and jihad, and many sincerely saw frontier warfare as service to Islam. At the same time, frontier life also involved politics, tribal alliances, revenue, prestige, and at times cooperation with Christian allies. In Arabic, fath (فتح) can mean opening and also conquest; in an Islamic sense, a conquest is only an honorable opening when it is governed by justice, restraint, and no compulsion in religion. Ottoman writers often interpreted victories as signs of Allah's favor, but a sound Sunni reading should not turn every Ottoman policy into proof of divine approval or make the dynasty infallible.

In this article, we will journey through the key phases of the Ottoman conquests in Europe, learn about the Quran's guidance on war and peace, and see what Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) taught about justice in battle. Along the way, we will highlight the truth and beauty of Islam, from the prophecies that foretold these events to the ethics that guided the conquerors. We'll also discuss what classical scholars and the major Islamic law schools said about jihad (religious fighting), and how the Ottomans implemented these principles. This historical voyage will show that Islam's teachings on warfare were ahead of their time in mercy and justice, and that the spread of Islam by the Ottomans left a lasting legacy of faith in Europe.

By the end, we'll reflect on what this legacy means for us as Muslims today. How can we honor the past without romanticizing war? What values can we learn from the Ottoman experience? With a modern, conversational approach, let's uncover the story of the Ottoman conquests in Europe, a story of belief, bravery, and the transformative power of Islamic ideals.

Rise of the Ottomans and the Quest for Constantinople

From Frontier Warriors to Empire

The Ottoman story begins around the year 1300 in Anatolia (Asia Minor). The Ottomans started as a small Turkic principality at the edge of the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire. They were on the frontier of the Islamic world, and their society was fueled by the ideology of gazâ (holy struggle) against the neighboring Christian states. In these early years, the Ottoman bey (chieftain), Osman and later his son Orhan, saw themselves as leaders of a holy war to expand Dar al-Islam (the Realm of Islam). This sense of mission attracted volunteers and adventurers from across the Muslim world to their cause. The early Ottomans lived simply, valued courage and faith, and believed that if they sacrificed for Islam, Allah would reward them with victory.

By 1354 CE, the Ottomans gained their first foothold in Europe. An earthquake had devastated the Byzantine fortress of Gallipoli, and Orhan's son Suleiman Pasha swiftly occupied it. This was a turning point, the straits of the Dardanelles were crossed, and a bridgehead on the European side was established. From this base, the Ottomans began expanding into the Balkan Peninsula. In 1361, they captured Adrianople (modern Edirne in Turkey) and made it their capital, strategically positioned in Europe. The Ottoman Sultan Murad I defeated a coalition of Balkan forces at the Battle of Kosovo in 1389, a clash that became legendary. Although Sultan Murad I was killed in battle, the Ottomans emerged victorious. This victory opened up Serbia and the central Balkans to Ottoman control.

The Ottomans generally did not pursue a policy of mass forced conversion, and the Islamic principle is clear: "There is no compulsion in religion" (Quran 2:256). Christian and Jewish communities were usually treated as People of the Book under the dhimma framework: they paid jizya or other taxes, retained churches, clergy, family law, and communal institutions, and owed loyalty to the state. The fully developed millet system is a later Ottoman arrangement, especially clearer in the early modern and modern periods, so it should not be projected unchanged onto the 14th and 15th centuries. This order was often more protective of religious minorities than many contemporary European arrangements, especially for Orthodox Christians and Jews, but it was not modern equal citizenship: non-Muslims had subordinate legal status, special taxes, and some restrictions, and practice varied by time and place. The fairest way to state it is that Islamic law gave non-Muslim subjects recognized protections for life, property, and worship, while Ottoman implementation ranged from admirable tolerance to policies that modern readers may find harsh. The Quranic standard remained: "Allah does not forbid you from being kind and just toward those who do not fight you because of religion" (Quran 60:8).

By the end of the 14th century, the Ottoman state had grown into a major regional power. However, they faced setbacks too. In 1402, the Central Asian conqueror Timur (Tamerlane) defeated the Ottomans at the Battle of Ankara, capturing Sultan Bayezid I. This led to a few years of crisis and civil war among Bayezid's sons. Yet, the Ottomans rebounded under Mehmed I and Murad II, reuniting their territories. Through these trials, their faith remained unshaken. Ottoman poets and scholars wrote that as long as Muslims were steadfast in prayer, justice, and jihad, Allah would "plant their feet firmly" (a phrase echoing Quran 47:7). They viewed each victory as a sign of divine favor and each defeat as a test to return to God's path.

"The Red Apple": Conquest of Constantinople (1453)

For the early Ottomans and other Muslims, Constantinople, the fortified capital of the Byzantine Empire, was the ultimate prize. They called it "Kostantiniyye" or sometimes "Fath al-Mubin" (the Clear Conquest). It was also nicknamed "the Red Apple" in Turkish legend, symbolizing a grand goal. Why was this city so important? For one, it was strategically located on the Bosphorus Strait, a bridge between Europe and Asia. Controlling Constantinople would cement the Ottomans as a true imperial power. But there was another powerful motivation: a prophecy of Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) himself.

A widely cited hadith reports that the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said: "Constantinople shall surely be conquered. What an excellent leader is its leader, and what an excellent army is that army." It is reported in Musnad Ahmad and other collections. Some scholars graded it hasan or sahih, while other hadith critics disputed its chain; it is not a hadith of Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim. Because of that, it should be presented as a famous and influential report with a known grading discussion, not as an unquestioned consensus-authentic narration. Even so, it deeply inspired Muslim rulers and soldiers for centuries. Several early Muslim campaigns attempted to take the city in the 7th and 8th centuries. The Companion Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (RA) joined one of those campaigns and died near Constantinople, and his memory became strongly connected to later Ottoman hopes for the city.

That leader came in the form of Sultan Mehmed II, later known as "Mehmed the Conqueror" (Fatih). In 1451 CE, at just 19 years old, Mehmed II became Sultan. He was determined, brilliant, and deeply devout. He prepared carefully for the task that others had failed. Mehmed built a fortress on the Bosphorus to cut off aid to the city. He amassed one of the largest cannons of the time (called the "Great Turkish Bombard"), and gathered an army of about 80,000 to 100,000 men. Before launching the attack, it's reported that Mehmed addressed his soldiers about the hadith of the Prophet (ﷺ), inspiring them with the honor destined for the conqueror of Constantinople.

On April 6, 1453, the siege of Constantinople began. For 53 days, the Ottomans encircled the city. They offered the Byzantine emperor Constantine XI terms of surrender more than once, promising to let the population live in peace if they yielded. This was in line with Islamic principles: war was not to be waged unnecessarily if surrender could save lives. But the proud city refused to capitulate. Finally, in the early hours of May 29, the Ottoman forces launched their final assault. After intense fighting, the Ottomans breached the walls. By midday, Constantinople fell.

Sultan Mehmed II entered the city as a conqueror and went to the Hagia Sophia, the grand church of the Byzantines, which he ordered to be preserved as a building and converted into a mosque. Ottoman and later accounts also describe gestures of humility before Allah, though details vary. The aftermath must be told honestly: Constantinople was taken by storm after refusing surrender, and the initial sack involved killing, enslavement, ransom, and seizure of property, as was common in premodern siege warfare and as jurists discussed under the rules of a city captured by force. Mehmed then moved to end disorder, secure the city, repopulate it, and turn it into his capital. He appointed a new Orthodox Patriarch, allowed many churches and communities to continue, and invited Christians, Muslims, Jews, and others to settle there. Thus the conquest included both the harsh realities of a stormed city and the later Ottoman policy of reconstruction, religious communal organization, and imperial renewal.

For many Muslims, the conquest of Constantinople was received as a moment of immense religious joy, especially by those who accepted the famous hadith about the city's conquest. Scholars, poets, and preachers in Ottoman lands celebrated it as a sign of Allah's favor and as a vindication of long Muslim hopes. At the same time, because the grading of the specific "excellent leader" report is discussed among hadith scholars, it is better to say that Mehmed and his army hoped to be included in that praise rather than to declare the matter with certainty. The city continued to be called Kostantiniyye in many Ottoman official contexts for centuries, while Istanbul was also widely used; the popular form Islambol was loved by Muslims as a devotional name but is not the main linguistic origin of "Istanbul," which is commonly linked to the Greek phrase meaning "to the city." Sultan Mehmed made the city his capital and also took the title Qaysar-i Rum (Caesar of Rome), presenting himself as heir to both Islamic ghazi kingship and the Roman imperial legacy.

Ottoman devotional tradition also connects the conquest with Abu Ayyub al-Ansari's grave. According to hagiographical accounts, Sultan Mehmed's spiritual mentor, Sheikh Akshamsaddin, identified the location of the Companion's burial place outside the walls, after which Mehmed built a tomb and mosque there, later known as the Eyup Sultan Mosque. This report is important in Ottoman religious memory, but it should be described as a later devotional tradition rather than a historically provable miracle. The shrine became one of Istanbul's most revered Muslim sites and powerfully linked the first generation of Muslims with the Ottoman conquest in the imagination of later Muslims.

The fall of Constantinople shocked Europe. The Byzantine Empire, over a thousand years old, was no more. Many European Christians called Mehmed "the Terror of the World," fearing that the Ottomans would sweep westward unchecked. But to many others, including some of the city's inhabitants, Ottoman rule turned out to be more tolerant than what might have occurred if roles were reversed. No mass persecutions took place; churches continued to operate (though some major churches became mosques, many others remained for Christian worship). Jews, who had been persecuted in Europe, found refuge in Ottoman lands in the years after. In fact, Sultan Bayezid II (Mehmed's son) later welcomed Jews expelled from Spain in 1492, famously saying that the Spanish king impoverished his own land by driving out these skilled subjects, whereas the Ottomans gained from it.

With Constantinople (Istanbul) as their capital, the Ottomans embraced a vision to be not just conquerors, but guardians of an Islamic civilization. Sultan Mehmed II patronized scholars, architects, and artists from across the Muslim world and even Europe. He established colleges and madrasas (religious schools), making Istanbul a center of learning. The city, once a symbol of Eastern Christianity, now became a beacon of Islamic culture and power. The Hagia Sophia itself stood as a powerful symbol: formerly a church, now a mosque with minarets, embodying the harmonization of two worlds under Islam. For the Ottomans, this was the manifest destiny that had been promised. And as one Ottoman chronicler noted, "the conquest of Istanbul was a proof that God's favor was with the Ottoman house", it increased their confidence that they were chosen to lead the Muslim world.

Expansion into the Balkans and Central Europe

After the monumental victory at Constantinople, the Ottomans pressed further into Europe with renewed vigor. Sultan Mehmed II did not stop at Istanbul. In the following years, he led campaigns to consolidate the Balkans under Ottoman rule. He captured Serbia fully by 1459 and Bosnia by 1463, extinguishing those medieval kingdoms. The Islamization of Bosnia should be described carefully. Older explanations often linked it mainly to Bogomil or other heterodox Christian communities supposedly preferring Ottoman rule, but modern historians debate how large and decisive that factor really was. Conversion in Bosnia was gradual and involved many causes: urbanization, Ottoman administration, Sufi networks, social mobility, tax structures, local elite choices, and the comparative position of Catholic, Orthodox, and Bosnian Christian communities. Over time, Bosnia developed one of Europe's most important indigenous Muslim populations, a legacy still evident today. Similarly, Albania saw substantial conversion to Islam over a long period, especially after Ottoman rule became firmly established.

The Ottomans' European expansion wasn't unchallenged. There were many battles and skirmishes as Christian powers attempted to resist. For example, one famous opponent was Vlad III of Wallachia (present-day Romania), also known as Vlad Dracula, who fought the Ottomans fiercely (and brutally) in the 1460s. Mehmed II campaigned against him and eventually brought Wallachia under influence, though Vlad's guerrilla tactics became the stuff of legends (and later horror novels!). Likewise, the Kingdom of Hungary became the bulwark of Christian Europe against the Ottomans after Serbia and Bosnia fell. A great battle occurred at Mohacs in 1526 (a few decades after Mehmed), where the Ottomans under Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent won a crushing victory against the Hungarians. The Hungarian King Louis II died in that battle, and as a result, the Ottomans took control of central Hungary, while the Habsburg Austrian dynasty took the west of Hungary. The Balkans, from Greece up to much of Hungary and Romania, were now either directly ruled by the Ottomans or were Ottoman vassal states.

One remarkable aspect of Ottoman rule in these European lands was how it integrated new territories. In many places, local nobility were co-opted or allowed to retain status if they cooperated. The Ottomans also used vassalage, tax arrangements, and local autonomies under the umbrella of imperial rule. The Janissaries were a distinctive elite military institution, and many were recruited through the devshirme, a levy on Christian communities in which boys were taken from their families, converted to Islam, and trained for military or administrative service. This system produced powerful soldiers and statesmen, including grand viziers, and it offered exceptional social mobility within the Ottoman ruling class. But it must not be romanticized: compulsory removal from families and conversion sits in obvious tension with the Quranic principle of no compulsion in religion and with the protections normally promised to non-Muslim subjects. Ottoman authorities justified the practice through imperial law and political necessity, while modern Muslim writers should be honest that it was not an ideal model of dawah or religious freedom.

By the 16th century, the Ottoman Empire was at its zenith. Under Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent (reigned 1520-1566), often regarded as the greatest Ottoman Sultan, the empire became a global power. Suleiman continued European campaigns, capturing Belgrade (the key to the Balkans on the Danube) in 1521, and laying siege to Vienna in 1529. The Siege of Vienna in 1529 was the first Ottoman attempt to conquer the Austrian Habsburg capital. It narrowly failed due to heavy rains, supply problems, and the strong city defenses. Yet the fact that an Islamic army had marched so deep into the heart of Europe was remarkable. It struck fear in Western Europe; "** the Turk**" became a looming menace in European folklore, parents would even tell misbehaving children "the Turk will get you" to scare them. The Ottomans represented the powerful "other" at Europe's doorstep.

For a century and a half after Constantinople's fall, the Ottomans were the superpower of Southeast Europe. Their territory in Europe (often called Rumelia in Ottoman terms) included Greece, Bulgaria, North Macedonia, Albania, Serbia, Bosnia, Romania (parts like Wallachia and Moldavia were vassals), Hungary (the central part as a province, with Transylvania as a semi-independent principality), and points further north through alliances with the Tatar khans of Crimea (who raided as far as Poland-Lithuania). This was the largest Muslim-ruled zone Europe had seen. The empire at its height stretched across three continents, Southeast Europe, the Middle East (including Arabia, after 1517), and North Africa, and lasted for over six centuries.

Despite almost continuous warfare on some frontier or another, the lands within the empire often enjoyed long periods of peace and prosperity. The Ottomans invested in infrastructure: building roads, bridges, mosques, markets, and baths that often still stand today. Cities like Sarajevo and Skopje were developed under Ottoman rule, gaining beautiful mosques, bazaars, and libraries. The Ottoman system allowed people from many ethnicities, Turks, Arabs, Greeks, Slavs, Armenians, Kurds, Jews, etc., to coexist under a single state. Each community had its space. Muslims, being the ruling class, had advantages in social mobility, but non-Muslims had legal protections rare for minorities elsewhere. For example, in Ottoman Bosnia, Catholics under previous rule had faced pressure, under the Ottomans, both Orthodox and Catholic Christians coexisted with the Muslim majority, each with their churches intact (though taxed).

One might wonder: what drove this relentless Ottoman expansion? It was not only the thirst for land and glory, though like every empire the Ottomans had strategic and economic motives: control of trade routes, frontier security, manpower, revenue, and prestige. A major part of Ottoman self-understanding was also religious duty. Sultans and commanders used the language of ghaza and jihad, and Ottoman writers often described campaigns as openings for Muslim rule and for the public practice and spread of Islam. In classical Sunni law, jihad under a legitimate ruler was not meant to force individuals to become Muslim; rather, it aimed, in the premodern legal framework, to secure Muslim political authority, remove hostile barriers, protect the Muslim community, and allow Islam to be publicly established. Many conquered people later chose Islam for mixed reasons: conviction, Sufi influence, urban culture, patronage, tax and status considerations, marriage, and participation in Ottoman institutions. Non-Muslim communities could remain Christian or Jewish if they accepted Ottoman authority and the taxes and restrictions attached to their status. Ottoman administration, combining Shariah, sultanic qanun, and a sophisticated bureaucracy, sometimes protected peasants from arbitrary feudal exploitation, but burdens varied greatly by region and period; taxation, forced labor, military requisitioning, and local abuses could also be heavy. A balanced account should acknowledge both the real Islamic ideals and the ordinary realities of empire.

By 1683, the Ottomans made one more big push at Vienna, this led to the famous Battle of Vienna in September 1683. It was a dramatic battle where the Ottomans were ultimately defeated by a coalition of Austrians and Poles (led by King Jan Sobieski of Poland). This battle is often marked as the end of Ottoman expansion in Europe. After that, over the next decades, the Ottoman Empire gradually began to lose territory in Europe rather than gain. The Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699 forced the Ottomans to cede large parts of Hungary and the Balkans to Austria and its allies. The age of conquests slowed, and the empire moved to a defensive stance.

However, even as the Ottoman military fortunes waned in the 18th and 19th centuries, the Islamic culture and communities they had established in Europe endured. To this day, countries like Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania, Kosovo, Turkey (European part), and parts of Macedonia and Bulgaria have significant Muslim populations, all tracing back to the Ottoman era. Istanbul remains one of the world's great Islamic cities. Mosques dot the skylines of cities like Athens' old Ottoman mosques (now museums), Thessaloniki (Salonika) once had many until 20th-century population changes, and Budapest even has a remaining Ottoman-era tomb of a dervish. The Ottoman conquests in Europe not only changed borders; they left a lasting religious and cultural impact. To Muslims, this chapter of history demonstrates how Islam spread through both the sword and the pen, through battles, yes, but also through the just treatment and vibrant civilization that made Islam appealing to many of the conquered peoples.

Let us now turn to the Islamic teachings that underpinned this historical saga. What does the Quran say about fighting and conquest? What guidelines did Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) lay down that influenced generals like Mehmed II and Suleiman? By examining these, we'll better understand the moral framework that guided the Ottoman conquests.

Quranic Verses on Struggle, War, and Justice

The Quran, the holy book of Islam, provides guidance on all aspects of life, including fighting in war. It doesn't glorify war for war's sake; rather, it permits fighting under specific conditions such as self-defense, removing oppression, and ensuring the freedom to worship Allah. Many verses of the Quran were revealed in the context of the early Muslims' battles against the pagan tribes of Makkah and their allies. These passages guided Muslims on when and how to fight, emphasizing both courage and restraint. Below are some key Quranic verses that relate to the topic of conquest, struggle (jihad), and how Muslims should conduct themselves in conflict. Each verse is presented with its English translation and reference:

Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah is Most Powerful to help them. - (Quran 22:39).

This was the first verse revealed allowing the persecuted Muslims to fight back against oppression.

Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress. Indeed, Allah does not love transgressors. - (Quran 2:190).

This verse lays down a crucial principle: fight those who initiate war against you, but do not go beyond limits (such as harming noncombatants or committing atrocities).

And kill them wherever you encounter them and drive them out from where they drove you out, for persecution is worse than killing… But if they cease, then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. - (Quran 2:191-192).

This passage, referring to the Makkan oppressors, emphasizes that fighting is justified to end fitnah (persecution). But if the enemy stops aggression, Muslims should also halt and show mercy.

Fight them until there is no more persecution and [until] religion [i.e., worship] is for Allah. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors. - (Quran 2:193).

This teaches that the goal of fighting is to eliminate religious persecution and allow the worship of Allah freely. Once that goal is achieved and the enemy stops oppression, Muslims must not continue fighting.

Fighting has been ordained for you, though you dislike it. But it may be that you hate a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows, while you do not know. - (Quran 2:216).

Here, Muslims are reminded that they might dislike war (naturally, it's dangerous and harsh), but at times it becomes necessary. Only Allah fully understands the bigger picture and wisdom in these trials.

And why should you not fight in the cause of Allah and for the oppressed men, women, and children who cry out, 'Our Lord, rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors, and appoint for us from Yourself a protector...'? - (Quran 4:75).

This powerful verse appeals to the conscience: fighting is framed as a duty to save the oppressed. It highlights that jihad is not for glory or wealth, but to help those suffering tyranny.

O Prophet, urge the believers to fight. If there are among you twenty steadfast, they will overcome two hundred… And Allah is with the steadfast. - (Quran 8:65-66).

In these verses, Allah motivates the believers, promising that patience and endurance can lead a smaller group of faithful fighters to victory over a larger force - a promise fulfilled in many battles in Islamic history.

It is not you who killed them, but Allah Who killed them. And you did not throw when you threw, but it was Allah who threw, that He might test the believers with a good test. Indeed, Allah is Hearing and Knowing. - (Quran 8:17).

This verse, revealed about the Battle of Badr, reminds Muslims that victory comes from Allah. Even though Muslims wield the sword or arrow, ultimately Allah decides the outcome. This mindset prevents arrogance in victory.

And prepare against them whatever you can of power and steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy… - (Quran 8:60).

Here Muslims are instructed to be well-prepared militarily to deter enemies. The idea is that a strong defense can prevent war (since enemies will think twice), but if war comes, being prepared is part of trusting in God.

But if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and put your trust in Allah. Indeed, He is the Hearing, the Knowing. - (Quran 8:61).

This beautiful verse shows Islam's preference for peace: if the enemy is willing to make peace, Muslims should accept that and trust Allah rather than insist on fighting.

Allah has promised those among you who believe and do righteous deeds that He will surely grant them succession (authority) upon the earth as He granted it to those before them… - (Quran 24:55).

This promise from Allah comforted the early Muslims and later generations: if Muslims remain faithful and do good, Allah may grant them power and leadership on earth. Many saw the Ottoman ascendancy as a fulfillment of this promise, as they were given authority over vast lands.

O you who have believed, if you support Allah, He will support you and plant firmly your feet. - (Quran 47:7).

A short but powerful verse, often quoted to encourage steadfastness. The Ottomans, for example, could reflect that their centuries of victories were because they supported Allah's cause, and thus Allah supported them in return.

Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed… [This is] the true promise [of Allah] in the Torah and Gospel and Quran. - (Quran 9:111).

This verse describes the spiritual transaction of jihad: a believer gives his life and wealth for Allah's cause and, in return, earns Paradise. It even notes that this concept of sacrificing for righteousness is affirmed in previous scriptures. Muslim warriors took great comfort in these words, believing that if they fell in battle, they would be martyrs granted Paradise.

It is He who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion, although those who associate others with Allah dislike it. - (Quran 9:33).

This verse (repeated in Surah 61:9 as well) gave Muslims confidence that Islam would eventually prevail over other religions in influence and truth. The Ottomans, seeing Islam spread in lands once staunchly Christian, felt they were part of this divine plan.

When the victory of Allah has come and the conquest, and you see the people entering into the religion of Allah in multitudes, then glorify the praises of your Lord and seek His forgiveness… - (Quran 110:1-3).

This chapter ("Surah an-Nasr" or the Chapter of Help) foretold the conquest of Makkah in the Prophet's lifetime, when many entered Islam. It also sets an enduring pattern: victories should lead to humility and praise of Allah, not pride. The Ottomans, after victories like Constantinople, often built mosques or endowed charities as a way to thank Allah.

These verses above are only a selection, but they cover the Quran's main themes on this subject: permission to fight when wronged, justice and limits in warfare, the higher purpose of fighting (ending oppression, enabling worship), promises of divine help, and the call to seek peace when possible. Throughout, there is an insistence on moral conduct: "do not transgress, for Allah does not love transgressors." This insistence deeply influenced Muslim conduct.

Indeed, when we examine historical records, we find that, for example, when the Ottomans took cities, they often spared civilians and respected churches, a behavior not always reciprocated by their opponents. This wasn't because Ottomans were uniquely kind by nature, but largely because their religion required and incentivized such behavior. The Quran taught them that even in war, one must fear Allah and act ethically. If any soldier was cruel beyond measure, he could incur sin and Allah's anger, something a believer would dread. On the flip side, verses promising Paradise for those who fight in Allah's cause sincerely (like Quran 9:111 above) made Ottoman soldiers and commanders view their campaigns as more than earthly adventures, they were earning spiritual reward.

The Quran also speaks to the outcome of these struggles: that Allah grants victory not just by numbers or might, but by faith. Verses like 3:123-125 remind believers of the angels aiding at Badr, and verses like 33:9 recount how Allah sent wind and unseen forces to defeat the Confederate enemies at the Battle of the Trench. Such narratives cultivated a strong trust in Allah's help (Arabic: tawakkul) among Muslim warriors. Ottomans heading into tough battles would pray for Allah's intervention, recalling how often outnumbered Muslims of the past won.

Finally, the Quran repeatedly pairs talk of battle with talk of forgiveness and mercy. After conquest, Muslims are encouraged to forgive. The supreme example is Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) forgiving the Quraysh after conquering Makkah. The Ottomans often cited that when they took a city, striving to emulate the Prophet's mercy. For instance, when Sultan Mehmed II gave refuge to the civilian population of Constantinople and kept the church leadership intact, one can see reflections of the Quranic ethic.

Prophetic Hadith on Jihad and Conquest

Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) not only delivered the Quran but also provided detailed guidance through his sayings and actions (the Hadith and Sunnah). The Hadith literature contains many narrations about warfare, ethical conduct in battle, and even prophecies about future conquests. These hadiths were well known to Ottoman leaders and soldiers. The Ottomans earnestly desired to fulfill the prophecies of the Prophet (ﷺ) and took his instructions on mercy and justice in war very seriously. Below is a collection of sound hadiths and historically influential reports related to jihad, conquests, and warfare ethics. Where a report is disputed, that is noted clearly:

Prophecy of Constantinople's Conquest: It is reported that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Constantinople shall surely be conquered. What an excellent leader is its leader, and what an excellent army is that army! (Reported by Ahmad and others)

This report became one of the most famous narrations associated with Constantinople. Some scholars graded it hasan or sahih, while others regarded its chain as weak, so it should not be introduced without qualification as an agreed-upon authentic hadith. Muslims nevertheless treasured it for centuries, and when Sultan Mehmed II conquered the city in 1453, he and his army hoped to be included in that praise.

Prophecy of Conquering Rome: (It was narrated that) Abdullah bin Amr (RA) said: We were with the Prophet (ﷺ) writing down what he said, when someone asked, 'Which city will be conquered first, Constantinople or Rome?' The Prophet (ﷺ) replied: 'The city of Heraclius (Constantinople) will be conquered first, then Rome.' (Musnad Ahmad, al-Hakim)

This hadith shows that Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) also predicted the conquest of Rome (which likely refers to Rome in Italy). Constantinople was indeed conquered first by the Ottomans. Rome has not yet been conquered by a Muslim army in history - some Muslims believe this may happen in the future. The Ottomans did attempt an invasion of Italy in 1480, capturing Otranto briefly, but did not reach Rome. Nonetheless, the prophecy of Constantinople came true, which strengthened faith that other promises will also come to pass in due time.

Forgiveness for the First Naval Warriors: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: The first army among my followers to undertake a naval expedition has earned Paradise. (Sahih al-Bukhari)

This hadith was in reference to a prophecy that Muslims would fight at sea. It came true when Mu'awiya (RA) led the first Muslim navy against Byzantium decades after the Prophet's death. Not directly about the Ottomans, but it highlights how eager early Muslims were to fulfill such prophecies. In Ottoman times, being a maritime warrior (for example, fighting the fleets of Venice) was also seen as a continuation of that legacy.

Standards of Military Conduct: Reports from the early caliphs, especially the famous instructions attributed to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (RA), include commands not to betray, mutilate, kill women and children, or destroy crops and trees unnecessarily, and to leave noncombatant monks alone. Versions of these instructions are found in early historical and legal sources, though some chains are mursal or historically transmitted rather than meeting the highest hadith standards.

The core principles are nevertheless strongly supported by authentic Prophetic teachings: the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) forbade killing women and children, forbade treachery and mutilation, and commanded disciplined conduct in war. Muslim jurists built on these texts when discussing noncombatants, property, crops, churches, monks, and public interest. Ottoman practice varied, especially in cities taken by storm, but the official Islamic ideal was that war must remain morally restrained and subject to law.

Prohibition of Killing Women and Children: It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar (RA) that during a battle, a woman was found killed, so the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) forbade the killing of women and children. (Sahih al-Bukhari & Sahih Muslim)

This direct hadith clearly forbids targeting women and children. Muslim generals, including Ottoman pashas, were aware of this. If an Ottoman soldier intentionally killed a non-combatant, he could face disciplinary action. For the most part, the Ottomans aimed at engaging enemy fighters, not civilians.

Mercy and Not Desiring War: Abu Huraira (RA) reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: Do not wish to meet the enemy [in battle]; but if you do encounter them, be steadfast. And know that Paradise lies under the shade of swords. (Sahih al-Bukhari & Sahih Muslim)

This hadith shows the balanced attitude Muslims should have: they should not be bloodthirsty or eager for war. One should wish for peace. However, if battle becomes necessary and unavoidable, Muslims must stand firm and remember the reward of perseverance (even martyrdom leading to Paradise). "Paradise under the shade of swords" became a famous saying, encouraging bravery but within a context of not loving war itself. Many Ottoman warriors certainly hoped for the reward of martyrs if they fell, but they also often gave enemies opportunities to surrender and avoid bloodshed.

Continuity of Jihad until the End of Time: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: A group of my community will continue to fight for the truth and remain dominant over those who oppose them until the end of time. (Sahih Muslim)

This hadith was understood to mean that there will always be some Muslims, somewhere, engaged in striving (whether militarily or otherwise) to uphold truth until the Day of Judgment. Many Muslim scholars saw the Ottoman state as playing this role, especially as it became the strongest Muslim power defending the ummah against European crusades and invasions. The Ottomans themselves took pride in being at the "frontier" of Islam, fighting on behalf of the Muslim world.

Justice in Treaties and Covenants: The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) severely warned against treachery. Among the sound narrations is his statement that every betrayer will have a banner raised for him on the Day of Resurrection, and his warning: whoever kills a person under covenant will not smell the fragrance of Paradise (Sahih al-Bukhari). These texts establish the seriousness of treaties, safe-conduct, and covenants.

Islamic law therefore required Muslim rulers to honor truces and agreements as long as the other side did not violate them. The Ottomans entered many treaties with European powers, and their record, like that of other states, included both principled diplomacy and hard political maneuvering. The ideal remained clear: betrayal and unlawful killing of protected persons are grave sins.

Treatment of Captives: The Quran praises feeding the needy, the orphan, and the captive for the sake of Allah (Quran 76:8), and the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and his Companions established precedents for ransom, exchange, release, and humane treatment of prisoners. Sira reports about the captives of Badr describe decent treatment and ransom arrangements, though details vary in strength.

Ottoman and other Muslim states had rules for prisoners of war, including ransom and exchange. Some captives were enslaved according to premodern legal norms, a practice regulated by Islamic law but not identical to modern concepts of imprisonment. This should be discussed honestly: Islamic law sought to restrain cruelty and open paths to manumission, while the institution of slavery itself was part of the premodern world and cannot be romanticized.

All these hadith together shaped a code of chivalry and ethics in Muslim warfare. The Ottomans inherited this rich tradition. We see it in anecdotes like when Sultan Selim I conquered Egypt in 1517 and treated the defeated Mamluk soldiers with respect, or when Ottoman generals like Gedik Ahmed Pasha negotiated the peaceful surrender of some Italian towns in the 1480s rather than sack them. Of course, reality of war was never pretty, the Ottomans, being human, had instances of harshness, and not every Ottoman soldier followed the rules perfectly. But as an official stance, the Ottoman state prided itself on justice and mercy. For example, after the Ottoman conquest of a region, it was common for Sultans to build charitable foundations: mosques, soup kitchens, hospitals. This was in the spirit of "glorify your Lord" after victory (as per Quran 110:3) and showing compassion.

The prophecies in the hadith also gave the Ottomans a sense of destiny. Fulfilling the Constantinople prophecy was a huge boost. In fact, after that, some Ottoman Sultans thought about the prophecy of Rome. Sultan Suleiman in one letter referred to himself as the "Sultan of the two lands and two seas" (Europe/Asia, Black Sea/Mediterranean) and hinted that he saw it as his duty to expand further. The later Sultan Mehmed IV in the 17th century named his son "Bayezid" with the title "Ghazi", hoping perhaps he'd conquer new lands (though by then they were on defense). The ideal of jihad had become institutionalized: the Ottomans had an entire governmental department for campaign planning (the "Divan" would plan seasonal campaigns almost every year in the empire's prime).

It's worth noting that classical jurists used categories such as Dar al-Islam, Dar al-Harb, and also lands of treaty, truce, or security, often called Dar al-Ahd, Dar al-Sulh, or Dar al-Aman. These are juristic categories, not fixed Quranic labels, and their application differed by school, era, and political circumstance. Sunni jurists agreed that armed jihad is not a private individual undertaking; it belongs to legitimate authority and is governed by capacity, public interest, treaties, protection of noncombatants, and the higher objectives of the Shariah. In premodern fiqh, Muslim rulers could fight hostile powers after the proper summons and legal conditions, but they could also make truces, alliances, safe-conduct agreements, and practical arrangements when these served the Muslim community.

The Ottomans officially followed the Hanafi school and often benefited from Hanafi flexibility regarding long truces, diplomacy, and alliances with non-Muslim powers, such as their alliance with France against the Habsburgs. Shafi'i jurists often discussed the ten-year Hudaybiyyah precedent when treating truces, but many jurists allowed renewal or extension when necessity or public interest required it. Maliki and Hanbali jurists also had detailed discussions on treaties, spoils, noncombatants, intention, and public interest. The four Sunni schools agreed on the legitimacy of jihad under proper authority, but they did not reduce foreign relations to constant war. Ottoman sultans regularly sought fatwas for major campaigns, yet specific stories, such as a precise pre-1453 fatwa declaring that the Byzantine emperor had violated terms, should be presented cautiously as part of Ottoman legal-political memory unless a reliable primary citation is given.

Scholarly Perspectives and the Islamic Ethos of Conquest

Throughout Islamic history, scholars have written about the concept of jihad and the conduct of Muslim conquests. Classical scholars such as al-Mawardi, Ibn Taymiyyah, and Ibn Kathir discussed jihad, governance, justice, treaties, and the limits of war in their works. Later Muslim writers also reflected on the Ottomans: the conquest of Constantinople, the defense of Sunni lands, the protection of the Hijaz, and the reasons for Ottoman strength and decline. After the Ottoman conquest of Egypt and the Hijaz in 1517, the sultans increasingly presented themselves as caliphs and protectors of the holy cities. However, the title caliph had been used in different ways before then, and the idea of the Ottoman sultan as universally recognized caliph of all Sunni Muslims developed gradually and was emphasized especially in later centuries. It is more accurate to say that the Ottomans became the leading Sunni Muslim power and claimed caliphal authority, not that every Muslim polity immediately accepted an uncontested universal caliphate.

One classical viewpoint comes from Imam Ibn Kathir. In his tafsir of Quran 24:55, he explains Allah's promise of authority to the believers as fulfilled first for the Companions and early caliphs. Later Muslim writers applied this moral pattern to later states: when Muslims upheld faith, justice, and obedience to Allah, they were strengthened; when injustice and corruption spread, weakness followed. Writers such as Ali Muhammad al-Sallabi present the rise and decline of the Ottomans in this moral frame, linking strength to prayer, justice, consultation, and adherence to Islam, and decline to internal corruption and loss of Islamic governance. This is a valuable spiritual lesson, rooted in verses such as Quran 13:11, but it should be held alongside ordinary historical causes such as military organization, finance, technology, geography, diplomacy, and administration.

In terms of political thought, jurists argued that conquest, when lawful, was not supposed to be mere plunder or ethnic domination, but the establishment of security, justice, and the public order in which Islam could be practiced and called to. Imam al-Mawardi, in his work on governance, includes among the ruler's duties protecting the religion, administering justice, guarding the frontiers, and conducting jihad under legal conditions. This did not mean that every conquest automatically produced justice, but it gave Muslim rulers a standard by which they could be praised or criticized. In parts of the Balkans, some peasants may indeed have found Ottoman taxation or courts preferable to previous feudal burdens, while in other places Ottoman demands could be heavy. The moral claim of Islam must therefore be distinguished from the mixed performance of any empire.

Scholarly commentary on specific events: After the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, scholars, poets, and Ottoman religious figures praised Sultan Mehmed and urged gratitude, humility, and justice. Ottoman accounts portray Akshamsaddin, Mehmed's teacher, as a spiritual encourager who reminded the sultan of religious responsibility. Mehmed II also sponsored major charitable and educational works, including mosques, madrasas, public kitchens, and medical institutions such as dar al-shifa facilities. He did not establish "vaccination clinics" in the modern sense; smallpox inoculation is associated with much later Ottoman practice. His patronage is better described through waqfs, public kitchens, schools, hospitals, and urban reconstruction.

Comparative School of Thought Note: The Ottoman state was officially Hanafi, but scholars from other Sunni schools also lived and worked within Ottoman domains, especially in Arab lands after the 16th century. Broadly speaking, Sunni jurists did not reject Ottoman campaigns merely because they were led by Hanafi Turks; they assessed war, treaties, taxation, and governance through the normal categories of legitimate authority, public interest, and Shariah limits. Still, it is too sweeping to say that all four schools, everywhere, recognized every Ottoman sultan as the unquestioned leader of Sunni Islam. Recognition varied by region and political circumstance: many scholars acknowledged Ottoman power and legitimacy, while other Sunni polities, such as the Mughals and Moroccan dynasties, retained their own sovereignty and religious authority. Ottoman wars against European powers were often framed as jihad and frontier defense. Ottoman conflict with the Safavid state was also framed in Sunni legal terms, but it should not be reduced to sectarian slogans alone; it also involved imperial rivalry, frontier security, and political control.

The reference to al-Maqrizi should also be corrected. Taqi al-Din Ahmad al-Maqrizi was an Egyptian historian, commonly associated with the Shafi'i scholarly milieu, who died in 845 AH/1442 CE, before the conquest of Constantinople and before the final fall of Granada in 1492. He cannot accurately be presented as a North African Maliki scholar praying for the Ottomans as the answer to the loss of Spain. A better point is that many later Muslim writers, looking back after the fall of al-Andalus and the rise of European power, saw the Ottomans as a major shield for Muslim lands. Modern historians often agree that Ottoman strength delayed or complicated European expansion into the eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, though counterfactual claims about what "would have" happened should be made cautiously.

One Turkish historian, Halil İnalcık, noted that the Ottomans believed their success in holy war proved Islam's truth and God's favor. On the other side, when Ottoman fortunes declined, it shook Muslim confidence, and scholars then doubled down on the message that Muslims needed to reform morally to regain Allah's support. This pattern of thought (rise due to piety, fall due to sin) is common in Islamic writings. It's echoed by modern thinkers who compare it to the Quranic stories of Bani Israel, etc., drawing lessons.

Philosophically, Islam's view of conquest can be contrasted with, say, pure secular imperialism. Islam sets a moral aim (establish worship of God and justice) and moral boundaries (no treachery, no injustice, keep treaties, etc.). Alternative ideologies (for example, the colonial conquests by Europeans) often lacked those moral checks when dealing with "others" (leading to atrocities like forced conversions in Spain, genocide of natives in the Americas, etc.). While the Ottomans were not saints, the framework of Islam did moderate their conduct in many ways. For instance, no Inquisition happened under the Ottomans; non-Muslims were not generally forced to abandon their faith. The Jews expelled by Catholics in Spain found peace under the Muslim Ottomans. Renowned 20th-century historian Stanley Lane-Poole once remarked that Ottoman rule, with all its faults, was more tolerant of diversity than many European regimes of the time, a direct outcome of Islamic teachings.

Conclusion

The saga of the Ottoman conquests in Europe is a fascinating blend of faith and history. From a tiny principality, the Ottomans rose with the cry of "Allahu Akbar" on their lips, believing they were instruments of Allah's will. They fulfilled prophecies spoken by Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) and extended the realm of Islam into new lands. Their story shows the dynamism of Islam, how it can inspire people to achieve what seems impossible, and to do so with a sense of higher purpose. This history is not just about swords and battlefields; it's also about building societies, spreading knowledge, and demonstrating Islam's values on a grand stage.

For us as Muslims today, there are several lessons and reflections to take forward:

• Faith as a Source of Strength: The Ottomans were not supermen - they faced defeats, crises, even near destruction. What kept them going was their strong faith and reliance on Allah. They prayed for victory, they saw their successes as from Allah, and their failures as a need to return to Allah. In our lives, we too can draw strength from sincere faith. While we may not be fighting physical battles, life is full of struggles (jihad in the general sense). The same principle holds: "If you support Allah, He will support you" (Quran 47:7). Whether we are striving to improve our communities, seeking education, or overcoming personal challenges, trusting in Allah and being firm on our principles will help us succeed.

• The Importance of Justice and Ethics: The Ottomans at their best upheld Islamic justice, earning respect even from those they ruled. When Muslims are just, kind, and principled, it draws people's hearts. Today, the "battles" we fight are often for hearts and minds - through dawah (inviting people to Islam) and representing our faith. The Quranic and Prophetic ethics - mercy, honesty, keeping pledges, helping the weak - are timeless. We should apply them in all arenas. For example, Islam spread in many places not by force, but by the good conduct of Muslims (traders in Indonesia, Sufi preachers in Africa, etc.). In a modern context, living as a good Muslim citizen, caring for neighbors, and showing integrity is a form of dawah that wins more ground than any force could.

• Unity and Leadership: One big reason the Ottomans succeeded is that they created unity. They ended feuds among Muslim factions in their region and presented a united front. They also eventually carried the mantle of the Caliphate, uniting many Muslims under one leader. Today, the Muslim world is divided into many nations and sometimes factions. While a single caliphate might not be immediately realistic, we can work on unity at various levels - unity in our local communities, cooperation across ethnic and national lines in the ummah, and standing together for common causes. The Ottomans also valued knowledge - they employed scholars and consulted them. Our community today needs knowledgeable, pious leaders and an informed public that works together. Division and ignorance only make us weak, as history shows.

• Avoiding Arrogance and Oppression: History also teaches cautionary tales. In later centuries, some Ottoman rulers grew complacent or indulged in luxury, and corruption seeped in. The empire began to weaken. Allah's sunnah (way) is that He does not grant continuous power to a people who fall into injustice or forget His guidance. As Muslims, we must remain humble and self-critical. We take pride in our heritage, but not blind pride. We recognize that whenever Muslims abandoned the Quran and Sunnah, degeneration followed. Thus, we strive to reform ourselves first. Each of us can ask: "Am I living up to Islamic principles in my personal life? In how I treat others?" Societal change starts in the hearts.

• Peace before War: The Ottomans fought many wars, but interestingly, once they established their state, a lot of their expansion also came through diplomacy and negotiation. They often preferred a city to surrender peacefully than to destroy it. In our age, physical jihad (armed combat) is not something individuals engage in - it's very much a state matter and global norms have changed. What remains as our field of struggle is the intellectual and moral arena. Our "conquests" today should be the conquest of ignorance with knowledge, of hate with love, of despair with hope. Dawah is the peaceful invitation to Islam, and it's ongoing. Europe today, for example, is not taken by armies but by ideas and demographics; Islam is the fastest growing religion there through migration and conversion, Alhamdulillah. We should engage with wisdom and good speech, as the Quran says (Quran 16:125), to win hearts. That is the prophetic method as well.

• Learning from History, Not Living in It: As Muslims, we're proud of heroes like Sultan Mehmed Fatih and Suleiman the Magnificent. But we shouldn't dwell in past glory or hold a romanticized view of bringing it all back by force. Times have changed; what remains constant are the principles of Islam. We honor our history by learning its lessons, both successes and mistakes. The Ottomans eventually fell behind Europe in technology and governance because they were slow to adapt (and some say, they strayed from the path that made them strong). Today, the Muslim world must embrace education, science, and good governance, which are also part of our faith's teachings (seeking knowledge is an obligation, justice in governance is paramount). Rather than yearning for empire, we should strive for an ummah that is strong in faith and beneficial to humanity.

In conclusion, the Ottoman conquests in Europe were a remarkable chapter of Islamic history where prophecy, bravery, and statesmanship converged. They demonstrate the potential of a community motivated by deep faith in Allah's promises. As Muslims, this history can inspire us to have confidence in our religion and to carry its message with excellence. The Ottomans showed that Islam could produce a civilization that impressed both friend and foe, through beautiful architecture, learning, multicultural harmony (to a degree unheard of elsewhere then), and of course military might when needed.

Today, we face different kinds of challenges, not knights and sieges, but misconceptions about Islam, disunity, and moral challenges of modernity. By remembering the Quranic verses and prophetic teachings that guided the Ottomans, we can also navigate our challenges. We should be proud but not boastful, strong but just, and always put our trust in Allah. As the Quran reminds us: "If Allah should aid you, none can overcome you; but if He should forsake you, who is there that can aid you after Him? And in Allah let the believers put their trust." (Quran 3:160).

May we take the best from our history, the courage of the ghazis, the wisdom of the scholars, the piety of the saints, and use it to better ourselves and our communities. And may Allah help the Muslims remain as a force of good in the world, whether through might or through peace, spreading the truth and beauty of Islam in whichever land we reside. Ameen.

Sources