Salafī‐Ashʻarī Polemics of the 3rd & 4th Islamic Centuries

While Sunnism is the largest sect of Islam, Sunnism itself is divided into many strands. The two main strands of Sunnism for the last few centuries are the Atharī (or Salafī) strand, and the Ash?arī strand. This papers seeks to examine the earliest recorded controversies that signal this intra‐Sunnī divide. While each of these two groups has historically attempted to claim true Sunnī ‘orthodoxy’ by denying the legitimacy, and at times even the early existence, of the other, it will be shown that the genesis of this intra‐Sunnī divide dates back to the first century of Sunnism itself, viz., the 3^rd AH/8^th CE centuries, and that there are specific historic incidents that indicate theological tensions within the nascent Sunnī movement that would later be manifested in the two streams of Ash?arism and Salafism. Hence, it can be argued that Sunnism was never truly unified to begin with, and that these incidents demonstrate theological tensions that existed from its very origins.     

Grand vizieral authority revisited: Köprülüs’ legacy and Kara Mustafa Paşa

In response to the recently expanding ‘renewal of faith’ literature and religion-based approaches to the Ottoman seventeenth century, this article sources the many available Ottoman chronicles and European diplomatic reports to shed light on the accumulation of full executive power in the hands of Köprülü grand viziers, starting from 1656. I demonstrate that, by the time Kara Mustafa Pa?a assumed the grand vizierate in 1676, the achievements of Köprülü Mehmed Pa?a and, more remarkably, his son Faz?l Ahmed Pa?a, had elevated the post of the grand vizierate to a practically unrivalled status in the Ottoman decision-making process. Further, I illustrate that Kara Mustafa Pa?a had already established himself as a self-assured individual in Ottoman bureaucracy long before he became the grand vizier. In conclusion, the article directs readers to reconsider Grand Vizier Kara Mustafa Pa?a’s ambitious undertakings – especially the siege of Vienna – as a combined outcome of the decision-making patterns established by the first two Köprülüs, coupled with the self-assurance that Kara Mustafa Pa?a had attained long before his appointment as the sultan’s ‘absolute deputy’.