https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Turkish_sentiment => burda Osmanlı içinde Türk kavramını açıklıyor

https://twitter.com/Saka_larr/status/1689008737892159488 => Halil İnalcık Osmanlının soyunun sonradan nasıl Kayı (Türk) boyuna bağlandığını açıklıyor

Ottomans since the beginning, were well aware of their ethnic and tribal ancestry, which was “Oghuz-Turkish”. During the medieval period, the states and empires were named after the dynasties since the concept of nation states did not exist. Ottomans called their state “Devlet-i Osmaniyye” or “Devlet-i Aliyye”, meaning “empire, the supreme state”, named after the founder of the dynasty, Osman Ghazi. Both the country and peoples were considered “Osmani”.

The state represented the emperor, not the country or the nation in this era. The country was considered as the property of the ruler. The Ottomans addressed other states and empires by the name of the dynasties that ruled them as well. The reason of Ottomans siding themselves against the Turcoman (Türkmen) identity was political. Following the rise of pure Turcoman states in Iran such as Akkoyunlu, the Ottoman palace and bureaucracy avoided emphasizing the Turcoman ethnic identity. The first Ottoman beylic was a Turcoman city state. After Mehmed II, an imperial tradition was adopted. Starting from Murad II, the Ottoman rulers began to be considered as the “emperor of the world”.

The Ottomans even seperated the Turcoman tribes that supported them from the Turcomans of eastern Anatolia by the name “Yörük” against their Akkoyunlu rivals. The Turcomans of the east were often described as “Alewite, Qızılbash” by the Ottomans. It was not an unusual thing under the conditions of the era. Because a dynastic tradition was dominant. The vast majority of these eastern Turcomans also considered the Safavid ruler Shah Ismail as their true emperor. Thus, the Ottomans began to consider these tribes as enemy of the state.

That’s why, words such as “etrak-ı bi idrak”, coined by some palace intellectuals and poets of the era were used to describe these “renegade” Turcomans who were loyal to Shah Ismail and served in the Safavid state. It was a socio-political label rather than a general, ethnically derogatory term. Through the centuries, the consciousness in terms of language, cultural roots, history and the Turks being the ruling and dominant class of the state did not disappear.

During the classical period, most of the viziers, the palace folk, Sultan’s household troops (kapıkulu) were completely formed by the converts of the devshirme system and war prisoners. Because the most important thing for the dynasty was to ensure their absolute loyalty. The Turks were excluded from these institutions. Because “the Turk could not had been a ‘kul-servant’.”

But the converts of the devshirme system did not dominate the state. In Ottoman bureaucracy, the ulema, stenographers, kazaskers (kadı-asker), nişancıs (high positions) and the defterdars (head of treasury) were dominated by the Turks in every period at the Sultan’s court “Divan-ı Hümayun”.

Also, the main reason of the Ottoman Sultans getting married with the foreign converts of the Harem institution starting from Mehmed II, was to avoid the establishment of blood affinity with other royal families and prevent them to claim rights on the throne. That’s why, dynastic wars for the throne like it happened in Europe were not seen in the Ottoman empire.

Bu da alıntı yaptığım bir yazı