Analysis of the Turkish expeditions with a focus on Otranto and venice in Turkish historiography and their interpretation according to the ideal of the Empire of Turks as Rome III during the reign of Mehmet the conqueror

Among the conquests during the term of Mehmet the Conqueror, Otranto was the place that the Ottoman Empire could keep for only a short time, while other countries conquered remained in the Ottoman Empire until the 19th century. Indeed, most of the cities in today's Turkey were conquered by Mehmet the Conqueror. From this perspective, Crimean Khanate and Bosnia among other geographies which were part of the Ottoman culture have been significant in Turkish politics throughout the history. On the other hand, the conquest of Otranto is not frequently referred to in Turkish political discourse. Unfortunately, Turkish historiography has a similar approach towards this conquest. Furthermore, there are land suspension books or certain foundation records of countries such as Albania, which was conquered in the 15th century, there is not any available Supreme Court reports or other archives from the Ottoman Empire. Oddly enough, there are not Ottoman chronicles on the four hundred and forty years before the 15th century. In this regard, almost all chronicles, where the foundation and expansion of the empire can be tracked, date back to the 15th century and earlier periods are missing. This may be referred to as re-writing of history with an imperial ideology. Even more oddly, the battle in Otranto in 1480 was only written in history archives by 16th century historians Kemalpaşazade et al. This may mean that it is unavoidable to search for 15th century Italian resources rather than Ottoman chronicles to find information on the Otranto expedition and conquest. In this context, Mehmet the conqueror focused on regions in Europe and Rome in Italy was undoubtedly among his primary targets. Political discussions in Turkey usually dwell upon Rome and Europe when referring to Ottoman conquests, yet it is quite rare that the mention the Ottomans proceeding towards Basra and Egypt or the expedition to Otranto. Nevertheless, it is crystal clear that Otranto has a special place in European historical memory. Despite this importance, many important battles, agreements and expeditions including the one to Otranto have not been subject to exclusive analysis as in monography in Turkish historiography. As a matter of fact, Otranto was conquered and kept under Ottoman rule for 13 months, yet this has only been a topic of general discussion rather than elaborated conversations among historians. In the light of this information, this research is designed to investigate the way how the expedition to Otranto is tackled in Turkish historiography in addition to its details and interpretation. In an attempt to answer these questions, this study further sheds light on the fact that the conquest of Italy should be evaluated from the perspective of re-foundation of the Roman Empire and Mehmet the Conqueror's mission in this field. Since his successor in office, Bayezid II did not have a mission to conquer Europe, it can be uttered that the Ottomans gave up from conquering Otranto or keeping it in Ottoman territory after Mehmet the Conqueror. Nevertheless, having a significant place, Otranto turned into an instrument of propaganda by the Church and Christians against Turks who were advancing towards Europe. Unfortunately, the use of this city as an instrument of propaganda turned into literature and had a major effect on scientific historiography as well. Italy, on the other hand, has recently started to apply a methodology to distinguish propaganda from real historical facts. In this regard, it is a well-known fact that neutral history writing requires objective archives and language skills. Therefore, it is necessary to follow the golden rule: "Audi alteram partem – listen to the other side". Key Words: Rome, Otranto, Audi Alteram Partem.