CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

Ottoman Interregnum

civil war in the early 15th century Ottoman Empire

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 2, 2026
Entity authorityQ726261 ↗
Source-derived summary

The Ottoman Interregnum, or Ottoman Civil War, (Turkish: Fetret devri, lit. 'Interregnum period') was a civil war in the Ottoman realm between the sons of the Ottoman sultan Bayezid I following their father's defeat and capture by Timur in the Battle of Ankara on 28 July 1402. Although Timur confirmed Mehmed Çelebi as sultan, Mehmed's brothers (İsa Çelebi, Musa Çelebi, Süleyman Çelebi, and later Mustafa Çelebi) refused to recognize his authority, each claiming the throne for himself, which resulted in civil war. The Interregnum would last a little under 11 years and culminate in the Battle of Çamurlu on 5 July 1413, when Mehmed Çelebi emerged as victor, crowned himself Sultan Mehmed I, and restored the empire.

Civil war

İsa and Mehmed

Civil war broke out among the sons of Sultan Bayezid I upon his death in 1403. His oldest son, Süleyman, with his capital at Edirne, ruled the recently conquered Second Bulgarian Empire, all of Thrace, Macedonia, and northern Greece. The second son, İsa Çelebi, established himself as an independent ruler at Bursa, and Mehmed formed a kingdom at Amasya. War broke out between Mehmed and İsa, and following the Battles of Ermeni-beli and of Ulubad (March–May 1403), İsa fled to Constantinople, and Mehmed occupied Bursa. The subsequent battle at Karasi between Mehmed and İsa resulted in Mehmed's victory and Isa fleeing to Karaman. İsa was later killed in a bath by agents of Mehmed.

Süleyman enters civil war

Meanwhile, the other surviving son of Bayezid, Musa Çelebi, who was captured at the Battle of Ankara, was released by Timur into the custody of Yakub of Germiyan.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Ottoman Interregnum” as civil war in the early 15th century Ottoman Empire. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA strong contextual entry point for chronology, institutions and public events when official records are distinguished from later interpretation. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1402, 1413, 1403—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Ottoman, Interregnum and civil can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the history & society register because the source frames it as civil war in the early 15th century Ottoman Empire. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 2, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q726261. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1402, 1413 and 1403.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Ottoman Interregnum”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Ottoman Interregnum primary sources, Ottoman Interregnum archive and Ottoman research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Ottoman Interregnum”?
  2. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
  3. Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Ottoman Interregnum” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.