Was Vlad raped by the Ottomans?
Disclaimer, as always: the following is, of course, only what I think, based on historical facts I learned so far (someone get me that Vlad's phone number ASAP). Feel free to think whatever you want, my word is really not a gospel. And certainly let me know if you've found some historical facts I am unaware of.
So, better title might be: do I THINK Vlad was raped by the Ottomans?
Now this is a very, very, VERY complicated question
...so I am afraid the answer will be of the same complexity. Grab a tea, or maybe the whole kettle.
Now, when I first started to analyze Vlad's character, I thought: "yes, I think he was raped."
When you look at the life of Vlad Draculea, there are two important factors you can't miss:
1. he was a prisoner of the Ottomans since he was a small child (from what I've learned he first became their captive at 6 years old, then later once again at the age of 11, this time staying for 5 whole years)
2. he apparently hated the Ottomans so much he was willing to die in battle with them, EVEN THOUGH HE DIDN'T HAVE TO (there were several times when he could just flee or submit to the Ottoman will. Also when you look at his second reign, it is apparent that he from the very start began preparations to go to the war with them one day). This isn't in line with his character - he was pragmatic, so much so, that he was willing to cooperate with Janos Hunyadi, who killed his father! Why was he then able to forgive Hunyadi, but would never forgive the Ottomans?
-> maybe you'd think "well, Zelenski* also doesn't submit to the Russians, and Putin didn't have to rape him for that"
- yes, I agree, but there is one important difference: the Ottomans had an opportunity to brainwash Vlad since he was a little boy. And apparently they were extremely good at this! Look at their praxis of Devșhirme: they systematically took little boys from their homes, shipped them to the Ottoman empire, and brainwashed them so effectively they made them loyal to the death to the sultan, someone who took them from their home in the first place!
Why then did it work on hundreds of little boys, but it didn't work on Vlad, who by the age of 16 lived in the Ottoman empire for longer than 1/3 of his life? They had a very strong cause to persuade him to join their side, too - he was the future ruler of Wallachia! And we see they did try this - and succeeded - in Radu's case!
Apparently, something had to happen to push Vlad against the Ottomans so he would hate them more than the killer of his own father, and didn't follow the path of his younger brother.
Now, what could that something be?
My first theory was that they were just brutal, because he was their prisoner.
- but then I found out that wasn't the case! Apparently, the Ottomans were very nice to their princely captives, they maybe even offered them gifts and treated them nicely, so they'd persuade them to follow their ways even when later they inevitably got out of their grip (see Radu)
- wasn't Vlad just unruly and stubborn, so they'd punish him often?
- Vlad was strongwilled, yes. But he wasn't stupid. He was born into mediaeval times, which were harsh. He knew what he was getting into if he decided to misbehave. So he wouldn't get traumatised by being punished for breaking the rules - he knew very well from the start what the rules were, and what punishment would follow (they made that extremely clear when they made him at the very begging of his second captivity watch the punishment of Brankovich brothers). So even though it would fit his character to break the rules now and then, he wouldn't get that much irrationaly angry at the Ottomans for punishing him accordingly (even if such a punishment would be considered brutal by modern reader. But Vlad himself wasn't from modern times, that's extremely important to realise! He was used to seeing such brutality from childhood - didn't he even grow up in a house with a direct view of the gallows?)
- couldn't he just dislike Mehmed?
- from what I've learned, he didn't really have opportunity to meet Mehmed during his captive years. If they met, they probably did so for only a very short time. Mehmed's character would truly have to be extremely horrible if these few moments were enough for Vlad to hate him to death. But I don't think that's probable, because then his own people would have to hate him too, and it would go down in history as well... And from the chronicles that doesn't seem to be the case.
- so... did they rape Vlad?
I was inclined to believe so. And this theory of mine seemed congruent with several other facts:
1. there existed the praxis of Basha bazi in the Ottoman empire
2. the fact that Vlad once again acted out of his pragmatic character when killing Hamza Pasha and Katavolinos (a person we know he lived with while in his first captivity at 6yo! Coincidence?!)
3. Vlad made A LOT of effort to lure Mehmed into Wallachia so he could have a go at him as well
4. we have written account of Radu being sexually assaulted by Mehmed
Now, it seems almost 100% clear that not only was Vlad raped, but it was maybe by at least two or three people - Katavolinos, Hamza Pasha, and Mehmed himself. Right?!!!
I discussed this point with @vladdocs, and I watched Corpus Draculianum videos about the matter, and, well, it seems that each of the points above can be explained in other way too.
1. The Basha bazi: yes, this did exist. But those children were a very specific caste of slaves. A royal prisoner wouldn't be used like that. However it's clear that the Ottomans did like small boys very much... so, it's not a 100% no, but it wouldn't happen systematically on purpose like with the Basha bazi.
2. The impaling of Hamza Pasha and Katavolinos: this would make sense to me. Why would the extremely pragmatic and strategic Vlad get rid of such important hostages, who could serve as great leverage against the sultan? But what I learned here is that Vlad could have other reason to impale them - maybe he wanted to make it clear to both his allies and his enemies how strong his resolution to go into this war is.
3. Vlad went out of his way to lure Mehmed into Wallachia - the sultan actually didn't originally intend to take personal part in the planned invasion. And when he did fall prey to Vlad's taunts and decided to go himself, during the most famous night attack Vlad went straight for his head, and came very close to killing him! Was that a personal revenge? It could be... but it was also highly strategic. If he managed to kill the sultan, the Ottoman empire would delve into chaos, as the heirs to the throne would start fighting each other, and wouldn't be able to restart the invasion again for quite a few years, maybe a full decade.
4. Radu's rape: yes, it is documented that Mehmed tried to sexually assault Radu and was unsuccessful in that one case (however it's not documented whether he tried again and succeeded then). A solid evidence that Mehmed was rapey, right? Actually, not really. Because we're not sure if this account is not fake - there's a possibility it was written by enemies who tried to tarnish Mehmed's character (same like when Vlad was accused of burning the homeless)
So... we are not much wiser, are we?
Me personally I still go with the assumption that yes, Vlad was raped at least by Mehmed (and you'll understand clearly why I think so if I ever post that part of the story).
(And in the bigger story, Io, Draculea, I let the other ones happen too, because not only it makes sense to me and it doesn't explicitly go against what we know - I also do it for the literally purpose of depicting how trauma works, how would the mediaeval people deal with it, and to see how would that shape Vlad's behaviour. Since I think this could be extremely useful for readers, as it might help them better understand why do victims of child SA behave the way they do, and how to act towards them in the future - I work with psychotherapists on this one. Because you see, in Io, Draculea, I try not only to shatter the traditional view pop culture has on Vlad. I also try to depict the difference between mediaeval mind and the modern one, so we can find inspiration in the things that are not seen in today's society anymore. And lastly, I also try through Vlad - someone who truly in real life was able to never break down from incredible hardships in life - to in a non-pushy way educate the reader in the field of mental health and psychotherapy, so they can get from the story something useful for day to day life as well. Because not everyone has money for psychotherapy. But everyone can read my story here on Tumblr.)
However you don't have to worry, for now, here in the format of short "historical" stories, I'll do my best to be the most historically accurate. So I'll in advance make the distinction what I think might, but didn't have to happen - like the other rapes; and what I think is highly probable - in this case, the rape by Mehmed (again, I'll explain in more detail in the pre-notes of the story - this post is too long already)
But why then aren't official historians agreeing with my assumption about Mehmed, if this part I strongly base in historical facts?
Historians can't make assumptions like that without clear evidence. They can think whatever they want, but they can't promote such major accusations without any concrete documented evidence in their hands.
And this is why I am quite sure I can say:
We will never, EVER have this theory confirmed!
Because the evidence CAN'T exist. Given the nature of the incident, if this really did happen, NONE of the involved parties would have any desire to have it documented. In mediaeval era, such an incident happening to a ruler would destroy their reputation, whether they were the victim or the iniciator. So both of them would make great effort to take that secret to their graves.
And so, I don't have any hope that we'll one day find the final answer to this question.
Maybe I hear one counter point: Wouldn't the trauma of being abused at such a young age destroy his sexuality? How could he then have romantic relationship with anyone, and have children? We know Vlad wasn't a sexually repressed maniak, isn't that then evidence to the contrary?
I actually don't think so in the case of Vlad. Because this is not where his story necessarily ends. I'll explain in the next part, where we'll look at how a mediaeval person would deal with trauma, and the real possibility Vlad could have at healing such a trauma in the 15th century.
So, the final verdict of "Was Vlad raped?" is:
We don't know. And we probably never will
I think yes, but I am not a historian
So, these were my thoughts and musings. But what do YOU think? Do you have some other theory why Vlad hated the Ottomans so much? Did I miss or missinterpret some historical fact? I'll be glad if you let me know! 😉
