Mehmed Ali offered to pay tribute in exchange for Husrev’s dismissal

Evidence

The truce of Kütahia, it has to be remembered, was not a permanent settlement; it was an agreement that neither Sultan nor vali put their signatures to and, moreover, its terms were to be renewed each year, giving Mehmed Ali the feeling that he had still not guaranteed for his family the secure future he was striving for. In addition, Mehmed Ali was required to pay an annual tribute to Istanbul, the amount of which was one of the most contentious issues in the years between 1833 and 1839: while the Sultan was claiming significant arrears, the Pasha refused to pay them. This issue became more acrimonious since the Pasha was convinced that the presence of Husrev as Serasker in Istanbul and his proximity to the Sultan made Mahmud particularly susceptible to his intrigues. The Pasha attempted, therefore, to impress upon the Sultan that as long as his old enemy continued to be present in the Divan, there would always be problems between Sultan and vali. He therefore proposed that “if the Sultan would only consent to remove [Husrev] from his councils, he [i.e. Mehmed Ali] would not only pay the tribute regularly …, but he would also pay a great part of what the Sultan demanded as arrears.” — Khaled Fahmy, All the Pasha_s Men_ Mehmed Ali, his…, 1557

Categorization

• XREF: Directly serves the reader’s interest in the tug-of-war between Mehmed Ali and the Ottoman court over military and fiscal leverage.