Five years on, thanks to the 18th amendment to the constitution we have bought ourselves a few more years to tackle the issue. Although we are no closer today than we were in 2008 we have until 2020 or 2021, depending on when the Presidential poll will be held.
The question is: could the succession follow Ottoman lines?
Kingship in Muslim dynasties has tended instead to pass between brothers. But whose son should then inherit the throne? Ottoman sultans solved this problem by murdering their brothers.
The Ottomans
believed in the survival of the fittest; every prince had an equal
claim to the throne. Succession meant dispute and dispute was settled
in the only way it could – through intrigue and warfare – since
you couldn’t exactly file a lawsuit. It was believed that the
winner (or survivor) would make the most competent and least depraved
Sultan.
Sibling rivalry and
open competition in a royal free market was common to the tribes of
the Central Asian Steppes – the same tribes from whom the Ottomans
had originated. Anyone who could claim to be the Sultan’s son –
legitimate or illegitimate – was welcome to compete. Unlike their
European counterparts, the Ottoman royal family did not obsess with
marriages and appropriate royal blood lines, which helped them avoid
inbreeding without impeding their capacity for insanity. (Taken from here)
An interesting question, is it not?
2 comments:
One could look at the Mahawansa to locate a few ways to solve this issue :P
I am not very familar with the text, but would welcome some appropriate quotes if you have any!
And welcome to the blog:)
Post a Comment