My paper investigates the Greek-Ottoman receptions of Sultan Abdulhamid II (r. 1876-1909) through close readings of a number of literary works produced by Greek Orthodox subjects of the “Red Sultan” frequently associated with pan-Islamism. Focusing on how Greek-speaking intellectuals from across the Ottoman political spectrum reimagined non-Ottoman texts and tropes as translator-editors and consciously modulated Western Orientalist tropes to serve their own readerships and sociopolitical commitments, I challenge the historiographical argument that an adoption of Western European intellectual norms and literary discourse was part and parcel of the “embourgeoisement” of non-Muslim Ottoman communities -and their resulting evolution into isolated “Westernized” sociocultural pockets- in the final decades of the Empire. To advance this argument, I problematize the genre of these late Ottoman works, exploring the uncertain, oftentimes wilfully porous boundaries between “fiction” and “non-fiction” as well as “translation” and “re-writing” in these texts. The Greek-language works I examine include an “intimate history” of Abdulhamid by the son of an Ottoman pasha that went on to become an international best-seller (and the Orientalist classic) on the subject, a tract-novella on the Hamidian “secret police” written by the sultan’s personal physician, a readaptation of the aforementioned “intimate history” shortly after the Young Turk Revolution of 1908, and the semi-fictionalized memoirs of the Ottoman royal family’s piano instructor (who also happened to be one of Istanbul’s most prominent woman intellectuals.) Experimenting also with the adaptability of concepts from classical reception studies to an Ottoman and Islamic context, I argue that the Greek-Ottoman literature on the sultan, far from constituting a conceptually stable “minority literature” or operating within the neat confines of a Muslim/non-Muslim discursive duality, created a diverse, and yet uniquely “Ottoman,” reception of Abdulhamid II. Finally, I try to explicate the varying Greek-Ottoman conceptualizations of (and arguments as to the relevance of) Ottoman and Ottomanist belonging formulated in these texts.